A man’s relationship obligations to his wives and children

[Aaron_D]

As far as I know the bible does not place a specific limit on how many wives a man can have, the only example I can think of is the verse that says the king should not multiply wives. And there are righteous men in the bible who had many wives and many children.

For example, Gideon had 70 sons. A man who was wealthy may be able to fulfill his obligation to materially provide for all of those children, but what about the relational obligations? It seems like having 70 sons would be neglectful because I don’t see how a father could take an active role in raising that many sons.

The same goes for having a lot of wives, there is a point when a mans attention would be divided between so many women that I don’t see how he would be fulfilling the command to love his wife even if he provided for them materially.

So I am curious how Gideon met his obligations to his children as a father and how someone with more that 10 wives could properly have a relationship with all of them and fulfill the command to love them.

 

[FollowingHim]

So I am curious how Gideon met his obligations to his children as a father

Gideon didn't meet his obligations as a father with all of them. Keep reading and you'll see the result of his bad parenting...

and how someone with more that 10 wives could properly have a relationship with all of them and fulfill the command to love them.

Again, they'd struggle. But it's not an issue either you or I are likely to be confronted with.

 

[Maia]

At some point overpopulation would become a problem if everyone has 70 children..... Unless we manage to get off this planet.

 

[frederick]

At some point overpopulation would become a problem if everyone has 70 children..... Unless we manage to get off this planet.

God gave the command to Adam and Eve, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it (Gen. 1:28). He repeated the command to Noah and his sons, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth" (Gen. 9:1). Either God knows what He's doing and there is plenty of room for people to multiply, or He's wrong. I'll believe God and accept that people can have as many children as He blesses them with. Btw, there's still lots of room for more children so obey the command and make babies.

 

[Maia]

Look at food prices. There is only so much we can do to increase food production. We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

Humans are the only animals dumb enough to destroy their eco-system.

 

[frederick]

Look at food prices. There is only so much we can do to increase food production. We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

Humans are the only animals dumb enough to destroy their eco-system.

God never gave humanity the right to wreck the planet; use its resources, yes, but not abuse it. It's not God's fault people are irresponsible with what He gives them. However, it doesn't mean His command to, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth" has changed.

 

[paterfamilias]

Personal level, in a fantasy world where resource acquisition was a non issue, I would like to have a few wives and several children. Don't have a number in my mind for either. That I spend my life and make my life's work being father and husband.

I see the obligation of husband and father which is couched as cover being so many fold...shelter, shield, table, hearth, instructor, provider and loving role model or loving husband. Likely missing a few roles but you get the impression.
The man of the house needs to wear many hats.

 

[NickF]

Look at food prices. There is only so much we can do to increase food production.

We don’t need to increase food production. We produce far more than is actually consumed. Food prices are manipulated and manufactured by massive corporations.

We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

Completely unnecessary.

Humans are the only animals dumb enough to destroy their eco-system.

Factually incorrect but whatever.

This topic is squarely in my professional wheelhouse and one I’ve been studying for more years than you have existed. I can promise the concerns you listed above are entirely unfounded and incorrect.

This planet can easily handle log scales more human activity if done sensibly.

 

[Bartato]

At some point overpopulation would become a problem if everyone has 70 children..... Unless we manage to get off this planet.

It's not possible for everyone to have 70, like Gideon. He had many wives (probably 10+). Women are the limiting factor. Gideon had a lot of kids, but some other men didn't get a wife (or perhaps died early) and didn't have children.

Look at food prices.

Our current high food prices are caused by government stupidity, evil, and corruption. Our central bank, debt based, fiat currency system is a disaster.

There is only so much we can do to increase food production.

There is a great deal we can do to increase food production. Our current food system is profoundly inefficient. It is designed around maximizing mechanization and corporate profits, and minimizing human labor and financial inputs, not optimizing productivity, or improving human health.

As both an extreme backyard gardener/homesteader, and as a Certified Professional Agronomist and Certified Crop Advisor (CPAg, and CCA), I am convinced that this world is fully capable of supporting a vastly larger population.

@NickF is right. We could radically increase food production, if we were willing to.

We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

De-forestation is an example of poor agricultural practices. Biologically complex perennial food forest systems are far better (but also difficult to mechanize and globalize).

Humans are the only animals dumb enough to destroy their eco-system.

This is incorrect. All sorts of animals can and do throw their eco-systems badly out of whack.

 

[paterfamilias]

As both an extreme backyard gardener/homesteader, and as a Certified Professional Agronomist and Certified Crop Advisor (CPAg, and CCA), I am convinced that this world is fully capable of supporting a vastly larger population

So what you are saying is that I should bug you as well about the notion of building good pastures in places like to the east of the rockies in semi desert conditions with ludicrously low carrying capacity.

 

[Bartato]

So what you are saying is that I should bug you as well about the notion of building good pastures in places like to the east of the rockies in semi desert conditions with ludicrously low carrying capacity.

We could talk about it in a PM if you like.

 

[paterfamilias]

We could talk about it in a PM if you like.

Cool. Will bug you later

 

[MemeFan]

Look at food prices. There is only so much we can do to increase food production. We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

Only effect of high food prices is production increase which will lower prices.

Anyway, higher population will push prices up which will form incentives to innovate and resolve problem.

See this:

'Chinampas': The Ancient Aztec Floating Gardens that hold promise for Future Urban Agriculture

By Dimosthenis Vasiloudis

www.thearchaeologist.org

There is a great deal we can do to increase food production. Our current food system is profoundly inefficient. It is designed around maximizing mechanization and corporate profits, and minimizing human labor and financial inputs, not optimizing productivity, or improving human health.

What is your estimation how much according to current knowledge? 10X?

 

[FollowingHim]

Look at food prices. There is only so much we can do to increase food production. We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

Humans are the only animals dumb enough to destroy their eco-system.

Food prices are being driven up by the environmental agenda. In New Zealand, massive areas of land are being taken out of food production and put into industrial monoculture forestry for carbon credits. This is happening in many other parts of the world also. It is insane.

And the land that remains in food production is being subjected to more and more environmental and other rules, which don't actually help the environment to any appreciable degree, but cost an enormous amount of time and money to comply with. All these costs must be passed on to the consumer. This is driving up food prices, and compliance with the rules is reducing production also.

Food production in the West is not declining because we're destroying the ecosystem. It is declining because of misguided attempts to "save" the ecosystem.

 

[MemeFan]

Food prices are being driven up by the environmental agenda. In New Zealand, massive areas of land are being taken out of food production and put into industrial monoculture forestry for carbon credits. This is happening in many other parts of the world also. It is insane.

And the land that remains in food production is being subjected to more and more environmental and other rules, which don't actually help the environment to any appreciable degree, but cost an enormous amount of time and money to comply with. All these costs must be passed on to the consumer. This is driving up food prices, and compliance with the rules is reducing production also.

Food production in the West is not declining because we're destroying the ecosystem. It is declining because of misguided attempts to "save" the ecosystem.

And general money printing.

 

[MeganC]

At some point overpopulation would become a problem if everyone has 70 children..... Unless we manage to get off this planet.

Look at food prices. There is only so much we can do to increase food production. We are already reverting to de-forestation in some places to increase farm land.

Malthusian claptrap and this same nonsense was parroted by Paul R. Ehrlich in the 1960's. Both bleated about doomsday population collapses and famines and neither happened.

Malthus was disproven by the advent of the Industrial Age and the development of industrial farming techniques.

Ehrlich was just dead wrong. His book, The Population Bomb, was written in 1968 and even though the facts of the past fifty-six years have proven him wrong people like yourself are still repeating the nonsense he printed in his book.

Humans are the only animals dumb enough to destroy their eco-system.

Correction: Humans are the only beings smart enough to preserve ecosystems for other creatures and not just themselves.

 

[paterfamilias]

This is one of many times where I wish my grandfather were still around.
He was a double doc in two different areas of geology and was an occasional speaker on both the coming ice age as well as later when it became global warming. He was no longer professionally active and it was near the end of his time when the narrative of climate change was getting started.

He was interesting to travel with as you can imagine...so long as you like impromptu lectures on geology and related topics. The grand canyon, several different caverns and especially giants causeway stand out in my mind. He was the guy to take over the tour and dig a fair amount deeper than the rest of the group was expecting.
As a kid I was used to it and I did not appreciate it the way I should have. Unfortunately I only retained so much
Decided not to go into the field though I would have have had a good background having spent a good chunk of my youth with him and his undergrads on field trips or in one of his mines. We had three geologists in the family though and they were near as adamant as the MDs in the family that the profession sucked.
Reeeeeally regret it now though in the i can really see the utility of having both hydro and petro chops.

Makes me smile to remember though that he was not a great rancher and that I could now teach him some useful stuff if he was still around.

So I don't get deleted for off topic, old boy did teach me a hell of a lot about duty to wife and children in his own gruff and stoic way.
So now it is on topic.
Neener