HonestYouthPastor – Polygamy Response Part 2

Part 2 picks up where the first response left off and answers HYP’s heavier exegetical claims: that God played no role in Jacob’s plural household, that Matthew 19 only names singleness and monogamy, and that 1 Corinthians 7 quietly forbids more than one wife. The governing question throughout is whether any New Testament writer had authority to overrule the Torah — and if not, every reading must harmonize with a law that already permits a man more than one wife and tells him how to provide for them.

The argument answered

• God did act in Jacob’s house: Leah credits God for opening her womb after she gave her maid to Jacob, and the wombs of Sarah and Hagar follow the same sovereign pattern.
• The Matthew 19 “calling” misread: HYP reads the eunuch saying as only two paths — singleness or monogamy — to quietly rule out plural marriage. The text names just eunuchs and those given to marry, and never limits a man to one wife — and with roughly equal birthrates, only plural marriage covers the surplus of women and widows.
• The law-cannot-be-changed framework: Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32, and 13, with Matthew 5:17–19, mean Jesus, Paul, and the apostles could not annul Torah — so a monogamy-only reading that contradicts the law cannot be right.
• The 1 Corinthians 7 “his own wife” argument: Paul uses two different Greek words for the man’s and the woman’s belonging, reflecting headship and the creation order, not symmetrical exclusivity — and the singular “wife” no more limits a man to one than “neighbor” limits him to one neighbor.
• Conjugal rights rooted in Torah: Exodus 21:10 — “if he takes another woman, he may not reduce her food, clothing, or conjugal rights” — shows Paul’s “do not deprive one another” assumes, not forbids, plural marriage.
• Isaiah 4:1 honestly read: seven women take hold of one man after judgment, and those who remain are called holy and recorded for life in Jerusalem — so plural marriage cannot be the evil thing HYP claims.
• The concubine question: Zilpah and Bilhah are called both servants and wives; their sons are legitimate tribes of Israel whose names are on the gates of the New Jerusalem.

Scriptures examined

• Genesis 30:18 — Leah: “God has given me my wages because I gave my maid to my husband”
• Genesis 16 — Sarah’s closed womb and Hagar’s opened womb
• Matthew 19:10–12 — the eunuch saying
• Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32; 13 — adding nothing to the law; the test of a false prophet
• Matthew 5:17–19 — “do not think I have come to abolish the law”
• 1 Corinthians 7:1–5 — “his own wife,” conjugal duty, do not deprive one another
• Exodus 21:10 — food, clothing, and conjugal rights for an additional wife
• Romans 7:2 — a married woman bound by the law while her husband lives
• Ezekiel 23 — God describing Himself as married to two sisters
• Isaiah 3–4:1 — judgment on the daughters of Zion and seven women to one man
• 2 Chronicles 24:2–3 — Jehoiada the priest giving Joash two wives

Why it matters

Once you grant that no apostle could revise the Torah, the “New Testament forbids it” objection collapses and the texts read plainly. This is Part 2 of a two-part response; start with Part 1, which covers 1 Timothy 4, 2 Samuel 12, and Matthew 19’s one flesh.