I originally created and published this as a separate website under the pseudonym, Son of Houdini, in order to accomplish three goals:
So in November 2001 I published the website and called it:
- 1. To shake up the followers of the HEM (then FICP) website and other polygamy ministries, to keep the apologists among them on their toes;
- 2. To be scrupulously honest with myself so as not to fall into the trap of complacency; and
- 3. To solve any questions the anti-polygamy camp were yet able to throw at me which I had not previously answered.
and threw the gauntlet down to the pro-polygamy community as 'devil's advocate', challenging them to refute me. They, of course, initially thought I was a monogamy-onlyist!
I received only one challenger in the 8 months waited before offering a rebuttal. The one challenger refused to give me permission to put up his answer on my webpage, even anonyously, though I never understood why, unless he felt his arguments were too easy to refute. One thing I learned was that there were not a lot of people in the pro-polygamy movement who were confident in their skills to defend the lifestyle.
As one of the longest defenders of Christian/Messianic polygamy I have heard all the aguments pro and con and been involved in a great many debates over the years. Most of the arguments that are offered by the monogamy-only camp are puerile and anti-biblical, the driving force being hormones and tradition rather than Spirit and Scripture. And so I created 'Son of Houdini' and a webpage which tried to refute the claims being made by Christian polygamists (including myself) using the best and most scriptural refutations I could find without contradicting anything the Bible says.
I must honestly say that one of my wives was disturbed by Son of Houdini's webpage and so I suggested we put it up in her club and invite the public to refute it. There are flaws in the arguments presented. I left it unchallenged for a while so that both my wives and other polygamists could sharpen their apologetic teeth. A lot of pro-polygamists got scared, begging me to refute it (not knowing I was the author), including seasoned apologists and good friends.
I consider that the arguments advanced by 'Son of Houdini' are, realistically, the only plausible anti-polygamy ones there are. No doubt some will disagree with me, in which case, I invite all and sundry to present their best arguments - pro and con - in this section. Though maybe I was wrong in saying this, I felt that once 'Son of Houdini' had been refuted, the case for polygamy would be water-tight. But not before.
Lublin, 7 March 2002