My only issues with this presentation is the lack of a man’s perspective and the women trying to dictate who the man should marry as if he doesn’t have a choice for his household. Also questioning a man relationship with God because he would be too busy with “too many” wives? Wouldn’t this logic also a apply for man having “too many” children? These are false justifications without the male perspective to appease the female tendencies to sooth the ego by not sharing what she believes she has found to be good in my opinion. Other than that I think that this was a good conversation to be had and am happy that these women are seeking truth. They just need a man’s guidance and perspective as women were created to help men.

The hard truth is, it's not just the men. Us women have to take accountability as well. This conversation was needed on sooo many levels. Thank You!

Hulda has been touched by The Most High. Her understanding of the Bible is such a blessing.

Thank you for this TRUTH!!!! I believe in one wife to love. Ya'aqov had 2 wife and he ONLY love one and tricked to marry the older sister. Our Hebrew men need to be healed and set free from lust.

Polygyny is illegal, but is not unlawful. Meaning it is illegal to have more than one marriage license per state in the U.S. For example you could have one legal wife and the remanding wives would be common law marriage. This would be legal and lawful.

She speaks confidently but if you actually look up the verses, they don’t say what she’s claiming.

I appreciate Shanae for allowing Huldah to speak. What she served to those who care to listen, learn and search for themselves is necessary for healing. I am glad for those who take this food and nourish their minds and souls! Yes, we need to normalize therapy in the “black” community. This was def a therapy session for me! Thanks ladies for taking the time to have this healthy conversation. May many others follow.

I knew this wouldn't apply to me but I listened out of respect for the sisters and their perspectives. As far as the Africa comment, I've lived there and have witnessed many relationships there and polygyny is very much still a thing over there and other parts of the world for that matter. The mindset of the West won't ever allow people to understand the lifestyle of the East

12:01 - "God's perfect will vs permissive will" ... God never corrected us on polygyny, not one time. He never told us that he was merely permitting it, so that being the case, the argument for it being part of his "perfect will" is stronger than it being part of his "permissive will".

Great podcast on a much needed conversation! Huldah my dear achoti you did a great job breaking these important subjects down! HalleluYah for your wisdom. Shanae, thank you for having Huldah on your show, I enjoyed y’all’s conversation!

Polygyny so much differently and putting aside my emotions to RESPECT IT...no one broke it down like this

10:59 -- Are you addressing specific people here or just polygyny in general? It gets rather tiresome for women to constantly claim that men who desire to cover multiple women are just in it for more sex. There are 23 other hours in the day, and the responsibility of another wife, well the juice isn't worth the squeeze to be blunt. Men who were just living by the flesh would simply just have sex with many women and not cover any of them, as most men today are. A man who wants to cover women in a biblical sense has to have a much greater understanding of God, and his will, and as such, it can never just be about sex. That's a perk, sure, but that's not the point. If your goal is to raise up men to be faithful men of God, you need to adjust your messaging on this topic, because you're essentially making the same tired arguments people have for hundreds of years that led us to where we are. Either we start teaching biblical marriage (including polygyny) and how to do it righteously, or all we are doing is kicking the can down the road.

I ABSOLUTELY LOVE HULDAH!!! Biblical understanding at its best! If you don't know the original language, it's difficult to get the TRUE/SOUND/DEFINITE understanding of Yah's Word!

Thank you so much for bringing Akhoti Huldah on your show. You don't have to be in this walk to understand that we as a people to need to heal from these destructive practices that have infiltrated generations.

Exactly! This is my approach when speaking with our brothers and sisters about polygamy.

This right here is such a needed conversation especially in the Hebrew Israelite community.

This was everything I hoped it would be. Sister Huldah, may Yah bless you. Shanaeyh, thank you for hosting this interview.

Started off as a good conversation until they started blaming men it is clear that accountability is women’s Kryptonite

Thank you for this interview ladies. Y’all spoke about everything I was thinking and feeling. To be honest, I was so disappointed after watching the interview with the two young brothers. Like Hulda said “men leading with pride, and with their loins.” We need more women like Hulda to help uplift our women who know that walking with Yah does not require them to be oppressed by false leadership. This Hebraic walk is not about men getting a free pass to lay down with whom ever they want. It’s simply Brokenness leading brokenness.

9:54 - Abram told Sarai to do with Hagar as she wanted because Hagar was still her servant, she was under her authority, and what he told her to do was "what was good in her sight." Sarai then decided to treat her harshly. She sent her away and God spoke to Hagar and told her to return and submit herself to Sarai (rather than rebel as she had). The point here is more about authority/submission than anything else. Sarai could have handled the situation better, so could have Hagar, but ultimately God intervened and told her to go back with assurances she would be cared for (if she submitted to Sarai her authority). Women today have a massive problem with submitting to authority. We don't have many women servants today, but we have a ton of rebellious wives/women who balk at the idea of submitting to authority. Ultimately later on Sarah wants Hagar gone again, along with Ishmael and Abraham obeys God in sending them away, importantly he didn't simply listen to Sarah alone and obey her wishes.

Wow! This was so deep and needed to be said and the head of the nail was hit on so many levels. Thank you for bringing this conversation to the fore front ladies.

This conversation is healthy, but if i might add. The real conversation we need to have is how we need to let the black men take control. This society has put the women first, were trying to break that. I think when our women finally lets us take our role through and through than we can finally heal, and yes that includes polygyny.

This was a fantastic conversation with Huldah. Absolutely necessary, I pray everyone, men & women out there view this and take heed to the words.

My goodness! What a barakah! So much truth, in this episode. Yes, yes, and yes, ladies! I've been saying this for so long. THANK YOU, SO MUCH FOR SHARING THIS!!! Words cannot express! Much shalom to you both!

I don’t disagree with some things being said here, but a lot of this was word salad. Men and women are different. Men are more sexual by nature (all men, not just us black ones) and there are more women than men. There is also a population imperative, if every man were to get with/marry one woman, there would be millions of them leftover and that’s not including those that are locked up or even homosexual. Sexlessness in men causes a bunch of problems (“cheating” in marriages, increased aggression and sometimes even more deviant behavior that is too graphic for this forum). If men cheat it’s just sex and they do it to stay in their relationships, it says nothing about the love he has for his significant other, but if a woman does it, there is a (personal) reason for it and she’s doing it to leave the relationship. Sex feels good for both sides, but it is more of a need for men as opposed to a want like it is for women. Most people also don’t make enough money to get to the end of life while in their prime years and society isn’t set up for a bunch of singles. A man with multiple women can insure his paternity, and take care of those women. A woman would not be able to do the same for multiple households. Modern medicine and technology cannot overwrite a millennia of biological hardwiring. Not saying polygyny should be practiced by everyone, but those who can afford it have reached a level where it is an option for them. It has nothing to do with trauma, that’s how a woman would view it (emotionally). As for children, most of them are born out of wedlock and are a byproduct of unplanned casual sex. Women chose who they sleep with and men choose who they commit to. A man cannot force a women to have a baby if she doesn’t want to have one. What happens more often than not is that the woman decides to have the baby even though he’s not ready or willing to be a Father. Single Mother’s are products of their own choices. Men have no rights after conception. If a man marries a woman he shows commitment, and therefore is more likely and definitely legally bound to provide and protect for his kids. If the legal system was fair toward men just as much as it is toward women, and he got to sign off his financial rights and there was no chance that anyone could come after him, then there would be a hell of a lot less children born out of wedlock. Men are problem solvers and while they’re not saints by any means, the bulk of these issues in the black community are coming from the women. The matriarchy in the black community has made it so that they feel like they don’t need us. They don’t care what their men think, until they see a successful one head over to the other side. They let themselves get, rude, loud, obnoxious and overweight; raising their boys to be soft and their daughters to be tough and then those daughters grow up saying that there’s no good men out here. Then they’ll make broadcasts on how jacked up we are because we decide to go outside of our race. These men that they’re talking about are their brothers, cousins, uncles, nephews, and sons; they know black women intimately and have gone outside of their race for better treatment and better deals in life partners. It pains me to write all of this, but we men are tired of having to defend ourselves for being who we are. Unfortunately the bad reputation black women have received in this country has been earned, the evidence is on full display by the exodus of successful men from the race and the ordinary men from the churches. Our women need to start listening to their men and stop fighting us because it’s not getting us anywhere.

Thank you both for this conversation. When the question of how do we create change was posed, I was reminded of Nabal’s wife in the Bible. When foolish men won’t listen, the women need to step in. This is why the wise women need to teach the young women. These men couldn’t have multiple wives if the young women had wise women to teach them truth, self-respect, modesty and self control. Men can only do what we LET them do. Even if some men were seeking to deceive women by not sharing their intentions of having a polygamous relationship, women could avoid the situation if they required a covenant or true commitment before sleeping with them. Huldah put some women up on game today. Now they know what Yah/God said and intended from the BEGINNING. I’m doing a happy dance just thinking about somebody hearing this and breaking away from a horrible situation or better yet, avoiding one.

Thank you both this was great and very well needed for both our Men, Women, & Children for our Nation of Hebrew YIsraelites.

Yes Iyah HulDah is a BlesSING to our “SHE-Brew” CommonUnity aka our BlessED HeBrew TeacHER! 💚🤲❤️

7:42 - Jacob had 4 wives because God played a direct role in opening and closing Rachel/Leah's wombs in order to end up with 4, why He did not say, but it was his divine hand in the matter causing it. At the end of the day, in where we are today, the purpose of having multiple wives is to cover women with a good man/husband. There simply aren't enough good faithful men to cover enough women, so we need to as a culture dispense with the notion that it's wrong or sinful, or against God's will. It's just marriage, it's not monogamy, it's not polygyny, it's marriage. Whether a man has 1 2 or 5 is based on circumstances and God's will for him/them.

You are so right! People think time stopped in Africa! Huldah thanks sis.

She’s definitely well studied but Most people aren’t well read so the women say ouuuh and ahh because they haven’t read before. At the end of the day we can’t change the law and what God made permissible. Moses, Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon , Essau, Lamech and others married multiple women. Bottom Line

You're looking at polygamy mostly from a male buck breeder perspective. That perspective could not be without the full cooperation of a selfish , desperate, fatherless, and husbandless female population that is your vast majority from young to old, But take heart in the Biblical dictate to obey the monogamy laws of the land because your women can legally marry one another as well as your men can marry one another. So just try to live righteously under the "Most High" in that imposed social environment. Perhaps you can put a leash on your husbands necks.

Such an great conversation and much needed perspective! Loved, loved, loved it!

All PRAISES to Our ABBA YAHUAH for the Wisdom endowed in our sister Huldah!!! Stay Strong Royal Daughter of Zion!!! Love you Girly....🔥🔥🔥💙🙏🏽 Thank you Shanae for having her on your show.....Barakah.....🧡

Such an eye opening episode.

stay strong sister Huldah, i went to download one of your children lessons for my daughter and your page is gone, it came up with scoffers, so stay strong my sister 🙏🏿🙏🏿

this is the best Episode on this channel and this is a great channel btw... please bring huldah back !!!

Great conversation ladies. Hey there Huldah. Glad to see your girl making room for you. Thank you, beautiful sister for hosting such a much needed and informative platform.

Thank you both.

Stumbled across this presentation. I like that the focal point begins and ends with the standard being "stay focused on YHWH"

This is one side; one day me and my friend had a conversation about how to please a women when two women was in front of us we didn’t ask the women we thought we knew but instead we should have ask them the women how do you know what men are going through did you ask a man

9:38 -- Where do you see Abram saying to Sarai "you sure... ?( with a side look)" in the text? All it indicates is that Sarai told him to take Hagar, and he listened to the voice of Sarai.

Very interesting. Funny how all this talk yet NO ONE can show in the scriptures where GOD (not man or woman) dis agrees with Polygyny. Also Interesting how our Beloved Savior spoke about the 10 brides (plural) going to meet the bride groom (singular). Y'all mention "from the beginning" as if that's going to solve the actually reality NOW of women actually out numbering men. So a bunch of talk and no ACTUAL SOLUTION, the scriptures also mentioned "in that day seven women will take hold of one man"... So are the scriptures wrong or you? Simple question!?

I so very much appreciated your video, which was two years ago, I am responding in Feb 2024. Yes, many of our people have experienced TRAUMA in our family or origin, and in relationships through our lives. Being able to recognize it and getting psychological help for it is often sadly never done....

Strong assertion of incorrect assumptions!

Thank you so much ladies🙏🏽❤🌼I just love Huldah🌻May Yah bless you both🙏🏽❤ all the way from South Africa 🇿🇦

I won't say she's wrong but she's leaving out a lot of things but she's all over the place also

9:05 - Pleasing a woman is not the purpose of marriage, or polygynous marriage. Covering her is and covering her in accordance with God's will for marriage, along with His mission for us. If a man is trying to have multiple wives simply with the mind of "I can please more than one" he's off the mark biblically. His entire mission is to please God, if God wants him to have more than 1 wife to cover, then he should, if only one, then he should have only one.

At first I was skeptical about this episode... But I must admit. Kudos to the sister. You have my Respect and my sub 💜💜 Shalom APTTMH 🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽

16:29 - You're reading a lot into the text "oh this man must got it goin on..." for someone who just chastised for people taking text out of context. That said you are right, Rebekah and her father had a choice in the matter and both agreed to the marriage, at that point she was betrothed, Issac took her into the tent and consummated the marriage. Just having sex with a woman does not make a marriage in God's sight as far as I can tell. However, there may be exception for virgin women, due to specifics in the law. Still more to study there. I will agree though, a man should (if he knows) let a woman know his intent to be polygynous upfront. There should be no deception in the matter.

This was an amazing discussion and sharing session. Really loved the points brought up in this. Bless you both & thank you very much for the enlightenment

Hi Huldah! This was great. Praise Him!

5:32 One of the most commonly attempted arguments against polygamy makes the assertion that polygamy is supposedly not the "original plan of God for marriage". This assertion is based solely upon two sequential factors. Jesus's reference to "at the beginning" in Verse 4 of the Matthew 19:3-9 passage, and thus, the "Beginning" story: Adam and Eve. That "at the beginning" phrase, which Jesus used there, of course, was only addressing divorce, not polygamy. Moreover, there is an additional very exegetically important matter to note about all this. Namely, the very story of "the beginning" (with Adam and Eve) ---indeed, the entire book of Genesis (which starts with the first three words, "In the beginning")--- was written by Moses. And Moses was a polygamist with two wives! Certainly, the very mortal author of the story "at the beginning" would know what he wrote and whether his own polygamy was not part of "God's plan" (if it was not)! Accordingly, it is clear that that phrase, "at the beginning", is simply not relevant to the topic of polygamy, anyway. Nevertheless, though, that phrase is what forms the basis for the subsequent factor pertaining to Adam and Eve. Namely, the argument asserts that, because the Scriptures only record that God seemingly only made "one Eve" for Adam, that somehow implies an "original plan of God for marriage" only for monogamy. The resulting implied speculation from that is that polygamy is to be perceived as somehow against that perceived "original plan of God for marriage". Upon deeper investigation, however, that speculative assertion does not hold up. If doctrine would hold people to a perceived "original plan of God", then at least two things must also be binding upon mankind. For examples, people must only walk around in nudity, and people must never die. Of course, to suggest such things is an absolute absurdity. According to the Bible, the reason that those two examples are obviously not binding as doctrine is because of Adam's sin. That sin of Adam had forever after changed (as it were) the "plan of God" as applies to us for doctrine. The Scriptures inform us that "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23). From that, the Bible further explains that, "Wherefore, as by one man [[ i.e., Adam ]] sin entered the world, and death [[ entered the world ]] by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." (Romans 5:12.) When Adam sinned, death entered in. Adam's sin is why we now die. And it is also why we now wear clothes rather than remaining nude, according to Genesis 3:21. The fact that we now wear clothes and do die is the proof that we are no longer under any perceived "original plan". So what has God planned for us instead? He gave us "the second Adam", which is Christ, that we might have life everlasting in Him (per John 3:16.). "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [[ which is Christ ]] was made a quickening spirit." 1 Corinthians 15:45. The first Adam brought death by his sin. The second Adam, which is Christ, brought life by His righteousness. "Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 1 Corinthians 15:46-47. Adam was of the flesh, while Christ is of the Spirit. Because Romans 8:1 shows us that we are to walk in the Spirit and not according to the flesh, we are certainly NOT supposed to follow after the example of the first Adam (who was of the flesh), but after the second Adam (who is of the Spirit), which is Christ. With this now realized that we follow after the "second Adam", Christ, we look to Christ as the example set for us in the true and current "plan of God for marriage". And this is explicitly confirmed and explained for us in Ephesians 5:22-25. "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it". Ephesians 5:22-25 This is very explicit. The "plan of God for marriage" is detailed as being modeled after, not the example of the first Adam (of flesh) and his wife Eve, but after the example of the second Adam, which is Christ (of Spirit) and His Churches. Following this model, each husband is to love his wives as selflessly, "footwashingly", and life-givingly as Christ so loves the Churches (that He laid down His life in the depth of such love). So too, each wife is to love her husband as each Church so loves the one and only Christ Jesus. As there is only one Christ for the Churches, there is only one husband. And as there are more than only one Church loved by Christ, it would not be sinful if there be more than one wife, of course. This is confirmed, of course, by the Parable of the Ten Virgins in Matthew 25:1-13. The Lord Jesus Christ described Himself as the polygamist Bridegroom for the "five wise virgins", which are the Churches. So, in conclusion, what we see is that the "plan of God for marriage" is very explicitly NOT after the model of the fleshly, death-causing first Adam and his (Scripture-recorded) apparent "one" wife, Eve. Rather, the Bible is clear that the current "plan of God for marriage" is after the model of the Spiritual, life-bringing second Adam, Christ, and His Churches.

New sub here! Love sister huldah

Love, love, love Huldah.

Can I find the podcast in Amazon music? "What she said" right? Shalom shalom

Huldah BLESSED me!! As she always do

1 Timothy 2:12

She spoke straight facts!!! HALLELUYAH for your wisdom sis 🌹🌹🌹

The Adam an eve story cannot be used to confirm that the bible promotes or condemns monogamy or polygyny. You are interpreting scripture instead of reading what it actually says.That's like saying God created Adam and Eve but he didn't create children so that means that we aren't supposed to have children. That logic is faulty. God gave us the ability to have children just as he did with wives. If there were only two people (which I'm not in agreement with) how could Adam have more than one wife? There is no need for more than one wife until humanity procreates and there becomes a need for a man to be with more than one wife. You are using a context and mindset that is foreign to the cultural setting of the old testament. At the time of these writings polygyny was widely practiced in the East (including Israel), so to imply that they were suggesting a monogamous union at the time is very dishonest and or ignorant.

I can legally marry up to four wives in nijeria and guess what they have way lower divorce rate than the west really 🥺🥺🥺🥺

11:12 - Another fallacy. There are 40+ examples of polygynous men in the Bible, very few have any issues directly stemming from the marriages. I could say "look at Adam and Eve, the first monogamous couple, they led us to sin and death, look at their children, they had the first sibling rivalry and the first murder. So see the fruits of monogamy are poison." It's a foolish statement to make, but that's what you do when you start blaming family issues with the marriage or amount of wives. I can throw a rock blindfolded and hit marriages with only one wife that have problems that make the Bible stories look like nothing. Let's not pretend monogamy-only works any better just as a result of only having one.

Thank you Huldah on this subject because more and more our Hebrew men are teaching this but not in it's WHOLENESS! This type of man must himself be a Virtuous man, with finances, proper spirit guided by TMH, ladies don't sign up with Pookie or June bug for a covering! Even the BEST MAN has many short coming, be careful on this. They are using this scripture to justify their own lusts.

It all seems that she wants to hold on to a western mindset while explaining the bible when the bible is an eastern mindset book. I only listened out of respect but the bible stands against you lady.

Polygyny is illegal, but it is not unlawful. You can practice polygyny without breaking the [color of] law.

Good conversation I wish it had a male perspective. They keep tying dishonesty and cheating as a main motivation to polygany.

The sadness of us relying on a fictional work from the greeks.

Europeans had polygyny before they were forced into Christianity (and until eventually polygyny was not allowed).

If you think every man that wants a second wife is broken or damaged, I think you're not seeing the whole picture... If I find a virgin I can marry and fulfill the whole plan, I will, but with worldly women that are accustomed to share super high status men, if you don't have multiple women, they won't treat you the same way... to me, it's about making people happy in my surroundings... Remember, jewish and christian marriages are for virgins... if you're not a virgin, that ship has sailed for you...

She’s still dealing with Trauma, she prolly was with the “isrealite movement” til her man tried gettin another wife

13:59 - I think you meant Exodus 21:10 here, not Deut 21. Respectfully, you have no biblical basis to claim that the woman is the one who decides if her clothing, shelter or sexual rights are adequate. In fact this law doesn't even state that at all. It says he cannot REDUCE any of the ones of the first. The spirit of it far more seems to be he cannot treat the first one in any "less" of a way than he previously was. Meaning (which makes perfect sense) that do not take on a second wife if it means you'll have to reduce anything from the first to cover it.

The fact that she acknowledged Men as males only, but always acknowledged females as Women is enough to make ones ears perk up to how this conversation would go. Also, while she didn't state the spiritual system that chose her, for her to mention " christ love " after mentioning being in Egypt is baffling. The image of christ originates from Ptolomy Sotere and is clearly shown in Egypt. I know, as I too, have been there multiple times. So ixnay on that. To say the bible is perfect, when Robert Funk and many others have held seminars, clinics and counsels regarding the validity of jesus and the bible itself to be "mere renditions of a drunken irishman" says a lot. So, to use a flawed text as a core staple for the discussion thereby makes the discussion moot. I could dissect this with a grade 8 scalpel, but it's rather old and presented from a feministic / womanistic psychological pathology. So I'll just leave this as it is. TLDR: Polygyny isnt good for "black males", but polyandry is fine for black women. Why? Because inerrant texts passively say so.

This is very much how it is In Islaamic scripture and tradition, though people do not practice it properly in our deen (culture) either. The Qur’aan makes it plain that a man may have up to four wives, but if he only knew he’d have but one. There are many rules involved with polygyny for us, too, but just like with you all, those rules are often disregarded. It’s mostly about sex and status/ego now, and doesn’t put the women/family/community first.

Exactly.

Beautiful talk

7:50 You women create your own narrative and reality. Why would you start a topic by referring to a poor man, are we also referring to 304’s!? If a Equal mirror was created for Adam as a helper, why is she the one that derailed everything that was established before her creation!? Not only are you not equal to a man, you’re still subject to the serpent’s cunning. If you don’t have on a head covering, don’t open your mouth about the Bible on the internet, that’s disrespectful! Or do you not know how to read!?

19:02 - There does seem to be a lot of trauma in the black community, and I don't totally disagree with your message here, but the fact is regardless of the trauma, or how black men may be going into the word and finding polygyny and then "using it to justify" (as you claim), we need to teach the truth, and not simply argue against a perfectly viable form of marriage because some men may twist it up. Learning about biblical polygyny and properly diving into the study on it I find leads to a better understanding of God, a much bigger desire to obey him and know him, and build yourself up as a man and those around you. I can assure you that your messaging here is not going to help those boys/men as it comes across as simply another woman condescending and throwing them under the bus. They need guidance, but this isn't it. Teaching them something that is fundamentally not taught by scripture is not helping to align them to it. And if you're teaching black women this message they will not help the matter either by repeating falsehoods and condescension to these men.

While I’m glad that this conversation is happening, the topic really deserves to be had at a deeper level. Tho I’m sure that these ladies fully believe their rationale, their arguments are flawed from a scriptural standpoint. I’d kindly recommend deeper study into the scriptures on the topic once a person can recognize and identify personal bias. While I agree with some of the points regarding a mans qualification to proceed into polygamy, the rest of the points are either non sequitor fallacies, false equivalence, misrepresentations or biased pretexts. A wife’s right to food covering and cohabitation does not give her the grounds to determine if it’s “enough” or satisfactory. A wife is not entitled to the entirety of her husbands resources. She is entitled to the basic provisions necessary for herself and his children. She’s entitled to bring her issues before the elders of the community for a ruling, if her maintenance has not been provided, but this idea that she can negate another wife entering covenant because of “sufficiency” is completely false. A mans marital obligation was primarily to provide access to procreation. This concept of marital entitlement to pleasure is the result of western romanticism. While it’s completely acceptable to engage in sex for pleasure between spouses, pleasure is a pleasant side effect, not an entitlement.

10:16 - Pretty good interpretation of the instructions to kings here, most folks just jump to the multiplying wives as some sort of regulation on polygyny, where it clearly is not about that, but you kind of dropped the ball when you made the case that a man can't be focused on God as he should be and not have time for multiple wives. That's foolish. David was a man after Yah's own heart, and he had upwards of 18, and God told him he would have given him more had he asked. Clearly a man's ability to focus on God + the amount of wives he can properly cover is based the man and his circumstances. You're mostly on the right track here but you have a HEAVY anti-polygyny bias that is clouding your judgement and making you say things that are foolish it seems.

I admit we are over sexualized

Wow, yall are way off! So go ahead and do it, call polygyny a sin! Say that Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and David were living in sin. I hear a lot of logical fallacies and assertions but not facts! Oh by the way YHWH had two wives as well. It makes no difference the Biblical family cannot be stopped.

Gift!

I’m sorry but y’all are also viewing the Bible through the trauma of feminism. And I’m a polygynist woman 😅

This is KDST. Huldah Dauid had said something wrong. ALthough most of what she said is true. I, being a black Jewish man. I grew up respecting women so I was not interested in sex and disrespecting women, but marrying one woman. So she can not say black man ...., but most black men. I would like to tell her what she said to help her so she can give a good presentation. I grew up and self educating myself I realized as she said translating the bible from Aramaic to English is how you learn. This helped me realize I was to be a Jewish person. Second part Hammurabi code of laws she did not discuss on this interview. This is crucial to her presentation. I heard he say her contact information, but I am having a heard time trying to write it down to getting it on the computer. Can you type it for me?

She wants men to continue lying to women. I noticed she took scriptures out of context. So you're a man now? Why is a women teaching a man's doctrine. We already have men of Yah teaching us how to be men... 🤦🏿‍♂️

What did yahusha say on the topic of marriage?

I don't care bring her back Ms.Hall, she broke that Bible down, these men know it's lust driven with wanting multiple wives, they need to at least be honest, but don't bring God into your sinful desires, that's the heart of man🤷🏿‍♂️

6:44 - Ezer (helper) generally is defined simply as a "helper", where do get any idea that it is "equal/opposite" to man, I'd love to know? That makes no sense whatsoever in the context of Gen 2. God created man first, He created woman from man. Should He have wanted to create an "equal opposite" He would have created her at the same time, and from dust, not from man. He created her from him, after him, as a help to him, to set a proper headship order. He gave Adam instructions for a reason, this reason is portrayed all throughout the rest of the scripture and that is that Man is the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the man and God is the head of Christ. It's a patriarchal setup from beginning to end.

Is it disobedient to Not want to be in a polygamous relationship?

Heavy

nude originally, breeding was with siblings originally

Only perspective is the fathers

5:56 - The appeal to creation fallacy. God created Adam and Eve, in the garden, in a sinless and deathless existence. If we are to use that to guide our decisions then we have to expect God to take a rib from us and make a perfect woman for us from us and we should all walk around naked and unashamed. Could He, sure, will He? Not likely. Why? Because He told us what to do in this world WE live in. Go forth and multiply and subdue the earth. He told us to do that within marriage, and He left how many wives we have up to context, our abilities as men, and our gifts from Him.

Love Hulda!

Polygyny is the culture of the world.☝️☝️☝️☝️

I’m 21 minutes in this conversation and it’s actually not “deep” at all. Sounding like the usual Babylonian feminist talk to me. I’ll still listen though.

5:16 You say it is illegal. It was illegal for blacks and whites to marry. Would you have turned them away as sinful. It was illegal to help escaped slaves. Would you have said it is the law of the land and sent them back. I think you would choose and do choose which laws you follow. We are never to follow unGodly laws. A common argument often used as the last-resort "excuse", in trying to still assert that polygamy (polygyny) must somehow be a sin, is what is known as the "law of the land" argument. In quoting Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1, and 1 Peter 2:13-26, this attempted argument asserts that, because polygamy is perceptibly against the "law of the land", and because these passages instruct Bible-believers to follow the "laws of the land", this itself makes polygamy a sin. Before addressing this argument directly, it is important to first address the details by which no "law of the land" is actually being broken. In a legal technical sense, polygamy itself is not usually specifically against the law. Rather, the legal term, "bigamy", is the outlawed act of a person having government-recognized existing marriages (i.e., government-recognized by "marriage license") with more than one living spouse at the same time. As such, as long as polygamist families do not obtain government-recognition (e.g., seeking a marriage-license), there is no breaking of any law. To Bible-believers, marriage is defined by God Who alone has the authority. It is not defined by any government. In the Bible, there is not one single example of any marriage becoming "legitimate" because of definition or decree by government. The truth is, if marriage is defined by governments, then that would say that none of the men in the Bible were actually married. That would be absurd, of course! While the Churches have mistakenly acquiesced (even capitulated) their trust in God's authority (as sole definer of marriage), in their wrongly thinking that government has such authority to define marriage, even so, the reality is this: It is not against the law to NOT GET MARRIED, in terms of any government definition of "getting married". Cohabitation is no longer against the law of the land of most countries in the modern era. If any government simply views a relationship as being that of cohabitating (which is not illegal), then even though Bible-believers and God know that the same relationship is indeed that of marriage before God, as defined by God alone, the truth remains: no "law of the land" is being broken. The interesting thing to note about this attempted argument against polygamy, though, is the blatant obviousness of the "circular logic" which this "law of the land" argument employs. Namely, the argument says this: Polygamy is a sin beause it is against the law. How did the bigamy laws come into existence in the first place? They made polygamy against the law because they thought it was a sin! Therein is the "circular logic". The argument has no external support supporting it. It goes round and round in trying to support itself, saying: Why is polygamy against the law? Because it's a sin. Why is polygamy a sin? Because it's against the law. But why is it against the law? Because polygamy is a sin. Why is it a sin? Because polygamy is against the law. And round and round it goes. Of course, as it is clearly proven that polygamy is not a sin, because polygamy really is Biblical, then that "circular logic" falls apart. Since polygamy is NOT a sin, it should NOT be against the law! And since most polygamist families are actually not breaking the law anyway, it is still not sin. As such, there should be no "law of the land" against polygamy. And that leads to the final irony that anyone would use the "law of the land" argument in the first place! In countries such as the United States, Bible-believers take great comfort in knowing and acting upon the legislative process by which the "laws of the land" can be passed, amended, and even repealed. If any law were passed, amended, or repealed which resulted in making things harder on true Bible-believers, they would (rightly) call it their Biblical DUTY to rise up to overturn the passing, amendment, or repeal. Therein is the irony! Even as polygamous Bible-believers are meticulous to not break any "law of the land", the bigamy laws are, nevertheless, truly burdensome. All the while, many non-polygamous Bible-believers would continue to look the other way and use the flawed "law of the land" argument to still oppose polygamy. In using the "law of the land" argument, though, the very Bible-believers who would rightly work to make changes in law if it isolated or it made things harder for fellow Bible-believers are unwittingly relying on this flawed "circular logic" argument to NOT do their otherwise self-defined Biblical duty to overturn laws which do isolate and make things harder for fellow Bible-believers with polygamous families. Thus, to not help such fellow Bible-believers with polygamous families to have freedom from the burdensome bigamy "laws of the land", such ones can be viewed as simply, albeit mostly unwittingly, continuing to fulfill the Spirit-given prophecy of 1 Timothy 4:1-3a. While all this happens, of course, polygamous Bible-believers will continue to not break any laws, simply by means of cohabitation before government, but of marriage before God. No doubt, should the bigamy "laws of the land" ever become changed and repealed, the "circular logic" will clearly require those who employ the "law of the land" argument to then have to wholly accept that polygamy really is Biblical.

It's difficult to listen to such self indulgent twisting of logic.

Christ and Him CRUCIFIED

Do not skip over the fact that Eve sinned so so one of the punishments were for her husband to rule over her and regardless of how I feel about it that's what God Said read