ylop wrote:
Seriously now, polygamy stands against the tide of 80 or more years of feminism.
And 900 or more years of false teaching by the Church.
EnchantedLife wrote:
It has recently become possible to select the gender of a baby by sorting sperm under a microscope. Insemination has to be artificial with this method, but it would allow polygamous families to have more girls than boys. The problem of supply would be eased if done on a large enough scale.
Maybe man does not have to artificially adjust the male/female birth ratio to increase the supply of available women. Maybe all we have to do is for the Church as a whole to be obedient to Him and teach/practice His design for families.
I have often wondered if God adjusted the ratio of male/female births in response to man's rebellion against His ordained family order. In other words, if everyone who truly loved and served Him had, for the past 1,000 years, been living according to His design (patriarchy as discussed in this forum) rather than living by the false TFV-MOP as taught by the Church, maybe there would be three or four females born for every male.
Very weak support for this idea (it's not even a theory yet, just the idea from which a theory might develop) might be found in Genesis. It is hard to believe that Adam and Eve, the most physically-perfect man and woman who ever lived, would have only three children in 130 years. (Cain, Abel, and Seth. And
maybe Eve was not the mother of Seth?) If the number of children they had were anything like the averages I found for families throughout the OT, they should have had 10-20 children in their first 130 years of being in a union. And don't forget - Adam lived for 800 years after the birth of Seth, and so would have had many more children. Maybe, in a patriarchal society (one that follows God's rules for families) God will allow His perfect design to function as He designed it. But in a rebellious society ("
I am the lord thy wife..." and most men go along with that idol worship) He makes adjustments, partly as judgment for that rebellion and/or partly to keep a workable balance in spite of man's sin.
If there were significantly more women than men, and we still practiced monogamy-only in spite of that unbalanced condition, many women would have no man.
Oops - that is pretty much the condition of the Church!!! (The actual ratio in evangelical churches, according to my research, is three women for every two men, or 1.5:1. It's much higher, as much as 4 or 5:1, in the RCC and some other non-evangelical churches.) Which is why so many of our young ladies go outside the fellowship of believers and marry unbelievers, and is also why we have so many unwed mothers in our churches. (The widows and orphans of James 1:27.) And those orphans leave the church, never to return, after graduating (or dropping out) from high school, because there is no father in their lives who can follow God's command in Ephesians 6:4. Josh McDowell says 91% of kids leave church after high school. And his numbers on that include children who have two parents - the rate for single-parent kids is near 100%.
The birth ratio thing is just an idea that's been rattling around in my skull for a few months. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. Who knows? Maybe together, we can make it into a workable theory.
Or discard it as a bad idea...
But the condition of our churches with regard to the ratio of women:men, unwed mothers, and children leaving church after high school is not just an idea or even a theory - it is reality, and I have done the research to prove it.
Perhaps it is a cultural dissonance or something but IVF is incredibly expensive with any sort of gender selection treatment adding thousands (literally) to the costs of treatment. Perhaps you don't know much about IVF but it is incredibly stressful on the body and the mind and isn't really designed to be used to supply Polygamists with enough future wives. It is for women suffering from infertility.
