What is Force? - FORCE - Love-Not-Force

"What is force?"

....as in meaning the question, "What is FORCE polygamy?"

This question was an EXCELLENT question asked on the Friends and Fellowhelpers email listserv.

Addressing this excellent question would indeed be of benefit for all of us, no matter where we are in growth or learning about what love-not-force is "all about".

From all the multitudes of email-posts of discussions we've had about love-not-force on the Friends and Fellowhelpers listservs, we have seen that FORCE polygamy would be something that would FORCE polygamy on a first wife. Yes, yes, we're being sort of silly here for using the same term to define the term!
LoL

It must also be said that the concepts of FORCE and of love-not-force go far beyond only the topic related to Christian Polygamy, but rather to the larger picture of one's entire atttitude and heart-walk. But for the sake of brevity and for simplicity, this writing here will stick here only to addressing this matter in terms of only Christian Polygamy.

It is important for us to have insight into specific practicality, doctrinal positions, and rhetoric which clearly help us to quickly identify the FORCE view of polygamy when we see it.

Understanding what FORCE polygamy actually is, in rhetoric, doctrine, and practicality, such understanding is indeed important for us, so as to not get confused as to what true love-not-force is. For surely, we do have to beware of not being mistaken (or even possibly deceived where applicable) by perhaps some concepts which really, if analyzed more closely, would reveal themselves as being "FORCE in love-not-force clothing", the idea of FORCE polygamy views disguised as if those ideas are supposedly being love-not-force. (Whether such things be done or spoken unwittingly or with deceitful intent, we still have to be aware of this, either way.)

Obviously, there can only be one definition of the TRUTH BEARER Vision of love-not-force, as that of being as it was laid out and defined by this ministry, and particularly by the Founder of this organization itself, the mortal source through whom the term has come to us.

And actually, as this ministry has indeed been defining what the only true definition of love-not-force really means, we have also been defining the definition of FORCE polygamy, as an obvious consequence of partly defining what love-not-force is NOT. (As such, these terms are exclusively defined here at this ministry, and if anyone would seek to obfuscate such definitions, then such actions of obfuscation will be self-revealing as such re-definitions will not match what is defined here instead.)

From some of the many, many discussions on the Friends and Fellowhelpers listservs, we have discovered and noted some examples of FORCE rhetoric, doctrine, and practice.

To list out just some of those, here are some as follows:

RHETORIC examples:

"God 'called' me to marry another and my first wife's negative reaction is because she is being disobedient to my authority."
(Of course though, that claim ignores that God is fully able to fulfill any actual "calling", and would not need a man to force any "calling". God does not need a man to "force his Ishmael", but rather would that a man trust His Promise to "bring his Isaac", as THAT is faith. We see such an example in Genesis 16,17, and forward, for example.)
The seductively clever obvious truth which says, "God is able to do what He wants and I as a man must obey God, without regard for what others think, including my first wife." That true statement is then followed up with the additional false claim, "And I tell you God has 'called' me to do this thing, even though my wife refuses."
(Of course though, that claim ignores that God has also pre-ordained that there are some things which God would never so "call", such as unilateral covenant breaking, for just one example, per Romans 1:31b,32. And the assertion ignores the fact that it is requiring others to TRUST the word and claim of a man who CANNOT BE TRUSTED because he has and is unrepentantly breaking his covenant.)

DOCTRINE examples:

"Romans 1:31b,32 does not apply as a matter of covenant breaking doctrine, because Leviticus 5:4-5 says one can repent of their oaths."
(Of course though, that ignores that oaths/vows are different from multi-party covenants, that Jesus told us not to make oaths/vows, while saying one should only say Yes or No to the terms of... covenants, not adding more to the ocvenants by additional acts of oaths/vows, in Matthew 5:33-37. It also ignores the call to not break the "golden rule" of Luke 6:31.)
"Romans 1:31b,32 does not apply to binding me to the 'forsake all others' clause because my making that covenant was 'outside the will of God'."
(Of course though, that ignores how God held the Israelites to their covenant with the Gibeonites, which was surely made "outside the will of God". IF EVER THERE WAS a covenant made "outside the will of God", it was the Israelite covenant with the Gibeonites! That covenant with the Gibeonites was even breaking covenant with YHWH and their doing so directly disobeyed the COMMANDMENT OF THE LORD Who had told them THREE TIMES not to make such a covenant. All as per Joshua 9 and 2_Samuel 21, despite Exodus 23:32-33[20-33], Exodus 34:10-15, and Deuteronomy 7:1-2. Despite being commanded three times of God, and despite that doing so also broke covenant with God Himself to do so, even so, YHWH held the Israelites bound to that covenant with the Gibeonites, punishing them for three years for breaking it, as seen in 2_Samuel 21!)
"I repented of breaking the covenant and so now, as my wife must forgive or has said she has forgiven me of breaking our covenant, I am now free."
(Of course though, that ignores the fact that the covenant was made under the terms "for life", as in using such a clause in the covenant as, " 'till death do us part", and that therefore the forgiveness of one single breach of the covenant does not free the man to breach it again. Such sin of covenant breaking this way would be the "sin which keeps on sinning" with each new act, just as it would be for a woman in the sin of committing adultery. Namely, even if a wife commits a sin of adultery (which means, "woman that breaks wedlock", in the ancient texts), and even though she repents, and her husband forgives, she, as a believer wife married to a believer man, is still bound to her husband. Romans 7:2-4. Just because she repents of committing the sin of adultery, that repentance does not then "free" her to then go sin the sin of adultery again. Likewise is the sin of a man in covenant breaking therewith committing likewise kind of a "sin which keeps on sinning" if he continues to do the sin, of unilaterally breaking his life-long covenant ---until or unless his wife gives her freely-given, uncoerced GENUINE ASSENT to re-negotiate the terms of the covenant so as to willingly delete the "forsake all others" clause. But otherwise, it is a binding covenant, and covenant breaking is another "sin which keeps on sinning" if one continues to do the same sin.)

PRACTICAL examples:

Having a "secret affair", to just FORCE the issue.
(Of course though, the deceitfulness of having a "secret affair" ignores the doctrinal matter that deceitfulness is cursed even if in the supposed name of being a supposed "work of the LORD" in Jeremiah 48:10, Romans 3:7, and the matter of "all liars" in Revelation 21:8. And this also ignores the obligation of honesty required of 1_Corinthians 7:4, that the man's flesh "is not his own" because, by copulating with another, he has exposed that other woman's own set of bodily fluids to his wife's body [in one flesh] ---not to mention again, Luke 6:31.)
Having the attitude of thinking: "If the first wife leaves when the second wife is brought in, then that idea is 'ok' because at least, the second wife won't be a 'problem' when a third wife comes into the family".
(Of course though, the sheer lovelessness toward the first wife in THAT is so clearly outside the the doctrine of Ephesians 5:25, as well as even Exodus 21:10, for that matter.)

From our having discovered and noted these above rhetorical, doctrinal, and practical examples of unrepentant FORCE polygamy in all our past discussions, it would seem that the overall picture of FORCE polygamy is simply put as being, NOT LOVE.

That is, FORCE polygamy is self-ISH-oriented whereas love-not-force is self-LESS-oriented. And true love according to Christ is indeed as being selfLESS, as the maximum extent of love is defined as laying down one's life for another, as we see in John 15:13. Thus, FORCE polygamy is indeed NOT LOVE, in it's way of operating toward the first wife. Hence, indeed, it is highly appropriate and applicable to use the opposite phrase of "force-not-love" when discussing this, as many dear ones among us who understand this have done! (For clarity sake, the reason why we generally try to simplify it in writings though is simply because most of us when discussing things would likely otherwise make the mistake of mis-writing the order of the words in the phrase by mere typo mistake, such that we would perhaps occassionaly end up saying "love-not-force" when we would have otherwise intended "force-not-love" and/or vice versa. And so, in order to prevent us from ever making that very likely mistake, the Founder recommends using the term, FORCE, just to protect ourselves from making that kind of mistake. Even so, the term, "FORCE", is indeed very excellently understood as "force-not-love", indeed! :-)

No doubt, FORCE is force-not-love, as it simply is not about LOVE per the way as Christ so loves the churches, and GAVE HIMSELF FOR US ALL who will believe in Him.

Now, mind you, we compassionately understand that any man can make mistakes, just as any of us are vulnerable to making any error or to falling into sin. And of course, we can understand how some men, without their having had the benefit of yet learning all these deeper mature principles of the TRUTH BEARER Vision of love-not-force, may have stumbled and erred along such similar lines of FORCE thinking in their past. We preach the TRUTH BEARER Vision of love-not-fprce for their sake indeed, as well, in trying to help them as being better equipped in how to walk more powerfully in the Spirit of the Lord. Yet, the difference, though, is that upon their subsequently learning of love-not-force, they then become without such excuse even that much more, IF they would thereafter defiantly go on still with the examples of FORCE polygamy rhetoric, doctrine, and practice. This is not said with any condemnation, but only as reality. Of course, it might take some time for some to finally receive the full revelation of it all (as it IS rather intense and comprehensive, no doubt!). We know that Romans 10:17 tells us that "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God", so, we understand that, for some, receiving revelation might have to come "by hearing, and hearing, and hearing" before such ones are able to fully receive it. So, we remain in love as we continue to preach in faith. We remain walking in.... ....love-not-force.

As was said from the beginning, the principles of love-not-force go far beyond only the matter of Christian Polygamy, but actualy go to the heart of true Christian walking in Christ, walking in true LOVE unto all, which, of course, includes love unto one's first wife. And as such principles DO go beyond that, it is also necessary for all of us to truly ever be walking in such love-not-force even unto those who would stumble into the errors of FORCE polygamy. We must never (and can never) apply FORCE to try to FORCE such ones to grow and learn of the ways of love-not-force. That kind of idea is just silly, of course! What we must instead do is simply walk in love-not-force.

FORCE fails.

Love never fails.

(We know that from 1_Corinthians 13:8a!)

And that's why we can understand that love-not-force, as it is TRULY defined, is simply and purely outright Christian doctrine for how we are to walk in Him!

Alleluia Hallelujah!

We praise Him Who has so loved-not-forced us that He laid down His life for us while we were so wretchedly unworthy and disobedient!

O the selfless love of the Lord!

And O that we all would walk with such selflessly giving profound Christ-like love toward all.

It is prayed that this has been of some help, if not a blessing as well, for any and/or all of us who have been able to read this here, as being in response to a truly excellent question.

May the love of the Lord Christ Jesus, Yehoshua ha'Mashiyach, be with us all.