• 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.

Random Comments

steve said:
I don’t know anything about their politics and what party is any good, but are they going grow any gonads and start standing up to the immigrants?
Click to expand...
Restore is in large part running on Millions Must Go and restoration of the death penalty. One of their largest advocates with a platform Carl Benjamin ie Sargon of Akkad is advocating for lashes being brought back as well.
The party is a little less than four months old and just came in third at a very big deal by election which put that weak that Burnham back into parliament and sent Stama off simmering. The point being that the population is genuinely sick of what is going on and to two tier anti white treatment of the native population in favor of any and all 3rd world <deleted> that just washed up to claim benefits and rape children. With Rupert Lowe having started the restore party and it exploding in growth...there is some degree of hope.
If you have any interest in how it started and their general vibe, get on X and search Rupert Lowe video and it will likely be the first one to pop up. Just a man on his farm making an announcement but it inspired millions.
 
This is a little random, but this is the thread for random thoughts. It didn't seem worthy of it's own thread.

The two opposing terms of "monogamy" and "polygyny" present a false dialectic. Using these terms creates a confrontation in which one of them must be superior, or correct. It is an important part of the foundation of Feminist dialogue.

It is fair to say that there is "unmarried" or "married," but to split "married" into two categories implies "good marriage" and "bad marriage." There is just marriage as Yahweh describes it.
 
MeganC said:
I agree. What truly matters is commitment.

Some men have more than one wife and some of those wives have kids.

But who would call them single mothers? ;)
Click to expand...
Yet we always hear from those in the monogamania camp how they believe that men who have or desire more than one wife, are not committing to their wife!
 
Transformator Reformator said:
Looking for ways to aquire the following gold mine source. Anyone knows English translation.

Polygamia Triumphatrix. By Johann Lyser (using pseudonym Theophilus Aletheus) in 1682.

treatise written by German Lutheran theologian It is a foundational text of early modern polygamist advocacy, arguing that polygamy is not only permissible but a divine requirement.

Core Arguments
  • Biblical Defense: Lyser argued that neither the Old nor New Testament explicitly banned the practice, using passages to suggest God ordained polygamy.
  • Population Growth: He theorized that polygamy was the best solution to repopulate Europe after the devastating losses of the Thirty Years' War.
  • Critique of Monogamy: The author actively criticized the Christian church's historical shift toward strict monogamy, blaming it for societal moral decay.

Publication & Censorship
  • Origins: Although the title page claims it was printed in Lund (Sweden) in 1682, it was actually published in Amsterdam to evade heavy censorship.
  • Backlash: Lyser spent his life traveling across Europe attempting to start a polygamist sect. His book was widely condemned by religious authorities, and a vast majority of the original copies were burned.

Historical Legacy
Today, the work remains an exceptionally rare and important historical artifact representing early radical critiques of traditional European marriage. It is frequently studied by historians of 17th-century political philosophy, theology, and the history of sexuality

Here is sample of material from the book:

“I am not even mentioning that many pagans and Turks, among whom polygamy is widely practiced, might convert to Christianity if polygamy were not prohibited among us. Gilbert Voetius, a highly learned man, testifies that the entire kingdom of Tonkin, together with its king, could have been converted to the Christian faith—if the Jesuits had not, in their discussions, dissuaded those who had already been converted from practicing polygamy. They even chose to persuade the king himself that he had to put away all his wives except one if he wanted to become a Christian. This so provoked the king that he cast out all those apostles (as they called themselves) along with their apostolic—or rather, fantastical—doctrine. For this loss to the church, those enemies—not only of polygamy, but even of marriage itself—will have to answer on Judgment Day.”
Click to expand...
Hear yee, hear yee. One of our own (not me), directed Ai to scan the pages of Latin masterpiece and form 1st English translation. It is about 600 pages of material. (English with Latin is available as well).

I am going to create different thread where we could react to it who wish. There are a lot of relevant nuggets of wisdom regarding patriarchy/polygyny. It is amazing those things were written in 1682. I am attaching the file here and in the new thread with the name "Reacting to Polygamia Triumphatrix By Johann Lyser".
 

Attachments

Heavens Declare said:
For a thread that is supposed to be random, we sure do seem to talk a lot about polygyny! Even Random threads can get derailed around here!
Click to expand...
Oh, sorry. I must have forgotten rules in FINE PRINT 300 pages ago. Thank you for keeping us on track on what to post on Random thread. (I hope you can detect sarcasm).

Are you running out of things to be angry about?

I am thinking of Random Comments" as a Bulletin Board.

P.S. I chose to respond the way I did because you chose exclamation symbol at the end of your sentences, so it sounded like you were yelling.
 
Last edited:
Transformator Reformator said:
Oh, sorry. I must have forgotten rules in FINE PRINT 300 pages ago. Thank you for keeping us on track on what to post on Random thread. (I hope you can detect sarcasm).
Click to expand...
It's hit or miss with me.

Transformator Reformator said:
Are you running out of things to be angry about?
Click to expand...
Never!

Transformator Reformator said:
I am thinking of Random Comments" as a Bulletin Board.

P.S. I chose to respond the way I did because you chose exclamation symbol at the end of your sentences, so it sounded like you were yelling.
Click to expand...
It's all good!!!!!!!!!
 
If you are partial to Textus Receptus translation, and you prefer Formal equivalence / Literal (as I am), I highly recommend Julia E Smith translation for studying. I think her translation is the best.

Here is sample of 1 Samuel 1:6. For example, NASB (Not Textus Receptus) has translated tsarah only one time as rival wife in the passage all other times NASB, translated the word distress (34 times), affliction (1), anguish (2), trouble (22), troubles (11), distresses (1).
Such bias of other translations creates perception of animosity in the family, when in fact it might not be the case.

NLT (Not Tecxtus Receptus) And though he loved Hannah, he would give her only one choice portion because the Lord had given her no children. 6 So Peninnah would taunt Hannah and make fun of her because the Lord had kept her from having children.

Julia E. Smith Translation 1876: And to Hannah he will give one portion more, for he loved Hannah; and Jehovah. shut up her womb.
6 Being grieved, her distress grieved her so that she was moved because Jehovah shut up about her womb

KJV: But unto Hannah he gave a worthy portion; for he loved Hannah: but the Lord had shut up her womb.
6 And her adversary also provoked her sore, for to make her fret, because the Lord had shut up her womb.

YLT: and to Hannah he giveth a certain portion -- double, for he hath loved Hannah, and Jehovah hath shut her womb;
6 and her adversity hath also provoked her greatly, so as to make her tremble, for Jehovah hath shut up her womb.
 
Even I did not know this. Baptists make about 1% of Ukranian population, but there were 450 Baptists churches targeted by Kremlin, not counting other Protestants, 700 churches were targeted. Many American Christians owe Ukranian Christians an apology for their willing stupidity (I am thinking of likes of Marjorie Green and Tucker Carlson, and many more).

David Wood makes great connection between Orthodox Taliban and rise of Ortho-bros rise
 
Last edited:
Transformator Reformator said:
Even I did not know this. Baptists make about 1% of Ukranian population, but there were 450 Baptists churches targeted by Kremlin, not counting other Protestants, 700 churches were targeted. Many American Christians owe Ukranian Christians an apology for their willing stupidity (I am thinking of likes of Marjorie Green and Tucker Carlson, and many more).

David Wood makes great connection between Orthodox Taliban and rise of Ortho-bros rise
Click to expand...

My understanding of Russian Orthodoxy is that it is a state religion. If you try to be a Baptist or a Lutheran or a Torah Observer - anything other than Russian Orthodox - you will either be imprisoned or killed.

Pro-Putin people talk about Russia like it is some misunderstood, magical Christian paradise. But there is something about modern Russia history which nobody understands. Russia is still effectively communist.

There is a book from a KGB defector named Anatoly Golitsyn which details how the fall of the Soviet Union was essentially an engineered longform plan by the KGB.

This book details it:

New Lies for Old​

In 1984, Golitsyn published the book New Lies For Old, wherein he warned about a long-term deception strategy of seeming retreat from hard-line Communism designed to lull the West into a false sense of security, and finally economically cripple and diplomatically isolate the United States.

Among other things, Golitsyn stated:

The "liberalization" would be spectacular and impressive. Formal pronouncements might be made about a reduction in the communist party's role: its monopoly would be apparently curtailed. An ostensible separation of powers between the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary might be introduced. The Supreme Soviet would be given greater apparent power, and the president of the Soviet Union and the first secretary of the party might well be separated. The KGB would be "reformed." Dissidents at home would be amnestied; those in exile abroad would be allowed to return, and some would take up positions of leadership in government.

Sakharov might be included in some capacity in the government or allowed to teach abroad. The creative arts and cultural and scientific organizations, such as the writers' unions and Academy of Sciences, would become apparently more independent, as would the trade unions. Political clubs would be opened to nonmembers of the communist party. Leading dissidents might form one or more alternative political parties.

There would be greater freedom for Soviet citizens to travel. Western and United Nations observers would be invited to the Soviet Union to witness the reforms in action.
Click to expand...

Golitsyn reportedly sought the assistance of William F. Buckley, Jr. (who once worked for the CIA) in writing New Lies for Old. Buckley refused but later went on to write a novel about Angleton, Spytime: The Undoing of James Jesus Angleton. One of the more notable claims made in New Lies For Old was that Andrei Sakharov was a "major KGB agent of influence".

In his book Wedge: The Secret War between the FBI and CIA (Knopf, 1994), Mark Riebling stated that of 194 predictions made in New Lies For Old, 139 had been fulfilled by 1993, 9 seemed 'clearly wrong', and the other 46 were 'not soon falsifiable'.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoliy_Golitsyn

------------

The KGB are communists. But they still are in charge of Russia, that never ended with the end of the Cold War. They just found a way to disengage from a costly and pointless endeavor, and use it as a means to build a longer strategy. Putin is KGB. He has been a dictator for a very long time, including a brief stint of having a puppet front man.

Communists don't believe in God or allow Christianity, but what we see in Russia is that a state-organized church operating as a limb of a government can be used against the people as a powerful tool. I don't want to get into the economics of it, because communism is really more about promoting negative emotional and spiritual lifestyles (envy, bitterness, covetousness) than a final economic wonderland. All that stuff is just bait to entice a populace to gut itself.
 
Off-Grid Artist said:
My understanding of Russian Orthodoxy is that it is a state religion. If you try to be a Baptist or a Lutheran or a Torah Observer - anything other than Russian Orthodox - you will either be imprisoned or killed.

Pro-Putin people talk about Russia like it is some misunderstood, magical Christian paradise. But there is something about modern Russia history which nobody understands. Russia is still effectively communist.

There is a book from a KGB defector named Anatoly Golitsyn which details how the fall of the Soviet Union was essentially an engineered longform plan by the KGB.

This book details it:

New Lies for Old​

In 1984, Golitsyn published the book New Lies For Old, wherein he warned about a long-term deception strategy of seeming retreat from hard-line Communism designed to lull the West into a false sense of security, and finally economically cripple and diplomatically isolate the United States.

Among other things, Golitsyn stated:



Golitsyn reportedly sought the assistance of William F. Buckley, Jr. (who once worked for the CIA) in writing New Lies for Old. Buckley refused but later went on to write a novel about Angleton, Spytime: The Undoing of James Jesus Angleton. One of the more notable claims made in New Lies For Old was that Andrei Sakharov was a "major KGB agent of influence".

In his book Wedge: The Secret War between the FBI and CIA (Knopf, 1994), Mark Riebling stated that of 194 predictions made in New Lies For Old, 139 had been fulfilled by 1993, 9 seemed 'clearly wrong', and the other 46 were 'not soon falsifiable'.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoliy_Golitsyn

------------

The KGB are communists. But they still are in charge of Russia, that never ended with the end of the Cold War. They just found a way to disengage from a costly and pointless endeavor, and use it as a means to build a longer strategy. Putin is KGB. He has been a dictator for a very long time, including a brief stint of having a puppet front man.

Communists don't believe in God or allow Christianity, but what we see in Russia is that a state-organized church operating as a limb of a government can be used against the people as a powerful tool. I don't want to get into the economics of it, because communism is really more about promoting negative emotional and spiritual lifestyles (envy, bitterness, covetousness) than a final economic wonderland. All that stuff is just bait to entice a populace to gut itself.
Click to expand...
Interesting perspective. I never heard that about pretending to loose Cold War.
 
steve said:
View attachment 12259
Click to expand...
Healthy society condemns evil consistently.

Problem: People can’t agree what is good or evil. The Creator gave us his instructions on what is good and evil. But even Christians can’t agree with what it says - so how much more those that reject the Scriptures.

True peace on earth is Isaiah chapter 2. All nations accept and learn Torah - and there is no more fighting between the nations.

All religions are state sponsored. They create their own light based on human wisdom. If the state hates something the Creator finds not sin - the state can declare it to be a criminal act - and the state sponsored religion will teach likewise (thereby - putting Messiah back on the cross - for he is the Word made flesh - and to do violence to the Word of God is to do violence to Messiah). So even if they preach doctrines and appear to be angels of light - they are Pharisees - for they are re-crucifying the Savior.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top