They Shall Be One Flesh by Dr. Tom Shipley

Summary

Dr. Shipley argues about whether the Bible mandates monogamy or allows for polygamy. His book, “They Shall Be One Flesh,” argues that sexual relations constitute a marriage covenant and that polygamy is permitted, while the other source, “Polygyny – Is It Scriptural?,” argues that the Bible’s first account of marriage in Genesis 2:24 establishes monogamy as God’s ideal for marriage and that polygamy is a violation of God’s plan. Both sources cite Biblical texts to support their arguments, with “They Shall Be One Flesh” claiming that the Bible includes multiple instances of polygamy and that God’s Law makes provisions for polygamy, while “Polygyny – Is It Scriptural?” asserts that these instances should not be seen as God’s approval of polygamy and that the practice of polygamy leads to social ills.

FAQ: Polygamy in the Bible

1. What does the Bible say about marriage?

The Bible’s primary text on marriage, found in Genesis 1:27-28 and 2:24, establishes God’s creation of man and woman as the basis for the union of one man and one woman in a lifelong, exclusive relationship. This pattern for marriage, ordained by God at creation, serves as the foundation for understanding marriage throughout Scripture.

2. Wasn’t polygyny practiced in the Old Testament?

It’s true that several figures in the Old Testament, including Abraham, David, and Solomon, had multiple wives. However, the mere presence of polygyny doesn’t equate to God’s approval or endorsement of the practice.

3. If polygyny is wrong, why weren’t these men condemned for it?

While the Bible records instances of polygyny, it doesn’t explicitly condemn those individuals for this practice in the same way it denounces other sins like adultery or murder. However, their polygamous arrangements often led to familial strife and conflict, illustrating the potential consequences of deviating from God’s intended design for marriage.

4. Doesn’t Deuteronomy 25:5-10 endorse polygyny?

Deuteronomy 25:5-10 outlines the practice of levirate marriage, a specific custom where a man was obligated to marry his brother’s widow if his brother died childless. This practice was designed to protect the widow and ensure the continuation of the deceased brother’s lineage, not as an endorsement of polygyny as a general principle.

5. What about the argument that God provided more women than men, necessitating polygyny?

This claim lacks historical and statistical support. While wars or other circumstances might temporarily skew gender ratios in specific locations or time periods, there is no consistent evidence that God created a surplus of women to normalize polygyny.

6. Doesn’t the prophet Isaiah, in Isaiah 4:1, predict a time when multiple women will pursue one man?

Isaiah 4:1 uses figurative language to describe a future scenario of societal upheaval, not to endorse polygyny. The passage depicts women desperately seeking security and provision, highlighting the consequences of a broken society, not an ideal marital arrangement.

7. Doesn’t Paul’s use of marriage as a metaphor for the relationship between Christ and the Church support polygyny?

This interpretation misapplies the metaphor. When Paul uses marriage to illustrate Christ’s relationship with the Church (Ephesians 5:22-33), he emphasizes the exclusive, covenantal bond between Christ, the bridegroom, and the Church, his bride. This analogy underscores the sanctity of monogamous marriage as God’s intended design.

8. In conclusion, is polygyny permissible for Christians today?

The overwhelming evidence from Scripture, beginning with God’s creation of man and woman and reinforced by the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, points to monogamy as God’s clear design for marriage. Therefore, polygamy in any form contradicts this design and is not permissible for Christians.

Biblical Marriage: A Study Guide

Quiz

Instructions: Answer the following questions in 2-3 sentences each.

According to the source material, how do sexual relations factor into the establishment of a marriage covenant in biblical law?
Explain the significance of Exodus 22:16-17 in the argument for polygyny.
How does the source material interpret the story of Ruth and Boaz in relation to the concept of marriage initiation?
What is the source material’s stance on the traditional interpretation of Deuteronomy 17:17 as a prohibition against polygyny?
According to the source material, how does the concept of “one flesh” in Genesis 2:24 support, rather than contradict, the argument for polygyny?
How does the source material use the example of Lamech in Genesis 4 to support its argument?
What is the source material’s response to the argument that the prevalence of monogamy in the Old Testament disproves the acceptability of polygyny?
How does the source material address the argument that polygamy in the lives of figures like David and Solomon was sinful even though they were considered righteous?
According to the source material, how do the metaphors used in Jeremiah and Ezekiel support the argument for the permissibility of polygyny?
What is the source material’s interpretation of the levirate marriage law in Deuteronomy 25:5-6 and its implications for the argument?

Quiz Answer Key

The source argues that sexual relations inherently constitute a binding marriage covenant under biblical law. This is based on interpretations of Exodus 22:16-17 and the “one flesh” principle in Genesis 2:24, implying a divinely imposed covenant through the act itself.
The source interprets Exodus 22:16-17 as evidence that sexual relations create a marriage covenant, even without prior ceremonies. The requirement of a dowry, even if the father objects, demonstrates the man’s established marital obligation.
The source interprets Ruth’s act of uncovering Boaz’s feet as a culturally acceptable form of proposing marriage through initiating sexual relations. This interpretation hinges on the understanding of specific Hebrew terms and cultural context.
The source argues that Deuteronomy 17:17, often interpreted as prohibiting polygyny, actually addresses the dangers of foreign treaty marriages and the accumulation of wealth, not an inherent prohibition against multiple wives.
The source claims that “one flesh” in Genesis 2:24 refers to the act of sexual union creating a binding covenant, and this principle applies even in polygamous marriages where a man becomes “one flesh” with each wife individually.
The source argues that while Lamech is presented as a sinful individual, the text doesn’t explicitly condemn his polygamy. Instead, it highlights his other transgressions, suggesting polygamy wasn’t the primary focus of his wickedness.
The source argues that while monogamy might be presented as an ideal, the Old Testament doesn’t explicitly prohibit polygyny. The presence of righteous individuals practicing polygyny further supports the claim that it wasn’t considered inherently sinful.
The source contends that the righteousness of figures like David and Solomon, despite their polygamous marriages, demonstrates that God didn’t view their polygyny as sinful. The text’s silence on condemning their multiple marriages strengthens this argument.
The source interprets the metaphors of God as a husband with two wives (Israel and Judah) in Jeremiah and Ezekiel as evidence that God acknowledged and even utilized polygamous imagery without condemning the practice itself.
The source argues that the levirate marriage law, requiring a man to marry his brother’s widow, even if he’s already married, demonstrates that having multiple wives wasn’t inherently wrong in the context of fulfilling this specific commandment.

Essay Questions

Critically analyze the source material’s reliance on the “one flesh” principle in Genesis 2:24 to justify polygyny. How does this interpretation compare to more traditional understandings of this passage?
The source material argues that the dowry requirement in Exodus 22:16-17 points towards a pre-existing marital covenant established through sexual relations. Evaluate this claim in light of alternative interpretations of this law.
Explore the source material’s use of specific Old Testament figures like Lamech, David, and Solomon to support its argument. How does this selective use of examples impact the overall strength and persuasiveness of the argument?
Critically examine the source material’s interpretation of Deuteronomy 17:17. Is the argument against interpreting this verse as a prohibition against polygyny convincing? Why or why not?
The source material claims that its interpretation of biblical marriage aligns with a theonomic perspective. Analyze this claim. How does the source’s argument either support or contradict a consistent application of biblical law to contemporary society?

Glossary of Key Terms

Polygyny: The practice of a man having multiple wives simultaneously.
Patriarchy: A social system in which men hold primary power and authority, particularly within the family and lineage.
Covenant: A solemn and binding agreement, often invoking divine witness or sanction.
Dowry: Property or wealth brought by a bride to her husband upon their marriage.
Levirate Marriage: A practice where a man marries his deceased brother’s widow, particularly to ensure an heir for his brother’s lineage.
Theonomy: The belief that society should be governed by divine law, specifically as revealed in the Bible.
Antinomianism: The belief that Christians are released from the obligation of observing moral law.
“One Flesh”: A phrase from Genesis 2:24, often interpreted as signifying the spiritual and physical union established through marriage.
“Law of First Mention”: A principle of biblical interpretation suggesting that the first occurrence of a word or concept establishes its meaning throughout Scripture.

Briefing Doc: A Review of “They Shall Be One Flesh”

Author: Tom Shipley

Publication: Institute for Christian Patriarchy

Date: 2009

Main Theme: This excerpt from “They Shall Be One Flesh” argues that polygyny (a man having multiple wives) is permissible, even implicitly endorsed, by the Bible. It challenges the prevailing Christian view of monogamy as the sole biblically sanctioned form of marriage.

Key Arguments & Ideas:

Genesis 1 & 2: Insufficient Evidence for Monogamy: Shipley argues that the “law of first mention” principle, often used to establish monogamy from Genesis, doesn’t hold. He claims the passage establishes patriarchy, which allows for polygyny. He states: “What is being established in Genesis is not a mandate for monogamy but a mandate for patriarchy.”
Sexual Intercourse as a Binding Covenant: Shipley posits that sexual intercourse itself constitutes a marriage covenant in the eyes of God, citing Exodus 22:16-17. He interprets the passage as demonstrating that seduction leading to intercourse creates a binding marital bond, regardless of ceremony or parental consent.
Ruth & Boaz: Shipley interprets the book of Ruth as supporting his argument. He argues that Ruth’s actions in uncovering Boaz’s feet should be understood as a sexual proposition leading to marriage, based on his understanding of similar language in other biblical passages.
Old Testament Polygyny as Evidence: Shipley argues that the presence of polygyny among figures like Abraham, David, and Solomon, considered righteous by God, legitimizes the practice. He suggests their righteousness implies God’s acceptance of their polygynous marriages.
Levirate Marriage as Proof: Shipley points to the Levirate marriage law in Deuteronomy 25:5-6 as further evidence. This law obligated a man to marry his brother’s widow if she was childless, regardless of his existing marital status.
Misinterpretations of Monogamy Arguments: Shipley criticizes counter-arguments favoring monogamy. He specifically challenges the interpretation of Jesus’ words in Matthew 19 as a condemnation of all divorce, proposing instead that Jesus allows for divorce in cases of adultery.

Quotes:

“Recognize polygyny as a valid consequence of creational patriarchy, and the seeming contradiction between Genesis and the specific provisions of God’s Law disappears.”
“The conditions which incur marital obligations are sexual relations (Exodus 22:16), it follows that when a man and woman enter into such relations an implicit covenant has been entered into.”
“The fact that an evil man had two wives does not, and CANNOT, by itself, establish that polygyny is unlawful.”
“David was not ‘(righteous) despite his polygyny.’ Polygyny was an ASPECT of his righteousness. It would have been sinful, once having become one flesh with his multiple wives, to put them away.”

Noteworthy:

Shipley frequently employs logical arguments and interpretations of biblical law to support his claims. He also critiques opposing viewpoints, aiming to dismantle the foundation of monogamy as the sole biblically sanctioned marital model.

Important Considerations:

Shipley’s views are controversial and challenge widely accepted interpretations of the Bible within mainstream Christianity. His arguments rely heavily on specific interpretations of select biblical passages and might not be shared by other biblical scholars.

Article