• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Wife literally fighting me

To my knowledge, the Bible never describes a "spirit of" a specific sin. It does, however, seem to describe spirits that are sinful in one specific way or another. But I believe these are not talking about an external spirit which is attached to us, but our own spirit which is in sin. For example, a "spirit of rebellion", or "rebellious spirit", may mean that a person's spirit (or character) is full of rebellion. Replace the concept of rebellion with any sin and it is the same, whether it is adultery, idolatry, or gluttony.

The "lying spirit" mentioned in 2 Chronicles 18 was, as I understand it, not a spirit of lies, but a spirit which lied. This spirit did not make the prophets lie, but lied to the prophets so that they would pass those lies to the king.

There are definitely instances where Satan tempts/tests people, as we see with Eve and with Jesus, and we see how Satan filled Ananias' heart to lie, but these appear to be the exceptions, not the rule. It appears far more common that our sin is the result of our own flesh, our own desires.

James says in (James) 1:13:
13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.
If it is our own lust/desire which causes us to be tempted, why would we say that an external spirit is instead responsible for our temptation?

Does not blaming a spirit for our temptation and our sin then indicate that we would be sinless and innocent if only that spirit would not interfere? We no longer recognize that it is our own hearts that are responsible, and shift our efforts and our prayers to removing this spirit that is impeding our path.

We do not need help from an external spirit in order to sin. Our own spirit is willing, but our flesh is weak, so "I do not do what I want to do, and I do what I do not want to do". It is no longer I who sin, "but the sin which dwells in me".

If we find that we are particularly prone to a specific sin, it is not likely because there is another spirit there to blame, but only our own spirit. Our flesh is weak here. Maybe we don't know how to stop, or don't want to. Or perhaps we believe it is a sin when it is our God-given nature that we are trying to rid ourselves of (for example, a man conflating confidence with arrogance, or a child conflating possession with selfishness).

So, no, I do not believe there is a "spirit of polygamy" (nor a "spirit of monogamy"). Or at least not in the way you are defining it. Technically, it is completely possible that there is a "spirit of polygamy", or rather that a spirit can be polygamous. In the same way that we were not given a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind (describing our own spirit, not an externally attached one), so God also has a spirit of love and a whole lot of other good aspects, among which is likely polygamy, since that is how He describes Himself. These are attributes of an individual's spirit (or character), not the intentions of an external spirit. In that way, there are men (and possibly women, depending on how we define this attribute) on this very forum who have a polygynous spirit. Not that they have some external spirit persuading them to act in a certain way, but that their own spirit is filled with love in the form of polygyny in the same way that the Father's spirit is filled.

To attempt to cast these spirits out is, I think, misguided. Yes, Jesus and His disciples cast out demons. But if we consider what those demons were doing, do we see them causing sin or tempting people? The only examples which were described that I can think of were those that caused affliction: seizures, fortune-telling, and a variety of behaviours that caused a city to be amazed when the man returned from the tombs after the legion were cast into pigs. These things seem more comparable to mental and maybe physical illnesses nowadays than to persistent sin. The idea that sin can be caused by demonic spirits which can be cast out is not something I remember reading in scripture.

Similar to what I said about the nightmares earlier, if we make our fight against sin instead a fight against spirits, we miss the underlying cause. When that cause is neglected, and the spirits do not seem to leave, our question again becomes "why?". Why does God not aid in our fight? Why does He not free us from this oppressive spirit? Why are we failing? It is again not because we are not good enough to cast out these demons, nor because God does not wish to help us, but because our focus is wrong. It is our flesh, our hearts and our minds which need to change. We need to be transformed by the renewing of our minds.

We should not fear the enemy, who can destroy our bodies, but instead we should fear (reverence) the One who can destroy both body and soul. We know that if we confess our sins then He is faithful and just to forgive us. Here, too, we need to trust God to teach us, to conform us, to renew us. We need to trust God that He knows our hearts. He knows our desire to obey Him, and how strong or weak that desire can be. We can trust Him to mold us into the shape that He wants us to take. Sometimes it requires patience on our part, who see our sin and desperately want it gone immediately. But renewal takes time. This is another good example of where sometimes we need to be still, cease striving, and know that He is God, and He is good and faithful.

For some, being still comes naturally, and they need to work on striving sometimes. For others, striving comes naturally, and they need to work on being still sometimes. Different people, with different struggles, facing the same God with different perspectives.



Regarding the consideration of the existence of a spirit of polygamy and the implications that would have, I think this is looking backwards at things.

God is the author of the law and of righteousness. Because He is the author of those things, He is indirectly the author of (the definitions of) sin. The enemy, and those under him, are not the authors of sin. They do not define what sin is, but merely oppose righteousness.

The enemy does not oppose righteousness with pure unrighteousness. There is truth mixed in with the lie.

Consider, for example, if you feel an urge to give all of your money and belongings, every last penny and item, to a homeless person. That may seem good on the surface, but it would leave you incapable of providing for your family, which God requires you to do if at all possible. Say you recognize that, and understand that this must be a ploy of the enemy. So instead you give the homeless person nothing. You have opposed the opposition of righteousness. But, in doing so, you may have missed God's desire for you to give the homeless person something. By opposing the opposition of righteousness, you have also opposed righteousness.

We cannot look to the desires of the enemy and negate them to understand the desires of our Lord and thus understand righteousness. We must look to the desires of our Lord to understand righteousness.
 
To my knowledge, the Bible never describes a "spirit of" a specific sin. It does, however, seem to describe spirits that are sinful in one specific way or another. But I believe these are not talking about an external spirit which is attached to us, but our own spirit which is in sin. For example, a "spirit of rebellion", or "rebellious spirit", may mean that a person's spirit (or character) is full of rebellion. Replace the concept of rebellion with any sin and it is the same, whether it is adultery, idolatry, or gluttony.

The "lying spirit" mentioned in 2 Chronicles 18 was, as I understand it, not a spirit of lies, but a spirit which lied. This spirit did not make the prophets lie, but lied to the prophets so that they would pass those lies to the king.

There are definitely instances where Satan tempts/tests people, as we see with Eve and with Jesus, and we see how Satan filled Ananias' heart to lie, but these appear to be the exceptions, not the rule. It appears far more common that our sin is the result of our own flesh, our own desires.

James says in (James) 1:13:

If it is our own lust/desire which causes us to be tempted, why would we say that an external spirit is instead responsible for our temptation?

Does not blaming a spirit for our temptation and our sin then indicate that we would be sinless and innocent if only that spirit would not interfere? We no longer recognize that it is our own hearts that are responsible, and shift our efforts and our prayers to removing this spirit that is impeding our path.

We do not need help from an external spirit in order to sin. Our own spirit is willing, but our flesh is weak, so "I do not do what I want to do, and I do what I do not want to do". It is no longer I who sin, "but the sin which dwells in me".

If we find that we are particularly prone to a specific sin, it is not likely because there is another spirit there to blame, but only our own spirit. Our flesh is weak here. Maybe we don't know how to stop, or don't want to. Or perhaps we believe it is a sin when it is our God-given nature that we are trying to rid ourselves of (for example, a man conflating confidence with arrogance, or a child conflating possession with selfishness).

So, no, I do not believe there is a "spirit of polygamy" (nor a "spirit of monogamy"). Or at least not in the way you are defining it. Technically, it is completely possible that there is a "spirit of polygamy", or rather that a spirit can be polygamous. In the same way that we were not given a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind (describing our own spirit, not an externally attached one), so God also has a spirit of love and a whole lot of other good aspects, among which is likely polygamy, since that is how He describes Himself. These are attributes of an individual's spirit (or character), not the intentions of an external spirit. In that way, there are men (and possibly women, depending on how we define this attribute) on this very forum who have a polygynous spirit. Not that they have some external spirit persuading them to act in a certain way, but that their own spirit is filled with love in the form of polygyny in the same way that the Father's spirit is filled.

To attempt to cast these spirits out is, I think, misguided. Yes, Jesus and His disciples cast out demons. But if we consider what those demons were doing, do we see them causing sin or tempting people? The only examples which were described that I can think of were those that caused affliction: seizures, fortune-telling, and a variety of behaviours that caused a city to be amazed when the man returned from the tombs after the legion were cast into pigs. These things seem more comparable to mental and maybe physical illnesses nowadays than to persistent sin. The idea that sin can be caused by demonic spirits which can be cast out is not something I remember reading in scripture.

Similar to what I said about the nightmares earlier, if we make our fight against sin instead a fight against spirits, we miss the underlying cause. When that cause is neglected, and the spirits do not seem to leave, our question again becomes "why?". Why does God not aid in our fight? Why does He not free us from this oppressive spirit? Why are we failing? It is again not because we are not good enough to cast out these demons, nor because God does not wish to help us, but because our focus is wrong. It is our flesh, our hearts and our minds which need to change. We need to be transformed by the renewing of our minds.

We should not fear the enemy, who can destroy our bodies, but instead we should fear (reverence) the One who can destroy both body and soul. We know that if we confess our sins then He is faithful and just to forgive us. Here, too, we need to trust God to teach us, to conform us, to renew us. We need to trust God that He knows our hearts. He knows our desire to obey Him, and how strong or weak that desire can be. We can trust Him to mold us into the shape that He wants us to take. Sometimes it requires patience on our part, who see our sin and desperately want it gone immediately. But renewal takes time. This is another good example of where sometimes we need to be still, cease striving, and know that He is God, and He is good and faithful.

For some, being still comes naturally, and they need to work on striving sometimes. For others, striving comes naturally, and they need to work on being still sometimes. Different people, with different struggles, facing the same God with different perspectives.



Regarding the consideration of the existence of a spirit of polygamy and the implications that would have, I think this is looking backwards at things.

God is the author of the law and of righteousness. Because He is the author of those things, He is indirectly the author of (the definitions of) sin. The enemy, and those under him, are not the authors of sin. They do not define what sin is, but merely oppose righteousness.

The enemy does not oppose righteousness with pure unrighteousness. There is truth mixed in with the lie.

Consider, for example, if you feel an urge to give all of your money and belongings, every last penny and item, to a homeless person. That may seem good on the surface, but it would leave you incapable of providing for your family, which God requires you to do if at all possible. Say you recognize that, and understand that this must be a ploy of the enemy. So instead you give the homeless person nothing. You have opposed the opposition of righteousness. But, in doing so, you may have missed God's desire for you to give the homeless person something. By opposing the opposition of righteousness, you have also opposed righteousness.

We cannot look to the desires of the enemy and negate them to understand the desires of our Lord and thus understand righteousness. We must look to the desires of our Lord to understand righteousness.
I don't want to go off of the topic completely.

Regarding the spiritual discussion, the heart is more important than spirits. You are correct there. Biblically we are taught more about having good conduct and keeping our hearts guarded, than evil spirits. But evil spirits are also able to put things into the heart.

“And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him;”
‭‭John‬ ‭13‬:‭2‬

Jesus was also tempted by Satan in the wilderness, so we cannot minimize their temptations.

“Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4‬:‭1‬

My theory on the temptations: He tried to get Jesus to make bread in order to break his fast(showing its importance), wanted Him to fall off of the top of the temple to commit suicide, and to worship him for obvious intent.

But I do agree that most of our issues stem from our own heart. From the heart is where our conflicts arise. Many ascribe this to devils when the person is at fault.

“For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭15‬:‭19‬

The devils work with what they have. If a person's hearts is darkened then they are able to go and live in that darkness. A person has to be willing to divulge in sin and get consumed in it. They desire to steal, kill, and destroy us in many different ways by getting us to sin, placing things in our hearts, making deals with people, entering in to people, teaching people their corrupt knowledge, having world leaders and media in their back pocket, etc.

“The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”
‭‭John‬ ‭10‬:‭10‬

And no, you don't have to show mental health issues to have a devil. My belief is at this point when you show many afflictions you either have a strong one, or many inside of you. There are normal everyday walking people who also have devils within them too, and i know this from experience. They really seek a home to live in. They don't always wreak as much havoc as you'd assume they do.

“Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12‬:‭44‬

I don't like to go deep on this topic because I just don't really like to. But I did want to address some of the things you said.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to go off of the topic completely.

Regarding the spiritual discussion, the heart is more important than spirits. You are correct there. Biblically we are taught more about having good conduct and keeping our hearts guarded, than evil spirits. But evil spirits are also able to put things into the heart.

“And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him;”
‭‭John‬ ‭13‬:‭2‬

Jesus was also tempted by Satan in the wilderness, so we cannot minimize their temptations.

“Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4‬:‭1‬

My theory on the temptations: He tried to get Jesus to make bread in order to break his fast, wanted Him to fall off of the top of the temple to commit suicide, and to worship him for obvious intent.

But I do agree that most of our issues stem from our own heart. From the heart is where our conflicts arise. Many ascribe this to devils when the person is at fault.

“For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭15‬:‭19‬

The devils work with what they have. If a person's hearts is darkened then they are able to go and live in that darkness. A person has to be willing to divulge in sin and get consumed in it.

And no, you don't have to show mental health issues to have a devil. My belief is at this point when you show many afflictions you either have a strong one, or many inside of you. There are normal everyday walking people who also have devils within them too, and i know this from experience. They really seek a home to live in. They don't always wreak as much havoc as you'd assume they do.

“Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12‬:‭44‬

I don't like to go deep on this topic because I just don't really like to. But I did want to address some of the things you said.
I would just add that the enemy of our souls empowers and indwells bad attitudes and lusts of every type and stripe.
Lust isn’t confined to the sexual desires.
 
I’ve done a lot of work with animals in the past and currently. Horses, cattle, dogs, all kinds. And most of them are dangerous and powerful. You cannot have a horse that trusts you and yearns to work with you, to do your will even before you can give the command to do the thing IF you use brute force to dominate and subdue the animal. Sure you can beat and “break” a horse down until it will obey. But that kind of animal will be ruined. A dog beaten daily will never have joy in and run to fulfill your wishes like one trained with patience and gentleness.

On the flip side, I’m not proposing nothing but sunshine, roses and butterflies. Those animals must understand that you are smarter, and more powerful than they are. Or they will dominate you.

I also work with animals. Most social creatures are hierarchical. And they will dominate you if given a chance and if you are unwilling to play the game, to fight back (justly) in at least some serious measure, you will loose. This is as dangerous with women as with beasts.

That women do this too, even when they desire otherwise, is the curse of Eve.

This is a general principle in any conflict, as game theorists found.
 
I also work with animals. Most social creatures are hierarchical. And they will dominate you if given a chance and if you are unwilling to play the game, to fight back (justly) in at least some serious measure, you will loose. This is as dangerous with women as with beasts.

That women do this too, even when they desire otherwise, is the curse of Eve.

This is a general principle in any conflict, as game theorists found.
Exactly. It's not just a women thing, it's a human thing. Women just have a slightly different flavor of this than men. And as human beings, it's easier to assume the way you relate is the same way the opposite sex will relate. So it pays to stay aware of and understand as thoroughly as possible how your wife will behave and function. Likewise for the women, spend some time trying to learn how men think and function. A woman who learns this will have a much more fulfilling and happy life because she will be able to meet her husband's needs and desires before he knows what they are. In turn, he will be so well satisfied that the overflow will pour out into her life and it will be much easier for him to seek to please his women. Seeking the good for the other will always pay dividends.
 
Exactly. It's not just a women thing, it's a human thing. Women just have a slightly different flavor of this than men. And as human beings, it's easier to assume the way you relate is the same way the opposite sex will relate. So it pays to stay aware of and understand as thoroughly as possible how your wife will behave and function. Likewise for the women, spend some time trying to learn how men think and function. A woman who learns this will have a much more fulfilling and happy life because she will be able to meet her husband's needs and desires before he knows what they are. In turn, he will be so well satisfied that the overflow will pour out into her life and it will be much easier for him to seek to please his women. Seeking the good for the other will always pay dividends.
Interestingly enough the only other words with the use of husband in it, is animal husbandry\husbandman. When you look into the etymology for them, it goes back originally to meaning farmer. Yet the etymology for husband which is the same word for animal husbandry\husbandman, spans back to the definition master of household.

I posit the theory that they originally were one and the same yet split into today's modern usage. A husband, in its original meaning, is a keeper of animals(yet used in the case of marriage) and master of the household. It is a complete and different understanding of what a husband is, which today is seen as just a form of partner. I do firmly believe that this is the true way to view a husband, and how the ancients understood it. A woman's husband is her greatest form of authority on the earth. He is her ruler or keeper(like with animals), not a partner, equally.

" thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬

Christ is a husband both in having a bride, and in keeping animals. As His sheep we are clothed by Him, sheltered by Him, fed by Him, loved by Him, led by Him, protected by Him, and these are all the exact same husbandly duties that us brothers have with our wives! Our main duty as His sheep and bride, is to follow Him and obey Him, which is the exact same as our wives. Those are her chiefest duties. It is a whole and complete picture.

When God sought to give Adam an help meet remember He originally was bringing animals to Adam, and then He saw that he was still alone.

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2‬:‭18‬-‭20‬

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭11‬:‭9‬

Adam even named the species(for lack of a better word) of Eve like he had named all the animals already. That she would be called woman, note this is not her name but her species name. What her 'kind' is called.

“And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2‬:‭23‬

Woman is the perfect creation for man. Man was alone until she came, but he must be a biblical husband with her. He must tend to and take care of his wife like a true husband.
 
Last edited:
Well said!
Too many men out there now are just users. They want access to a woman, (or many women) but don't want to care for any. These to me are more like hunters, and often they end up "poachers" as well. They rarely respect moral boundaries and some think nothing of using another man's wife.

Animal husbandry goes far beyond just throwing hay (or scratching itches in the user analogy :cool: ) it is providing what the animals need to thrive and produce, and keeping them safe. Lessons I hope our children will learn in caring for the sheep. A barbed wire fence is as deadly as a coyote if your milk ewe rips her udder and gets mastitis. There is something very satisfying about listening to sheep cropping grass (or weeds) the chewing and short walks from plant to plant. Then to see them bed down in the shade to chew their cud. Relaxed and happy. ... I like this.
 
Last edited:
Interestingly enough the only other words with the use of husband in it, is animal husbandry\husbandman. When you look into the etymology for them, it goes back originally to meaning farmer. Yet the etymology for husband which is the same word for animal husbandry\husbandman, spans back to the definition master of household.

I posit the theory that they originally were one and the same yet split into today's modern usage. A husband, in its original meaning, is a keeper of animals(yet used in the case of marriage) and master of the household. It is a complete and different understanding of what a husband is, which today is seen as just a form of partner. I do firmly believe that this is the true way to view a husband, and how the ancients understood it. A woman's husband is her greatest form of authority on the earth. He is her ruler or keeper(like with animals), not a partner, equally.

" thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬

Christ is a husband both in having a bride, and in keeping animals. As His sheep we are clothed by Him, sheltered by Him, fed by Him, loved by Him, led by Him, protected by Him, and these are all the exact same husbandly duties that us brothers have with our wives! Our main duty as His sheep and bride, is to follow Him and obey Him, which is the exact same as our wives. Those are her chiefest duties. It is a whole and complete picture.

When God sought to give Adam an help meet remember He originally was bringing animals to Adam, and then He saw that he was still alone.

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2‬:‭18‬-‭20‬

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭11‬:‭9‬

Adam even named the species(for lack of a better word) of Eve like he had named all the animals already. That she would be called woman, note this is not her name but her species name. What her 'kind' is called.

“And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2‬:‭23‬

Woman is the perfect creation for man. Man was alone until she came, but he must be a biblical husband with her. He must tend to and take care of his wife like a true husband.
What most don’t recognize is that Adam was made for Yah, Eve was made for Adam.
People assume that both are equally for themselves and each other.
 
Interestingly enough the only other words with the use of husband in it, is animal husbandry\husbandman. When you look into the etymology for them, it goes back originally to meaning farmer. Yet the etymology for husband which is the same word for animal husbandry\husbandman, spans back to the definition master of household.

I posit the theory that they originally were one and the same yet split into today's modern usage. A husband, in its original meaning, is a keeper of animals(yet used in the case of marriage) and master of the household. It is a complete and different understanding of what a husband is, which today is seen as just a form of partner. I do firmly believe that this is the true way to view a husband, and how the ancients understood it. A woman's husband is her greatest form of authority on the earth. He is her ruler or keeper(like with animals), not a partner, equally.

" thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬

Master of livestock. Master of the house. Master of the woman.

The word translated husband in the bible in the original language usually means one of two things: man, master. We see here an example of something I've noticed repeatedly, the etymology behind our English words mirrors that in the Bible. Husband means master in both cases. But this meaning of husband has been lost to the passage of time and shift of language and the modern church has chosen to hid the meaning behind the translation as it doesn't fit modern sensibilities.
 
Too many men out there now are just users. They want access to a woman, (or many women) but don't want to care for any. These to me are more like hunters, and often they end up "poachers" as well.
Amen, I agree. Yes, as men by default we are set as predators until we become moral.

The key I saw for myself to first start understanding this, was us all being a bride while also being sheep to our Good Shepherd. And how David's wives were referred to as flocks and herds, while Uriah's lone lamb, Bathsheeba, I'll quote it because it speaks magnitudes by itself.

“but the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.”
‭‭2 Samuel‬ ‭12‬:‭3‬

It clicked for me when I saw the parallels. I finally realized, like a revelation, this is what marriage actually is. It is designed that the woman comes into belonging of the man, for exchange of being taken care of continually. Every need met, and loved upon. She is no longer her own, but his, which is why her name becomes her husband's. I had been deceived in not knowing that this is marriage, and it has historically always been this way. That there are many husbands in the world in name only, but not in action.

Me coming to understand this, has furthered my understanding of the Father and the Son, and our relationship to Him. We had our own bride price, or dowry, paid in blood.

“and he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”
‭‭1 John‬ ‭2‬:‭2‬

“What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭6‬:‭19‬-‭20‬

and as His bride, we will take on His name

“and they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭22‬:‭4‬
 
Master of livestock. Master of the house. Master of the woman.

The word translated husband in the bible in the original language usually means one of two things: man, master. We see here an example of something I've noticed repeatedly, the etymology behind our English words mirrors that in the Bible. Husband means master in both cases. But this meaning of husband has been lost to the passage of time and shift of language and the modern church has chosen to hid the meaning behind the translation as it doesn't fit modern sensibilities.
So now husband is merely an elevated form of boyfriend, that you 'commit' your life to but don't belong to and leave when no longer happy. I had a woman at my job tell me she didn't belong to her husband, as if to say she's beat the system.

It is interesting when words change meaning, usually while you are targeted and under war. Like "ye shall not surely die".
 
There’s a lot I don’t know about the situation and the two of you. But more often than not, a man finds out about polygyny and broaches the subject far before his wife is ready to hear about it. Then in typical logical male fashion he continues talking about it without understanding her perspective.

(Live with your wife in an understanding manner)

Now before I say this, please don’t anybody hear me saying women are equal with animals. That’s absolutely not my point.

I’ve done a lot of work with animals in the past and currently. Horses, cattle, dogs, all kinds. And most of them are dangerous and powerful. You cannot have a horse that trusts you and yearns to work with you, to do your will even before you can give the command to do the thing IF you use brute force to dominate and subdue the animal. Sure you can beat and “break” a horse down until it will obey. But that kind of animal will be ruined. A dog beaten daily will never have joy in and run to fulfill your wishes like one trained with patience and gentleness.

On the flip side, I’m not proposing nothing but sunshine, roses and butterflies. Those animals must understand that you are smarter, and more powerful than they are. Or they will dominate you.

If your wife is angry it’s probably because she is terrified. It’s likely because your bringing up polygyny has torn down her boundaries, made her feel vulnerable and exposed, turned her world upside down.

She needs reassurance and often, that you will never cast her aside, that she is precious and priceless to you. That she is treasured and a pearl beyond worth. You need to convince her that not only is divorce not on the table, but that she belongs to you, and you will not tolerate losing her.

You honestly probably need to shut tf up about poly, and get your house in order. Teach her (slowly) about patriarchal headship and the proper role of a wife. Shut up about polygyny.

Teach her and your whole house about biblical authority, God’s nature, His relationship towards us. Our responsibility towards others.

I’ve only had to look disapprovingly at my wife once and inform her she should get a spanking once. (I’ve never hit her though, never needed to) That’s because I’ve spent the time demonstrating and proving through my actions that I am the head of the household. But she knows if she’s going to act like a fool, that there are stripes for the backs of fools, and God chastens those who he loves.

Again, I know nothing of you, your wife, your attitudes, history or anything. So I’m just making guesses here. But often, people who act that angry and violent are scared and have no boundaries.

Remove the fear, establish boundaries. Provide security, be a man and teach the Word.

Listen to the hard men podcast. Read Athol Kay’s Married Man Sex Life Primer. No it’s not about getting more sex, that’s just marketing. A woman who’s willing to go nuclear like that on a man doesn’t respect her man. You need to be respectable before she will respect you.
THIS..... ALL OF THIS!!!
I'm sure your wife came into the marriage not even knowing about polygamy in the way that you have found it!! It sounds like you have researched polygamy recently.
I don't know how long you have been married. If you never mentioned polygamous marriage ever you need to tread ever so lightly..... even tip toe....or not to be disrespectful... but you need to back off polygamy for now! Nick worded it much more eloquent than I can.
You are a man so your view will be different. You are trying to make her see something that goes against her every fiber. She came into the marriage thinking one man and one woman... soul mates I'm sure! Let Polygamy take a back seat... it sounds like forgiveness and reconciliation need to be in the forefront of your marriage right now.
 
THIS..... ALL OF THIS!!!
I'm sure your wife came into the marriage not even knowing about polygamy in the way that you have found it!! It sounds like you have researched polygamy recently.
I don't know how long you have been married. If you never mentioned polygamous marriage ever you need to tread ever so lightly..... even tip toe....or not to be disrespectful... but you need to back off polygamy for now! Nick worded it much more eloquent than I can.
You are a man so your view will be different. You are trying to make her see something that goes against her every fiber. She came into the marriage thinking one man and one woman... soul mates I'm sure! Let Polygamy take a back seat... it sounds like forgiveness and reconciliation need to be in the forefront of your marriage right now.
For anyone who is willing to go where God leads Him, and take all of scripture not just some of it, this topic is bound to come up. For any serious research into biblical marriage really. I do not fear or am subject to my wife, nor do i need to keep my mouth if i intend to say something. What is best is to breach the topic at the very least, then help to rebuild her. Keeping it all to myself I believe would of been the worst thing to do, if it potentially happens. Don't you think? There is no easy way about it. If my understanding of marriage now allows for this, it is better for her to know sooner than later. It's way better to be upfront and truthful, even if it brings pain, that's how I see it.

If she is willing to align to the bible like I have, about marriage(which it seems like she is), than she will need to change her perspective. It is as simple as that. Sure it may need time, and that is fine.

I get your point of view, and I understand your opinion. But now everything is out. I've already told her all that I've needed to say. Now is time to rebuild and take each day at a time.

Doesn't mean I'll ever have a second wife, but that either way she is by my side as a biblical wife--subject to me like the church to Christ, obeying me in everything. Following my lead.
 
Last edited:
Just to throw a wrench in the names discussion, in Hebrew thought, to name something is to take dominion over it... You become responsible for it. I'm not sure I would want to have ownership of a demon. So maybe don't be naming them and thereby bringing them into your life.

The only times demons get "names", they are merely descriptive. Legion is many, shatan is adversary, Lucifer was technically an angel at the time, and is never mentioned by name again. "The queen of heaven" is not necessarily a name either.

The only time I've had what could be described as a demonic encounter was before I came to Torah, and thankfully the spirit was after the other guy in the room and not me. But yeah, that sensation of death that emanates from those is something else. And I know death better than any man ever should. Just a cautionary.
 
For anyone who is willing to go where God leads Him, and take all of scripture not just some of it, this topic is bound to come up. For any serious research into biblical marriage really. I do not fear or am subject to my wife, nor do i need to keep my mouth if i intend to say something. What is best is to breach the topic at the very least, then help to rebuild her. Keeping it all to myself I believe would of been the worst thing to do, if it potentially happens. Don't you think? There is no easy way about it. If my understanding of marriage now allows for this, it is better for her to know sooner than later. It's way better to be upfront and truthful, even if it brings pain, that's how I see it.
Best way to do it. Get it out in the open and discuss it. When I did an in depth study on marriage, I discussed it with my wife within 2 or 3 days. Of course she was originally hesitant about this topic, but over time came to accept it as Biblical and good.
 
Best way to do it. Get it out in the open and discuss it. When I did an in depth study on marriage, I discussed it with my wife within 2 or 3 days. Of course she was originally hesitant about this topic, but over time came to accept it as Biblical and good.
What prompted you to start questioning things?
 
Back
Top