Dating / matchmaking websites

[MeganC]

I’ve had more problems with people who claim to be Christians and claim to believe the Bible rejecting clear scripture on the topic. It can be right in front of their nose and they won’t listen.

Pardon me here for a moment.

In World War Two there was an Admiral named Arleigh Burke who issued an order of the day that said;

"If it's related to killing Japs, it's important, If it's NOT related to killing Japs, it's NOT important"

This was in response to military bureaucrats who were upset that frontline troops who were busy trying not to get killed by the Japanese were also too busy to fill out forms and get approvals and then route those approved forms so some bureaucrat could stamp the form and put it in a file cabinet.

For these military bureaucrats the process was more important than the outcome. Adm. Burke gave them some perspective.

With regard to Scripture Jesus demonstrated that the outcome was far more important than the process.

Despite THE LAW Jesus healed people on the Sabbath. Didn't He?

Because the outcome, a person being drawn closer to God, was much more important than a law.

Should we honor the Sabbath? Of course.

But we're also called to discern when the interpretation of Scripture interferes with the purpose of Scripture.

Scripture doesn't exist just because God likes Him some rules and likes making people obey.

Scripture is our roadmap and guide to living a better life that draws us closer to His Throne.

Yes, we should pay attention to the roadmap and the guidelines but sometimes the best way to get to a place is to go off road, to fly, or to blaze a new trail. The purpose of the journey is ultimately where we're going. Scripture should help us on our way and not be made into something that obstructs us. Jesus understood this.

 

[MemeFan]

In World War Two there was an Admiral named Arleigh Burke who issued an order of the day that said;

"If it's related to killing Japs, it's important, If it's NOT related to killing Japs, it's NOT important"

This was in response to military bureaucrats who were upset that frontline troops who were busy trying not to get killed by the Japanese were also too busy to fill out forms and get approvals and then route those approved forms so some bureaucrat could stamp the form and put it in a file cabinet.

For these military bureaucrats the process was more important than the outcome. Adm. Burke gave them some perspective.

Off course they are assholes in real life. Why?

Well, bureaucracy follows rule book. If other people don't do exactly according to rule book, how will bureaucrat do his job?

 

[steve]

What I am saying is that when you deal with secular people you can't use Scripture to justify your lifestyle however you absolutely can use your lifestyle to justify Scripture!

Absolute Gold!

 

[Mark C]

Despite THE LAW Jesus healed people on the Sabbath. Didn't He?

WRONG.

His point was, and remains, "Choose life!" And, as "Lord of His own Sabbath," He made that clear.

And He was teaching that what THEY said was 'law', wasn't.

Scripture should help us on our way and not be made into something that obstructs us. Jesus understood this.

So how much more so for crap that ISN'T real Scripture at all, but just BS men say He should have said?

I came to realize that "polygyny" is no longer a 'litmus test' for bots and trolls on 'dating sites,' because "polyarmory" - and other perversions masquerading as hip, tolerant, and even trendy. And even stupid bots can parrot waste-stream xtianity and pass for "wife material."

But Real Discernment about His Written Word! Think about it: even ChatGPT and most LLMs have been programmed on too much pablum to pass for a Real Proverbs 31 Woman of YHVH.



Addendum: For now...

 

[Farmer in the Dell]

I’ve had more problems with people who claim to be Christians and claim to believe the Bible rejecting clear scripture on the topic. It can be right in front of their nose and they won’t listen.

I couldn't agree with you more! Not just on the subject of polygamy of MANY other topics.

 

[frederick]

This is a trap a lot of Christians fall into when trying to justify Scripture to people who reject Scripture.

Just because there's a Chapter and Verse that says a thing doesn't hold any authority with people who reject the authority of Scripture and who often deny the existence of God.

I will plead guilty to being one of them. My parents were not religious and were in fact very secular. So was I.

When I decided on poly and joined my family I still wasn't interested in faith but I did have to live according to some Scriptural expectations. It wasn't an easy adjustment.

But one day I realized that having a bunch of babies, living in a big family, not being around drugs or physical abuse...all of this was the outcome of leading a Godly life. And I was pretty dang happy and blessed!

Over the years I've seen other secular women come to the life because it's a better life.

What I am saying is that when you deal with secular people you can't use Scripture to justify your lifestyle however you absolutely can use your lifestyle to justify Scripture!

"See, we live according to Scriptural wisdom and we're really happy about it."

That's a difficult argument to counter for secular people who are mired in debt, whose relationships are a string of disasters, and whose lifestyle choices are often visible in their piercings, tattoos, and Kool-Aid hair.

They might not choose to join you but I can tell you from personal experience that they won't argue with you.

The outcome of living a Godly life is validation of the truth of Scriptural wisdom.

Yes, and this is where your personal salvation testimony becomes a powerful tool for presenting the truth of the gospel. We see examples of this in the Book of Acts with the apostles and disciples using their salvation testimony to challenge their hearers.

 

[The Revolting Man]

you can't use Scripture to justify your lifestyle however you absolutely can use your lifestyle to justify Scripture!

Damnit Megan! That’s perfect!

 

[MeganC]

Despite THE LAW Jesus healed people on the Sabbath. Didn't He?

WRONG.

His point was, and remains, "Choose life!" And, as "Lord of His own Sabbath," He made that clear.

And He was teaching that what THEY said was 'law', wasn't.

Looking what I wrote and then looking at what you wrote kindly explain to me where exactly my comment was wrong?

"And He was teaching that what THEY said was 'law', wasn't."

But we're also called to discern when the interpretation of Scripture interferes with the purpose of Scripture.

Isn't that what Jesus did in healing on the Sabbath? He clearly illustrated that the interpretation of Scripture and then the establishment of that interpretation as THE LAW was utterly nullified the moment that the interpretation and the subsequent law interfered with the purpose of Scripture.

 

[Mark C]

Looking what I wrote and then looking at what you wrote kindly explain to me where exactly my comment was wrong?

Despite THE LAW...

It was NOT 'law'. It wasn't "despite" anything that was His. As long as that's clear, I'm fine with the rest.


PS> Michael Rood did an excellent teaching years ago to REALLY illustrate that point, concerning the healing of the man at the 'pool of Siloam.' From spitting in His hand, to "making mud," to anointing the man's eyes, to telling him to "pick up and take" his stuff -- literally EVERY single explicit thing He did in that 'Sabbath healing" was a DIRECT and EXPLICIT violation of the things THEY called "law" (aka 'traditions of men,' in some Bibles) that WERE NOT, and were NOT His Instruction about Sabbath.

They had, by Rood's count, well over 1500 "commandments" concerning Sabbath at that point, as opposed to fewer ACTUAL Written commandments in Scripture than you can count on two hands.

He was "Lord of the Sabbath" - His Sabbath! - for a reason. But it's NOT, repeat NOT, because He 'violated' His own Instruction about His Sabbath in any way, shape, or form. That difference is critical. And it was what He taught.

 

[MeganC]

It was NOT 'law'. It wasn't "despite" anything that was His. As long as that's clear, I'm fine with the rest.

You're kind of stuck in a rut here and you're reading my comments with 20/20 hindsight.

Jesus didn't think it was the law. We both agree on that. But the clerics of the time interpreted Scripture to prohibit things and they declared that to be law, didn't they? Or are you also going to tell me that Matthew was wrong in how he wrote Matthew 12?

 

[Mark C]

You're kind of stuck in a rut here and you're reading my comments with 20/20 hindsight.

Hopefully we have both clarified the issue.

Jesus didn't think it was the law. We both agree on that. But the clerics of the time interpreted Scripture to prohibit things and they declared that to be law, didn't they?

That was the point.

Elsewhere (Matthew chapter 23, Mark 7, etc) - He called them "hypocrites," repeatedly, for doing so.

Or are you also going to tell me that Matthew was wrong in how he wrote Matthew 12?

You'll have to be more specific. I don't have a problem with what Matthew actually wrote, but I don't know which variant you are referring to, or whether that was rendered well in whatever translation you prefer, or not. (A good rendering will make that distinction clear as well; not all do.)

But the point remains. Yahushua was teaching about His own Instruction, including His Sabbath, "as One having Authority," and "not as the scribes." (Matthew 7:28-29)

 

[MemeFan]

Pardon me here for a moment.

In World War Two there was an Admiral named Arleigh Burke who issued an order of the day that said;

"If it's related to killing Japs, it's important, If it's NOT related to killing Japs, it's NOT important"

This was in response to military bureaucrats who were upset that frontline troops who were busy trying not to get killed by the Japanese were also too busy to fill out forms and get approvals and then route those approved forms so some bureaucrat could stamp the form and put it in a file cabinet.

For these military bureaucrats the process was more important than the outcome. Adm. Burke gave them some perspective.

Off course they are assholes in real life. Why?

Well, bureaucracy follows rule book. If other people don't do exactly according to rule book, how will bureaucrat do his job?

I just noticed. Did you noticed that Admiral Burke order is rule. Yea.....

See what work in bureaucracy does to people?

These people are soo unable to use common sense what only way to fix issue is to update their rule book.

 

[IndianaLife]

Had a lady friend suggest that I should be looking at 4chan. Consider me deeply dubious to start with. Not to mention the fact that that she tried explaining to me as part of giving me the 4chan advice that I could not be looking for a based woman. That first women would cringe at the idea of being based and that a person can not be based anyway.
Lol ok

View attachment 6251

Ugh, people like this are what I keep finding on ModernPolygamy and StiseterWives, which have been mentioned in this thread. Some pregnant women as well. Such dumpster fires of sites.

As far as your GIF, man, I loved Father Ted so much, it was such a fun show. Ardal O'Hanlon was interesting on Taskmaster too.

 

[IndianaLife]

We are more than open to suggestions (preferably in private as competitors may be browsing) if you have ideas on how we can better broaden our market while maintaining an acceptable degree of quality (or at least honesty). We are not shy about throwing a few thousand dollars at an experiment.

Anything. Been on there a year now and it's the same handful of women getting on every *week* and the bulk of them just seem like they're looking for the next in a series of baby daddies.

Have you ever tried running Reddit ads targeting the polygamy tv show subs? I imagine a small subset of those audiences are interested.

 

[paterfamilias]

Ugh, people like this are what I keep finding on ModernPolygamy and StiseterWives, which have been mentioned in this thread. Some pregnant women as well. Such dumpster fires of sites.

As far as your GIF, man, I loved Father Ted so much, it was such a fun show. Ardal O'Hanlon was interesting on Taskmaster too.

I think modernpolygamy as a site is doing a decent job but you can only work with the material that shows up to the party.
I like how one can fit their stated criteria dead bang and you not only will not receive a reply to a polite introduction bit they can not be bothered to view your profile.

Apparently all of them have an enormous amount of options and can afford to be super parsimonious.

I find it especially interesting given that a significant number that I have spoken to are proposing to come to the party with a suitcase and a hard luck story or that they are quite cavalier about the shocking amount of life baggage they have managed to accumulate. To such an extent that one would need a detailed study of the program before watching the play or simply be lost...even with being able to check chat logs for reference.

One does have to wonder about how to raise one's proverbial currency in the woman's eyes beyond flaunting money, getting chiseled over night and acting like a grandiose narcissistic douche

 

[ModernPolygamy]

Anything. Been on there a year now and it's the same handful of women getting on every *week* and the bulk of them just seem like they're looking for the next in a series of baby daddies.

Have you ever tried running Reddit ads targeting the polygamy tv show subs? I imagine a small subset of those audiences are interested.

We have never done Reddit as they don't allow advertising in any relationship oriented subreddits. Though we do have the https://www.reddit.com/r/Polygamy/ subreddit.

We used to advertise to the tune of several thousand dollars per month when we were a paid site but do not advertise after switching to being free and verification only. This was a decision made based on the time and focus that could be devoted to it, though it slows the flow of new women through the site.

I think modernpolygamy as a site is doing a decent job but you can only work with the material that shows up to the party.

This has always been the issue....for us and the competition. The market is thin. You can spin up a bunch of fake accounts, like one competitor has done, or you can let the known scammers run to fill out the ranks, as another competitor has done. ...or you can filter the junk and let things be thin, though more authentic.

I have second guessed my decision to go free, as you can't blow thousands on advertising on a free site. But, I don't have the time in the day to give it what I feel it needs when doing that. So, for now, we're dealing with a small party. ...feel free to invite your friends.

 

[paterfamilias]

This has always been the issue....for us and the competition. The market is thin. You can spin up a bunch of fake accounts, like one competitor has done, or you can let the known scammers run to fill out the ranks, as another competitor has done. ...or you can filter the junk and let things be thin, though more authentic.

I have second guessed my decision to go free, as you can't blow thousands on advertising on a free site. But, I don't have the time in the day to give it what I feel it needs when doing that. So, for now, we're dealing with a small party. ...feel free to invite your friends.




Have done so for your site as well as this one.

Think my count is around 3 and 5 respectively at this point.

As the economy and culture continue to erode, I suspect that the real numbers will go up.

Lots to say about joining an established family when it comes to safety and security.

 

[Con8]

We have never done Reddit as they don't allow advertising in any relationship oriented subreddits. Though we do have the https://www.reddit.com/r/Polygamy/ subreddit.

We used to advertise to the tune of several thousand dollars per month when we were a paid site but do not advertise after switching to being free and verification only. This was a decision made based on the time and focus that could be devoted to it, though it slows the flow of new women through the site.




This has always been the issue....for us and the competition. The market is thin. You can spin up a bunch of fake accounts, like one competitor has done, or you can let the known scammers run to fill out the ranks, as another competitor has done. ...or you can filter the junk and let things be thin, though more authentic.

I have second guessed my decision to go free, as you can't blow thousands on advertising on a free site. But, I don't have the time in the day to give it what I feel it needs when doing that. So, for now, we're dealing with a small party. ...feel free to invite your friends.

Hello MP!

Out of the three websites I've experienced. MP had to best quality, low numbers but active users that were there. Over 2+ years using your site we did not experience one scammer. The moderator was very friendly as well! We have taken a step back from seeking and are redirecting our focus. Not being on the internet dating scene for over a decade...was a wild experience.

There were no issues to be had with the websites paid or free service. The only negative thing we really experienced was how quickly most people wanted to jump aboard and how fast they wanted that ship to sail, with very little vetting. It could be a contributing factor that many of these women were single mothers in low- or no-income situations.

 

[paterfamilias]

The only negative thing we really experienced was how quickly most people wanted to jump aboard and how fast they wanted that ship to sail, with very little vetting. It could be a contributing factor that many of these women were single mothers in low- or no-income situations.

Ding ding ding we have a winna

I have experienced that as well but all bloody over in my looking. Couple of times when not looking.

There absolutely are reasons why some people are not living the best possible life. Seeming to have zero impulse control.

It is not a rip on adults with poor judgement and significant time preference issues but istarted training my son as a toddler on this sort of thing.
Do you want one toy now of four toys tomorrow sort of thing.
Some adults continue to fail that test.

 

[ModernPolygamy]

There were no issues to be had with the websites paid or free service. The only negative thing we really experienced was how quickly most people wanted to jump aboard and how fast they wanted that ship to sail, with very little vetting. It could be a contributing factor that many of these women were single mothers in low- or no-income situations.

This was the most shocking thing for me after starting the site. I will see so many profiles, talk with members along the way, and hear from them when they meet someone and decide that's it for them and want to close their account. And, of course, we've had more than our fair share of chats. It's been shocking how transactional things can seem. You want X, Y, and Z....I want X, Y, and X. So, let's start making plans for me to move in and get pregnant in the first 6 months. WHAT???

I get that people move at different speeds, but that's insane for both sides. Even with the best of intentions, finding someone (1 person, not polygamy) that really fits with you and is someone you want to wake up and see every day is TOUGH. In monogamy, what should you (as a guy or girl) think if the other person started talking about how many kids you both want and making plans to move in. ...you would run for the hills. As you should.

On the other hand, that makes a great filtering mechanism. If she's talking about how it would work if she moved in or how many kids you would like before getting to know you, run.

I take it as a great compliment that you have never run into a scammer on the site. I can't promise you never will, as we are bombarded, but it won't be from lack of trying.