• 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.

Suitor Sorting (Dating Daughters Thread Reference)

The contextual application for my initial post seems to be misunderstood. Since this a forum about bibilical families I had assumed the context would have automatically been established. The initial ideas are proposed for a community of practicing believers who are pursuing patriarchy and biblical headship. This excludes most church assemblies and all secular institutions. Deutoronomy 7:3-4.

I ask the question because it seems like as more people are awakening to the fact monogamy-only is not true, we will begin to see theory turn into application. Especially with what seems to be a return to tribes and communities. With the state of the world as it is and many potential calamities on the horizon, the thought behind this thread is what does this look like? How should this be handled?
 
Last edited:
frederick said:
Where I live, I've NEVER seen a church assembly with equal numbers of males and females. The assembly I'm most frequently involved with would have at least double, and possibly triple, the number of single females. Reality makes life a lot different than pie-in-the-sky-by-and-by dreams. Please understand, I'm not advocating for women to be irresponsible. But life is lived in the real world.
Click to expand...
Hence, fornication and sinning against the Creator is the end result. Pastors don't want to mediate on his torah. They get their righteousness from the world. But even if they did tell the truth - would the people accept the truth? Or would they call it a cult, and move down the street to the next 501 c3 that tells them exactly what their itching ears wanna hear?
 
This is the problem society has gotten so far away from Biblical Patriarchy and Headship that they see it as offensive and wrong. This is why women are walking around with the attitude and arrogance of I don't need a man I can do it by myself and they do not realize they are trading that for the protection and care of a covering for the lie of Satan that they don't need a cover and can make it by themselves and this is the ultimate lie of Satan to destroy the family.
 
OttoM said:
Because they know the people would leave and go on another 501 c3.
Click to expand...
Otto.... Please study up on what a 501C3 is. It is no more than a paragraph in the IRS code that defines a non profit. It defines all home worship gatherings as 501c3's. You do not need to file for that status in order for them to define you as a 501c3. Filing for that status only serves to allow people fewer issues when claiming a tax deduction for their donations.

The 501c3 status is not inherently evil. The only free speech issue is if it is used for political speech. In order to lose the 501c3 status, someone would have to report you as doing political speech and an investigation would have to be conducted. Evidence gathered and a case made that you have engaged in political speech. This is not that big a deal.....

I know how freedom lovers, like many I associate with, love to rail against the 501c3 status. With research though, I discovered that our home fellowship WAS one by definition, without ever requesting that status.

Shalom...
 
Man_in_the_Middle said:
Otto.... Please study up on what a 501C3 is. It is no more than a paragraph in the IRS code that defines a non profit. It defines all home worship gatherings as 501c3's. You do not need to file for that status in order for them to define you as a 501c3. Filing for that status only serves to allow people fewer issues when claiming a tax deduction for their donations.

The 501c3 status is not inherently evil. The only free speech issue is if it is used for political speech. In order to lose the 501c3 status, someone would have to report you as doing political speech and an investigation would have to be conducted. Evidence gathered and a case made that you have engaged in political speech. This is not that big a deal.....

I know how freedom lovers, like many I associate with, love to rail against the 501c3 status. With research though, I discovered that our home fellowship WAS one by definition, without ever requesting that status.

Shalom...
Click to expand...
Your home fellowship falls under the 508c1a exemption in the defintion of a 501c3, simply for existing.
 
BiblicalLiteralist said:
Your home fellowship falls under the 508c1a exemption in the defintion of a 501c3, simply for existing.
Click to expand...

Some folks might mistakenly conclude this is a 'good thing.' Big Brother is being nice to your "home fellowship." How kind of "Him." The truth is more insidious.

Understand what is REALLY going on here:

From Black's Law dictionary, 'exemption' is "freedom from a general duty or service, immunity from a general burden, tax, or charge...'
...'a privilege allowed by law...'

(and the definition of immunity is circular, back to 'exemption.')

The important point is that the First Amendment, aka "Article I of the Bill of Rights," says that, "Congress shall make NO law...prohibiting...the free exercise of religion..."

There is simply NO central government authority whatsoever to have ANYTHING to say our our "free exercise" of our faith in YHVH.

This is a back-door attempt to say, we DO have a way to attach our strings to your "home fellowship," by claiming we "exempt" it from our ability to tax and regulate it - but did NOT HAVE TO.

And we can always change our mind. With or without 'due process' of 'law'.

It is part of the legal ruse by which Kalifornia (et al) attempted to "regulate" 'home fellowships' -- even if they hadn't asked for State Recognition as a 'church'.


It's very much akin to the claim of "common law marriage," which is really nothing of the sort. That, in fact, is a similar way to be able to claim "we AUTHORIZED your marriage, even though you didn't ask for it..." so we still have control. And we can assert "bigamy," or take your children, and so on. (Check out satanic "domestic violence" jurisdiction claims in the majority of corporate US states. They will claim jurisdiction over a "sexual relationship" if you admit that there was sex involved, and so can control things like children, 'restraining orders,' and gun possession.)

If you don't know when "strings" are being attached, and how to say "no" (even if only before YHVH) - they are already attached.
 
Mark C said:
Some folks might mistakenly conclude this is a 'good thing.' Big Brother is being nice to your "home fellowship." How kind of "Him." The truth is more insidious.

Understand what is REALLY going on here:

From Black's Law dictionary, 'exemption' is "freedom from a general duty or service, immunity from a general burden, tax, or charge...'
...'a privilege allowed by law...'

(and the definition of immunity is circular, back to 'exemption.')

The important point is that the First Amendment, aka "Article I of the Bill of Rights," says that, "Congress shall make NO law...prohibiting...the free exercise of religion..."

There is simply NO central government authority whatsoever to have ANYTHING to say our our "free exercise" of our faith in YHVH.

This is a back-door attempt to say, we DO have a way to attach our strings to your "home fellowship," by claiming we "exempt" it from our ability to tax and regulate it - but did NOT HAVE TO.

And we can always change our mind. With or without 'due process' of 'law'.

It is part of the legal ruse by which Kalifornia (et al) attempted to "regulate" 'home fellowships' -- even if they hadn't asked for State Recognition as a 'church'.


It's very much akin to the claim of "common law marriage," which is really nothing of the sort. That, in fact, is a similar way to be able to claim "we AUTHORIZED your marriage, even though you didn't ask for it..." so we still have control. And we can assert "bigamy," or take your children, and so on. (Check out satanic "domestic violence" jurisdiction claims in the majority of corporate US states. They will claim jurisdiction over a "sexual relationship" if you admit that there was sex involved, and so can control things like children, 'restraining orders,' and gun possession.)

If you don't know when "strings" are being attached, and how to say "no" (even if only before YHVH) - they are already attached.
Click to expand...
like I said,... "I know how freedom lovers, like many I associate with, love to rail against the 501c3 status."

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top