Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

How Heretic Jamal-Harrison Bryant Eroded the Rules for Bishops in the African Methodist Episcopal Church

Posted by Job on March 16, 2008

Independent Conservative » Blog Archive » How Heretic Jamal-Harrison Bryant Eroded the Rules for Bishops in the AME Church.

First, if you don’t know who the heretic named Jamal-Harrison Bryant is you can check out this previous post.
He’s one of the many who pimps the flock for money and then ends things
with a quickie confession to Jesus. He has also been known to make
demands of God as if God is his personal puppet. One instance was
captured in a comment in this post over at

A Word About “Apostolic Arrogance”

Dear Melvin & Community:

This morning I turned on the TV to BET and the Right Reverend,
Elder, Doctor, Bishop Jamal Bryant was preaching in Uganda, Africa. The
place was overflowing with hurting and hopeless people. In his usual
way, Bryant began to promote himself to the folks by saying,

“It’s time for me to demonstrate Apostolic Arrogance, and declare
that I’m giving God until 2010 to make the Country of Uganda one
people, one mind, one Country, and that there will be only one God.”

Notice, he declares as if he is greater than God and can give God
time limits. This is NOT a man ministering the true gospel of the Lord
Jesus Christ, but a true heretic. You can read plenty more posts by Melvin Jones about this man.

Now, that you fully understand how dangerous of a heretic
Jamal-Harrison Bryant is, it should not surprise you that he asked to
lead a campaign to have a female given the title of bishop in his AME

Scripture makes it clear that it was never intended for women to
assume titles such as bishop/elder/pastor and are not to assume
spiritual headship over men.

Titus 1:5-11 (New King James Version)

5) For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order
the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I
commanded you—

6) if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination.

7) For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not
self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not
greedy for money,

8) but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled,

9) holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may
be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who

10) For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision,

11) whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households,
teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain.

Now for some, they feel that just does not make it clear enough.
They make up titles like co-pastor and such, which are not biblical and
not valid, because it is still an effort to put women in spiritual
authority over men and that’s not how God wants things to be.

1 Timothy 2:11-13 (New King James Version)

11) Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.

12) And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.

13) For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

Now some like to claim that since Acts 2:17
shows that God would pour out his spirit on all flesh in the last days,
that women should now be allowed to assume any role in the church, this
is wrong. The verse of scripture specifically says that “daughters shall prophesy”
and so they do. Women were even prophesying to Paul, the one who
explained that women do not have leadership over men. They would
council him, but never were they in a position of authority over men. (In
the New Testament prophesy is to give words that edify, not something
on the level of fortune telling or like the Old Testament prophets, see
1 Corinthians 14:3.)
keep in mind, even the apostles said that they were in the last days
themselves and they did not violate the order of duties for women and
They were in the last days themselves and never forsook
sound order as God had commanded, we should not either. Women have
helped make men aware of a great many things, but this does not mean
that women should be granted positions of authority over men.

Paul also notes to Timothy as inspired from God in the name of the
Lord Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit, that men who wish to be
bishop should be good leaders of their own household.

1 Timothy 3:4-5 (New King James Version)

4) one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence

5) (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?);

Women are to be the homemaker, not the one who assumes rule over the house.

Titus 2:3-5 (New King James Version)

4) that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children,

5) to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.

So as the man heads his house, a good man is to be selected as the
one in positions of leadership in the church. This is not a small
matter or a trivial point, but the sound order and structure as
ordained by God. And despite how many people claim otherwise, there is
never a record of Jesus ever having a female as an apostle. Women offer
invaluable discernment regarding some matters and share that with
others, but it is not to be done from a position of leadership over
men, period.

Now that you are fully aware of these things, I want to show how
Jamal-Harrison Bryant intentionally pressed to see a woman be given the
title “bishop” in the AME church. On 8/4/2000, the Baltimore
Afro-American newspaper ran a story titled The politics of ordination: Rev. Jamal Bryant’s insider account of Bishop Vashti McKenzie’s election.
Vashti McKenzie was a woman who had been working in the role of head
pastor of a church. She had become popular because she is a woman and
because she totally played the politics of the political Left from the
pulpit. She has always been much of a political spokesperson and of
course never should have been given the role of pastor over a church. (She
is the type that runs with folks like Jesse Jackson. Always crying
about justice via politics, until the discussion is on babies being
killed in the womb. Leftists never cry for government to end murder
So she woke up one day and decided she just had to run for
“bishop” in the AME organization. She claims it was inspired by God,
but we know even her role as “pastor” was not God’s will, so she had
already started down a road of spiritual deception way before trying to
become a “bishop”.

Here are some short excerpts from that article I mentioned, that
details how Bryant helped a woman assume the title of “bishop” in a
church organization.

It also took a mega-campaign, replete with behind-the-scenes
dealmaking, slogans and theme songs, security forces, and a small army
of enthusiastic volunteers-all coordinated by her campaign manager, the
Rev. Jamal Bryant.

JB: It was … warfare is the best way I can put it. Uh, Vashti McKenzie
is not only young and a woman, but it was also her first run.

SY: Her first attempt …

JB: Her first attempt. Most people have to run at least twice. My
father [Bishop John Bryant] didn’t win his first time, and had a larger
church, and a large family name, reputation as well. But, the church
saw something in her. You’re dealing on the floor with people from the
deep South, who still have some baggage of sexism. You’re dealing with
trying to convert people from the Continent who are not used to seeing
women in positions of leadership and authority over men. You’re dealing
with other women who love themselves but would rather be under a man
than under their own peer. So, we were running the floor having to
combat and to fight all of those arguments. I don’t know if it was like
a day like Vietnam, to say it lightly.

SY: So, obviously you have nurtured a relationship with Bishop McKenzie
over the years, but when did she formally come forward and say I want
you to be my campaign manager?

JB: Well, no I went to her.

SY: Oh, you went to her?

JB: I went to her and said, um, `We’re getting close. There are some
things I think that you can win, but I think there are some things that
I can help you do.’ And she in faith gave me the reigns and said, `Run
with it.’

Notice the disdain that Jamal-Harrison Bryant has for the South and
his disapproval of desires to adhere to proper instruction. He speaks
the language of secular humanism and political correctness, not the
scriptures and gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. This shows where his
true foundation is. Bryant has a political science degree and although
he also holds degrees in theology, it is apparent that he moves in
terms of politics, not the will of God. That’s why he was eager to
assume the role of McKenzie’s head cheerleader. 2 Thessalonians 2 speaks of the coming of strong delusion
and how Satan will prop himself up as God and many will fall for it.
People like Bryant, via his heresy and dismissal of sound doctrine are
paving the way for the coming Antichrist.

What will you do when someone like a Benny Hinn comes along
and has false doctrine but can actually heal people and doctors confirm
it? Will you say he’s anointed? Will you claim he’s got a gift from
God? Or will you realize they are the Antichrist or a warm-up act for
him, that was foretold would show signs and lying wonders? Jesus warned
it’s coming

Matthew 24:24 (New King James Version)

24) For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

That’s right, fakes will come and have plenty of physical signs to
show those who put their trust in emotion rather than sound doctrine. This is why adherence to sound doctrine is so important.
Allowing in twists of scripture allows in a lie. Twists of scripture
allowed some to claim the faith in America and hold slaves. Twists of
scripture are why not just women, but gays are seeking to head
churches. Twists of scripture are why people are carrying on in all
manner of disorder at church meetings and blaming it on the Holy
Spirit, ignoring that one of the fruits of the spirit
is self control. Another is faithfulness and we must remain faithful to
the truth as recorded in scripture. Otherwise, we will fall for

Christians are going to have to decide if they wish to be politically
correct or holy. The two are not the same and don’t come from the same


57 Responses to “How Heretic Jamal-Harrison Bryant Eroded the Rules for Bishops in the African Methodist Episcopal Church”

  1. Thank you for giving this wider viewing.

    You know, I didn’t mention it in this particular post, but in scripture EVEN THE EVANGELISTS WERE MEN. Men such as Timothy went on to become a Bishop which we today call “Pastor/Elder”. The evangelists were younger men often working their way to becoming elders and in the process of proving themselves. Also evangelists might not have had a family yet, as is expected of an elder, 1 Timothy 3.

  2. Job said


    So what then does one make of Lydia and Priscilla?

  3. I have nothing in scripture to indicate Lydia and Priscilla, or Phoebe and Mary mentioned in Romans 16 were “evangelist”. Unless you know some details that I’m missing.

    These women were fellow laborers, but we know they were not apostles although Paul who was an apostle spoke well of them. They were fellow laborers, but not assuming leadership over any men. I don’t see where they were selecting elders like Timothy and Titus and they were not given any instructions on how to manage churches like Timothy and Titus. From what we have, unless you know different, it seems they helped in a capacity keeping with them not assuming actual formal authority over men. It seems them being fellow laborers was because they did things noted of good women who were later listed as widows taken care of by the church, detailed in 1 Timothy 5:9-10.

    They probably helped women in areas men could not (maybe with some affairs of women), maybe offered council in private to possibly both men and women. As we know Priscilla was with her husband having a side-bar with Apollos, but never assumed church leadership over him. Phoebe carried the letter to the Romans that was written by Tertius, all as Paul instructed, the book of Romans in our Bibles today.

    The term “deaconess” is claimed for women such as Lydia, Priscilla, Phoebe and Mary and it seems to be in church history. A deaconess was given their post to help women with issues particular to them. “Deaconess” is not a term in scripture, but elders today may appoint women to help in various areas where there might be a need, understanding they are not to take leadership of men.

    Women play a VITAL role in being co-laborers of the gospel, but in scripture I see a consistency in the roles held by certain men versus roles held by women. All needed, but certain roles were given to certain men and I’ve not found where a woman was called “evangelist”, but I could be wrong. Have you found different in your study of church history?

  4. therev1 said

    Galatians 3:28 (King James Version)
    King James Version (KJV)
    Public Domain

    There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

    Does this verse help us to overcome sexism?

    Let’s go back to Gensis 1.

    27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

    30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

    31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

    POINT #1

    Note that God blessed THEM, and in the end EVERYTHING He made “was VERY good”. However, after “The Fall” women were put under the subjection of men (Gen. 3:16). Yet, when Jesus came to earth, He came to regain the dominion man AND woman lost to Satan (Isa. 61:1; Luk. 4:18)!


    Mat. 23:5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,

    6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,

    7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.

    8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.

    9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

    10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.

    11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

    12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

    POINT #2

    We should NOT focus so much on earthly titles, but on being servants.

    Earlier Jesus said,

    Mat. 20:20 Then came to Him the mother of Zebedees children with her sons, worshipping Him, and desiring a certain thing of Him.

    21 And He said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto Him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on Thy right hand, and the other on the left, in Thy kingdom.

    22 But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto Him, We are able.

    23 And He saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of My cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on My right hand, and on My left, is not Mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of My Father.

    POINT #3

    God the Father will determine our “place” in the Kingdom! Also, note that Jesus said “even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”


    Rev. 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

    POINT #4

    The Devil is the “accuser of the brethren”, and he tries to influence us to do the same.


    Jhn. 15:12 This is My commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

    Jhn. 19:11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against Me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered Me unto thee hath the greater sin.

    POINT #5

    Our focus MUST be on loving each other! Our power is for leading people to God, who is the Giver of ALL authority – including those who were involved in the Crucifixion!

    Jer. 3:15 And I will give you pastors according to Mine heart (see Gal. 5:22-23), which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.

    Jam. 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.


    Rom. 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

    I pray we overcome our insecurities with regards to who is in charge.

  5. Job said


    If you are attempting to make a point, please state it explicitly.

  6. Job said


    I did not perceive the positions of evangelist and prophet as being positions of authority. (I also did not view deacon as a position of authority either, but rather an official servant office.) I presumed an evangelist to be one whose chief calling was spreading the gospel, i.e. a church planter or missionary. As Lydia founded a church in her home according to the Acts narrative, I presumed the evangelist title applied to her. I refer to Lydia as a “founder but not president or CEO” sort regarding that particular church … the one at Thessalonica if I am correct.

  7. therev1 said

    Stop the in-fighting!

  8. Job said


    I perceived that to be your point, but I did not want to falsely accuse you. Now sir, I went to your website, and I praise God for your deliverance, for I myself was delivered by God from a very strong and grotesque pornography addiction. Still, though, it must be said that you should not blaspheme the Word of God by using scriptures selected and quoted out of context to oppose other scriptures. You know perfectly well that the Bible explicitly states in a consistent pattern of revelation from the Old Testament to the New Testament that women are not to serve in spiritual authority roles over men. The reason for this is that God created man first, and made His covenant with man. He then made woman as man’s suitable helper. Why? Because God knew that man would sin. But because the covenant was not made with woman, and the instructions from God came to the woman not directly but indirectly, even though Eve transgressed first and led her husband into transgression, the sin of the fall was attributed to Adam. The result of this arrangement was that sin is considered to pass spiritually through the male line, but not the female line. (It is for that reason that to this day, in order to be considered a Jew, you have to be the child of a Jewish MOTHER, not a Jewish father. That is amazing when you consider how strongly patriarchial Hebrew culture was, with women having virtually no rights.)

    So it is precisely because women were NOT given equal roles or leadership roles in the covenant that facilitated God’s not attributing the sin of the fall to Eve, and therefore using the seed of the woman to redeem mankind through Jesus Christ! People who are claiming that women should be preachers are rejecting the very thing that God used to make salvation of mankind possible.

    Now as to your claim, a very common one, that Jesus Christ restored the original relationship between man and woman … that is an interesting and compelling theory that sounds very good. But the problem is that not one of you can point to a single scripture to back it up! It is a doctrine of man created to fit modern times, the trend in liberal churches due to feminism and in charismatic churches that claims that women can hold positions of authority in the church. Well I have to ask you … were all the churches from the time of the New Testament until Azusa Street (and that speaks nothing of Ellen White’s Seventh Day Adventist cult that teaches that Jesus Christ and Michael the archangel are the same) wrong? After 2000 years of Christian history, is only the modern church capable of interpreting the Bible correctly, to discover hidden keys and mysteries that Christians in times past have been blinded to? How arrogant and lifted up with pride we modern Christians must be to believe that concerning ourselves, to think that we are so much better, more advanced, more civilized, etc. than our brothers and sisters in Christ in times past! It is that mindset that divides us from the timeless, eternal, universal mystery that is the Body of Christ, not my rising up to defend scripture!

    Listen, the only advantage that modern Christians have over Christians in times past is that we have a universally agreed upon canonical Bible that is widely available in many translations thanks to modern technology. And we are even throwing away that advantage, that great blessing, by taking the very Bibles that you can go purchase for $1 at any flea market (whereas in the early church a single copy of the Bible poorly transcribed on animal skins cost as much as a rich man would make in a year, and during times of persecution a person could be killed for even possessing it!) and throwing it away by pretending that we are so modern, advanced, and civilized that we don’t have to believe or obey what the Bible says!

    And no, barring women from serving as elders does not remove their equality with men. Are you equal to President George W. Bush? Are you equal to the Queen of England? Of course you are! Equality as a human being has nothing to do with your station in life or in the church. Were that the case, men that are not called to be pastors, teachers, preachers, prophets, evangelists, elders, deacons, etc. (the vast majority of us!) would be inferior to those that are! That shows the very lack of logic. How is it that a woman cannot be considered equal to a man unless she is allowed to preach from the pulpit when the vast majority of men are not allowed to preach from the pulpit? If preaching from the pulpit is the standard of equality, then the few men that are actually called to preach are better than not only the women, but also the rest of the men!

    That is why it is better to just stick to what the Bible says. Do you honestly think that on judgment day God is going to punish people for adhering to 2 Timothy? Of course He isn’t. So if God isn’t going to punish you for obeying what the Bible says, why take the chance that He WILL punish for for DISOBEYING what the Bible says?

    Brother rev1, please read this document so that you can stop rejecting the very plan that God used to save you.

  9. Job, I see Lydia in Acts 16, receiving the Word and having the apostles stay with her once they were out of prison in need of a roof over their head. I don’t see how that shows she planted a church. Yes her home was used to encourage brethren while Paul and Silas were there, but it seemed to be a momentary event rather than the planting of a local church. Saints may have continued meeting there or somewhere else, is that noted? If they met at her house continually, it does not seem to indicate she was an “evangelist” by the act of doing what she did, but I’m not seeing anything noted for certain.

    Can you show me what you are seeing in scripture regarding Lydia?

  10. Therev1, you’re just wrong. All these details provided and you’re mishandling scripture. The verses you’re citing show how we are all heirs to the promise of salvation to those who believe on Christ, the Christ who picked 12 MEN to build His church on Him as the cornerstone and one was a devil and replaced with another MAN. But you’re pulling verses you’ve cited away from their full and proper context. When reading more of the surrounding scripture of what you cite it’s clear they are not what you attempt to make them to be regarding your efforts to put women in leadership of men.

    We’ve provided scripture about roles for church leadership already, but I doubt any continued dialog would convince you. Despite how clearly consistent scripture is in this regard. The Lord will have to help you see the truth if He wills, because it’s obvious all that has already been provided did not help you any.

    You have assumed a position not granted you by the authority of scripture. (A woman claiming church leadership as a preacher over women and men.) Now you’re in your self appointed post and you are presently in an effort to defend what you are doing. God did not call you to such a post in His church, you heard a deceptive voice. God’s Word is in agreement and you’ve placed yourself outside of agreement.

    Job and I stand on 1 Thessalonians 5:14 although you might consider it “in-fighting”. If to debate this is “in-fighting”, you are a hypocrite of your own words to cry “stop infighting”, while you have engaged in this debate yourself.

  11. therev1 said

    God bless you!

    I must tell you that I am indeed a sinful creature, I make no pretense about that (Rom. 3:23). I further add that whatever I am, it is your responsibility to love me as well as every other person on earth (Mat. 22:36-40). What does that mean to you? Do you think it’s beneficial to keep berating people (Mat. 7:1)?

    Clearly, the Bible teaches us to have faith, in fact it is impossible to please God without it (Heb. 11:6). Perhaps you feel that your stance is a demonstration or a testament of your faith.

    Maybe it’s your ardent hope for an idyllic life that has made you so passionate in your desire to find the Truth. Certainly hope is a good thing, and I applaud you for that. As you know we live in a time where everyone is not in agreement of a “biblical world view”.

    However, our world view should be the same as God’s view of the world as stated in Jhn. 3:16. Why? “And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” I’m sure you realize that charity is love.

    Let’s assume you are 100% right about everything that you have espoused. What does the Bible say to do when you friend is down? “To him that is afflicted pity should be shewed from his friend. (Job 6:14).” Jesus built up twelve men by loving them! Some of us get so caught up in conventions as if we missed the lesson of Rom. 14.

    God is not nearly as concerned as about this situation, which is why in the resurrection these earthly ideas of man and woman will end (Mat. 22:30). Moreover, realize the point Jesus made in healing on the Sabbath. We absolutely have liberality though it offends some people, and is the reason why Jesus was put to death. Furthermore, if my house is on fire, I don’t care who is bringing water to save it, be it a man or a woman!

    It may also help if we can understand that a lot of the Bible is written allegorically, metaphorically, symbolically, etc. Taking into account that one’s focus may be personal, social, and/or spiritual, one should see how this affects our perspective.

    To speak on context, it might surprise you to realize that context is perceived differently by people of varying degrees of maturity. Note the changes in demeanor of a person as they get older. So the same with the world. God is going to bring Mankind to a state of Universal rest, as foreshadowed in the Creation Story. Before that can happen, the drama of the world’s various dogmas has to be played out.

    One of the main techniques the Devil uses to keep us divided is to play on our fears. These fears can detract us from simply praising and worshiping the LORD. I end by telling you that frankly, I do not really care about this or any other issue. My mission is to:

    Mat. 6:33 “seek”
    Rom. 10:9 “get folks saved”
    II Tim. 2:15 “study His Word”
    Mrk. 16: “preach the gospel”
    Rev. 22:14 “entering the gates”

    In the Kingdom, there are going to be kings, princes, and commoners, each performing their specified roles. I’m sure you are aware of this, so I won’t bore you with details. However, let me just state that I pray the LORD will continue to use us according to His purpose!


    My calling was pre-ordained (Jer. 1:5), and it is of no consequence whether you, or anyone else accept that.

  12. therev1 said

    One more thing. At no point did I ever state that I was debating any issue, and I fail to see why there is so much name-calling among followers of Christ.

  13. PewMember said

    This is to everyone posting in this forum:

    Did any of you pray and ask God what He thinks of the matter? Perhaps that’s the best way to clarify the issue because each you use scripture but the points are opposing. I believe God can talk and will answer you. I mean, we can talk and we are made in His image. I would love to hear what He says in response to your inquisition.

    I’ll be waiting…

  14. PewMember – I asked, He answered and the answer is the scripture I’ve already cited.

    Of course this is going to look like some opposing thing if you don’t study the whole word. If you study in whole, you see how someone like Therev1 is totally pulling scripture out of context. Taking parts of statements (God’s statements, God’s word) and making them fit a pre-desired conclusion.

    Then when admonished, the response is always claims they are not being “loved” right and such. Bottom line, they will use every level of obfuscation to avoid addressing the fact scripture grants no sanction to women assuming leadership posts in the House of God over any man. Somebody is supposed to handle some special ministry matters with women and teach children, that is where women such as Therev1 are to be.

    If you read Ephesians 5 you’ll see how God’s order is played out in human marriage. A human household (marriage) reflects the relationship between God and the church. There the man is designated the head. Then we look at management of the House of God, 1 Timothy 3. The person managing God’s house has to have proven they could lead in a human household, it has to be a man and is explained to be. This is why before that chapter comes 1 Timothy 2, where women holding leadership and training roles over men is strictly prohibited. People can claim the terms are somehow different, but they are not, scripture is consistent. And as Paul fully details, it all goes back to Genesis 3.

    This is not some contrived assertion, but reading the Word of God and not trying to impose American bias you have to submit to the truth.

  15. Job said


    “It may also help if we can understand that a lot of the Bible is written allegorically, metaphorically, symbolically, etc. Taking into account that one’s focus may be personal, social, and/or spiritual, one should see how this affects our perspective.”

    So … is “thou shalt not kill” one of those? What about “thou shalt not steal?” “Thou shalt not commit adultery?” “Thou shalt have no other gods before me?” Or what about John 3:16? Romans 10:9-10? Now please do not view this as an attack on you, because quite frankly less than three years ago I was using precisely the same arguments that you are. But the simple fact is that everyone uses “context” to discard the Bible verses that they do not wish to obey, but get all literalist and fundamentalist on the verses that they agree with! Take the liberal Christians: they use your same arguments to reject everything the Bible says against fornication, homosexuality, adultery, Jesus Christ being the only way to heaven, miracles, and the reality of final judgment. But what the Bible says about compassion, mercy, forgiveness, justice to the poor and oppressed, and peace? Oh, they are hardline straight and narrow on those things and will judge and accuse harshly anyone that does meet their standards on it!

    For the Bible to be meaningful, we have to take it all seriously. Yes, there are context issues … the New Testament church should not keep the Old Testament laws (nor should we back political movements that seek to turn America into Old Testament Israel or more accurately a Vatican vassal state), and we are not supposed to literally chop off our hands and pluck out our eyes. But none of those things are supposed to undermine the consistent nature of Biblical revelation or the message and authority of the Bible.

    It is not my ardent hope for an idyllic life. Why would I hope in such a thing? Such a hope would be totally absurd! The Bible tells the New Testament church that our lives are going to be filled with trials and tribulation and persecution, both against the world that has rejected us just as it rejected Christ (for we are the Body of Christ) but also against our own flesh. The way to overcome this time of being tried by fire is with the ministry of the Holy Spirit which intercedes for and comforts and guides us. However, for the ministry of the Holy Spirit to be effectual, we have to be obedient. Obedient to what? The commandments of Jesus Christ. What are the commandments of Jesus Christ? The Bible!

    What you are doing is claiming that God left behind for us a flawed, incomplete, unreliable guide and witness that will vary from generation to generation, culture to culture, and even individual to individual. That is actually the political theory of cultural relativism that has been imported into theology to create and justify false doctrines. It is not sound Biblical doctrine based on an honest reading of the scripture.

    As a matter of fact, what you are doing is no different from what Jesus Christ condemned the Pharisees and scribes for. The common notion is that Pharisees and scribes were condemned because they were too strict on sinners and needed to be more lenient. Quite the contrary, the Pharisees were the most lenient of the Jewish religious sects, and the Hillel school of Paul (and of most of the Jews that contended against Jesus Christ) was the more lenient of the Pharisees than the other Pharisee school of Shammai. People make up that stuff in a clear attempt to justify living in rebellion to the Bible! The Bible makes it clear that the error of the Pharisees was twofold. 1) They rejected Jesus Christ. 2) They rejected what was actually written in the scriptures in order to create their own rules. Now true, they did create their own rules to adapt to some very difficult situations. They were living under occupation of a hostile foreign pagan power and no longer had a king or a legitimate priesthood. So basically, they had to make up a lot of stuff as they went along. But a lot of the things that they made up was wrong, and they also pretended as if their made up rules had the same force as the original scriptures, and it got to the point where a lot of the people did not know the difference between the law of Moses and the interpretations of the scribes and the rules of the rabbis.

    Also, the Pharisees made distinctions between the rich and poor, the powerful and the powerless, etc. And that is what we are doing now. A lot of these excuses are being made not to defend the poor humble person down the street, but these rich powerful famous preachers getting into sex scandals, preaching false doctrines, stealing money, etc. After all, you did choose to reply to a Jamal Harrison Bryant thread didn’t you, instead of to the many devotionals and theological articles that I have on here? If it weren’t for these Paula Whites, Juanita Bynums, Serita Jakes, Aimee Semple McPhersons, Jan Crouches, Tammy Faye Bakkers, etc. in the pulpit and if some of the denominations hadn’t also started ordaining female preachers (in most cases following the lead of the charismatic churches) virtually no one would be using the same scriptures to cast off 2 Timothy that homosexuals use to claim that Jesus Christ had a relationship with the apostle John. (See a refutation of that claim here to know that I am not making stuff up: The reality is that even with what the charismatic, black, and liberal churches are doing, only 2% of ordained ministers are female. Far from God raising up women to meet some urgent endtimes spiritual need created by modern times, allowing women pastors is a marginal practice adopted by liberal, charismatic, and black churches that often also have serious doctrinal issues elsewhere. It just so happens that the churches that use women preachers are so far removed from the Christian mainstream that you have no idea how rare it is. (Such churches also tend to have little knowledge of theology, history, or doctrine of the church.)

    I used to day “Christianity is grown folks business” on some of my more vigorous debates with people. But I have to cast that off as unbiblical because that is not what the Bible says. The Bible says that we are to have faith like little children. You know what little children do? They believe everything that you tell them without question and put their trust in it 100%. It is only when they get older that rebellion (and doubt) start to creep in.

    What you are doing is rejecting the way God told you to approach scripture in favor of the doubt and rebellion, and taking the doubt and rebellion for being some sort of advanced, sophisticated faith. It is time for you to come out of that and go back to being a child lest you perish.

  16. therev1 said

    After praying more on this matter I am convinced that you are correct in your assertion as far as the order that God has ordained. Not that I wasn’t already, but my concern was two-fold.

    One, that bickering causes some to withdraw from making further progress in their walk of faith; and two, that we as men would totally disavow a person’s salvation based on the gender of a pastor who led such a person.

    However, you have cited instances where there has been a necessity for females to take a leadership role. In my case I was not involved with a male pastor when I was found. I was “troubled” by it because I was later informed of this situation in terms of the roles of the sexes.

    Since that time my pastor married a pastor which put this issue to rest for me. I would not be the leader in my home, and my community had I not known her for I was content to live a somewhat self-centered lifestyle!

    I thank you for your diligence on this matter, and would only ask that you understand we are to present God’s Word in love.

    “The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished (II Pet. 2:9).”

    God bless your ministry!

  17. Job said


    “One, that bickering causes some to withdraw from making further progress in their walk of faith”

    Nay, such people have no faith to begin with because they are not born again because they resist the Holy Spirit as clearly revealed in the Bible. The Bible specifically states that we are to correct doctrinal errors in other believers, and provides many examples of figures in the Bible doing exactly that. As a matter of fact, most of the New Testament deals with doctrinal error. You do realize that virtually all of the middle and high New Testament theology comes from reading where James, John, Peter, and Paul wrote letters to correct errors. Were it not for their writing to correct errors, we would have very little to base our theology on other than the gospels and the Old Testament. And even in the Old Testament, a great deal of the prophetic books were dedicated to correcting the errors of the kings and the people of Israel. Also, the Bible makes it clear that there is nothing wrong with discussing and debating scripture with other believers so long as it is not done for self – centered reasons (pride, reputation, entertainment, a desire to “win” or “be right”) and done in a wrong fashion. So long as the reason for the debate is to glorify God and to edify the brethren and is done in a God – honoring fashion, then such discussions are not only fine, but necessary. An example of this in the Bible is the Jerusalem council in Acts, where they had a discussion on how to evangelize the Gentiles. Also in Acts were attempts to warn and perhaps dissuade Paul from going to Jerusalem. It just so happens that everything past Acts is a letter, so we do not have examples of godly discussions in the New Testament past the gospels. However, such discussions do take place in the Old Testament and the gospels! Remember the queen of Sheba who came to try Solomon with hard questions? And also, not all of the trying questions to Jesus Christ were called sinful. It was only the people that asked Jesus Christ questions in an attempt to trick or condemn Him that Jesus Christ denounced. Jesus Christ even fielded a great many questions from the Pharisees in a very civil manner.

    “that we as men would totally disavow a person’s salvation based on the gender of a pastor who led such a person.”

    Well, the Hebrew Name of Jesus Christ translates to “God saves.” It is God that saves people, not people, including pastors. If God uses a female pastor to save someone, then it is an act of God to the glory of God just as it is with anything and anyone else. If we as men are going to decide that we are going to disavow someone’s salvation for any reason other than that person’s obvious and persistent lack of a Godly life, then anathema on the false accuser, not the falsely accused! I personally must say that I finally understood the gospel after hearing a Word of Faith preacher explain grace on television, and I know have Word of Faith down as a very dangerous abominable heresy.

    “Since that time my pastor married a pastor which put this issue to rest for me.”

    The co – pastor arrangement is unbiblical, because that female co – pastor is still in authority over the other males in her congregation, including the other male members of the pastoral staff. I am sorry, but the only churches that have female pastors are the liberal churches and the charismatic churches. Even adding those together, it makes up 2% of the ordained ministers in this country. A lot of charismatics do not realize this because they do not fellowship with orthodox Christians but only each other. This is particularly a problem in black churches, because all of the black denominations (National Baptist, Progressive Baptist, AME, the charismatic ones, etc.) ordain women. Were black churches to start fellowshipping with white Christians on a regular basis, they would see just how few female pastors there are. So it is still an issue until A) this “female pastor that married a male pastor” admits that God does not call females to be elders or teachers and ceases trying to be one. Again, as stated earlier this is a big issue because not only are such people just flat out rejecting what the Bible clearly states and are in open rebellion against it, but further if they reject the Bible in this area, there are going to be other areas where they reject sound doctrine and mislead people too. This should not cause you trouble because there are plenty of churches out there that are attempting to follow the Bible, and God will lead you to one of them if you earnestly ask Him. God did not deliver you and give you a testimony only to place you in a situation where you would continue in spiritual disobedience.

    Therev1, I am certain that God has called you to ministry. However, you must have guidance and instruction in the Word of God before you know what that ministry is. I would urge you to attend a seminary or Bible college with a Reformed theological orientation so that you can find out what role God has called you to fill and how and where you can fill it.

  18. Job said


    Back to our discussion, I am basing my assertion that women can be deacons and evangelists based on a very strict conservative explicit reading of scripture. Meaning, from what I have seen, the only positions in the New Testament church that are forbidden women by explicit verbal command are elder and teacher. (The Roman Catholic Bible implies that “teacher” is what the gospels called a scribe or doctor of the law, meaning an authoritative voice on scripture that people seek out to resolve doctrinal and theological disputes. In practice, Protestants have rolled the elder, pastor, and teacher positions into one. Whether that practice is Biblical is a debate for another day.)

    Now yes, the Bible does say that women should not be in authority over a man. But I have not seen any evidence that a deacon, prophet, or an evangelist is a position of spiritual or ecclesiastical authority. As a matter of fact, the Bible makes it clear that prophets are not. Take the Old Testament: the prophets talked, but had no power to compel anyone to obey! And yes, there were actual, bona fide legitimate female prophets, including Huldah that advised a male king.

    So that leaves evangelist. What manner of authority does an evangelist have? From what I have read, “evangel” means messenger of the good news. Now of course, we are all supposed to evangelize, the Great Commission is to everyone! The question, then, is what makes someone holding that office different from all other Christians. I perceived it to be someone with a specific calling (and attendant Holy Spirit gift) to evangelize above and beyond that of any other believer. Some say that in practice that is a person who is “a natural” at successfully evangelizing lots of people or hard to evangelize people, others would say that it is a missionary. However, others still would call it a revivalist i.e. John Wesley, D.L. Moody, Charles Finney, and Billy Graham (the problems that many have with Finney and Graham an also to a lesser extent Wesley and Moody notwithstanding, they are only examples that you would recognize especially in the case of itinerants like Graham), but I have a problem with that because it also requires one being a pastor/preacher.

    Of course, you have on your side the matter that no female was ever officially denoted as a deacon or evangelist in the New Testament (several were called prophets though, we have debated the issue of Philip’s daughters in the past and there is no need to rehash that). Now my knowledge on the subject is not comprehensive, so if you are aware of a more explicit Biblical definition of evangelist or of women being explicitly withheld from evangelist, deacon (apart from husband of one wife, yes I am aware of that), or prophet let me know. (Apostle, besides being a nonissue in modern times, is incontrovertibly an authority role.)

    But deacon specifically, recall that the first deacons literally “waited tables.” Is that an authority position? That said, I do concede that Stephen the martyr and the others were PLACED IN CHARGE OF TO OVERSEE DAILY ADMINISTRATION. That is a feather in your cap I admit, and a big one. But as the Bible seems to call deacon a purely servant role (recall that the apostles stated that they could not leave preaching and doctoring the Word of God to perform that type of service), I am not willing to concede that deaconesses are limited to serving other women.

  19. Well I’ve not said a word here about prophets and you know that’s an entirely different discussion. Given I don’t find any woman or man that fills the qualifications for that office anywhere in our time. Nobody has shown to meet that 100% standard for that office. But you know that is a different lengthy sidebar for us 😀 .

    I don’t think I ever said there are no female prophets in scripture, but we agree now that there are regardless of whatever discussion we’ve had before. If I ever said there were no female prophets, that certainly was my error. Although I can’t say I ever found a female prophet who made open proclamations to cities as some male prophets did. Female prophets seemed to act in more discreet ways.

    We agree deacons don’t hold authority over anyone. (Too bad many churches today have gone outside of scripture and treat deacons like pseudo-elders. One of that long list of issues with many churches.) My statements about deaconess are from what I’ve seen mentioned about them from church history. I’ve mentioned people like Phoebe are often viewed as having been a “deaconess”. I don’t find her transporting a letter to the saints in Rome as servicing women exclusively. Of course we agree “deaconess” is not a term in scripture, but it is a term in church history and women in that office in church history were utilized for service to women. That does not mean that is all they might do, but their often primary focus. But we agree it’s not a leadership position, so there’s probably no need to dwell on it.

    You know when I speak of these things I’m speaking of the “office” and not general church use of a term. In the “office” of evangelist, we see in scripture they did appear to have a level of true authority. In Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus he has them selecting elders and establishing all kinds of rules for the church. If that’s not authority, I’m not sure what we can say from scripture is “authority” regarding one saints relationship to another.

  20. Job said


    OK, so we are in agreement regarding prophets and deacons (prophetesses and deaconesses) in the context of this conversation. That leaves evangelist. Yes, Timothy and Titus had authority. No denying that! The issue is that I always perceived Timothy and Titus as being elders. In my rather crude search on Biblegateway of the KJV, I only see 3 references to evangelists. Acts referred to Philip as such, then there was Eph. 4:11, and in 2 Timothy 4:5 where Paul told Timothy to do the work of an evangelist. (The Young’s Literal Translation, which appears to do a credible job when I check it on, only has the Acts reference to Philip listed.) The ESV agrees with the KJV. Had to go to to find a searchable online version of your NASB, and it gave the same as ESV and KJV. But I will defer to your statement that Titus did in fact have the title of evangelist, as he did have the same role as Timothy.

    Well, if Titus and Timothy are all that we have to go on concerning the role of an evangelist, then it appears that I need to study the duties that the Bible recorded Titus and Timothy (in addition to what you have pointed out) as being charged with! So if Titus and Timothy are the Biblical templates, then yes evangelist is a position of authority. But that begs the question, what of Philip? I suppose that is something that I will have to study also …

  21. The issue is that I always perceived Timothy and Titus as being elders.

    No sir, Timothy did not become a church bishop/elder till much later in his life. (Go look up the history of Timothy’s life.) Being an evangelist was the proving ground brother. There were way more evangelists in scripture than the few mentioned with the title. All the men the Apostles sent to work under other Apostles were evangelists. They were men who the Apostles had laid hands on to minister the gospel.

    I feel the office of evangelist is still active and pastors/elders/bishops designate men for the role before having them be an elder. I’m not saying anything against the many cases I know you could cite of people doing the work of an evangelist when no church would support them. My point is that when keeping with scripture, a church would have been there for that evangelist in support of them. Somebody would have laid hands for them to preach. That is more consistent with scripture and would ensure the evangelist had credible support among men, given an established church leader endorsed them. Even Saul/Paul received training and prayer from others before the Holy Spirit called him apart to be an Apostle. So in cases where there is need and no local church supports an evangelist, that evangelist’s local church was out of order for not agreeing with the need to spread the gospel.

    In scripture, after Christ’s resurrection, we don’t have record of people just “out of the blue” becoming evangelists on their own accord from what they say was told to them. Although I won’t deny the history we have of some going out on their own and spreading the gospel where no church group dared go, although a church group should have. allows searching of NASB along with other translations.

  22. Job said


    I did not see NASB on Biblegateway. Oh well, it was still good to add Olivetree to my list of searchable online Bibles! “I feel the office of evangelist is still active and pastors/elders/bishops designate men for the role before having them be an elder. All the men the Apostles sent to work under other Apostles were evangelists. They were men who the Apostles had laid hands on to minister the gospel.”

    That would mean that the evangelist is more along the lines of the “itinerant preacher/revivalist” sort that I mentioned earlier, the John Wesleys. But I will continue my study of Philip, Titus, and Timothy!

  23. Yes, although personally speaking, John Wesley standing against the doctrine of election and the term “revivalist” being a Charles Grandison Finney type term, I can’t say I mention them first 🙂 .

    Itinerant pastor, endorsed to preach via somebody having laid hands on them that is already an elder, that I’ve found to be consistent with scripture. An evangelist is not an elder, but in a position of leadership. I guess I always thought of them as sort of a “junior” pastor, requested into the field to preach the gospel by elders. That is when you have elders doing things as they should. And they could be in one area without traveling.

    Anybody just coming from out of no where without any history and endorsement always gets a leery eye from me. That’s typical of the guys running from a scandal they were part of in another town.

    The Truth About What Some Call “Altar Calls” and “Revival”.

  24. Where I said

    “endorsed to preach via somebody having laid hands on them that is already an elder”

    I should have said:

    endorsed to preach via having hands laid on them BY ELDERS

    This modern error of one pastor running a church alone clouded my statement a little. There should be multiple elders in a church and those MULTIPLE ELDERS should be in agreement and the ones who lay hands on someone to do the work of an evangelist.

  25. Job said


    Now don’t go lumping in Wesley with Finney!

  26. Agreed, that was not my intention 🙂 . Sorry, Charles Grandison Finney should never be confused with John Wesley. They are not at all comparative.

    But Finney did see the error of his ways…much later, way after the cancer was growing on its own and he had to admit he gave the church a cancer.

  27. therev1 said

    Due to shortness of time, let me just say God bless you, and that I will endeavor to keep in touch. Thanks.

    God’s peace.

  28. tonya said

    WOW!!! What is this, really? As a Woman In Ministry, I have come to find hermaneutical interpretations such as the ones listed above funny as…. well you know. Be a little more poignant in understanding the historical, cultural, and theological nuances of the scriptures. What is even more funny to me is how we (black folks) claim God as a liberator during the era of slavery and the civil rights movement, but nothing more after that. Are you trying to tell me that the “pecking order” of God only abhors racism and not classism or sexism? If that is the case then are we truly liberated? Oh, one more thing……if abortion is an abomination to God, then why did God allow David and Bathsheba’s baby to die?
    Just a few thoughts, accidently came across this site.

  29. Wow! Tonya did you say you are a minister? And you ask such a question as the one below.

    if abortion is an abomination to God, then why did God allow David and Bathsheba’s baby to die?

    Answer: because the child was created in sin, and God hates sin. God didn’t kill the child as abortionist do.

  30. Kyle said


    Stop kidding yourself. First Margaret Sanger a leftist atheist created Planned Parenthood for the exclusive reason of getting rid of the less than desirables including blacks. Oh by the way she is just adored by the Leftist Socialist Democrats the same alter you pray at. Remember Tonya, “Ye shall have no other gods before me”. Tonya why don’t you catch up on your own history and maybe you might find the truth out about this. Another thing, haven’t you ever wondered why most clinics are located in urban areas? Ding! Ding! Ding! You guessed it. Because that is where a large numbers of minorities are. And another thing Tonya. Who said you have the right to be a minister of the Gospel? I don’t think you qualify according to the scriptures. Lets keep this going shall we? Let me guess that you are a staunch liberal Democrat. Don’t get me wrong the religious right is just as bad so don’t accuse me of that. But as I was saying. Let me guess your probably of the progressive gospel being spouted out of many churches today. You focus on issues in the community rather than repentance. You focus on local and national elections rather than on God’s elect. You probably jump up and down, babble in tongues, and fall on the floor, and You see Tonya your part of the problem. The facts are pretty clear. Jesus shed his blood for the remission of sins for those who God the Father chose. We are to die daily to ourselves. This means our sin nature. We are to live holy lives. We should not be scared to say what sin is. It’s people like you who bring the leaven into the Church with your progressive leftist gospel. You Tonya are the problem not the Elect who come to this site and uphold the true message of the Gospel.


  31. Kyle said

    Rev Patrick Williams,

    I checked out your website and noticed that you are African American. I applaud the fact that you stand for truth in this age seeing that the Black Church in general has been inculcated with so many devious plots by the Devil. We only need to look at the stronghold the Prosperity Gospel, the Gay Christian Movement, and the liberal agenda has penetrated the Black Church.

    Keep up the good work and God Bless,


  32. Tonya, do you endorse homosexuals in church leadership as well? In my debates with homosexuals that claim to be Christians who feel God affirms their sleeping with someone of the same sex, THEY USE THE EXACT SAME LINES YOU USE SIMPLY ADJUSTED TO SUIT THEIR DESIRES.

  33. Kyle said


    Very true indeed. I love the drive by posters who spout off some leftist nonsense then scurry away and hide. Very telling.


  34. tonya said

    Wow!!! Once again…this really amazes me! Let me answer some of your questions. No, I do not endorse homosexuals in church leadership. I am pretty sure that God hates all sin. No, I don’t have extensive floor excercises and use tongues in every other sentence. I do not say “praise God” in every sentence that I say nor am I stuck on a “prosperity gospel.” I have not taken a vow of poverty, I happen to have my own business that provides well for my family and community. Does my ministry have a focus on the needs of my community….hell yes!! (I know that one just set you back!) We sometimes forget that Christ had a habit of meeting the needs of the people first before trying to get them saved. Although I am not a politician I still have a concern for humanity. I am on the frontline daily ministering to the needs of those (primarily teens and women) who are HIV positive and/or full blown AIDS. Thats a reality that is seen everyday. Meeting the needs of the people that has fallen in the cracks has proven to be the most effective way to lead them to Christ. Let me guess….you compel a person to repent before you feed them? Do you make them seek forgiveness before you give them clothes? Or maybe you are one of the many “church folk” that refuses to reach out to a 12 year old that is HIV positive because you think that they have brought this disease in through their sin? Am I progressive? Well…I’m in the process of building a foundation specifically to focus on providing help for those infected with a disease that is silently devasting our communities (oh, by the way this is a community issue). So I guess that makes me very progressive. I’m not leftist or conservative, I’m a realist. Jesus did more than seek repentance. Understand the essence of the ministry of Jesus. In all of His holiness and righteousness, Jesus was also an everyday “brotha” who was not only our savior, but someone who cared about the people that society forgotten. Maybe in the future there will be room for dialogue

  35. Tonya,

    Much like Martin Luther King Junior before you, you’ve been caught into the affairs of man, to the point secular humanism is your god and you’ve developed a false christ for yourself, that is not at all the Christ of scripture. Your false christ would have picked 6 males and 6 females as apostles, but the Real Christ picked 12 MEN. Because as Ephesians 5 notes the husband is the head of the house and that matches 1 Timothy 3 clearly regarding men leading in the House of God, in following Christ, who came to earth in flesh as a MAN. He is not a “was” He IS LORD.

    I’ll keep following the real Christ who came for the expressed reason of bringing sinners to repentance and you can have your false christ who will burn with you in the lake of fire (if you don’t repent) who you claim came for “more”.

    Luke 5:32 (New American Standard Bible)

    32 “I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

    Tonya, you are so steeped in delusion. Your false claims of church leadership are the very least of your problems.

  36. And I find it interesting how false christ following Tonya blows her horn in the streets about her deeds, when the real Christ told us never to do such, Matthew 6.

    Tonya’s false Christ even came for abortions, which Kyle and Pastor Williams have already addressed sufficiently.

  37. tonya said

    Well, this has been one of the most interesting exchanges I’ve had in quite sometime!! Blowing my horn? Really? This is what I see. First, for you to make that comment about MLK,Jr. lets me know that you do not have the heart of God, anywhere. How can one be a follower of Christ and not be concerned about the affairs of not just our communities, but humanity. Perhaps this may appear to be a little mean spirited to you, but I don’t think that you (and the other commentators) are much of a challenge for me. Secondly, what made this exchange so interesting (and fun) for me is knowing that in reality, you don’t have the hermaneutical intellect, the theological foundation, or the heart for the work of Christ to stand toe to toe with me about anything (as it stands now). Want to leave this with you; among the many instances in the work of Christ, John:5 records the exchange between Jesus and the man lying at the pool of Bethesda. Now let me ask you this (I mean since Jesus didn’t do “more”), what came first? Did Jesus tell the man not to sin anymore or place him in a position to be healed first? I mean, I could go on with more, but here’s another thought for you. Jesus himself quoted from the writings of the prophetic voice of Isaiah 61. I have never denied the call to repentance. That is a mandate for salvation. But even you cannot dispute the fact that Jesus did not do “more” than call for repentance. Jesus made a way for repentance to be possible, not only through His faith, but through His works. If this is the best that you can do, so be it. But as my pastor(also my father) often says, “when you’re dealing with locked-up mindsets, its really not worth the effort.” It is what it is..

    MLK,Jr., did you really say that? WOW!!!!!
    Be blessed

  38. How can one be a follower of Christ and not be concerned about the affairs of not just our communities, but humanity.

    Martin Luther King Junior’s pagan mentor Gandhi was very concerned about the affairs of communities and humanity. Which is why King admired the pagan so much.

    I’ll let you ponder these for a bit, given I’m so beneath you in your eyes.

    Proof From His Own Writings That Martin Luther King Jr. Was NOT A Christian

    Martin Luther King’s MORMON DOCTRINE!

    Regarding Jesus healing people, you’ve totally missed the point of WHY He was doing such miracles.

    Luke 10:13 (New American Standard Bible)

    13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had been performed in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.

    The miracles, were to bring sinners to repentance.

    You speak of hermeneutics (although you misspelled the word “hermeneutical”), while in an earlier comment of yours you stated:

    …if abortion is an abomination to God, then why did God allow David and Bathsheba’s baby to die?

    If God favors MAN performing abortions, shouldn’t Nathan have killed David’s baby by his own hand? I always thought a mother losing her child of causes outside of actions by man was called a “miscarriage” not “abortion”. You follow a false god that approves of the shedding of innocent blood. While MY GOD, THE ONE TRUE GOD WHO IS THE PERSONS OF FATHER, SON AND HOLY SPIRIT has said in His Word, that taking innocent blood is evil. Recorded by the same prophet you mentioned Jesus spoke of Isaiah 59. You follow a FALSE “more” christ who you claim approves of the shedding of innocent blood.

    Jesus is the object of faith, He did not simply do things by faith, He is the Christ, the one men are to have faith on, the One through whom all was made! It’s not Him who needs faith to do anything, but we who need faith on Him IN TRUTH. As you may have heard, “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Jesus is the Son of God, the One who has seen the Father and is One with Him. We humans need faith because of what we have not seen and hope for, Jesus was with the Father before creation and is with the Father now, they are One.

    Tonya, I’m sure my foolishness is most entertaining to you, but perhaps you’ll allow me to entertain you a little more.

  39. Tonya, what you’re missing is that one can make humanity their god and many have to their own destruction.

  40. Tonya, I have a little project for you, if you’re willing to accept it. I’ve been working on it personally myself for many years and found it to be an unsuccessful search, but perhaps you have what I was searching for.

    Can you please find me a case where Martin Luther King, Jr. stated clearly that faith on the Lord Jesus Christ is a person’s ONLY hope for salvation?

    You know I listened to sermons by King for many years and never heard him say it once. I’ve been to the King center, never saw it mentioned. Have material about King, never read it mentioned. Read books and such by King and others, never saw it mentioned. I have seen him deny truths of the Christian faith, such as the virgin birth of Jesus Christ though. Please let me know where he said what I mentioned above, which is the foundational core of Christianity, since you’re so flabbergasted that I said he was not truly walking as a Christian. He was a “preacher” well published and his words are better documented than most. So if he was telling people that they had to believe on the Lord Jesus or spend eternity in the Lake of Fire, I’m sure it has been recorded, somewhere. Can you help me find it? Oh Tonya, can you do that small favor for me who you find to be such a fool?

  41. And Tonya, if you can’t find the statement above I mentioned, here are some other items of interest I’ve never found from Martin Luther King Junior. Maybe you can find one of these if not the statement above.

    – Find if King ever affirmed the virgin birth of Jesus Christ.

    – Find if King ever affirmed the full bodily resurrection of Christ from the dead and ascension to Heaven.

    Just some things I’ve had a hard time finding, but I’m certain since as you said:

    …I don’t think that you (and the other commentators) are much of a challenge for me.

    You’ll find these things in no time flat!

  42. tonya said

    Ok, seriously, I’ll probably check out after this one. First, I still have the love of God for ya! Secondly, sorry for the mispell, get caught up sometimes. Third, thats the point that I made initially, Jesus did what needed to be done to lead the sinful person to humanity. Nuff said..Finally – King, well…..its been a couple of years since I’ve been in the classroom so I will look through my library to pull info off of an old paper. I’m trying to understand your plight. MLK not preaching the resurrection..hmmm. God is not mentioned in the book of Esther, so on and so forth. What does this have to do with the cost of tea in China? Here are a couple of tidbits that I do remember. Giving you a leg up on the task previously given to me. Can’t remember the site info…but I hope this helps. Crozer(the seminary he attended) carried a great deal of Kings work in archived files. In those writings perhaps you will find what you are looking for. King was not noted for his love for scriptural literalism and at the same time was not ethusiastic about Christian liberalism(not the way that you think). I have not quite made it to my 40’s so I can’t tell you that I have heard ALL of his sermons. Which sermons did you listen to? Where was he at the time and what was the occasion? The reason I asked is because when listening to what I listened to, the occasion was on something totally different than the virgin birth, the resuurection and etc. When you take the time to read his paper dealing with these topics you will find that he was not trying to establish his personal reflections, but merely expounding on the philosophy of the Greco-roman concept of Christianity and how that influenced the early church. For an example; the same writings that you quote from Paul to justify your belief in women not being in leadership, is actually based upon Roman Imperial theology that has a hierchal system that actually served as the foundation for slavery here in the U.S. So you see, there is much to understand. May not be back, still want to thank you for this experience….it was fun!!! Be blessed

  43. Tonya,

    …Jesus did what needed to be done to lead the sinful person to humanity.

    To humanity?

    What does this have to do with the cost of tea in China?

    It’s got nothing to do with the cost of tea in China, but plenty to do with the fact there are major tenants of the Christian faith you’ll be hard pressed to find ever have been spoken or written of in affirmation by MLK, Junior. In fact, you’d have an easier time finding documentation of him being against many foundations of Christianity if you really study the theology he honestly embraced.

    King was not noted for his love for scriptural literalism…

    Exactly, to the point he actually was promoting another gospel.

    Which sermons did you listen to?

    Plenty more than I could enumerate, but over 100 more than likely. And these were mostly the regular “Sunday morning sermons” he would give at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, GA. Where I used to live in Baltimore, MD a local AM station would play one of his sermons every week and I was a listener for years. It was a service provided through the SCLC. And listening long enough, you recognize he talked a whole lot about “love” and there is never a solid connection made to such love being related to the truth of Christ death for sin, burial and resurrection. Never is it made clear that by grace, faith on Jesus and His completed work at the cross the ONLY hope for ANYONE to be saved.

    It made it most apparent to me even then, that the rumors of King’s womanizing HAD TO BE TRUE. It really comes out in his speaking if one listens to him enough. He was hung up on “love”, but it strays from the full truth of scripture and falls into a “love” that is not love of God through Christ alone, but actually love of humanity.

    King did not say Jews, Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics would be singing “Free At Last” because of faith on the Lord Jesus, but rather because he believed some ecumenical racial harmony was coming because he “dreamed” it. He was pushing Universalism and doctrines of Baal, secular humanistic theology, that falls short of the truth of scripture.

    I’ve read King’s writings where he speaks against the Virgin birth of Jesus and found his statements were not simply his analyzing someone else’s opinion, he was fully asserting it as his own. And this is why his professor who was very much against the notion of the Virgin birth of Christ thought highly of his paper. This is also why you have not found me a source that says King ever affirmed any belief in the Virgin birth of Christ. Tonya, you have to understand, King had turned to a false gospel, that really did not believe any of the supernatural events regarding Jesus. And there are some from King’s day who still follow that heresy.

    And you’re promoting a “pro-abortion” jesus, which is heresy too.

    Regarding what God had the apostle Paul to write to saints, it was not spawned from “Greco-Roman” concepts. It is the True Word of God. If you follow how Judaism was before Christ came to earth in flesh via Virgin birth (before any Roman influences), you see never were woman placed in spiritual authority as Elders, never. The term “Elder” which is used in the church is a DIRECT correlation to the use of the term from Judaism. Never is the role for a man, Jesus never picked any women as Apostles and never did the Apostles claim a woman should hold any church leadership over any man. Whether any other culture agreed with something in the Word of God does not make it any less THE TRUTH. This teaching is fully consistent from Genesis to Revelation, with women on occasion being a “Prophet”, but doing so from a less outspoken capacity than when a man would fill such a role. Never is a woman affirmed by the Apostles as a church leader. If the same Jesus who broke so many other rules that were “tradition” wanted women leading the House of God, He would have picked 6 men and 6 women as Apostles. If the Apostles who went to death for the truth were told by Christ through the Holy Spirit to have women in leadership, they would have noted it clearly in scripture. Women had many liberties in the Gentile world including the ability to file for divorce from a husband, unlike with the Hebrews, but never does an Apostle claim women should hold church leadership. The woman in Proverbs 31 holds many astute leadership posts, but not church leadership, or in that time temple leadership.

    And as I said, the issue of women such as yourself falsely claiming church leadership over groups with men is the least of your issues. Still here are some papers for you to review.

    The Use of Women as Elders
    Female Leadership in the Church

  44. John Kaniecki said


    Just to throw in my two bits.

    I Corinthians 13 among many scriptures makes it plain that Love is the most important thing a Christian can possess. But you cannot possess the Love God desires without the scriptures. Many, many people know the Word of God but wax cold in their Love.

    When Christ was asked about the Pharisees he said, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore they bid you observe, that observe and do, But do not ye after their works: for they say and do not.”Mathew 23:2-3.

    What that tells us is that the Jews had to listen to the Pharisees in following the law but not act like they did. The Jewish leaders were Godless and dead. Read Hebrews and we see that we have a much more important Word. Hebrews 2:1-3.

    Don’t forget that our battle isn’t against flesh and blood but against ‘spiritual wickedness in high places’.Ephesians 6:12 While I commend Dr. King for his work that does not qualify him as a good Christian. He should have done what he did without neglecting the message of Jesus Christ and the gospel.

    Yet saying this I would rather see a Martin Luther King rise up again then a dead, legalistic Christian who has no senses and waxes weak or even empty in his Love! In my opinion there is nothing worse to the faith than a hypocrate.

    After all who did Jesus criticize the most. He attacked the hypocrates!

    All around the world there are Christians who are doing the right thing for the right reasons. That is they Love not in word only but with word and deed. Also they acts as ‘lights’ and ‘salt’ to the Earth by telling the message that the only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ.

    Unfortunately people will deviate from the ‘narrow way’ because they don’t like part of scripture or whatever. While I may say many controversial things on this blog I always admit when the ideas are not directly from scripture. Unfortunately many here I feel here are subject to some levels of confusion.

    It was my fourth day on the job. Please pray for me.



  45. John Kaniecki said


    Hi hope you are well.

    Reading your article you state people on the Left never cry out against abortion. This is too strong a statement as some do. Be it is generally true.

    Also how do you counter the claim that once the baby is born the Right doesn’t care anything about the child?

    Pulling one self up by one’s boot straps may work at best one in a hundred. I am not advocating about throwing money at a problem as that is never a good answer. In fact many on the Left criticize ‘liberals’ because they make their token donation but do not invest themselves in the fundamental changes society needs.

    I think a good gauge is whom do you associate with and on what level. Do you as a Christian invite the homeless and poor into your household. It’s one thing to have them in your church building its another to have them in your home. And when dealing with people who are on what we call the fringes of society is the relationship one of equality?

    Yet all said and done the ‘Liberal’ in my estimation is still superior to the cold hearted ‘Conservative’ who ingnores the situation.

    I realize I have made broad generalizations and certainly there are exceptions to the rules. I have come to these conclusions from my experiences in life. I have met very wealthy people and have been on equal terms with them. I also have been with the down and out and on equal terms with them. I met schizophrenics who were much better people then millionaires.

    Scripture backs up my thoughts. James 2:5-7 “Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgement seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by which year are called?”

    There are other scriptures I could include but I must do some things.



  46. John, do you not know many poor people are not in favor of government dolling out money?

    Is Mississippi a “rich state”? Yet they vote overwhelmingly Conservative and have put almost every abortion mill in that state out of business. No reports of babies starving of starvation there.

    Have you not read former slave Frederick Douglass’ speech What the Black Man Wants?

    Do you not know that the average income growth rate for Blacks was going UP FASTER BEFORE government assistant programs?

    Do you not know that the Australian Aborigines have been pressing against what they call “sit down money” in government welfare checks?

    Now John, explain to us how claiming to follow Christ and taking money from heathens by government force to have the government that by it’s own mandates cannot share the message of Christ redistribute the money is Christian? Do you not see that a poor person who has basic needs met seeking money by force is nothing but greed? And you’d be hard pressed to find an American that recently died of starvation. Do you not understand that being angry for money money when you have the basic essentials is covetousness?

    Can you cite for us which Apostle went to Caesar and demanded of Caesar to give poor saints money? Or did they turn to fellow saints for help?

    Can you cite from scripture any Christian who went to government demanding money, ever?

    I find it interesting how you claim a Liberal political view is “superior” to one that might be considered Conservative leaning. In a nation where I invite you to show me some examples of babies who have recently died of starvation, talking as if nobody shows care for a child after its birth is a moot point. Even in areas with TRUE POVERTY such as parts of Africa, many woman don’t go killing their own babies in the womb, till the United Nations Population Fund doles out money for abortions to be performed!

    While my stance in political terms is generally more Conservative than your own, I would never claim I have some level of “superiority” or that I have a view that is “superior” to yours John. I think you need to very much keep in mind, that in church history saints used to fully abstain from all political involvement, so to jump up today being involved in it and claiming your political view “superior” is a bit of a stretch. It sounds as if you are commending yourself. I hope you don’t reach next for the heretical claims of Jesse Jackson and try saying “Jesus was a Liberal”.

    I don’t think you should become overly consumed in the affairs of Caesar.

    And John, nobody who does not believe on Christ is going to Heaven, not even if they lived an entire life in pure poverty.

  47. Devon said

    Well said IC as usual…you have far greater patience then myself!

    John, you seem almost the opposite of the prosperity otherwords, you somehow think that poverty is to be equated with piousness etc etc…nothing could be further from the truth!

    And where do you get the idea that Conservatives do not care about the Baby after they are born??? What are you reading?? The Howard Zinn view of America!!!

    As IC and others have pointed out, NOWHERE can you find in the Bible where we as the Body of Christ are we to forcibly take the money out of the pagans hands and forcibly redistrubite it……

    We as the Body, however, are to take care of each other and then tend to the unsaved……simply put, you cannot find socialism or marxism in the Bible….indeed, you find what we like to refer to as the ‘Protestant Work Ethic’ that helped make Western Europe and North America great nations…..that now is tragically changing of course.

    However, my families history is filled with what we call ‘prairie socialists’….from Saskatchewan…Christian folk that were wonderfully saved but had no clue about economics or politics … certainly i can understand and accept into the body of Christ socialist Christians…as wrong as you are and other’s that hold to such views, it is not a dividing matter…kinda like Christians that disagree on the Death Penalty or Guns etc etc….

    In essentials unity…etc etc…..St.Augustine….

  48. John Kaniecki said

    IC and Devon,

  49. John Kaniecki said

    IC and Devon,

    Hi hope you are well. I’m afraid I must quote myself!

    “Pulling one self up by one’s boot straps may work at best one in a hundred. I am not advocating about throwing money at a problem as that is never a good answer. In fact many on the Left criticize ‘liberals’ because they make their token donation but do not invest themselves in the fundamental changes society needs”

    So all your arguments about the money just throw out the window please!

    I am talking about a deeper social change. Perhaps you can’t comprehend what I envision, a righteous society.

    The scripture from James points out that more poor people are of the faith then rich people. I will bring in other scriptures that are relevant.

    And Devon while we are on the topic, you never did personally recommend a book on the native American indians that you read. Is it because you have read none and are simply accepting what you are being told as truth? This is a matter I have studied extensively. Unfortunately when you go to the history section of the book store there is not much material to choose from.

    And yes I did read Howard Zinn’s book A People’s History.

    I have to run to work in a few minutes. May God bless you!



  50. John, while I am happy you are gainfully employed I regret you don’t have as much free time to discuss things as we used to 🙂 .

    The scripture from James points out that more poor people are of the faith then rich people. I will bring in other scriptures that are relevant.

    Are you trying to make the absolutely heretical and 100% in line with Liberation Theology claim that poor people are saved simply because they are poor? I really need you to answer the question for me and you saying a definitive yes or no before you give a wordy response would be appreciated.

    James was not writing to the world at large, he was writing to the following audience, as God led him to:

    James 1:1-3 (New American Standard Bible)

    1 James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad: Greetings.

    2 Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials,

    3 knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance.

    The entire foundation of this letter God had James to write rest on the fact he’s addressing what we would call Messianic Jews. Telling them how they will receive a reward for their suffering in the faith. It’s not a blanket declaration that all poor people receive some sort of default salvation. When Christ speaks of blessings for the poor in scripture, He was speaking of those WHO WERE LISTENING TO AND FOLLOWING HIM.

    You also mentioned:

    I am talking about a deeper social change. Perhaps you can’t comprehend what I envision, a righteous society.

    Where in the Bible are you told that you would find such in Caesar? Which Apostle in scripture petitioned Caesar for such “deeper social change”?

    John, Devon is correct when he mentions that some things you assert are the inverse yet near similar statements that come from the prosperity far Right Wingers. You are pressing for a society of moral values just as much as the far Right lashes onto their pet political topics and with both yours and theirs, while in neither case are either of you really on the firmest of bibical foundations. You’re taking scriptures that involve church management and Christian living and trying to lump them onto a government that expressly is antichrist, a government that worships at the feet of Baal. There’s an odd mixing of darkness and light going on in some of these “faith based political” movements, but the bottom line is this, government is not a reflection of Christ and we’re never told to try and make government an extension of the church.

    Consider what God had Paul to write, through Christ by way of the Holy Spirit.

    1 Timothy 6:7-8 (New American Standard Bible)

    7 For we have brought nothing into the world, so we cannot take anything out of it either.

    8 If we have food and covering, with these we shall be content.

    You live in a nation where plenty of effort is made by groups of all political stripes, to ensure the basics are available and THE POOR OF THE WORLD RUN TO AMERICA, while you grew up here and complain ad nauseam.

    John, my brother, be content and have a good day at work.

  51. Kyle said


    I’m sure you have compassion on those people who have AIDS and young women who are pregnant by telling them it’s OK to have an abortion because you don’t want the poor kids to grow up in poverty or acquire AIDs also right? If so your a sick unrepentant individual. Your obviously an advocate for baby killing. Sadly the topic deviated to MLK where we should be focusing on your wanton disregard for 40 million babies killed since Row V Wade. Let me help you out a bit. We only have 300 million people in the US and 40 million have been aborted. Do the math. Your really sick if you think God condones this. You need to repent.


  52. John Kaniecki said


    No of course poor people have no different standing then rich people. Yet I would consider this statement from James to translate that percentage wise there will be more believers from the poor section than the rich. Many poor people are lovers of money while some rich are not. My own personal experience shows the Bible is true. We knocked on every door in Montclair. (Not me personally of course it is a large town.) The most interested people were those with less money.

    The question then is what is the purpose of government and what is a Christian’s role in that? I certainly hope you don’t believe the JW’s line that we shouldn’t participate at all.
    Everything in a Christian’s life should give glory to God.

    Finally the idea of a righteous society comes right out of the Word of God. If a bull gores a man and the man knew his bull was prone to do so the owner would be guilty. Do not glean the fields twice leave the rest for the poor. Read Leviticus, Numbers and Dueteronomy you will see the laws God laid down. No understand that Jesus fufilled the law. Lust, Christ said was the same as adultery. In the same way these simple Laws of getting along should be projected forward into New Testament thinking.

    Sorry to cut it short, it is my day off and I went in extra for training. Now I have errands to run. The dealership is closed on Sunday. 8)



  53. I won’t get into figures, but too many rich people fall into the deception of their riches for comfort. And some without fall into the deception of desire for riches. The poor in Christ have a great reward coming and the wealthy in Christ have an added effort of needing to give of their means to help others. Those in Christ with greater comfort in this life also have some additional responsibility, to share their means of comfort with others, 1 Timothy 6:18-19.

    The Jehovah-less Witnesses are in deep heresy. Their relationship to government is nothing when considering all their other more pressing issues, with their false doctrinal teachings. But you can’t deny, that in church history the church used to abstain from government involvement. You can’t fault Jehovah-less Witnesses on that one, although they might take it to an extreme that might not even be consistent with church history. Honestly, their posture regarding government involvement is far closer to church history than ours. We can’t fault them for the fact they never promote the scam known as “church tithing” either. I totally consider how much someone desires to be involved in politics under Romans 14. Given the church used to never be involved and we never see the Apostles doing such. Although some Christian saints in scripture were figures in government, they were in government even before claiming to follow Jesus Christ. I see no command for Christians to vote and feel each saint must consider carefully what they will do in their own walk with the Lord.

    I think government is becoming so much a mess, that it’s harder than ever for saints to endorse much of it. I know there is not a single Presidential candidate out there with a “big name” that I could dare vote for personally. And again that’s my stance in the Romans 14 sense. I’ll probably write in “Duncan Hunter” at this point, I would have voted for him.

    But you know John, scripture teaches us that things will trend towards the Antichrist and saints have to realize at what point they might be promoting the enemy in their efforts to promote political agendas. So I take far less stock in politics than I once did, FAR LESS. And you can look at my blog and Job’s as examples. For both of us, the level of posts about politics has taken a sharp decrease. And both me and Job used to hang out on the same political message board once upon a time. Although we didn’t learn that till recently.

    When scripture speaks of a “righteous society” you’re talking about Israel. Those who claimed to follow God and were set apart from pagans everywhere else. By the old covenant of the Law all are condemned and only by Grace is anyone saved by Christ Jesus, to avoid the curse of the Law. John, you can’t get or make a “righteous society” of a society that does not embrace Christ.

  54. John Kaniecki said


    Hi hope you are well.

    Let us carefully look at what we are talking about. In Canada and the United States we have elected officals and all citizens can participate in elections. As a citizen we have an obligation to do our best to make sure our government comes as close to our Christians as possible.

    Your statement that nowhere in the Bible does it say that we should take the money from the pagans and redistribute it. Yet more importantly we should not take money from the pagans (to use your terminology) and use it for the works of the devil. The United States uses it’s money to fund abortions, shouldn’t we object to that. The United States starts agressive wars, shouldn’t we object to that. Indeed we are to Love our enemy and turn the other cheek.

    Now let me ask you is it right for a sovereign nation to take back what belongs to them. A specific example is when Salvador Allende wanted to nationalize the coporations in Chile. What happened was the United States through the CIA ovethrew that government to prevent this. Would you consider that wrong or right according to God’s scriptures? Understand that the man put into power Pinochet was a brutal oppressor of the people.

    The true situation of Chile sets important precedents on how you look at things. It is not a nation telling it’s citizens to share things equally. Instead it is a sovereign government saying what is inside their country belongs to the country. Let me remind you to that those companies who took possession of the resources did not do so in a Godly way.

    Also don’t forget to share which texts on the native Americans you have read!



  55. The one thing about Jehovah-less Witnesses that always got me in regards to them and money and I’ve probably said this before. Is that they ask people who reject them at the door for 50 cents. How have they hacked scripture, to try and affirm that they feel they are the “saint” and should go asking someone who rejected them, with them feeling whoever rejects them is an apostate for money? Money they claim they will use for “ministry” (spreading their lies and heresies to corrupt as many that won’t wisely reject them). Where in scripture do the Apostles go actively seeking money from people they felt were apostates? And while the Jehovah-less Witnesses will beg people they feel are “apostates” for money, they won’t give a dime to any group (charity, religious or otherwise) outside of themselves. If they see the Salvation Army collecting for donations the Jehovah-less Witnesses will walk right past them, but they’ll gladly go to that Salvation Army worker’s house and beg them for 50 cents!

  56. John Kaniecki said


    I agree with everything you said. (At least in your last blog 8)I would go further to say that when people look for the answers in politics that is a very bad thing. Only through Christ can there be meaningul spiritual change. You like to mention Docotor King. I am sure you agree what he did benefited society but it also was short changed as he didn’t promote the salvation aspect of Jesus.

    Yet haven’t we both agreed that Christ will reign on Earth for a thousand years. We must prepare for those days.



  57. Yes we agree Christ is the answer.

    Yes I think some things and I say some things MLK Jr. endorsed were good things. Through common grace he did do some and I repeat some noteworthy things. Unfortunately he never showed true knowledge of saving Grace. I don’t know what Christ might have done for him between the time he was giving his “Mountain Top” speech and talking of desiring to fly to Mount Olympus to speak with Greek pagan philosophers and the shot that killed him the following day. I just don’t have evidence he ever came to really know salvation by Grace through faith in truth. And in all my hearing and reading of him, I never found it. So it was with great disappointment the day I had to admit all my “wondering” about his statements about “love” were really out of step with scripture. And it made it clear that in his misguided view of “love” he was sinning against his wife in adultery.

    I mention King because for some he is a real idol. And if they can get beyond assuming somebody is sin free simply because they advocated societal change it helps some realize they can only count on Jesus Christ.

    I find that Thomas Jefferson did some noteworthy things also, but I also had to admit he was not a Christian although he favored some Christian things. He never favored true faith in Christ.

    Yes our Lord is coming, come quickly Lord Jesus!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: