Polygyny is one of many forms of Polyamory because 'Poly' means 'many' and 'amory' means 'loves'----therefore "many loves" which is the nature of Polygyny. I fully agree with you that multiple wives of Biblical husbands were often treated as property. There is a male chauvanist undertone running throughout the Old and New testaments because both Judaism and Christianity have become male-dominated religions. But that does not mean that these Biblical characters did not love their wives, in their own narrow, male-chaunanist way. And if they loved 'many wives', then it means they had 'many loves' which IS Polyamory!
But there is a big difference between the beautiful simplicity of Jesus' original teachings and the male-dominated, narrow and distorted teachings of the orthodox churches. Jesus regarded women and men as equals, and he never ever taught that men are the head of the family with a license to control and suppress their wives. Women, such as Mary Magdalene, were influential in the early years of the church, especially while Jesus was alive, but later on men sought to suppress and control Christ's female followers. And that's why women are still not allowed to be priests in most churches.
Unfortunately, Christian priests also began to teach that bodily desires were enemies of spiritual growth, and that sex should only be for creating offspring, not for purposes of pleasure. So they promoted celibacy as being superior to marriage---another way of suppressing women.
If you read Jesus' Parable of the Ten Virgins with an open mind, it's easy to see that it might possibly be likening the Kingdom of Heaven to a Polygamous marriage.

I don't need to validate my lovestyle by looking to a person who may or may not have lived 2000+ years ago.

If you're Polyamorous then that's fine by me, but quoting a book that has been rewritten as often as the Bible will lend you no credibility in my mind.

I find the historicity of Jesus a trifle improbable, since the story involves TWO cultures that were fairly compulsive record-keepers.

I think it's probable that Jesus existed. All the evidence points in that direction... but I think he was just a man that was severely hyped up... like Buddha, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, King Author, Beowulf, and other folklore we read about. It isn't really the fault of these guys... it's just followers/story tellers adding a little bit of their wishful thinking to the story as they pass it on to others. You can see this going on today.

There is evidence that the man actually existed and was the centre of an anti Roman feeling in Judea. He was as is written, descended from the true royal lineage and with his brother created an " embarrassment" for the Romans and their appointed "King". There is actually a reference to a " sit in " by Jesus followers in Caesarea.
He was the promoter of equal rights, although polyamory was never mentioned and those were equal rights for everyone including the Roman "Give to Ceaser what is Ceasers" when he spoke of taxes.
His claim on the throne is what got himself and his brother James into trouble and in front of the crowd with Pilot between them for that famous scene. This is where re-writes and translation comes in.
Pilot asked the crowd "Which shall I release, The Nazarine or the Bar Abbas?"
Now we know the Nazarine was Jesus, what we weren't told as children was that being a Nazarine had nothing to do with Nazareth. Bar in Judaic translates to "Son of" and Abbas to " Father" or God if you will.
This puts a whole new view as to the "Historical" situation. To translate Pilots words more accurately, "Which shall I release, Your King or your Priest?"
James, the priest, was to die at the hands of the Christian convert Paul, twenty years later on the steps of the temple. Paul would take over the new religion and begin the change that would be set in stone by Constantine 300 years later, when he commanded that everyone follow his rewrite, or die.

Lol... Wow.. now there is a radical idea. They probably don't mine the poly lifestyle but also don't mind rape and murder now and then either.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sata...tual_abuse

Satanists are definitely a lot more fun to hang around with than Christians and certainly less judgmental... was there ever any doubt of this?