Men's mindset of women's polygyny naturalness

[MemeFan]

Genesis of this post is me noticing something in mindset of forum members. It's something I noticed several months ago.

I think we can divide two mindsets: natural and spiritual.

Natural mindset assumes that women don't have any problems with polygyny. Every is ready for polygyny acceptance from moment little girl is born. All that needs to be done is removal of hurtful cultural influence. Current culture is only problematic things.

Spiritual mindset assumes polygyny doesn't come from women's nature. Instead women must be converted into polygyny similar as how Holy Ghost convinces us.

Mindset matters because it determines how man will try to convince his darling to "accept" polygyny. Spiritual one will write 15 page paper, collect all biblical examples and collect dozens of verses to defend his position. Natural one will just help darling to become what she already is. Work is mostly shutting her inner voice: "poly bad" and making her to trust her already existing pro-poly instincts.

In my opinion spiritual mindset is dumb one: way more work and "playing hard to convince" isn't good approach in anything which deals with ladies.

Key lesson here: Mindset used to convince ladies toward polygyny matter. Make sure you use good one, instead of dumb one.

Reward for dumb one: Wife won't accept polygyny, Holy Ghost gets extra work, divorce, potential second ladies run away.

 

[paterfamilias]

I see it as natural but from a different point of view.

-woman are conservative fertilizers whereas men are broadcast fertilizers

-there are far more moms in history than dads per the genetic record

With respect to convincing them, it is peculiar to me having talked to many dozen woman about the topic over time how much of a difference there is in their thinking across a spectrum. Some apparently can not think about it and I mean that literally. It is like showing an elephant a mouse in a old cartoon. It is immediate rejection with no reasoning, just fear or anger. More common are those who can understand the idea of how it is more efficient with respect to potentially having more incomes and allo parenting opportunities etc but just not for them as they could not get past the jealousy. Then the oddball that frankly feel like the extreme right hand of that bell curve, usually in more than one way, who upon presented with the notion, simply think about it and agree that it makes sense.

I suppose that spiritual is pretty important to convincing a woman to go along with it. I as the oddball to start, never went through that process. Happily I married a woman on the extreme right hand of the bell long ago and there was never any convincing. I don't envy those who married the left hand of the curve and good luck to those in the middle.

 

[Earth_is-]

1 Timothy 2:11-15
Women should learn quietly and submissively. 12 I do not let women teach men or have authority over them. Let them listen quietly. 13 For God made Adam first, and afterward he made Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan. The woman was deceived, and sin was the result. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing, assuming they continue to live in faith, love, holiness, and modesty.

We live in an age where Satan has deceived all the nations. What is up is down. What is down is up. Today's culture is a perversion of the Biblical Truth. A lot of women love it, because they prefer what the world teaches on marriage and patriarchy; versus what the Creator of the Heavens and Earth says. Why? Because they love the temporary control, influence, and power Lucifer gives to them over their men. However, these alleged Christian women are making HUGE mistakes. Because this world is temporary. Eternity is forever. You can not serve two masters. Lord Jesus says if you come to me Lukewarm - I will spit you out. You either come to him hot or cold.

Every woman that refuses to submit or accept polygamy from her husband that meets God's qualifications - is a feminist. Feminism is not from above. It's from below. Being woke is not from above - it's from below.

Being reborn is from above. Biblical Patriarchy is from above.

Simple choice really.

 

[Bartato]

Genesis of this post is me noticing something in mindset of forum members. It's something I noticed several months ago.

I think we can divide two mindsets: natural and spiritual.

Natural mindset assumes that women don't have any problems with polygyny. Every is ready for polygyny acceptance from moment little girl is born. All that needs to be done is removal of hurtful cultural influence. Current culture is only problematic things.

Spiritual mindset assumes polygyny doesn't come from women's nature. Instead women must be converted into polygyny similar as how Holy Ghost convinces us.

Mindset matters because it determines how man will try to convince his darling to "accept" polygyny. Spiritual one will write 15 page paper, collect all biblical examples and collect dozens of verses to defend his position. Natural one will just help darling to become what she already is. Work is mostly shutting her inner voice: "poly bad" and making her to trust her already existing pro-poly instincts.

In my opinion spiritual mindset is dumb one: way more work and "playing hard to convince" isn't good approach in anything which deals with ladies.

Key lesson here: Mindset used to convince ladies toward polygyny matter. Make sure you use good one, instead of dumb one.

Reward for dumb one: Wife won't accept polygyny, Holy Ghost gets extra work, divorce, potential second ladies run away.

This is a good topic, and I'm sorry I missed it earlier.

I think a similar argument could be made regarding manner of persuasion.

There is the dialectical approach which uses logic, reason, and evidence.

There is also the rhetorical approach which argues based on emotional impact.

A lot of us are primarily dialectical thinkers. We were persuaded of polygyny based on the Biblical evidence, and logical reasoning, and we try to persuade others using the same evidence.

It doesn't work very well because most people (particularly women) aren't dialectical thinkers.

Their emotions blind them, and they cannot see the truth.

A lot of pastors (being effeminate and cowardly) are also emotionally dominated and will close their hearts to the scriptures.

 

[MeganC]

Every woman that refuses to submit or accept polygamy from her husband that meets God's qualifications - is a feminist. Feminism is not from above. It's from below. Being woke is not from above - it's from below.

Nope. Sorry.

If a man swears an oath before God and witnesses that he will cleave only to his bride forsaking all others then she's not wrong in expecting him to uphold his oath. No one held a gun to his head to make him say this.

I wrote about this once and said if you go into a monogamous marriage then it's going to be difficult to change that into a poly marriage later on.

It's as easy as building a canoe and then one day trying to make it into a 747 airliner.

It's easier to just start with the 747.

 

[Bartato]

Nope. Sorry.

If a man swears an oath before God and witnesses that he will cleave only to his bride forsaking all others then she's not wrong in expecting him to uphold his oath. No one held a gun to his head to make him say this.

I wrote about this once and said if you go into a monogamous marriage then it's going to be difficult to change that into a poly marriage later on.

It's as easy as building a canoe and then one day trying to make it into a 747 airliner.

It's easier to just start with the 747.

It's kinda like a camel going through the eye of a needle, very unlikely.

On the other hand, we serve the God who raises the dead. All things are possible for Him!

Of course it is up to Him, and not us. Men trying to force it in their own strength will discover they are weaker than they thought.

Personally speaking, I just gave it to Jesus, and trust He will bring it to pass if He wills (and most likely He doesn't). I'm fine with that, because I'm content with Him alone.

Craving polygamy seems kinda like the desire to become rich. It's fine to be rich, (and polygyny is also lawful) but the love of money (and craving more women) brings about all kinds of evil, and causes some to wander from the faith and pierce themselves with many griefs.

 

[frederick]

Craving polygamy seems kinda like the desire to become rich.

No, there are many warnings against pursuing money/riches but none against having godly wives. In fact, contrast these Proverbs: Proverbs 23:4-5, Do not overwork to be rich; Because of your own understanding, cease!
Will you set your eyes on that which is not?
For riches certainly make themselves wings; They fly away like an eagle toward heaven.
And Proverbs 18:22; He who finds a wife finds a good thing,
And obtains favor from the Lord.

One pursuit brings disappointment the other brings God's favour. Quite a contrast, indeed.

 

[MeganC]

Hi @frederick , I understand what @Bartato means and I think you two are actually in agreement here.

Bartato spoke to craving more money and craving more women as problems and I would agree. Craving more women just for the sake of having more women around is a problem.

Wanting to build a large family that brings the favor of God is not.

It's the difference between a Biblical Family and a secular free love household.

 

[Bartato]

No, there are many warnings against pursuing money/riches but none against having godly wives. In fact, contrast these Proverbs: Proverbs 23:4-5, Do not overwork to be rich; Because of your own understanding, cease!
Will you set your eyes on that which is not?
For riches certainly make themselves wings; They fly away like an eagle toward heaven.
And Proverbs 18:22; He who finds a wife finds a good thing,
And obtains favor from the Lord.

One pursuit brings disappointment the other brings God's favour. Quite a contrast, indeed.

There is a type of desire for additional wives (or wealth) that is good and a type of desire that is harmful. I think our hearts know the difference. I've experienced both.

The one who seeks wealth (or wives) for security, for self aggrandizement, or for selfish pleasures in the gratification of the flesh, is off track. The one who desires wealth (or wives) to better and more extensively serve Christ sems to be on the right track.

In the parable, one servant was give five talents of money, another two, and another one. The key is to be faithful with what we are given. The man with five talents (and the one with multiple wives) is capable of doing more good, and also wasting more if he is foolish.

The one who was faithful with what the Master provided was given more.

 

[paterfamilias]

Natural mindset assumes that women don't have any problems with polygyny.

Natural for the win

 

[NBTX11]

Nope. Sorry.

If a man swears an oath before God and witnesses that he will cleave only to his bride forsaking all others then she's not wrong in expecting him to uphold his oath. No one held a gun to his head to make him say this.

I wrote about this once and said if you go into a monogamous marriage then it's going to be difficult to change that into a poly marriage later on.

It's as easy as building a canoe and then one day trying to make it into a 747 airliner.

It's easier to just start with the 747.

Well, kind of. A lot of men make this vow in ignorance of the word, because they were told by their pastors or churches they had to in order to take a wife. Once they find the truth, should their wife still expect them to keep an unbiblical vow forever?

I repeated this vow almost 32 years ago when I married my first wife at age 20. I repeated what the preacher said to repeat because that’s what I thought it took to marry my woman and I wanted to marry her. Was it a bad vow, yes it was, but I unknowingly made it anyways.

Once my wife is presented with truth, should she still expect this vow be upheld, or should she release her husband from this unbiblical vow. In my case, I asked my first wife to release me from this vow, and she did so. Only then did I seriously pursue PM.

 

[frederick]

Hi @frederick , I understand what @Bartato means and I think you two are actually in agreement here.

Bartato spoke to craving more money and craving more women as problems and I would agree. Craving more women just for the sake of having more women around is a problem.

Wanting to build a large family that brings the favor of God is not.

It's the difference between a Biblical Family and a secular free love household.

Thanks @MeganC

 

[Earth_is-]

Nope. Sorry.

If a man swears an oath before God and witnesses that he will cleave only to his bride forsaking all others then she's not wrong in expecting him to uphold his oath. No one held a gun to his head to make him say this.

I wrote about this once and said if you go into a monogamous marriage then it's going to be difficult to change that into a poly marriage later on.

It's as easy as building a canoe and then one day trying to make it into a 747 airliner.

It's easier to just start with the 747.

As we grow older - we should become more wise through Godly wisdom. Seeking His Word. What he says. The contrast with the world and human traditions. I do agree - a man that made such a vow - even through ignorance - should not bring another wife along unless the first wife accepts. Because a vow to her has been made. If men and women were taught the biblical truth - instead of deceptions and lies - I doubt most men would make such a vow. But regardless of that - a vow is a vow. At the end of the day - it’s YAH’s will in such cases. He closes and opens doors. So may the Most High’s will be done.

 

[MeganC]

Well, kind of. A lot of men make this vow in ignorance of the word, because they were told by their pastors or churches they had to in order to take a wife. Once they find the truth, should their wife still expect them to keep an unbiblical vow forever?

You made a vow and swore an oath before God. Your wife is a party to that oath. If she does not release you or give her consent to modifying that oath then your oath should be upheld. After all, you made the oath before God, correct? Me in your place I'd be much more concerned about God's judgment than your wife's.

 

[bfoster]

Who can free a man from an oath, even if he made it under deception? In Joshua 9, Joshua did not break the oath he swore to the residents of Gibeon after discovering that they had deceived him. Perhaps there is a difference in relation to marriages, as we know that a man can break his vow if the woman has lied about her virginity. In the case in question (where a man swears exclusivity to a woman before learning about plural marriage), is the woman's word really enough to free him from that vow?

 

[MeganC]

Who can free a man from an oath, even if he made it under deception? In Joshua 9, Joshua did not break the oath he swore to the residents of Gibeon after discovering that they had deceived him. Perhaps there is a difference in relation to marriages, as we know that a man can break his vow if the woman has lied about her virginity. In the case in question (where a man swears exclusivity to a woman before learning about plural marriage), is the woman's word really enough to free him from that vow?

If the oath is between two parties then both parties should agree before the oath is released or modified. Otherwise the oath is broken.

 

[Bartato]

If the oath is between two parties then both parties should agree before the oath is released or modified. Otherwise the oath is broken.

I generally agree with you on this point, but it isn't absolutely the case.

Let's say someone enters a homosexual 'marriage" and makes a vow like that.

That oath is fundamentally void on its face because there is no such thing as homosexual marriage. It is a forbidden, unlawful vow, and a nonsensical one.

Here I am referring to "before God", not in the eyes of the state.

A vow based on deception and fraud (monogamy only marriage) is different. It is still improper but in a different way.

Moreover, it was the church leaders that deceived us, not our wives.

I think the husband should request to be released from this improper vow, and in reverence before God, the wife should release the husband. I do think the wife has a moral duty to release the husband from this improper vow, made in ignorance, and based on deception.

That said, I agree that the vow still has moral weight, and the husband should still take it seriously.

 

[bfoster]

Moreover, it was the church leaders that deceived us, not our wives.

Therefore, could a monogamous marriage vow be considered from "time of ignorance" for a polygenic marriage to be established?

 

[MeganC]

I generally agree with you on this point, but it isn't absolutely the case.

Let's say someone enters a homosexual 'marriage" and makes a vow like that.

That's a false equivalence argument.

Homosexual marriage is not legitimate from the start. And you cannot swear an oath before God to commit sin and then expect that God wants you to uphold your oath more than He wants you to stop sinning.

Monogamous marriage is not a sin. Neither is upholding your vow or oath to forsake all others at the outset of a monogamous marriage.

 

[Bartato]

Therefore, could a monogamous marriage vow be considered from "time of ignorance" for a polygenic marriage to be established?

Here is another consideration. Is a Roman Catholic vow of celibacy (priests and nuns) binding? I believe it is also improper. Martin Luther (and wife Katy) didn't seem to think it was binding ( former monk and nun).