I think Rachel or Samuel's mother Hannah might have a few words to say about sharing a husband when we see them in the resurrection - if asked. The Law regulated it, but Jesus made it clear that was permitted would no longer be so at Mt 19:9.
"I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the grounds of sexual immorality, and marries another commits adultery." Mt 19:9
Is this supposed to mean that as long as you do not divorce your innocent first wife you can marry another?
Well it does not indicate you commit adultry if you do not divorce the first wife. The verse is a prohibition of divorce, not of polygamy
Looking further we find
Christ fulfils the law of Polygamy
This subject of polygamy applies to Christ and the gospel, in that Christ came to fulfill the law and the prophets (Mat.5:17). Christ is a polygamist in the sense that the church is likened to five wise betrothed virgins (Matt. 25:1-13, Matt. 24:34). Christ is one with the "members" (plural) of His body, the church, and one Spirit with them all (1 Corinthians 6:15-17).
Christ, in fulfilling the law, is the perfect husband to each individual member providing them with "clothing" such as His robes of righteousness (Matt. 22:11-14, Rev. 7:9,13-14, Rev. 22:14), "food" as He is the "bread of life" (Jn. 6:32-35), and "hidden manna" (Rev. 2:17) which God's people are presently feasting on at the wedding supper of the lamb (Rev. 19:9). Could any Christian doubt the loveliness of Christ as his lover? Christ has taken His people to His banqueting house, and His banner over us is love (So. 2:4). He has provided a place or a dwelling for us (Jn. 14:2). There's no question that God's people are well taken care of.
SOURCE
A common argument is that this clearly prohibits polygamy as the man would not be divorced if the divorce is invalid and that is why he is guilty of adultery. but it is not that simple or clear
Now, some make the following argument (Glenn Miller, Polygamy in the NT period):
The key thing to note here is that this argument fails if polygamy is acceptable! Jesus' point is that improper divorce does not nullify a marriage, and if the first marriage still stands, then a "second" marriage is adultery--and NOT simply 'polygamy'! This is very clear.
So the argument is basically this:
Jesus says, the man who invalidly divorces his wife, then marries another, commits adultery
Because the divorce is invalid, the man is still married to his first wife when he marries the second
For the second marriage to be an act of adultery, it must be invalid
If polygamy is prohibited, then the second marriage is invalid, since the man already has a valid existing one
If polygamy is permitted, then the second marriage is valid; the man's existing marriage is irrelevant
Hence, Jesus' words can only be true if polygamy is prohibited
Thus, Jesus implicitly teaches that polygamy is prohibited
Is that logic sound? If not, where is the weakness?
May I suggest the invalidity may be in premise (5): If polygamy is permitted, then the second marriage is valid; the man's existing marriage is irrelevant. This assumes too much. How? Well, if polygamy is allowed, then the mere fact that a man already has a wife is not in itself reason he cannot marry another at the same time. However, that does not mean that he has an unfettered right to marry another; polygamy could well be permissible in some circumstances and not others.
A proposed principle: A man is only permitted to take another wife if he cares for his existing wife/wives, and will treat the new wife and the existing wife/wives equally with one another/each other (the Islamic teaching on polygamy involves a similar principle)
Now, following on from this principle. The man has invalidly divorced his first wife. He has putatively divorced her, put on a show, an act, an appearance, an attempt, of divorcing her, even though the divorce is a legal and moral nullity. In such circumstances, if he marries another woman, is he caring for all his wives equally? By invalidly, illegally and immorally divorcing her, he has not cared for his first wife properly, so he is not permitted to take another; thus any subsequent marriages of his are not valid marriages, and his consumation of them is adulterous. Having illegally divorced his first wife, he cannot marry any further wives, until he sets things right with his first wife (e.g. rescinds the illegal divorce). So, under this proposal, Jesus' words are compatible with polygamy after all.
SOURCE
Was Polygamy A Sin In The New Testament?
Now let's consider the main objections against polygamy taken from the New Testament.
Objection #1:
Jesus himself said that polygamy is a sin.
Rebuttal:
Actually, Jesus never specifically said that polygamy per se is a sin, though many claim he did. Certainly if Jesus had said such a thing unambiguously, Christian giants like Augustine, Aquinas, and Luther would have noticed it. Those claiming Jesus denounced polygamy rely on either Matthew 19:9 or the parallel passages of Mark 10:11 or Luke 16:18 as support:
for the rest see
HERE
