The NXR Podcast - THE LIVESTREAM - Matt Walsh Vs Andrew Tate： Traditional Marriage & Polygamy

00:00:00.000 Leave us a five-star review on your favorite podcast platform.

00:00:03.800 I get it. It's annoying. Everybody asks, but I'm going to tell you why.

00:00:07.540 When you give us a positive review, what that does is it triggers the algorithm

00:00:12.040 so that our podcast shows up on more people's newsfeeds.

00:00:16.280 You and I both know that this ministry is willing to talk about things that most ministries aren't.

00:00:21.860 We need this content for the glory of God to reach more people's ears.

00:00:26.800 matt walsh and andrew tate had a little spat on x recently over the last 24 to 36 hours over the

00:00:38.020 topic of polygamy matt walsh as a western catholic he was arguing for monogamy he's saying that

00:00:45.920 monogamy is the marital structure that built western civilization and he's not wrong andrew

00:00:51.960 Tate, on the other hand, was arguing for having as many children as you can through as many

00:00:57.320 wives as you can, or in his case, maybe it's not legally a wife, but some kind of pseudo

00:01:03.400 partnership, concubines of sorts.

00:01:06.060 And this kind of became the talk of the town. 0.87

00:01:09.220 So today we want to do an episode talking about polygamy.

00:01:11.960 And first, we're going to address it from the Bible.

00:01:14.140 What does the Bible actually teach in the case of polygamy?

00:01:17.260 Is it ideal? 1.00

00:01:18.800 Is it a virtue?

00:01:20.540 Lower than that.

00:01:21.400 is it if it's a vice is it a permissible vice or is it inherently sinful is it sinful in some cases

00:01:28.260 or sinful in all cases these are the questions that we're going to answer in the first segment

00:01:33.180 dealing with the scripture and then in the second segment of the show we're also going to be

00:01:37.940 addressing monogamy versus polygamy as it pertains to the western and european tradition looking at

00:01:45.620 even pre-Christian eras in Europe, even northern tribes looking at the Germanics, looking at the

00:01:52.220 Celts, and seeing what was going on here even before the gospel was brought to bear. Were they

00:01:58.980 mostly monogamous, or were they mostly polygamy, polygamist? This is the kinds of questions that

00:02:05.880 we'll do our best to answer in this particular episode, and then dealing with, of course, some

00:02:10.260 of the specific tweets that we saw from both Andrew Tate and Matt Walsh. Now this episode is

00:02:16.420 brought to you by our premier sponsors, Armored Republic and Reese Fund, as well as our Patreon

00:02:22.500 members and our generous donors. If you'd like to join our Patreon for extra exclusive ad-free

00:02:29.500 content, you can do so by going to patreon.com forward slash right response ministries. And if

00:02:36.680 you'd like to make a donation today, you can do so by going to rightresponseministries.com

00:02:43.300 forward slash donate. Let's tune in now.

00:02:55.800 All right, here we are. Let's just, I think we should just lead off with some of the tweets

00:03:02.040 that have gone viral at this point. Do we start with Andrew Tate and then look at Matt Walsh and

00:03:06.600 him responding or what yeah let's uh let's go ahead and do our best to steel man a position

00:03:10.640 to steel man a position is the opposite of to make a straw man out of it so to straw man is to put up 0.70

00:03:15.120 the weakest the most pathetic version of the argument and say well look how easy it is to

00:03:19.920 knock over whereas the steel man is to say if i could make the case as best as possible even if

00:03:24.220 i don't agree with it what would i what would i argue and tate's argument kind of goes along the

00:03:28.980 line of here in the west especially you have be it a court system be it a cultural of a culture

00:03:34.180 of feminism that the whole system is rigged against the man and so men that undergo voluntarily

00:03:39.440 marrying one woman they kind of in some ways his argument would be well they kind of subject 0.80

00:03:44.460 themselves to you could have your money taken your wife also could go crazy she could say

00:03:48.680 i'm going to take your son and i'm going to turn him into a girl and you're never going to see him

00:03:52.720 again and so he sees those different things he says hey uh men you should have you know don't 0.93

00:03:58.120 put all your eggs in one basket as many women as would be willing to as possible and as many children

00:04:02.800 through them and uh listen to what he says in responding to matt because matt is kind of the

00:04:06.740 illustration of the opposite right andrew tate claims to have 40 children with nine different

00:04:10.940 women matt walsh has i think six kids with one woman which good for matt praise god but listen

00:04:16.600 to how he kind of responds to matt as matt's making the point that like hey marriage is good

00:04:20.280 all of these different things he says this he says hey matt agreed on this point any man with

00:04:25.460 a brain this is why any man with a brain doesn't hand over the keys to his castle so the wealth

00:04:30.880 that he's built, his job, his properties, everything he's accrued, doesn't hand over 0.60

00:04:34.620 the keys to his castle to a misandric legal system that is a feminine-coded legal system 0.98

00:04:39.400 and over emotional, unchecked females. The world has changed, Matt. Women are a fraction 0.95

00:04:45.600 of what they were. Telling men to just get married and be loyal gets men wrecked. The 1.00

00:04:51.640 only way they hold the relationship together is to give up any ounce of masculinity. Living

00:04:56.400 hell. The smartest move on the chessboard. This is his claim. So all of that, and I even

00:05:00.780 touched on it too it's true about the court systems the smartest move tate says on the chess

00:05:05.600 board for a man now is to get rich and have as many children as he wants from as many women as

00:05:10.980 he wants and take care of them all second world avoid first world courts own your empire and women

00:05:17.760 will respect you in return for provision and he follows up and says you have four sons and i have

00:05:23.340 i think it's something like 20 or 30. like on paper matt is just not going to have 20 sons and

00:05:28.960 if he does, someone please conduct a wellness check on his poor wife. So that's kind of the

00:05:34.540 steel man of the arguments. He's saying, Hey, and it is true. And I personally know these men and

00:05:38.180 you can't just say like, well, you know, just, just be a good man and be loyal. These are real

00:05:42.160 cases where I men have, I remember one good brother, his wife was, uh, was holding off and

00:05:47.380 filing divorce papers until the 10 year mark because at the 10 year mark, she was entitled

00:05:51.260 to more of his wealth. She was going for his kids to take custody of them. She was going for his 0.88

00:05:55.820 money and not just his money but as much money as he should he she could get while she was sleeping 1.00

00:06:00.900 with another man and the court system she walked in she got everything she wanted here in texas

00:06:05.940 two years ago like that legitimately happens he's a good faithful man leading the family working hard

00:06:11.620 and she took him for everything that he's worth now there's not a single boilerplate solution to

00:06:16.500 that that's not really the topic of what we're saying today but we have to be honest that there

00:06:20.320 is a point that the men were saying i don't know about this marriage thing like that kind of sounds

00:06:25.700 like i'm setting myself up for a lot of risk that risk is real even though tate's point is wrong

00:06:31.780 well just have as many children with as many women as possible no that's not the right response

00:06:35.280 either but the problem he points out i really think is a real one yeah anything to add anything

00:06:41.160 no yeah i think that's uh you know you you can certainly understand why when andrew date talks

00:06:47.820 about this it's there where the appeal is coming from like i i do understand like in this common

00:06:53.160 you know in this context like men are i mean you have a large swath of men who i think have been

00:06:58.940 alienated by women for one reason or another um and uh as a consequence i think they've sort of

00:07:05.100 turned away from like a biblical ideal of marriage i'll put it that way um and uh you know and what

00:07:12.060 tate's saying about relationships and how you know in the modern context women abuse you know in a

00:07:18.720 way abuse men and use men so on and so forth like i think it's appealing to say hey actually your

00:07:23.860 instincts that you're you're being told to sort of uh suppress um for in this like western sort

00:07:31.440 of schema they're actually they're actually appropriate um and uh and and that's where

00:07:37.080 andrew tate's appeal is coming from i think it's partly on like the physical uh side of things

00:07:41.780 like hey exercise you know hustle try to get as much money as you can but i think on the relationship

00:07:46.300 side as well um he you know how he talks about hey you know ballers kings so on and so forth

00:07:53.300 they get a lot of women i think that that just appeals to men i think i think matt walsh is

00:07:58.680 coming with more of the sort of historical biblical view of marriage and trying to articulate that

00:08:05.460 um sort of in this back and forth that we're looking at um and uh yeah we see it come to

00:08:10.640 we say it come to a clash i think it's appropriate west to sort of steel man uh you know some of the

00:08:16.240 good points that tate's making like like you've done um but uh but also see why why it's so

00:08:22.940 commonly held in the christian sort of schema matt walsh what matt walsh will say so yeah um yeah

00:08:29.380 let's play matt's video all the benefits for the man uh that traditionally are baked into the

00:08:35.960 equation of marriage according to god's design have been stripped away with our modern feminist 0.97

00:08:41.160 tradition that we now have here in the west so you think of what's the incentive for a man to

00:08:47.480 get married um part of it is legacy lineage that he would have posterity that would carry on his

00:08:53.500 name um i mean today you have you know hyphenated last names you know often uh the wife not even

00:09:00.640 taking uh the last name of the husband you also have all these women on birth control continuing

00:09:06.340 to be on birth control, even entering into marriage. So they're not actually producing 0.99

00:09:12.120 offspring. They're not actually going to provide a child, an heir for that man. The other incentive

00:09:18.640 from a biblical perspective is that sex, the only proper context within Christian thinking,

00:09:24.820 Christian ethics, is within marriage between one man and one woman. And there are prevalent cases

00:09:33.240 of women who refuse to sleep with their husbands and and so there's there's no there's no moral

00:09:40.680 obligation in the minds of many women today uh you know that the idea of conjugal rights i mean

00:09:46.320 you think of even you know some of our laws as it pertains to uh incarceration uh like why why

00:09:53.240 are there conjugal rights it's like you're a criminal you broke the law like you could be a 0.76

00:09:57.140 murderer you know you murdered someone i'm sorry you don't get to uh you don't get to have sex 0.99

00:10:02.560 with your wife. And yet, on the books, we have had this system of conjugal rights, even for 0.99

00:10:09.480 criminals, because what we're saying is that it's not just the criminal being able to receive

00:10:15.800 that sexual intimacy, but he has an obligation to fulfill that for his wife, for his spouse.

00:10:22.020 And so she has a right to it. And it's actually outlined as a right. And this is what we see in

00:10:27.860 scripture i believe it's first corinthians chapter 7 where the apostle paul says do not deprive one

00:10:33.140 another unless by mutual consent and even then over only for a time um uh so that you may devote

00:10:40.400 yourselves to prayer but then be rejoined together uh for there is much temptation in the world um

00:10:46.940 and and so even the apostle paul who as far as we know remained single he's talking about married 0.78

00:10:53.940 couples and saying, if you're married, you should be having sex. And, you know, like he doesn't,

00:10:59.640 you know, he's not a legalist about it. He's not putting, you know, a timestamp, you know,

00:11:03.000 like you have to set alarms on your phone, you know, to, you know, but, but he's saying, you

00:11:07.260 know, the, the overarching, at least, you know, concept is that that sex would be somewhat

00:11:11.980 frequent. It would be somewhat regular. And, but he binds it in language of duty, not, not merely

00:11:18.420 recreation or pleasure. You should do this because it's fun. It's like, no, you, the husband has

00:11:23.920 a duty to his wife and the wife has a duty to her husband but in our feminist society where there's 1.00

00:11:30.860 you know there's there's no sense of that that remains a woman can marry a man not sleep with 1.00

00:11:37.640 him not bear children for him if she does bear children or at least you know conceive children 0.95

00:11:44.340 she can murder his children with impunity a wife think about that even in marriage even not just 0.99

00:11:49.900 out of wedlock but even in marriage your wife who you're legally married to can take your unborn 0.98

00:11:56.280 child to a hit man and pay him your money that you've earned and have that child murdered your

00:12:03.700 child and there's not a dang thing that you can do about it legally but you cannot stop her and 0.92

00:12:10.620 if you tried by force to stop her you would go to jail and your child would still be murdered

00:12:17.220 in the womb because she's got a nine-month window to carry it out. Ample provision in time. 0.92

00:12:24.060 So you get married and there's no guarantee. It's like, well, I want to get married because I'd like

00:12:29.020 to be able to have sexual intimacy. There's no guarantee that she'll sleep with you. Well,

00:12:34.500 I'd like to have a son. There's no guarantee that she'll give you children. Well, you know, 0.78

00:12:40.380 but maybe she'll get pregnant. There's no guarantee that she'll continue to keep the pregnancy and 1.00

00:12:45.400 won't murder your child with legal impunity um and she can go and take all of your stuff 0.72

00:12:52.320 and she will win she will the entire court system is geared towards her so the moment that you get

00:12:59.520 married um you're entering into a scenario where especially for worldly men who aren't christian 0.63

00:13:05.980 you're looking at less sex not more less sex if any sex at all uh you're looking at a hyphenated

00:13:13.980 last name um you're looking at uh no posterity maybe some murdered posterity and probably um

00:13:23.600 her ending up taking you know 50 of the company that you started when you finally or she finally

00:13:29.440 opts out yeah and taking my stuff and the house um so andrew tate is right in terms of the diagnosis

00:13:36.320 and that's where the red pill has always been right as long as they've been around

00:13:40.400 um they're absolutely right and a lot of christians don't still just don't quite get it a lot of

00:13:47.220 pastors i don't i don't think they quite understand how how high the stakes really are and and how

00:13:54.000 incredibly corrupt uh and and how rigged the deck is against the husband so i'm sympathetic uh in

00:14:02.120 that regard um but at the same time what andrew tate is arguing for not only is it not the

00:14:09.020 Christian position. Um, but it's also not the Western position, which makes sense when you

00:14:14.380 think of Andrew Tate and the fact that, you know, when he, when he finally realized, okay, you know,

00:14:19.020 like I need to, I can't just remain undeclared when it comes to my faith religion. I need to

00:14:26.180 kind of, you know, make up my mind here. And he, and he realized, you know, like, Hey, if I'm going

00:14:30.780 to be based and right wing, you know, whatever that is for Andrew Tate, um, there's not really

00:14:36.180 a category of i'm based in right wing and uh and i'm agnostic oh so you're a lib right i'm based

00:14:43.140 in right wing but i'm an atheist you've never met someone like me before yeah yeah we we have it's

00:14:48.420 called james lindsey and you're actually a leftist there is no right wing category that's not profoundly 0.92

00:14:54.360 religious right there's not not not really and so i mean dave rubin is a very more uh wait he's gay

00:15:00.020 yeah exactly so so what they you know what what guys realize as they start going down you know 0.55

00:15:05.180 take the red pill, go down the red pill rabbit hole, is they realize, okay, I've got to be

00:15:11.280 religious. I've got to pick one. And so naturally, which religion does Andrew Tate pick? Well, he

00:15:16.560 picks Islam, not Christianity, but Islam. Islam is not Western. Islam is, you know, it's not 0.94

00:15:24.740 American. It's not European. And so, you know, he picks a religion that allows for polygamy. He 1.00

00:15:31.720 picks for a religion that allows for multiple wives and and all these you know allows for harems 0.98

00:15:37.700 and allows for and and so for me to see like okay here's here's uh you know an allegedly you know

00:15:43.880 islamic guy and he's going to argue for you know some version of polygamy makes total sense but

00:15:52.080 but i think it's you know it's good and we're going to do that uh now but but to argue you

00:15:57.480 know the biblical uh impetus against uh what andrew tate is positing but then also uh to show

00:16:04.780 that this this is not uh it's not it's not american it's not european uh it's not just

00:16:12.340 that it's not christian it's not western this is not how western society was built you want to go

00:16:18.300 to societies that embrace polygamy great um then then enjoy living in a hut right but if you want

00:16:26.000 cathedrals and you want airfare and you want you know smartphones and cell towers if you want

00:16:34.640 civilization then you're looking at christian nations and you're looking at monogamous nations

00:16:42.580 you're not looking at nations with harems the nation that allows you to have multiple wives

00:16:48.400 is also the nation where you live in a grass hut so enjoy your hut but to take all the benefits of 0.93

00:16:55.960 Western society while mocking some of the bedrock principles that built Western society is 0.84

00:17:05.340 disingenuous at best and hypocritical, more likely. Let's play Matt's clip, kind of his

00:17:11.580 rebuttal too. And we've pointed out, obviously, we agree with Matt much more on this, but he does

00:17:16.040 still kind of miss the mark a little bit. The setup which Andrew Tate describes and promotes

00:17:21.560 where men have children by many different women

00:17:23.980 has lots of historical precedent.

00:17:26.580 It does. 0.71

00:17:27.880 This is the way that primitive societies

00:17:29.940 have operated for thousands of years.

00:17:31.640 And today, this strategy, if we can call it that,

00:17:34.720 is very popular in certain communities in this country.

00:17:38.100 And you could always spot those communities

00:17:39.900 because they're the ones that are the most dysfunctional,

00:17:42.740 the filthiest, most destitute,

00:17:44.240 and crime-ridden places in the country.

00:17:46.720 Show me the murder rate

00:17:47.820 and the average yearly income in any neighborhood,

00:17:49.860 and I will tell you whether most of the children in that neighborhood have a father in the home

00:17:54.220 or not. And I will never be wrong. Andrew Tate talks about this kind of lifestyle as though

00:18:00.420 it's natural. In a post on Sunday, he made that claim explicitly. He said, quote,

00:18:05.120 monogamy isn't natural for men. Men are men. This is how they'll always be.

00:18:11.520 And he's right in a certain way. It is natural. It's natural in the sense that it appeals to our

00:18:16.780 most base and uncivilized impulses. Another word might be primitive. An even better word would be

00:18:23.360 animalistic, which is why it's so commonly found in the animal kingdom. Reptiles and fish behave

00:18:28.720 this way. You're not going to find a monogamous lizard or shark. Monkeys are almost always

00:18:34.780 non-monogamous. Go down the list of animal species and they almost all approach family

00:18:40.220 formation the way that Andrew Tate prescribes. But the problem is that we are not monkeys or

00:18:47.680 lizards or sharks. We are human beings. And my controversial contention is that we should act

00:18:53.600 like it. Is monogamy natural? Even better, it's supernatural. Man and wife become one at the

00:19:02.300 altar. They are bound together by the vow they made before God. This is above our base instincts.

00:19:10.220 And so is composing a symphony or sculpting the statue of David out of a massive hunk of marble.

00:19:15.960 These things are achieved just like any great thing is achieved by rejecting temptation,

00:19:22.260 subordinating our base desires, embracing some measure of hardship for the sake of something

00:19:26.860 far greater than whatever momentary pleasure we can experience by giving into them.

00:19:31.800 And there is nothing in this world more manly, more masculine than that. In fact, I would say

00:19:37.420 this is the very definition of masculinity. Can you do the harder thing for the sake of the greater

00:19:44.940 good? If you're going to impart one thing to your sons and your daughters as a father, it should be

00:19:52.160 this. Teaching them how to do the harder thing for the greater good. And if you can't, or if you

00:20:01.500 won't, then you aren't manly. And no matter how much money you have or how much you can bench

00:20:06.900 press. It doesn't matter. Now, Tate says that men will be men, and yes, that's true, but

00:20:12.580 will they be good men? Will they be men of virtue and fidelity and discipline?

00:20:20.360 They can be, if they pursue the higher thing. In a similar way, I might say that many men

00:20:26.580 will father children. That's easy to do. But will they be fathers? They have children. Will 0.88

00:20:34.000 they raise them. That's the hard part. I keep talking about hardship and difficulty, rightly so,

00:20:41.380 but I don't want to make it sound like being a faithful husband and father is nothing but misery

00:20:45.920 and drudgery and all you can do is just grit your teeth and bear it. That's not the case.

00:20:51.120 I love being married. I love being a dad. It's a lot of fun much of the time. It's a source of

00:20:56.360 great joy. That's what happens when you simply let go of your childish need to put your own

00:21:02.220 immediate gratification before anything and everything all the time. You discover an ability

00:21:06.200 to do the harder thing and actually enjoy it. The way that guys like Tate describe marriage

00:21:13.200 makes it seem like, you know, we're living in entirely different universes, and perhaps we are.

00:21:18.500 Because he describes marriage like it's a labor camp. A man is imprisoned by his controlling,

00:21:23.380 ungrateful, promiscuous wife who runs out to cheat on him as soon as he leaves for work in the 0.95

00:21:27.760 morning. He makes it seem, or outright claims, that it's essentially impossible for a man to 0.84

00:21:32.140 find a good, faithful woman who will bear his children, stay true to her vows, and respect

00:21:37.740 and love him until he dies.

00:21:39.600 But how could it be impossible?

00:21:42.940 I am currently in such an arrangement.

00:21:46.120 I know many men in the same boat.

00:21:49.300 If you don't know any truly happy and faithful marriages, then I would suggest that the problem

00:21:54.280 isn't with marriage.

00:21:55.880 It's that you are surrounding yourself with awful people.

00:21:59.580 now finally back to the subject of raising boys

00:22:04.480 yeah we agree with a lot of that i agree with a lot of that i think there was a lot of criticisms

00:22:13.140 i think specifically aimed at tate that were that were more relevant than i think his defense of

00:22:19.220 marriage doing the harder thing for the greater good i thought was great yeah i agree with that

00:22:23.680 at the end there though is when he's kind of starts to like you know um he he kind of almost

00:22:32.020 kind of made it like i'm in a good marriage my wife is is kind and faithful and and therefore

00:22:38.240 it seems like he was implying um that that women like matt's own wife are prevalent and that they

00:22:45.940 grow on trees yeah and i'm like where do you if you know where please tell the young man

00:22:51.720 out here looking for a wife i wonder when matt i i assume he's he's has to been married for at

00:22:57.420 least a decade yeah oh yeah wes will look it up i i i'm gonna guess i think he got married 15 years

00:23:03.800 ago plus that sounds about right that's what i'm gonna guess but go ahead well i was just gonna

00:23:08.660 say like also one thing as you're watching this clip like becomes evident is that what what matt

00:23:15.500 walsh is criticizing about andrew tate's um sort of version if you will of polygamy is something

00:23:21.680 that actually outright you know outright should just be condemned like because because what he's

00:23:26.840 saying is true you think about islam i think aquinas specifically did a study of islam and

00:23:31.580 essentially described it as the pursuance of lust like that is what that is the embodiment of that 0.97

00:23:37.960 faith right um it's just money power precisely yeah it's just permit it's just permissive

00:23:44.260 and so in the way that matt walsh is criticizing andrew tate and what he's how he's talking about

00:23:49.580 dating and marriage and uh polygamy it that is the right that is the right criticism to make

00:23:55.940 because that i mean we were talking about before the episode like for 99 of men who are liking

00:24:02.000 andrew tate's tweet here and espousing this kind of view like it it is a selfish lustful motivation

00:24:08.460 and and we should just as we the point i'm trying to make here is we should distinguish

00:24:12.580 the criticisms we're leveraging at tate and and his view of polygamy from the very real presence

00:24:18.340 of polygamy in scripture that we're forced to wrestle with as christians and that you know

00:24:23.120 church fathers so on and so forth and church history have wrestled with it's just different

00:24:26.960 It's just a different context, different reasons, so on and so forth.

00:24:32.600 He was married 2011, so he was 25 years old at the time, about 14 years ago.

00:24:37.440 And that probably was a time where it was easier to find a good woman.

00:24:40.700 We've talked about this before. 1.00

00:24:41.840 A lot of women marry for potential in men.

00:24:43.700 So they see a man that is working hard, but he's not there yet.

00:24:46.580 He's disciplined, but he can grow in it.

00:24:48.340 And they say, I want to come along for that journey.

00:24:50.640 But men at some level, they're marrying for youth, like the ability to bear children.

00:24:54.720 but there's also an element of a past in there.

00:24:56.700 A past can't be erased, and there's men that would say no to some women

00:25:00.040 because of the lifestyle, specifically a promiscuous lifestyle that they've lived.

00:25:04.400 And my point is that it's actually possible in a given nation, for example, 1.00

00:25:07.860 of all the women of marriageable age,

00:25:10.560 that more women would have a past that would disincline them towards marriage. 1.00

00:25:14.080 It could be more or less. 1.00

00:25:15.860 So you could have a time like ours in which the vast majority of women, 1.00

00:25:19.360 for one reason or another, are generally ineligible for marriage,

00:25:23.120 whether it be by their temperament, whether it be by their views being feminist.

00:25:27.720 There can be, a Christian man can be looking to date,

00:25:30.580 and proportionally there would be more eligible Christian women

00:25:33.780 that he could date 50 years ago than today.

00:25:36.460 It's not a fixed number that there will always be a fixed number of Christian women,

00:25:39.520 and all of those Christian women would be good women that you should be happy to marry.

00:25:42.940 And I would definitely say, right now it would seem, 1.00

00:25:45.800 there is a dearth of good Christian women to find and to marry 1.00

00:25:49.280 that want to be mothers, that want to be good stay-at-home wives,

00:25:52.440 that want to respect and submit to their husbands that wasn't always the case 20 30 40 years ago but

00:25:59.400 that most certainly probably is the case now and telling people well hey i did it when it was easy

00:26:03.520 like that's great but that doesn't help a lot of men who are saying it is rough out here

00:26:08.320 yeah yeah finding a good woman is pretty difficult i'm always i've quoted it before people get mad

00:26:16.020 at me i understand that there are um there's some other context to this in the higher interpretive

00:26:20.960 level um and how it pertains to more spiritual things but uh nonetheless you still have in the

00:26:26.960 book of ecclesiastes he says when i was searching but still not yet finding i found one upright man

00:26:33.400 among a thousand but not one upright woman among them all classic i feel like that like that's

00:26:41.000 kind of like uh these days i could probably you know for the single man that could be your life

00:26:44.920 verse uh maybe a little bit discouraging maybe pick a different verse it's a little bit more

00:26:49.660 hopeful but um yeah let's turn just a biblical portion of this so the biblical arguments and

00:26:55.600 that was even some of the criticism that matt walsh got matt you should be making these arguments

00:26:59.160 for monogamy based on scripture right and i couldn't help a little bit but think the way

00:27:03.760 he was kind of describing polygamy to your point antonio we have to be honest about this you will

00:27:08.280 not win if you're not honest with people that oppose you so if you're arguing for monogamy

00:27:12.740 which we are you do need to be honest about what the bible says whether it be abraham whether it

00:27:17.720 be Esau, whether it be David, whether it be Solomon, Joash later on in the book of Kings.

00:27:24.580 There were a number of biblical patriarchs who had multiple wives. Abraham was two. I think Esau

00:27:29.920 was two. Is it Isaac as well? He has four, I believe. Yeah. So Isaac has four. David has,

00:27:37.060 it seems, about eight. Solomon, just put them all to shame. Jacob has four because he marries

00:27:42.020 Rachel, Leah first, and then Rachel, and then each of them have a servant that married Jacob.

00:27:47.260 So Jacob has four.

00:27:48.680 I think Isaac is two.

00:27:49.720 Yep.

00:27:49.980 So you have a number of cases in scripture.

00:27:53.420 And if we're perfectly honest, we don't see anything necessarily in the text.

00:27:56.920 Now, the first man who's married to two women, Lamech, this would be in Genesis chapter four,

00:28:01.020 he is condemned.

00:28:01.800 He's known as a violent man.

00:28:03.120 It records there that he's married to two women.

00:28:05.100 And he boasts about being too violent to a young man who just slighted him ever so slightly.

00:28:10.080 And he says, all right, if Cain was avenged, let me tell you how much I'm going to avenge

00:28:14.100 someone who offends me.

00:28:15.420 And the difference is Cain.

00:28:16.560 in the case of cain and cain was you know he was no saint but in the case of cain it's god exacting

00:28:22.160 this vengeance sevenfold right i'll put my mark on you because cain is like you know okay um you're

00:28:28.640 gonna allow me to live after killing my brother abel you know and i'm gonna be a wanderer and 0.96

00:28:32.880 i'm being banished but um people are gonna find me and kill me you know and god makes him this 0.53

00:28:38.640 promise and says i'll put my mark on you so that if anybody finds you and tries to lay a hand on 0.99

00:28:43.120 on you, tries to harm you or kill you, I will exact vengeance on them sevenfold. Whereas Lamech 0.99

00:28:49.380 is saying, if Cain's vengeance was sevenfold, mine will be 77fold. So he's saying, it'll be

00:28:55.320 exponentially more. And he's also saying, I'm going to exact that kind of vengeance. And he's

00:29:02.760 talking about that in the context of presumably what we can tell implicitly is like a young boy

00:29:09.240 who doesn't commit a crime but just slights him, offends him.

00:29:14.760 And so he's like, I'm going to go and absolutely destroy 1.00

00:29:17.160 and murder and kill this young boy. 1.00

00:29:19.240 So that's the wickedness of Lamech. 1.00

00:29:22.440 He was wicked because he had two wives. 0.88

00:29:24.180 No, it's wicked because he's wicked. 0.90

00:29:26.180 But then you do have to grapple with the fact that

00:29:28.600 the most wicked guy so far in the biblical narrative

00:29:32.660 other than Cain, and arguably from what you can tell

00:29:35.360 from the text he's he's you know he's 11 times more wicked than cain so thus far in the biblical

00:29:42.980 narrative from genesis chapter 1 it's the most wicked guy in scripture we've seen thus far he

00:29:48.380 he also happens to be descriptively the first guy in scripture who has more than one wife

00:29:53.600 yep so not not a great you know and abraham's marriage to hagar that that does not go well

00:29:59.960 either sarah gets jealous she kicks her out she nearly dies in the desert uh same thing with

00:30:04.780 Jacob, there's strife and everything. Probably the best you could do would be David. So David

00:30:09.660 did not have 800 wives like Solomon, who, for the record, took him and led his heart away from God

00:30:14.400 later on in his life, which was the specific warning about kings multiplying wives.

00:30:19.140 We have David who had about eight wives and is likely some other concubines.

00:30:22.780 And you could make the argument with Bathsheba, and we're just trying to kind of go through the

00:30:26.480 biblical narrative to say what the Bible says about this. And you can say with Bathsheba,

00:30:29.840 well, see right there, like the fault was with Bathsheba. But if we're being technical,

00:30:33.120 the fault was that he slept with the wife of another man. So Bathsheba was Uriah's wife.

00:30:37.820 Because David had other wives. Exactly. And it was permissible for David at that time. I thought 0.60

00:30:43.920 there was an interesting comment here from Foxhound in the chat. He said, and he's right,

00:30:48.380 when we're making biblical moral arguments, descriptive texts, they're not nothing,

00:30:53.760 but they are descriptive rather than prescriptive. Prescriptive meaning that the Bible's actually

00:30:57.920 you know explicitly commanding something descriptive is it's just describing a picture

00:31:03.240 of something right like what you just referenced with David and Bathsheba right that's a descriptive

00:31:07.580 what's going on well David you know sleeps with Bathsheba another man's wife and then sends you

00:31:13.560 know her husband Uriah to the front lines and has Joab and everybody retreat from him so that

00:31:19.360 essentially you know effectively he's murdered so you'd read that that's that's in the Bible

00:31:23.720 but it's a descriptive um text and it's not prescribing saying so this is what you do to

00:31:28.960 live a good and godly life you need to find somebody who's a close friend uriah was one of

00:31:33.000 the 30 mighty men he was he wasn't just a random guy in israel he was one of david's friends you

00:31:37.080 need to find a close friend top 30 friend list and uh and you just sleep with his wife you know

00:31:42.300 and make sure that he uh that he you know set the stage for him to die in some tragic um accident so

00:31:48.600 that's a descriptive text not prescriptive so too with lame going back to that real quick

00:31:53.240 foxtown just brought up you know you can argue that if you wanted to play the devil's advocate

00:31:57.880 you can argue in another one you can say well the first uh the first monogamous marriage in the

00:32:03.400 bible led towards the fall of the entire human race adam and eve like i want that to happen again

00:32:10.540 probably should cut out all that monogamy right you know so so that that is a fair point so lamech

00:32:17.180 i think there's i think there's something there but uh but if that's if that's the you know the

00:32:21.340 whole foundation of the argument then no that's not strong enough yeah but if we talk about like

00:32:25.920 i you know you think about arguments for monogamy against polygamy i i wouldn't necessarily go to

00:32:32.260 lamech i i think there's a couple other things and as you read the church fathers i think there's

00:32:36.340 two sort of primary ways that monogamy as not only the ideal but um uh that all other forms

00:32:44.180 of marriage would be sinful polygamy bigamy um i think the best arguments are going to be

00:32:49.100 Christological. And so this is the way that Christ and the church mirror a husband and a bride and

00:32:56.820 that being sort of a view of marriage. And that sort of aligns with Genesis 2, 24, that a husband

00:33:04.240 should leave his parents and cling to one wife, hold fast to one wife. So you have that sort of 0.86

00:33:09.440 Christological view, biblically speaking. And then I think the natural law arguments are also

00:33:13.300 something that comes out in sort of the anti-Nicene church fathers, which is to say that

00:33:18.860 polygamy introduces disorder. It's a disordered sort of a version of the family. So you think

00:33:25.280 about like Andrew Tate, he's got 40 kids and nine wives. Can he possibly be a biblical father

00:33:31.640 to all 40 of those children? Can he sort of do his duty to sort of raise them in the fear and

00:33:39.560 admonition of the lord so and so as parents are commanded as fathers are commanded um and so you

00:33:45.000 have that sort of that one's tough because you think of like adam and eve you know adam lived

00:33:49.300 you know over 900 years like adam probably had he probably had over 100 kids yeah easily and so like

00:33:56.760 so i i do understand i like the christological argument i i like that a lot i was going to say

00:34:03.080 what i would add is um just an argument from um from creation itself so like when jesus makes his

00:34:10.020 argument about um against divorce he says you know well moses uh told you that um that if you

00:34:17.320 want to divorce your wife you must offer her a certificate of divorce but i tell you and then

00:34:22.880 and then what he appeals to similar to the apostle paul when he's arguing for male headship in first

00:34:27.320 timothy uh chapter two uh jesus but i tell you from the beginning it was not so and i think that

00:34:33.720 that is a strong argument to just to say from the beginning um the first marriage is one man

00:34:40.260 and one woman god god could have i mean adam has a few more ribs right like i'm you know like i'm

00:34:46.800 not a biologist but you know but like i'm pretty sure we have more one more than one uh rib in our

00:34:51.740 body like i mean seriously like god could have taken you know uh one from each rib cage and

00:34:57.180 here's here's two wives yep you know but he but he doesn't and i and i do think that that's a

00:35:01.900 more significant argument yeah and i think that i think that argue from argument from creation is

00:35:06.520 more is actually upstream from the natural law argument because you you would struggle to find

00:35:11.980 biblical prohibitions against polygamy like really the only approach you can take is say

00:35:16.560 how did God create man in the garden? Perfect, holy, righteous. And then what flows from that 0.77

00:35:23.740 naturally? And then, and so, yeah, you're totally right. I think the appeal to creation,

00:35:28.840 the appeal to natural law. Now, natural law though, like technically, for example,

00:35:33.280 you think of the inverse, which would be one woman with multiple men. That is, it's literally 0.65

00:35:38.760 baked into the fabric of the universe. The psychological effect, this is for women as 1.00

00:35:42.800 relates to biology and pair bonding and maybe someday we do have to do it we'll do a whole

00:35:46.720 episode on the effects of it but a woman that sleeps with multiple men will have all sorts of 0.91

00:35:51.160 downstream health issues psychological mental health issues her likelihood of divorce so if

00:35:56.480 you're talking about a woman that slept with multiple men prior to marriage and increases

00:35:59.960 her likeliness of divorce but you don't actually see that with men men who would have multiple

00:36:04.460 partners other women they don't experience that at all if one woman put it this way solomon had 0.99

00:36:09.520 800 some wives and concubines combined if one woman had heaven forbid 800 male partners in her

00:36:15.840 lifetime she would be psychologically destroyed her body would literally not survive it and god

00:36:20.980 has made the fabric of the universe that so i would say at some level in natural law we don't

00:36:25.620 see an equivalence in that no you have men that would as the head of the home then potentially 0.80

00:36:31.420 like even moses an argument could be made there's zipporah and then there's a kushite woman

00:36:35.920 potentially being two separate individuals that's actually and we'll make this point kind of in the

00:36:40.260 second one that is actually probably and even Rush Dooney makes this point a valid real family but

00:36:46.420 one woman with multiple men with somehow the woman serving as the head of it the the federal

00:36:53.240 representative the matriarch the matriarch that's impossible so I agree with you like natural

00:36:57.840 just even having multiple women in the same household Rush Dooney has examples yeah it's

00:37:02.780 not great they get jealous just like we see in the bible but it is still possible but natural law

00:37:07.700 for sure tells us that the inverse is impossible yeah there's gradations against nature for sure

00:37:14.440 yeah exactly we've talked about that before actually ironically in the context of an episode

00:37:19.980 about andrew tate sitting in the right direction everybody lost their mind obviously the point that

00:37:25.900 i was making and i literally said it if you just panned out and didn't clip me out of context all

00:37:29.980 the time is there are sins which um are in accordance with nature but still sins and then

00:37:35.500 there are sins which go against nature right so like romans chapter one that's one of the things

00:37:40.060 that paul argues about homosexuality says that men exchange natural relations with women and

00:37:46.160 were inflamed with lust for one another so a man who's promiscuous is sinning but he's sinning in

00:37:52.820 a way that does accord with nature it doesn't accord with the law of god right but it does

00:37:57.600 accord with nature so it's still sin and it's not absolving that and saying that it's not a sin

00:38:02.140 but a man who's promiscuous is not sinning at the same degree the same level as a man who's

00:38:08.820 sleeping with another man not all sin contrary to popular opinion not all sin is equal all sin

00:38:14.500 apart from repentance and faith in the lord jesus christ is equal in its ultimate eternal effects

00:38:20.120 that it will separate you from the love and intimacy of the triune god forever in hell so

00:38:27.860 all sin is equal in that aspect but not all sin is equal both in the sight of god but then also

00:38:34.820 certainly in its temporal earthly consequences and effects and we've talked about that multiple

00:38:40.660 times so there are sins which are absolutely immoral their sins but accord with nature and

00:38:47.660 then there are sins that go against nature and those sins which betray nature and contradict

00:38:53.120 nature are greater sins with greater temporal effects and they are more abominable in the sight

00:39:01.020 of god god hates all sin but he goes to great lengths in multiple texts throughout the proverbs

00:39:08.220 for instance, to say God doesn't like any sin, but six, no seven, are detestable to him or

00:39:17.620 abominations to him. So even from God's purview, some sins are greater than others. And certainly

00:39:25.020 from a human viewpoint and temporal effects, some sins are greater than others. So all that being

00:39:32.440 said, back to a woman having multiple husbands, one of the reasons that that doesn't 0.92

00:39:38.200 work is because of the principle of male headship, which is a part of the natural order. In the case 0.85

00:39:45.400 of a man who has multiple wives, there is still one head. In the case of a woman who has multiple 0.92

00:39:52.280 husbands, she cannot. It's not just, oh, she won't be a good head. She's not the head. She cannot be 1.00

00:39:58.920 the head. She's not the head of that household. And so by virtue of one woman having multiple 1.00

00:40:04.860 husbands then that means if she has three husbands there are three heads and anything with more than

00:40:10.340 one head is a monster as the old adage goes and so now you don't just have you know like three

00:40:16.280 wives who are struggling with strife and jealousy but now you have three men who are vying against

00:40:23.760 one another competing one another for the authority of that household and the children

00:40:29.000 and its direction and its economic production and all these. So you never see that. And I think

00:40:36.940 that's worth noting. You never see that in the Bible. So what we'll talk about here in a moment

00:40:42.860 a little bit later, none of us, just we'll go ahead and as a disclaimer, we feel comfortable

00:40:48.720 saying this. Polygamy is not esteemed in scripture. It's not dignified in scripture,

00:40:57.000 and it's not the ideal. Now, whether or not polygamy is a sin, we're going to address that

00:41:03.060 here in a moment. If there is permissibility, not ideal, but at least a moral permissibility

00:41:11.420 in some cases, and we'll talk about that in a moment, for polygamy, what we can all agree on

00:41:16.880 is there's not even the permissibility. There's not even a conceivable, not one conceivable

00:41:24.300 hypothetical scenario where polygamy would even be permissible in the case of it being one wife

00:41:31.220 with multiple husbands because it goes against nature nor would it be i think permissible to

00:41:36.020 make the argument that polygamy is at ever the ideal too so you can't make woman with multiple

00:41:41.100 men you can't make even say you can't ever make that even permissible that's what god kind of

00:41:46.440 intended from the beginning none of that we're going to discuss the arguments be it from church

00:41:50.060 history be it from nature uh what are some possible scenarios where god's word maybe has some some

00:41:55.760 wider boundaries yep so let's go to our first commercial break and we will be right back

00:41:59.520 the danger of centralized power is often represented by the word king as americans

00:42:06.040 we hate the word king civilian ownership of body armor is about helping people to have increased

00:42:13.340 power to resist tyrants and criminals. And so Armored Republic is about helping

00:42:19.700 you to preserve your God-given rights to the honor of the Lord Jesus Christ

00:42:23.600 because he is the king of kings and he governs kings and he will judge them.

00:42:28.780 This is Armored Republic and in a republic there is no king but Christ.

00:42:34.840 We are free craftsmen and we are honored to be your Armorsmith choice.

00:42:43.340 running your business with purpose means looking beyond last month's numbers to next year's

00:42:58.720 vision kaylee smith offers cfo level strategy scaled just for small businesses at mid-state

00:43:06.320 accounting she takes care of your compliance bookkeeping and tax returns while providing

00:43:12.500 holistic advisory and fractional CFO services to help you steward your resources with a distinctly

00:43:20.420 Christian perspective. Ready to align your finances with your future? Then call Kaylee

00:43:26.380 Smith at 573-889-7278 for a free, no-obligation consultation. Mention the Right Response podcast

00:43:37.420 to get 10% off your first three months.

00:43:41.560 Prefer to explore online?

00:43:43.240 Then you can visit midstateaccounting.net

00:43:46.760 to learn more or schedule a call.

00:43:49.540 Again, that's midstateaccounting.net.

00:43:52.900 With Midstate Accounting,

00:43:54.440 you'll plan for tomorrow while operating in faith today.

00:43:58.140 So call Kaylee Smith at 573-889-7278.

00:44:04.700 Again, that's 573-889-7278.

00:44:11.380 Heaven's Harvest takes pride in providing you with the best freeze-dried emergency survival food kits on the market.

00:44:19.080 Their kits stand out because they prioritize serving sizes and calories that will sustain you for the long haul.

00:44:26.220 No gimmicks, no fillers, just a diverse array of nutritious options that will pleasantly surprise you.

00:44:33.160 But they're more than just emergency food.

00:44:36.500 They're advocates for sustainable preparedness.

00:44:40.000 Their heirloom seed kits include heirloom, non-GMO, non-hybrid, open pollinated seeds,

00:44:47.160 ensuring that your garden produces the same quality and variety year after year.

00:44:53.100 Packaged in high-grade Mylar foil, their seeds have a 10-year shelf life.

00:44:58.680 So get 10% off your Heaven's Harvest order by using our special discount code, RRM, at checkout or by clicking the link in the description below.

00:45:10.960 Made in the USA and free shipping on orders above $99 for the U.S. only.

00:45:18.780 So welcome back.

00:45:20.300 We're going to ask the question, is polygamy always, in every case, a sin?

00:45:25.720 And I want to lay this and I'll toss it over to Antonio.

00:45:28.320 I like what the Westminster, I think it's the Shorter Catechism, what it defines sin as,

00:45:32.840 because sin is not just, it's not arbitrary.

00:45:35.580 It's not left up to, well, this felt like a sin, or I would even say internal states,

00:45:39.820 like we have to be careful just attributing sin to, well, I didn't feel this in worship,

00:45:43.660 or maybe I was distracted.

00:45:45.320 Sin very specifically in the Westminster Shorter Catechism is any want of conformity to

00:45:50.020 or transgression of the law of God.

00:45:53.420 Sin is the word itself in Greek, to miss the mark.

00:45:55.860 it's want of so the lack of conformity so a a negative sense i didn't do what was required by

00:46:02.300 the law of god or transgression of in its positive connotation actively transgressed actively

00:46:08.080 disobeyed and very specifically the law of god and we say god's law the ten commandments is the

00:46:12.980 best encapsulation of it both nature and god's word teaches us the law of god what to do and

00:46:19.420 what not to do and for theonomist for example levitical law is then expounded so expounding

00:46:25.220 upon what it means to not murder, what it means to not steal. Here's what that looks like in the

00:46:29.120 commonwealth. Here's what that looks like for the state to step in and say, hey, this counts as

00:46:34.160 murder. Hey, this counts as theft. So sin, any want of conformity unto or transgression of the

00:46:40.640 law of God, or asking in every single case anywhere, has polygamy always counted as that? 0.75

00:46:46.740 Yeah. And, you know, I think you think about church history, I think the predominant view

00:46:52.960 on marriage is that polygamy is sin. And we'll have to look at some quotes from some church

00:46:58.060 fathers in the second and fourth century who said as much. But there have been a few theologians

00:47:04.080 through time who have kind of viewed, and we've talked about this sort of in the buildup here,

00:47:08.980 viewed polygamy as sort of a post-fall concession. I think you could admit it to be such.

00:47:14.360 Luther famously said that, you know, polygamy was something like less ideal, but certainly in

00:47:22.280 particular context was permissible. And he used that to sort of make sense of the patriarchs in

00:47:27.640 the Old Testament. And then you had guys like Calvin who came and said, polygamy is actually

00:47:32.420 worse than divorce. And it's sort of a more grievous transgression, if you will. And I think

00:47:39.660 we talked about natural law. I think most of the arguments sort of were built upon this idea of

00:47:46.820 the created order, one man, one woman in the garden, and that being sort of, and polygamy

00:47:52.200 sort of being a transgression of that natural law. So we can, let's look at some of these quotes and

00:47:56.440 we can see how this was articulated. We can first take a look at Tertullian. We're looking here in

00:48:00.720 the second century. Tertullian states here, now if any limitation is set to marrying, such as the 0.86

00:48:07.680 spiritual rule, which prescribes but one marriage under the Christian obedience maintained by the

00:48:13.120 authority of the paraclete or the Holy Spirit, it will be his prerogative to fix the limit who has

00:48:17.960 once been diffuse in his permission. So here you can see that articulation of the difference in

00:48:22.920 the Old Testament, the diffuse permission around marriage now being changed in the New Testament

00:48:29.280 with this prerogative to fix the limit to one marriage. And this goes back, Joel, to that

00:48:33.920 Christological view and sort of Christ's teachings sort of superseding what the Old Testament was

00:48:41.620 commanding for marriage. Then we can jump to the next one here, which is Ambrose. So now we're

00:48:48.360 talking about the fourth century, circa fourth century here. It says, it is not licit for you

00:48:55.780 if your wife still lives to take another wife, for indeed to seek another when you have your

00:49:00.240 own is a crime of adultery. So here we see the categorization of polygamy into the sin of

00:49:07.580 adultery, violating the Decalogue. This is most serious because you think in your sin that you

00:49:13.120 should seek freedom in the law. So this last sentence is becoming particularly important

00:49:17.380 because obviously in various contexts in sort of medieval and pre-medieval Europe, there were

00:49:24.480 places you could live in polygamy be permissible by law. And here we see Ambrose saying, even if

00:49:30.800 you live in a place where you have freedom in the law, you ought not as a Christian hide your 0.65

00:49:36.300 polygamy behind that freedom, that it would still be sin. And so pushing back against this idea

00:49:40.980 that there's a pragmatic element to biblical marriage. And so this is just simply to lay

00:49:48.380 the groundwork for how the early church fathers are thinking about polygamy, obviously making

00:49:54.280 different various arguments, trying to wrestle with the Old Testament. But I think it's helpful

00:50:00.120 at least to just, like I said, set that sort of framework. And then we can talk about some of the

00:50:04.460 complexities. I also, Joel, you mentioned sort of two approaches to how we think about polygamy.

00:50:13.020 And specifically after the Matt Walsh clip, you said, firstly, it's not Christian. And that way,

00:50:18.260 I think we're saying it's not ideal. It's not what God holds in highest esteem for creation.

00:50:23.700 And then you also said it's not Western. And I think that's really important. We think about 0.61

00:50:28.580 what is the Western common law, English common law and American common law jurisprudence had

00:50:35.120 to say about polygamy? And obviously we know that polygamy has been outlawed. It's one of the big

00:50:39.020 reasons that the Mormons, for example, were so persecuted in the 19th century is because of the

00:50:44.160 practice of polygamy and the way that it violated laws. Well, we can go all the way back to William

00:50:49.200 Blackstone. So did some of the fundamental commentaries on the laws of England. Blackstone,

00:50:54.140 I'm sure people are familiar with, he would essentially review laws in medieval Europe and

00:50:59.660 specifically medieval England and try to give justification and rationale to them. And so much

00:51:05.000 of it is biblical rationale, but there's also a ton of natural law baked in as well. And it's

00:51:09.900 super interesting. But I have this quote here from William Blackstone, just to bring a little

00:51:13.740 bit of clarity to how it's distinctly non-Western polygamy. Blackstone says,

00:51:20.700 another felonious attempt with regard to the holiest state of matrimony is what some have

00:51:25.260 corruptly called bigamy, which properly signifies being twice married, but it is more justly

00:51:30.420 dominated polygamy or having a plurality of wives at once. Such second marriage, living the former

00:51:37.540 husband or wife, is simply void in a mere nullity by the ecclesiastical law of England. So the church 0.61

00:51:43.880 obviously outlawed polygamy at the time. And yet the legislature, on top of the church's prohibition,

00:51:49.680 the legislature has thought it just to make it a felony so a criminal act by reason of its being

00:51:55.480 so great a violation of the public economy and decency of a well-ordered state for polygamy

00:52:01.600 can never be endured under any rational civil establishment whatever specious reasons may be

00:52:08.460 urged for it by the eastern nations the fallaciousness of which has been fully proved

00:52:13.480 by many sensible writers so you see here uh both the ecclesiastical sort of prohibition so we see

00:52:20.100 the biblical argument being brought in but also a natural argument he talks about public order

00:52:24.680 and decency um and and in terms of why polygamy would be outlawed um and and yeah and so i think

00:52:31.680 it becomes evident whatever the case is whether we're saying it's uh like calvin it's it's it's

00:52:36.880 worse than divorce or whether we're saying like luth like luther it's a post-law concession it's

00:52:41.320 less than ideal. It is certainly not Western, and it's certainly not something that should be

00:52:46.100 promoted. Yeah, polygamy seems to always attach itself to Christian heresies. So whether it's 0.98

00:52:52.640 Islam, which is a Christian heresy, came, you know, in 700 AD, and you can tell from the Quran that

00:52:59.280 Muhammad was, you know, listening to much of, you know, the oral tradition and even looking at some

00:53:05.820 of, you know, the apostolic writers within, you know, the Christian, you know, the biblical canon,

00:53:09.780 and then taking some of those things which he heard as oral tradition and some of the things

00:53:14.480 he saw written and then kind of piggybacking off of those as he was writing the quran so you have

00:53:19.540 like some of the the apocrypha you know legendary texts of like jesus from the womb as mary and

00:53:26.920 joseph are fleeing you know king herod and his edict and they're going to egypt and mary is

00:53:32.520 hungry and jesus from her womb speaks to a tree and the tree you know like bows over so that 0.81

00:53:40.300 mary can take some of its fruit and eat and muhammad is picking up on these things because 0.83

00:53:45.140 he thinks that it'll give credence to the quran and to islam because uh by piggybacking off of

00:53:51.460 christianity but he doesn't know what's true christianity and what are you know just extra 0.80

00:53:55.800 you know extra biblical apocrypha texts or parts of oral tradition and so my point is islam is a 0.93

00:54:01.520 Christian heresy. Judaism is a Christian heresy, and so is Mormonism. Mormonism is a Christian 0.92

00:54:09.560 heresy, and so it's actually prevalent and quite common that within Christian heresies

00:54:14.080 that there are, you know, allowances for polygamy, like Mormonism, you know, or Islam.

00:54:21.420 But within Christianity, which has dominated the West, you know, for easily a millennium,

00:54:27.940 if not a millennia and a half at this point, it's been pretty tight with monogamy. And the thing

00:54:37.360 that I was going to add is, because I've seen in the chat people saying, well, what do you do if

00:54:41.620 a Muslim family converts to Christianity? So there's missionary efforts in some African nation

00:54:49.860 where Islam is the predominant religion and you have families converting from Islam to Christianity

00:54:56.860 and some of those families. The husband has two or three or four wives. And I've actually

00:55:03.240 dealt with some of these cases where I've helped to disciple a little bit some guys who were

00:55:13.420 recently converted to Christianity from Islam and had more than one wife. And they said,

00:55:18.820 what do we do? Do we stay with our first wife or our most recent wife and send the other wives

00:55:24.220 away and i think biblically um i think by by implication implicitly uh the clear answer

00:55:32.020 is that uh you remain married to all all as many wives as you have three four wives whatever it is

00:55:38.740 you remain married to all of them you're faithful in your provision and protection

00:55:43.560 uh to all of them you don't send any away and you don't take any new ones and then per the

00:55:49.980 qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, when it comes to eldership, these guys who are now

00:55:54.880 Christian, these families, that man would not be qualified to serve as an elder in the church. 0.92

00:56:01.680 And so I liken it, the best way that I could describe it is I think it's similar to divorce 0.64

00:56:07.240 and remarriage, especially divorce without biblical cause, which is prevalent in our

00:56:13.740 Western context, primarily a Western apostatized context where much of the West has turned its

00:56:24.200 back on Christianity. And so today, having couples in our churches, our Christian churches,

00:56:30.520 that are on their second or third or fourth marriage, they're not married to two or three

00:56:36.340 or four individuals simultaneously, but it is their second, third, and fourth

00:56:41.240 marriage and by their own admission. And I've dealt with several of these cases by their own

00:56:46.860 admission. They would say, yeah, I divorced my spouse. They didn't divorce me. I divorced them.

00:56:53.120 There wasn't biblical cause. There was no adultery. I just, you know, we just weren't

00:56:58.420 getting along and we were angry with each other and I was angry at them and I filed for divorce

00:57:04.020 and, you know, and I see that that was a sin now, but I, I made this mistake. Maybe it was

00:57:10.400 pre-conversion before becoming a christian or in some cases sadly because sin still persists even

00:57:15.720 for the christian in some of these cases it's i was converted i was a christian but i was an

00:57:20.900 immature christian um and i chose to sin in this way but i divorced my wife without biblical cause

00:57:27.640 and since then i took another wife and remarried her so two sins actually occurred biblically

00:57:33.360 speaking one an unlawful divorce and then second remarriage in light of an unlawful divorce rather

00:57:40.040 than being reconciled to your former spouse. So two sins have occurred, but here's the key

00:57:47.100 language that I think will be helpful for the listener. There's a difference between having

00:57:52.640 sinned and sinning. There's a difference in I sinned, past tense, I committed a sinful action,

00:58:01.920 versus sinning, meaning I'm in an ongoing continual state of sin. And so in those cases,

00:58:08.500 um the the correct pastoral counsel to give like if you have you know a man in your church who says

00:58:14.800 i i unlawfully divorced my wife this is now my second wife i've been remarried i shouldn't have

00:58:20.080 done it i realize that now but i did it um and so i'm i'm planning on divorcing this wife also

00:58:25.780 and then going and being remarried to my first wife i hope that any christian pastor who's

00:58:30.880 listening uh would have the correct biblical instincts to counsel that individual and say

00:58:36.420 no no you sinned yes but you are not actively sinning now the best thing that you can do

00:58:44.800 according to the word of god is now be a faithful husband in your current marriage should you have

00:58:50.500 entered into this current marriage no but god redeems even unlawful means and you are currently

00:58:59.040 in the will of God, that is, in his sovereign will. God allowed this to happen. This falls

00:59:06.400 underneath the banner of his sovereignty, and the marriage that you are now in is not an active,

00:59:13.040 continual state of sin. This is a legitimate marriage. It's a valid marriage. It's not ideal,

00:59:20.820 right? Ideally, you would have been married once. You would not be on your second or third or fourth

00:59:25.620 marriage so this is not an ideal marriage but it is a marriage it is a legitimate marriage whereas

00:59:31.200 if two homosexual men walk into church and are you know according to them allegedly married

00:59:39.260 according to them and sadly according to our our provisions legally and our nation right now and 0.84

00:59:45.620 what the law allows for with with you know gay marriage and they walk into the church and they 0.64

00:59:50.560 say, hey, we've been converted. We're Christians. What must I do to be a disciple of Jesus? In that

00:59:58.620 case, you would not only counsel, but you would command that they immediately, as soon as possible,

01:00:05.380 absolve the marriage. In the meantime, they should separate immediately. They should live

01:00:10.480 separately. They should not engage in any inappropriate sexual behavior. They should

01:00:16.300 engage with each other as much as they have to legally to sort out the absolving or if legally

01:00:25.440 that's the only way to do it divorce of this marriage because it was never a legitimate

01:00:30.020 marriage it wasn't marriage so you can you can counsel someone to end a marriage that's not

01:00:36.260 marriage not only counsel but command someone insist that they end a marriage that's not marriage

01:00:41.760 but you cannot insist or command or counsel in fact you're obligated to command in the opposite

01:00:50.500 direction that anyone in any legitimate valid marriage remain faithful in that marriage so now 0.68

01:00:57.520 back to polygamy i think it would be likened to the scenario not of two homosexuals who think

01:01:03.860 they're married and according to the state are married but in the sight of god are not married

01:01:08.300 and therefore should end that alleged marriage. I think that polygamy is less likened to that

01:01:15.680 and more likened to the unlawful divorce and subsequent remarriage. So the unlawful divorce

01:01:24.040 and subsequent remarriage is someone who sinned, but is not sinning. So too, someone who is already,

01:01:31.080 so you're not counseling an 18-year-old young man about what has not yet been done,

01:01:36.900 but what he should do in the future. Hey, you know, this is what you want to do. You want to

01:01:40.360 go out there and get as many wives as you can. Like, no, that's bad counsel. But if you, if you 1.00

01:01:46.800 are ministering in an Islamic context or even a Mormon context, and so-and-so, you know, walks

01:01:53.060 into the church and he has not a husband, but he has two or three or four wives, he's not sinning.

01:02:01.820 he sinned he messed up he did something less than ideal less than god's ideal but he is not in an

01:02:08.820 active continual state of sin in fact i would argue that it would be sin for him to divorce

01:02:14.520 uh one or two or three or you know his and send away his wives so the obligation now falls upon

01:02:21.220 him to his fidelity is in the arena of protection and provision for those wives and part of the

01:02:29.100 provision so there's the spiritual and the physical aspect of both of those two categories

01:02:33.180 spiritually protect and physically protect spiritually provide and and physically provide

01:02:39.660 and when it comes to provision physical provision that's not only food and shelter and clothing

01:02:44.520 um and those kinds of things but it also one of those provisions in the physical provision category

01:02:50.380 is godly offspring so he actually has um she has conjugal rights and not just for the purpose of

01:02:57.340 union and pleasure but for the purpose of procreation she has rights and therefore he has

01:03:03.660 a moral obligation under god and under scripture that if he's going to be married to four wives

01:03:10.120 not only does he have to feed them all and clothe them all and shelter them all and disciple and 0.98

01:03:14.700 catechize them all and take them all to church he also has to have sex with all of them and he has 0.99

01:03:21.020 to have meaningful godly sex uh with the intent ultimately it's up to the lord whether or not 0.99

01:03:28.560 these wives conceive but with the intent and the design um of providing for each of them

01:03:35.760 multiple godly offspring and that actually falls underneath um his moral obligation the last thing

01:03:43.500 i'll say on this to like like west said in the beginning to steal man right so we are not

01:03:48.480 polygamist um but we don't want to just have silly straw man arguments against it we want to give it

01:03:54.360 a fair treatment to steel man um the the polygamy you know position i've talked to guys who hold

01:04:02.340 that view i've never talked to anybody who actually has you know more than one wife but

01:04:07.080 guys who hold that view and let me just start by saying um in every case when a guy says you know

01:04:14.020 i'm a polygamist you've never met anyone like me um he's always single and um and always wants to

01:04:22.180 have more sex you know and so like any anybody's like well you know joel i'm just trying to be

01:04:27.800 biblically faithful i'm just looking at the text and i'm um i find it i find it somewhat um fascinating

01:04:35.180 you know um it's it's a bit funny that the guys who are really really concerned about being just

01:04:41.060 you know, faithful exegesis and, you know, biblical fidelity all tend to fit the same

01:04:47.000 stereotype. Like I've never, I haven't met that 50 year old man who has a wife, you know,

01:04:50.960 and four children. Um, but I have met that 18 to 25 year old man who's currently single,

01:04:57.580 wants to have more than one wife because he is at the peak point in his life of testosterone

01:05:04.780 and likes the idea of having lots of sex. So I've talked to these guys, um, not the best

01:05:10.120 representatives for the position, given their, you know, their current earthly estate, the fact

01:05:16.760 that they're, you know, 18 years old and single. But some of these guys, you know, and they'll,

01:05:21.840 you know, I've had guys, you know, send me, you know, position papers on this is something that

01:05:26.680 I wrote or something that someone else wrote that, you know, like, I just want you to read it,

01:05:30.880 you know, just consider it with an open mind. And so to, you know, to steel man the argument,

01:05:35.540 um the best that i've come across in the pro polygamy camp in terms of uh even then i don't

01:05:42.860 see i haven't seen anything that's like this is the ideal but but permissible and permissible in

01:05:47.360 the west today uh you know um in our context today um the argument that they would make

01:05:53.260 is they would say biblically the moral obligation of the man to his wife or wives is not um sexual

01:06:01.420 fidelity. That that's actually not the pledge that he makes. It's the wife, the bride, that pledges

01:06:11.420 her duty is submission and faithfulness. Submission to his authority, which is why she can't have more 0.99

01:06:19.000 than one husband. Because what if she has two heads? What if they contradict? And she actually 1.00

01:06:23.240 cannot fulfill her vow um to be uh submissive to one federal head um and and then also simultaneously

01:06:31.840 submissive to another federal head if they're both saying two things that are contradictory

01:06:36.040 and so um so her obligation is submission and fidelity um with love and and and sexual you know

01:06:46.100 fidelity and faithfulness um and so so she has one husband because she cannot be sexually faithful

01:06:55.020 with more than one and she cannot be um in terms of authority submitted uh with with two authorities

01:07:02.840 more than one authority whereas on the husband's um moral obligation um most of the the biblical

01:07:11.320 text and i've had guys you know have sent me these papers and cited it and done you know the the

01:07:16.380 exegesis to the best of their ability and here are you know all the the relevant you know scriptural

01:07:20.920 text um the husband is commanded in scripture it's it's not faithfulness and it's not submission

01:07:27.880 it is protection and provision protection and provision and from you know as just you know a

01:07:36.520 form of art for argument's sake um it is you know physically possible within the realm of reason

01:07:43.720 that a high caliber uh successful wise man and i think if he's exceedingly wise he probably will

01:07:52.880 decide not to have more than one spouse but i'm a high caliber man can actually uh provide for

01:08:01.620 more than one woman and protect more than one woman and still that family unit that household 0.76

01:08:10.340 that involves one husband and more than one wife would still only have one federal head namely the

01:08:17.000 one husband so there's a reason why you know an argument can be made for permissibility although

01:08:24.400 i don't think i'm not a polygamist i don't think that we should do polygamy but an argument could

01:08:29.160 be made for polygamy in terms of one husband multiple wives an argument cannot be made under

01:08:37.220 any circumstances for one wife with multiple husbands and then getting into okay what are

01:08:43.240 these hypothetical circumstances uh where polygamy with one husband and multiple wives

01:08:49.040 might be you know morally permissible um scenarios like that would be you know and there are some

01:08:55.420 cases where you know you have christian authors talking about this um and and one that we'll

01:09:00.980 probably get to i think we have a quote from rush tuning um who um argues for the permissibility

01:09:06.340 of polygamy under some circumstances but one circumstance would be uh war um if a nation

01:09:13.360 is war torn and has been at war for um for several years with a form a formidable opponent

01:09:22.060 and half of the men of that nation right if it's a christian nation seeking to be an ethical nation

01:09:28.640 they're not sending their wives and children into battle so the women are still alive but the young

01:09:35.100 men have gone off to the battle lines and if it's a a heinous and tragic war it is conceivable that

01:09:43.440 you could have half of the male population of a nation under these circumstances in a given time

01:09:49.280 that have deceased and so there are twice as many young women looking for suitors as there are men

01:09:57.840 and they need to repopulate their nation because of the atrocities of war and the immense loss of

01:10:05.580 life that they've just experienced with half of their young male population and there's also

01:10:11.240 um a consideration to be made from compassion uh to the the sheer fact that um if you strictly

01:10:20.160 remain monogamous in these circumstances half of the young women will die alone and childless

01:10:26.820 and um and those fathers of this society who only had daughters it was no fault of their own

01:10:33.800 uh that their name would be snuffed out of the annals of history and they would have no one to

01:10:39.060 continue their line so there are scenarios where this could be conceivable but again i'll end with

01:10:45.420 this in our current apostate western context here in america in many nations in europe but i'll just

01:10:53.580 stick with america because i'm american if anything we have the opposite um i'll refer you

01:11:00.660 again to ecclesiastes while i was searching yet still not finding i found one upright man among

01:11:05.660 a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all. In our current context, you can see even from

01:11:11.320 the chat as we're broadcasting this episode live, the problem that we keep running into is that 0.99

01:11:18.300 there are simply not enough godly, submissive, Christian, modest women. There seem to be far 1.00

01:11:29.240 more men who are suited for Christian marriage than there are women. And so to think that in

01:11:39.160 this context that it would be ideal is absurd or even permissible for a Christian man saying that 0.96

01:11:49.640 it is virtuous and morally, biblically permissible for him to nab up three godly women as his wives 0.61

01:11:59.040 when there may only be four godly women currently in these United States that are single and all

01:12:06.300 these other men who are desperately seeking a spouse, I think is atrocious. I think that it's

01:12:13.880 theft. I think that it's selfish. I think it's greedy. I think that it's immoral and wrong.

01:12:23.060 Yeah. No, I like that pushback. Rush Dooney brings that point up that many men in their

01:12:27.800 pursuit of justifying polygamy that's they don't it's so short-sighted so okay you have one wife

01:12:33.940 and with that comes duties to in-laws for example so those children that you have with her also the

01:12:38.260 grandparents should be able to see them and enjoy them there's also going to be brother-in-laws

01:12:42.620 father-in-laws that are going to say hey if you don't care for her if you're abusive we're going

01:12:46.880 to come to your home and we're going to beat you and so what young man looks at that and then says

01:12:51.500 uh you know what i wish i wish i just had more of that more in-laws more grandparent duties and

01:12:56.940 dinners like going to dinner and honoring your your father-in-law your mother-in-law that's a

01:13:01.700 good thing so it's so short-sighted when men especially in our time in the west these united

01:13:06.660 states where the ratio is about 50 50 to say all the the duties and everything that comes with it

01:13:11.980 i'm not even doing one i think i would like three four x the multiple of it it's incredibly

01:13:17.700 short-sighted for something so shallow as i would like to have more sex now i'm going to push back

01:13:23.560 a little bit. I'm going to use Russ Juney because I think my intention here is, if we're looking at

01:13:28.860 the Scripture, we're going especially in the biblical law, it's interesting how there are

01:13:33.320 just areas where the law doesn't strike us where we think it would. It doesn't come across to us

01:13:39.580 the way we think it would. For example, lesbianism. Lesbianism is not punished by death in the Old

01:13:44.260 Covenant. If we're going through the text, Russ Juney says this, you look at it, it's only men 0.53

01:13:48.700 that are held liable to that high degree. Now, there could have been an argument from prevalence,

01:13:52.840 even though Paul does recognize that in Romans 1.

01:13:55.280 But there's times where the law looks at men and women and goes,

01:13:57.460 hey, these are not the same.

01:13:59.020 For example, if a married man was to sleep with an unmarried woman, 0.74

01:14:01.940 he had to pay his dowry, he had to provide all the services to her, 0.96

01:14:04.960 take care of her for the rest of her days,

01:14:06.560 but it was not the death penalty.

01:14:08.960 And so when we do look at the law, what we recognize,

01:14:11.400 I'm going to read Rush Dooney on this, is he says,

01:14:14.500 Rush Dooney, this is from a lecture that he gave on monogamy.

01:14:17.360 In other words, here in the law is elsewhere we find the biblical principle,

01:14:20.520 to whom much is given, much is expected.

01:14:22.220 We see, therefore, that the law only tolerated polygamy while establishing monogamy as the

01:14:28.040 standard. 0.99

01:14:28.900 The reason clearly was that the polygamous family was still a family, a lower kind of 0.96

01:14:33.260 family life, but still a form of family life and therefore tolerable. 0.95

01:14:37.440 The next example, again, this is from the same lecture.

01:14:40.640 In passage after passage, monogamy is assumed to be the God-ordained standard.

01:14:45.080 On the other hand, we must say that polygamy is recognized as a fact and regulated.

01:14:50.060 It is actually less prominent in biblical history than most people believe the number

01:14:53.420 of polygamous marriages that are cited in the Bible are relatively few.

01:14:56.720 It is only that people notice them more than anything else.

01:14:59.620 The case of Solomon is so conspicuous.

01:15:02.240 Now, to bring it to today is, again, for the reasons we just stated, but as a young Christian

01:15:06.660 man in the United States seeking polygamy, is he in sin?

01:15:09.900 Yes. 0.80

01:15:10.760 But actually, I think the sin here is, for one, it's a duty.

01:15:13.720 It's a sin against his fathers.

01:15:15.740 if you are a Western man, your fathers, they built this world on monogamy. I think of Bach,

01:15:23.240 I think of C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tokian, G.K. Chesterton. Those men all had one woman for life

01:15:29.940 that they married, that they were soulmates with. Norman Rockwell, they produced incredible art,

01:15:35.500 incredible works of fiction, incredible theological writings. The Western standard has been, we are

01:15:40.860 not the world of eunuchs, of harems, the world of a man's status is measured by how many women he

01:15:48.040 can get pregnant. Guys, we're European. And Europeans said, you have freedom, but that

01:15:54.160 freedom is bound by duty. The oath that you took at the altar, forsaking all others till death do 0.55

01:15:59.120 us part, that actually matters for something. And so I think the best pushback against it to give,

01:16:04.400 and we're giving it here, for one is saying the reason you're pursuing this is the desire for

01:16:08.060 more sex. But also, too, polygamy is an Eastern thing. So even if the Bible in its law at the

01:16:13.880 time says, hey, we do recognize that there are scenarios, for example, captive war brides or a

01:16:19.260 scenario where much of your population is wiped out by war, where this is a form of the family

01:16:23.260 that is acceptable, that is not today. Now, we don't go back and we don't condemn. I don't think

01:16:28.440 I wouldn't. The patriarchs like David, potentially Moses and Abraham, they were in a time where that

01:16:34.520 was something that was normal permissive i mean abraham is essentially managing a small nation

01:16:40.520 hundreds of fighting men massive amounts of wealth and literally his only wife that he has

01:16:46.260 she hasn't been able to have a kid for 90 some years so there's an understandability to it there

01:16:52.380 and it's her idea and it's her idea the one case where he shouldn't have listened to her

01:16:56.700 but i would say none of those apply today so i can perfectly say yeah i understand why david

01:17:02.620 had eight wives. That was the time he was king. I mean, the dude's literally like fighting for his

01:17:07.780 life. Seems like every single page of scripture. And he's still a man after God's own heart. Now,

01:17:13.620 he doesn't get to build the temple. No one who converted, for example, from Islam to Christianity

01:17:17.900 and has multiple wives, he can't be an elder. An elder must be a husband of one wife. But even in 0.99

01:17:22.180 the case of David not being able to build the temple, God cites the reason. And it's not because

01:17:25.980 he had more than one wife. It's because he shed too much blood. And if it was because of having

01:17:30.580 more than one wife then it would be a bit ironic that his son solomon ends up building the temple

01:17:34.660 who had that's even true a few wives yep so the point is i don't have to go all the way back

01:17:40.180 and begin to condemn the patriarchs to say today this is not something that should be pursued and

01:17:47.380 andrew tate is selling the lie he's telling you to revolt against your fathers revolt against the

01:17:52.620 tradition that made us revolt against this would definitely be specifically protestant i think of

01:17:57.080 the Westminster Confession that says marriage is between one man and one woman. No man may

01:18:01.480 lawfully add to himself more than one wife. You are revolting and sinning against your

01:18:05.460 fathers, against your Protestant tradition, and, famous words, stop it. Stop doing it.

01:18:11.340 And you're breaking the law.

01:18:12.460 Andrew Tate is Eastern. 0.82

01:18:13.480 Yeah, and you're breaking the law. 0.61

01:18:14.360 Polygamy is illegal in all 50 states, so if you are a quote-unquote polygamous, you are 0.96

01:18:18.480 breaking... 0.73

01:18:19.440 Yeah, you're just sitting against the magistrate. In fact, it's, I think, we'll take it from

01:18:23.400 two angles i think you know from a church perspective i don't know of any church in the

01:18:27.740 west that would let you as an let you become a member uh parishioner in good standing having

01:18:33.560 being married simultaneously to multiple people so then you forsake uh what's that short of being

01:18:39.140 a convert yeah like if you came if you came in it was already done yeah right but in terms of

01:18:44.920 sort of ordaining a marriage or or overseeing i don't know any christian church that would

01:18:49.580 officiate that officiate precisely and so you have both the legal aspect you'd be violating

01:18:54.000 if you're in a church as a member or parishioner you'd be violating the ecclesiastical aspect

01:18:59.160 um and them not sanctioning the marriage um so those are also things to think about but i think

01:19:04.020 like wes i really liked i like the russian quote i like you framed it i think what i walk away as

01:19:09.040 i read this saying is um there are all sorts of reason polygamy will be sin or would be sin

01:19:15.400 but it isn't necessary it isn't inherent to the polygamy it's inherent to the context it's inherent

01:19:21.140 to the reasons you're being married the the the circumstances by which you're married so on and

01:19:26.000 so forth is it legal um all of these things uh would sort of lead me to believe that 99 percent

01:19:32.380 of all polygamous relationships yeah are are sin uh in this day and age but uh and saying it that

01:19:38.560 way it's going to get you farther with the red pill young man today and i see where you're coming

01:19:42.560 it's good to say i i like that language of saying that it's not inherently sinful because

01:19:46.400 you know you could conceive of a scenario going back to what i was talking about you know earlier

01:19:50.320 but like in islamic nations let's say some sub sub-saharan african nation where it's you know

01:19:56.260 predominantly islamic and uh this guy you know let's say he doesn't already you know so it's

01:20:01.700 not the scenario of you know he's already has multiple you know brides as he's now coming to

01:20:06.540 christian faith but let's say he's he's recently converted he's a single a single eligible bachelor

01:20:12.420 and he happens he's in an impoverished country and let's say that in this scenario you know he

01:20:17.620 becomes a christian and he's a single bachelor he was a muslim you know you know recently but now

01:20:22.860 he's been a christian for a year and he's joined a christian church and in this christian church

01:20:27.460 let's say that there are 20 young single god-fearing christian women and he's the only

01:20:35.020 single man and there's no sign of there being any more you know single men in in the future

01:20:42.460 and he's rich he's eligible um he's successful and he's god-fearing and christian um in a scenario

01:20:51.180 like that um it may be permissible that he's okay um instead of 19 of you losing out um 15 of you

01:21:00.440 are going to lose out because i'm going to pick five but that is not our context yep at all

01:21:06.680 exactly and being and again having kind of like you have to be honest with the law the law of

01:21:11.880 the old testament god's law which is good and right just did not forbid explicitly that type

01:21:17.120 of arrangement and so you just be honest and say it didn't now i don't think it would be wise

01:21:20.800 potentially because of x y and z but if we're honest with the text yeah david had a similar

01:21:25.760 arrangement it's similar to the slavery conversation it's like we don't want to just

01:21:30.440 sit here and be like oh slavery oh my gosh like oh and clutch our pearls and this is the most

01:21:35.720 terrible thing terrible terrible too uh there's a certain point where it's like you're calling god

01:21:41.620 terrible there are certain things that god allowed for that are you know lib mind takes offense at

01:21:50.980 and um and slavery not in all contexts not in every manner but um but you think of again like

01:21:58.000 old testament um context where like you just you just went to war and there's some scenarios where 0.68

01:22:04.220 like by divine you know eat it god says wipe them all out the women and children like jericho but

01:22:12.740 there may be other scenarios where god actually he allowed in the old testament and this this is 0.94

01:22:17.740 the case where you don't actually have to kill them all um and so then what do you do with all

01:22:22.860 these people and um in some of those cases what you do is you enslave them and then you treat them

01:22:31.360 fairly but they are slaves they become your property and god allowed for this and i'm not

01:22:37.600 saying again i'm not saying so let's bring it back let's do it you know but i'm not i'm also

01:22:42.380 not going to sit here and say you know what i'm better than god i am morally because that's

01:22:47.680 ultimately what you're saying you just have to recognize that and have just a little bit of

01:22:51.360 humility um whenever you find yourself being more compassionate than jesus whenever you find

01:22:57.080 yourself being morally superior to god um you probably should just sit down you know count

01:23:04.220 backwards from 10 catch your breath you know rethink your inks um that's not a good place to

01:23:09.460 be i i'll just i'll give you a hint as a as a basic rule of thumb when you think you're better

01:23:13.900 than god it's not a good place to be and so that's why you know we're we're in this episode it's like

01:23:19.980 all right so our episode today is is polygamy you know sinful um and you know the cameras you know

01:23:25.960 tune up and we say yes thanks for tuning in i hope you've enjoyed this episode please subscribe to

01:23:31.080 our youtube channel that's why this episode is is not as short and simple as that because

01:23:35.800 the reason why we're offering nuance and you know circumstances and what does church you know

01:23:42.780 history say what does the western tradition say what did you know Rush Dooney say what did this

01:23:46.980 guy say the reason why we're doing that is because we're not going to you know sit in these chairs

01:23:52.860 and tell you that polygamy is great because it's not but we're also not going to say it's inherently

01:24:01.480 sinful and exalt ourself to a station of moral superior superiority against god yeah and that's

01:24:09.140 it's actually so it's like oh well you guys are just dancing around like what we're yeah we are

01:24:14.600 dancing what we're dancing around is arrogance what we're trying to avoid is falling into the

01:24:21.200 the the pitfall of moral superiority against god which is just spiritual brazen pride and arrogance

01:24:29.620 I think of Job where God calls him a man who's blameless in all his ways.

01:24:33.620 Job had hundreds of slaves.

01:24:35.920 So it's like Job was blameless.

01:24:37.560 Hang on, God.

01:24:38.620 Hang on.

01:24:39.560 Hang on, God.

01:24:40.080 He was not, says my 21st century liberalism. 1.00

01:24:43.900 You're a fool. 1.00

01:24:44.620 You're proud. 1.00

01:24:45.440 I like it. 0.97

01:24:46.700 Rushduni in the Institutes of Biblical Law, he talks about the ultimate sin,

01:24:51.980 let's say, for the Sixth Amendment. 0.68

01:24:53.440 Let's take murder.

01:24:54.060 he says murder actually is a sin precisely because it's taking the life uh in a way that's

01:25:01.040 unauthorized by god in other words making god and the you you know usurping god's authority as

01:25:07.700 actually as the sort of preeminent sin and so that's why he can argue you talk about genocide

01:25:12.700 for example and the cases in scripture of genocide it's well it was authorized by god and therefore

01:25:18.000 not murder because god is the standard we don't have that today just we don't have prophets today

01:25:22.240 There's no prescriptive text for all people in all times and all places to exact genocide.

01:25:28.640 So that's not a universal prescriptive principle in the scripture.

01:25:33.100 Instead, it's always descriptive passages of certain times and certain peoples in certain places.

01:25:39.240 And it always came by divine revelation.

01:25:42.620 And we no longer have capital P prophets receiving new revelation from God that's extra biblical,

01:25:48.760 which means that we can never have conceivably in this gospel age until the final return of

01:25:54.880 jesus christ when he separates the sheep from the goats jesus will genocide yeah um all the goats

01:26:00.520 yeah that he would not no no no women goats no children goats none of them get to remain they 0.82

01:26:05.800 will all be cast into hell and christ will do it himself and he will do it to um to the praise of 0.82

01:26:12.240 of the the glory and honor of his father and uh and it'll be good and it'll be right and it'll be

01:26:18.120 just and and and all those things um but we in this gospel age um we don't we we are operating

01:26:25.100 we we fly by the radar we have we have the biblical text this is our revelation where our

01:26:33.180 eyes are not rolling back in our head we're not doing the you know witchcraft and wizardry you

01:26:38.580 know bethel school you know the protestant you know hogwarts we don't we don't do that um uh god

01:26:45.140 god is not speaking in that way any longer we do have divine revelation but it's inscripturated

01:26:50.800 it's canonized and there's no prescriptive text that says under these circumstances in this type

01:26:58.240 of war here's where you commit genocide we don't have that so then we follow just war theory which

01:27:04.540 is garnered principles depending who you're you know citing seven give or take principles that

01:27:11.500 are implicit but prescriptive from the whole of biblical text and none of those allow for genocide

01:27:18.060 so that's like why why we can say you know as an axiom you can't walk on water joel and i wouldn't

01:27:24.260 be lying right but god can make a man walk on water right yeah and you think i'm exaggerating

01:27:29.520 when i say like the west and monogamy so greece and rome at the time of christ this is pre

01:27:34.420 christianity spreading out by the 300s or so they had laws in the books that only the man could

01:27:39.700 only have one legal wife, especially in Rome. In Asia, a man would typically have one legal

01:27:44.520 wife, but concubines were very common. In most of Africa, a little bit different in

01:27:48.480 Egypt, but below the Sahara Desert, it was the same thing. It was tribes, it was the 0.90

01:27:52.640 chieftain of the tribe, accumulated all the wives. Some of Northern Europe, some of the 0.90

01:27:56.620 rulers there, they would have multiple wives. Monogamy really has been a Western thing,

01:28:01.840 and that's even prior to Christianity for the most part. Tacitus, when he's in Germania,

01:28:06.240 I think when he visits the German tribes and sees life there, like they held adultery as like a

01:28:11.300 terrible sin. If a woman committed adultery, she was, if not executed, run out of the town.

01:28:16.180 Like her commitment to the marriage was taken very, very seriously. And so again, if you're

01:28:21.320 an American and you're thinking about what is my duty to my forefathers, my duty to those who came

01:28:26.100 before me, my Christian forebears, monogamy is really high up there in just a way it isn't in

01:28:31.200 the east yeah right yeah we looked it up before we started recording you know and and and looked

01:28:35.680 at multiple citations but um even pre-christianity in the west um northern you know european tribes

01:28:43.600 and then certainly the greeks and the romans um monogamy was the norm um it wasn't uh universal

01:28:50.820 and exclusive um but primarily the uh the exception was first and foremost an exception

01:28:57.660 and then secondly it was almost entirely relegated to um to nobility uh it would be rare cases of

01:29:05.860 individuals like a charlemagne type figure right um you know like a king or a lord or someone like

01:29:11.160 that that didn't have a son to further his line and his wife was barren and so he was permitted

01:29:16.980 you know instead of sending her away charlemagne had about eight wives and 12 concubines yeah so

01:29:21.600 instead of sending this one away was permitted to take others so it was a rarity it was it was

01:29:28.960 narrowly you know applied to men of of high estate and nobility but the average common man

01:29:39.660 even pre-christianity pre-christidom in western societies was monogamous for centuries before

01:29:49.820 even hearing the gospel before even hearing of the christian faith and so there's something to

01:29:54.320 be said i'll i'll end with this and we'll go to our last commercial break and then we're going to

01:29:57.860 do super chats um but i'll end with this the chicken or the egg there is something to be said

01:30:03.660 for that why has the west been so successful first and foremost as a christian and as a pastor

01:30:10.060 um to boot i'm going to say that the west has been successful because of the immense mercy and

01:30:16.160 kindness and grace of god and um because the west was thoroughly saturated in christian revival

01:30:22.560 after revival and reformation and with deep christian roots stretching back a millennia to

01:30:29.100 a millennia and a half that's first and foremost that is true i also so not this is not a substitute

01:30:36.320 but in addition i do think that there is something to be said for why uh the west seemed to be um

01:30:44.920 a more conducive soil for the seed of the gospel to be planted and bring forth like jesus even

01:30:54.540 talks about you know like um that you know some will will be tenfold twentyfold thirty a hundred

01:31:00.120 fold returns right so there uh there's always going to be scenarios whether it be on an

01:31:05.300 individual basis or whether it be on a collective basis of different nationalities or whatever it

01:31:11.680 Maybe there's always, or different eras, different time periods, there's always a principle within

01:31:18.100 Christianity because Christianity does not assert egalitarianism where the gospel goes forth and

01:31:25.000 the ground, the person or the people are in fact receptive. And so they genuinely are born again.

01:31:31.000 They genuinely are converted and Christianized. And yet some people, some soils produce a tenfold

01:31:39.360 return and others a hundredfold return and and i think that you have to acknowledge at some level

01:31:45.900 that what made the west incredible was christianity and yet also christianity

01:31:52.540 went to many places and it thrived it really took root and produced a massive return in the west and

01:32:02.880 And I think that monogamy might be, actually, I think it's a significant concept just to ponder

01:32:10.220 that monogamy might be one of the core principles and building blocks of Western society, pre-Christ,

01:32:18.280 pre-Christianity, that made Christianity take such deep root and produce such great returns,

01:32:29.180 whereas christianity going to other places um there's an argument to me like what you think

01:32:35.480 of sub-sahara africa well christianity came later so so in some cases you can make arguments of

01:32:40.920 well christianity has been alive and well for 1500 years over there but only you know 150 years or

01:32:47.660 250 years over here sure but there are plenty of eastern places aside from just you know sub-sahara

01:32:55.560 africa um a certain asian context where christianity went early just as early arguably

01:33:04.260 from history just as early as it came to the west to european context and and so it's not that the

01:33:10.360 europeans just got a 500 year head start but there are other eastern societies where christianity

01:33:17.320 came it did take root it did actually produce something there was a return a tenfold return

01:33:22.820 let's say, genuine born-again converts and society being shaped for the better by Christian

01:33:31.860 virtues and Christian principles, but did not have the same hundredfold return that it had among

01:33:39.020 Europeans. And I think that part of it is because the soil there, although conducive enough for

01:33:46.560 genuine born-again conversion was not as conducive for civilization building, for world-shaping 0.61

01:33:56.900 policies and innovation. And I think one of those premier factors might be their view of

01:34:05.460 the family unit and monogamy. Westerners are monogamous because of Christianity and were

01:34:13.260 monogamous in large part before christianity which is part of why christianity flourished there

01:34:18.940 so greatly and so to have discussions of oh but maybe polygamy uh is good is um as the kids would 0.90

01:34:29.080 say retarded let's go to our last commercial break and we will be right back handling the 0.72

01:34:33.860 super chats that you guys put in if you haven't put one in yet uh go ahead give us a question or 0.58

01:34:38.860 a comment. We appreciate your kindness and generosity in supporting this ministry. We'll

01:34:43.600 go to the commercial break and we'll come back and as quickly as possible handle the super chats

01:34:48.280 and call it a day. Hello, brothers in Christ. Let me ask you something real. Are you truly

01:34:54.000 protecting and providing for your wife and children, not just in this life, but the one to

01:34:59.280 come? Here's a reality check. Only 45% of adults in America have life insurance and of those,

01:35:06.000 nearly two-thirds are underinsured. That's not good stewardship. And as Christian husbands and

01:35:12.720 fathers, we're called to do better. But what if you could protect your family's future and wisely

01:35:18.800 grow your wealth right now? That's where private family banking comes in. It's a proven strategy

01:35:24.860 that allows you to leverage your existing cash flow, build tax-free legacy wealth, and give your

01:35:31.440 family lasting security, all while aligning with your biblical call to provide and protect.

01:35:38.720 This is what it looks like to turn post-mill talk into post-mill action. Tap the link in the show

01:35:45.320 notes to book your free discovery call and take your next step toward financial discipleship

01:35:51.560 and multi-generational impact.

01:35:54.060 in the future it may be hard to persuade people that what happened starting in the spring of 2020

01:36:05.040 really did happen a fake pandemic was the signal that one morning began the foreclosure on

01:36:12.440 everything that had until the evening before been central to the idea of democratic constitutional

01:36:19.880 republics. The most shocking thing was not so much that this started to happen, but that almost no

01:36:26.760 one seemed to object to it happening. Almost no one sought to defend the rights and liberties

01:36:32.980 being overturned. Leftists clamored for more and more tyranny while most conservatives fell silent.

01:36:40.820 In this book, The Abolition of Reality, Irish dissident leader John Waters describes not merely

01:36:46.660 what happened, but the meaning of what happened, in what may well be judged by history as the most

01:36:52.740 heinous crime of all time. This book, as Winston in 1984 said, is for the future for the unborn.

01:37:02.620 Get it from Western Front Books at the link below. That's www.westernfrontbooks.com. Again,

01:37:10.220 that's www.westernfrontbooks.com. Sending your son to a competitive school often places a

01:37:19.600 significant additional burden on the family. While these schools promise high academic rigor,

01:37:26.660 character development, and preparation for top-tier universities, much of the workload

01:37:32.180 ultimately falls on the parents. The combination of early dismissals, as early as 2.30 p.m.,

01:37:39.220 heavy homework demands, and sports commitments can create an overwhelming and stressful experience

01:37:46.000 for both students and their families. At St. John's, our philosophy is different. We prioritize

01:37:53.280 structure, balance, and efficiency to ensure students thrive academically, physically,

01:37:59.760 and spiritually. Here's how we do it. Our instructors are the cornerstone of our commitment

01:38:06.180 to excellence, bringing a unique blend of expertise, discipline, and leadership to the

01:38:12.320 classroom. Earning $200,000 annually, our educators are among the most accomplished

01:38:18.160 in their fields. Nine-hour school days, classes run from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., maximizing learning

01:38:26.060 during school hours. Our confession brings clarity, fosters unity, and glorifies Christ

01:38:33.720 as we seek to instruct, develop, and mentor young men

01:38:37.860 in loving God and neighbor rightly to the glory of God.

01:38:42.520 Ordo amoris et soli deo gloria.

01:38:46.420 And finally, our curriculum, Integra,

01:38:49.500 is a challenging blend of STEM

01:38:51.900 with classical Christian humanities.

01:38:55.340 Campuses opening in the summer of 2026

01:38:58.380 in Dallas, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio.

01:39:02.660 Visit stjohns.academy to learn more and sign up today.

01:39:07.480 Again, that's stjohns.academy to learn more today.

01:39:14.980 All right, we're back.

01:39:16.200 We're going to go as quick as we can. 0.78

01:39:18.140 My oldest daughter, we have enlisted her this summer in horse riding lessons.

01:39:24.560 And this is her last horse riding lesson today.

01:39:28.760 And it has started pretty much right about now. 0.79

01:39:31.400 so i gotta go at least catch some of it uh super excited from which wife i'm just kidding yeah from

01:39:37.340 the the one wife that i have um all right so here's our first super chat from brian johnson

01:39:42.000 he gave us 10 bucks thanks brian we appreciate it he said if uh you converted a muslim man with

01:39:47.400 four wives to christ what would you recommend he do with his polygamous family we would recommend

01:39:52.920 he takes four more no uh we would say uh you keep the wives you do not send them away you don't 0.62

01:39:58.000 dishonor them. Part of what you have to understand is these are women who have now already been

01:40:03.640 married. They are no longer virgins. They are going to be less desirable. It's not that they

01:40:08.440 could just go and pick up another husband. You are sending them away to perpetual singleness.

01:40:14.980 And by virtue of sending them away, assuming that each of these four wives have born children for 0.93

01:40:21.340 you, you're sending away your children, which is unlawful and immoral and wicked, or you're 0.64

01:40:26.460 keeping the children and separating the children from their mother. So the only moral permissible

01:40:33.560 thing to counsel that Muslim man with four wives is you keep your four wives, you do your best not 0.97

01:40:40.220 to show favoritism among your four wives, you fulfill your duties both spiritually and physically

01:40:46.600 of protection and provision for each of your four wives and all the children they bear to you,

01:40:52.580 And then per 1 Timothy chapter 3 and Titus 1, you serve as a faithful member in the church and you cannot be an elder.

01:40:59.560 All right.

01:40:59.800 That would be the answer.

01:41:01.000 Wes, you want to take Nick Bonner?

01:41:03.220 All right.

01:41:03.640 Nick Bonner, two super chats.

01:41:05.660 Thanks so much, Nick.

01:41:06.400 First one, $20. 0.96

01:41:08.000 Nick asked or really said, the self-proclaimed top G, that's Andrew Tate, is indeed a fool, just not for the reasons Big Eva says he is. 0.96

01:41:15.060 Correct. 0.96

01:41:15.400 I really like the way of saying that.

01:41:16.640 like there is something about uh men who are championship fighters world-class chess champions

01:41:22.260 that reflects some level of discipline and self-mastery and tenacity and ambition and so

01:41:28.240 that's like insofar as young men see that and emulate it unafraid yeah don't care about what

01:41:34.440 the olympics mocked christ at the last supper and andrew and his brother were out front of the 0.99

01:41:38.240 french consulate protesting on behalf of christians right so there is tons of reasons why he is a fool 0.94

01:41:44.140 but exactly to nick's point it's not the reasons that big eva points out that's right and nick's 0.85

01:41:48.780 second chat another 20 nick said every girl i've dated in the church claimed that she wasn't a

01:41:53.640 feminist and wanted me to lead until i share my traditional views that they disagreed with

01:41:57.820 complementarians affirm male headship and theory only that's right it's like that office that

01:42:03.260 office skit from ryan where he's like i i want to be led but just when i'm in the mood to be led

01:42:08.260 i want to be led but uh lead me but only when i want to you know something yeah i love the idea

01:42:16.200 of male headship you know like he's the one that's working hard and working late but in practicality

01:42:21.060 i hate it theoretical male headship yeah no complementarianism is just uh functional

01:42:26.700 egalitarianism so you're absolutely right it's sad but very true uh i can do the last one yeah

01:42:31.640 dapper dan since five dollars he says change my mind when a man does something wrong mainstream

01:42:36.240 conservatives blame the man when a woman does something wrong they blame liberalism all right

01:42:41.000 i'm gonna give my best argument ready yeah i the only thing i would push back on that is i would

01:42:46.660 say so he said uh when mainstream conservatives um when a man does something wrong they blame the

01:42:52.960 man and when a woman does something wrong they blame liberalism the only uh you know slight

01:42:57.140 tweak that i would have to this is i would say mainstream conservatives when a man does something

01:43:00.920 wrong they blame the man and when a woman does something wrong they also blame the man um it's

01:43:05.220 the woman did something wrong and the man is at fault. And the only other thing that I would do

01:43:10.480 to tweak it slightly is I would include in that not just mainstream conservatives, but also

01:43:15.560 reformed Protestant pastors. It is 100% what you hear from them virtually all the time. Is your

01:43:25.860 wife cheated on you? Sounds like you were a bad husband. Like all the time. So it'd be one thing 1.00

01:43:32.740 if it's just bin shapiro you know or mainstream conservative you know political pundits but we

01:43:38.780 have grown very weary and tired of hearing this exact same rhetoric from uh from pastors over and

01:43:48.800 over and over again and the answer is simple it's because they are feminist they can say they're

01:43:54.440 complementarian they only have male elders and they can they can try to you know to showboat all 1.00

01:44:00.780 of their conservative cards and their credentials. But at the end of the day, they are still well

01:44:07.720 within the frame, the permissible, acceptable, current framework of liberalism. They are liberals

01:44:14.840 walking around in a Christian skin suit. It is 20th century liberalism. It may be the best of 0.91

01:44:21.100 liberalism. It may be the most conservative that liberalism can be, but it is still a shape, a form,

01:44:28.340 a version of liberalism and until modern western christians can break out of that grid break out

01:44:38.280 of the matrix of liberalism and i think the linchpin of liberalism is egalitarianism so until

01:44:44.000 they can get rid of egalitarianism across the board as it applies to patriarchy rather than

01:44:50.480 egalitarianism between men and women as it applies to nationality or ethnos or race as it applies to

01:44:57.360 peoples, different groups of peoples at every single level and as it applies to individuals

01:45:02.340 that Johnny and Jackie are not the same. Johnny and Jimmy are not the same. And there's a certain

01:45:10.200 extent to where Johnny and Jamal are not quite the same. And until pastors are willing to say that

01:45:17.780 without any malice, without any envy, without being rude or disrespectful with a desire to see

01:45:24.680 Johnny and Jimmy and Jackie and Jamal all in heaven together, all saved, all loving the Lord,

01:45:32.200 but until they're able to say that they're not the same and that we should not treat them the same

01:45:38.440 in the sight of God, equal in dignity. In the sight of the law, in terms of legal provisions,

01:45:45.080 okay. But beyond that, in society and culture as a whole, we must recognize distinctions. I really

01:45:53.320 believe that egalitarianism, the steamrolling of all distinctions, is the linchpin, the engine

01:45:59.800 of this freight train of liberalism. And we can't stop the train of liberalism and return to

01:46:08.360 historic Christianity without disabling the engine of the train, which is egalitarianism.

01:46:15.140 And you can't just sit there and say, well, I don't like this one portion of the engine,

01:46:20.000 right because i'm patriarchal so i don't like egalitarianism as it applies to men and women

01:46:24.340 but um egalitarianism as it applies to america and haiti i love that right haitians you can

01:46:32.160 you they're just you know nations are just fungible widgets and you can just um you know

01:46:36.740 you can just uproot and input 500 000 haitians and remove 500 000 you know european americans

01:46:43.560 and uh and nobody will bat an eye because it's just the same as long as they memorize the 0.71

01:46:48.200 Declaration of Independence and have eaten some apple pie and gone to one 4th of July, you know,

01:46:52.720 celebration like Vivek Ramaswamy, they can wear the Texas, you know, button-up shirt and a cowboy

01:46:57.540 hat, then we're good. If that's you, you are an egalitarian. You may think you're not because

01:47:04.120 you've only thought of egalitarianism as it applies to sex, gender, male and female, but you

01:47:09.520 are still in egalitarianism, which means you are still on the liberal train, which means you are

01:47:14.660 not on the historic Christianity train, and we won't win. You cannot punch your way out of the 0.91

01:47:21.440 frame while remaining in the frame. If you want to win, you have to unplug. You have to reject

01:47:27.660 the whole thing. You have to say it's all a lie. I will not be a lib. I will not be a lib. I'm sorry,

01:47:35.260 I will not be, but just a little bit of a lib, just a teensy little lib. I will not be a lib.

01:47:40.620 I'm a Christian, gosh darn it, hell or high water, I am a Christian, and I will not condemn 0.94

01:47:47.220 all my fathers throughout church history and all the apostolic writers and all the Old Testament 0.97

01:47:52.800 texts and God himself to hell because my modern sensibilities tell me that my moral framework is

01:48:00.100 superior to theirs. I will not do it. I reject liberalism wholesale, and until we can do that,

01:48:07.180 we will not restore the West because we will not restore the very thing that made it great, 0.98

01:48:12.680 which is historic Christianity, not 20th century liberalism walking around in a Christian 0.91

01:48:18.560 skin suit. So you must, you must, you must reject it. You must reject it. All right. That's all we 0.88

01:48:24.920 got for today. I hope you guys have been blessed and Lord willing, we will see you on Friday with

01:48:29.840 a special guest. We have Dr. Stephen Wolf lined up to come on the show. And it's really fitting

01:48:35.600 with my you know ending monologue you know ramp rampage whatever i was on just a you know rant

01:48:42.140 i'd like to think that it was a uh a holy rant but um it fits well with our next episode friday

01:48:48.000 3 p.m central time dr stephen wolf will be discussing uh discussing with him the article

01:48:52.800 that he recently published uh through american reformer and it's on what is it called christian

01:48:58.480 inequality christian inequality the defense there a defense thereof yeah so he's defending

01:49:04.320 um and and explicitly labeling it naming it as christian and what is it equality nope inequality

01:49:12.380 that'll be the topic for friday uh it's sure to be a banger and uh stephen wolf i think he always

01:49:18.340 speaks about these things um in courageous ways um uh ways that are um responsible well read um

01:49:26.900 and courageous, but also it's always rooted. There's citations, there's reasons. It's not

01:49:34.300 just flying by the seat of his pants. It's not unhinged. And I have no doubt that he will

01:49:38.620 produce for us a well-grounded argument for why historic Christianity allowed for, and even beyond

01:49:47.160 that, acknowledged and admitted inequality in a hierarchical world that God built within this

01:49:55.700 natural order. So that'll be our episode on Friday and we hope to see you then.

The NXR Podcast - July 23, 2025

THE LIVESTREAM - Matt Walsh Vs Andrew Tate： Traditional Marriage & Polygamy

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript