The appearance of evil.

[Running Gator]

21 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

That's not what we are talking about.  What is being discussed is situations where  a married man and a married woman are alone together and while their meeting, say, at a restaurant is completely innocuous and innocent, it could end up fueling a rumor mill, and tarnishing their testimony, as a result.  Avoiding the appearance of evil means avoiding potentially compromising situations.

Yes, it is what we are talking about thanks to this post from earlier in this thread...

I will not ride alone with a woman, nor should a woman invite shame upon herself and me by doing so

[LadyKay]

2 hours ago, missmuffet said:

Yes, a wise choice. Especially for your marriage.

Then this isn't so much about sin but more about protecting yourself from  being accused of something you didn't do. That I think was the reason Billy  Graham had this rule. So many people too willing to lie to destroy the lives of others. That is how the devil works. 

Edited April 21, 2017 by LadyKay

[Running Gator]

1 minute ago, LadyKay said:

Then this isn't so much about sin but more about protecting yourself from  being accused of something you didn't do. That I think was the reason Billy Gram had this rule. So many people too willing to lie to destroy the lives of others. That is how the devil works. 

That is why he had the rule, and it is why so many companies now require a third person when a supervisor is speaking with a subordinate, regardless of the genders involved.

[Guest shiloh357]

10 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

Yes, it is what we are talking about thanks to this post from earlier in this thread...

I will not ride alone with a woman, nor should a woman invite shame upon herself and me by doing so

So you're assigning that to all of us?

[Kindle]

2 minutes ago, Davida said:

I'm beginning to understand why so many Bible following Christians have left WCF.

What's you stance on this topic? If I may ask.

[LadyKay]

27 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

That's not what we are talking about. 

What do you mean it is not what you all are talking about? I seen it posted here about ridding in cars with someone.  There for that is why I commented on the ridding in cars issue. I've not gotten to the restaurant issue yet. I'm not sure I want too as that seems kind of a personal thing that one needs to work out for themselves; and I am still busy talking about the car issue. You have to give me time to get caught up here when I come in late like this. 

[Guest shiloh357]

9 minutes ago, LadyKay said:

Then this isn't so much about sin but more about protecting yourself from  being accused of something you didn't do. That I think was the reason Billy  Graham had this rule. So many people too willing to lie to destroy the lives of others. That is how the devil works. 

Yes, it is about honoring one's marriage and the marriage of the other person, so that no one gets falsely accused in the rumor mill.

It is also known as the "Billy Graham rule" and it kept his ministry scandal free.   But some think it is an archaic, sexist rule that is demeaning to women.

[LadyKay]

25 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Except that neither of them were married.   So that doesn't really fit the discussion here.

I need the face palm emoji cause that is how I feel reading this. 

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, LadyKay said:

I need the face palm emoji cause that is how I feel reading this. 

This is about married people avoiding the appearance of evil.   It is not about whether it is a sin for woman and a man to be alone in the same place.  It has morphed into that discussion because some posters simply refuse to correctly frame the issue.

[Running Gator]

14 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

So you're assigning that to all of us?

No, I am explaining that the comment that you claimed was not what was being talked about was indeed a comment being talked about.