• 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.

What do you think the situation of Biblical plural marriages will be like in the coming years?

bfoster

Member
Male
- (This may be news to just me, but) there seems to be a growing number of pro-polygenic "preachers" on the internet lately. I won't go into whether they are generally "Biblically correct" or not, but they have certainly attracted the attention and interest of many people on the subject.

- There is the prophecy in Isaiah 4 that there will be a time when seven women shall take hold on one man.

- There are young people who are growing up in polygamous or pro-polygamous homes today, who may follow in their parents' footsteps in this regard (This doesn't necessarily support my point, but it might be)

In the future, Biblical polygamy will certainly not be seen in a better light than it is now, but based on these points and others that you find interesting, do you think there will be an increase in Biblical plural families? And what do you think life will be like for these people in the coming years?
 
Well, we don’t even know what this country is going to look like in the coming years. 😜
But I’m sure that the pendulum will continue to swing in the direction of more polygynous acceptance.
 
Well, we don’t even know what this country is going to look like in the coming years. 😜
😂 And I'm afraid that in my country it might not be very good, but let us dream!

But I’m sure that the pendulum will continue to swing in the direction of more polygynous acceptance.
It's like it ALMOST couldn't get any worse than it is now
EDIT: Unfortunately it could
 
I will hope and pray that truly Biblical families will increase, whether these families contain one wife, or more than one.

For a family to be Biblical, I believe it needs to be God centered, filled with faith in the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, given new life by the Holy Spirit, through the Gospel, informed and instructed by the Scriptures, covenantal, and patriarchal. I'd argue that those are essential.

It may also be polygynous. Some will be, but most probably won't.

I think the number of truly Biblical families will increase. I think the number of polygynous households will also increase.

The religion of Churchianity (which abhors polygyny) is on the decline, but the the Lord Jesus Christ is always working to build and purify His Church.
 
The religion of Churchianity (which abhors polygyny) is on the decline,
I’m not sure how you can support that.
But if so, it’s great news.
 
When polygyny again becomes a "major factor" at some point in coming years, it won't be pretty for most. Isaiah 3 into 4:1-2 is more stark than most can yet comprehend.

Women who would never CONSIDER what it might be like to have an actual man to cover them will literally die for the chance.

And, sadly, that probably won't be the vision most guys had either. And part of the reason will be that most won't survive to see it.

But Isaiah 4:2 says "hang in there."
 
The religion of Churchianity (which abhors polygyny) is on the decline, but the the Lord Jesus Christ is always working to build and purify His Church.
I’m not sure how you can support that.
But if so, it’s great news.
I think @Bartato is spot on about this. Churchianity is suffering similar losses of participation to the Mainstream Fake News.
 
There is the prophecy in Isaiah 4 that there will be a time when seven women shall take hold on one man.
When polygyny again becomes a "major factor" at some point in coming years, it won't be pretty for most. Isaiah 3 into 4:1-2 is more stark than most can yet comprehend.
Amen.

No doubt Isaiah 1 came to pass long, long ago, but I don't see evidence that Isaiah 2 is close to being fulfilled, much less Isaiah 3, so it may be wishful thinking to consider holding one's breath for Isaiah 4 to bless any of us with additional wives -- and perhaps, as @Mark C points out, a 'blessing' we may not be truly benefited by if we have to first personally go through Isaiah 2 and 3.

If wishes were horses, we'd all take a ride -- unless, perhaps, that ride was one with the headless horseman.
 
- (This may be news to just me, but) there seems to be a growing number of pro-polygenic "preachers" on the internet lately. I won't go into whether they are generally "Biblically correct" or not, but they have certainly attracted the attention and interest of many people on the subject.

- There is the prophecy in Isaiah 4 that there will be a time when seven women shall take hold on one man.

- There are young people who are growing up in polygamous or pro-polygamous homes today, who may follow in their parents' footsteps in this regard (This doesn't necessarily support my point, but it might be)

In the future, Biblical polygamy will certainly not be seen in a better light than it is now, but based on these points and others that you find interesting, do you think there will be an increase in Biblical plural families? And what do you think life will be like for these people in the coming years?
Regardless of timing for Isaiah 4, the tide has already turned and is being accelerated not only by common culture that accepts different lifestyles, but multiple voices are growing w in Christian and Messianic circles speaking truth boldly... I think the dam is leaking heavily and a crashing wall of truth is coming.
 
Due to the culture of polyamory and open relationships, it seems like a plural family wouldn't cause a scandal these days (at least until they know it's being done in a Biblical way).
The problem is 'paganism' - literally, ANTI-YHVH, Elohim of Scripture, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and hated by this world with a passion few yet understand.

"Polyamory," and cutting the genitalia off young children too young to even understand what they WILL miss are common symptoms of what has been unleashed, but is still growing. It ends, pretty obviously now, with worship of an "AI god" (the work of men's hands) that will implement a lot of things some people are starting to even see coming.

"The world" is just fine with people having "sex" with anything that moves (ok, maybe that's not even a requirement now) - especially if it's been drugged, mutilated, injected, and DNA-modified - and increasingly thinks 'more is better' there, too.

As long is it isn't done according to His Word. We still really can NOT serve two Masters.
 
There’s always been a remnant that are okay with being outcasts of society - kicked out of their modern day synagogues - because they chose “His Word” over what the world says. Most of the one’s in leadership roles in Christianity are doing the same thing the Pharisees were rebuked for - skillfully sidestepping God’s Law in favor of their human traditions. For example, how many Christian women will hate His Word when they read His Word - calls homosexuality an abomination and tosses feminism in the fire dumpster where it belongs?

Men as well need to wake up - Adam was kicked out of paradise not because he was deceived by the ancient serpent - but because he obeyed his wife rather than his Creator. What did Lord Jesus say? If you don’t love me more than your mother, father, wife, children; then you’re not worthy of me. This, I personally believe, may even be a callback to Adam. Adam was not deceived by Satan, but he obeyed his wife rather than obeying his Creator. You can’t serve two masters. Therefore he was kicked out of Paradise along with his wife. This is the same thing happening throughout the Christian world. Men are afraid of being called sexists, anti-feminists, anti-equality, to appease what the world pushes out versus standing on the Word of God as their shield and armor. This is why we need faith. What did the apostles say to the Lord Jesus? “Master - increase our faith.”
 
I don't think it will get much better. Every type of sexual deviancy will be celebrated and adored, but Biblical marriage will be abhorred. By society, and especially so called Bible believing Christians.
That's a neat trick: using a time machine to send a post from the past into the present that would have been predictive back then but is now past tense.
 
Men as well need to wake up - Adam was kicked out of paradise not because he was deceived by the ancient serpent - but because he obeyed his wife rather than his Creator. What did Lord Jesus say? If you don’t love me more than your mother, father, wife, children; then you’re not worthy of me. This, I personally believe, may even be a callback to Adam. Adam was not deceived by Satan, but he obeyed his wife rather than obeying his Creator. You can’t serve two masters.
I don’t want to start a debate in the midst of this thread, so I will just say that the idea that Adam “obeyed” his wife is an unproven opinion.
 
I don’t want to start a debate in the midst of this thread, so I will just say that the idea that Adam “obeyed” his wife is an unproven opinion.
Genesis 3:17
And to the man he said, “Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree whose fruit I commanded you not to eat, the ground is cursed because of you. All your life you will struggle to scratch a living from it.”

The Hebrew word for “listened” is sometimes translated to “obey,” for example in Judges 3:4. Someone can start a new thread if we wish to discuss this further. I won’t be commenting any further on this topic on this specific thread.
 
I don’t want to start a debate in the midst of this thread, so I will just say that the idea that Adam “obeyed” his wife is an unproven opinion.
Genesis 3:17
And to the man he said, “Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree whose fruit I commanded you not to eat, the ground is cursed because of you. All your life you will struggle to scratch a living from it.”

The Hebrew word for “listened” is sometimes translated to “obey,” for example in Judges 3:4. Someone can start a new thread if we wish to discuss this further. I won’t be commenting any further on this topic on this specific thread.
In most of the literal translations, the meaning is something in between 'obey' and 'listen': hearken.

The Concordant Version of the Old Testament reads: "And to Adam He said: Because you hearkened to your wife's voice and ate from the only tree that I instructed you, saying you must not eat it, Cursed is the ground on your account; In grief shall you eat of it all the days of your life." Hearkening is to take heed, to pay strong attention to. It's not quite obedience, but Genesis 3:17 indicates that Adam elevated the entreaty of Eve over YHWH's instruction, which definitely indicates disobedience to YHWH -- and thereby at least implies obedience toward Eve in contrast to Adam's failure to obey YHWH. It's clear that, at the very least, Adam gave great weight to Eve's suggestion that Adam disobey YHWH and then, absent direct obedience to Eve, Adam freely chose to disobey YHWH -- all of which qualifies as splitting hairs in regard to whether he obeyed his woman. Indirectly, but only by one degree of removal, Adam obeyed the Adversary, and as his consequence in The Fall, Adam and thus men from there on out were punished for failure to follow the proper chain of command.

These verses are perhaps topmost among those cited as the scriptural justification for the imperative of patriarchy, so this is not an insignificant consideration. In fact, I believe consideration is highly appropriate in this or any other thread about polygyny, because polygyny is downstream from patriarchy. Without the imperative of patriarchy, polygyny (especially as opposed to polyandry) is substantively dependent on patriarchy. In Genesis 3:6, Adam violated the imperative of his headship, and, just as is the case in our own lives as men in modern times when we disobey YHWH's commanded structure, whether or not we're obeying our wives when we elevate their wishes over YHWH's instructions is a distinction without a difference.
 
@PeteR, are you and Kelly back home from Israel? Either way, I pray for your safety.
Regardless of timing for Isaiah 4, the tide has already turned and is being accelerated not only by common culture that accepts different lifestyles, but multiple voices are growing w in Christian and Messianic circles speaking truth boldly... I think the dam is leaking heavily and a crashing wall of truth is coming.
I also hope you're correct in your assessment, and my optimistic nature concludes that we will eventually be in the picture you're painting, but I disagree with your assessment of immanence. Within our own multiple closed circles, it may seem like the tide has turned, but if we're going to use that metaphor what is required is for the majority to be headed in our direction -- and that is very far from the case; the vast majority of people are not leaning toward acceptance of polygyny. The dam may be leaking, but as one fascinated by tangible dams to the point of having visited the under side of some of the largest ones on Earth I can assure you that every dam is always leaking. This is true metaphorically as well as literally, and the general culture is still actually headed in the opposite direction of polygyny acceptance; in fact, proponents on our side probably missed the pragmatic window for jumping on the anything-goes bandwagon, because (a) we were too collectively concerned with signaling our disgust of alternative lifestyles over our willingness to promote polygyny, and (b) unlike exceptions-to-the-rule like you, most among us prefer to contemplate and pursue polygyny in the deep recesses of the shadows.

Multiple voices may be growing within Christian and Messianic circles speaking truth boldly, but, primarily because of the timidity of the vast majority of those who see biblical truth in this matter, the mainstream culture neither hears nor would even pay attention to those "multiple voices," because they're not even as significant as a Who to Horton. Maybe I'm guilty of insufficient allegiance to my side in this matter, but I pay great attention to the actual cutting edges of mainstream culture, and the way it looks to me is that, absent a revolution among polygynists that asserts itself in the main right out in the open rather than only doing so in secret gatherings in unpublished locations, it appears to me that backlash against polygyny is more likely than grand acceptance, because our culture remains predominantly gynocentric, and it continues to not sit well among mainstream young women that they have to share the top-tier unmarried men they currently throw themselves at. Given the trend toward avoiding marriage, I don't see any grounded, reasonable solution for those women who fantasize getting high value men all to themselves, but they're not even close to recognizing polygyny as an attractive alternative.

No amount of generally-timid (not that yours is that; far from it) promotion of polygyny is going to actually turn the tide. Teaching won't do it. Women writ large can't be logically talked into anything. They will only come around when they're no longer rewarded for being entirely selfish, and this will require something entirely distinct from intellectual persuasion. It will require the creation of absolute resolve among men in general to refrain from propping up the female delusion that they don't need no man.
 
I don’t want to start a debate in the midst of this thread, so I will just say that the idea that Adam “obeyed” his wife is an unproven opinion.
Genesis 3:17
And to the man he said, “Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree whose fruit I commanded you not to eat, the ground is cursed because of you. All your life you will struggle to scratch a living from it.”

The Hebrew word for “listened” is sometimes translated to “obey,” for example in Judges 3:4. Someone can start a new thread if we wish to discuss this further. I won’t be commenting any further on this topic on this specific thread.
In most of the literal translations, the meaning is something in between 'obey' and 'listen': hearken.

The Concordant Version of the Old Testament reads: "And to Adam He said: Because you hearkened to your wife's voice and ate from the only tree that I instructed you, saying you must not eat it, Cursed is the ground on your account; In grief shall you eat of it all the days of your life." Hearkening is to take heed, to pay strong attention to. It's not quite obedience, but Genesis 3:17 indicates that Adam elevated the entreaty of Eve over YHWH's instruction, which definitely indicates disobedience to YHWH -- and thereby at least implies obedience toward Eve in contrast to Adam's failure to obey YHWH. It's clear that, at the very least, Adam gave great weight to Eve's suggestion that Adam disobey YHWH and then, absent direct obedience to Eve, Adam freely chose to disobey YHWH -- all of which qualifies as splitting hairs in regard to whether he obeyed his woman. Indirectly, but only by one degree of removal, Adam obeyed the Adversary, and as his consequence in The Fall, Adam and thus men from there on out were punished for failure to follow the proper chain of command.

These verses are perhaps topmost among those cited as the scriptural justification for the imperative of patriarchy, so this is not an insignificant consideration. In fact, I believe consideration is highly appropriate in this or any other thread about polygyny, because polygyny is downstream from patriarchy. Without the imperative of patriarchy, polygyny (especially as opposed to polyandry) is substantively dependent on patriarchy. In Genesis 3:6, Adam violated the imperative of his headship, and, just as is the case in our own lives as men in modern times when we disobey YHWH's commanded structure, whether or not we're obeying our wives when we elevate their wishes over YHWH's instructions is a distinction without a difference.
 
Back
Top