Critiquing: Why Weren’t the Israelites Explicitly Forbidden to Practice Polygamy?

June 20, 2024 | #STRask – Stand to Reason

Polygamy in Israel — Biblical Marriage Model — Wisdom from Solomon — Laws and Ideals — Cultural Context

---

Introduction

The content from the STR podcast, Why Weren’t the Israelites Explicitly Forbidden to Practice Polygamy?, addresses questions about the biblical stance on marriage, the practice of polygamy in the Old Testament, and the wisdom of Solomon given his polygamous relationships. Amy Hall and Greg Koukl explore these topics through a theological lens, attempting to reconcile the biblical model of marriage with the historical practice of polygamy.

Outline of Key Points and Logical Coherence

1. Reconciling the Biblical Model of Marriage with Polygamy

Claim:

“We have norms that are offered in Scripture the way God designed things, and then we have people who violate them.”

Explanation and Critique: The content claims that the biblical model of marriage is one man and one woman, but acknowledges that key biblical figures practiced polygamy. This presents a logical inconsistency as it raises questions about why these deviations were permitted and how they align with divine design. The explanation provided—that people often violate divine norms—does not adequately address why these violations were not explicitly condemned or legislated against, especially when these figures are often depicted as morally exemplary.

2. The Lack of Explicit Prohibition Against Polygamy

Claim:

“I think for most people, polygamy was impracticable, and so it wasn’t that big of a problem.”

Explanation and Critique: The argument suggests that polygamy was not explicitly forbidden because it was impractical for most people. This reasoning is dubious and unsubstantiated as it lacks concrete historical evidence to support the claim that practicality was the primary reason for the absence of prohibition. Moreover, it overlooks the moral implications and the potential for social and familial harm caused by polygamy, which should have warranted clearer legislative guidance if the biblical model of monogamy was indeed the ideal.

3. Wisdom from Solomon Despite His Polygamy

Claim:

“When you read the Proverbs, I read the Proverbs regularly… it just goes to show that one-third of the whole book is meant to encourage people to seek wisdom and not folly.”

Explanation and Critique: The content acknowledges the wisdom attributed to Solomon while highlighting his personal failures, particularly his extensive polygamy. This creates a cognitive dissonance as it questions the credibility of his teachings on marriage and wisdom. The assertion that a person’s wisdom remains valid despite their personal failings needs a stronger justification, especially when the failings directly contradict the wisdom purportedly imparted.

Identified Logical Inconsistencies and Fallacies

1. Moral Contradiction:

The content struggles to reconcile the ideal of monogamy with the historical practice of polygamy among revered biblical figures. This presents a moral contradiction, as it implies a disparity between divine ideals and the actions of divinely favored individuals without sufficient explanation.

2. Cognitive Dissonance:

The content’s simultaneous praise of Solomon’s wisdom and acknowledgment of his polygamy creates cognitive dissonance. This inconsistency undermines the logical foundation of the argument that Solomon’s wisdom remains authoritative despite his significant personal failings.

3. Unsubstantiated Claims:

Several claims, such as the impracticality of polygamy for most people, lack empirical evidence and are unsubstantiated. The obligation to substantiate these claims with historical or sociological data is crucial for maintaining logical coherence.

Obligation to Substantiate Claims

In logical discourse, especially when discussing historical and moral issues, it is essential to substantiate claims with reliable evidence. The podcast’s assertions about the impracticality of polygamy and the reasons for the lack of explicit prohibition require concrete evidence to be credible. Without substantiation, these claims remain speculative and weaken the overall argument.

Methods to Test Alleged Promises of God

To critically evaluate the promises of God mentioned in the content, potential methods could include:

1. Empirical Observation:
   • Analyzing historical records and contemporary instances where individuals claim fulfillment of divine promises.
   • Studying the socio-economic and psychological impacts of adhering to divine laws on individuals and communities.
2. Psychological Analysis:
   • Investigating the mental health and well-being of individuals who strongly believe in and follow divine promises.
3. Sociological Studies:
   • Conducting sociological research on communities with strong religious beliefs to assess the correlation between belief in divine promises and societal outcomes such as crime rates, educational attainment, and overall quality of life.

Mapping Belief to Evidence

It is crucial to align one’s degree of belief with the degree of available evidence. Theological claims, particularly those with moral and practical implications, should be critically examined, and beliefs should be adjusted according to the strength and reliability of supporting evidence. This approach promotes intellectual honesty and logical coherence in evaluating religious content.

---

I invite you to discuss these arguments further in the comments section.