• 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.

Conduct Unbecoming.....

And some more....

ARTICLE 3: ACCEPTED BIBLICAL COVENANTS OF HUSBAND AND WIFE. Through his revealed Word, God has shown to reveal only two types of covenants in relationship to husband and wife. The first is a single covenant, consisting of a husband and a wife. The second is a plural covenant, consisting of a husband, and more than one wife. No other relationships, commitments, contracts, or relationships defined as 'marriage' by any earthy authority is considered valid unless it meets the criteria of the forms of accepted Biblical covenant.
 
ARTICLE 4: SANCTITY OF COVENANTS. A covenant between husband and wife is considered sacred. Our primary concern as members of this compact is to both honor and protect the sanctity of those covenants at all times. As such, it is considered a violation of this compact to infringe or seek to interfere with the covenant of another, whether they are members of this compact or not.
 
ARTICLE 5: MUTUAL ASSENT AND AGE OF CONSENT. We, the members of this compact, hold that the covenant of husband and wife is mutual. No man may take a woman as his 'wife', unless she assents and agrees to the terms of that man's covenant with her. Likewise, a woman may not enter into a covenant of marriage unless and until she is considered to be of the age of consent. Since the revealed Word does not address a specific age of consent, and since this may vary by culture, as members of this compact we agree to hold to the limits of earthly jurisdiction regarding this matter.
 
ARTICLE 6: THE DIGNITY OF WOMEN. The members of this compact affirm and hold true to the concept that women are a sacred gift from God to man, and should be valued as such. A woman who mutually assents to covenant to a husband should not be regarded as a possession, but rather as an equal partner in that covenant. Though husband and wife may differ in rank in covenant relationship, both are directly accountable to God first in all matters of behavior, both earthly and spiritual. Their priorities in duties are the protection of the sanctity of their covenant with God and to each other.
 
ARTICLE 7: THE HONOR OF MEN. It is the duty of all men, either in covenant or waiting for covenant, to be men of honor. To be truthful in all things; to be courageous against the enemy; to be considerate of the needs of others; to be pure in mind, heart and speech; to be loyal to and protective of relationships and covenants; to be obedient to the revealed Word, and to be dedicated to the daily pursuit of all that God has prepared for him, is the definition of a man of honor. As men of honor, we are commissioned to protect one another, and to protect the families and covenants God has entrusted to us. A man of honor is not abusive, either physically or verbally. A man of honor is understanding to and protective of our unique status as adherents of a culturally challenging concept. A man of honor reserves sexual desire for covenant with his wife. A man of honor keeps his covenant pure before God. A man of honor will fight as hard for the covenant of his brother in faith as he would for his own. We, as men of this compact, pledge ourselves to rise above the ordinary, and to make our standard elevated far above the norms of culture and earthly life. We pledge ourselves to be men of honor.
 
Hummm....this is indeed some good ideas. I would however suggest to use the Scriptural literal two word system: "my man or my woman" so as not to infringe upon or to be disrespectful to earthly governmental systems.
 
IMHO, there are some excellent ideas presented in the posts on this thread.

The problem, as I see it, is this: we are scattered all over the world, from Korea to the Philippines to Australia to the Great Republic of the State of Texas to Socialist People's Republic of New Mexico...

We could meet via electronic conferencing to hammer out the details, which might be expensive, but still cheaper than requiring all interested parties traveling to one central location.

Which brings up another point: how do we finance the whole shebang? Voluntary contributions? Membership fees? Find some super-rich plig to bankroll it? Or what? That kind of thing (except for accepting donations to help defray the cost of my education at LUO, send a PM asking for my paypal email or my snail mail address if you wish to contribute :lol: ) is outside the scope of my expertise.

I like your articles, Doc. They form a good starting point. I also agree that we should make the basis of membership in the organization behavior-based, not belief-based, because of so many different sets of beliefs within the Christian community - but all should be Christian and accept the Bible as being God's Word and as the final Authority for faith and practice. (Not the Book of Mormon, the Koran, etc.) We need to have some Bible-based beliefs in common, for Paul tells us:
2 Corinthians 6:14 NKJV (14) Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?

Count me in!
 
Name for Polygamy Safety Organization

To All,

Okay, we've done it. While talking with Fairlight, we came up with the perfect name for the Organization...

"Polygamy Safety and Friendship Establishment" (PolySAFE) (TM)

We'll call the website PolySafe.org!!!

I've obtained the domain name POLYSAFE.ORG, and am donating it to the organization when it is formed. I can also supply hosting if I have the space on my account.

So, what does everyone think???


John for Christ
 
Re: Name for Polygamy Safety Organization

John_for_Christ said:
To All,

Okay, we've done it. While talking with Fairlight, we came up with the perfect name for the Organization...

"Polygamy Safety and Friendship Establishment" (PolySAFE) (TM)

We'll call the website PolySafe.org!!!

I've obtained the domain name POLYSAFE.ORG, and am donating it to the organization when it is formed. I can also supply hosting if I have the space on my account.


John for Christ
So, what does everyone think??? Seems like a great idea on the surface. Would there be any legal issues? How would we go about creating a safe list of people? Would we list only safe names and simply exclude the others?
 
just thinking... but could we have a private thread here with the names of those considered safe based upon some guidelines, and only accessible to safe members? There are both men and women out there with evil intentions.
 
I have a suggestion. :)
We could start by placing questionable people on moderation. In the meantime, the staff at B.F. could confront the individual regarding their behavior. If the person's behavior doesn't change, then it may be time to ban the individual from the forum.

Anyone accusing someone of improper conduct should be willing to submit any & all proof they have to support the accusation. This should be about behavior and not doctrine, since even Christians disagree amongst themselves on doctrine from time to time.

I do agree with Pastor Whitten that "doing nothing is not an option".

Blessings,
Fairlight
 
aphesis paraptoma said:
Fairlight was offended because someone used her name, but Fairlight is innocent and should not be named but what about the offender?

Certain suggestions have been by others and will be forthcoming but the naming of known offenders must be considered.

Paul named names, he warned his fellowship by naming them, how else could he effectively prevent them from harming others?

The individual used my real name (and no..my mama didn't name me Fairlight :D ). This was a concern for me because I had been the victim of a very persistent stalker for many years, which became a matter of police record. I asked the person who was using my name online to please stop and he refused. Then a male friend who owned a poly group asked him to stop on my behalf and he again refused.... :?

I agree that we need to name names and I shared the complete details of all the accusations on my list, including names with Pastor Whitten and a few other B.F. staff members. I didn't post the names on this thread because I didn't feel that would have been appropriate, but The staff have all info.

Blessings,
Fairlight
 
Hi Fairlight. Welcome back to your topic! I think naming where deemed appropriate by BF staff is fine - people should have confidence in their own conduct and not be afraid of light. Regards, ylop
 
While I consider the benefit of organizing various poly groups around a general code of ethical behavior worthwhile, I sincerely doubt that we could pull it off. There is hardly a more diverse group of people than the citizens of poly world. We have a hard enough time agreeing on basic things as it is. To put someone else in charge of overseeing the ethical conduct of our membership is asking for a revolution.
I have a simpler plan that should not even need to be mentioned, but since our society is so fragmented and weakened, I will. I can't speak for other nations, but the good ol' US of A has become so mollified by a group mentality that we tend to not defend ourselves or police ourselves. "Let the Cops take care of it", "Call 9-1-1" is the cry of the day. this is a true statement, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away". The recent 10th anniversary of the Islamic attack on America recalls the perfect example of the problem and proposes the perfect solution to the ethical conduct issue for BiblicalFamilies.org.
On any of the four planes that were hijacked and used as weapons, the only weapons that are known of are box cutters or utility knives. Short blades that can slash and cause pain and bleeding, but are not lethal unless a major artery is cut. These knives in the hands of a few men who are obviously not there in an official position should never have stopped a few brave, red-blooded American men from eliminating their threat. Briefcases, serving trays, purses, coats, even seat cushions could be used as defensive instruments to overtake the knives. In the available space on board an airliner a few brave men could have won the day. The valiant men on flight 93 did the job, they just waited too long to act. Why did the terrorists win??? They won because everyone on the planes have been acclimated to thinking, "Call somebody". Our ancestors knew better, the right to self-defense is an inalienable, God given right. We must not convey with simplicity of mind the health and well being of BiblicalFamilies.org into the hands of another entity or even our government officials. They have enough to do, more important things to do than clean up our messes. We need to be certain that if we allow our yards to be cluttered with trash, someone else WILL come in and clean it up to THEIR satisfaction and send us the bill for it.
I propose that the members of Biblical Families police our own backyard, clean up our own messes so that we are not an eyesore to our world. When someone is misbehaving, report them with the evidence to the Staff. We will come up with a basic, simple but clear code of conduct, but it must be implemented. Don't wait for someone else to report problems, do it your self. When the staff takes appropriate action, don't criticize and don't coddle offenders. We must be an organization, a fellowship of godly behaving people or there is no reason for us to exist as a group. Troublemakers ought not to be tolerated. If we cannot disagree, agreeably then we should report or shut up. Personally, I would like to see a lascivious person make a comment and quickly be taken to task by every man here (pm's preferably). Perverts should be ashamed to show their face on this site.
OK, I have ranted enough.
Editing: Guess I haven't ranted enough. Is our anonymity worth all the screen names. I use my actual name for a purpose, I do not want to hide my beliefs. I know that many here may suffer loss if their belief in Biblical Marriage were known, but every movement has some martyrs. Just something to think about.
 
"we have a private thread here with the names of those considered safe based upon some guidelines"

I would like to suggest that when people join the site that they have the opportunity to submit a scanned image of their passport, drivers license, or some other form of valid identification. This could also be an option for existing members. Once an identity is verified then there could be some sort of indication either next to the avatar or somewhere obvious that would show that this person is truly who they say they are. Regardless if we get any of the things discussed her going or not I would like to see some type of verification taking place.

Scarecrow *Verified
 
I propose that the members of Biblical Families police our own backyard, clean up our own messes so that we are not an eyesore to our world. When someone is misbehaving, report them with the evidence to the Staff. We will come up with a basic, simple but clear code of conduct, but it must be implemented. Don't wait for someone else to report problems, do it your self. When the staff takes appropriate action, don't criticize and don't coddle offenders. We must be an organization, a fellowship of godly behaving people or there is no reason for us to exist as a group. Troublemakers ought not to be tolerated. If we cannot disagree, agreeably then we should report or shut up.
John you have my vote! As far as using real names, we do use our first names and are considering using our last.
I would like to suggest that when people join the site that they have the opportunity to submit a scanned image of their passport, drivers license, or some other form of valid identification. This could also be an option for existing members.
A good idea but nothings a 100%, people could scan fake id's just as easily as creating a new screen name.
 
John Whitten said:
Guess I haven't ranted enough. Is our anonymity worth all the screen names. I use my actual name for a purpose, I do not want to hide my beliefs. I know that many here may suffer loss if their belief in Biblical Marriage were known, but every movement has some martyrs. Just something to think about.

I agree in theory but what about women ? I'm not sure it's always a good idea for women to use their real names online....any thoughts ?

Blessings,
Fairlight
 
Fairlight said:
I agree in theory but what about women ? I'm not sure it's always a good idea for women to use their real names online....any thoughts ?

Wasn't me you asked, but ...

IMO, there IS a place for a good cussing. That would be when someone comes on inappropriately, or stalks. Blast 'em, and be colorful about it. Also, feel free to save evidence and prosecute if they don't quit.

If need be, also feel free to get a concealed carry permit, pepper spray, taser, etc.

Seems like those are sensible ideas whether a woman uses a "screen name" or not. And if they are done, why bother with the pseudonym?

Besides, if some corrective action DOES need to be taken, our society is already primed to give far more help to ladies than it will to men anyway. A man in the same situation would be told to handle it, while everyone will spring to the aid of a damsel in distress! (Not complaining, mind. Just my observation ...)

Just one admittedly male opinion.
 
John Whitten said:
While I consider the benefit of organizing various poly groups around a general code of ethical behavior worthwhile, I sincerely doubt that we could pull it off. There is hardly a more diverse group of people than the citizens of poly world. We have a hard enough time agreeing on basic things as it is. To put someone else in charge of overseeing the ethical conduct of our membership is asking for a revolution.

Sure there are a diverse group of people in the poly world. However, there are guidelines all the leadership can agree to on Christian Polygamy groups. I don't see the issue as you do.

Nobody is asking to put anyone else in charge of the ethical conduct of BF membership. Such an organization would be passing on their judgment recommendation to the BF leadership. If BF chose to ignore it, then I suppose BF would be out as well.

But the problem with that is EXACTLY why we have so many troubles. Nobody wants to agree on standards. Until we do, polygamy will never be more than a fractured and hopeless movement.

Christians should stick together. All the Mormons, Muslims, and other polygamists can deal with their own problems.

I don't think ANYONE that matters is going to have a hard time agreeing to a few basic standards. For instance, there are men that think that underage marriage is good and righteous. They can take a flying leap! We don't need them. So they don't agree. So what? THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.

We aren't talking about detailed and petty restrictions. We are talking about broad protective standards of conduct. No unsolicited sexual e-mail or messages. No messages involving aberrant sexual behavior, including, but not limited to, bestiality, cannibalism, human sacrifice, and homosexuality. No physical threats against others.

If BF cannot agree to those rules, then perhaps a better organization should replace BF...or any organization that cannot say that this moral standard should apply to everyone.


John Whitten said:
I have a simpler plan that should not even need to be mentioned, but since our society is so fragmented and weakened, I will. I can't speak for other nations, but the good ol' US of A has become so mollified by a group mentality that we tend to not defend ourselves or police ourselves. "Let the Cops take care of it", "Call 9-1-1" is the cry of the day. this is a true statement, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away". The recent 10th anniversary of the Islamic attack on America recalls the perfect example of the problem and proposes the perfect solution to the ethical conduct issue for BiblicalFamilies.org.
On any of the four planes that were hijacked and used as weapons, the only weapons that are known of are box cutters or utility knives. Short blades that can slash and cause pain and bleeding, but are not lethal unless a major artery is cut. These knives in the hands of a few men who are obviously not there in an official position should never have stopped a few brave, red-blooded American men from eliminating their threat. Briefcases, serving trays, purses, coats, even seat cushions could be used as defensive instruments to overtake the knives. In the available space on board an airliner a few brave men could have won the day. The valiant men on flight 93 did the job, they just waited too long to act. Why did the terrorists win??? They won because everyone on the planes have been acclimated to thinking, "Call somebody". Our ancestors knew better, the right to self-defense is an inalienable, God given right. We must not convey with simplicity of mind the health and well being of BiblicalFamilies.org into the hands of another entity or even our government officials.

I submit that this is prideful and a bit foolish. BF is not the be-all and end-all of polygamy, nor Christianity. At least the early church had the good sense to be humble and work together, like when the elders and apostles met in Jerusalem in Acts 15.

Here's the thing, we ARE cleaning up our own mess if we are part of an organization that works AMONG Christian polygamy groups to spread the word about wicked people. When we keep it bottled up at BF, then we are doing our brothers and sisters in Christ a disservice. We are allowing bad people to run rampant in their groups, without saying a thing.

Or are you wanting to make BF the top organization for spreading the word? That would be a bad idea as well, allowing BF to lord over other groups.

The ONLY solution is a neutral organization that works with ALL of the organizations. That is the only way it will ever work.

Even our ancestors worked together for justice all the way back to the beginning of history. The opposite is anarchy and everyone doing what is right in their own eyes. God forbid!

The idea only works when we ALL join in our own self-defense. Unless we report the problems, no organization can deal with them.

Here's what I've seen: Foolish men debating whether wicked men should be banned or not, being namby-pamby with men that are would-be adulterers, sexual deviants, abusers, and other deviants with the precious women and that we as God's children ought to protect with all of our might. Even some of our brethren are getting attacked, yet BF for example takes forever to deal with a simple problem. Did they do it? Then kick their nasty butts out!!!


John Whitten said:
We must not convey with simplicity of mind the health and well being of BiblicalFamilies.org into the hands of another entity or even our government officials.

You miss the point that we don't get the choice of putting the well-being of BF into the hands of the government if these kind of things continue. The government will do it themselves and we won't get the say-so.

Unless we broaden our scope to include other Christian poly groups as well, then we will come under scrutiny as a movement, not just as individual groups.


John Whitten said:
I propose that the members of Biblical Families police our own backyard, clean up our own messes so that we are not an eyesore to our world. When someone is misbehaving, report them with the evidence to the Staff. We will come up with a basic, simple but clear code of conduct, but it must be implemented. Don't wait for someone else to report problems, do it your self. When the staff takes appropriate action, don't criticize and don't coddle offenders. We must be an organization, a fellowship of godly behaving people or there is no reason for us to exist as a group. Troublemakers ought not to be tolerated. If we cannot disagree, agreeably then we should report or shut up. Personally, I would like to see a lascivious person make a comment and quickly be taken to task by every man here (pm's preferably). Perverts should be ashamed to show their face on this site.

I hope BF doesn't become so internal and insulated as not to be part of the entire Christian polygamy movement. If BF starts to act that way--as a selfish, wholly independent group--then I'll work against them. That's wrong and a bad attitude. We are part of the body of Christ. We aren't insulated from our brethren and shouldn't be. It becomes a cultist attitude at a certain point, and I've known many cults and how they work.

This benefits only a narrow number of people who need to know who is dangerous in the poly world. Not only that, but what about people coming from other groups and secretly soliciting or hitting on the membership before they are stopped? A standards organization has the benefit of passing that information along, while NOT doing so risks not only BF members--particularly the women--but also members of other Christian polygamy groups. A warning that passes to all would be well worth any "authority" you might feel that BF has lost.

Pastor Whitten, while you know I respect you, I feel that you are taking a very negative and bad position on a good idea that will benefit and protect many people. BF should not be on a selfish power trip over polygamy. BF is not God's special chosen instrument of polygamy.


John Whitten said:
OK, I have ranted enough.
Editing: Guess I haven't ranted enough. Is our anonymity worth all the screen names. I use my actual name for a purpose, I do not want to hide my beliefs. I know that many here may suffer loss if their belief in Biblical Marriage were known, but every movement has some martyrs. Just something to think about.

Yes, our anonymity is well worth all the screen names. You may be insulated from financial disaster by retirement or by some other means, but most of us need to make a living.

The thing is that you aren't looking at this realistically nor rationally. There are many beliefs that should be hidden for a time. A wise person doesn't tell all he knows, until he has tested the waters and decided with good reason whether to stay out or jump in.

I'm sorry, but polygamy is not a belief that is so important that we ought to become martyrs over it. There are far more important things to do with our lives than to destroy them over polygamy. We aren't talking "some martyrs", but the wholesale destruction of everyone.

If God calls you to speak your mind in public about polygamy, more power to you. But to suggest that we should all stick our necks out for a non-essential of Christianity is not reasonable.

For the first time since I came to believe that polygamy is a blessed union over the past dozen years or so, I have started dating/courting a woman that I'd like to marry. I hope to marry her in about a year. So polygamy is becoming a serious issue for me, and while it isn't essential to Christianity, it will be to my own situation.

But until that happens, I have to be able to prepare for my second wife and take care of my family at the same time. I'm not financially well off, so I can't just blurt out to the neighborhood, "Hey! I'm a polygamist!" and hope to be able to survive. I have time to deal with the issue and prepare. In the meantime, I appreciate my relative anonymity.

Yet in all the time I have believed in polygamy, I have never lied to anyone about it if they have asked. What I have done is be CAUTIOUS with what I say and try to make strong points that can't readily be challenged. But I don't foolishly just tell them I believe in polygamy no matter what they think. IT'S NOT THAT IMPORTANT. If God makes me a spokesperson as a polygamous man, ONLY THEN will I step out and upset society. Until then I will quietly and wisely work to change minds, one at a time if necessary.

In the past dozen years, I have helped HUNDREDS and maybe thousands of people believe that polygamy is blessed, or have helped to strengthen their stance on the topic. Even keeping relatively silent, I have affected more change than most pro-polygamists out there. So it doesn't take being outspoken to create change. It just takes quiet and honest determination to speak the truth to those that will hear, without unnecessarily offending the ones that don't want to hear.


John for Christ
 
Back
Top