If you interact with enough people, especially people who enjoy discussing the Bible online, you will eventually run into someone who claims to be Christian but advocates for polygamy. Most Christians have an intuitive sense that polygamy is wrong but don’t quite know how to articulate why. When they encounter people who actively promote it, many believers find themselves flummoxed by pro-polygamy arguments. It might not be the ideal social arrangement, but how could something practiced by biblical heroes like Abraham and David be outright sinful?—especially when neither testament contains an explicit prohibition “thou shalt not marry multiple wives”?

My goal in this article is not to provide a point-by-point refutation of common polygamist arguments. Such refutations have their place, but this approach puts the monogamist on the defensive by granting pro-polygamy arguments a modicum of seriousness: it presumes that these arguments deserve attention, if only to be demolished. Instead, I want to go on the offensive and provide a handful of arguments that polygamy is inherently sinful. It is a slight difference, but I want my readers to be equipped to explain not merely why polygamy isn’t right, but why polygamy is wrong. There are probably more arguments against polygamy than the ones that follow, but these strike me as the most compelling.

1. Argument from Nature

Some things can only be known about God through special revelation (e.g., in the scriptures). But other things about God can be understood simply by looking at the material universe. When God created the physical world, he designed nature in such a way that it would testify to him.

Many scriptures discuss nature’s role as a witness to God. Ps 19:1-3 describes this universal testimony when it says, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.” Paul says in 1 Cor 11 that nature should teach us something as mundane as how long to wear our hair; and Paul says again in Rom 1 that nature discloses “the invisible things” of God, “even his eternal power and divine nature.” If we know how to look and listen, creation can teach us many things about her Creator.

One of these things that nature gives us is a basic understanding of morality—God’s righteousness and the way that humans ought to behave. Ps 50:6 says that “the heavens shall declare his righteousness: for God is judge himself.” Ps 97:6 says that “the heavens declare his righteousness, and all the people see his glory.” And Rom 2:14-15 says that God has written his moral law on our consciences, so that we naturally do and desire things which are just and right. Regardless of place or time, everyone has had an intuitive sense that theft and murder are wrong; or at the very least, no one wants to be killed or stolen from.

I suggest that nature testifies to God’s intention that human beings should be monogamous. It is currently the case—and always has been, so far as we can tell—that the human population is almost exactly 50% male and 50% female. These percentages fluctuate a little; if I have my figures correct, the 2025 world demographics are 50.27% male to 49.73% female.¹ But there has never been a situation, so far as I am aware, when there were two or three or four women for every one man. Many animals have a 2:1 female to male ratio or higher; in certain insects, the ratio is hundreds to one. But not for the human family. This should catch our attention.

If God had intended for men to have multiple wives, it would be strange indeed that he did not set the world up that way. If polygamy became a dominant social arrangement globally, a significant number of men would be incapable of having wives. God already said in Gen 2:18, “It is not good that the man should be alone.” Of course some people will choose not to marry, and other people will lose a spouse to death and remarry. But by splitting humanity 50/50 into males and females, God has testified in nature that men and women should only have one spouse.

2. Argument from Original Creation

The book of Genesis gives us a picture of how God originally created the world. Although nature can give us clues about God’s intentions, inspired scripture more plainly shows us what God wanted “in the beginning” before we and our world were corrupted by sin.

Six times in Gen 1 God looked at what he had made and declared, “It is good;” and the final, seventh time he said, “It is very good.” But once, and only once in this prelapsarian paradise, did God call something “not good:” “And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him” (Gen 2:18). God did not want Adam to be alone; so he created Eve, brought the young couple together, and performed the first wedding in human history. It was a match made by heaven, and the institution of marriage has endured ever since.

When the Almighty decided to remedy Adam’s isolation, he created one woman for one man. In a perfect world, still exactly as he had designed it, God instituted monogamy. God easily could have made any number of wives for Adam, but he made only one. Now someone may object that we no longer live in an unfallen world, so Adam and Eve are not a fitting example for modern marriage. But appealing to original creation is exactly what Jesus did when the Pharisees asked him about divorce and remarriage.

One man and one woman, not one man and two or three women, is “what God hath joined together” in the beginning (Matt 19:6). Quoting Gen 2:24, Jesus said that a man (singular) should cleave to his wife (singular), “and these two [not three or four] will be one flesh” (19:5). Like divorce, it seems that God temporarily permitted polygamy under the Old Testament “because of the hardness of their hearts” (19:8). But what Jesus says about divorce applies equally well to polygamy: “from the beginning it was not so.”

3. Argument from the Bride of Christ

Just like Jesus did in Matthew 19, when Paul discusses marriage in Ephesians 5 he refers back to original creation: “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh” (Eph 5:31 // Gen 2:24). Immediately after quoting Genesis, Paul wraps up the passage by elevating marriage to the level of a spiritual analogy: “This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Eph 5:32). Christ’s relationship with the church is like a husband’s relationship with his wife.

Or, more properly speaking, a husband’s relationship with his wife is like Christ’s relationship with the church. It is not he who is like us: it is we who are like him. God is not made in our image; we are made in his. Deep down, when we say things like “God is a rock,” what we really mean is “rocks are like God”—because God has always existed, and rocks reflect qualities like stability and permanence which he has always possessed. I repeat: it is not that Jesus’s relationship with the church is like a husband and wife—it is the husband and wife who are like Jesus’s relationship with the church.

Wives are told to submit to and reverence their husbands in the same way that the church submits to and honors Christ. Husbands are commanded to love, nourish, cherish, and sanctify their wives as Christ does the church. A husband is called his wife’s head, just as Christ is the church’s head. Put simply, Christ’s relationship to the church sets the agenda for a man’s relationship to his wife. Men and women are called to imitate what the Lord and his Bride already are. A man should behave towards his spouse the way that Christ behaves toward his.

So how many brides does Christ have? Only one. The Bible repeatedly says that we are “one body” (Rom 12:4-5, 1 Cor 12:12-13, Eph 4:4, Col 3:15). Eph 2:11-18 teaches that Christ has removed the former separations between Jews and Gentiles; the blood of Jesus saves both, Christ has “broken down the dividing wall between us,” and “we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” Consequently, through the cross both Jew and Gentile are reconciled to God “in one body.” Gal 3:28 says that “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Multiple times Revelation refers to “the Bride,” “the Lamb’s wife”—never “the Brides,” “the Lamb’s wives.”

Christ only has one church, and godly husbands are called to pattern their marriage on Christ’s relationship to the church; as Christ has one Body and Bride, so a husband should only have one wife. Jesus Christ is monogamous. A true Christian will imitate his Lord.

4. Argument from Requirements for Ministers

On the one hand, multiple scriptural passages call ordained ministers to live as examples to the general church. Speaking as a pastor himself, Peter encouraged his fellow-pastors to “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you…being examples to the flock” (1 Pet 5:1-3). Paul told Timothy to “be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity” (1 Tim 4:12). He exhorted Titus to make himself “a pattern of good works” (Titus 2:7). And Paul told the Thessalonians that he had worked to support himself while ministering in Thessalonica so his lifestyle could provide them “an example to imitate” (2 Thes 3:7-9).

On the other hand, multiple passages call Christians to follow and imitate the example set by godly ministers. Paul told the Corinthians to imitate him as he imitated Christ (1 Cor 11:1). He encouraged the Philippians, “Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern” (Phil 3:17). And the author of Hebrews exhorted his readers, “Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith” (Heb 13:7).

In a healthy church, the congregation should be able to look at their pastors and live like they live. All other things being equal, if a pastor abides by the biblical stipulations set for a minister, then a congregant should be able to imitate him with a clean conscience.

Since congregants are supposed to imitate their ministers’ way of life, how many wives is a minister allowed to have? For both a bishop/elder/pastor and for a deacon, the scriptures stipulate that he must be “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim 3:1-2, 12, Titus 1:5-6). Regardless of his other qualifications, polygamy disqualifies a candidate from ministry. If the congregation follows the example of their ministers with respect to marriage, they too will be monogamous.

5. Argument from Fornication

Fornication is a serious sin. Jesus says that fornication “defiles a man” (Matt 15:19 // Mk 7:21-23). Fornication was one of the four sins from which the apostles and elders at the Jerusalem council specifically commanded gentiles to abstain (Acts 15:20, 29, 21:25). Paul commanded the Corinthians to break fellowship with a fellow Christian who persisted in the sin of fornication (1 Cor 5:1-11). Fornication is a work of the flesh (Gal 5:19); Christians are commanded to flee from it (1 Cor 6:18). And, most pointedly, Paul says that fornicators will go to hell, because they cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9-10).

Most people assume that the term fornication (Grk. πορνεία) refers specifically to pre-marital sex, but the word actually has a broader meaning. Fornication refers to any illicit sexual activity; it is merely a general term for sexual immorality.

The book of Hebrews refers to Esau as a “fornicator or profane person” (Heb 12:16). But when we search the OT, we don’t see any instances of Esau having pre-marital sex. What we do see is Esau marrying multiple women. “And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Bashemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite” (Gen 26:34-35). “And Esau seeing that the daughters of Canaan pleased not Isaac his father; then went Esau unto Ishmael, and took unto the wives which he had Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael Abraham’s son, the sister of Nebajoth, to be his wife” (Gen 28:8-9). “Esau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan; Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite; and Bashemath Ishmael’s daughter, sister of Nebajoth” (Gen 36:2-3).

Fornication is a sin and fornicators do not inherit the kingdom of God. A Christian should heed the warning of Heb 12:16 to not be “a fornicator like Esau.” Polygamy is a form of fornication.

6. Argument from Divorce and Remarriage

If polygamy were permissible, this would render Jesus’s teaching about divorce and remarriage nonsensical. In Matthew 19 the Pharisees come to Jesus and ask him whether it is permissible for a man to divorce his wife for any reason (v. 3). Jesus initially responds that people ideally should never divorce, much less for any reason: “Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder” (v. 6). The Pharisees press the issue further: if divorce is wrong, why does Moses permit it in the Torah (v. 7)? Jesus acknowledges that God made allowance for divorce; but this was due to human sinfulness, not God’s original intention for humanity. “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so” (v. 8).

Then Jesus states his position on divorce and remarriage. Jesus gives only one reason for a valid divorce: “for fornication / sexual immorality” (ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ). If a man divorces his wife for any other reason than infidelity and then remarries, he is guilty of adultery. And if a man marries a divorced woman, and she was divorced for any other reason than infidelity, he is guilty of adultery. “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (v. 9).

Now think about this with me. If divorcing one woman and marrying a different woman constitutes adultery, wouldn’t keeping the first woman and marrying a second be that much more adultery? In the first situation, the man is no longer living with the first woman; he has exchanged her for a different woman and married her. But doing this is adultery: he has married a second woman, even though he is still validly married to the first. Even though he has divorced his first wife and no longer considers her his wife, this man is being adulterous against his first wife by taking another. If leaving the first woman and taking a second woman is adultery, then keeping the first woman and taking a second must also be adultery.

Let me offer a counterexample. Let’s say I walk into a bookstore holding a book that I already own. While I am looking through the store’s inventory, I begin to covet a book that is for sale and decide to steal it. So I take the store’s book and my book out of their dust jackets and swap them; I leave my book on the shelf, and I take the store’s book home with me. Doing this would be theft, even though I am currently in possession of only one book; because Book A was originally mine (and still is) but Book B was not mine (and still isn’t). Now let’s say I walk into a bookstore holding a book that I already own. I see another book and decide to steal it. But rather than swap the books, I simply grab the second book and leave with both of them. This would also be theft.

And it is the same with polygamy. If getting rid of one’s first wife and marrying a second constitutes adultery, then keeping one’s first wife and marrying a second also constitutes adultery.

Tota Scriptura versus the These Words Exactly Fallacy

In a different context (see here), I have discussed what I call the These Words Exactly fallacy. As I stated in that previous post, “A person is guilty of the These Words Exactly fallacy when he insists that a specific wording be used, even though a different wording communicates the same concept.” For our discussion of polygamy here, I believe that tota scriptura offers a helpful contrast to this fallacy. Tota scriptura (“the whole of scripture”) is a theological principle which emphasizes that we must take the Bible as a whole. We do not serve a smorgasbord savior, and he did not inspire a buffet Bible. We cannot pick the parts of scripture that we like and reject the rest.

It is true that a person can read the entire Bible and never see the explicit command, “Thou shalt not marry multiple wives.” But this, in itself, proves nothing. I submit that demanding such a statement is an example of the aforementioned These Words Exactly fallacy. We should not expect a “thou shalt not” statement about every issue. Rather, applying the principle of tota scriptura, we should look at the whole of scripture to see what God thinks about the subject. A given action may still be a grave sin, even if the Bible does not expressly forbid it in any single verse; and we can know this by seeing what God thinks about it throughout scripture.

As the above arguments demonstrate, polygamy

1. is unnatural
2. is contrary to God’s original creation
3. corrupts the analogy between human marriage and Christ’s relationship with the church
4. goes against the example God commands ministers to set for the congregation, an example God expects the congregation to follow
5. constitutes fornication
6. constitutes adultery

These six reasons are sufficient to demonstrate that polygamy is a grievous sin. If these six reasons are not enough to convince the polygamist, I seriously doubt that a “thou shalt not” statement would do the trick.

Simply put: as a Christian you can’t have your Kate, and Edith too!

1. According to a UN-based estimate; see here. ↩︎