I appreciate your contribution, Zec. It doesn't seem like they are really interested to see what these things mean, only how they can bolster their theology.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
ChristianForums
- Thread starter Shibboleth
- Start date
I was skimming the thread again this morning, and really appreciated your approach, challenging the pro-poly side to defend their arguments from scripture, then turning the tables.
Well, if we are going to be fair-minded, it is the least we can do. However, more than anything, it will be the Word of God that changes those who will hear Him... our unsubstantiated opinions are pointless in an attempt to show that something is acceptable in God's eyes.
Well let's not let this get around or some of our people might get some ideas but I have been banned for rules violations. I have to admit that I'm surprised. I thought for sure someone would want to engage a little bit but apparently these guys are not interested in discussion at all. I'm shaking the dust off.
Me, too, apparently...
I suppose I was correct about what I said above.
May God open their eyes or at least help them to be more fair-minded.
I suppose I was correct about what I said above.
May God open their eyes or at least help them to be more fair-minded.
Which thread is it? I skimmed through the topics over there and didn’t see which thread @ZecAustin is on. He must be using deep cover
@Asforme&myhouse,
He posted as "The Revolting Man" in the thread we got deleted from, and his posts have been deleted also.
He posted as "The Revolting Man" in the thread we got deleted from, and his posts have been deleted also.
If you do a search for polygamy over there, you'll find it's been discussed over and over for many years, the entire history of the forum. Thousands of posts (seriously, the search box gives "about 2000" results). I may or may not have been involved in such discussions in the distant past... 
Past moderators were fairly reasonable about the topic - they required polygamy to only be discussed in the "Christian theology and ethics" section, and not in general marriage advice sections etc, but otherwise allowed the discussion to occur.
This new thread was in the "Christian theology and ethics" section, but it appears that at least one moderator is now using their moderation privileges to enforce their own theological view and delete opposing statements. Very sad and completely against the spirit of a theological discussion forum.
It's probably wise to keep quiet about this and not raise it with the staff there. Because at present, if anyone is seeking information about polygamy and searches that forum, they'll find tonnes of discussion with some valuable content in the archives. But if the present moderators are alerted to this they seem the sort of people who might go on a purge and delete a load of good reference material. So it's probably best to leave it alone.
Past moderators were fairly reasonable about the topic - they required polygamy to only be discussed in the "Christian theology and ethics" section, and not in general marriage advice sections etc, but otherwise allowed the discussion to occur.This new thread was in the "Christian theology and ethics" section, but it appears that at least one moderator is now using their moderation privileges to enforce their own theological view and delete opposing statements. Very sad and completely against the spirit of a theological discussion forum.
It's probably wise to keep quiet about this and not raise it with the staff there. Because at present, if anyone is seeking information about polygamy and searches that forum, they'll find tonnes of discussion with some valuable content in the archives. But if the present moderators are alerted to this they seem the sort of people who might go on a purge and delete a load of good reference material. So it's probably best to leave it alone.
I would really love to know what "rule" they claim we violated
If they think that is something, they ain't seen nothing yet.
;^)
I will leave that particular forum alone for now, however, in deference to the wisdom of FollowingHim's counsel.
;^)
I will leave that particular forum alone for now, however, in deference to the wisdom of FollowingHim's counsel.
Happened to me about 6 months ago when we started talking about polygamy and someone brought up the law of first mentioned and I made the If your not also teaching vegan nudism your a hypocrite comment.
So effective rhetoric gets you kicked out? How encouraging.
"See Romans 7:1-3; marriage to another person while the first spouse is living is deemed to be adultery."
It is amazing to me that people read something and get it so flat wrong. If you actually read the verse it apples to wife only. This is actually one of the verses I use to teach that the NT _SUPPORTS_ polygamy. You have to ask why Paul limits this to the wife only and not the husband, and the reason is polygamy. When we teach that men can have a second spouse, but a wife can not it is because of this verse (and others).
And this is the whole crux of his case: that polygamy is adultery. Wow! He is 180 wrong.
As far as our comments deleted, I am encouraged that lots of good comments that were present before we arrived remain.
It is amazing to me that people read something and get it so flat wrong. If you actually read the verse it apples to wife only. This is actually one of the verses I use to teach that the NT _SUPPORTS_ polygamy. You have to ask why Paul limits this to the wife only and not the husband, and the reason is polygamy. When we teach that men can have a second spouse, but a wife can not it is because of this verse (and others).
And this is the whole crux of his case: that polygamy is adultery. Wow! He is 180 wrong.
As far as our comments deleted, I am encouraged that lots of good comments that were present before we arrived remain.
That is actually a really good demonstration of the affect that equality has had upon people and church theology. They read passages like that and subconsciously read them as applying both ways. They literally miss the fact that it is written to women, in exclusion of men. They see 'wife' but perceive 'spouse'.
This ties in closely with the modern day vs. Biblical definition of adultery. The very language has been corrupted to blind us.
This isn't just a polygamy thing either. Many heresies in history were propagated via redefinitions of words.
How far back does this go? I'm not sure. In Websters you can see they were about halfway there in the redefinition of the word adultery.
Are they talking again?