Statement of Focus for Biblical Families

[Mark C]

Both, you’ve never taught the truth as far as I can see. You’re always being cryptic and evasive because you’re too scared to be wrong or get contradicted and you’re far more interested in being sarcastic than persuasive. You’re one of the least effective communicators here because of your fragility. It’s a very common failing of men who consider themselves educated.

And also, even that isn’t going to be tolerated anymore. Which is a shame because you had gotten much better lately. You could be a valuable contributor if you’d switch to decaf and stop trying to bombast everyone in to not disagreeing with you.

No, only the arrogant, self-absorbed assholes who project their own revolting nature onto anyone who is "far more interested in being sarcastic than persuasive".

I take it back, Steve. I was disturbed, and I obviously understated the case. Orwell was right, and obviously, so was Lord Acton.

[No one] (Torah or non-Torah) should be a jerk about it. Civility and respect should be rooted in our common love for the LORD.

To Torah Observant folk . . . to be as clear as I can . . . If someone belittles or disparages you because of Torah Observance, this should not be so. . . and it will be addressed. If we don't catch it on our own, don't hesitate to contact anyone in leadership. There have been breaches on both sides of the community, this is an opportunity to get us back toward order and a beneficial witness.

I rest any case. If this is what "moderation" looks like in this "new focus" - well, civility prevents me from being honest about my reaction.

Suffice it to say...

Besides, some A$$hole would just censor it anyway.

 

[The Revolting Man]

No, only the arrogant, self-absorbed assholes who project their own revolting nature onto anyone who is "far more interested in being sarcastic than persuasive".

I take it back, Steve. I was disturbed, and I obviously understated the case. Orwell was right, and obviously, so was Lord Acton.

I rest any case. If this is what "moderation" looks like in this "new focus" - well, civility prevents me from being honest about my reaction.

Suffice it to say...

Besides, some A$$hole would just censor it anyway.

No one is censoring you. I’ve attempted to approve both of your posts calling me an asshole. I may not have worked the software correctly, I’m still learning it.

For the record everyone, @Mark C thinks I’m an asshole, at least twice more than you have seen here. Three times if you count “asinine”.

Is that good Mark? Is that a fair representation?

 

[Mark C]

For the record everyone, @Mark C thinks I’m an asshole, at least twice more than you have seen here. Three times if you count “asinine”.

Far more times still if you count things I learned to ignore. Sadly, that's evidently no longer going to be possible.

And yet some here wonder why midrash (whether they know what it means or not) so often, perhaps intentionally, it seems, descends into acrimony.

...Is that good Mark? Is that a fair representation?

It shouldn't need to be. And THAT is the problem, and it is not even remotely good.

But, hey, how will anyone else on BF, not blessed with the Blue Check, ever again know whether what they are reading is what somebody actually wrote? Or whether they should even bother here?

And that is not good, either. But maybe I'm particularly sensitive this week, Zec. After all, it looks like you might be a good candidate for FBI Director next. (How I wish there was merely "being sarcastic.")

 

[FollowingHim]

I just thought I'd point out that the above exchange perfectly illustrates why you are a poor communicator @Mark C. You previously mentioned the importance of midrash, and Zec said he didn't know what it means.

A good communicator would say "midrash means X, and this relates to what I am saying in such-and-such a way".

A completely ineffective communicator would say something like:

And yet some here wonder why midrash (whether they know what it means or not) so often, perhaps intentionally, it seems, descends into acrimony.

In other words "I have a really smart point, I'll repeat it again using the same terms you didn't understand last time, if you don't already know what I mean, sucks to be you."

You don't teach @Mark C. That was a great teaching opportunity, and you chose not to teach, but just boost your own ego. Your participation here could be so much more profitable and calmer if you decided to actually teach. You never do that.

 

[NVIII]

No one is censoring you. I’ve attempted to approve both of your posts calling me an asshole. I may not have worked the software correctly, I’m still learning it.

were you supposed to say this out loud? Can we see the list of trigger words?

You’re always being cryptic and evasive because you’re too scared to be wrong or get contradicted and you’re far more interested in being sarcastic than persuasive.

This is true. But is it cause for censorship?

Is that good Mark? Is that a fair representation?

It shouldn't need to be. And THAT is the problem, and it is not even remotely good.

But, hey, how will anyone else on BF, not blessed with the Blue Check, ever again know whether what they are reading is what somebody actually wrote? Or whether they should even bother here?

Bingo.

Who said anything about not debating and crossing swords? You’re blowing this thing out of proportion.

Am I really?

 

[NVIII]

I just thought I'd point out that the above exchange perfectly illustrates why you are a poor communucator @Mark C. You previously mentioned the importance of midrash, and Zec said he didn't know what it means.

A good communicator woukd say "midrash means X, and this relates to what I am saying in such-and-such a way".

A completely ineffective communicator would say something like:

In other words "I have a really smart point, but if you don't already know what I mean, sucks to be you."

You don't teach @Mark C. That was a great teaching opportunity, and you chose not to teach, but just boost your own ego. Your participation here could be so much more profitable and calmer if you decided to actually teach. You never do that.

This is a much better approach than censorship.

 

[FollowingHim]

Am I really?

Yes.

 

[NVIII]

Yes.

I will be tickled if you're right.

 

[FollowingHim]

I will be tickled if you're right.

I'm right. Honestly, we've done this many times before, so I know what I'm talking about. Every time we update the forum rules or moderation policies the same pattern follows. The vast majority of people welcome the change and say little or nothing about it. But there are two classes of people who react strongly to it:

1) 1-3 people who will actually be impacted by the change see that it will limit them, and kick back against it. @Mark C is today's example.

2) Another 1-3 people who will not really be impacted by the change at all panic about "censorship" and also argue against it for philosophical reasons. You're today's example of that reaction. Within a month of the change these people have generally forgotten all about it as they see it was actually a positive move or did far less than they thought it would, and they revert to the majority opinion of accepting or even welcoming it. You'll be the same.

 

[NVIII]

I'm right. Honestly, we've done this many times before, so I know what I'm talking about. Every time we update the forum rules or moderation policies the same pattern follows. The vast majority of people welcome the change and say little or nothing about it. But there are two classes of people who react strongly to it:

1) 1-3 people who will actually be impacted by the change see that it will limit them, and kick back against it. @Mark C is today's example.

2) Another 1-3 people who will not really be impacted by the change at all panic about "censorship" and also argue against it for philosophical reasons. You're today's example of that reaction. Within a month of the change these people have generally forgotten all about it as they see it was actually a positive move or did far less than they thought it would, and they revert to the majority opinion of accepting or even welcoming it. You'll be the same.

I know you've done it many times, and I know there's a third class of deplorables. Those who shake the dust off their feet as they leave, and then generally forget all about it.

 

[FollowingHim]

I know you've done it many times, and I know there's a third class of deplorables. Those who shake the dust off their feet as they leave, and then generally forget all about it.

Yes, that is true, there are always a few people who get angry and leave over any change in any direction, this is inevitable. What you may not be aware of is the number of people who have already left prior to this change, and are the reason why we are making this change. The number of people who would leave if we did NOT make this change greatly outnumbers the handful who might leave because they get their knickers in a knot over the change itself.

Trust me. If you stick around you'll see what I mean. Or you could obviously choose to leave, but in that case you'd never see that your fears were unfounded.

 

[FollowingHim]

No one is censoring you. I’ve attempted to approve both of your posts calling me an asshole. I may not have worked the software correctly, I’m still learning it.

were you supposed to say this out loud? Can we see the list of trigger words?

Just so it's clear to those reading this, this was simply Zec misunderstanding how the software worked. None of Mark's posts were flagged for moderator approval, and Zec did not approve any of his posts, all appeared here as they were without any censorship. Zec did deal with some post "reports" where posts had been flagged retrospectively by other users for moderators to look at, and all posts flagged for review were left unchanged, hence his imprecise use of the word "approved". No censorship has occurred.

 

[Edward]

I would like to point out that I am Torah observant and I would also like to point out that I probably adamently disagree with maybe 50% of the people here and that includes Nathan on certain doctrinal issues. But when I came to this forum, I came to this forum knowing that there would be people here that I would adamently disagree with, because it's not a Torah observant forum, I came here to learn about polygyny and Biblical marriage, that is the ministry of this forum and it is made clear on the Home Page. I do appreciate that there is now a Torah observant section for us to hash issues out in. And I thank Nathan and others for allowing a small little page, I concider it a privilage to have that because it isn't the focus for this ministry. I know Steve pointed this out, but I am going to point it out again,
Acts 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

I personally believe that if people... II Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
They will sooner or later come to the Truth.
Nathan I would personally like to thank you for starting this ministry so that we have an oportunity to learn about Biblical Marriage. I honestly believe that if it hadn't been for the ladies ministry of this forum @Proverbs3.5 would not be where she is today, Julie and a lot of the ladies are part of her growth, so Hats off to you ladies

 

[Michael Moon]

Calling down the wrath of God towards men who are just clarifying the focus and intent of the ministry sounds about as antichrist as a person can get. But what do I know.

Quoting Romans 1:18 is antichrist? I would indeed question what you know madam. I called the wrath of God upon the unrighteous who suppress the truth. If that is you or me or the leadership of this forum is for the Almighty to decide. But the warning remains for us all.

If you feel the need to add

But what do I know.

to the end of saying someone is

about as antichrist as a person can get.

it is probably best to hold your tongue.

Oh no one is suppressing the truth. We are focusing on those aspects of the truth that we specifically feel called to promulgate. Peter and Paul had different ministry focuses from each other. And BibFam has its own ministry focus.

I would emphasize that I said quite clearly:

This forum, while prioritizing things other than the whole truth, is still profitable - for now.

I haven't seen Torah Observance seriously censored. Yet. From my view the non-TK presence is far more adamantly against the TK presence than the reverse.

But other threads, not Torah threads, have been shut down and people pushed off the forum for the sake of not insulting or disturbing people. Two instances I can think of that were almost specifically for one person who left anyways.

My recitation of Romans 1:18 is a reminder to this ministry AND myself not to suppress the truth and to pursue truth above man's acceptance.

I have no say in the leadership of this forum. I don't plan on "quitting" even if rules are made I don't particularly like. I will leave if the forum becomes unprofitable to me or I to it.

 

[Tamara]

Quoting Romans 1:18 is antichrist? I would indeed question what you know madam. I called the wrath of God upon the unrighteous who suppress the truth. If that is you or me or the leadership of this forum is for the Almighty to decide. But the warning remains for us all.

If you feel the need to add

to the end of saying someone is

it is probably best to hold your tongue.

I appreciate the response. I am furiously taking notes as I know the glorious angels in heaven are doing as well. May the Lord of Heaven and Earth bless us all.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Alright, everyone stop hyperventilating and see how we do. @FollowingHim is right. The existing leadership has a long track record of having a very light touch. The addition of two moderators is unlikely to change that.

 

[Michael Moon]

I know that it is not a complete parallel in any way, but some similarities between where we are at and the position of the apostles in Acts 15.
19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

To the non-Torah folks, I apologize for using this situation as it probably comes across as a Torah argument. My aim is to show the Torah folk a Scriptural example of dialing it back, since they are the ones who seem the most disturbed at the present stance of the leadership here.

A very good point, although I worry about the fact that verse 21 is no longer true. Torah is no longer taught in most churches, and is seen by most Christians as no longer necessary. But this is not a church, and perhaps the care that would pertain to fellow members of a local church going forward in all truth does not pertain between all of the members of this forum.

I will repeat myself and say that I look forward to the day I can meet many of these men in person.

 

[Mark C]

I just thought I'd point out that the above exchange perfectly illustrates why you are a poor communicator @Mark C. You previously mentioned the importance of midrash, and Zec said he didn't know what it means.

Was he actually asking? Or just being...revolting?

Maybe I've just seen something else once too often. OK, MORE than once...

You don't teach @Mark C. That was a great teaching opportunity, and you chose not to teach...

The point of this thread, emphasized with insult that the 'moderators' claim will not be tolerated, and then doubled-down by you, says the opposite. TEACHING will no longer be tolerated, especially if it is on a Verbotten Topic.

Does midrash fall there? Forgive me, I got the impression, and said so, that it is no longer an option. AND THAT was what I was "teaching."

Actually, I was OBJECTING to BF becoming another 2FB. With gate-keepers and their own revolting Woke Police.

You guys seem to think I'm a stickler for 'Torah'. But I kinda like the concept of free speech, of which 'midrash' is an example.

BTW - for those that are sincere, since no one without an axe to grind asked, midrash is 'iron sharpening iron.' It's a method for teaching, interacting, and learning Scripture. It can be "adversarial" (perhaps at its best, even, but it's done for the right reason, as opposed to what we are seeing here, now.) It's Socratic questioning, it's questioning authority, it can even be playing 'devil's advocate,' for the purpose of learning - specifically about His Word. All of it. Again, something that seems to be...threatened.

Your participation here could be so much more profitable and calmer if you decided to actually teach. You never do that.

BULL$#!T. Time for bluntness, at least briefly. I have posted links to no less than a half-dozen specific teachings on Biblical topics, most marked "MEAT." in just the one

Deeper discussion (theology and more)​

category only recently. Pete Rambo was kind enough to turn one into video that was specifically polygyny-related.

Not sound bites. Not stuff that is 'just repetition of what we've heard before.'

I taught today, on Numbers chapter 30, from parsha "Matot." It will be up on Hebrew Nation Radio shortly, and my own website. I get the impression it will NOT be welcome here.

This thread was not about that. It was about what, and I quote, "isn’t going to be tolerated anymore."

Were I to teach, it would involve quoting Voltaire, and Thomas Jefferson. But I did at least mention them, perhaps assuming that some who care about "tyranny over the mind of man," might know the references.

And I've already quoted Orwell. And you made the point, within a month, they'll forget, and love Big Brother. But maybe quit posting, too.

​

 

[Mark C]

[People who] kick back against it. @Mark C is today's example.

I was kicked off the BF Board, banned, censored, left, and was asked back, more than once, before you were even here, Samuel. And I know, first hand, where it LEADS. And so does anyone paying attention to the FBI/Twitter/FB anti-first-amendment Woke Parade.

Been there, done that, have the T-shirt. And it's revolting.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Was he actually asking? Or just being...revolting?

Maybe I've just seen something else once too often. OK, MORE than once...

The point of this thread, emphasized with insult that the 'moderators' claim will not be tolerated, and then doubled-down by you, says the opposite. TEACHING will no longer be tolerated, especially if it is on a Verbotten Topic.

Does midrash fall there? Forgive me, I got the impression, and said so, that it is no longer an option. AND THAT was what I was "teaching."

Actually, I was OBJECTING to BF becoming another 2FB. With gate-keepers and their own revolting Woke Police.

You guys seem to think I'm a stickler for 'Torah'. But I kinda like the concept of free speech, of which 'midrash' is an example.

BTW - for those that are sincere, since no one without an axe to grind asked, midrash is 'iron sharpening iron.' It's a method for teaching, interacting, and learning Scripture. It can be "adversarial" (perhaps at its best, even, but it's done for the right reason, as opposed to what we are seeing here, now.) It's Socratic questioning, it's questioning authority, it can even be playing 'devil's advocate,' for the purpose of learning - specifically about His Word. All of it. Again, something that seems to be...threatened.



BULL$#!T. Time for bluntness, at least briefly. I have posted links to no less than a half-dozen specific teachings on Biblical topics, most marked "MEAT." in just the one

Deeper discussion (theology and more)​

category only recently. Pete Rambo was kind enough to turn one into video that was specifically polygyny-related.

Not sound bites. Not stuff that is 'just repetition of what we've heard before.'

I taught today, on Numbers chapter 30, from parsha "Matot." It will be up on Hebrew Nation Radio shortly, and my own website. I get the impression it will NOT be welcome here.

This thread was not about that. It was about what, and I quote, "isn’t going to be tolerated anymore."

Were I to teach, it would involve quoting Voltaire, and Thomas Jefferson. But I did at least mention them, perhaps assuming that some who care about "tyranny over the mind of man," might know the references.

And I've already quoted Orwell. And you made the point, within a month, they'll forget, and love Big Brother. But maybe quit posting, too.

​

Dude you’re all up in arms about censorship and men fighting it out but you have tried to report two of my posts in the last 24 hours. Isn’t that a little, let’s not be revolting, self contradictory? Maybe you need a little midrash?