-
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.
Meat God the Father - a polygamist
- Thread starter Verifyveritas76
- Start date
Biblically, Jews were of the house of Judah which encompassed Judah, Benjamin, Simeon and parts of Levi. The term began to be used during the Babylonian exile and first appears in the book of Esther. Multiple 'old' testament prophecies clearly point to physical descendants of Jews in the last days, while Paul does affirm that circumcision of the heart and flesh is important to being a Jew. So, it is more complicated than simply saying creed v. bloodline...
That said, @Daniel DeLuca is right when he says,
because, God always traces through the male... So, He promised to scatter the seed of Abraham and promised to regather it, through the house of Israel and the house of Judah... He further states that not a single grain will fall.. (Ez. 39:25-29)... So, somehow lineage plays a part, though we can't see it from this side...
I take from this that the true descendents of Israel (paternal line) could be absolutely anybody, and those who consider themselves Jews by race (maternal line) may or may not be actual descendents of Israel. Only God knows. But it's irrelevant anyway - because those who follow Him are grafted in, and those who do not are grafted out, so only faith actually matters in the end.
I heard from a Jewish person once that the switch to matrilineal designations came about because of rapes and forced marriages prior to and during the diaspora. It maintained some semblance of genetic purity. True or not, I'm not sure.
While those maybe true, is it possible that persecution reduced the male population at points and a monogamy only mindset, post Rav Gershom ca. 1020 CE, required that to keep Jewish progeny up, the lineage was traced through the mother, even if she married a non-Jew?
Just spitballing, but something's teasing the corners of my mind re genetic tracing in a monogamy only environment where persecution is pressing, particularly on the men...
Not just for the Jews, but any society or group that wished to maintain their community in the face of war and famine throughout history would have had to adopt some form of poly for survival.
Even non-poly folks will sometimes concede that poly was a "necessary evil" in special circumstances and that God "allowed" it. They know that it works, and even preserves genetic purity. It grows your numbers.
I think that we may be able to make inroads with some if we appeal to the wartime or persecution aspect. While not quite to the level of historical persecution of the church, we are seeing Christianity under attack more and more in the West. Low birth rates (by personal choice) combined with a newer generation leaving the church in droves, and less evangelization means that we are not repopulating our Christian tribe.
The Church is exploding in Africa and in parts of Asia not just because of evangelism and a mighty work of the Spirit of God, but because they have higher birth rates and younger populations of converts in childbearing years.
I heard a podcast yesterday @Robhar may be able to post the link, but the speaker, Rob Miller talked about polygyny at the 1:30:00 mark as it related to young Iraqi Christian (technically, Notzrim) women who married older married men as defense against ISIS poachers for prostitution, and to produce offspring in the face of young men lost to persecution and war. So, this is a real and current argument in the church this century!
Well here goes. I've shared to a couple places and some have said they've had trouble accessing. Hopefully no glitches for those of you who want to check it out...
https://www.podcasts.com/2730-years...and-counting-34f045285
WOW!!!!
That's an incredible clip (I haven't listened to the whole podcast just that part of it). And it is the first time I have seen a direct application of Isaiah 4:1: "And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach." That "reproach" word is always difficult for us to understand. But in this case it makes complete sense. They were marrying older men to take away the shame of being sold into prostitution. Finally this may be the correct way of understanding this prophecy!
But what the speaker also makes abundantly clear is that the USA has caused the destruction of these Christians. They only lived in Iraq and Syria (Aleppo). Before the invasion of Iraq there were about 20,000, and they were protected by Saddam. During that war, their Muslim enemies attacked them. Then the Syrian war began, also causing their slaughter. By the time ISIS came there were already only about 2,000 left, who were then subject to ISIS. The blame for all this is laid squarely at the feet of the USA, for destabilising their protection and enabling their destruction. They had survived there for 2000 years until the USA got adventurous. This is evil, pure and simple. Satan has used the USA as a tool for the destruction of God's people.
In Babylon the Great was found the blood of the saints.
Fascinating clip, from 1:29 to about 1:38 or so.
No! You can't blame the US every time something evil happens around the world that the US could have done something different. An invasion of Iraq, was probably not the best solution, but Saddam and his two sons, were evil players on the world stage who flouted UN restrictions and mandates for "No fly" zones. The people who are carrying out genocide, are the true culprits here, and many US soldiers have fought to defend the helpless. Invading Iraq may not have been the best move, but abandoning those people, was far worse.
I was pointing out what the speaker themselves said (not quoting them, but repeating their point). I do not blame the USA for everything evil in the world, there is much good in the USA. But, in this particular case, the speaker takes pains to point out that this community had survived for 2000 years - until the USA invaded Iraq, which was the point that triggered their persecution and near-destruction. I found that a very interesting point, and important to note as the immediate context for this apparent fulfilment of Isaiah 4:1.
You know, the one misstep I think that GW Bush made in that whole fiasco, was the demand to step down in 24 hours. If that had been Trump, he would have been content that Saddam was finally caving in to pressure to allow inspections. I don't know who was whispering in his ear to push for Saddam's removal, but I suppose it would have been more reasonable to demand that his two sons stand trial for their crimes, than to simply demand that Saddam step down.
I think the problem is broader than that, because similar problems have occurred as a result of the wars of different US presidents. I do not believe that any US president is overtly anti-Christian (except possibly Obama), none want to harm middle-Eastern Christians. However, there is a common theme in the actions that they take, whereby Christians end up as collateral damage, while this is all-but-ignored by the US media so there is no accountability. I believe that within the contingent of civil servants advising the various levels of the US government are people with evil agendas. Either conscious evil agendas, or receiving demonic advice and honestly thinking it is their own good ideas.
In the same way, the latter years of the British empire's major influence over the Middle East, before the USA took over that role, show a similar level of collateral damage against Christians. The US role is simply a continuation of the British one.
Over the past century, Palestine has been stripped of its Christians (Bethlehem used to be >90% Christian, now something like 5% Christian), Lebanon has had serious problems, and Christian populations have been subject to varying levels of attacks in many places, most seriously in Syria and Iraq. Largely as collateral damage from British and US influence in the region and the regimes each has established or deposed & replaced. It is a long-term pattern that is important to recognise.
One key long-term example is the removal of the Hashemite dynasty from the Islamic holy sites, and imposition of the House of Saud in their place. This was done by the British and maintained by the USA, despite the Hashemites being more tolerant of Christians and the Saudis far more radically anti-Christian.
In the same way, the latter years of the British empire's major influence over the Middle East, before the USA took over that role, show a similar level of collateral damage against Christians. The US role is simply a continuation of the British one.
Over the past century, Palestine has been stripped of its Christians (Bethlehem used to be >90% Christian, now something like 5% Christian), Lebanon has had serious problems, and Christian populations have been subject to varying levels of attacks in many places, most seriously in Syria and Iraq. Largely as collateral damage from British and US influence in the region and the regimes each has established or deposed & replaced. It is a long-term pattern that is important to recognise.
One key long-term example is the removal of the Hashemite dynasty from the Islamic holy sites, and imposition of the House of Saud in their place. This was done by the British and maintained by the USA, despite the Hashemites being more tolerant of Christians and the Saudis far more radically anti-Christian.
Last edited:
I recall seeing a documentary about this:
As @rockfox has so frequently and accurately pointed out, besides perhaps allowing himself to be baited by the fact that his father was bested by Saddam, GWB in most ways was just yet another reflection of our postmodern feminist leftist and Anti-Christian culture, so, of course, the media are always happy to mainly look the other way as Christians are targets of destruction outside our borders.
I don't know. I remember how much the leftists, feminists, homosexual/transgender groups, hated him. Bush Derangement Syndrome, was a thing back then.