# Married people- thou shalt not facebook?



## lynnie (Nov 17, 2010)

Rev. to NJ church leaders: Thou shalt not Facebook | US National Headlines | Comcast.net

This is an AP article so I didn't want to post more than the link.

I don't facebook myself, so I've no experience, but is it really that tempting?


----------



## Zenas (Nov 17, 2010)

My _only_ girlfriend is now my wife so I have no idea.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Nov 17, 2010)

I realize that his position seems legalistic. But SO MANY marriages fall apart over Facebook that I find it difficult to be critical of him. 
And, folks, I don't buy the whole "well, those were troubled marriages to begin with." Sometimes, sure. But not always. Sometimes trouble starts when folks overly confident in their own ability to be strong are slowly wooed by the deceitful sin that lies within us all.

Do I think I'm strong enough to resist all temptation to cheat on my wife? YES. But I'm also prudent enough to know that it is better to play it safe than sorry... So my wife and I are NOT on Facebook. And I recommend that everyone here follow suit.


----------



## Tripel (Nov 17, 2010)

Well said, Ben. I agree. 

I would never make a blanket statement that FB _needs_ to be avoided, but there is a valid reason to avoid it.


----------



## Poimen (Nov 17, 2010)

There is definitely some wisdom in his prohibition but, since it violates Christian liberty, I cannot support it. Had he said that he strongly advised his staff to not become members of Facebook, that would be a different matter altogether. 

I can see the temptation though: racy pictures, 'anonymous' encounters... to what might they lead I wonder? Many of things can be blocked out (or persons de-friended) but I do like the idea (in the article) of sharing your password with your spouse. Our wives may already have oversight over our web browsing (as mine does with me) but we could make it more effective by sharing more direct access to the sites that we regularly visit.


----------



## Brother John (Nov 17, 2010)

When my wife and I started a facebook account we created one together. We activated all the privacy settings and even created a name that combined both ours. We just wanted to have it for contact with friends and family so we decided to share it just like our email account. We go out of our way to remove any possibility of hiding anything. We try to keep a completely open book between each other. And others have noticed, my wife has even had an older female relative of hers ask why she would not want to have her own separate accounts. This gave my wife the opportunity to explain why we do it. We also have an internet filter that I have my wife keep the password to just to remove any temptations or accidental exposures. But on the flip side of the coin, even with all this I can still see the negatives of facebook.


----------



## Andres (Nov 17, 2010)

My wife and I both have facebook accounts, but we both have each others passwords too. I even just stay logged into my FB account so anytime my wife wants, she can look at any and all she wants to. The day I begin to feel I need to hide things from her is the day I will delete my account. We both also leave our separate email accounts logged in on our home computer too. She has complete access to all that also. Do I think my wife regularly checks my emails and FB's? No, but I feel better knowing she can whenever she wants. 
I agree with the others and see how it could be tempting and if that is an area one struggles with or is tempted by, then by all means do whatever you need to to avoid it, including not having an account. For my wife and I, it is not a problem so we both have accounts and neither of our consciences is bothered by them.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 17, 2010)

I think he is correct in some of his assessment. I don't have much to worry about. I don't have any old flames. I don't meet up with other women either. I am leery of counseling or seeking to help females for the most part. It tends to bring an emotional attachment that can be disruptive to relationships. I always encourage women to lean on their husbands. 

I facebook quite a bit. It has been a great tool in evangelizing and discussing truth. It also keeps me connected with my old friends and Pastor in Va. Beach. It has been a great blessing in my life. I just reconnected with the first Christian brother I ever had because of Facebook. We lived together in the barracks for 3 years while we were in the Navy. We lost contact with each other after he got married in the early 90s. Last Sunday we talked on the phone together for the first time since then. It was a major blessing.


----------



## louis_jp (Nov 17, 2010)

Sounds silly to me. There is nothing tempting about Facebook. If they've got that big of a problem in their church, then they have bigger issues than a particular website. Washing the outside of the cup isn't going to help.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Nov 17, 2010)

I tend to agree with Louis.


----------



## Elizabeth (Nov 17, 2010)

I use Facebook, but have only family members and a few women friends on it. It's a fun way to share quick blurbs, but I could def see it being a problem for folks if they are not careful with its use. I know my kids have gotten into a few minor kerfuffles with it.


----------



## TimV (Nov 17, 2010)

It seems most men have women hanging all over them, or at least ready to pounce. I wish I had that problem. I have (? I think?) a couple hundred friends on FB, half women, probably half married, I talk to lots of them all the time and I've never had one married woman, and only about 3 single women even hint that they'd like to get closer to me.

Must be nice.


----------



## Skyler (Nov 17, 2010)

louis_jp said:


> Sounds silly to me. There is nothing tempting about Facebook.


 
Umm.

Seriously?


----------



## coramdeo (Nov 17, 2010)

This is no longer a problem as the temptresses have been removed!
Facebook Bug Deactivates Women's Accounts En Masse, ID Required to Restore Profiles


----------



## Curt (Nov 17, 2010)

My wife and I both have FB accounts. I don't have the huge number of "friends" that a lot of folk seem to have. I have reconnected with some "long lost" family members, however. I've never been tempted. Nobody has ever attempted to seduce me. My girlfriend (wife of 42+ years) keeps me busy.


----------



## Rich Koster (Nov 17, 2010)

In response to the command to delete or resign, I would resign. Not that I believe Facebook is a great thing and we all need it, but that I am against hanging the Pharisees rope. If the leadership has such little integrity to begin with, Facebook isn't the problem. The unqualified leadership is the problem and the use of Facebook for "hook-ups" is only a symptom. 

To Titus, [mine] own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, [and] peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.


Tts 1:5	¶	For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:


Tts 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.


Tts 1:7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;


Tts 1:8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;


Tts 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.


Tts 1:10	¶	For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:


Tts 1:11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.


----------



## moral necessity (Nov 17, 2010)

The preacher is only to command what has been commanded by Christ and His Word. When one falls short of doing that, or goes beyond that, the elders should present the error before him and pray for his repentance. That said, much caution and warning can and should be preached about placing oneself near the precipice of sin. 

Blessings!


----------



## Scottish Lass (Nov 17, 2010)

Andres said:


> My wife and I both have facebook accounts, but we both have each others passwords too. I even just stay logged into my FB account so anytime my wife wants, she can look at any and all she wants to. The day I begin to feel I need to hide things from her is the day I will delete my account. We both also leave our separate email accounts logged in on our home computer too. She has complete access to all that also. Do I think my wife regularly checks my emails and FB's? No, but I feel better knowing she can whenever she wants.
> I agree with the others and see how it could be tempting and if that is an area one struggles with or is tempted by, then by all means do whatever you need to to avoid it, including not having an account. For my wife and I, it is not a problem so we both have accounts and neither of our consciences is bothered by them.


----------



## Jack K (Nov 17, 2010)

lynnie said:


> I don't facebook myself, so I've no experience, but is it really that tempting?



I haven't found it to be tempting. But it sounds like it is for a significant number of people. My guess is it depends on who your friends are, and how much you participate. I'm on facebook because it's the best way, and in some cases practically the only way, to communicate with some people. It's also nice, now and then, to see what old friends are up to. But I seldom post anything there. I'm just not that into it. And that may explain why I've not been tempted.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 17, 2010)

A pastor that lords it over his flock in such a way ought to be kicked out. 




> he is ordering about 50 married church officials to delete their accounts with the social networking site or resign from their leadership positions.


----------



## BJClark (Nov 17, 2010)

lynnie;



> I don't facebook myself, so I've no experience, but is it really that tempting?



It is apparently that tempting to some folks per the article..

However, I imagine if they had the temptation on FB they probably had issues within their marriage (lack of intimacy, communication ect.) and FB afforded them the opportunity to chat privately with the opposite sex about the problems in their marriage as opposed to seeking counsel, and talking with their spouse about their marital concerns..it doesn't even have to be marital problems they discuss, if they are talking to someone ekse more than they are their spouse..there is a problem..

But those things can happen without facebook, twitter, myspace, ect.; they happen in offices as well --but other type programs that were not mentioned such as skype, or webcam, where voice and video stream can be added could be just as harmful to a marriage if one is not careful to take care of their marriage..


----------



## fishingpipe (Nov 17, 2010)

My wife and I have separate Facebook accounts, but she rarely uses hers. She reads mine just to keep up with what her family is doing, but I don't think she has ever felt the need to "check what I have been doing." I rarely post on mine, but it is always fun to reconnect with old friends or make new ones. Most of the folks who care to see what I have been up to either read my blog or follow me on Twitter. I use those two much more often.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 17, 2010)

lynnie said:


> I don't facebook myself, so I've no experience, but is it really that tempting?



Not for me. Ironically, about the only reason I use Facebook is to be able to contact some of the younger people in our congregation. Increasingly, younger people don't use e-mail but use Facebook and will often respond via Facebook where they don't check their e-mail often at all.

In fact, I just signed up for Facebook's new messaging app as a way to contact them.


----------



## jandrusk (Nov 17, 2010)

Saying Facebook is responsible for breaking marriages up is like saying that spoons are responsible for making Rosie O'Donnell fat. I'm being sarcastic, but it's the truth. I think Christians think that removing the medium between the sin and the sinner will fix the problem It will not, they will just find another way to sin. The problem is with the heart as Christ said, ESV: Matthew Chapter 15:18-19: "But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander." Just like a gun; it can be used for good (saving someone's life from an attempted rape/murder) or as evil (as an instrument for rape/murder).


----------



## au5t1n (Nov 17, 2010)

The much bigger temptation with Facebook is the temptation to waste time -- speaking from experience.


----------



## TimV (Nov 17, 2010)

A couple people said stuff about handy communications. I post if I have extra tomatoes. I post if I need labor. My daughter posts to tell me when she'll get home. If anyone isn't an FB friend here, I'm the Tim Vaughan with the honey bee logo. Friend me.

I was thinking about the OP driving today. In the dorms at Uni I had "it" offered to me. I've had a couple lonely housewives make advances over the years on job sites (not very often!) I've heard of lots of marriages breaking up due to people meeting at the office. But facebook? I'm not doubting Ben, but I wonder if it's not a demographic deal coupled with long military absences.


----------



## Jack K (Nov 17, 2010)

Semper Fidelis said:


> lynnie said:
> 
> 
> > I don't facebook myself, so I've no experience, but is it really that tempting?
> ...



Same experience here. Without Facebook, I have a hard time getting responses from the teen and college people involved in my ministry area.

The pastor is quoted as citing the fact that many of the infidelities he got wind of somehow involved contact via Facebook. Well, given the widespread use of Facebook I wonder if this is truly unusual. Let's take the experiment back ten years. Would a large percentage of infidelities involve some contact via email? Or take it back 30 years. What percentage of infidelities involved a phone conversation at some point? Should we have outlawed email? Phones?

It may be a logical error to cite the fact that a large number of improper relationships include Facebook contact and conclude from this that Facebook _causes_ the problem. Such relationships always require some form of communication, and Facebook is a very common way to communicate today. I grant that Facebook may have more ability to reunite long-forgotten friends than did the older forms of communication. But before we became such a mobile society, people saw old flames all the time. You gotta learn to deal with that, not hide yourself from the world.


----------



## KMK (Nov 18, 2010)

From the article:



> Miller said he has spoken from the pulpit before about the dangers of Facebook, asking married couples to give each other their passwords to the site.



Is this what the pulpit has come to in America? Perhaps marriages in America are in trouble because so few are using the pulpit for its intended purpose: the Gospel.


----------



## Kim G (Nov 18, 2010)

Facebook doesn't ruin marriages, sinful people ruin marriages. Of course if you're flirting with your ex on Facebook you might end up cheating (the problem is the flirting, not Facebook, email, text messaging, phone calls, or running into each other at the coffee shop).

My husband and I both have our own accounts. We're both always logged in and cam see each other's profiles. We have nothing to hide. My husband has routinely unfriended coworkers if they have a potty mouth or post inappropriate profile pictures. Our friends are mostly the same people--family, good college friends, and church members. It's the only way for us to all stay in touch. If you can't control the way you use the medium, get rid of it FOR YOURSELF. Don't make others do the same when they don't have a problem with it.

I don't think many people over 25 (myself included) really understand what it's like to grow up in a completely connected society. I feel like I'm thirty years older than my brother who's only six years younger than I am. The PBS Frontline film "Digital Nation" is an interesting watch. FRONTLINE: digital nation - life on the virtual frontier | PBS


----------



## FenderPriest (Nov 18, 2010)

As stated above, I do not think it is _Facebook_ per se that is the problem. If people want to commit adultery, without listing them, they don't need facebook to accomplish their aim over the internet. Old flames? Sure, but again, I don't think Facebook is the problem. As in all cultural interactions, the thing required is wisdom, love, and self-control. I've never found Facebook to be more tempting than any other situation. Personally, I find it more and more annoying than anything else - why on earth do I care what everybody I've ever met is doing at every moment of their lives? As I've looked at my own heart on the issues and temptations that the internet offers, I find that I am more prone to temptation when I am less satisfied in Christ alone and less grateful for the _many_ gifts he has given me.

I think some good Gospel preaching could set a lot of these issues straight.

All that said, if wisdom for a Christian's life and walk with the Lord means they should cancel their Facebook account, then by all means, _do it!_.


----------



## jwithnell (Nov 18, 2010)

Right now, the biggest Facebook conversation going on with me and some of my friends involves discussing our church building expansion and posting pictures of it. Zowie, pretty racy stuff!

Seriously, I think a person's heart is revealed in how they approach Facebook and set up their accounts. Saying you are married and posting very little personal information in the profile is a start; same with turning on all the privacy settings. Also, virtually all of my friends are mature, reformed believers -- except for the attorney general of Virginia (we worked on his campaign, and I doubt seriously if he ever reads anything I post.)

Some people use Facebook as a kind of dating site -- posting lots of personal information, then opening up their profiles to anyone who's trolling. That's trouble! I'd be concerned about any Christian who does this.


----------



## Tripel (Nov 18, 2010)

jandrusk said:


> Saying Facebook is responsible for breaking marriages up is like saying that spoons are responsible for making Rosie O'Donnell fat. I'm being sarcastic, but it's the truth. I think Christians think that removing the medium between the sin and the sinner will fix the problem It will not, they will just find another way to sin.



I don't think anyone on the PB would suggest Facebook itself is responsible for breaking up marriages. We all admit that it is a man's heart that causes him to sin. But it is also important to use caution. While there's nothing inherently wrong with Facebook, it does provide a unique avenue to pursue sin. I'm intrigued by the UK study a year ago finding about 20% of divorces made reference to Facebook. I don't think it was a scientific study, but there's still some validity. 

Yes, I know, there are a lot of avenues to sin out there. TV is one such avenue for sin, and I applaud those who have sworn it off...but that's not to say that we all should do the same. 

I just think it's naive to simply say that people will "find another way to sin" as if those who have pursued adultery on Facebook would have pursued it another way. That's not necessarily true. That's like saying those who have gotten wrapped up in p0rnography would have done so even without the internet. Not so. 

And again, that's NOT to say we should remove everything that provides an opportunity to sin. That would be impossible. We do, however, need to take seriously our fallen state and recognize that none of us is immune to temptation. Facebook will continue to be used as a wholesome tool by many people and a tool for sin by others.


----------



## Andres (Nov 18, 2010)

Tripel said:


> I just think it's naive to simply say that people will "find another way to sin" as if those who have pursued adultery on Facebook would have pursued it another way. That's not necessarily true. That's like saying those who have gotten wrapped up in p0rnography would have done so even without the internet. Not so.



I disagree. I think this is exactly the case! If a person is unahppy in their marriage and does not have the self-control to honor the commitment to their spouse and to the Lord, then they are going to let their eyes begin to wander and eventually it's going to lead to sin. If they don't have a FB account, then they are going to flirt at the office or with the neighbor and so on. And the p0rn example is the same. For those who partake in that sin, if they don't have internet access they would simply go old school and buy magazines or movies.


----------



## Tripel (Nov 18, 2010)

Andres said:


> I disagree. I think this is exactly the case! If a person is unahppy in their marriage and does not have the self-control to honor the commitment to their spouse and to the Lord, then they are going to let their eyes begin to wander and eventually it's going to lead to sin. If they don't have a FB account, then they are going to flirt at the office or with the neighbor and so on. And the p0rn example is the same. For those who partake in that sin, if they don't have internet access they would simply go old school and buy magazines or movies.


 
I'm really surprised by your response. I could not disagree more. 
You don't have to have an unhappy marriage in order to fall victim to sin. Rather, you just have to be a sinner. 
With the example of p0rn, I just can't fathom how you can believe that. The p0rn industry is making billions of dollars it would not have made if it were just relying on magazines and movies. Why do you think p0rnography is such a bigger problem for men today than it was 20 years ago? The internet has made it readily accessible and private. No chance all of the people struggling with it now would be having the same struggle without the internet.


----------



## Andres (Nov 18, 2010)

Tripel said:


> Andres said:
> 
> 
> > I disagree. I think this is exactly the case! If a person is unahppy in their marriage and does not have the self-control to honor the commitment to their spouse and to the Lord, then they are going to let their eyes begin to wander and eventually it's going to lead to sin. If they don't have a FB account, then they are going to flirt at the office or with the neighbor and so on. And the p0rn example is the same. For those who partake in that sin, if they don't have internet access they would simply go old school and buy magazines or movies.
> ...


 
I understand your point about just having to be a sinner to fall into sin, but not every married person cheats on their spouse, even though they are all sinners. Perhaps this is for another thread, but there are people who have certain circumstances, whether internal or external, that make them more susceptible to certain sins. Maybe a pastor or someone who counsels couples would like to weigh in, but I know if I were ever counseling a man and I asked him why he cheated on his wife, I don't think him just saying, "i'm a sinner" would be an acceptable answer. It would be a correct and true answer, but there is more to it than just that.


----------



## Joseph Scibbe (Nov 18, 2010)

Sounds like a lack of integrity and accountability amongst the leadership. On the other hand I recently deleted a friend because of her trend to make her profile pictures incredibly racy. I would rather not have that in my life at all.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Nov 18, 2010)

Poor myspace. They get no more attention. =)


----------



## seajayrice (Nov 18, 2010)

did the Pastor ban booze or just Facebook?


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Nov 18, 2010)

As a young (good looking =)) guy, I can honestly say that there is temptation. But there's temptation wherever you go. Whether it be at work, school, grocery shopping, movies, etc. It's a heart issue not a Facebook issue. I mostly use facebook to keep in contact with friends, family, and Reformed friends. There is much good that can be done on facebook. I've made friends on there that I wouldn't have made otherwise. I've gotten to witness to people I wouldn't have had the chance to witness to otherwise. I've also been strengethned by the fellowship you can have with other believers. Facebook is not inherently evil. Man's heart is.


----------



## AThornquist (Nov 18, 2010)

I believe there is the _possibility_ of real temptation on Facebook. There is the issue of laziness (as Austin stated), but I have been drawn into lust because of browsing with an unguarded heart and stumbling across (pun?) pictures of girls that weren't vulgar but were sexually attractive nonetheless. The Lord is worthy of my obedience, so I quit Facebook. I didn't want that opportunity anymore.


----------



## Skyler (Nov 18, 2010)

awretchsavedbygrace said:


> As a young (good looking =)) guy, I can honestly say that there is temptation.


 
As a young and not-so-good-looking guy, I haven't run into any serious temptations on Facebook, either time management or lust-wise. Partly because I don't really use it a whole lot, partly because I'm really careful who I pick as a friend. But I know they're out there and other people have run into them.

In my opinion Facebook is kind of like the rest of the Internet. It's not bad, but bad people put bad things on it. We have to be careful just like with the rest of the world to choose the good and avoid the evil. Banning Facebook is like retreating--giving up that ground to Satan. Instead we need to stand our ground and proactively fight to make everything bring glory to God. Sure, maybe there will be a few casualties--that's why it's called war. Retreat really doesn't reduce casualties in the long run. It demoralizes, for one thing, and it also exposes your back to the enemy. Now, if you're losing people left and right, then there may well be a problem--but it's not because of the battlefield, it's because of the way you're fighting. Remember, God isn't a god of the hills that can be defeated on the plains.


----------



## lynnie (Nov 18, 2010)

If you read the original article, the pastor said that Facebook was particularly problematic because people met up with old boyfriends/girlfriends, started just talking, and then sin got in. I think if I did connect with old boyfriends the first thing I would want to ask is "how's your Mom, how's your sister, did you ever get married and have kids, etc". I can see how easy it would be to go down memory lane with the best of good intentions. Old bonds can reform easily. Like I said I don't do facebook, and I am very happily married and can't picture any problem...but, I can picture if an old boyfriend was single and lonely maybe I could be a snare for him? 

That was this pastor's stance- Facebook is more tempting and more of a snare than normal living, because old amorous connections can so easily reform. Once you are close to somebody (maybe you used to kiss and were soul mates) those people are a vulnerable area forever? I never slept around but I have heard that its best to avoid old lovers just because the bond you had was so strong. A lot of folks got saved after a teenage rebellion that was immoral...and meeting up with old flames is tempting? 

At least it is something to be aware of, and a less legalistic policy would be no old dates on facebook, as opposed to no people at all?


----------



## Idelette (Nov 19, 2010)

I don't think we can bind people's consciences and forbid them from using facebook, but I do think facebook can be dangerous and wisdom is needed. Of-course it is the heart of man, and not the means used that is evil. But, I will say this much, I have seen married men (including reformed married men) do things on facebook that they would never do in person. I think in some ways fb makes things more casual and opens doors that would otherwise be closed in real life. And what has really disturbed me is how many married men spend so much time chatting with people online (including women) rather than spending time with their wives and families. Even if the content of a relationship is "appropriate", the time spent chatting and exchanging information with other people robs your spouse of time that could be spent with them. I think married people need to guard their hearts in all areas of life, and that includes online relationships. And I don't think only married couples should use caution, I think singles, especially women ought to be very cautious! I appreciate couples that open accounts together or have access to each other's accounts. And I've always appreciated it when a married man that sends me a message, always includes his wife in the message....that is honorable in my opinion!


----------



## au5t1n (Nov 19, 2010)

I met my biological father and two sisters on Facebook.

QED


----------



## TimV (Nov 19, 2010)

awretchsavedbygrace said:


> As a young (good looking =)) guy, I can honestly say that there is temptation.



Julio, can I use some of your pictures? I wanna get tempted.


----------



## Semiomniscient (Nov 19, 2010)

I agree with those who consider Facebook a tool that can be used for good or ill. Just like most other things in the world, there is a beneficial use and that's what my wife and I use it for. Granted, there are dangers enough in becoming addicted to sites like that and wasting a lot of precious time and ignoring your spouse. But the same can be said of forums like this! However, while my wife and I have separate facebook accounts, we've had them since before we were married, and I've never been tempted to be unfaithful because of it. I can see the issue of "reigniting an old flame" argument for avoiding it, but isn't this just common marital sense? Just like you probably ought not go meet an old girlfriend for coffee privately, you shouldn't be starting up an "online relationship" either. Doesn't mean that you can't "befriend" them on facebook--for instance, I still check in on an old high school girlfriend's rapidly growing family. But we need to be sensible about things and have self-control and good judgment. I think a blanket ban is unwarranted. But some people need the discipline. And I disagree that the pastor ought to be kicked out for requiring it. We choose people to shepherd us, we should allow ourselves to be guided by this shepherd's judgment unless their leading us astray. This seems legalistic and unwarranted, but a call for firing is equally over-the-top.


----------



## LaurieBluedorn (Nov 21, 2010)

"...The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers says 81 percent of its members have used or been faced with evidence plucked from Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and other social networking sites in divorce cases over the last five years...."

I found this statement from the article to be the most interesting.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 21, 2010)

It's funny that people are condemning facebook but not the whole internet in general. If facebook proves to be a temptation through social networking (mostly typed words, not graphic pictures)....then surely (at least for visually stimulated guys) the internet in general is a much bigger tempation:

Amazon.com: p0rn Nation: Conquering America's #1 Addiction (9780802481252): Michael Leahy: Books



Addressing p0rnography Temptation in Your Church | Covenant Eyes Inc.

Protecting Church Leaders from p0rn | YourChurch.net

Straining at a gnat and allowing the big lusty camel to sneak under the tent.


----------



## LaurieBluedorn (Nov 21, 2010)

Here's another twist to the story.


----------



## Pergamum (Nov 21, 2010)

WOW!!!!!!! That *IS *a twist!


----------



## Edward (Nov 21, 2010)

LaurieBluedorn said:


> Here's another twist to the story.



Thanks for adding additional relevant information. Sounds like he doesn't need Facebook....


----------



## he beholds (Nov 21, 2010)

austinww said:


> The much bigger temptation with Facebook is the temptation to waste time -- speaking from experience.



This is exactly my problem. Which isn't to make light of it--wasting time is a huge affront to God. 
And my facebook is always up (hence my time wasting!) and my husband surfs my page instead of his since I'm more active on it--so we do have those checks in place. Though, the whole password sharing came very naturally and has never been an intentional checkpoint. I admit that I have had my husband change MY password on occasion so I could not log in!



LaurieBluedorn said:


> Here's another twist to the story.


Ick, that made me sick.


----------



## Andres (Nov 22, 2010)

Edward said:


> LaurieBluedorn said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another twist to the story.
> ...


 
sounds like he doesn't need to be pastoring.


----------



## TexanRose (Nov 22, 2010)

I've never found Facebook to be tempting in the least, but I guess there are a few safeguards I've put in place for myself without thinking much about it--the first is that I'm careful about who I add as friends, and the second is that I'm quick to "hide" friends from my news feed if they post things I'm uncomfortable with. 

I think that password sharing--to Facebook, e-mail accounts, even the Puritanboard  --ought to be a matter of routine for married people.


----------



## Skyler (Nov 22, 2010)

TexanRose said:


> I think that password sharing--to Facebook, e-mail accounts, even the Puritanboard  --ought to be a matter of routine for married people.


 
As long as you don't let wives in the Tool Shed.


----------



## kevin.carroll (Nov 22, 2010)

The problem is not Facebook, but our indwelling sin. BTW, ABC news reported this morning that the pastor that made that pronouncement is being investigated for...uh...moral indiscretions.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Nov 25, 2010)

Andres said:


> Edward said:
> 
> 
> > LaurieBluedorn said:
> ...



He stepped down. Anti-Facebook Pastor Steps Down After Vote - CBS News 

Just hope I don't see him 'come back' after a year off like Paul Shepard.


----------



## Semiomniscient (Nov 26, 2010)

kevin.carroll said:


> The problem is not Facebook, but our indwelling sin. BTW, ABC news reported this morning that the pastor that made that pronouncement is being investigated for...uh...moral indiscretions.


 
Sounds like this may have been a case of a guilty conscience? ...at least I hope it was. Sheesh!


----------

