Saturday, November 27, 2010

Sex In Marriage...Is Polyamory Permissable?

A Must Read If Your Have Been Taught That You Must Be Baptized In Order To Be Saved
A 9pg. PDF of this powerful teaching is available upon request

On To Our Featured Story:
Heb. 13:4 ~"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."
 When The Sin Of Polyamory Overtakes A Pastor & Wife
Pastor Cedric Miller and his spouse Minister Kim Miller made the news recently when Pastor Miller first, decided to go on a anti-Facebook campaign, requiring all his church leaders to delete their accounts due to increased instances of marital infidelity among individuals that he was counseling. According to him, most instances of  marital infidelity over the last year or two shared a common thread in that they were inspired in some way by Facebook. Initially, I thought...OK, that's well and good as I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook quite intentionally, because there does seem to be a difference between what some individuals display and what they say...Posing in provocative clothing and in soft-porn style poses may be a way that some find to share the "good news" but it is highly inconsistent as far as I'm concerned. Then, yes, I have seen some "old flames" get reunited by way of the service. After all, the pastor was was trying to keep people from reverting to their "pre-Jesus" past. However the rest of the story is what caught my attention. Come to find out that this pastor and his wife willingly engaged in a three to four way sexual tryst (that is group sex orgies) regularly for an extended period of time while they were yet saved, sanctified, and leading the church after about 13 years of ministry. In other words, this was before Facebook and after his pre-Jesus past...

To summarize, the pastor (Cedric) said that 13 years into his 23 year pastoral ministry, he and his wife and another couple, also members of the church, indulged in closed door orgies. According to him at times he would watch this particular "church assistant" (adding a whole new ungodly dimension to that title) have sex with his wife and and eventually he would join in. The male church member's  spouse (yes, he was married too) was also encouraged to watch the encounters from time to time, and from what I gather participate on occasion. These orgies took place sometimes after bible studies, Sunday services and Monday nights either before during or after the game. (I suppose)
According to Pastor Cedric's sworn testimony, after much time and many orgies had taken place, there was a sudden break in the action. That came When the pastor's wife (Minister Kim) found that the church assistant (the man with whom she was having regular extra-marital group sex) was also having sex with other women in the church, she then became alarmed and wanted the affair and sex to cease. Again, according to sworn testimony, pastor Cedric initially had no idea why his wife wanted to stop the affair. He recounted:
"My wife found out about it and she just wanted nothing to do with what was going on with us,''..."And I didn't know what it was for awhile. And it wasn't till, as the other women came out publicly, that's when I found out about it. So, at first I didn't know why she just didn't want any part of it.''
Now, that's amazing and this whole story is so fantastic, it's unbelievable, but the other part that amazes me equally as much is that 1- they did all of this while pastoring a congregation without missing a beat, and 2- They (Pastor Cedric) acts as if it really doesn't matter because it's all in the past and everyone has been through something. Plus, they've supposedly already discussed this with their church and the church is OK with everything that has happened.

We will discuss what actually happened here and further discuss sex within marriage in the rest of this article.
Confidence/No Confidence
True to his word, Pastor Cedric addressed his congregation during a recent Sunday service asking that the congregation reaffirm their confidence in him as a leader stating that he would gladly step down if what he and his wife had done was a "covenant breaker" for the membership. he also stated that some time ago, he had briefed the church on the situation and provided intimate details of the affair and the extent to which he had fallen, so the church was not receiving "new news" regarding the situation.

"Can Anybody Tell Me What's Wrong With This Picture?"

That was one of the most comical parts of what was otherwise a very sad movie, "Falling Down" The question is right on point for me however.

What Happened In This Case?

Pastor Cedric and Minister Kim, (bless their hearts) were overcome by the sin of Polyamory. Unlike its sinful relative polygamy, polyamory does not take anyone home, does not need to spend the night, does not need to meet in bars or street corners, and does not need to marry. Unlike it's sinful cousin adultery, polyamory does not allow secrets and demands those involved to be totally open with one another about their sexual desires and times when orgies will take place.  And unlike its freaky and sinful uncle "swinging",  polyamory requires a mental and emotional attachment and commitment to those engaging in the orgies. Polyamory only needs 1 commitment. That commitment is that of a pledge to inform, be silent, and faithful as long as the relationship exists.

Now, understand this...Polyamory, hinges on the fact that a person becomes so passionate and emotionally drawn in that he/she cannot remain and stay faithful to their spouse, but yet demands faithfulness from those involved. This is utter confusion. Polyamory is a sin and a ticking time bomb ready to happen. It is a cycle that will only lead to mental and physical frustration, abuse and all other kinds of social and sexual ills.

When we hear Pastor Cedric's accounting of the events, it provides all the signs of polyamory. In fact his wife Kim, when she finds out that the "church assistant" is engaged in other affairs, breaks it off. This is a classic sign of being Polyamorous. From the participants standpoint, there is a risk of disease and if someone is having sex with someone else outside of the group, then those that are left inside feel like they have lost control and are exposed. There is also a strong emotional attachment to those with whom sex is shared. In this case Pastor Cedric was so permitting  that he was initially totally oblivious to that fact that his "assistant" had violated the rule of polyamory. All of it was and is evil, but he was simply gettin' his freak on.

You Mean This Has To Be Taught In Church?

Pastor Cedric and Minister Kim are not alone. Unfortunately there are some in the modern church that have inclinations such as theirs and have taken Heb. 13:4 totally out of context to justify their actions and behavior. The modern assumption of the verse is that "whatever a husband and wife decides to do in bed, or whomever they agree to invite to their bed, is OK with the Lord".  The assumption is that as long as there is "agreement", then God is pleased. Therefore, we have a lot of church folk making "agreement" with one another and struggling with various aspects of their marital sexuality and certain other practices which they have incorporated into their time of sexual intimacy.

Now, I know that this may be a shameful thing, as some of the readers have experienced these things or have had sentiments such as these presented to them within the context of their marriage and relationship. Some have felt embarrassed to talk about these things and don't know who to turn to for advice or really what to do. Some simply took the road of silence because they didn't want certain information in the wrong hands, because you never know who the next Rev. Dr. Leon Lonnie Love may be and what opportunity that he may be looking for. 

Still others have wondered what are the limits of this scripture? I won't be graphic in this post as I don't believe that to be necessary to get the point across. However, I will say that any activity that violates the word of God, creates shame, and that involves more than the 1 man and 1 woman that God has created and united by lawful holy matrimony to enjoy sexual activity, is outside of the boundary of "undefiled" as recorded in Heb. 13:4 and is rejected of God.

No matter what agreement a husband and wife may come to, we are to be and remain holy before God. Group sex or sex with additional partners, is not authorized by God, no matter if husband and wife are in 100% agreement. In fact there is no agreement of sin that God honors within marriage or ministry. Neither is any other relationship outside of the bond of holiness and that which is pleasing to God acceptable in his sight.

Sexual Objects

This leads to another conversation. A conversation regarding sex within marriage. What a husband should know is that a wife is not a sexual object, even within the context of marriage. A wife is not a prostitute neither is she a whore. I have counseled individuals who know only part of one scripture as it pertains to marriage..."Submit!"...Most times that only has to do with sexual submission. The bible however requires that the husband and wife submit to 1-God, then to 2- one another and that is not simply sexually, but mentally, emotionally and within the boundaries of a healthy contextually defined marital union.

Ephes. 5 21-25 ~ "21-Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. 22-Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23-For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24-Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25-Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;"

On the other hand a wife should not use sex as a reward for good behavior. Sex is not a training technique to be used as a doggie biscuit. Holding out simply for the sake of "making" one do what one wants done is also ungodly. It is true that a man may live longer and have overall better health if he has sex more regularly! However, a man should know that sex doesn't begin in the bedroom. It sometimes begins in the laundry room by doing a few loads of clothes or as a result of changing a diaper or making one's self available to do something that takes the pressure off of a certain situation. Sex is complex and a special part of a marital relationship and is not meant to be used and or abused, but should be valued by both husband and wife.

Sexual Complications & Misunderstandings

One thing is sure, there must be communication for sex within marriage to work. I have counseled families and individuals experiencing sexual dysfunction.

Situation 1:
The husband was highly upset and felt driven to find other sexual partners because his wife was frigid, cold and unfeeling about sex. She on the other hand had some reservation because he had previously been unfaithful and had provided no assurance that he was seeking to prove that he valued his marriage sexually. It was a real conundrum.

In the initial meeting we found that there were quite a few inaccurate perceptions and expectations on both sides of the issue. For the wife, she was able to come forth with the fact that sex was unusually painful. This is called dyspareunia. This was her primary discouraging factor. When the husband would make his demand and she rejected it. He wouldn't stay engaged long enough for her to share the reason with he simply would blow up and blame her for being insensitive to his needs and both would clam up and go their way.

She found out that he had been faithful to his marriage and that his desire was for her, but they had not taken the time to have a deep and sincere talk regarding the issues involved. She of course saw a physician, received treatment. In the process she and her husband began healthy dialogue and learned how to use their intimacy to show greater compassion and concern for one another. 

Situation 2:
In another situation, a husband noticed and felt that his wife was not responding to his sexual advances. He felt that his wife simply didn't want him sexually and this caused him to place his time in exploring other forms of sexuality such as pornography and ultimately masturbation. Neither of these practices  facilitate healthy sexual interaction or spiritual or moral purity.

She felt that her husband was uncaring and only wanted to use her as an object for lust within the context of their marriage.  What eventually came out was that she had experienced sexual abuse and was violated at an early age by a family friend. Although her virginity had not been taken she was fondled and used as the object of a man's lust. This was the problem. When her husband approached her in an overt sexual manner,  she shut down emotionally. He would view it as a personal attack against him didn't try to reconnect.

When this was discovered, there was a show of compassion within the marriage like never before. The husband never knew what his wife had experienced and she had never shared because of shame. Their marriage moved to a new level of friendship and love as a result of the exposure of this information and soon sex became more frequent and a non issue.

For me, Pastor Miller's situation is not about whether God can forgive individuals for their sin. Yes he can and he does. That is without question. He has forgiven me of my sins and yes, I have even sinned since I've been saved....MY LAWD!...So I thank him for his forgiving power and grace.

What this brings up is the deeper issue of the integrity of the marital relationship and also what the church allows and endorses by silence. In this case, it was a secret sin and one that wasn't exposed to the church, so the church cannot be blamed for being blindsided, however the pastor is under a greater obligation to walk upright with a heart right before God. Having polyamorous or other sexual inclinations within pastoral ministry, deserves the utmost attention, care and sincerity in getting sin out of the heart.

As a leader, if we're wondering why the power of God is not enveloping our congregations, could it be because leaders are abusing the word of God, have not repented, or taken the time to purge themselves of evil and sin? We must consider this. When church leadership falls or fails to maintain their holiness, sanctity and place before God, there is a problem of epic proportions. Sin multiplies and has many more victims than the individuals committing the sin themselves. Beyond forgiveness, I'm sorry, but there is an issue here that is not so easily skirted around.

We have become desensitized to the egregious nature of sin because it has become so prevalent within society in general. We have become accustomed to seeing pastoral indiscretion and sins on the front page of news papers, TV, blogs and other places where news information is passed. All of those things, I believe, has caused us to look at this situation and miss what really happened.

I hope that this is not one of those times and i sincerely hope that someone's marriage is blessed as a result of being able to talk about real issues and establish boundaries that previously did not exist.

1 Pet. 1:13-16 ~ "13-Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; 14-As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: 15-But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; 16-Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy."

APP Article:
Pastor Banned Facebook Had 3 Way Sex



ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — A pastor who barred church officials from using Facebook, saying it can lead to adultery, is temporarily stepping down from the pulpit following his admission that he engaged in a three-way sexual relationship a decade ago.
The Rev. Cedric Miller made worldwide headlines last week when he urged congregants at his Living Word Christian Fellowship Church in Neptune, N.J., to drop their Facebook accounts because he believes the social networking site facilitates affairs.
Days later, Miller offered to step down after The Asbury Park Press reported on a 10-year-old affair of his own involving a three-way sexual relationship with his wife and a male church assistant.
On Wednesday, Miller told The Associated Press that he would be "taking some time off" following a church vote Tuesday night on his status as senior pastor. He said he will resume his pastorate "eventually."
He says church members gave him a vote of confidence, subject to some restrictions he wouldn't list.
The church had no immediate comment.
Last week, Miller had ordered about 50 married church officials to delete their Facebook accounts or resign from their leadership positions. He also suggested that married members of the congregation do likewise, and said he was deleting his own account.
Miller said he made the request because 20 couples among the 1,100 members of his flock had run into marital trouble over the last six months after a spouse connected with an ex-flame over Facebook.
At Sunday's service, Miller, with his wife by his side, asked church leaders to support him in light of his own affair.
"For any pain that my past mistakes has caused you, I again ask for your forgiveness," the pastor said from the pulpit.
Facebook has not responded to messages seeking comment.


  1. Disgusting--I just read in the newspaper today that the "pastor" will only be gone for 3 months and then will return to his position.It tells alot about the man that he would even return.If you think I am being unkind or judgemental, take a moment and reflect on the kind of behavior this "pastor" and "first lady" engaged in for a significant period of time.

  2. I added that update from the AP to the article.

    What is 3 months going to do? It's been 10 years. I've heard him say he was sorry, but is he denouncing his actions as a pastoral leader? There is much more a dimension here and sum it up like Anon said, "DISGUSTING"

    This is a mess.

  3. God Bless you Pastor Burnett,
    While I do agree that the actions of the Pastor and his wife were sinful and certainly not the behavior a Shepherd and his wife should engage in, where is the forgiveness of sin? Let's be real, from the accounts of the story he never denied that this indeed happened or made any excuses for their actions. Truly the bible is the believer's guide to how we shall live and govern our lives. 1 Corinthians 6 clearly speaks to this type of behavior. Everyday we wake up new mercy is given unto us all and we are given another chance to get it together. I believe this occured 10 years ago, what has been their lifestyle since then? what if God uncovered those things that we think people don't know about? If God does not forgive where shall we all be? 18How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
    Jude 1
    19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
    20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
    21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
    22 And of some have compassion, making a difference:
    23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

    I am prayng that as we enter a new decade and the coming of our Lord draws near, we seek God with our whole heart, pray and intercede on the behalf of the leaders who are confused,fearful, and caught up that they will be set free.

  4. Are you serious? Why is this man pastoring...The real reason that his congregation is having affairs is not because of facebook, but because the members are manifesting the spiritual disease that has trapped the leadership in this church. The spirit you sit under as your leader, is going to be the one that you will contract. For example, Jealous pastors birth jealousy in members--I'm a testament to that.

    How could you sit up under such a person with this kinda loose morals? I mean even unsaved people know this is wrong.

    And let me just say, you can get demons from any unlawful sexual activity. And I got one I'm trying to whip now, who talks in his own voice with my body--they are difficult to get rid of.
    There are rules that restrict all of man's behavior--rules given by God and set into place when the earth was created. For instance, the Lord just showed me last week, that my student had some anal sex demon--I was like, God if this young man has a spirit because of this, you mean anal sex is a sin?
    Yes, because this is an unlawful activity whether you're married or not. I can't imagine the nature of the spiritual stronghold this couple has.

    Thanks for addressing this marriage bed is honorable among all scripture. I first heard bishop weeks and juanita bynum, use this scripture on youtube to justify cussing in the bedroom; and I thought it was just the craziest thing I ever heard--Weeks saying that there is no sin, if it is in the bedroom...but now I see that this is type of thinking is common in some quarters of the body of Christ...blasphemous and by the way, the Lord also showed me this--all sexual infidelity leaves you ripe open for spiritual infidelity adn vice-versa. If you'r doing nasty stuff, you become a ripe candidate for heresy, doctrines of devils, and lots of stuff.
    Honestly, they need to stop and close their church down. Paul says in Ephesians, it's a shame to even speak of things that are done in secret--and we are talking about church folk here

  5. I really don't have anything to say on that particular issue, but I will say that I don't think the bible teaches polygamy as being a sin. I say that because God never specifically said a man must have one wife only. If we look at the David & Bathsheba story when Nathan came to him he mentions that God would've gave him many more wives to the ones he already had.

    In addition to that, monogomous marriage is more of a European construct than anything else. Most blacks in this country and the caribbean trace their ancestry back to West Africa. In Africa, polygamous marriage was the norm and we blacks knew nothing of monogamy until we came in contact with Europeans.

    Also you get into questions of biological fitness, which is a whole post in and of itself. It's just that monogamous marriage best fits a Western european society, which we happen to live in.

  6. Anon December 3, 2010 9:58 AM,

    So, it's OK for black folk to have more than one wife because we were "created" that way???

    Monogamy was an invention of white folk???

    Please expound.

  7. Dear Anon,

    Polygamy is never sanctioned in the bible, but was it a part of the near eastern culture in that time of antiquity, yes. If you notice every polygamous relationship in the bible lead to trouble and anquish. God allowed this because he knew that heart of man was hard and lustful, notice his covenant laws to Israel, they were not to do this which would make them not like other nations, but the Lord decreed that if you did, you were to take care of the other wife as much as the first (look at especially the situation between Jacob, Rachel and Leah). And yes the NT echoes the same one husband one wife.

    As I said earlier God allowed this, as he allowed divorce, was he for it, of course not, but once again the wicked nature of our hearts cause many things. And as for God's rebuke of David, he was exposing the shrewd, calculating and hypocritical nature of the king's heart during this period in his life, not actually saying I would've given you more wives.

  8. God never told Israel they werent to have multiple wives. They couldnt take a mother and daughter as wives, but polygamy was never talked against. The king wasnt supposed to multiply wives. Monogamous marriage may have been the ideal, but polygamy was still allowed. If a man died w/o leaving a son, his wife became the wife of his brother, that was ancient hebrew law. In war, if an ancient hebrew man saw a woman he liked after capturing a city, he was allowed to take her as a wife (unless they were given orders to kill everyone and everything).

  9. Anonymous~December 3, 2010 8:53 PM,

    Now I must be reading things incorrectly because it looks like you are making the statement that because we don't see literal prohibitions against certain behavior that the behavior is acceptable. Right?

    Therefore by you not seeing prohibitions against cocaine, meth, and glue sniffing those practices would be acceptable both societaly and for Christian practice???

    Then since we're dealing with sexuality, same would go for masochism or even having sex with dolls...certainly the bible doesn't address those sexual arrangements either right?

    What you are offering is a fundamentalist view of scriptural interpretation which in and of itself is not a bad thing, but when viewed as you do is the worst thing imaginable, because you distort the character of God and the nature of his command and reconstruct a righteousness that fits the letter of the law as you understand it but is totally contrary to the spirit of God and his word.

    1- God's word is not just letter. It is spirit and it is life (John 6:63) In other words it is both applicable to changing times and it is more than the construction of the grammatical context on parchment. In addition Paul says that the letter of the word kills (law), but the spirit gives life (2Cor. 3:6)

    I say all that because when you say things like this:"God never told Israel they weren't to have multiple wives. They couldn't take a mother and daughter as wives, but polygamy was never talked against."

    Then you have totally missed the spirit contained within the law of God.

    Every marriage of section of scripture where multiple wives were mentioned or even multiple sexual relationships there was trouble and some of that trouble exists today. Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon to name a few, are individuals who had more than one wife and who's violation of the plan of god in that are damaged not only their families but damaged the community of God.

    God used those as examples as what NOT to do. Jesus when dealing with the issue of divorce, which GOd allows because of the hardness of the hearts, comes back and condemns divorce and in the process straightens out the understanding of the structure of the family union. Here what he states:

    Mt. 19:3-6~"3-The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4-And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5-And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6-Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

    You'll see this same conversation in Mk. 10:2-9.

    see 2

  10. 2(con't) resuming from my previous statements:

    What has he done? Taken care of two things in one instruction. 1Affirmed that there are regulations against divorce and that the Pharisees were misapplying scripture to condone their sin and 2- reaffirming the correct biblical intent for marriage that 2 people, 1 MAN and 1 WOMAN: not 1 man and 2 or three or four or five women were to be 1 flesh...He is applying Gen. 2:24 and affirming that condition to be the condition of God honored marriage.

    We see the outgrowth of problems scripturally from the violation of GOd's word.

    Another point you introduced is that God somehow endorsed these actions by being silent. However God wasn't silent. 1- He made a way of covering the sin and pointed toward the sin with the sacrificial system. That system couldn't sacrifice enough lambs and bulls to keep people clean (Heb.10:3) because sin was more deep than an external issue. 2- Jesus writes a deeper law on our hearts and makes a sacrifice to free us from the power of sin...which includes the SIN of polygamy.

    Now, you're left with this...either you'll persist in saying that polygamy is acceptable because you don't see chapter and verse: in doing that you will also say that God endorses other things we know that is inspired by the sin nature such as slavery etc. In doing that you will and have utterly changed the nature of God into the nature of men and also violated the scripture in doing so.

    I could deal with the rest because you offer so many erroneous statements in such a short period, but I'd like to hear your response, BIBLICALLY, to this argument first.

    Thank you.

  11. Im not saying anything that is not in the bible. You can't say God said something is wrong, yet say he "allowed" it because its what society wanted at the time. At the time, society also loved to worship multiple gods. He didn't "allow" that, so I don't see how anyone can say he "allowed" it because it was the custom at the time. It's a black and white issue, it's either right or wrong. There is no specific verse in the bible you can cite to say polygamy is wrong. You can quote other verses and speculate, but nothing definitive.

    As things are going today, homosexuality is fast becoming "normal" in society. What if 100 years from now, when it is the norm for men to marry men, will someone then say God "allows" it because it's what society wants? No one would use that argument for homosexuality so I don't see how you could for polygamy.

    The argument for God allowing something because its what people wants makes no sense unless you are willing to say God would allow anything people wanted.

    Read 2 Samuel 12:8. In that verse, God admits he gave David his "masters wives". Why would God punish Davids unbelief, his murder, his adultery and leave out his polygamy?

    Im not changing anything, Im taking it for what it says. The bible also says God is the same yesterday, today and forever.

  12. Anon,

    You said:"Im not changing anything, Im taking it for what it says. The bible also says God is the same yesterday, today and forever."

    This is what I'm talking about and you're in the same condition of the Pharisees that i referenced and that Jesus spoke to in Mt. 19 and Mk. 10 Same condition different subject.

    now the SCRIPTURE is clear the God given command was what...1 MAN and 1 WOMAN...Gen.2:24...

    That is undeniable. Why not quote that to begin with? Simply because you interpret 2 Sam. 12:8 as card blanche for polygamous marriages??? That's a ridiculous interpretation.

    You use the judgement of David, in which he is being judged for the sexual sin of adultery of making 1 woman, that wasn't his wife, his wife and killing her husband and interpreting this verse as an "endorsement" of his sin:

    "7-And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; 8-And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things"

    You believe that this is an endorsement of polygamy??? Who are "his master's wives"???

    Let me help you, the "master's wives" were the daughters of Israel who were preserving themselves for husbandry and the Lord's service. They were virgins of which David could have had any pick of the lot. Their commitment was to God...

    This scripture is in no way is an endorsement of polygamy. And an argument from silence, such as you suggest, is ineffective. David ended up with about 4 wives if memory serves me correctly and his house was in total disarray as a result. Favored son killed, children raping one another and killing one another and a host of other issues.

    Yet you have "nerve" to contend that God somehow endorsed this??? Sir this is a travesty and your position is nothing more than a travesty and endorsement of what God calls a SIN. You cannot possibly know or be familiar with the nature of God.

    Yes, without naming it along with thousands of other unnamed SINS, God calls polygamy a sin because of what it is, why it is, how it is, and what it produces. Jesus points to the arrangement as not being what God endorses and after all Jesus IS the WOWRD is he not?

    This arrangement among others not only violates the word of God, it confuses and reduces men to animals and offers no benefit to society and or humanity. The bible is replete with examples of people doing what you endorse and handling the word of God without knowledge as you are doing.

    Sir your interpretation is bogus and thoroughly refuted on multiple grounds. This argument isn't even close.

    Boy, I do say the devil is real and his deceit never ceases!

  13. Brother Harvey,there is nothing in the Bible that is clear on polygamy. Nothing at all. That is not me siding with polygamy, that is me stating the obvious. Clearly you ignore historical elements of the Bible. And those that disagree with your interpretation of scriptures are ridiculed by you.

    Your ego weakens your message.

  14. You make the mistake Brother Harvey of looking at this issue through today's lens. Polygamy was quite normal for the wealthy and was not viewed as a sin. Not condoning, just speaking the truth.

  15. Rev-rund,

    You already know that you have proven yourself to be biblically illiterate and lacking in interpretive skills...That's for certain...

    The problem is that you think that because a practice was common that God endorsed it...That's a ridiculous statement to make...

    I say this...dissociate Rev. from your name, repent, and please get saved. You do God a disservice to clergy with your strained and inapplicable interpretations. I'm sorry that I have very little if any empathy for you because you're a charlatan by choice. A straight apostate...

    Now since this is your belief, answer this for me...why don't you take up the struggle for polygamists like you do for homosexuals?

    All other replies from you will be deleted until you answer and address that singular question.

  16. One thing that's intolerable is biblical illiteracy from one who is proud to hail themselves as clergy. It is utter confusion.

    Now, once again Palmer overlooks everything that God states in his word regarding the subject and creates his own brand of morality on the subject.

    From his statements he further believes that God's morality is established by the community...In other words, if people do it, and there;s no chapter and verse, then God says it's OK?

    That's the biggest farce of an argument from any sort of scriptural reason that I've ever heard...

    We will be entertained by you no further Rev-rund

  17. If polygamy was ok, then why are there so many comparisons to marriage and our relationship with Jesus Christ?

    I am sorry, I don't have chapter and verse in front of me right now, but I could not help but comment.

    We are called the bride of Christ. Hmm, if I recall properly God is a jealous God, and we are to serve him only. We can not serve two or three gods and still be the Bride of Christ.

    This is just a small glimpse of how God views marriage. We are to interpret the Word by the Holy Spirit. He teaches us both the spirit and the letter.

    Pray, Read, then pray some more for the CORRECT meaning of God's word and understanding of God's nature.

  18. Thank you Marcia.

    Excellent comment. Welcome to the site and the board.

    Chapter and verse not necessary when one knows the word of God as you do, and the nature of God through his word. It's called the holiness of God which obviously some have set out to distort.

    Thank you

  19. Let me help you, the "master's wives" were the daughters of Israel who were preserving themselves for husbandry and the Lord's service. They were virgins of which David could have had any pick of the lot. Their commitment was to God...

    My question is "How can you prove this????"

    We can't just randomly go throughout the bible and say "well we follow this today, we don't follow this today, that verse over there was for back then, this one over here is for today." There has to be a rhyme and reason, otherwise, it makes no sense at all.

    Im not saying polygamy is the best way to go, but to say the bible says it's a sin, thats going a bit far. Yes davids house was in disarray, but it wasnt exactly because of polygamy. He couldve had all those children by the same woman and still had the same results as far as the behavior of his children went. So that doesnt prove anything.

    Furthermore his childrens behavior was a result of his episode with Bathsheba. It was a punishment. Polygamy had nothing to do with it.

  20. Anon,

    Look, I've allowed comments before but no more...follow the rules from this point on. Above the commentary box I say, Anonymous commenters please place your name or a handle within the comment if possible.

    Now IF you are literate, please place your name or handle with the commentary, if not, sit on the sidelines and continue to learn. Thank you very merch!

    You made this statement regarding the "master's wives":My question is "How can you prove this????"

    1- CONTEXT of scripture and spiritual purpose and application of it. Who was David's Master?

    Two meanings:

    A- King Saul (as in predecessor) and his house all of Sauls power kingdom and authority. In fact here the language is FIGURATIVE as David never took any of Saul's wives to himself.

    "I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives"-The phraseology means nothing more than that God in His providence had given David, as king of Israel, everything that was Saul's. The history furnishes conclusive evidence that he never actually married any of the wives of Saul. But the harem of the preceding king belongs, according to Oriental notions, as a part of the regalia to his successor."[Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary]

    B- God and his kingdom (1 Sam. 13:14) God gave David the pick of the daughters of Israel who were dedicated to the Temple and the Lord's service.

    Phrases and words:

    "and thy master's" ~ 'adown (aw-done') from an unused root (meaning to rule); sovereign, i.e. controller (human or divine) -- lord, master, owner. Compare also names beginning with Adoni-.

    "wives" ~ 'ishshah (ish-shaw')
    irregular plural, nashiym {naw-sheem'}; a woman

    There is a dualistic context to scripture. The scripture itself states as much as it states that he was given the "House of Israel and Judah" This included the temple virgins dedicated to the service of the Lord. Hophni and Phineas were guilty of defiling the temple (1 Sam. 2:12) and the women dedicated to the Lord. (1 Sam. 2:22) So we have proof that they existed and that this was a practice and these women were, in essence, the Lord's.

    see 2

  21. 2

    Now since WE KNOW that David did not take the wives of Saul and that the prophet not only spoke naturally but also spiritually, what's your problem in understanding the full and complete concept of what God was communicating to David in this scripture?


    Now, please prove your point scripturally as I have appealed to scripture and the nature of God which supports my case thoroughly and adequately in previous comments, which you have not addressed AT ALL.

    Polygamy was a SIN under the Old Covenant. We see GRACE and MERCY in dealing with mankind just like God did with divorce. GRACE and MERCY revealed in the OT by God not allowing the sin to destroy them further.

    In addition the Polygamy WAS the problem in David's house. Tamar and Amnon were half brother and sister.(2 Sam. 13) and the full brother of Tamar, Absalom, Killed his half brother Amnon.

    This split family was problematic psychologically, emotionally and all. They were damaged by the complete arrangement as it was all done is sin and allowed by God's MERCY and GRACE not his endorsement.

    You Sir take the argument to another level and claim that God's grace and mercy, in this situation and many others that could be named, was a sign of his endorsement and that's not the case. Polygamous arrangements were done out of sin even if that sin was common to the day in which it was done...

    Prov. 14:12~"There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death."

    As stated from Genesis the command of God was that ONE man and ONE woman would be husband and wife. Just as Jesus (THE WORD ~ Jn. 1:1) reaffirms in Mk. 10 and Mt. 19

    Now Deal with that...any of it and we'll be making progress otherwise repetition of an adequately refuted argument will not be allowed.

    Thank ya!

  22. Now, some may ask why I am being particularly to the point with these two or perhaps one commenters...It's because they are promoting a Spiritual Principality that is pertinent to the deception that has gone out into the world today,and I recognize it as plain as day. The Lord has allowed me to see it. This isn't the first principality that I have dealt with in ministry and they are readily revealed.

    Since the sin in the Garden, which was based on an argument from "God's silence"

    Gen. 3:4-5~"4-And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5-For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

    ...Until the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness in which the devil himself used an interpretation of the word to tempt Jesus...

    Mt. 4:6-7~"6-And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 7-Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." This is repeating Ps. 91:12

    We see the devil craftily using God's words to try to create doubt in the hearts and minds of God's people by trying to twist and turn the word to create utter confusion.

    Here we have individuals that say they know the bible, endorsing polygamy because it was a cultural norm and asserting that God was by virtue of that a cultural God.

    This type of deceit opens the door for all kinds of cultural sins now doesn't it? If God was endorsing of polygamy because it was a cultural norm, then all we have to do is change the culture to sin in whatever manner we would like it to and say that "God endorses this"...

    Here in is the trick revealed, to shift the standard of righteousness from a holy god to the righteousness of men and make the image of GOd after men and mankind.

    This is especially poignant in dealing with sins of clergy in this society. This is a principality that has attacked the church in effort to deceive and destroy and bring others into their confusion to challenge the righteousness of God, but it is revealed here and on this site.

    These ministers are those as Paul instructed:

    2 Tim. 3:1-9~"1-This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2-For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3-Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4-Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5-Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6-For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7-Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8-Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. 9-But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was."

    Now the key here is understanding the devilish works of Janes and Jambres who were Pharaoh's magicians who stood against Moses and Aaron producing their magic to counter the miracles of GOd.

    That principality was destroyed then and it will be destroyed in modern times.

    Principality of evil...I SEE YOU!

  23. You are hard, rude and disrespectful to those that expose your lack of Biblical knowledge

    You say polygamy is a sin but do not provide us any scripture. You block before I can respond.

    I hope folks see what kind of person that you are and they run from your faulty advice and biblical knowledge. You twist words, I stated that I have endorsed nothing.

    No. You say that polygamy is clearly a sin in the Bible but it is not. Am I saying that God condones polygamy? No what I am saying is that you cannot back up your argument.

    Throughout the Bible you will find multiple proof of polygamy in a positive sense.

    Judges 8:30 - Gideon
    1 Samuel 1:2 & 13:14 - Elkanah
    1 Chronicles 2:46-48 - Caleb
    2 Chronicles 24:3 - Joash
    Song of Solomon 6:8
    Jeremiah 3:6-10 -
    Jeremiah 31:31-32 -
    Matthew 25:1-13

    Look I am not condoning are saying polygamy is okay, clearly it is illegal today but it was not illegal once upon a time, nor was it listed as a sin. That is your interpretation.

    I will not be back to your blog. You have been exposed, you have shown that something is not right within your ministry.
    God can take care of that. Check your ego my friend.

    Minister Gerald Palmer,MSW

  24. I see what you are saying, but the problem is is that you are taking some verses literally and taking others figuratively and for no real reason.

    I agree monogamy is the ideal way, but I guess the simple question is: Why was something allowed by God yesterday but the same action a sin today?

    The problems in Davids house was not the problem of polygamy but the result of Davids episode with bathsheba (remember the sword shall never depart).

    And lets forget David. What about Abraham. We all know about Ishmael and the problems that caused, so what about the other wives and children he had? Its just too many men to name in the bible that were polygamous yet were still considered righteous in Gods eyes.

    No one ever repented (or had to) for being polygamous.

    Dillema is, there are no scriptures against polygamy but there are scriptures supporting monogamy.

    If you say God does not promote unrighteousness, but God "allows" polygamy to be practiced (which you say is unrighteous) which is it?

    The church says polygamy is wrong but the bible doesnt conclusively state that.

    BTW, jn 1:1 talks about the trinity. In Mark 10 Jesus does indeed talk about monogamous marriage. Yes he does. It still isn't saying anything as far as polygamy goes so it is irrelevant to the discussion of polygamy. It's more relevant to a discussion of divorce. Matthew 19 also talks about divorce, not polygamy.

  25. FM,
    You seem to be struggling with the fact that the bible can hail the men for their good works while they could yet performs certain acts and display heir sinful nature. That should be no conflict, those type of things are biblical and only serve to display the grace and mercy of God. Look at Abraham. He is hailed as being the father of the faith but yet we see that he must have had at least one breakdown to get with Haggar??? Was that a sin? Absolutely it was. Started problems that exist to this day. Was he a man that believed God? Absolutely. Did he otherwise sin? Yes especially when he lied to the Egyptians regarding Sarah being his sister.
    Why does the bible not mention Abraham’s sins along with his exploits of belief? Because of Grace and Mercy. That was the foreshadowing of the mercy that we would find in Jesus.
    So to realize that polygamy was a sin which was practiced and which God had mercy on men should not be shocking and in that context that’s why his mercy endureth forever!
    You asked, "Why was something allowed by God yesterday but the same action a sin today?"

    God showed his MERCY and GRACE as revealed through HIS son. God allowed a lot of things, but his nature towards sin didn't just start or appear in time. It would have to be constant if he were eternal.

    What God calls sin didn't just start or begin to be sin. It was always sin if it was contrary to the nature of God, God's design and intent it was a product of sin. Sin and evil is simply a corruption of good not an absence of it. Marriage was good, polygamy was a convention of sin and the sin nature of men and mankind. Therefore there is solid biblical basis to call it SIN.

    As stated I believe that you confuse what God allowed with what he endorsed. BTW: repentance covers all sins, known and unknown. The blood of Jesus covered the sin of polygamy even for those who didn't know it was a sin. That's shouldn't be surprising to find out.

    If God is unchanging then his views of sin and what is sinful cannot and does not change. It is impossible for him to do so without violating his nature. Therefore is he allows something and covers humankind with grace and yet requires that humankind repent and come under grace and truth in Jesus it is because sin is and has been present.

    see 2

  26. FM,

    Now, are you to say that slavery is NOT sin? If slavery is a human condition and product of the fall of mankind then how can it escape its label? Could the condition of slavery be considered good? Could God allow slavery to save a nation of people and further his truth? YES!

    God does not condemn slavery by chapter and verse, now does he? Although he makes certain provisions differently than surrounding cultures there is no "thou shalt not have slaves". How do we know that 1- it's wrong and 2- it's sinful in it's most basic sense?

    The answer:

    1- By examining the nature and character of God as it pertains to the condition itself. That condition is inconsistent with his nature as revealed through scripture although he makes certain provisions because of man's sin and the pervasive nature of sin.

    2- By examining the instances of slavery and looking at what the result and outcome is of it. In EVERY case God delivers a people out of bondage and slavery. However sin causes them to become bound again and again.

    God meets Moses on Sinai in Ex. 3 and says he's seen the "afflictions" of the people and has come to deliver them. Are we to say that slavery was not one of those afflictions?

    Ps. 34:19 says that the righteous have many “afflictions” but the Lord delivers out of them all...

    Now if slavery as not an “affliction” and tantamount to a condition that God is not pleased with (for the oppressed and the oppressor) then why is God consistently delivering individuals from the condition of something (slavery) that is good?

    Same rationale for polygamy. The statement of God against it as a practice is clear. Polygamy only serves to complicate, take away and mess up and confuse things. Every scripture you can point to the same result. God bring life and abundant living, the situation of polygamy does not do that in any circumstance.

    Let's take apostate Palmer's little list that he says displays "polygamy in a positive sense"

    He says: Judges 8:30 - Gideon

    First of all that scripture is only a statement of fact. The real is this, Gideon died and utter HELL broke out. The people didn't like his children. Scripture says, "35-Neither shewed they kindness to the house of Jerubbaal, namely, Gideon, according to all the goodness which he had shewed unto Israel." and his son Abimilech, was overtaken in idolatry went back, made a deal with the devil and killed all his brothers (Judg. 8:30) God judged Abimelech for his actions also.

    What's the message? The family problems associated with polygamy, ambition and sin in general. A host of issues, but it was split family in turmoil. As stated God in no way endorsed the method and sin by which he had all these wives.

    There's a David reminder isn't there? There's turmoil and confusion and murder amongst all these children by different wives...tragic result of POLYGAMY.

    He says:1 Samuel 1:2 & 13:14 - Elkanah

    Now isn't that funny? The whole reason Hannah was driven to God was because she was MOCKED by her husband's OTHER wife.

    V.6- "And her adversary also provoked her sore, for to make her fret, because the LORD had shut up her womb."

    How is that POSITIVE??? If he has only ONE wife who is there to mock this lady??? NOBODY!

    He says:"1 Chronicles 2:46-48 - Caleb
    This only records historical facts and no judgment is made of what if anything good happened. One thing we know is that with very few exception none of these children contributed to the plan of salvation and most were only mentioned in this chapter and verses. They disappear.

  27. 3 Con't

    He said:"2 Chronicles 24:3 - Joash"

    Now here we have a young boy who does not choose polygamy, he has it thrust upon him for political and social reasons. Here's what Gill says about it:

    And Jehoiada took for him two wives,.... Not for himself; he had a wife who was aunt to King Joash, and he had sons who were concerned with him in anointing him, 2 Chronicles 22:11 and was now upwards of one hundred years of age; but for the king, when he was at an age fit for marriage, he advised him to marry, and proposed wives to him, whom he thought would be agreeable; for, observing what mischief was done both in church and state through Jehoram's marrying Athaliah, he was desirous of preventing any such disagreeable marriage; and as the young king was in all things guided and directed by him, so he was in this; and no doubt they were good women he pitched upon, and proposed to the king; one of them was Jehoadan, 2 Chronicles 25:1, but the name of the other we know not: "and he begat sons and daughters;" how many is not said, nor do we read of the names of any of them, but of Amaziah who succeeded him."

    Now arranged marriages were a custom and not a sin, BUT is this positive? Joash didn't make this choice for himself.

    I'm still looking for an instance where polygamy is portrayed by God to be "positive" as the good rev-rund says, while he calls me "exposed" and "biblically illiterate"...LAUGHABLE!!!!

    Next up he says, Song of Solomon 6:8

    He takes the poetry of a love song and says that it portrays polygamy positively...By the way, this is from a man whom GOd TELLS not to marry strange women and he has the can't help it's and next thing you know he's worshipping at the IDOLS of many of his wives and concubines...which God warned him against from the beginning.

    Still looking for positive

    He says: Jeremiah 3:6-10 -
    Jeremiah 31:31-32"

    Here God is using prophetic language discussing the condition and state that he was married to Israel and Judah. Now the "polygamy positive" thinker wants us to believe that God views himself as having had 2 wives (Israel and Judah) therefore God was a polygamist also.

    This is an absolutely LOONY assertion, suggestion and would be interpretation of scripture.

    I would advise that one first read the bible to understand the structure of the nations, why God spoke as he spoke and spend some time studying prophetic language and how it was used...

    Nothing positive here as Israel and Judah were described as being whores in need of redemption. Polygamy WAS NOT being hailed in any way or manner.

    Then he says:Matthew 25:1-13

    Using the PARABLE of the 10 virgins to say that that the bible presents Polygamy as being positive???

    This has no basis as this simile was only that, a parallel. This wasn't any sort of endorsement to polygamy. He's talking about the Kingdom Of God not the kingdom of this world or lust and drawing a parallel.

    His is a fruitcake interpretation of scripture!

    Even then, 5 were left...they were unwise!

    So what we have with polygamy is clear, it is a result of sin.

  28. finally:

    It is not God's standard or ideal neither was it EVER God's standard or ideal.

    God allowed it as well as other sins because man had no covering for sin other than sacrifices which were ineffectual and only pointed toward a redeeming savior.

    The condition of Polygamy was a display of God's mercy and grace.

    Very little good if anything was added to society as a result of polygamy.

    Jesus uses a teaching on divorce to not only talk about how divorce, as it was being applied by the religious leadership of the day was wring, but he also set forth the original pattern and declaration of marriage in Gen. 2. He RESTATES the command of Genesis of ONE man and ONE Woman and he handles other issues.

    This was significant for Matthew and it is called a literary technique if inclusio, which Matthew specialized in and often used. He connected the OT to the NT sewing up certain concepts and what was revealed in Jesus. He does this quite often in his gospel. He did this with the concept of the family, marriage and divorce in this one narrative.

    The Jew, the target of Matthew, would recognize this right away, but our eyes need help to see it...

    I just didn't know how much help, so forgive me for being too assuming.

    Now Rev-rund, calls me biblically illiterate, yet offers nothing to support his argument and gives some type of flim-flam, "Look I am not condoning are saying polygamy is okay, clearly it is illegal today but it was not illegal once upon a time, nor was it listed as a sin."

    Fruitcake, fruitcake, fruitcake and flim-flam!

    God's word is his word no matter whether something is illegal or not. The legality DOES NOT matter.

    I have backed up my assessment that polygamy is SIN thoroughly biblically. We need not chapter and verse to do so. We have the record which reveals his nature and his design.

  29. Now, since I have proven polygamy to be a SIN as it is a corruption of the plan and will of God for mankind and marriage, maybe we can have discussion over to the real topic:

    Polyamory and marital agreement.

    If the marital bed is undefiled, can a husband and wife agree to certain things such as this and it be honored by God?

    Remember, we're not talking about some "legal" arrangement by men, that has nothing to do with the argument. Strip clubs are legal, and there is no real Christian that will say that visiting them and participating in their operation is not a sin.

    We're talking about the word and nature of God and that which pertains to holiness.

  30. You didn't prove anything. I just discontinued it because it was pointless, I'm not going to change your mind and you won't change mine. It's not that I'm not willing to admit I'm wrong, but it's that i know what i read because it's in black and white. Any unbiased reader can plainly see it.

    I respect your opinions, but thats all they are...opinions. Like when you mention polygamy was tolerated because of grace and mercy, thats an opinion.

    And then, you cant take a few instances of polygamy gone bad and use those instances to say polygamy anywhere and at all time is bad. Someone could say the same about monogamous marriages in the bible.

    For instance, Adam and Eve was a monogamous pair. But they were responsible, according to genesis, in introducing sin to mankind. I think that would be the mother of all "gone bad" instances. Or the fact that Cain killed Abel, but they had the both of the same parents, not just one parent. Jacob and Esau also had both of the same parents and look how that turned out.

  31. FM,

    And I will say that absolutely nothing has been either delivered or called into question by you.

    Contrary to you I have laid out a more than sufficient case and supported that with scriptural reference, reason and additional philosophical support based on God's nature and eternality all to which you offer an empty nothing.

    Obviously you can't identify a biblical argument against sexual sin, or at least the sin of polygamy. I can't expect you to actually go to the point of the post and deal with polyamory, it seems that would be utterly futile.

    So the pointless part is that you obviously believe that polygamy is not and or or was not a sin, or probably both. Thus proving that you have no clue as to the eternal nature of God's holiness and the mechanism of sin itself.

    Your statements regarding Adam and Eve and the outcome of their, suddenly, Genesis means something to you doesn't it? What about Genesis 2 when God says man (one man) shall leave his mother and father and cleave unto his WIFE (one wife) not WIVES? (Gen. 2:24) What of that, since Genesis, the bible and singular family relationships suddenly enlighten you as to certain truths?

    As you said, I can't change your mind, I only strive to give our readers sound biblical basis for the argument against sexual immorality including polygamy.

    As the objective readers have already stated, what you hold to be true doesn't even make rational sense, yet alone a basis for the moral value of relationships.

    This is important because the church faces more sexual immorality than a little but, and I won't let my end down to be spoken well of by individuals with your belief or those with other beliefs contrary to scripture and the nature of God as he has revealed within the text.

    Thanks for stopping we'll see you on another topic.

  32. An anal sex demon!!!!! Are you serious??? Why are black pentecostals so obsessed with spirits, ghosts, and goblins?

    It seems that black pentecostals are the only people in the world that believe in anal sex spirits.Please don't say that in public, you may have two orderlies coming to put you in a room with padded walls.

  33. No, it's a DEMON that causes people to believe that polygamy, polyamory and homosexuality are anything close to being acceptable to God as sexual practices.

    That's where the DEMON is.

  34. I find it funny (not in the ha ha kind of way) that black pentecostals take spirits and demons so seriously. Given that alot of the practices of black pentecostals mirror alot of the worship practices of west African tribes who also believe heavily in spirits and drum beating, etc when those same black pentecostals are descended from west Arica.

    I went to a Lutheran church some years ago, it was an all white congregation. There service was extremely different. Alot of hymns, just organ playing no other instruments. For some reason, most christians don't believe in spirits like pentecostals do.

  35. Use a Handle IF you comment again please. Commentary without it will be deleted.

    Thank ya very merch!

  36. By the way, I meant no disrespect to you, I just had a differing of opinion.

  37. FM,

    That's OK I hopr uuo didn't feel belittled by me...if so I repent and apologize and will make sure that I do my best to not let it happen again...

    Anyway, I think that's how we should discover an issue...turn it upside down and look, think, pray and look it is and was good.

    I'll keep praying and developing teaching regarding teh subject. In the end I think it'll only make us better.


  38. Palmer...I APOLOGIZE to you too! Although I do give you a hard way to go intentionally...You may be able to stand it, I don't know.

  39. As a Minister and Registered Social Worker reading this blog and these post, all I can say is: brothers & sisters, let's keep this discussion simple.

    Read and know the Word of God and be filled with Holy Spirit as Believers in Jesus Christ of Nazareth! Sin is sin. Depravity, licentiousness, lasciviousness and concupiscence have many other names, shapes, colours and flavours! Yet, sin is sin! We are to depart from sin! We are to defer to our weaker brethren and be cautious in our outward behaviours, that we do not cause others to stumble (there's a WHOLE lot wrapped up in that Truth, that MANY forget to lovingly follow!) If we all belonged to God-fearing local congregations where Matthew 18 was practised there would be no need for this blog entry or the voluminous comments! I am NOT lacking mercy as I minister, however I see much need for exhortation of Christian leaders to be above reproach and well submitted to overseers and to the Lord and in right loving relationship with their wives! We are ALL prone to sin and each of us can fall. We are challenged to be careful when we correct that we too would not sin... Be sober-minded, conduct yourselves in a manner befitting the Glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ. Walk humbly, confess your sins one to the other and lift up the weak and broken hearted!


I've switched to real time comments for most posts. Refresh your screen if you post and do not see it right away. Please send me an email if you try to post a comment and cannot do so. Thanks.