• 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.

Sister Wives...

Jonathan Turley hired to represent Kody and wives...

This is getting very good!

Kody and family have hired Jonathan Turley, a prominent constitutional law attorney to represent them...

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/entertainm ... r.html.csp

Along with developments in the Texas case I think we will see the bigamy laws fall in 2011...
 
mrscottyl said:
Welcome here, and you will find that there are people from all walks and even many different denominations and non-denominational structures here. I too am a Messianic Jew, as are others, and if you ever want to talk, or ask questions, feel free to ask. There are many wonderful people on here that truly exude the Love of the Father. I will preface this next statement as saying that I may be wrong, but there are many here who are not as comfortable with their views on Biblical Marriage/Scriptural Polygyny being known as others such as myself. I am one of the more outspoken ones here, although there are times when I do not say much on this forum. But I have a journalistic site where I post pro-polygyny posts and even do my best to stand up and defend brothers and sisters attacked for their beliefs (http://mrscottyl.blogspot.com) an internet podcast that is the sister to the site, where we also lift up people and organizations, such as what we did here for Doc and Biblical Families, as well as trying to educate the public on what a Scriptural Polygynyst really is (http://thatpolygamyshow.info), and even a scriptural family based site where we do discuss polygyny, but also a whole lot more, and to where there are many people here that are also there (http://scripturalpatriarchs.wackwall.com). And people know my name, and even call me by that (as well as a lot of other nasty things from those who are anti-polygyny). Make yourself at home, and there is never a stupid question. If I can do anything for you, just let me know.

Scott

Thanks for the reply. You know I have never had a real problem with poly being biblical. It seems logical and reasonable and 'normal' extension of life and faith in Torah. I realize that I am not in the majority thinking that. That view got me into a some trouble in Bible College and then Seminary. Of course my Torah view also got me in trouble.

Praxis is the problem. What I did think: IS that people (other then a few wacked out people) actually practiced PM. That is what has stunned me and even bothered me. It went from well that is ok but no one actually does it . . . to OMGosh people actually do practice. And these people do not seem wacky (or Mormon).

It is the same kind of thought and amazement and praxis issue that occured to me when I found that I could still practice as a Jew and believe in King Messiah. I was told that I had to give up all aspects of Judaism. Ani Ma'amin.

Most of my questions as you can tell from my posts . . . is that of practice not Bible.
 
Jonathan Turley's Blog...

As an attorney in the case he cannot comment on things, but he has stated he will not interfere with those that wish to make comments at the blog...so here it is...feel free to chime in...

http://jonathanturley.org/2010/10/06/re ... more-27100
 
Set your DVRs and other recording devices to the Oprah show soon. The family on Sister Wives will be on there.

http://www.tmz.com/2010/10/08/sister-wi ... my-bigamy/

This will give another boost of publicity and bring more attention to the family and polygamy overall. Hopefully, they're lawyer and legalized polygamy will be a topic!
 
The Brown's family from Sister Wives will be on Oprah today (October 14 - Thursday)
 
Did anyone watch this show on Oprah?

How did it go?
 
I have watched a few shows ... I am little behind now, but I thought that it was curious that even inside a polygynous relationship that matriarchy still reigns supreme, there are just several ruling matriarchs :) :D. Just an observation.
 
Dr. Allen...an atheist had this to say on a blog that I have been participating on:

"Bleh, our discussion was a hell of a lot more interesting that Opera’s interview."

I think she is of the mindset "Hey, if it's for you, do it". I don't think she got very in-depth.
 
Polygynous Honeymoons & Kody Brown

By L. Tyler, San Diego County, CA
COPYRIGHT (c) JANUARY 14, 1996; Revised 11/22/10 All rights reserved.
This file, in its entirety, may be posted on or copied off of
computer networks like Internet or WWW by anyone so
inclined as long as it is not changed.
Edited, compiled and written by L. Tyler,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OrthodoxB ... gePolygamy 
http://groups.google.com/group/Biblical ... myPolygyny
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PolyPolyg ... gynyNJesus
http://biblicalmarriagepolygyny.yuku.com/forums/66

I just finished viewing TLC's coverage of Kody's honeymoon with his new wife, Robyn. I have problems with the way he did his honeymoon and the reactions of his three other wives make me think I'm not the only one. I believe the decision to have an 11 day honeymoon in San Diego was a bad one.
Reasoning from 1 Corinth 7:1-5 and my polygynous experience, I wish he had decided to take 11 days free from his employment, spent the 11 nights at home with the whole family, spent the 9 hours of daytime of the 11 days with exclusively with his new wife honeymooning, spent the first three nights with the new wife (if the other wives consented), and then spent the remaining 8 nights in his new rotation/schedule with all four wives. I know that doesn't seem very romantic, but I believe it is fair and takes into consideration the feelings and needs of the other wives.

My thinking immediately goes to the following:
***1 Cor 7: 2 but because of and to avoid sexual immorality each man should be [sexually] having his own woman, and each woman should be [sexually] having her own man. . . .4. The woman doesn't have [sexual] authority over her own body, but the husband [does]; in like manner also the man doesn't have [sexual] authority over his own body, but the woman [does]. 5 Do not be denying each other [sexually], unless, it may be, by consent for a time, that you may devote yourselves to fasting and prayer, and again be conjugally cohabiting [sexually reuniting], so that Satan does/will/may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control . . .

From this I understand that Kody's responsibility is to keep on sexually having his own women, and their responsibility is to keep on sexually having Kody. This marital obligation is partly based on the authority Jesus has given Kody over the bodies of his own women, and the authority Jesus has given Kody's own women over his body. This is the same kind of authority established by Jesus in Romans 13, except in this case the sword bearing and punishing is done by Jesus or his angels (1 Cor 11:30-32ff).

From that Scripture it is clear that Kody must not sexually deny any of his own women, and his own women must not sexually deny Kody, "unless, it may be, by consent for a time, that" they "may devote" themselves "to fasting and prayer, and again be conjugally cohabiting [sexually reuniting], so that Satan does/will/may not tempt" them, because of their "lack of self-control." So any honeymoon that occurs in the Kody family would have to be arranged so that not one of the wives is denied sexual access and intimacy unless it is by mutual consent, and then only for a mutually agreed upon time of fasting prayer, followed by resumption of regular marital and sexual intimacy. So that is where I got the idea of Kody taking 11 days free from his employment, spending the 11 nights at home with the whole family, spending the 9 hours of daytime of the 11 days with exclusively with his new wife honeymooning, spending the first three nights with the new wife, Robyn, (if the other wives consented), and then spending the remaining 8 nights in his new rotation/schecule with all four wives.

The Bible is crystal clear that in one's marriage it is unacceptable to Jesus for there to be any prejudice, partiality, favoritism, or preferential treatment between the members of the marriage. The following Scriptures make it very clear there should be no prejudice, partiality, favoritism, or preferential treatment in the family's verdicts, decrees, trials, determinations, judgments or ordinances dealing with its own affairs and relationships.

***1Ti 5:21 I solemnly call upon you, in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels, to carry out these instructions of mine without prejudice<4299 = or preferring one before another>,, and to do nothing from partiality<4346 = or favoritism>..WEY
>>>Strong's (4299) pro>krima, — prok’-ree-mah; a prejudgment (prejudice), i.e.
prepossession: — prefer one before another.
>>>Strong's (4346) pro>sklisiv, — pros’-klis-is; a leaning towards, i.e. (figurative)
proclivity (favoritism): — partiality.
***JAMES 2:1 ¶ My brethren, you must not make distinctions<4382 = or must not have partiality, favoritism>. between one man and another while you are striving to maintain faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our glory. . . . 8 ¶ If indeed you keep [the] royal law according to the scripture, You shalt love your neighbour as thyself, you do well. 9 But if you have respect of persons<4380 = or partiality, favoritism>, you commit sin, being convicted by the law as transgressors.
>>>Strong's (4382) proswpolhyi>a, — pros-o-pol-ape-see’-ah; partiality, i.e. favoritism: — respect ofpersons.
>>>Strong's (4380) proswpolhpte>w, — pros-o-pol-ape-teh’-o; to favor an individual, i.e. show partiality: — have respect to persons

***PROV. 24:23 ¶ These things also come from the wise. It is not good to have respect of<5234 = or regard or care for; to disregard, ignore or reject> persons <6440> in judgment <4941 or decrees, trials, determinations>. . . .
>>>Strong's {5234} rk"n; — nakar, naw-kar'; acknowledge, care for, respect, revere, disregard, ignore, reject, perceive, regard, respect
>>>Strong's {6440} µynip; — paniym, paw-neem'; the face, countenance, person
>>>Strong's {4941} fp;v]mi — mishpat, mish-pawt'; verdict, decree, trial, determination, judgment, ordinance, court sentence

***PROV. 28: 21 ¶ To have respect<5234 = or regard or care for; to disregard, ignore or reject> of persons <6440> is not good; . . .
***LEV. 19:15 You shall do no unrighteousness in judgment; you shall not respect <5375 = accept, exalt, forgive, pardon, exalt, regard, spare> the person <6440> of the lowly, nor honour the person of the great; in righteousness shalt you judge your neighbour.
>>>Strong's {5375} ac;n; — nasa', naw-saw'; accept, exalt, forgive, pardon, exalt, regard, spare
***DEUT. 1: 17 You shall not respect <5234 = or regard or care for; to disregard, ignore or reject> persons <6440> in judgment <4941 or decrees, trials, determinations>; you shall hear the small as well as the great; you shall not be afraid of the face of man, for the judgment is God's; and the matter that is too hard for you shall bring to me, that I may hear it.

Righteous, just and fair judgment and justice; protection for the rights of the afflicted and the poor; pursuit of that which promotes peace and personal maturity/growth; acting without prejudice or bias; no biased respect of persons, no intimidating biased influences; no one is to be considered common or unclean or unimportant or expendable; no putting of spiritual or emotional stumbling blocks and fall-traps in the way of another -----sounds like a pretty darn good way to live. It's a shame that so few marriages in the world even come close to this standard. That should not deter us, for we can, to the best of our ability after and with His enabling, struggle to achieve this in our own sphere of influence and leave our microworld a better place when we are finished.

http://www.shtyle.fm/community.do?cid=41185
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2648256332
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BlackPolygyny/
http://meetup.com/SanDiegoChristianPolygyny
http://www.flickr.com/groups/christian_polygyny/
 
elkanahtyler said:
I just finished viewing TLC's coverage of Kody's honeymoon with his new wife, Robyn. I have problems with the way he did his honeymoon and the reactions of his three other wives make me think I'm not the only one. I believe the decision to have an 11 day honeymoon in San Diego was a bad one.

I am betting that TLC paid for the honeymoon and that the 11 day honeymoon was done to create a bit of "drama". Let's not forget that this is a "reality show" and they need some drama in the mix to keep people talking about the show. A "reality show" with no drama would soon bore the viewers.
Blessings,
Fairlight
 
Who is like God? said:
I have watched a few shows ... I am little behind now, but I thought that it was curious that even inside a polygynous relationship that matriarchy still reigns supreme, there are just several ruling matriarchs :) :D. Just an observation.

This is EXACTLY the impression they gave me, as well !!! I guess I'm the odd one out because I find Kody Brown to be very tedious and grating. I doubt if I will continue to watch the show.
Blessings,
Fairlight
 
I agree with you Elkanahtyler,

I cried at the way Kody and Robin were so flippant to the other wives. Expecially upsetting was when Robin had to 'insist' that he check in with the family (which most folks do every day when they're away). He then called his first wife for a second then 'had to get going', to somewhere although it sure didnt seem that he was really in a hurry to do anything. He basically just brushed her off because she was asking for his time but he didnt seem to want to be 'bothered' with her. No love, no assurance, just total focus on the newby. It still has me upset. Robin also comes off (in my opinion) as rude and disrespectful to the other wives, as if she is showing them that she is the new focus.

It would have seemed more balanced to me if they'd have respected the other wives and taken 3 days (same as the others) and then inited the entire family to join them on vacation. Quite frankly I'm appalled.
 
i agree about the contrived drama. i hope that it does no lasting damage to the fam, but i am afraid that it will.

drama aside, being able to see some of the interactions and the mechanics of their lives is still worthwhile in my opinion.
 
I agree, Steve. Viewing the interactions of the Brown family is very informative, often inspiring and encouraging, and always thought provoking. They are obviously so natural, normal and imperfect that you realize that they are a real and functioning family. I'm not a Mormon but I am a FB friend of Kody and I pray for his family because they are such precious people. He may not be living the polygyny dream, but the polygyny model he presents is the best I have seen in my 50 years of observing and thinking about Biblical polygyny - except maybe for the FCSM family.
 
Today I bought the TLC DVD of the Kody Brown show and a copy for my ladies. Looking forward to some interesting discussions.
 
TLC's Kody Brown and his polygyny are beautiful and delightful compared to the horrid polygyny of "King Phillip and His Seven Wives" (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-storie ... 16968565/; and http://www.sundancechannel.com/films/500255849/) with its "rampant jealousy".
For my part, after fifty years of believing in, studying and finally practicing polygyny, the only well done and successful polygyny I have witnessed is the polygyny of Kody Brown, the FCSM family and that of India's 20th Century Maharni Devi. The remarkable movie "The Wedding Gift", where the dying wife gets a wife for her husband so he and the kids wouldn't be alone, was moving and thought provoking, but so very far from our experience today. "The King and I" isn't an acceptable model. So until someone else steps forward very visibly and publicly, in my book Kody Brown still gets my "Well done chum!" Seems to me godly and successful polygyny seems to be the exception rather than the rule, perhaps as rare as snow on a Miami beach.
 
elkanahtyler said:
I'm not a Mormon but I am a FB friend of Kody ...

I do not think that that is really him.

I agree that he gets Kudos for being a public example. While we can critique the family they were able to give polygamy a much friendlier public face.
 
Back
Top