Meat Polygynous culture is already here -- a perverse one.

[NationBuilder1]

Consider for a moment the outcome of the perverse sexual permissiveness that we see in western culture today. Fornication is not only not punished by law, but it is actually encouraged; communist doctrine requires, for the sake of destroying the family and further consolidating power in the state, recreational sexual promiscuity in the extreme. And people have generally fallen for communist, satanic lies, especially women, as feminist ideas seep further and further into even the saltiest of Christian assemblies. The result has been that in the sexual "free market," most men are deemed undesirable by most women, and these women now generally throw their sexuality at the top 1% of the most attractive men, indeed creating a de facto culture of polygyny without even realizing it. We are forced then to conclude that if and when polygyny is normalized, most men will be without a wife, and the most desirable men will have an abundance of sexual opportunity.

Now let us consider what our Creator has prescribed in the Scriptures regarding the laws concerning sexuality. A woman, for example, is potentially punished for failing to bring her virginity to her marriage (and indeed, the history of many nations indicates that the inflection point of their rise and fall starts with their failure to punish female sexual impurity) -- and the offense is capital in nature. A man, for example, for the impropriety of laying with a girl is "punished" by paying the girl's father a handsome sum of 50 pieces of silver -- a year's wages for the average man at the time -- and he cannot put the girl away ever. Imagine, then, the penalty for such a crime and then being unable to pay such a sum; the man would be indebted to the father and possibly therefore become a slave to him. Consider the Torah Laws governing and regulating polygyny, which requires men to be responsible, not diminishing the rights, clothing, and food allowances of a wife in order to take another. Such laws would serve to temper the tendency that women would have to flock to the same 1% of all men. Consider also that, according to some studies of western nations, 30% of all children born to married mothers are not the biological offspring of their mothers' husbands. Consider that most divorces, upwards of 90%, are initiated by the woman, driven by a conscious or subconscious desire for a better male -- hypergamy -- and now juxtapose this trend with the Biblical prohibition (repeated at least four times in the New Testament) from marrying a divorced woman (queue the hysterics).

Where am I going with this? It appears that, given the perversion of the time, polygyny is inevitable, the great irony being that the same people who are promoting female promiscuity, the feminists, are engaging in polygynous behavior, which they paradoxically claim to hate. Their ironic behavior is no surprise to me, of course, but it occurs to me that the only way to prevent the inevitable unrest of having the problems described above is to carefully obey the Torah in every relevant detail. I cannot imagine a culture that, without the Torah, normalizes polygyny (mostly because most men would want to kill me, because I would have virtually all of the women).

I would like to know your thoughts on the current "polygynous" tendencies of females, the fact that, now that they face no punitive actions for their promiscuity, they are throwing themselves at the top 1% of attractive men. Even so-called Christian women are doing this under the guise of serial monogamy by divorce and remarriage (i.e. polyandry). Also, I would like to know your thoughts on the desirability of a polygynous culture unshackled by the constraints of the Torah.

Good? Bad? Necessary? Unnecessary?

 

[frederick]

I cannot imagine a culture that, without the Torah, normalizes polygyny

From what I understand polygyny is normal in many native cultures and certainly in Muslim culture.

 

[MemeFan]

Consider for a moment the outcome of the perverse sexual permissiveness that we see in western culture today. Fornication is not only not punished by law, but it is actually encouraged; communist doctrine requires, for the sake of destroying the family and further consolidating power in the state, recreational sexual promiscuity in the extreme. And people have generally fallen for communist, satanic lies, especially women, as feminist ideas seep further and further into even the saltiest of Christian assemblies. The result has been that in the sexual "free market," most men are deemed undesirable by most women, and these women now generally throw their sexuality at the top 1% of the most attractive men, indeed creating a de facto culture of polygyny without even realizing it. We are forced then to conclude that if and when polygyny is normalized, most men will be without a wife, and the most desirable men will have an abundance of sexual opportunity.
Now let us consider what our Creator has prescribed in the Scriptures regarding the laws concerning sexuality. A woman, for example, is potentially punished for failing to bring her virginity to her marriage (and indeed, the history of many nations indicates that the inflection point of their rise and fall starts with their failure to punish female sexual impurity) -- and the offense is capital in nature. A man, for example, for the impropriety of laying with a girl is "punished" by paying the girl's father a handsome sum of 50 pieces of silver -- a year's wages for the average man at the time -- and he cannot put the girl away ever. Imagine, then, the penalty for such a crime and then being unable to pay such a sum; the man would be indebted to the father and possibly therefore become a slave to him. Consider the Torah Laws governing and regulating polygyny, which requires men to be responsible, not diminishing the rights, clothing, and food allowances of a wife in order to take another. Such laws would serve to temper the tendency that women would have to flock to the same 1% of all men. Consider also that, according to some studies of western nations, 30% of all children born to married mothers are not the biological offspring of their mothers' husbands. Consider that most divorces, upwards of 90%, are initiated by the woman, driven by a conscious or subconscious desire for a better male -- hypergamy -- and now juxtapose this trend with the Biblical prohibition (repeated at least four times in the New Testament) from marrying a divorced woman (queue the hysterics).
Where am I going with this? It appears that, given the perversion of the time, polygyny is inevitable, the great irony being that the same people who are promoting female promiscuity, the feminists, are engaging in polygynous behavior, which they paradoxically claim to hate. Their ironic behavior is no surprise to me, of course, but it occurs to me that the only way to prevent the inevitable unrest of having the problems described above is to carefully obey the Torah in every relevant detail. I cannot imagine a culture that, without the Torah, normalizes polygyny (mostly because most men would want to kill me, because I would have virtually all of the women).
I would like to know your thoughts on the current "polygynous" tendencies of females, the fact that, now that they face no punitive actions for their promiscuity, they are throwing themselves at the top 1% of attractive men. Even so-called Christian women are doing this under the guise of serial monogamy by divorce and remarriage (i.e. polyandry). Also, I would like to know your thoughts on the desirability of a polygynous culture unshackled by the constraints of the Torah.
Good? Bad? Necessary? Unnecessary?

You are not seeing good. All societies through history are polygynous. It is consequence of human nature.

In which previous society 1% of men has taken 100% of girls as wives? None. In fact in all societies most men (over 80%) do find at least one girl. 80/20 principle doesn't apply to sex, dating and marriage. There is too much friction for small minority to take all girls.

 

[NationBuilder1]

From what I understand polygyny is normal in many native cultures and certainly in Muslim culture.

Regarding the question, "what is desirable?" Although, I would certainly prefer Muslim culture over the current leftist lunacy, there are so many aspects of Islamic culture that are frankly undesirable to me, because they do not regard our Creator's standards as important -- although, point by point, they are more concerned about it than most Christians (quantitatively). Muslims, for example have no regulations regarding a man's ability to afford more wives -- as long as it does not exceed four, you're good to go. So, put them all in one room with mattresses on the floor -- muslims are ok with that, sharing scarcity instead of abundance. Muhammad also had no compunction about raping female prisoners of war and selling them for ransom, which the Torah prohibits. So, kudos to muslims for being so devout, but their devotion to their religion puts them at odds with our Creator's instructions in the Torah.

 

[frederick]

Regarding the question, "what is desirable?" Although, I would certainly prefer Muslim culture over the current leftist lunacy, there are so many aspects of Islamic culture that are frankly undesirable to me, because they do not regard our Creator's standards as important -- although, point by point, they are more concerned about it than most Christians (quantitatively). Muslims, for example have no regulations regarding a man's ability to afford more wives -- as long as it does not exceed four, you're good to go. So, put them all in one room with mattresses on the floor -- muslims are ok with that, sharing scarcity instead of abundance. Muhammad also had no compunction about raping female prisoners of war and selling them for ransom, which the Torah prohibits. So, kudos to muslims for being so devout, but their devotion to their religion puts them at odds with our Creator's instructions in the Torah.

Obviously yes, Islam is just another false religion but the culture is quite accepting of, and has normalised, polygyny. Christianity on the other hand (everything that comes under that banner) is not going to normalise polygyny because of all the traditions that oppose it. And that is in spite of homosexuality and divorce having been normalised by so-called Christianity - both of which are spoken against by God in His Word. Go figure!

 

[steve]

Mostly, I think that it all adds up to an Isaiah 3 culture of ridiculous numbers of single women. All of them too proud to settle for less than the top 10% of men, if they will even settle that low.

 

[MeganC]

Regarding the question, "what is desirable?" Although, I would certainly prefer Muslim culture over the current leftist lunacy, there are so many aspects of Islamic culture that are frankly undesirable to me, because they do not regard our Creator's standards as important -- although, point by point, they are more concerned about it than most Christians (quantitatively). Muslims, for example have no regulations regarding a man's ability to afford more wives -- as long as it does not exceed four, you're good to go. So, put them all in one room with mattresses on the floor -- muslims are ok with that, sharing scarcity instead of abundance. Muhammad also had no compunction about raping female prisoners of war and selling them for ransom, which the Torah prohibits. So, kudos to muslims for being so devout, but their devotion to their religion puts them at odds with our Creator's instructions in the Torah.

A saying attributed to the Dalai Lama:

The problem with Christians is that they do not follow the teachings of their prophet (Jesus). The problem with Muslims is they do.

 

[NickF]

I would like to know your thoughts on the current "polygynous" tendencies of females,

This is female nature. Just reality.

the fact that, now that they face no punitive actions for their promiscuity, they are throwing themselves at the top 1% of attractive men.

Women have always done this and will always do this. It is essential to survival. Its base instinct.

Even so-called Christian women are doing this under the guise of serial monogamy by divorce and remarriage (i.e. polyandry).

People are people. Women are permitted, encouraged from every angle to pursue selfish ambitions. There are no consequences, only support and encouragement from the world to make bad choices that are antithetical to a stable healthy family. They are lied to from childhood on to believe lies. They are all princesses, disney says so. I could go on for a long time expounding upon this.

Also, I would like to know your thoughts on the desirability of a polygynous culture unshackled by the constraints of the Torah.
Good? Bad? Necessary? Unnecessary?

Culture divorced from God and his standards for righteousness is bad and will never work.

I have a lot more to say but currently don’t have time to type it all out. Product descriptions to compile and organize before New Years day launch.

 

[frederick]

A saying attributed to the Dalai Lama:

The problem with Christians is that they do not follow the teachings of their prophet (Jesus). The problem with Muslims is they do.

That sounds about right

 

[MeganC]

People are people. Women are permitted, encouraged from every angle to pursue selfish ambitions. There are no consequences, only support and encouragement from the world to make bad choices that are antithetical to a stable healthy family. They are lied to from childhood on to believe lies. They are all princesses, disney says so. I could go on for a long time expounding upon this.

I would go a step further here. Women and girls are not just permitted and encouraged to pursue selfish ambitions and self-destructive choices the contemptible leftists/feminists actively discourage women from choosing traditional and healthy family situations!

Like I said on another thread the demonic left will tell us that a thirteen year old girl can consent to recreational sex, hormone treatments to sterilize herself, gender mutilation surgery, politically approved medications, and etc.

But if that same thirteen year old girl wants to get married and have kids? Oh, then she's too young to make that kind of a choice!

I guess one thing I don't like so much about Wyoming is that we don't have enough trees for hanging leftists who predate on children!!!

 

[steve]

I guess one thing I don't like so much about Wyoming is that we don't have enough trees for hanging leftists who predate on children!!!

Scaffolding is an option, because dragging them is frowned upon.

 

[PeteR]

Good post, @NationBuilder1 . One major issue that @The Revolting Man made me ponder is divorce. In addition to teaching the Biblical truth of polygyny, we must teach heavily the Biblical truth of a woman's right (or lack thereof) to initiate a divorce. Part of what is feeding the radical serial monogamous (de facto polyandry) culture is no fault divorce.

Truly, there is NO TURNING BACK. Humanity has crossed the line and is accelerating toward personal, cultural, and corporate self destruction. The ONLY repair is a full return to Torah including the standards and punishments. An incremental reversal will not suffice and only result in us returning eventually to the state we are currently in.

 

[MeganC]

Truly, there is NO TURNING BACK. Humanity has crossed the line and is accelerating toward personal, cultural, and corporate self destruction. The ONLY repair is a full return to Torah including the standards and punishments. An incremental reversal will not suffice and only result in us returning eventually to the state we are currently in.

The Roman Empire rotted from within and just three years after one of their writers wrote about how Rome was all-powerful the city of Rome itself was sacked.

What followed was a rejection of the excesses of Roman culture. Homosexuals were no longer tolerated but instead were exterminated. Heretics and apostates of the (then) new Christian faith were also exterminated.

The future for the West will inevitably follow the Roman model. Internal rot will lead to internal collapse and inevitable invasion. The invaders will not be kind to those woke and liberal and leftist types who brought about the destruction of the West.

It is in no small way to me ironic that the secular humanist and anti-Christian idiots who worship Diversity are inviting droves of Muslims into their countries. Once Islam metastasizes in a country the first thing they'll do is exterminate the atheists and sexual deviants as they start to party like it's 799.

 

[steve]

The invaders will not be kind to those woke and liberal and leftist types who brought about the destruction of the West.

Those woke leftists who are so thoughtfully neutering themselves on soy.

 

[LDremoved]

The result has been that in the sexual "free market," most men are deemed undesirable by most women, and these women now generally throw their sexuality at the top 1% of the most attractive men, indeed creating a de facto culture of polygyny without even realizing it. We are forced then to conclude that if and when polygyny is normalized, most men will be without a wife, and the most desirable men will have an abundance of sexual opportunity.

How would this not be the case even if the "sexual free market" didn't exist? Just curious.

 

[NationBuilder1]

All societies through history are polygynous. It is consequence of human nature.

No disputes here, although Roman law did prohibit the practice, which is why Christians adopted it even though it was not uncommon in hebrew culture.

In which previous society 1% of men has taken 100% of girls as wives?

In fact, we see this trend in cultures where women are given the right to choose. We see this exact trend in the culture of sexual permissiveness in western nations today, as women, given a free-will choice, flock sexually to the same 1% of all men -- even in fornication. Because of forced monogamy, women cannot enter into marriages with these men, which leaves them discarded and of lesser (and I would argue zero) sexual value, which leaves them jaded and bitter, and we see this trend today where women are choosing not to marry and have children (which is cascading to the extinction-level birth rates we are presently seeing). Ideally, I would prefer to define polygyny as strictly a covenant marriage, but I am, for the sake of this conversation, defining polygyny as a trend around females' free-will trends of fornication and coalescing around the same top tier men to the neglect of most other men. By this definition, we see this situation in western culture today.

This trend is an example of what happens when women have the right to choose. They flock to the same men, preferring at a primal level, to prioritize sexual opportunity over monogamy. Monogamy benefits the 70% (or so) of men who are less desirable to women, leveling the playing field of sexual opportunity, but also consolidating political power with the state (instead of with the top tier of successful men). So, in fact, our culture has undergone the ultimate inversion where today men prefer polygyny more than women (as they generally claim). Women, despite their claims, as current sexual trends indicate, prefer sexual opportunity over monogamy (thus tacitly accepting polygyny for the sake of opportunity), which is why I assert that this culture has undergone the ultimate inversion -- where men prefer polygyny but women claim they do not. Women do prefer polygyny, and given the right to choose, will flock around the same top tier men. We are seeing this exact thing play out in real-time today with women's sexual "liberation."

Therefore, for men, polygyny brings the hope and opportunity to have many wives (if they can earn them), but the reality for most men, especially in a culture that is not committed to Torah, is that there will be no sexual opportunity whatsoever because top tier men will easily outcompete them, which will brings other social problems (and benefits, frankly). The problems include social unrest and crime, which must be dealt with.

Torah is the only way to deal with such problems.

Could it be that, for this reason, Yah is not intently interested in women's right to choose their own husband? The Bible is replete with language regarding male-headship, and I am starting to suspect, especially in light of today's lunacy of women's "rights," (and how women have generally abused those "rights" through fornication, divorce, and child-murder), that the restriction of those "rights to choose" was the Most High's intent all along for this fallen world. Given the choice, women generally choose wrongly, which cascades into many other problems.

 

[frederick]

No disputes here, although Roman law did prohibit the practice, which is why Christians adopted it even though it was not uncommon in hebrew culture.


In fact, we see this trend in cultures where women are given the right to choose. We see this exact trend in the culture of sexual permissiveness in western nations today, as women, given a free-will choice, flock sexually to the same 1% of all men -- even in fornication. Because of forced monogamy, women cannot enter into marriages with these men, which leaves them discarded and of lesser (and I would argue zero) sexual value, which leaves them jaded and bitter, and we see this trend today where women are choosing not to marry and have children (which is cascading to the extinction-level birth rates we are presently seeing). Ideally, I would prefer to define polygyny as strictly a covenant marriage, but I am, for the sake of this conversation, defining polygyny as a trend around females' free-will trends of fornication and coalescing around the same top tier men to the neglect of most other men. By this definition, we see this situation in western culture today.

This trend is an example of what happens when women have the right to choose. They flock to the same men, preferring at a primal level, to prioritize sexual opportunity over monogamy. Monogamy benefits the 70% (or so) of men who are less desirable to women, leveling the playing field of sexual opportunity, but also consolidating political power with the state (instead of with the top tier of successful men). So, in fact, our culture has undergone the ultimate inversion where today men prefer polygyny more than women (as they generally claim). Women, despite their claims, as current sexual trends indicate, prefer sexual opportunity over monogamy (thus tacitly accepting polygyny for the sake of opportunity), which is why I assert that this culture has undergone the ultimate inversion -- where men prefer polygyny but women claim they do not. Women do prefer polygyny, and given the right to choose, will flock around the same top tier men. We are seeing this exact thing play out in real-time today with women's sexual "liberation."

Therefore, for men, polygyny brings the hope and opportunity to have many wives (if they can earn them), but the reality for most men, especially in a culture that is not committed to Torah, is that there will be no sexual opportunity whatsoever because top tier men will easily outcompete them, which will brings other social problems (and benefits, frankly). The problems include social unrest and crime, which must be dealt with.

Torah is the only way to deal with such problems.

Could it be that, for this reason, Yah is not intently interested in women's right to choose their own husband? The Bible is replete with language regarding male-headship, and I am starting to suspect, especially in light of today's lunacy of women's "rights," (and how women have generally abused those "rights" through fornication, divorce, and child-murder), that the restriction of those "rights to choose" was the Most High's intent all along for this fallen world. Given the choice, women generally choose wrongly, which cascades into many other problems.

While I can agree with much of what you say we see the history of Israel, a nation established and built on polygyny, doing what other nations have done. Israel not only had the Law, but they had the very man who wrote it out for them to lead them from Egypt into the land promised to them. They were witnesses to the miracles in Egypt and experienced divine provision as they journeyed, however, in spite of all their privileges, were unfaithful to God and went rotten from the inside out.

The writer of Psalm 106 summarized it saying, But they mingled with the Gentiles And learned their works; They served their idols, Which became a snare to them. They even sacrificed their sons And their daughters to demons, And shed innocent blood, The blood of their sons and daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; And the land was polluted with blood. Thus they were defiled by their own works, And played the harlot by their own deeds. Therefore the wrath of the Lord was kindled against His people, So that He abhorred His own inheritance. And He gave them into the hand of the Gentiles, And those who hated them ruled over them. (Psalm 106:35-41).

I don't see any difference between Israel historically and contemporary Christianity so I suspect we will see the same outcome. Doing the same things, repeating the same mistakes is unlikely to result in a different outcome.

 

[MemeFan]

No disputes here, although Roman law did prohibit the practice, which is why Christians adopted it even though it was not uncommon in hebrew culture.


In fact, we see this trend in cultures where women are given the right to choose. We see this exact trend in the culture of sexual permissiveness in western nations today, as women, given a free-will choice, flock sexually to the same 1% of all men -- even in fornication. Because of forced monogamy, women cannot enter into marriages with these men, which leaves them discarded and of lesser (and I would argue zero) sexual value, which leaves them jaded and bitter, and we see this trend today where women are choosing not to marry and have children (which is cascading to the extinction-level birth rates we are presently seeing). Ideally, I would prefer to define polygyny as strictly a covenant marriage, but I am, for the sake of this conversation, defining polygyny as a trend around females' free-will trends of fornication and coalescing around the same top tier men to the neglect of most other men. By this definition, we see this situation in western culture today.

This trend is an example of what happens when women have the right to choose. They flock to the same men, preferring at a primal level, to prioritize sexual opportunity over monogamy. Monogamy benefits the 70% (or so) of men who are less desirable to women, leveling the playing field of sexual opportunity, but also consolidating political power with the state (instead of with the top tier of successful men). So, in fact, our culture has undergone the ultimate inversion where today men prefer polygyny more than women (as they generally claim). Women, despite their claims, as current sexual trends indicate, prefer sexual opportunity over monogamy (thus tacitly accepting polygyny for the sake of opportunity), which is why I assert that this culture has undergone the ultimate inversion -- where men prefer polygyny but women claim they do not. Women do prefer polygyny, and given the right to choose, will flock around the same top tier men. We are seeing this exact thing play out in real-time today with women's sexual "liberation."

Therefore, for men, polygyny brings the hope and opportunity to have many wives (if they can earn them), but the reality for most men, especially in a culture that is not committed to Torah, is that there will be no sexual opportunity whatsoever because top tier men will easily outcompete them, which will brings other social problems (and benefits, frankly). The problems include social unrest and crime, which must be dealt with.

Torah is the only way to deal with such problems.

Could it be that, for this reason, Yah is not intently interested in women's right to choose their own husband? The Bible is replete with language regarding male-headship, and I am starting to suspect, especially in light of today's lunacy of women's "rights," (and how women have generally abused those "rights" through fornication, divorce, and child-murder), that the restriction of those "rights to choose" was the Most High's intent all along for this fallen world. Given the choice, women generally choose wrongly, which cascades into many other problems.

You are way overcomplicating.

Instead of automatically running to Bible is only way, you should ask does your idea makes sense in another culture. In this case no.

Why? Accesibility. I'm certain peasant girls would like to finish in bed with prince or king, but neither are accesible. Who were lovers of European kings? Noble ladies? Why? They had access to king.

Also important, peasant man who like to boink peasant girls. And they will themselves with babies before prince can even visit village. And peasant wife with lots if children isn't interested in king, but in ensuring her man sticks with her.

Again, 80/20 principle doesn't work on male/female relationships. And there are also natural laws in human society. Such laws are universal and din't require Bible for explanation. Example how be make friends.

 

[Mark C]

Consider that most divorces, upwards of 90%, are initiated by the woman, driven by a conscious or subconscious desire for a better male -- hypergamy -- and now juxtapose this trend with the Biblical prohibition (repeated at least four times in the New Testament) from marrying a divorced woman (queue the hysterics).

Sorry. Queue the correction.

Mostly agree, but didn't see the above highlighted error called out as part of the addressed issue:

There IS no "Biblical prohibition" on a "divorced" woman remarrying!!!!

And if you have a mis-translation that seems to say so - find a better rendering, or study the original for yourself, as Paul suggests.

The problem is at LEAST 'two-fold,' and has been addressed here (and by myself repeatedly) before. So I won't rehash, BUT:

1) 'Divorce' is a horribly mis-understood term. As Pete correctly observed above, the situation there is so bad there is 'no turning back,' at least for most. The English word is generally used WRONGLY (see Matthew 5:32 where the KJV and variants get it wrong more than once in the same mistranslated VERSE!) The "putting away" (Malachi) is what Yah hates, and the words are NOT synonymous. See Deuteronomy 24:1, and 3.

2) That same Deuteronomy 24:1 and repeated in 3 makes it clear that a woman who HAS a 'sefer keretutah' MAY in fact "become another man's [wife/isha]." "Forbidding to marry" is such a b!t(#.

Yahushua didn't CHANGE it - He Wrote it. No wonder the twisted concept of licensed, Big-Brother Perverted, "RESPECTED" Abominations masquerading as marriage is such a steenkin' fetid mess.

Return to Torah is great. But read it, as Written, first.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Sorry. Queue the correction.

Mostly agree, but didn't see the above highlighted error called out as part of the addressed issue:

There IS no "Biblical prohibition" on a "divorced" woman remarrying!!!!

And if you have a mis-translation that seems to say so - find a better rendering, or study the original for yourself, as Paul suggests.

The problem is at LEAST 'two-fold,' and has been addressed here (and by myself repeatedly) before. So I won't rehash, BUT:

1) 'Divorce' is a horribly mis-understood term. As Pete correctly observed above, the situation there is so bad there is 'no turning back,' at least for most. The English word is generally used WRONGLY (see Matthew 5:32 where the KJV and variants get it wrong more than once in the same mistranslated VERSE!) The "putting away" (Malachi) is what Yah hates, and the words are NOT synonymous. See Deuteronomy 24:1, and 3.

2) That same Deuteronomy 24:1 and repeated in 3 makes it clear that a woman who HAS a 'sefer keretutah' MAY in fact "become another man's [wife/isha]." "Forbidding to marry" is such a b!t(#.

Yahushua didn't CHANGE it - He Wrote it. No wonder the twisted concept of licensed, Big-Brother Perverted, "RESPECTED" Abominations masquerading as marriage is such a steenkin' fetid mess.

Return to Torah is great. But read it, as Written, first.

I’m not sure you could have done one thing to make a Biblical truth more off putting.