Welcome. I would imagine anybody with 10 people in close living proximity could start denomination. perhaps you are that guy.
-
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.
Introduction - MarkH from west central Indiana
- Thread starter MarkH
- Start date
Perhaps many of us should be "that guy".
Some of us already are.
I'd be interested to hear your story. Please DM me.
Welcome, Mark.
The denomination called "Churches of Christ," which is probably the most liberal Protestant denomination among those that still assert the Resurrection of Christ, is generally, at worse, apathetic about polygyny. Many individual Church of Christ locations, while not promoting polygyny, are very accepting of its practice.
Perhaps that could even be an applied implementation of the mission statement of Biblical Families.
Do you mean "United Church of Christ" or "Church of Christ?" Church of Christ is no salvation without baptism, no musical instruments and must have Lord's Supper every service. The United folk accept LGBTQ people.
Yeah; I think it's UCC.
And it would be a trade-off; you'd be surrounded by liberals, most of whom would probably be clapping themselves on the back for 'tolerating' you.
Yes, I have a local (southern Colorado Rockies) fellowship, certainly non-501c(3) and thus non-'denominational,' that is very much "All of Scripture, as Written" oriented. You (and anyone else here, who probably already knows that
would be welcome to join us for Sabbath services and teachings, they're on-line afterward as well:www.markniwot.com has most of the link info (Paltalk, Discord, podcasts)
And I also do a lot of radio shows, from daily news and a "Torah-Teachers Round Table" to a constitutional/economics/Scripture hour that reflects my primary ministry, "Come out of her, My people." Those are all up on Hebrew Nation Radio:
www.hebrewnationonline.com
which is not explicitly 'marriage oriented,' and individual hosts no doubt vary, but most that I have talked to about the topic (which is quite a few) are, by necessity, CONSISTENT in their view of Scripture. Polygyny thus follows.
Welcome Sir.
Perhaps check out Straightway Truth Ministries. I believe they may have a branch in Indiana.
Welcome Mark! I love what you are thinking. I am wondering what sort of names we could come up with for denominations that support polygyny.
What many FLDS people do, is reach out to the LDS community, and draw members in from there. I attend a Southern Baptist church close to where I live, so while I disagree with them on their understanding of marriage and the role of headship for the husband, I agree with nearly everything else, and I have found individuals who I am able to influence, as the Lord opens opportnities for me to do so. I know truthbearer.org purports to have a list of ministers, and purports that when they reach "critical mass", the ministers will be able to speak as one voice, but unless you a a paying member, you won't see the list, and word of mouth hasn't gotten around very well for that list. We at Biblical Families are pretty open about who we are and where we are from, but trying to put together a map, would be an arduous task.
EDIT: Hmmm....the name FLDS has me thinking we could have FSBC, Fundamentalist Lutherans, Fundamentalist Pentacostals, Fundamentalist Non-denominationalists, etc. The only one that would not work, would be Fundamentalist Independent Baptists, because IFB is already taken.
What many FLDS people do, is reach out to the LDS community, and draw members in from there. I attend a Southern Baptist church close to where I live, so while I disagree with them on their understanding of marriage and the role of headship for the husband, I agree with nearly everything else, and I have found individuals who I am able to influence, as the Lord opens opportnities for me to do so. I know truthbearer.org purports to have a list of ministers, and purports that when they reach "critical mass", the ministers will be able to speak as one voice, but unless you a a paying member, you won't see the list, and word of mouth hasn't gotten around very well for that list. We at Biblical Families are pretty open about who we are and where we are from, but trying to put together a map, would be an arduous task.
EDIT: Hmmm....the name FLDS has me thinking we could have FSBC, Fundamentalist Lutherans, Fundamentalist Pentacostals, Fundamentalist Non-denominationalists, etc. The only one that would not work, would be Fundamentalist Independent Baptists, because IFB is already taken.
Last edited:
Thank you, Daniel. I was a SBC preacher's kid and after a military aviation career, my first ordination was SBC. The Faith and Message statement from the SBC is directly in opposition to PM. I'm sure they were aiming it at the LBGQT community but it is there nonetheless.
The truthbearer guy appears to have tried to go it alone because you never see any others associated with him. That and all his sites are so outdated as to appear to have died of natural causes.
The truthbearer guy appears to have tried to go it alone because you never see any others associated with him. That and all his sites are so outdated as to appear to have died of natural causes.
@blessedwith2 is from Illinois.
I don't consider the SBC Faith and Message statement to be in opposition to PM (though most Baptists probably would see it that way). I'm a member of an SBC church, and in good conscience hold to both the BF&M 2000 and the lawfulness of polygyny.
Here is what the BF&M 2000 says about marriage.
"Marriage is the uniting of one man and one woman in covenant commitment for a lifetime."
I completely agree with that. Marriage is the uniting of one man and one woman. It's just that God permits men to participate in more than one of these covenants at the same time.
Jacob was united one to one with Leah. Jacob was united one to one with Rachel. Leah and Rachel were each individually and separately united with Jacob. Leah and Rachel were not married to each other.
Elkana with Penina and Hannah was the same thing.
David with Abigail, Michal, Ahinoam, ect. was the same thing.
That just seems to be the clear teaching of Scripture.
So, @Bartato: Do You believe the state Messengers of your state SBC associations would, in a majority, vote in agreement with you on the biblical interpretations? How about the national convention?
My statement was not based upon your or my understanding of the scripture. True each SBC church is autonomous but they agree upon group votes for how the Convention speaks. Any church out of line with the convention may be excommunicated.
My statement was not based upon your or my understanding of the scripture. True each SBC church is autonomous but they agree upon group votes for how the Convention speaks. Any church out of line with the convention may be excommunicated.
If the F&M 2000 meant to explicitly prohibit polygyny, then they should have added something like "the exclusive union of one man and one woman", or "the exclusive monogamous union of a man and woman".
Of course the Bible doesn't teach that. The Bible obviously treats polygamy as legitimate marriage. Therefore, I would not affirm such an addition.
I agree that the messengers probably intended to prohibit polygamy in addition to homosexual unions, and that any SBC church openly affirming polygamous unions would be disfellowshipped.
I wouldn't shed tears if my local church left the SBC, or was disfellowshipped by the SBC (or by the Northwest Baptist Convention that we here in Washington belong to).
The SBC is looking pretty "woke" these days anyway, being badly compromised by the fear of man, cultural accommodation, feminism, statism, and critical race theory/neomarxism
That's not likely at any rate as the pastors/elders of my local church are far less enthusiastic about polygamy than I am (and I am somewhat less enthusiastic about it than many here at Biblicalfamilies).
I'm not all that Baptist anyway
. I was raised in the Wesleyan tradition in the church of the Nazarene, which I left when I came to hold a more Reformed/Calvinistic view of the Faith. I might say that I lean "Reformed Baptist", but much more strongly Reformed than Baptist.
You won't find such a denomination, and I would not suggest starting one for the primary purpose of being plural marriage friendly. The Kingdom already has too many denominations, the Body is already divided too much, and we don't solve this by dividing even further. This is honestly just one issue - one that has strong implications for our theological understanding, and is of critical importance for those few people who actually find themselves in a plural marriage, but still just one issue. If you gather together a load of people who agree on polygamy, as we do here, you'll find they disagree on almost everything else (e.g. Torah). Even this Biblical Families ministry could not found a denomination, as once we got past doctrine point 1 (plural marriage is acceptable to God) we'd fight over every other point and would never manage to even write a statement of faith! And if you did succeed the world around would consider you a weird cult, which would severely curtail your fellowship with other believers and place hurdles in your way of impacting wider society with the Gospel.
I would suggest instead continuing to live in your local churches, whatever denomination they may be, in order to maintain fellowship with other local believers. Then take whatever opportunities God puts in your path to help individuals. Be the church member who will surprise everyone by advocating for acceptance of a plural family that turned up at the church. Be the one who will advise a man who is having an affair to actually take responsibility for his actions and both of his women.
But do all of this from a position of honour - as someone who is respected by the church for their wisdom and integrity, not already rejected as a heretic before you have any opportunity to do any good. Gain a good name, and then leverage the respect you command strategically when the need actually arises. This will give you far greater ability to have a positive impact than running away would ever allow you to have.
Of course, if you're kicked out, and nobody will fellowship with you, go ahead and start that house church!
I would suggest instead continuing to live in your local churches, whatever denomination they may be, in order to maintain fellowship with other local believers. Then take whatever opportunities God puts in your path to help individuals. Be the church member who will surprise everyone by advocating for acceptance of a plural family that turned up at the church. Be the one who will advise a man who is having an affair to actually take responsibility for his actions and both of his women.
But do all of this from a position of honour - as someone who is respected by the church for their wisdom and integrity, not already rejected as a heretic before you have any opportunity to do any good. Gain a good name, and then leverage the respect you command strategically when the need actually arises. This will give you far greater ability to have a positive impact than running away would ever allow you to have.
Of course, if you're kicked out, and nobody will fellowship with you, go ahead and start that house church!