-
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.
The biblical model for adding wives, is *NOT* about equality-MEN only
- Thread starter IshChayil
- Start date
Why does this conversation so often end up about money? Perhaps I'm missing something here. We have two accounts, the business account, and the house account. The house account I budget. We both have access to it and it's for all our expenses that aren't associated with the business. If we go on a date (which happens about once a year if we're lucky) then I have to make sure there's enough money in that account to do so. I don't have my own money to spend. Samuel rarely buys me surprises and if he does so they are usually small things (like a chocolate bar). So my assumption is that when we add a second wife she would have access to that account. We would be a family, the money is all joint, I don't see any issues with that. If Samuel and her were going on a date then there would still need to be enough money in that account for that to happen, and him buying any of us surprises would be the same. It wouldn't really change. I'm aware that that money would then need to pay for the expenses of a third adult in the house (plus any children she may have), so I guess I would get 'less', but I never really spend it on myself so...
Am I missing something? It just seems super simple to me and everyone seems to make it so complicated. If we had to split accounts and I had to have my own money then that would be complicated.
However, thinking about this now, what if she had a job with her own money and wanted to keep some for her own? Would I want to have money of my own too? I guess I would because I'd want things to be fair and equal (is this what you're trying to address?). But then if I did have my own money, what on earth would I do with it?
I don't need it.
I don't like money.
I positively hate shopping.
I liked buying new slippers because my feet are warm.
Perhaps I would spend it all on slippers.
Am I missing something? It just seems super simple to me and everyone seems to make it so complicated. If we had to split accounts and I had to have my own money then that would be complicated.
However, thinking about this now, what if she had a job with her own money and wanted to keep some for her own? Would I want to have money of my own too? I guess I would because I'd want things to be fair and equal (is this what you're trying to address?). But then if I did have my own money, what on earth would I do with it?
I don't need it.
I don't like money.
I positively hate shopping.
I liked buying new slippers because my feet are warm.
Perhaps I would spend it all on slippers.
It was mentioned in another thread (being too lazy to find it), this thought of treating each equally. It was shown that to treat each equally would be exhaustively unrealistic. Where is the line drawn? There's only 1 passenger seat in the front of a car. Should there be a checklist on the dash showing how many times each wife sat up front? do you count when more than 1 is in the car at the same time or does it always count? Sarah likes new slippers, so Samuel better get slippers for #2 as well.... except #2 doesn't like slippers... too bad, #2 gets them anyway. Must be equal! (sorry Sarah, that was too cute of an example to pass up. 
)
The overall agreement among the participators of that convo, was that we had a verbiage issue. The problem was using the word Equal. The best alternative was to use Equitable. To treat each wife equitably according to her needs. Deciding what is equitable, outside of each individual family unit, is a fool's errand in itself and must be decided internally.
But I do agree with you, @IshChayil . If you don't spoil the woman to start with, it won't be an issue to end with.
)The overall agreement among the participators of that convo, was that we had a verbiage issue. The problem was using the word Equal. The best alternative was to use Equitable. To treat each wife equitably according to her needs. Deciding what is equitable, outside of each individual family unit, is a fool's errand in itself and must be decided internally.
But I do agree with you, @IshChayil . If you don't spoil the woman to start with, it won't be an issue to end with.
That's just the way we're mostly wired. The primarily functional method of providing for a family is through little bundles of colored paper. Yes, there are other ways, but even those who don't use money can see it as analogous for their particular definition of "wealth" and "providing". It's a guy thing.
Hehe well I'm certain you have the introspection to realize your family organization is very good and your feminine attitude is very mature; this is not always the case.
I always had a feeling New Zealand was more down to Earth than the states; in the states it is very hard to escape materialism.
Regarding why is money always mentioned? It's really just because it's the easiest to categorize empirically. LIke when we discuss "success" it means different things for different people. For some success means "having my time back to spend as I wish (with family instead of 9 to 5, etc); for another success means having 10 hot rods. Analyzing things it's easier to gauge using something empirical like material things; and in this case, the bible uses that as the first example as well.
Kinda hard to categorize some other things. But in my post I think I actually spent more time discussing sex time with the man than I spent discussing loot from him
Last edited:
Wait a minute, that passage is pretty specificly talking about a servant girl who has been bought. She is protected from being deprived. I don't think this applies to a regular wife.
Correct, ZecAustin, but there is a corollary. The concept is
(and I certainly find the logic consistent with "Hebraic thought patterns," things like 'the heavy and the light; ie, if THIS, then HOW MUCH MORE so, this...)
if we're talking about standards for a concubine, then HOW MUCH MORE so, for any other wife?
For that reason, Exodus 21:10 has long been considered the "minimum necessary conditions" for any marriage. Can't say I'd argue with that, personally...
There's plenty of materialist people here. I'm just not one of them, nor could I be in this house, where on earth would I put all my 'treasures'?
I think it more boils down to the fact that I don't like money as a concept. I would much rather go back to the barter system. I know that has it's issues, and people freak out because how on earth would they pay their taxes for breathing air and living under the sky if they didn't have invisible money in a bank account? Yeah, about that...
But, I digress. Back to the topic at hand.
Righteo, lets go there then. That can't be equal. That seems entirely absurd. For example, right now I am heavily pregnant, and there's not much going on around here due to medical reasons. If that was equal with a SW then she wouldn't be getting any either, which would leave Samuel with 2 wives and no sex.But in my post I think I actually spent more time discussing sex time with the man than I spent discussing loot from him
So it's not about equality, it's about fairness. I had a boss once who used to say 'swings and roundabouts'. Sometimes I worked overtime without pay, and sometimes he let me go home early. We all ended up at the same place, but sometimes it swung his way and sometimes mine. It wasn't always equal, but at the end of the month it was fair.
Exactly.
I got a laugh out of this. I'm a first and only wife, and hubby and I have a united focus on caring for our family. I feel much the same way you do about money, it's needed for certain things, but it doesn't make us happy, and we certainly don't love it for what it is.
Moving away from that material mindset happened over time, and more when we quit watching television 17+ years ago, and moved further away from all the shopping that cities afford. It was realizing that it's possible to be happy, even if that wish list of items doesn't get filled for days, or weeks, or even EVER that helped me to see what really matters. It is sad how many couples divorce over money, and what money can buy.
If another woman wanted to 'keep up with the Jones' we would be a poor choice of a family, but if she wants to be part of who and what we are, whatcha see is whatcha get! Lol
ZecAustin's mastered this.
Yup. Unless it's a bag sale at a thrift store.
I think it is more a function of Romanticism than materialism to spoil the wife. Instead of positional authority to lead the home, men have been conditioned to lead by leveraging materialism in a form of emotional manipulation to coerce the woman into a pleasant enough attitude where they are more amiable to the idea of agreeing with the man. I.e. If momma's happy we can do it your way, thus the authority to lead in the home is controlled by the wife.
Well said, @Verifyveritas76.
"Happy wife, happy life." As they say! Lol
This seems a little bit silly to me, I would assume that this really only needs to apply to a family who's relationship is more like a petty tug-of-war than a happy home. If the wives get along and everyone's acting like mature adults than I don't think this is something that needs to be an issue. But then, I don't have a sister wife so it's all just conjecture on my part.
I hear ya @rustysdove11 ! But on the forum we all (particularly the men) like to get down to the nitty gritty, and plan for things that may or may not happen. It's also about looking at things in a biblical way, when you've looked at things from a societal viewpoint for most of your life. It can take a bit to get your head round at first so discussions like this are good.
I'm definitely of the viewpoint that we should all just be acting as adults and as a family and if we all did just that it would solve a multitude of problems from the get go anyway.
I'm definitely of the viewpoint that we should all just be acting as adults and as a family and if we all did just that it would solve a multitude of problems from the get go anyway.
I agree that these things *should't* be a problem for a group of mature adults who are scripturally grounded. A big problem seems to be (in some cases that I am aware of) that there are a lot of unforeseen and unknown immaturities that crop up when poly becomes a reality. Thought like this is how we (mostly men, like FH2 said) try to mitigate any craziness that we unintentionally visit upon ourselves.This seems a little bit silly to me, I would assume that this really only needs to apply to a family who's relationship is more like a petty tug-of-war than a happy home. If the wives get along and everyone's acting like mature adults than I don't think this is something that needs to be an issue. But then, I don't have a sister wife so it's all just conjecture on my part.
"She was so put together! I had no idea she was so attached to caffeinated coffee!"
I'll see you and raise you two. First, this is true of ALL cases I am aware of. Second, in my experience there is an inverse correlation between the self-confidence with which people approach this and the amount of time their second marriage lasts (or until the first one caves under the pressure of the second one).
Because of the cultural problems we face (both our own internal brainwashing that we're not aware of and the external pressures we face living a deeply counter-cultural lifestyle), there is simply no way to predict what plural marriage is going to reveal about a person, and it is a mistake to believe that because your monogamous marriage is 'all that' that it necessarily follows that 'you got this'. The more you can hash out and prepare for in advance, the better. And the general topic of the OP—how to manage the competing claims of the women—is a Really Big Deal, worth thinking through in advance.
The general culture (including the corporate church) not only has nothing to offer in this arena, they can't even understand the question.
Sad, but very true.
This is one of my biggest concerns. I think that having a biblical family model is crucial to success for Christians. That being said, though Ive been been brought up in a conservative, God fearing home and tried to raise my family in much the same way, Ive just recently begun to realize how out of sorts what we view as a "biblical family model" really is! And thats before you factor in poly! There's so much in our so called Christian family culture today that is twisted to fit within the framework of Roman(ce) family culture and its hard to tell where one starts and another ends.
In my opinion, the romantic model skews everything. It provides the foundation for jealousy, envy, greed, selfcenteredness, division of the home, dissatisfaction, falling into and out of love, on and on.
The biblical model however, done correctly, shows all parties 'under authority', looking not every person upon their own concerns/needs, but on the concerns/needs of others, all parties striving to 'build their house' on a solid foundation, the wives submitting in obedience and faith, the husband submitting in love (not to them but to the best for them) and showering blessings and honor, striving to train up children in the way that they should go. Above all, all parties endeavoring to be faithful stewards or servants of anything entrusted to them.
Last edited: