What Exactly Is Physical Fornication? Not What We Have Been Lead To Believe – A True Definition!

Having been in the church for some time before I awoke to the institutional church beast system, I had always noticed that the pastor and members of the institutional system made sure that it was drummed into the congregation that fornication meant “sex before marriage”, and I believed that this was the case until recently when the Spirit personally challenged me to prove this was the case out of the scriptures. Having look at this from a thousand different angles, I can once again confirm that I had been suckered by the institutional church system on this issue. I will put a challenge out there for anyone to show me out of the scriptures that fornication means sex before marriage.

In fact, I will also put it across that the institutional church has no clue as to what actually constitutes a marriage or I would say, have changed the meaning of marriage in order to control and make money through the new definition that they have fabricated and rendered unto their unsuspecting congregations aswell as the common people.

What Really Is Fornication?

Fornication is simply “unlawful sex(eg homosexuality, lesbianism, beastiality, pedophila, incest etc) and rampant sexual relations with many different people”. An easy example of this is porn actors and actresses. Another quick example of this is celebrities who are known for sleeping around with person after person. I am sure that you are not short of examples here. Let us look at the scriptures and see for ourselves that moreover whenever fornication is mentioned in the scriptures, the involvement of many people is also mentioned as part of the description of it. Isaiah 23:17 reads:

23:17 And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.

Ezekiel 16:15 reads:

16:15 But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.

Ezekiel 16:26 reads:

16:26 Thou hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh; and hast increased thy whoredoms, to provoke me to anger.

Notice so far how fornication is linked to harlotry and whoredoms.

In the Most High describing his people that had forsaken him, he had this to say in Ezekiel 16:28-30 which reads:

16:28 Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied.

16:29 Thou hast moreover multiplied thy fornication in the land of Canaan unto Chaldea; and yet thou wast not satisfied therewith.

16:30 How weak is thine heart, saith the LORD GOD, seeing thou doest all these things, the work of an imperious whorish woman;

Jude 1:7 reads:

1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

When you go into the book of Jasher, it gives an detailed description of how the people of Sodom and Gomorrah four times a year would retreat to a valley and every man would take hold of his neighbours wife and daughter and do with them what they saw fit. Jasher 18:13-15 reads:

13.  And all the people of Sodom and Gomorrah went there four times in the year, with their wives and children and all belonging to them, and they rejoiced there with timbrels and dances.

14.  And in the time of rejoicing they would all rise and lay hold of their neighbor’s wives, and some, the virgin daughters of their neighbors, and they enjoyed them, and each man saw his wife and daughter in the hands of his neighbor and did not say a word.

15.  And they did so from morning to night, and they afterward returned home each man to his house and each woman to her tent; so they always did four times in the year.

That is your fornication. If fornication meant “sex before marriage” then why did Christ state the following in Matthew 19:9 which reads:

19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Wait a minute, you mean a man/woman can commit fornication while they are married? Yes. But the institutional church told us that fornication is “sex before marriage” right? Yes. Do you see what happens when you begin to allow the Spirit to guide you and actually begin to think things through for yourself? Obviously there is a clear contradiction with what the definition of fornication is according to the scriptures vs the definition of fornication according to the Institutional Church Beast System. How can fornication mean sex before marriage when you can be guilty of fornication and be married at the same time according to the words of Christ himself?

The real definition of fornication was in our faces all along, we just trusted in the beast system and believed in our hearts that it was telling us the truth. Let us look at the great WHORE described in Revelation 17 and see why she is given this description. Revelation 17:1-5 reads:

17:1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:

17:2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH:

Again, can you clearly see how fornication is always linked with whoredoms and harlotry?

The institutional church has capitalised upon the incorrect interpretation of marriage and has quite frankly milked and is still milking this cow. They conduct the ceremonies, they control the so called “marriage licences”(which is a whole other topic within itself), they rake in the money, it is always about the money. That is why the institutional church refers to marriage as an “institution”. Marriage is simply 2 people deciding that they wish to commit themselves to each other for life and sealing that commitment via sexual union, in other words the sexual union is the marriage. This is proven with our father Isaac in Genesis 24:65-67 reads:

24:65 For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a vail, and covered herself.

24:66 And the servant told Isaac all things that he had done.

24:67 And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, now I wonder what could have happened in that tent to make them become husband and wife? No second guesses are needed here. You see, the world has marriage backwards, they believe walking down the isle during a ceremony is the marriage when in fact the way of the Hebrews with the marriage was the sexual union first, then if one wished to celebrate the marriage that had already taken place, then they would organise a marriage event. This is what Christ was attending in John 2:1-11.

We live in a world today where we are bombarded daily with sexual imagery whether seen or unseen and the sexual drive today in men and women has been artificially turbo charged by wicked evil men in high places who have hidden agendas. In an ideal world we would find our ideal partner relatively quickly and would be committed to them for life. However, this world is far from ideal, moreover we must search for that special person who we can connect with and is compatible with us and this process can take time in many cases. Since we now know that fornication is actually sleeping around with many different people and not sex before marriage as we have been ill informed, we know not to do this on our search for someone who we can commit to permanently. If you have a partner, stick to that partner only and see the relationship(whatever it may be) through until its end.

This is why Paul stated that every man should have his wife and vise versa to avoid people sleeping around. 1 Corinthians 7:2 reads:

7:2 Nethertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

Paul also went on to deal with abstinence and how that it was not good or beneficial for long periods because temptation would creep in, in relation to couples(1 Corinthians 7:5) . He also made mention that if single folks were not able to abide as him(being celibate), then they were to marry for this is better for them than BURNING(ie, blue balls for the men and cross legged and roasting for the women(1 Corinthians 7:9). This is a reason why when you women are angry at your men, holding back the nookie is not a very smart idea as you are simply encouraging the possibility of him looking elsewhere for it.

Talking also on a related subject, masturbation is simply an act that is trying to fill the void of a regular healthy sex life. The reasons behind masturbation can be various from person to person. Some masturbate occasionally whereas others will regularly carry out this practice and some are even addicted to this habit. Addiction in this area has normally been triggered by some event in the person’s history. Normally, exposure to sexual materials at an early age, sexual abuse/molestation of some sort and parental neglect are the key triggers for masturbation addiction. Healthy regular sex is an essential part of life and do not let anyone else tell you otherwise, especially the institutional church beast. Long periods without sex is not normal and healthy and should be avoided at all costs.

No Bonding Equals No Children – Population Reduction Agenda

This is why the royal political elite promote promiscuity, because with men/women sleeping about with different persons however frequent, no bonds are made, thus no families are created, no children are born which ties in with the population reduction agenda of these rich super so called elitists. You see, while they are telling you to enjoy yourself, have as many sex partners as you want while having no children, they are are having 5, 6, 7, 8 plus children in their families. Reducing the world population can be done in many ways, some more subtle than others. These global elitists have declared that the family unit must be destroyed and free sex is a common instrument used in achieving their goal. It has certainly worked in the west, take a look around you.

I mentioned before at the beginning that fornication can also be unlawful sex. Homosexuality, lesbianism, beastiality and inter generational sex(pedophilia) all fit into this category. So you homosexuals, lesbians, pedophiles and beast lovers who thought that clarification of this definition has now given you a clear run, THINK AGAIN. The Most High has already declared your actions as an abomination. Leviticus 18 deals with all of these foul actions and shows us that they are not to be practised under any circumstances as they are an abomination unto the Most High. Not that you even need a bible to see that the above lifestyles are foul and destructive to the core. I have questioned homosexuals and their supporters and asked them to give me just one positive aspect that the homosexual lifestyle brings to a community, I am still awaiting an answer.

Well, I hope that this has cleared up this issue and given people a clearer understanding as to what the word “fornication” actually means and once again I put the challenge out there for anyone to show from the scriptures that fornication is sex before marriage. I await responses.

The Deprogramming And Decontamination Process Continues

Stay Individual

Blessings In The Most High Our Heavenly Father

 

209 thoughts on “What Exactly Is Physical Fornication? Not What We Have Been Lead To Believe – A True Definition!

  1. No challenge here.
    GREAT post as always!! I allowed the spirit to guide me in relation to this topic as well and I was led to a stikingly similar conclusion. The sexual act itself is the marriage in the eyes of The Most High. If this is done loosely with many people, obviously there is no commmitment (as you stated). That type of erratic or methodical sexual “no strings attached” behavior is in fact whoredom and fornication — no doubt.
    Very nice post sir, keep em coming.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Exactly, well put, I couldn’t have concluded it better in so few a words myself. Yet again, another scam that has been run on us by the institutional church. It always is about the money and control of the people. Even modern dictionaries have chosen to get in on the scam and put out incorrect definitions on this word. The scriptures are absolutely correct when they say that the love of money is the root of all evil(1 Timothy 6:10).

      Liked by 1 person

    • Yes this is the false Christianity that has been preached for a while. St. Augustine was loved by Protestants, Calvinists, and Catholics. He had tons of Gnostic ideas like “all sex is evil, and everything physical is evil.” These teachings and doctrines of man has crept into the Church and now you see why tons of Christian men/women struggle with porn, because they’re told to suppress their natural desires for a mate, because they’re told it’s EVIL!

      The Churches of today are the Pharisees and scribes of Jesus time, who shut up the door to Heaven, and burden man and women with their own rules, they themselves can’t keep.

      Matthew 21:31 Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

      Matthew 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

      Liked by 1 person

    • To the brother who wrote this blog/page; you have a lot of good points.. But saying ‘MASTERBATION’ is alright is TOTALLY a lie from the pit of hell!

      Like

      • Vie,

        Masturbation is the normal result/fallout due to a lack of sex. If somebody is sexually aroused and they don’t have a partner to have sex with, exactly what else are they supposed to do?

        This is why the majority of churches today are filled to the brim with so many closet masturbators, because the church lies to them about the truth definition of the word “fornication” and additionally makes them feel guilty about self relief. Sexual urges are supposed to be relieved, it’s either through sex or masturbation that this is going to happen, there is no way around this.

        Sorry, the Most High doesn’t see it as you see it, he looks at all the circumstances and the history behind the individual and the deed.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Great post Verbs! I have been searching scriptural passages on this subject recently. From a young age I have always said to family and friends that I would never get married in the conventional way as I knew it was not of The Most High even though I did not know my true identity. To this day i do not speak with my family as my ideals are too out there for them and im sure they think i am crazy. The Most High has been working in my life and it has taken a huge burden off me with no wedding planning and stupid christneings ect..lol. I knew the whole set up up of western chuchified marriages and divorce was a money making scam. How could a so called preist who is satanic marry two people????And now they are marrying same sex???? thanks for allowing The Most High use you to breakdown these church lies I have been also looking for sciptures on adultery. If you have any could you please post a reply.
    Many Thanks. Really enjoy reading your posts
    Bless you in the Name of our Father

    Liked by 1 person

    • This was a great burden off my shoulders when the Most High challenged me on this issue, forcing me to conduct a thorough investigation on this matter, and I didn’t even have to dig deep to reach the conclusion that the institutional church had suckered me again. The last wedding I attended was a few years ago where I witnessed the thick booklet of marriage licences, just waiting to be completed with the relevant names of the couples “getting married”. Everything in this world is just a racket for a certain few to benefit from, so called “weddings” being one of the largest rackets that the institutional church has going.

      Your situation with your family was prophesied out of the mouth of Christ himself when he said in Matthew 10:34-36 which reads:

      10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I CAME NOT TO SEND PEACE, BUT A SWORD.

      10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

      10:36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

      All praises must go to Ahayah for lifting me up and freeing my mind to do this as I could have easily remained in a zombie like state like the rest of the general population and be focusing on mindless trivial nonsense. On the adultery issue, I found the following:

      Exodus 20:14
      Leviticus 20:10
      Deut 5:18
      Prov 6:32
      Jer 3:8,9
      Jer 5:7
      Jer 7:9
      Jer 23:14
      Jer 29:23
      Ezek 16:32
      Ezek 23:37
      Hos 4:2,13,14
      Matt 5:27,28,32
      Matt 19:9,18
      Mark 10:11,12,19
      Luke 16:18
      Luke 18:20
      John 8:3,4
      Romans 2:22
      Romans 13:9
      James 2:11
      2 Peter 2:14
      Rev 2:22

      On the variation “adulterous” I found these:

      Proverbs 30:20
      Matt 12:39
      Matt 16:4
      Mark 8:38

      Hope these help you out on your studies, as always the thanks are greatly appreciated.

      Ahayah Bless

      Like

      • Hey dude so I wanted to ask, I’m 14 and I want to get a girlfriend would that be fornication and lust, I’m asking because when this topic comes up everyone gets into debate and I’ve been confused for a long time

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar Guzman,

        Getting a girlfriend is not fornication and is not lust. The church likes to lie about a lot of things in order to keep their members ignorant and under control. Fornication only occurs when you begin to have sex with many different women or you involve yourself in sex that is contrary to nature ie homosexuality, bestiality, incest and pedophilia. Stay away from the above pitfalls and you will be just fine.

        Like

    • I’m glad you found the light on this. So what if your family don’t talk to you. Who are you supposed to be afraid of, your family, or the Most High?

      Who are you supposed to please, your family, or the Most High?

      Like

    • Not all churches are the same – look for a church that practice biblical truths. It is not good to conclude that all church is the same.. And lot of things mentioned on this site are only someone’s opinion but no truth.

      Like

      • Vie,

        I’ve heard that statement before about “not all churches being the same”. I’ve already dealt with that flawed argument in my Institutional Church Beast Infrastructure book, the Most High is pulling down these monuments of failure because they are no longer examples of the church that Christ established in Matthew 16. It’s your choice, leave or become a casualty in the up and coming carnage.

        Sorry, here I deal with facts unless stated otherwise. If I have an opinion on any particular topic then I will declare it as an opinion.

        Like

  3. Excellent post! I was able to have clear understanding about something I thought I already understood. Your post is a great example of why we need to reread what we’ve read, studied and prayed about. The Holy Spirit will open up a whole new level of understanding on matters the “church” had you to believe was the WORD. When actually it became the “churches” interpertation, leaving us to make that interpertation as the way to live and believe.—I noticed when I pulled myself out of that kind of “church” setting and decided to do nothing but take these scriptures at face value, without any outside influences, I began to not only see and understand better, but I felt….lighter, as though I had shedded old dead skin. I found taking the WORD at face value, gave me new life, love and respect about how I serve the Almighty everyday. He does not lie or hide the truth. Because he is the truth.

    Much love to you, Bro. Verbs. Thank you for creating this blog and being true to it. Prayers to you and your loved ones as you continue along like myself and others, on this rewarding mission.

    Like

    • The love and prayers are always greatly appreciated and they are returned in the same manner. I was just sick and tired of running into people who didn’t want to answer questions and would use my curiousness and inquisitive nature against me by telling me that by asking questions I was doubting the Most High and his word, thus making me feel guilty and over time I would keep my questions to myself.

      I remember attending the institutional church and seeing things that I knew was wrong, however when I confronted congregational members, I was told to look upon what I had seen in a different light and that I didn’t “fully understand the intricacies” of the “church”. It is a struggle to live by the institutional church model, as I stated before in my Institutional Church Rhetoric blogs, you either break and become a zombie under the institutional church system, not questioning and accepting everything or you fight, rebel and ultimately leave the system. The latter is preferable in the eyes of the Most High. Now he can truly have a personal relationship with you without any distractions or other voices interrupting your walk with him.

      Remember our saviour Yashayah said it himself in Matthew 11:30 which reads:

      11:30 For MY YOKE IS EASY, and MY BURDEN IS LIGHT.

      Your shedding of skin analogy is a perfect representation of the unnecessary and burdensome rubbish you leave behind when you come out of the institutional church system. Another comparison is a power lifter throwing down the barbell of weights after completing the competition time. Herein as you stated begins a new life. I must say that the new path is strange in that it is so far removed from the image of the walk that the institutional church drummed into us. At the same time though it is exciting as you do not know where you will end up next or what direction the Most High will take you in.

      May the blessings of Ahayah be upon you and your people. We will soon see Zion.

      Ahayah Bless

      Like

  4. Hello verb,
    I am agree with what you’ve wrote … In Africa (I’m native of Congo), we have the customary marriage and this is enough to officialize the wedding between the both parts family ….In our actual civilization, we have a to prove it legally and so, get marry at the registry hall at least. The church wedding can be use as “blessing ceremony” then … as evangelical member church.

    Let me know what you think …

    Like

    • Agreed, the ceremony is not the main part of the wedding, to be honest it is just a side show. The consummation(sexual union)part is the most important part and where the real focus should be. However there are circumstances that may require you to go through the ceremony. Pressure from parents and elders may be a reason or maybe it might be part of a tradition that is kept. Under circumstances like these and others I understand why people go through the ceremony stage, to avoid hassle from others, however this blog is simply bringing light to the lies that have been pushed by the church, to make people think that sex before marriage is fornication, this is simply error and a lie that has been propagated by the “church” for greed and financial gain.

      Like

  5. I understand your argument about fornication. But if sex before marriage is not called fornication, does it mean that its ok since the bible doesn’t say sex before marriage is wrong but says fornication is werong?

    Like

    • The “sex before marriage” statement is completely false, a red herring and a pack of lies from its conception. According to the Bible, the sexual union is the marriage if you both have decided that you wish to spend the rest of your days together. However, finding a mate for life isn’t easy thesedays so you most probably will have the experience of several relationships before landing on the right one. Fornication is simply behaving like a porn star. As long as you stay away from this type of behaviour(ie, that is going from person to person) and keep your sexual relations to the current person you are with only, then you are in sync with the scriptures.

      The so called “church” wants you to have blue balls(as a man) and sit there cross legged and roasting(as a woman) and live in fear with their false ” no sex before marriage” slogan constantly on your mind, when sex is supposed to be a regular and healthy part of life. Unless you have the temperance and control that Paul had then I wouldn’t bother trying to be a monk. So, in relation to the so called “church”, their definition of marriage is wrong(deliberately) to line up with their “no sex before marriage” false mantra. Money, money , money, always follow the money.

      Like

      • Not so I’m afraid. Jesus clearly distinguished between marriage and living together when He spoke to the woman at the well. Read John 4: 16 – 18

        Like

  6. Very good post! I’ve been telling people this for years. The only thing I want to know is who made fornication mean premarital sex? Fornication comes from the Latin fornix which means “archway”. Where did premarital sex come into play?

    Like

    • Blame the Roman Catholic church for this seed of disinformation which they then spread to the other denominations(which are really the children of her) in order to control and declare themselves lords over something that had been created by the Most High himself. As I have mentioned on here before, the term “premarital sex” is a false term to begin with. They have just made the term up out of whole cloth, so now you have to go through their rules and regulations in relation to marriage in order to be “legit”(according to their lies and propaganda).

      Also remember, the bottom line here is money, money, money, money. Marriage is very lucrative to the Institutional Church Beast System which prides itself on keeping people in the dark in chains of bondage, not teaching them anything of value and rinsing them for their cash.

      Like

  7. I really enjoyed reading this. This backs up what I have understood from my reading and understanding of the Bible on this subject. I wish many people would read this as well.

    Great job uncovering the truth

    Like

  8. A new problem arises when you equate fornication as sleeping around, and sexual union as marriage. If you have sex with someone, then according to you, you are married. Now that you are married, the only way for you to lawfully leave your spouse is if they cheat on you according to Mat 19:9, “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery: and whoever marries her who is put away does commit adultery.”

    In this sense you better think long and hard about who you sleep with, as the only thing that can separate you two in God’s eyes is infidelity.

    Like

    • Well, the scriptures show us that physical fornication is linked with harlotry and whoredom. I’m not bringing my opinion to the table here. There is nothing here that is “according to me”. We know from Matthew 19:9 that fornication cannot possibly mean “sex before marriage” since in that very same verse Christ was talking to married men. You are also missing the commitment aspect to this. Two people can have casual sexual relations but not be married but they are not fornicating as long as they sleep with each other only. Isaac was committed to Rebekah when he had sex with her which is what made the marriage.

      It is indeed true, that we should be thinking more about who we decide to have sexual relations with anyway. Even in Matthew 19:11 Christ stated that this order of saying wasn’t for everyone and in the 12 verse he went on to say that those that can receive it should receive it, this is one of many examples of the grace of the new covenant.

      Like

      • I agree that fornication is not out right “sex before marriage.” I believe that the intent to marry should be present when a male and female decides to have sex.

        You stated, “Two people can have casual sexual relations but not be married…” So if a couple decides to have sex with no intention to marry yet they do not sleep with anybody else, what do you call this? Do believe that this honors the Father and His purpose for sex?

        As a male virgin, I have been looking into this subject lately and it has given a great deal of insight. Great article.

        Like

      • Matt,

        The primary purpose for sex is actually for procreation, the pleasure experienced as part of the process is a merely a side bonus. Back in the day before feminism was introduced into society in the 1960s the chances of running into a good, decent woman without having to date over and over was much higher than it is today. If two people decide to have sex with the intent to marry in mind then that is all good, however in 2015 this is far from the case in western societies. The chances of you finding somebody with the same mindset is very slim. You would be better off looking for women in a foreign country where feminism hasn’t contaminated them or to where the contamination is at a minimal level.

        Again, when dealing with sex you must discard of the “sex is only permitted within a marriage” mantra, this is part of institutional church beast propaganda. At the end of the day sex is a need just like oxygen, the church has done great damage in rendering sex under the designation of a desire. If a person feels sexually aroused then they are going to relieve that urge through either having sex or through masturbation. I talked about this in my book The Institutional Church Beast Infrastructure. The Most High has a problem with promiscuous sexual practices and sex that is contrary to nature, if a person steers clear of these two avenues then they will be just fine in his eyes.

        The muzzling of a necessary function is the reason why there is so much sexual promiscuity, porn addiction and closet masturbation within the church beast system today. Remember, boys and girls typically first become aroused when puberty kicks in, since people in western societies on average get married in their mid to late 20’s, what is a person to do in the meantime if they subscribe to the church’s commonly push doctrine on this issue? The misunderstanding of sex is the primary issue with most believers, not the sex itself.

        Like

  9. I loved this but in regards to the homosexuality I disagree with you. I am a lesbian myself and have struggled for years in the dark and with depression. I asked God for multiple signs and asked Him to guide me to where I needed to go and the Spirit in me did. I was sent multiple dreams and one night I prayed “if this is truly what you want for me, let me know.”
    That night, in a dream, I saw 1 Corinthians 12:15 written on a piece of paper. I didn’t recognize the verse so I read it. The chapter for me perfectly.

    God still continues to guide me this way.

    I ask you to open your mind for a moment and check out this site. It explains things better than I do so… You may be surprised. Or send gaychristian a message on tumblr.com. He’s great at answering your questions. He may actually provide you challenging answers.

    God Bless!

    http://www.gaychristian101.com/why-do-homosexuals-believe-that-homosexuality-is-not-a-sin.html

    Like

    • Also when I said in the beginning with the depression, I meant when I thought I was straight and searched for love where it couldn’t thrive. The same way as (assuming you’re a guy) you would feel were you romantically involved with a guy. It wouldn’t feel right or natural. Same thing here

      Like

      • It sounds like to me that there are many issues layered on top of each other here. The homosexual issue is a very complex one. I used to think that it was simple when I was in the institutional church, however today I realise that homosexuality is a snare that can be rooted in many triggering events. One thing that you can do is if you are unaware of what events have sparked off your desire towards women, you can ask the Most High in prayer to show you where this all came from, how did your desire for women start, what was the trigger that kick off your lesbian lifestyle?

        The answers may not come straight away, they may take time to manifest and it is going to be a process to put the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle together, but trust in the Most High and he will answer you and show you where all of this originated. Once this information is revealed to you then the healing process can really begin to take shape and work quicker.

        From the fact that you have stated that you have not been attracted to men for as long as you can remember, I suspect that something happened to you possibly when you were younger that derailed your natural path towards men and a family. The number 1 culprit is normally abuse in any form though there are other factors than can also bring about a turn to this lifestyle.

        Blessings

        Like

    • No, this is a far cry from what the Most High wants from you. Christ stated in Matthew 19 that he which made them at the beginning made them MALE AND FEMALE when he was questioned by the Pharisees about valid reasons for divorcing a wife. Also remember that it is the Most High that makes the rules, not men. It is important to look to the Most High for standards and not what men are promoting for their own ease and comfort of mind.

      Nobody is born a lesbian or a homosexual, you never came out of the womb a lesbian. Normally this lifestyle is taken on by a person due to some sort of tragedy or some sort of trauma occurring in that person life, a good number of times it is common to experience these tragic events when they are young. I suspect that this may have happened in your life. There are many circumstances that can trigger off somebody turning to the homosexual lifestyle.

      I don’t know what the Most High is doing in your life but I can tell you for certain that he will purge that lesbian spirit out of you if you are genuinely seeking him. To be honest, you should feel comfortable in the fact that the Most High will take away the desire for women out of you and return unto you the natural desires towards men. It is not for you to feel comfortable about being lesbian, it is for you to feel comfortable about having the faith that the Most High will bring out of you a new creature and deliver you from the clutches of homosexuality.

      It is only the world that promotes homosexuality and lesbianism as being normal and now we have so called christian groups attempting to justify these lifestyles before the Most High power. It isn’t going to happen, The Most High’s position is the same on these 2 lifestyles as it was when he laid down the rules against them from the beginning.

      The beginning of the redemption from lesbianism comes from acknowledging that the lifestyle is wrong, especially if you can trace back the root to some sort of tragedy or trauma based event that occurred in your life. How can it be right if it is rooted in tragedy? It is when you acknowledge that you need redeeming, this is when the Most High can bring you out of that lifestyle and remove that spirit from within you. It is for him to do the work within you, there is little you can do except have faith and trust in him to complete the transformation.

      The danger here is believing what men say over what the scriptures clearly teach on this topic. Ask the Most High to give you a hatred for the lifestyle and to bring you out from its clutches. If you are genuinely seeking a change back to the natural desires of a woman then the Most High has seen this and there is nothing for you to be concerned about. The danger however is accepting your current damaged state as normal and believing that there is no need for change.

      The fact that you have been wrestling with this issue shows me that the Most High is working with you to purge out that lifestyle from you, even though sometimes it may not feel like it. Believe it or not the struggle is a sign that the Most High is still with you. Loose that conscience and that is when the trouble starts. Your walk with the Most High is an individual walk, what he is doing in your life I have no idea about and it is none of my business but I can definitely say from reading the scriptures that you being a lesbian is not going to be the end product when he has finished purifying your heart.

      Blessings In The Name Of The Father

      Like

      • A marriage is quoted to be between a man and a woman but we see that it’s not like that in the Bible, an example being Solomon and his many wives (and concubines).
        Also, if you look at the original translations of the Bible, the word homosexual was never used and the original Greek words, in fact had different connotations.
        Also, saying no one is born gay is not a valid point to make. I could just as easily say you weren’t born straight and chose to love women but I’m sure you’ll disagree.
        Medical evidence seems to point to genes and hormones and how they impact the developing child.

        I appreciate your point of view, however, I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree ❤

        Merry (almost) Christmas btw ❤

        Like

      • This is what many homosexuals and lesbians alike attempt to do in order to try and make their lifestyle fit in with the scriptures, they start propagandising and lying on the bible to try and make it accommodate their life rather than the reverse(which should be the normal action and direction), accepting the raw truth on what the bible says about the lifestyle of homosexuality and trying to change.

        How Solomon was living in his time in no wise justifies your current lifestyle as Solomon was an individual who lived 1000s of years ago and you are an individual who is living in today’s era. You will stand before the Most High to give an account of YOUR LIFE, not Solomon’s. The Most High will not allow you to use somebody else’s life as a pillar and crutch to lean on as an excuse for indulging in abominable behaviour.

        The bible does not have to specifically use the word homosexual in order for it to lay over the commandment and understanding that two people of the same sex must not sleep together, in fact it doesn’t use the word homosexual, however it is clear, “mankind shall NOT lie together with mankind as with a woman, it is an abomination to the Most High”. You cannot misinterpret or manufacture an alternative interpretation for this. The only 2 alternatives for the homosexual to do at this point is to either accept what is written plainly in truth or to lie to himself and others by fabricating a false explanation on what is written.

        In fact a bible isn’t even required to know that homosexuality/lesbianism is wrong. All I need to do is look at nature itself, another part of the Most High’s creation. I do not see a male lion trying to have sexual intercourse with another male lion. This is contrary to nature and you can go all through the animal kingdom and witness the same thing, male and female only coming together.

        I have debated homosexuals and homosexual advocates alike and all they have been able to show me in terms of the theory that homosexuality is a trait that you are born with is a load of maybe, possibly, hope so, could be and many more inferences and hypothesis. No scientist will come out and blatantly say that yes people are born homosexual because they all know that there is no real hard science to back the theory. So they stick to the may bes, could bes and possiblies.

        No, you took on the lifestyle, just because you may not remember when you took it on because you have been practicing it for so long, this doesn’t change the fact that you made a choice in the past to sleep with your first woman and have continued making the same choices to sleep with more women ever since. As I stated before, the homosexual/lesbian who acknowledges that what they are doing is wrong and that they require spiritual help from on high, he/she the Most High will have mercy on however, the homosexual/lesbian who attempts to justify their lifestyle by lying on the scriptures and believes that they are not required to make a lifestyle change, that person is in serious trouble and I would not like to be in their shoes.

        Your lifestyle is justified in the eyes of men only, not in the eyes of the Most High, you would do very well to remember this.

        Blessings

        Like

      • Btw, I haven’t been “practicing” anything. I’m only 17. I am a virgin. And I was waiting until marriage to have sex and I happened to stumble upon your article. Iv only come to this conclusion a couple of months ago.
        Don’t assume the homosexual lifestyle includes promiscuity because in many cases it does not.
        And also, homosexuality occurs in over 1500 species of animals. You can find this fact in any google search engine. It is a simple fact that it does occur.
        Also, the Leviticus verse you tend to throw around isn’t reliable anymore. It was a set of cultural laws that was meant to set apart Gods people at the time. They were cultural and ceremonial. If you abide by these it would also mean we couldn’t eat shrimp, wear two types of linen together, or shave your beard.
        The law was done away with by Christ as He came to “abolish the law”.
        Also, I believe the sin of sodom and Gomorrah wasn’t homosexuality but was, in fact, the fornication between people that was so lust filled and lacked monogamy.

        Like

      • Listen, it doesn’t matter what degree of homosexuality you are indulging in, none of it is justified in the eyes of the Most High. Like I said before your lifestyle is only justified in the eyes of men and they have fed you utter rubbish in regards to the Most High’s standing on this issue. Whether promiscuous or monogamous, the lifestyle is an abomination unto the Most High and there is no way around this apart from rolling into deliberate ignorance and self denial.

        See how you homosexuals are so desperate to validate your lifestyle that you will clutch onto any straw and make up utter nonsense in an attempt to persuade the public that it is an acceptable and normal practice. Homosexuality in animals, utter nonsense. You see rare, random out of nature behaviour occasionally come out of some animals and you automatically conclude that this is their normal instinct and course of life???

        The more you talk, the more I see that you in danger because you clearly must be conversing with people who simply do not know the scriptures. The scriptures are of the Hebrews, my people. I am a Hebrew by bloodline therefore I am the authority over my records. There are no parts of my records that are “not reliable”, this is utter nonsense and needs to be trashed immediately.

        The law for your information consisted of two halves, the Moral half and the Sacrificial/Atonement/Ordinance half. The Moral half is in relation to interacting with and living with mankind in stability and equilibrium whereas the Sacrificial/Atonement/Ordinance half was in relation to how to interact with the Most High. The Sacrificial/Ordinance/Atonement half is the half that was abolished with the sacrifice of Christ and replaced by faith and believe, the Moral half still stands as this half deals with living amongst your fellow man. So no, you cannot sleep with women as this is against the Moral side of the law WHICH IS STILL IN PLACE.

        Stop dealing with and listening to unlearned fools who are handing down to you corrupt and dangerous advice aswell as dodgy misinformation. This is a sure way to end up in hellfire. This is exactly what I am talking about, homosexuality wasn’t the only sin as to why these 2 cities were destroyed, but they were the main reasons why the Most High took them out. It doesn’t matter what you believe, the Most High set ablaze 2 cities in the past for indulging in what you are currently practicing and do you believe that you can possibly escape drinking of that same cup of judgement he handed to them? You better think again, you will burn into ashes and dust just aswell as the folks at Sodom and Gomorrah did, guaranteed.

        Bless

        Like

  10. Great post. You left 1 thing untouched. Levitical law was for the jews, given to them by Moses on how to conduct themselves in the land of canaan. God NEVER condemned homosexuals. In fact, in Isaiah ch. 56 GOD speaks to the “eunuchs” as well as Jesus in Matthew ch. 19. Please stop using the old laws to prove your point. If that were the case, then sunday worship is wrong, you can’t eat shellfish, when a woman is on her monthly, she is to be separated because she is unclean, among other things. Find out who and what a eunuch is before passing judgment on others. Keep up your work. Just be more thorough in your research. Thank you and GOD bless!

    Like

    • The Levitical law as you call it was indeed for the Jews. However, you also forget that these same Jews whom the Most High separated were to be an example which the rest of the world was supposed to follow, this was and still is the plan. So, when the Most High stated that man was not to sleep with another man as with a woman, this was the standard that the Most High wanted the world to adopt through the premier example of his people.

      God doesn’t condemn the homosexual who acknowledges that his lifestyle is an abomination unto the Most High(abomination means sickly, sick or sickened) and that he needs to change. The homosexual however who does not believe he needs to change and believes that the Most High will accept him as he is, is condemned already. The homosexual lifestyle is putrid and sickly to the Most High and he makes his feelings about it known in no uncertain terms nor dark sentences. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were incinerated because they were UNREPENTANT about their homosexual activities. They were also practicing pedophilia which always comes on the heels of homosexuality. If burning these people is not a condemnation of the homosexual lifestyle, then what is?

      Sir, what has a eunuch got to do with either homosexuality or fornication? Have you merely injected this in for fun? You do not understand the law, the moral side of the law was never dropped nor is it old because this side of the law relates to how man is supposed to live in harmony, longevity, prosperity and peace with other men.

      The ordinance/sacrificial/atonement side of the law is the part of the law that Christ replaced through his death. The sabbath, unclean meats and the things pertaining to a woman in her monthly cycle were all under this part of the law, not the moral section. The side of the law that pertains to morality will always stand and this is confirmed in the new testament also(1 Cor 6:9, Gal 5:19-21). You cannot use that old law nonsense to justify sweeping aside morality, it isn’t going to and cannot work, that is your own law not the scriptures, old or new testament.

      Keep relevant to the topic at hand sir, I see straight through random, miscellaneous points that have nothing to do with the topic being discussed and I won’t tolerate them. Your praises are appreciated sir however, you need to refine your knowledge on how the law was structured and exactly what section Christ replaced with his death.

      Most High Bless

      Like

      • Hello. Its obvious that you did not research the word “eunuch” to find out what it means nor did you read the scriptures that I provided for further research. “They have eyes to see, but see not, ears to hear, but hear not”. I am a gay male who has been to several pastors seeking knowledge to rid myself of what some people have called “the demon inside of me”. I was told I had a demon inside of me and I needed to pray it of me. With my relationship with GOD, he brought me to Isaiah ch. 56 starting at verse 3; “neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and CHOOSE the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; Even unto them will I give in mine house a name better than of sons and daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall NOT be cut off. Now on to the new testament in Matthew ch 19, Jesus was disputing with the pharisees about divorce when the eunuch was mentioned again

        Like

      • I know exactly what a eunuch is, what I am failing to understand is what a eunuch has to do with homosexuality or fornication. There is no common link whatsoever. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with being a eunuch. A eunuch either cannot take part in sexual activities or chooses to refrain from sexual activities. Homosexuality and fornication are the total opposites of this and homosexuality is on a completely different tangent all together.

        You need to understand that if you have a true relationship with the Most High, that he is working to bring you out of the homosexual lifestyle, not bringing you to a position where you justify and normalize the lifestyle in your mind. If you are attempting to justify the lifestyle of a homosexual, you will find absolutely no leverage to do so within the scriptures.

        Like

      • At verse 11 Jesus said “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mothers’s womb, (gay men), and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: (castrated or transgendered), and there be eunuchd, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake, (nuns, priests, etc). He that is able to receive it, let him receive it! My point is, I realized that I was not demon possesed. GOD does not make any mistakes. He knew me in my mother’s womb. I came to the conclusion that GOD wants no 1 to perish. I decided that I must deny my flesh, like everyone else to be pleasing to the Father. The question posed to me when He opened my eyes to the truth was are you going to live your life for yourself or in service to GOD. I chose the latter.

        happier. Instead of condemning that what you don’t understand, ask the Father to give you clarity on these issues so you don’t condemn those who are different than you. People with these attitudes run GODS people away from Him and He is angry about it. With all thy getting, get understanding

        Like

      • A eunuch born from their mother’s womb is referring to a person who has no interest in any sexual activities from day one and continues in that manner for as long as they desire. A eunuch is not a homosexual and whoever fed you this nonsense I pray will be recompensed fully for teaching this folly.

        A eunuch who is made a eunuch by men has simply been castrated by force. What does transgenderisation have to do with this process? The eunuch is not attempting to change their sexual anatomy, a man’s penis is not removed in order for him to replace it with a synthetic vagina, the male organ is removed and that is the end of the story. Again, as I stated before, the scriptures will not justify the homosexual lifestyle whether abstaining or not abstaining from sexual practices, it makes no difference.

        You are correct, the Most High does not make any mistakes, you never came out of the womb a homosexual, something has happened at some point in your life that has triggered a turn to this lifestyle, the normal culprits being all forms of abuse, neglect, parents divorcing and/or a dis-functional family unit.

        I will condemn homosexuality because the Most High condemns homosexuality. I am not condemning you, I am condemning the homosexual lifestyle. There are no scriptures that condone this lifestyle and homosexuals calling themselves christians have been attempting to justify their sexual orientation through the scriptures for years, and it still is not working.

        As I stated to a lesbian who also commented on here not so long ago, the homosexual who admits to the Most High that their sexual orientation is not according to his order and his works and who asks the Most High to restore to them the normal and natural desires towards the opposite sex, that homosexual the Most High will reach out to, save and restore to him the former in deep forgiving love. It is the homosexual that attempts to justify their lifestyle by twisting the scriptures to bring themselves ease of mind, convinces themselves that this lifestyle is favourable in the eyes of the Most High despite the scriptures clearly stating the opposite and then goes further to teach this false position to others, that homosexual the Most High will deal with, with angry and fury poured out and I would not like to be in his/her shoes.

        I understand the general mechanics that can bring a person into any kind of bondage. Restraining oneself from having sex with the same gender is not sufficient, prayer requests to the Most High to restore the natural desires towards the opposite sex are the next step forward.

        Blessings In The Father

        Like

      • I apologize about how my post came out, but all I am saying is get understanding before you teach. Study to show thyself approved, and thar doesn’t mean taking the old covenant to condemn those who are under the new covenant which us grace. People can and do take advantage of grace, but just because we are under grace does not mean we can do anything we want. We must choose the things that are pleasing to GOD no matter who or what we are. We live by the spirit, not the law. The Holy Spirit guides me in everything I do and keeps me from sin because I hide the word in my heart and keeps GODS law in my heart and obey them because He loves me just as much as He loves all others. This my last response in this issue. I hope you research for yourself. GOD bless! 🙂

        Like

      • You cannot throw to the wayside the law of morality, it is the law of nature handed down to us from the Most High. As long as there is nature in existence and as long as we are living among others, the law of morality will always remain. The new covenant condemns homosexuality just as much as the old(Rom 1:22-32 -paying particular attention to verses 26 and 27, 1 Cor 6:9-11, Gal 5:19-21 to name a few). Active participation in homosexual behaviour is both fornication and an abomination unto the Most High and abstinence but still retaining the desire towards the same sex is still unnatural and still most definitely not according to the directions of the Most High.

        Grace is there but you must always remember that grace is there to give you the breathing space and room to MAKE THE NECESSARY CHANGES or at least ask the Most High to initiate the change process, not to continue to justify the works of the flesh and to exalt evil doing. Remember, you are supposed to be a NEW CREATURE in Christ, you would do well to remember this.

        Bless

        Like

      • I am not condoning homosexual acts nor any other sexual act that GOD has condemned. I said that we are to live our lives in obedience to GOD through the Holy Spirit. As I realized through study and scriptures, if I love GOD I would die to my flesh daily and no longer be carnally minded. And eunuchs are not born without desires of having sex. All eunuchs through history are not sexually attracted to the opposite sex. This is fact as I have studied. Your response was cool. You basically repeated what I said. My point is we live by the spirit and if you have the holy spirit, it will help you not to do the things GOD does not approve. as listening to mine. I have been celibate for over a year now. And its because of me keeping my relationship with GOD throuhg Jesus that I have been able to do this.

        Like

      • Everything under the umbrella of homosexuality not just the sexual act itself is an abomination to the Most High.

        On the flip side I understand that purging that lifestyle out of a man/woman is a process and takes time to complete. Now it is for the homosexual to acknowledge that his lifestyle is contrary to the Most High, hold up his hands, ask for mercy and to be changed back to desire the opposite sex and trust and have faith that the Most High will complete this work.

        Again sir, the bible defines the meanings of words within itself, this is what this very blog post is all about. Outside authorities are not a requirement and more times than none, are not valid.

        Bless

        Like

      • You cannot go to men for an interpretation of something within the scriptures, this is the problem and the root of this twisted interpretation on the BIBLICAL meaning of the word eunuch. The Spirit is supposed to give you the understanding on the scriptures, not men with an agenda at hand who are also attempting to ease the struggles within their minds.

        The biblical definition of a eunuch is very different from the interpretation that men have decided to forge today. You cannot look at and study the scriptures from an academic standpoint, the bible is a spiritual book requiring discernment from the Holy Spirit to fully comprehend its contents.

        The true test of whether what you are saying is true is if you can show out of the scriptures alone that you have an accurate point. There is not one scripture in the bible that connects a eunuch on any level with homosexuality. If you still say otherwise, please show me one.

        Bless

        Like

  11. I absolutely love this / I love the fresh angle and truth you backed it up with / I too felt something wasn’t right or systematic and this has clarified everything !!!

    Blessings

    Like

  12. Very Enlightening. This was a good post and cleared things up for me as far as fornication is concerned. I felt in my spirit for a few years something wasn’t quite right with the topic as a whole. As for marriage ceremonies are concerned, i’d never knock anyone for having a more traditional ceremony (according to today’s standards) not to mention I’ll eventually enjoy one myself and enjoy others. I kno the truth and i’m very content with how I’ll move forward. Me and my beautiful woman know exactly what we are and mean to each other, and that’s the most important thing.

    Like

    • Exactly, there is nothing wrong with going through with the traditional ceremony if that is what a person chooses, however the church has used this ceremony as a tool of manipulation on so many fronts. That is pure evil and wickedness.

      Like

      • i hear you. The actual ceremony and beyond…..SO much have been manipulated by the church. This is aint even the half of it. However, there are some great churches who don’t even require funds to perform a ceremony (like mine). no rental fees….nothing. just shoot em a date and you can use the building and have a preacher. Now, the government?? That’s an entirely new post! lol

        Like

  13. Now I just want to know if there are any churches who will preach this. I would LOVE to attend a church that taught this.

    Like

    • I very much reckon that you would have a very hard time finding a church that would preach the truth on this issue as you read so in this blog. If they started teaching the truth then their power and control over the people would be reduced significantly.

      Also people would then begin to question the reasons why they were lied to for such a long time. People are leaving churches in mass at the moment, could you imagine what would happen if this came to the surface? Exactly, this is one of the main reasons why they keep this truth aswell as many others under a very thick carpet. Knowledge is power.

      Like

  14. Hi Verb2012
    Great article.
    I myself fell in love with a guy 5 years ago now, it hasn’t always been an easy ride.
    He isn’t a Christian but accepts the fact I am. I prayed earnestly to God to take the feelings I had for him away I wasn’t looking for love or anything when I met him, I was content with God and I still love him more than ever, I honestly never wanted to go out with a non-Christian. But now not a day goes by where I don’t pray for him and his salvation. And when I go to my church ( a good one) he always asks what God said today, or when I read my bible.
    A year into the relationship I lost my virginity to him, so I have only had the one partner and that’s all there will ever be. And that night is still special in my mind,
    My previous relationship was an abusive one in a sexual, emotional and spiritual way, the guy was a Christian but did not respect me. More so he was my best friend.
    Now my partner is my best friend and he has caused a lot of healing in trusting again and loving again.
    I had been wondering if what I am doing is sexually immoral.
    But he considers me his wife and I do everything a wife should do and he treats me as such,
    Now I find myself planning a ceremony and feast to celebrate our relationship with friends and family.
    My friend thinks I am committing sexual sin, she wants me to abstain from it until the wedding (a year away) but that would only hurt my partner. Because to him the piece of paper is moot, he cares about the commitment he made to me.
    Your thoughts on this?

    Like

    • God’s Princess

      Christ stated that the children of this world are wiser than the children of light. Your husband(because that what he is already in the eyes of the Most High) is exactly correct when it comes down to the marriage licence, it is a worthless and a dangerous piece of paper. The marriage licence actually replaces the state at the head of the marriage instead of the Most High. The marriage licence also gives the state the right to take away any children that you have or might have in the future if they do not feel that you are looking after them “appropriately”.

      The sad thing about many Christians is that they do not do any of their own research, they typically listen to the pastor and take what he says at face value as if the pastor is infallible. The marriage licence originally came from the days shortly after slavery. There were many interracial marriages taking place between black men and white women, the state was not happy about this movement so it brought in a legislative rule that if a white women wanted to marry a black man or vise versa, the marriage had to be registered with the state. This is where the marriage licence came from, it was the state’s method of keeping track of how many blacks were marrying whites. It has nothing to do with the Most High, NOTHING. Besides it was the Most High who created marriage between a man and a woman not the state, so why would I need permission from the state to be married via their piece of paper, the Most High has already given me the authority to marry. The long and short of it is the state is attempting to replace the Most High and have you worship it instead of him.

      If you ask a average Christian to show you out of the scriptures that sex before THEIR IDEA of marriage equals fornication, they simply cannot do it. Nowhere in the bible does the word fornication equate itself to the commonly used term “sex before marriage”. It is the pastors who have handed down this false definition to their flocks. Many Christians assume that fornication means sex before marriage however it cannot be proven out of the scriptures. I have already put out the challenge here for somebody to prove me wrong and nobody has stepped up to the plate yet, in fact all people who have commented on this post have had to agree with the breakdown that I have given.

      Another interesting twist to this matter is that even if you and your husband were having sex for recreational purposes alone, you still would not be committing fornication/sexual immorality as along as you would only be having sex with each other. However, the commitment you have already makes you a husband and a wife in the eyes of the Most High, the world’s definition of marriage and when sexual intercourse should take place is insignificant as yet again, the world did not create marriage or sexual intercourse.

      Sex is a normal function, a normal part of an adult’s life and it is an activity that should be enjoyed to the fullest between men and women who are committed to one another without any obstructions or false information snaring the process.

      Now if your friend believe that you are committing sexual sin/sexual immorality, I will put out the challenge to her to come here and show where the sexual immorality is being committed, though I already know that she will not be able to do it.

      Also, this business about not being “unequally yokes with unbelievers” is another scripture that has been misinterpreted, this is another topic that I am going to have to write a post about. Remember, you husband must have some sort of spiritual foundation for him to be asking you about what took place in your services or what you are reading. Contrary to what you may have been told by dodgy pastors, his salvation is not your obligation and liability, anybody can have a walk with the Most High without attending a church, this is another false ideology that has been placed out there by pastors who are merely looking for more people to suck money from. Salvation comes from the Most High, not a church building or a congregation.

      There is no fixed pattern to salvation, it is supposed to happen in different ways for different people however the church has you believe that salvation has to occur according to how “they” define and map it out, utter rubbish. When the bible talks about unbelievers, it is referring to people who are in complete darkness, who hate Christ, The Most High, the scriptures and all other things associated. If your husband was truly an “unbeliever” according to the definition in the scriptures, he would not be committed to you, he would hate you, he would not be asking you about the bible or your church services however, this is not the case.

      So in summarising, no you are not committing sexual immorality according to the scriptures, according to the “convenient” definition of the majority of pastors and misinformed christians yes but according to the scriptures and the Most High NO. Who and what matters more? Also, do not feel that you have an obligation to organise any formal celebration just to appease friends and family, it is your marriage not theirs, you and your husband make the rules concerning it, not outsiders.

      Most High Bless

      Like

      • Hi verbs2013

        Thanks for your helpful answer- the next time I talk to my friend I think I might forward her this site 🙂
        As it is my parents and his parents completely approve of our relationship.

        Actually before the church took over completely, and marriages “had to be registered” people would write down their partners names in their bibles and the day they decided to commit.

        I am really looking forward to your unequally yoked message too!
        Thank you so much for your insight,
        you have a great blog going here.

        God Bless!!

        Like

      • God’s Princess

        I have been meaning to do a post on the church’s definition of being unequally yoked but I’ve had to deal with some other topics that needed urgent attention but nonetheless that post will be coming soon.

        Glad to have put your mind at rest on this issue. I know what is like being uncertain on various issues, seeking real answers and not finding any.

        You are right about the bible being used as proof of marriage in times past, I believe that you can still purchase bibles that contain a page in the front of the book which is dedicated to marriages.

        Most High Bless

        Like

  15. I was reading and scanning alot of this. Wow. I’m new to most of this. I just learned about the institutional “church” this year and about fellowship in homes. I learned about the real definitions of words in Greek and in Hebrew. My husband and I live together of course. It wasn’t planned to be married but it happened. And now even the people (most I believe) at where we fellowship know that my husband and I are married in the sight of God. We are not “legally married”. It’s caused alot of frustratation with friends and family who live according to the institutional “church” and their ways. I want to live at peace with them, but the only way it seems is if I have the state’s “approval” of being married. We didn’t think everything through but understand this is for life. I’m not my husband’s number 1 choice. I know this. God has spoken to me many times concerning my husband even when I was frustrated. Thankfully, my husband and I didn’t just meet. We’ve known eachother for almost 6 years. But my family is happy with how he is other than the fact that him and I live together/have sex and they say I’m living in sin.

    Like

    • Rachel,

      As I stated to somebody else who commented on this very same post, ask any institutional church member to demonstrate from the Bible that fornication means “sex before marriage” and they will be completely lost flicking through their Bible like an Eskimo in a tropical rain forest.

      Christ put this misconception to bed in Matthew 19 when he stated that a HUSBAND could not divorce his WIFE except under the circumstances of fornication. Husband, wife, fornication???? These institutional church members are a complete mockery and a disgrace. They for the most part do not read the scriptures for themselves and they believe every word that comes out of the pastor’s mouth without verification or confirmation. Fornication equalling sex before marriage as I stated before is the pastors institutional church definition, it is NOT a definition found within the scriptures.

      As for your friends and family, do not feel pressured into doing anything that you are not comfortable with doing or something that there is no need to carry out. Again, I guarantee you that all they can do is point to the word fornication in the Scriptures and then TELL you that it means sex before marriage. They cannot show you that definition from the same book, nobody can. If they could then they would have come onto this post already and posted the evidence………………however,I am still waiting for a rebuttal on this post and it has been at least 2 years since I first posted it.

      Bless

      Like

  16. OMG A huge weight once again has been lifted off my shoulders. I remember 4 years ago I went to church with my cousin and her husband and the pastor was speaking about adam and eve and the “institution of marriage” and using the same old tired church definition “sex before marriage” of fornication he said “Now don’t get me wrong about sex and relationships. God is saying, to legalize it, before you do it” or something to that effect and now a few months ago the preacher at the anglican church calls two “unmarried” people living together as “SHACKING UP” wow. and I still have to go to church tomorrow… it’s Easter Sunday service, Verbs pray for me… lol

    Like

    • KingoftheTeddybears,

      What makes me laugh is that the word “legal” does not even occur within the scriptures one time. Nor does the word “institution”. These institutional church beast infrastructure pastors, preachers, reverends, bishops and evangelists are all full of crap. The lid has been blown off of this deceptive propaganda. Got to do a short blog today on this Easter nonsense aswell.

      Like

  17. I get what you’re saying and you have some great points but I don’t think you understand what fornication actually is. Fornication is any sexual act outside of marriage (not just before marriage). That being said of course you can have fornication take place in marriage it’s also known as cheating. If you look up a hundred other translations of Matthew 19:9 you will see that it is talking about if the wife is unfaithful. Sadly premarital sex is still fornication because it is sexual activity outside of marriage. Trust me I have studied trying to prove it is ok. I’m a 20 year old guy with a smoking hot girlfriend if I could have sex without feeling guilty I would!

    Like

    • Christian Bores,

      The slogan of “pre martial sex” and the negative connotations that have been attached to it have simply been manufactured by the Roman Catholic Church and further pushed forward into so called “law” by the institutional church beast infrastructure pastors. This proves the point that I have always made, there are two definitions of the word fornication, the pastor’s convenient definition and the biblical definition.

      Pastor’s definition of fornication = Sex that takes place outside of/before marriage.

      Biblical definition of fornication = Promiscuity and sex which is contrary to nature(homosexuality, lesbianism, beastiality, incest, pedophilia.

      The first is unprovable and you have clearly demonstrated this is the case via your lack of supporting scriptures. Secondly, guilt cannot always be used as a barometer to gauge whether an action is correct or incorrect. I would state that your feeling of guilt in relation to this particular issue is simply a construct that is part of the programming you have received from your institutional church beast infrastructure pastor.

      I have firmly stated before that there are absolutely no scriptures that anybody can bring forward to demonstrate that fornication is translated to mean sex outside of/before marriage, however I can demonstrate and bring forward scriptures clearly show that fornication equals promiscuity at the least all day. Sorry sir, your institutional church beast propaganda concerning fornication will not fly here, you need to go back and study this subject harder.

      If you still feel that I am wrong then I await the scriptures to demonstrate your position.

      Like

      • Alright I’ll give you scripture. But it’s the same scripture you have put up just looked at differently. And I do agree with you to an extent. I think if two people make a life commitment to each other then that could in God’s eyes be seen as marriage. The church however just makes a public event of this which I would also see as not so necessary. If people are truly committed to one another then that is between themselves. But if they are not then it is not marriage and that’s where fornication can take place. See 1 Corinthians 7:2 which you stated earlier- “Nevertheless, [to avoid] fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”
        Here it is saying to avoid fornication, get married. Therefore not being married (however you view that) would result in fornication when sexual relations take place. So that would be saying sex or sexual relations outside of a marriage (life commitment etc.) would be fornication. So yes premarital is not technically fornication if the two are committed to each other. And I guess only God and them know if they truly are.
        But I’m sure you would understand why the church cannot say this. Because if they did people would be sleeping around saying I thought we were life mates, I guess not.
        I’m kinda rambling but I’m just trying to see your point of view. I might be confused on what exactly you are trying to state too.

        Another scripture is Matthew 19:9. Which you also stated. “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.”
        This if you look at other translations and understand what this one is saying, fornication is sexual relations outside of the confines of marriage. Am I right? Because you can commit fornication by cheating, homosexuality, and all those other semi-disturbing acts while still being married. So then fornication would be defined as sexual relations outside of marriage. I think what we would have to clarify is “marriage”. Marriage is when two people make a life long commitment to one another. This is not really how the church defines marriage so to the church premarital sex is wrong unless it is a proper lawful marriage. But I like your points on this. I just think the real problem is what is marriage not what is fornication.

        Like

      • Christian Bores,

        I hope that you realise that with every comment you make, you are simply proving my point. This is what I have stated before, all that folks can do is show me scriptures wherein the word “fornication” is contained, however none can show me where the sex before marriage definition has been drawn from. I still contend that sex before marriage = fornication is bogus nonsense and the fact that nobody thus far has been able to prove otherwise simply bolsters my position.

        My position is simple, we have been lied to by the leaders of the institutional church beast infrastructure. Fornication means promiscuous sex and sex that is contrary to nature, this is the biblical definition and this is a definition that can be easily proven. I believe by sticking to this definition, things are made alot easier. I also believe that folks need to stop listening to these institutional church beast infrastructure leaders as they are peddling much disinformation and confusion which comes straight from the camp of Satan himself.

        Like

      • I might be proving your point but that’s because I agree with you on some stuff. Just not what you are saying about fornication. You believe that sex outside of marriage is wrong? Two people not in a life long commitment having sex is wrong right? Then wouldn’t sex before marriage be considered wrong? Because before would mean “outside of” just based on it’s definition. Because I can and have shown scriptures saying that sex outside of marriage is wrong.
        You are going to have to show me in the bible where it says that sex outside of marriage is ok. Then I will agree with you on this subject.

        And I might agree with you on your position about the leaders of the institutional church beast infrastructure. But I don’t think they are completely wrong in wanting to have proof of a life long commitment. Which is why they would say sex before marriage is wrong. Because the only way they know two people are committed to each other is through a traditional marriage. So yes I agree with you on that but you also have to see why they do it right?

        Like

      • Christian Bores,

        There is absolutely nothing wrong with sex outside of “marriage” as long as there is no form of promiscuity involved or sex that is not according to nature. Two people(man and woman) who are not committed and are having sex is NOT fornication in the eyes of the Most High as long as they continue to engage in sex between themselves only. After all people have physical needs in that area that need to be taken care of.

        No, you have simply shown me the word ” fornication” and thereafter run with the usual institutional church beast infrastructure assumptions and narrative. You keep introducing marriage into the equation yet fornication has nothing to do with marriage according to the numerous scriptures that have already listed in the post. Fornication has its own definition which is completely separate from marriage, your continuous introduction of marriage into the discussion is simply a red herring.

        As for marriage itself, the Most High formed the union of marriage however the institutional church beast infrastructure has usurped this union and utilised “marriage” for its own monetary gains. A marriage has nothing to do with any so called church, the world has assumed that somehow the institutional church beast must be involved in and oversee the unifying of two people and the “church” has simply run with the public’s ignorance and made a whole heap of cash from the fact that people are not questioning the legitimacy of its involvement in overseeing “marriages”.

        On a side note, the world’s understanding on what a marriage is, is completely wrong within itself as I have also talked about. The world has simply morphed marriage into a regimented, rigid institution and the church beast has stepped in as the controller of that mutant institution.

        Like

      • Where to begin.. Well seeing as I have read over some of your other replies you seem quite stubborn and don’t seem to accept disagreement; I don’t think I’m going to change your mind. But I will say this.
        You still haven’t shown me scriptures where it states that sex outside of marriage is ok.. I’m waiting..?

        Your words, “After all people have physical needs in that area that need to be taken care of.” Ok so we have an extreme desire that is hard not to fulfill. Let’s just fall victim to our flesh. Romans 8:8- “Indeed, those who are under the control of human nature (flesh) cannot please God.” Might I remind you Jesus was in the wilderness for 40 days and was tempted yet he didn’t fall victim to fleshly NEEDS (not desires). I think we can control our sex drive for a little.

        And finally, (I don’t even need to go into marriage because we have similar views on that at least) but you say that fornication is separate from marriage haha?? Sorry couldn’t help but laugh cause did you read the verses in the bible? They go hand in hand 1 Corinthians 7:2 says to get married as to not commit fornication. Right there in the text just read it please.

        Still waiting on that scripture letting me know it’s ok to have sex outside of marriage. I need it to be as clear and simple as 1 Corinthians 7:2 though thanks.

        Like

      • Christian Bores,

        It is not that I am stubborn, I am simply answering back your points and calling you to account for inconsistent and questionable statements. As for “sex outside of marriage”, what are you specifically referring to? If you are dealing with a person who is married and that same married man/woman engages in sexual relations with another person ie an affair then of course this is not correct as Christ talked about this in Matthew 19. However, if two people who are NOT married engage in sexual activity for any set period of time between themselves alone, there is nothing wrong with this and there are no scriptures that speak against this activity.

        Falling victim to the flesh? What manner of reckless statement is that? So for example if I am thirsty and I take a drink of water, according to your ideology I am “falling victim to the flesh”. The same principle can be applied to eating food and going to the toilet to relief one’s self. All of the above are necessities which need to be fulfilled, the same applies to sex, however what the institutional “church” has deliberately done is remove sex from the “needs” department and transfer it to the “wants and desires” department. By the way, the maximum that a person can go without water is 1-2 weeks at the most(7-14 days), Christ had to have been drinking water in the wilderness and he was obviously was going to the toilet there too. Christ satisfied his immediate essential needs, “falling victim” is really a bad choice of words when it comes down to satisfying/fulfilling/meeting needs.

        If sex is a want/desire and not a need then explain why sexual immorality in the church beast system is through the roof. This is exactly what happens when you restrict the need of sex and render it under a want or desire, desperation and outlandish behaviours ensue shortly thereafter. It is for this reason why pornography and masturbation addictions are also running rife within the so called church, the institutional church beast rendering needs instead under wants and desires just because of its “desire” to control its congregation. The fact of the matter is that the sexual need is not meant to be restricted for long periods of time, Paul eluded to this in 1 Corinthians 7:5.

        You can laugh all you want with regards to fornication and marriage having their own separate definitions. All you have done is simply seen both words in the same sentence and taken a leap of faith(according to your institutional church training and indoctrination) and assumed that both words are connected and go hand in hand. The majority of verses where fornication is mentioned in the scriptures, marriage is nowhere to be found in those same verses at all:

        2 Chronicles 21:11
        Isaiah 23:17
        Ezekiel 16:15,26,29
        Matthew 15:19
        Mark 7:21
        John 8:41
        Acts 15:20,29
        Acts 21:25
        Romans 1:29
        1 Corinthians 5:1(which proves my point about fornication also meaning sex that is contrary to nature ie incest is mentioned here).
        1 Corinthians 6:13,18
        1 Corinthians 10:8
        1 Corinthians 12:21
        Galations 5:19
        Ephesians 5:3
        Colossians 3:5
        1 Thessalonians 4:3
        Jude 1:7
        Revelation 2:14,20,21(Jezebel is mentioned here – Jezebel is a harlot, this confirms another one of my definitions of fornication meaning promiscuity).
        Revelation 9:21
        Revelation 14:8
        Revelation 17:2,4
        Revelation 18:3,9
        Revelation 19:2

        So, you continue to request the scriptures which show that it is “ok” to have sex outside of marriage, however you are still running with the assumption that fornication = sex outside of marriage ie sex between unmarried couples/men and women. On the contrary, I have carefully read 1 Corinthians 7:2 however unlike yourself I have also taken into consideration all of the other verses where marriage and fornication are not mentioned together at all and where fornication is mentioned with other behaviours(harlotry, whoredoms, incest etc) and sensibly concluded that fornication must have a different meaning other than the common “sex between unmarried men and women” mantra that we have been fed.

        Like

      • Ok I’ll keep it consistent for you. Sex outside of marriage. However you view marriage whether it’s a life commitment or by law. Show me where it states that is acceptable in the eyes of the Most High.? Please just point out a verse.. If you cannot just admit it and don’t beat around the bush.

        Ok and as far as marriage and fornication I still don’t get how you think they don’t go together it is quite obvious to most people. I looked up your verses and yes I agree fornication is homosexuality along with the rest but it is also plain and simple sexual relations outside of marriage. Look at what Paul tells us.. It is best as people and followers of Christ to remain celibate but if our sexual desire is too strong (which it will be for most people especially with all the sexual movies/books/magazines out there) to get married as to not commit fornication. So it’s not just words in the same verse as you stated. It is intertwined.

        And when it comes to all your verses the reason you wouldn’t see marriage and fornication used throughout them is because they do intertwine. Fornication takes place outside of marriage so every time the bible brings up fornication it doesn’t need to bring up marriage.
        I mean it would be nice if you could prove in those verses that fornication is not sex outside of marriage. Just in one of those verses?? Oh and yeah not just how fornication is sex that is contrary to nature…I know that, it’s in the bible but fornication is also sex outside of marriage (also in the bible).

        Like

      • Christian Bores,

        Again, sex outside of marriage equals fornication concerning who, married folks or unmarried men and women? You are beginning to tap dance and truffle shuffle around this subject. I already have shown you that folks WHO ARE MARRIED and have sex outside of that marriage are in the wrong, Christ has also confirmed this for us.

        The first place were the word fornication is mentioned in the scriptures is in 2 Chronicles 21:11 where there is also no mention of the word marriage. Let us see what actions are linked with the word “fornication” in this location. Verses 21:11-13 reads as follows:

        21:11 Moreover he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit FORNICATION, and compelled Judah thereto.

        21:12 And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,

        21:13 But has walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem TO GO A WHORING, LIKE TO THE WHOREDOMS OF THE HOUSE OF AHAB, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father’s house, which were better than thyself:

        To be honest I could rest my case here however I will go on. Mind you, fornication and marriage are not mentioned together in the same vicinity until the new testament. Also please note how the word fornication above is linked to the words “whore and whoredoms”. We now turn to Isaiah 23:15-17 which reads:

        23:15 And it shall come to pass in that day, that Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years, according to the days of one king:after the end of seventy years shall Tyre sing as an HARLOT.

        23:16 Take a harp, go about the city, thou HARLOT that hast been forgotten;make sweet melody, sing many songs, that thou mayest be remembered.

        23:17 And it shall come to pass at the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, AND SHE SHALL RETURN TO HER HIRE, AND SHALL COMMIT FORNICATION WITH ALL OF THE KINGDOMS OF THE WORLD UPON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.

        Fornication, harlot, all the kingdoms of the world ie a high quantity??? I rest my case here, the promiscuous definition of fornication I have proven here now twice. By clearly demonstrating that the word fornication does not mean unmarried couples or unmarried men and women engaging in sex and that it actually means promiscuity and unnatural sex, by default unmarried men and women engaging in sexual activity are automatically vindicated of this false charge.

        With regards to it being obvious to most people that fornication and marriage are linked, of course it is obvious to most as most folks have been indoctrinated in some form or another by the institutional church beast system and just like yourself, they see the word “fornication” and they automatically lean upon the institutional church teachings and mantra that has been hammered into them that fornication equals sex outside of marriage ie unmarried couples/men and women.

        In regards to the verse that you quoted from Paul, Paul was stating that it was better to get married in the face of strong sexual needs than to burn ie be agitated by the strong sexual libido and follow it through by leading a life of promiscuity thereafter. Your continual introduction of marriage into the equation is still a red herring of distraction.

        Sorry, for every verse that you can supply me claiming that fornication = sex outside of marriage(which is true in part when you are dealing with couples who are already married and engage in extra marital affairs, that part I can agree with), I can supply you with 4-5 scriptures which clearly link the word fornication with harlotry and whoredoms ie promiscuity.

        This is exactly the mess that is created when strangers get a hold of the records of my forefathers and believe that they know more than the people of the very bible itself. As I stated before, the claim that marriage is intertwined with fornication is simply an institutional church propaganda piece that has been put out there to control their congregations, however that cancerous propaganda will most definitely not be flying here at Slaying Evil.

        Like

  18. Pingback: The Sexual Dysfunction Created By The Church – Short Post! | Exposing Corruption Under Every Rock

  19. If marriage means having sex, which makes sense b/c weddings like today didn’t exist back then. Why would you continue to have sex once your relationship is over with someone else?
    Then they become your spouse?
    Then the next person is your spouse? then the next, and so on. So I could have 15 husbands before I settle down according to what your saying? So when I stop having sex with one, does that mean I divorce him? if not then I become and adulterer.
    Im not seeing the full picture here.

    Like

    • The Free Woman,

      There is no real marriage until both parties commit to each other fully and whole heartedly. It is at this point where the “marriage” takes place. Nobody walks into a relationship fully committed from the beginning, it is as time goes on that one begins to put a little bit more of their heart into the relationship until both parties decide that they want to remain with each other for life(if things progress that far for them). Before this point both parties are merely feeling each other out/testing the waters, seeing if you are compatible with one another.

      It has been a number of years since I wrote this post so my understanding and knowledge of this issue has been refined and increased since then. The actual marriage is the decision by BOTH PARTIES to commit to one another for life and this decision is then sealed via sexual union.

      Like

      • I found your blog, b/c I too began to question and reject everything the institutionalized church teaches. Eventually, I began to question sexuality as well.
        Your answer makes sense and I will continue to follow you and hopefully find more answers!
        Thanks for the reply!

        Like

      • The Free Woman,

        The institutional church is truly a beast. This church beast infrastructure has completely turned the normal sexual functionality between men and women completely on its head. I deal with this very issue in one of my recent posts. Glad to have answered your question, that is why I am here. You’ll find many topics covered at this blog, some are very controversial however the truth must always be exalted above a person’s feelings.

        Most High Bless

        Like

  20. You wrote down something in one of your blogs, and I wrote it in my journal b/c its so powerful and so true. I will paraphrase it. Pastors these days are modern day gatekeepers, witches ect. Its their job to keep the average person enchanted with programs. The entire church program is set out to keep you in a spiritual dead zone yet at the same time have you believing your gaining great knowledge. The reality is your like a cow chained to a treadmill, going nowhere, being milked for your money!

    WOW!

    Thats truth! The modern day church is infiltrated by Masons, witches ect and is spiritually depleted from any type of word that produces life. I have experience more abuse, ulterior agendas, racism
    and humiliation than any other place I ever have before. Do you hear me? I have been ridiculed and left for dead by church leadership & members and laughed at, while so sick I didn’t know what was going on with me. I was told my faith wasn’t strong enough and told not to get medical care. My family rescued me. The thing is they saw the church corruption years prior to me. I am now in such a place of freedom and rest I know I am to take what happened to me and my family and write a book. Ive seen a lot but what I KNOW is if you want to meet mean, corrupt people, go to church. why are they like that? B/C they do not see, hear or question for themselves. They are ZOMBIES!! I was too at one time, but now I know the truth and Im gonna spread it as I am told to.

    Like

    • The Free Woman,

      This modern day church set up originates from the slavery plantation. In order to prevent plans and plotting among the slaves, the slave masters devised a form of worship which is literally akin to entertainment. This is why everything is so loud, dramatic and enchanting within these modern day churches, with this format in place the slave master could hear his slaves cooning and buffooning and thus he was comforted in knowing that his slaves were towing the line. This particular format was clearly illustrated and referenced to in the film “Goodbye Uncle Tom”.

      I have asked many people to show me the particular format that these churches use out of the scriptures but nobody has been able to so far. This is simply because the format and the programmes that these churches use are all man made, sure the individual components such as prayer, singing etc can indeed be located within the scriptures however the particular format and patterning of these individual actions found within these churches is straight from the bottomless pit.

      The modern day church is a nasty place to be in, the church beast infrastructure certainly does not hold any nourishment nor does it hold any answers of value for your average believer. As I have stated before in numerous other posts, your walk with the Most High is an INDIVIDUAL walk, therefore in order to maximise the benefits of your individual relationship with him, you must walk OUTSIDE of the confines of the so called church. The things that happened to you I am sorry to hear about however I am not really surprised at all, institutional church beast infrastructure members can be some of the nastiest people on the planet. They have no compassion and the majority of them are certainly not honest. Zombies and spellbound they are to the fullest.

      Glad to hear that you were able to get out of the pit of decadence, now you can walk with the Most High in a non regimented fashion and now you will begin to see true wonders and your relationship with him really begin to prosper and grow. The thing is that many people see that something is wrong within these churches yet many are afraid to step out and thus instead they begin to blame themselves and think that they are in error for questioning the extremely dodgy and questionable practices taking place around them.

      Most High Bless

      Like

  21. I look forward to seeing the true wonders of Him! Thanks for the great conversation, look forward to speaking with you more!
    God bless!

    Like

    • Melvin Wynne,

      In the eyes of the Most High who is the creator of marriage, NO. However the earthly institution called the State says different, they require you to apply for a marriage licence in order for your marriage to be recognised by “them”. It all depends on who you see as the head of your marriage, the Most High or the State.

      Like

  22. What is promiscuity and who defines it?

    If marriage is the act of sex with the intent of commitment does that also mean that those who have sex with multiple people who they’ve had commitments to have been married multiple times?

    What does licentiousness and lewdness mean?

    How do you deal with the admonition to “avoid the appearance of evil”?

    Like

    • H1sw1ll1am,

      Why are you asking me for the definitions of promiscuity, licentiousness and lewdness? If you are coming from a scriptural perspective then you should already know the answers to these questions as the definitions are already contained therein.

      In relation to the other point that you made, the chances of you having had “commitments” is very slim if you have had multiple partners, the words “commitment” and “multiple partners” are at complete odds with one another.

      Like

  23. Why are you asking me for the definitions of promiscuity, licentiousness and lewdness?

    I ask because one of your premises is based upon the concept of promiscuity. Yet you didn’t define it, neither did you say if it was from The Lords point of view.

    What does licentiousness and lewdness mean?

    Simple question using Scriptural terms. Would you answer it in your own terms please?

    If marriage is the act of sex with the intent of commitment does that also mean that those who have sex with multiple people who they’ve had commitments to have been married multiple times?

    You deflected.

    How do you deal with the admonition to “avoid the appearance of evil”?

    You didn’t even attempt to answer this question.

    If your premise is rock solid and your understanding and character is reflective of the Lord’s then these should be simple enough questions to answer directly and succinctly.

    BTW, you’re not totally off base. So don’t get defensive, answer the questions and see where they lead.

    Like

    • H1sw1ll1am,

      There are no deflections being carried out here, my aim is to simply ensure that you are not attempting to waste time with meaningless questions, nor attempting to bring in topics and definitions that are not relevant to the discussion and to ensure that you are not attempting to launch low key trickery under the guise of so called “questioning”.

      You’re asking me for the definitions of promiscuity, licentiousness and lewdness for what exact purpose please? Why have you introduced licentiousness and lewdness into the discussion and what is the relevance?

      I already answered your question with regards to marriage and commitment, there obviously was no real commitment involved if you have engaged yourself with “multiple partners”. This type of scenario is called an Oxymoron.

      I am simply attempting to establish what angle you are coming from first. I can already detect that you are not coming from a point of sincerity. You first need to be honest and upfront and declare where you stand as I can see that you already have a preconception that you are not willing to bring forward.

      Like

  24. My purpose is to reveal truth. A man of character, and one who is speaking with such authority, would simply answer the questions regardless of any perceived negative motive or perceived trap because such a man would also be a seeker of truth by nature and willing to have any flaws in their words revealed.

    What you’ve done is to make yourself out to be a mouth piece for the Most High by the authority in which you are declaring supposed truth. A man of God, let alone a man of character, would have simply answered the questions directly and succinctly to see where they went. If your words and teaching are of God then nothing anyone could ever say or ask could possibly break the truth of them.

    What is promiscuity and who defines it?

    If marriage is the act of sex with the intent of commitment does that also mean that those who have sex with multiple people who they’ve had commitments to have been married multiple times?

    What does licentiousness and lewdness mean?

    How do you deal with the admonition to “avoid the appearance of evil”?

    These are all very simple questions which don’t require a whole lot of time.

    A man of God should feel refreshed to come across a Berean.

    Like

    • H1sw1ll1am,

      I’m afraid it is not as simple as you claim. A man of character also recognises time wasters aswell as those with hidden agendas who attempt to approach him under the guise of “genuine enquiry”. Christ experienced these same tactics with the Scribes and the Pharisees, he himself didn’t always answer their questions, sometimes he would answer them in parables and other times he would ask them questions in return as I am doing to you because he knew the trickery of their hearts just in the same manner that I can detect the insincerity of your nature.

      You asking me such questions immediately raises a red flag as nobody else here who has commented has done the same. I will also remind you that Christ also stated that your yes should be yes, your no should be no and that anything else apart from these proceeds from evil. If you feel that there is something here that is posted in error then simply show the errors instead of beating around the bush with miscellaneous deceitful questioning. That is what a person of honesty, accountability, responsibility and true integrity would do.

      Like

      • It’s alright, I understand why you couldn’t answer those questions. It’s most often the simplest questions which demonstrate the error behind the proposed truth which is being shared. Now you’re faced with the choice of leaving those questions up for other readers to hopefully read and ask for themselves, answering them directly, further deflecting, and erasing altogether any trace of your cowardice which has been shown by your deflection. All of which demonstrate your character and the spirit which you’re operating in.

        Like

      • h1sw1ll1am,

        What “error”??? Again, if there indeed is error behind the information within the post that I have written then why are you having such a difficult time declaring it? It is just as I suspected, you have nothing of substance to bring to the table except deceit and trickery, your questions were not answered simply because you are not approaching me under a genuine cause of enquiry. You have a final chance to declare the error in the message. Any other response will simply prove that you are a fraud.

        Like

  25. To the readers who may come across this teaching:

    I asked the writer of the teaching of this blog post to answer these questions:
    What is promiscuity and who defines it?

    If marriage is the act of sex with the intent of commitment does that also mean that those who have sex with multiple people who they’ve had commitments to have been married multiple times?

    What does licentiousness and lewdness mean?

    How do you deal with the admonition to “avoid the appearance of evil”?

    I did so in hopes of revealing truth, error, and character. The writer of this teaching knew that in answering these simple questions that the foundation of his teaching would be revealed. He deflected and even downright avoided answering a couple of the questions because the obvious answers would shine a light on what he didn’t want you to see or what he himself didn’t see and had to big of an ego to simply admit. I challenge the reader to answer these questions for yourself and hold them up to his teaching. Does it reveal this teaching to be spiritually pure or dirty?

    Now as for the author of this teaching:

    Your avoidance of my questions and attempts to deflect away from them reveal that you have something to hide; whether it’s ego, error, or both. You’d have been much better off before your readership to answer the questions. Now your staff is broken and your credibility is diminished for it. Are you going to continue to avoid answering my questions or erase all record of this ever happening, further revealing the spirit which you operate through?

    Like

    • The Readers of this blog are truth seekers, therefore, we do not argue the points. We take the time to read them and study them for ourselves. If we disagree we certainly do not call the author out on the carpet or try to make him look foolish. Thats childish.

      We truth seekers are all on the same mission here. That being said, it is clear that its you who does not fit in with your squabbling.

      If you cant take the time to figure things out for yourself and are being disprectful to the author we dont want you here.

      Like

    • H1sw1ll1am,

      Stop attempting to feign yourself as some sort of pious victim who was simply looking for truth. The questions you asked were well out of place and didn’t fit into the subject matter directly, therefore I knew that you were coming here with deceitful intentions. You talked about me not answering your questions yet I had very good reasons not to answer them, the main reason being that you clearly have a hidden agenda that you are unwilling to disclose.

      Rather than actually deal with the subject matter, you attempted to make an issue with information that is not relevant to the topic being discussed, you would rather deal with micro contentions as apposed to dealing with the relevant topic as a whole direct and head on. This is a tactic of deceit straight from the bottomless pit. As I stated before, if there is error in the message that I have delivered then show the error instead of using trickery and cunning strategies through out of place miscellaneous deceptive questions.

      Now if there was indeed any error in anything I stated, you would have demonstrated this from the very beginning rather than beating around the bush and attempting to argue on micro issues which do not really deal with the issue as a whole.

      For all those who will read this in the future, this is the typical behaviour that comes from members of the institutional church beast infrastructure. Remember when I talked about the technique of “transfer”, where your average church beast member will try to move you towards a topic that they have good ground and knowledge in, try to defeat you there and then if successful make the claim that they won the original debate. Do not fall for this Kansas City shuffle.

      Again, to H1sw1ll1am the cowardly keyboard warrior, if there is indeed error in the message then please show us all the error otherwise hold your peace. As the saying goes, “put up or shut up”. This is not a children’s playground, you cannot come to Slaying Evil with such childish nonsense and get away with it, you will be checked every time.

      Like

  26. The Readers of this blog are truth seekers, therefore, we do not argue the points. We take the time to read them and study them for ourselves. If we disagree we certainly do not call the author out on the carpet or try to make him look foolish. Thats childish.

    We truth seekers are all on the same mission here. That being said, it is clear that its you who does not fit in with your squabbling.

    If you cant take the time to figure things out for yourself and are being disprectful to the author we dont want you here.

    Like

    • Lisa, a seeker of truth would have simply answered the questions. Most especially one who put themselves in the public as a teacher of Gods truth. So let me ask you, since you decided to defend this man rather than seek the truth, can you answer the questions?

      It’s ok though if you don’t. I don’t expect you or anyone else to do anything here other than to deflect and defend this guy. But in doing so, you help make it appear to the world that he couldn’t answer for himself and needed others to run blocker for him so that he didn’t have to deal with being challenged.

      As for the author:

      Don’t worry. I won’t comment anymore on this post. But remember, if your teaching was really of The Lord no one would be able to withstand you. Since it’s not, there’s only two other sources it can be from; your carnality or the enemy. You’ve been warned.

      Like

      • I have spent much time trying to get answers out of this author. My questions were simple and like you I didn’t receive any direct answers. It’s sad to see that “truth seekers” follow blindly nowadays without doing any research for themselves. I prayed about it and decided to stop posting on this blog. It was a waste if time. Trust me you can “win” but he won’t budge. I appreciated your post though.

        Like

      • Christian Bores,

        Stop the dishonest rubbish as you somewhat attempted to launch the same technique as this deceiver, only you began to do this midway through the conversation instead of at the beginning. I answered your questions at the beginning because they were of relevance to the topic, anybody can read over the comments and see that for themselves, you simply got your institutional church beast infrastructure backside handed to you on a plate. This is why I refer to the majority of those who call themselves christians as “so called”, because the trickery and deceitful techniques that you use are most certainly not from the Most High.

        Your lack of honesty is also something to behold. This is one of the main reasons why folks in their droves are leaving these institutional monuments of failure called churches, deciding to walk with the Most High as individuals and fellowshipping with much smaller groups of people. The so called “church” is dead.

        Like

  27. Sooo…..if you have sex with someone then the 2 of are married? If so, what if I break up with that person and start sleeping with another person? Am I then married to the “new” person too? And if I break up with #2 and start sleeping with #3, am I not having sex with different people (thus fornicating) or is it not so as long as its 1 partner at a time?

    Like

    • Nancy,

      You are too worried about the finer lettering of the law, this is not how the Most High works. The best way to put this is whatever relationship you go into, ensure to manage it in the best way possible. The Most High is not going to fry you because you have been through relationships that haven’t worked. As long as you do not involve yourself in a promiscuous lifestyle and do not engage yourself in sex that is contrary to nature(homosexuality, lesbianism, beastiality, incest, pedophilia), then you will be fine. You will automatically know if you are stepping out of line, the inbuilt instinctive moral compass that the Most High has placed within each and every man and woman on this planet will give you clear indications. It is those who choose to ignore this inbuilt moral compass that the Most High has a problem with, not those who abide by it.

      Like

  28. Now, the thing is, what you have said here might be right but let’s always be precise and “complete” in our gospel. It is totally wrong for you to get someone even if you have the intention of marrying them and have sex with them, claiming that the sex is the marriage. In Gen 24, before Isaac took Rebekah in to sleep with her and she became his wife, the oldest of Abraham”s servant had already gone to do all the proper arrangements before she was released and blessed by her parent and siblings(Verse 53-54) and they had supper(a small celebration). The same thing in Chapter29:22 Before Jacob could sleep with “Leah”, Laban arranged a celebration and a” blessing “party. Looking at chapter 34 however, when Shechem slept with Dinah, KJV says he “defiled” her, and yet he sought to marry her?Wait a minute, I thought sex was equal to Marriage. The grevious consequences of sleeping with lady is shown in verse24-29…Let’s be careful so that we don’t lead the people astray. Are we really slaying evil???

    Like

    • DeeJay,

      Cereal box, boil in the bag, ready in 3 minutes, fast food joint Christianity is so easily deconstructed, let me show you your errors. It was a noble effort that you made to try and prove me wrong but alas you failed. You talked about these supposed arrangements, what arrangements exactly? It was simply a case of Abraham’s servant requesting permission from the father of Rebekah to take her back to Issac for the purpose of marriage. Then you talked about the supper as if that somehow was part of the marriage, the fact of the matter is that Rebekah only became Issac’s wife when she entered into a sexual union with him in the tent, not before, read the scriptures again for yourself. The “supper” was simply a celebration of the fact that she WAS GOING TO BE MARRIED.

      Then you tried to bring up the example of Leah however you have conveniently forgotten that Jacob was tricked by Laban, he served Laban 7 years for Rachel and instead he was given Leah. Also the feast that you mentioned was simply to celebrate the coming marriage which yet again was forged when Jacob slept with Leah. You are attempting to raise the issue of ceremonies as if they have something to do with marriage but you are failing miserably.

      Then the biggest joke of them all is when you attempted to use the example of Shechem sleeping with Dinah. There are some obvious points that you clearly missed. Firstly Dinah was a Hebrew whereas Shechem was a Gentile, it was not meant for the Hebrews to marry strangers, the Hebrews were to marry within their own nation only. Secondly, listen to what Simeon and Levi said to Jacob after they slaughtered all of the males in the city. Genesis 34:30 reads:

      34:30 – And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, Ye have troubled me to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites: and I being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house.

      34:31 – And they said, SHOULD HE DEAL WITH OUR SISTER AS WITH AN HARLOT?

      The “defilement” was the fact that Dinah was being treated like a prostitute/sex slave by Shechem. Read the account again, she was being held against her will(as a hostage) in Shechem’s house which is why the scriptures state that she had to be “taken” out of his house by her brothers Simeon and Levi. Hamor and Shechem had to be slain in order for Dinah to be released, read Genesis 34:26 for yourself.

      Now feel free to try again if you wish, however I suggest that you approach me with better examples as these you brought to the table were lame. Stop listening to institutional church beast pastors and read the bible for yourself. Yes, I am slaying evil here, I am deconstructing the janky doctrines and the dodgy interpretations of scripture that have been distributed by the church beast system. I am also bring people the true gospel, the gospel that modern day christians purposely steer clear of, yet they will still call themselves “followers of Christ”!?!?

      Like

  29. Hi..just stumbled on ur post..I’m a Nigerian and I would really appreciate if u sent ur reply to my email address..i have a boyfriend but I’ve been taught my whole life dat kissing and physical romance is wrong..but I find myself doing it now and my conscience still pricks me wen I do dem..I’m a christian but I sumtymz feel I’m not right with God wen I do dez..I’m 19..what is ur say on dis??

    Like

  30. Great post! Yet you failed to address the fact that a wife found not to be a virgin in ancient Israel after having had sexual intercourse with her husband for the first time could be stoned to death. Would that not constitute sex before marriage as a sinful act??????

    Deuteronomy 22:13-21 (Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)

    13 `When a man taketh a wife, and hath gone in unto her, and hated her,

    14 and laid against her actions of words, and brought out against her an evil name, and said, This woman I have taken, and I draw near unto her, and I have not found in her tokens of virginity:

    15 `Then hath the father of the damsel — and her mother — taken and brought out the tokens of virginity of the damsel unto the elders of the city in the gate,

    16 and the father of the damsel hath said unto the elders, My daughter I have given to this man for a wife, and he doth hate her;

    17 and lo, he hath laid actions of words, saying, I have not found to thy daughter tokens of virginity — and these [are] the tokens of the virginity of my daughter! and they have spread out the garment before the elders of the city.

    18 `And the elders of that city have taken the man, and chastise him,

    19 and fined him a hundred silverlings, and given to the father of the damsel, because he hath brought out an evil name on a virgin of Israel, and she is to him for a wife, he is not able to send her away all his days.

    20 `And if this thing hath been truth — tokens of virginity have not been found for the damsel —

    21 then they have brought out the damsel unto the opening of her father’s house, and stoned her have the men of her city with stones, and she hath died, for she hath done folly in Israel, to go a-whoring [in] her father’s house; and thou hast put away the evil thing out of thy midst.

    Like

    • Eric Nelson,

      No, because the scriptures state that her “whoring” is the issue, it clearly states that in the 21st verse. A whore sleeps with many men not just one, this would be her clear transgression as per what is written.

      I suppose the other issue here would have been with regards to dishonesty, everybody in her family would believe that the woman is a virgin yet the opposite would be true. The issues here are promiscuity and dishonesty, it must also be stated that a woman can be a whore at anytime in her life, not just shortly before she is to be married.

      Like

  31. I hear you, but how would her husband know if she had been with one or 1000 partners? Secondly, did not Apostle Paul state that it was better to marry than to burn (with sexual passion)? Does this statement alone not imply that Paul was telling them to get their sexual release from within the confines of marriage? I understand that the act of intercourse was the marriage ceremony so does that not rule out
    sexual self fulfillment?

    Like

    • Eric Nelson,

      We already know that she would have slept with multiple partners accordingly because the scriptures describe her as a whore. Since when is a woman who sleeps with one man given that description?

      You mentioned Paul and what he recommended to avoid constant sexual arousal without an outlet, however this still has nothing to do with the biblical definition of the word fornication. As I have stated before, fornication has nothing to do with marriage, it has its own separate definition. Fornication can take place both within a marriage aswell as with couples who aren’t married per say.

      It seems to me that you are still attempting to imply the “sex before marriage” thesis, albeit via a different strategy.

      Like

      • Okay, I must be missing something because to assume that every woman in ancient Israel had multiple sex partners if she were found not to be a virgin does not make sense to me . I’m going to post this wonderful article on facebook along with the comments in order to glean more feedback.

        Like

      • Eric Nelson,

        Every woman in Israel, multiple sex partners??? Now you are simply adding vestigial baggage to the discussion. Lets just stick with the issue at hand, what the definition of fornication is according to the scriptures instead of debating over micro issues that are not relevant to the discussion.

        Like

      • LOL! “Every woman in Israel, multiple sex partners???” My actual comment was in relation to every Jewish woman not found to be a virgin upon the consummation of her marriage clearly had sex before marriage and that’s how a married person could commit fornication and that’s why Jesus made this statement in Matthew 19:9: {And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for FORNICATION, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.}.

        This is one of your previous comments:

        {“Wait a minute, you mean a man/woman can commit fornication while they are married? Yes. But the institutional church told us that fornication is “sex before marriage” right?”}.

        I’m saying that the bible gives us a clear example of how a married person can commit fornication before marriage——because the sexual act of intercourse is the marital ceremony that binds 2 people together as husband and wife. A new wife found not to be a virgin meant that she had sex before marriage at least ONE TIME and she could therefore be stoned to death in ancient Israel. You are the one implying that a non-virgin new wife had to have had sex with multiple partners. I think the article is awesome except for that one point. I think the article can help a lot of people but I also think people will be confused on that particular issue. The article has now been exposed to well over 300,000 viewers—along with our perspective comments—in various facebook forums. Below, I will post a controversial article I wrote concerning marriage and divorce that I think duck-tales with your article yet I simply want clarity on that one particular issue. I thought I was misunderstanding your basic meaning and the feedback the article will generate will provide clarity as to whether others notice the same thing I do.

        Like

      • Eric Nelson,

        Allow me to clarify my position in this post once again in order to clear up any confusion. The aim of my post was to simply demonstrate that the institutional church beast infrastructure definition of the word “fornication” equating to sex before marriage/pre marital sex is incorrect and that the proper definition of the word fornication according to the scriptures is promiscuous sex and sex that is contrary to nature.

        Now because fornication can take place within a marriage aswell as outside of one, in other words at anytime, there is no possible way that the readily provided church beast definition could be correct. As I pointed out before, if Christ clearly stated that married couples could only divorce under the condition of fornication, then how could fornication solely apply to couples who are not married. The church has simply used the “fornication equals sex before marriage/pre marital sex” mantra in order to garner extra money from hosting weddings and issuing marriage licences.

        Fornication has nothing to do with marriage even though the act can take place within a marriage, as I mentioned before it is completely separate from marriage, however the church in its passion of greed has falsely linked the word “fornication” with the word “marriage” for mainly the reason above aswell as few others.

        The term “sex before marriage” is a red herring and a smoke screen within itself, designed to give a person the impression that having sex before getting married is a sin. No, engaging in “promiscuous” sex and sex that is “against the flow of nature” is the sin, however the church beast infrastructure will not enlighten its parishioners to these facts. I hope that this has cleared up any misunderstandings that we may have had before, it seems that I may not have completely understood where you were coming from.

        Like

      • I think I am a lot clearer on your position. I was just talking to a preacher friend of mine and it caused me to look at CONCUBINES in the bible in relation to God’s people. For example, God never called King David out for having concubines yet he did call him out for committing adultery with Bathsheba. The existence of concubines in the bible gives further credibility to your article.

        Like

  32. ARE COUPLES WHO GET DIVORCED REALLY LIVING IN SIN ??????? DOES THE BIBLE REALLY SAY THAT GOD HATES DIVORCE????????? by Eric J. Nelson

    One of satan’s biggest tricks is to call what isn’t sin sinful in order to dupe the religious masses into trying to walk with God from within the power of their own human strength, thus placing themselves under the Old Testament curse which the bible refers to as a ministry of death and condemnation (2 Corinthians 3: 7-10).

    Divorce is yet another topic that exemplifies why it is imperative that we honor the word of God enough to study it for ourselves verses allowing others in positions of spiritual leadership to interpret the bible for us. Ever since I was a child I have heard preachers preaching and teaching that God hates divorce——and those who get divorced are living in sin——-and a divorced person who has the audacity to remarry is committing adultery every time they have intimate physical relations with their husband or wife. They use as a scriptural backdrop Malachi 2:16 even though Malachi 2:16 says no such thing concerning divorce.

    Malachi 2:16—– “For the Lord God, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth PUTTING AWAY: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the Lord of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.”

    When studying the bible it is imperative to ALWAYS divide/separate the terminology. Words in the bible that are spelled differently have totally different meanings or at least slightly different connotations. The terms PUTTING AWAY and DIVORCE are clearly not the same terms.

    In ancient Israel—-not to be confused in anyway with the modern day Body of Christ (In other words, the scriptures we are about to study were never written to us in the first place; our instructions concerning marriage are found in Romans-Philemon.); in ancient Israel men were PUTTING AWAY their wives without giving them a legal BILL OF DIVORCEMENT. This meant that the official marriage covenant—-witnessed by God Himself—-was still in effect. An example of why God hates PUTTING AWAY is because married men were dealing treacherously with the wives of their youth. Many of these men would take up with younger prettier women thus leaving their aged wives in the cold (Malachi 2:14). They would coldly send their wives away without going through the legal trouble to give them a legal WRIT OF DIVORCE. In ancient Israel if a woman did not have a male support system such as a husband, son, or a male relative in general to take care of her she could literally starve to death. A lot of PUT AWAY wives were forced into prostitution in order to survive, while yet other PUT AWAY wives would simply remarry. When it was discovered that these women were still legally married to their husbands because they could not produce a legal BILL OF DIVORCEMENT they were promptly executed. The standard form of execution is ancient Israel for adultery was stoning. This was an extremely brutal and vicious practice. It’s also sad to note that in ancient Israel that a woman who did not have a legal BILL OF DIVORCEMENT was considered to be her husband’s property and was legally prohibited from remarrying. This is exactly why Jesus blamed the men who PUT their wives AWAY for causing their wives to commit adultery (Matthew 5: 32—–”But I say unto you, That whosoever shall PUT AWAY his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:……..”).

    The New Testament Greek word for “put away” is APOLUO while the Old Testament Hebrew word for “put away” is SHALACH.

    The New Testament Greek word for “divorce” is APOSTASION while the Old Testament Hebrew word for “divorce” is KERIYTHUWTH.

    Other scriptures to consider that discuss PUTTING AWAY and/or DIVORCE under the Old Testament covenant are: Deuteronomy 24:1; Nehemiah 13: 25-30; Malachi 2 & Ezra 9.

    A wonderful resource where one can check New Testament Greek terminology side by side with accurate English translation is known as The Textus Receptus:

    http://www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/textus_receptus_king_james/greek_english_kjv_index.htm

    A wonderful resource where one can check Old Testament Hebrew side by side with accurate English translation (with the apocrypha included) is known as The Greek Old Testament Septuagint:

    http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/septuagint/default.asp

    Matthew 5: 31-32—–”It hath been said. “Whosoever shall PUT AWAY (apoluo) his wife, let him give her a WRITING OF DIVORCEMENT (apostasion): But I say unto you, That whosoever shall PUT AWAY (apoluo) his wife, saying for the cause fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced (apoluo/ apolelumenhn NOT apostasion) committeth adultery.”

    Like

  33. just discovered this page & agree with almost everything besides one issue. homosexuality/lesbianism… when correctly translated, the terms in the old and New Testament clearly point to shrine prostitution… thank you for this it was well written

    Like

    • Tyler,

      Glad that you have found this post informative and useful. On the homosexual issue, shrine prostitution is mentioned nowhere within the scriptures. The scriptures on homosexuality being an abomination are clear, I simply cannot see how shrine prostitution can be interpreted from men being instructed not to sleep with other men as they would with women.

      This shrine prostitution doctrine is nothing more than modern day institutional church beast infrastructure christian liberal propaganda which seeks to normalise homosexuality biblically, however this is a fool’s errand, it simply cannot be done bar psychological and mental gymnastics.

      Like

  34. “Since we now know that fornication is actually sleeping around….with many different people…. and not sex before marriage as we have been ill informed…..”

    Question? I am sleeping around with many different people and I’m not married JUST YET. So “Having Sex Before I or You, Decide to Get Married IS NOT Fornication?” This is Great!!

    1 Corinthians 14:33King James Version (KJV)
    33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

    Like

    • Tavale,

      If you want to have sex before settling down and committing to the person you want to have children with then simply stick to having sexual relations with one person at any given time and you will be just fine.

      No, sex before marriage IS NOT fornication and don’t allow any of these decadent pastors to tell you otherwise.

      Like

  35. Thank you for this article, I was told that fornication was sex before marriage also, I attend a Pentecostal church which the Pastor (don’t get me wrong VERY passionate about his bible teaching) but I always kinda felt unsure what fornication was. Now I know

    Like

      • Application of bad logic is what leads to your erroneous teaching.
        The fact that Jesus refers to “fornication” in the context of “marriage” ( not actually marriage, more accurately wrt to husband, and wife; which is the same as fiancee and fiancé, and engaged couple, as with the case of Joseph and Mary, when he considered “putting her away quietly”) , does not necessarily exclude the defintion of fornication to include pre-marital sex, which is just another “unlawful” sexual act.
        The fornication in this instance refers to sexual activity while “betrothed” ( or promised, or engaged) to the other.
        When it comes to the exhortation of the Apostle Paul, to “marry”, rather than “burn(with passion)”, the inference is obvious: otherwise, if he had followed YOUR faulty logic, he would merely have suggested that one find a suitable “concubine”, which is essentially what you’re suggesting here.
        The origin of the word F.U.C.K comes to mind here: For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.
        It’s become a cuss-word, but is in fact, the equivalent of “fornication”.

        Please, I urge you, study to “show yourself approved”, before teaching doctrine of this nature.
        Yes, tradition of marriage may have changed since the days of the connubial tent, and the white, spotted sheet, BUT..the principles of virginity, chastity, sexual loyalty remain;
        While at the same time, marriage depicts the picture of Christ and the Church.

        Like

      • Leon,

        Bad logic is bringing your own interpretation to the scriptures in order to accommodate the teachings and the doctrines of dodgy church beast pastors. Christ stated that a husband could not divorce his wife except under the circumstances of fornication, the scriptures are plain and clear on this issue, therefore it is obvious that fornication cannot equate to “sex before marriage” and thus “sex before marriage” can no longer be considered as an accurate definition of fornication.

        Husband and wife equates to marriage, the interpretation you have given here is either your own or from a church beast pastor who desires to lead his flocks further down the road of deception, you cannot circumvent this fact. There is no such thing as pre marital sex, it was mantra that was invented by the Roman Catholic church in order to institutionalise the natural covenant of marriage and thus be able to generate revenue from it, do your own research.

        You referenced Paul, however Paul never contradicted Christ. The inference Paul was talking about was that it was better to marry if you are unable to contain sexual arousal being a single man. Note though how the word “fornication” is not mentioned anywhere here either. I am stating that fornication does not mean pre marital sex and I have more than proven this position. Christ’s words alone in Matthew 19:9 are sufficient enough to prove my point.

        This is also not taking into account the fact that fornication is not associated with marriage anywhere in the old testament, though it is associated many times with harlotry, promiscuity and being a whore. As for the word F.U.C.K there are many trains of thought as to the original meaning, I have heard a variety of different suggestions, the one you have given here cannot be accepted as the final answer.

        You need to stop listening to these institutional church beast pastors who continually feed their flocks garbage in order to keep them in place and thus secure their financial foundation. Fornication does not mean “pre marital sex”, fornication means promiscuous sex and sex that is contrary to nature, plain and simple. Fornication equating to pre marital sex cannot be proven out of the scriptures which is why you had to introduce a disjointed interpretation of marriage. On the contrary, you need to go back and study this issue again without the interference of pastors who have a lifestyle to uphold.

        Like

      • Your own definition of marriage testifies against your teaching, Verb.
        Read the account of Mary and Joseph:
        ““Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this way: When as his mother Mary was ESPOUSED to Joseph, BEFORE THEY CAME TOGETHER, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.  Then Joseph her HUSBAND, being a justman, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privately.  And while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, ‘Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary THY WIFE: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.’ And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins. 

        One need not draw on the definitions of “Beast Pastors” as you so eloquently put it; it is in the plain text of the Scriptures, if one is willing to see it.
        I Praise Almighty God for this.

        ~let He who has ears, listen.

        Like

      • Leon,

        You need to stop bringing inferences to the table. Yet again throughout all of these scriptures the word “fornication” is never mentioned at all. This is exactly what I stated here in the post and in my book dealing the institutional church beast infrastructure, so called “believers” cannot draw the pre marital sex definition from the scriptures, thus they have no other choice but to fall back on inference aswell as the pastor’s interpretation of the word.

        As I have clearly proven, fornication has its own separate definition, it has nothing to do with marriage at all. As I stated before the Roman Catholic Church wove the pre marital sex definition into the word fornication in order to institutionalise and thereafter monetise marriage. Again, do your own research on this topic instead of returning here and repeating the same pastoral nonsense.

        Like

      • Verbs:
        That’s the first time i’ve heard scripture referred to as “pastoral nonsense”

        That was Matthew 1: 18-21

        Your response is disingenuous and misleading, as is your doctrine.

        Like

      • Leon,

        You’re simply wasting my time and your own. Just like every other person who holds to the “fornication equals pre marital sex” mantra, you cannot demonstrate this from the scriptures, therefore you must bring along and introduce inference which almost always is based upon the pastor’s interpretation of the word fornication.

        I could equally argue that your response is also disingenuous because you continue to reference scriptures where fornication is not mentioned at all, Matthew 1: 18-21 being part of the latest batch you have brought forward.

        Out of Christ’s own mouth he stated that a husband could not divorce his wife except under the circumstances of fornication. We are clearly being shown here that married people can also be guilty of fornication, thus common sense should tell you that the church’s pre marital sex definition of the word fornication is 100% wrong.

        Its seems to me that you are arguing against Christ not myself and much unlike yourself I can deal with the word fornication in its correct context.

        Like

      • Verbs
        You’re not not follow your OWN ARGUMENT;

        You use Matt 5:32 to say that fornication referred to, is within the context of marriage.
        Not so.
        Joseph considered doing EXACTLY what Jesus is referring to in Matt 5:32…
        The Angel tells him that
        1. she is pregnant by the Holy Spirit;
        2. He can “go ahead” and take her for his WIFE

        Notes:
        BEFORE THEY CAME TOGETHER, ( by YOUR OWN definition, they are not yet married) they are referred to as HUSBAND and WIFE.

        This is what you are missing when reading Matt 5:32.

        Now, if you would put aside ad hominem rationale for a moment, reconsider your statement that Jesus uses “fornication” within marriage in the text.

        Like

      • Leon,

        Inference yet again. The issue here is what is the definition of the word fornication, therefore we must go to the scriptures where the word fornication is mentioned. As I stated before you cannot do that because you cannot extract the pre marital sex definition, therefore you have to reference other scriptures where the word is not mentioned and infere fornication equals pre marital sex from there.

        The situation of Joseph and Mary has nothing to do with the statement Christ made to the Scribes and the Pharisees. You seem to forget that they had asked him if it was lawful for a man to put away(divorce) his wife for any cause, thus in order to divorce folks must already be married.

        Sorry, no pre marital status can be applied to Christ’s statement since he was dealing with the issue of divorce and the qualifications for it. You cannot divorce somebody you are engaged to, you cannot divorce your fiance.

        You are taking some serious L’s here sir. Again, I see fornication mentioned nowhere in the Joseph and Mary account, I only see your inference being levied and touted.

        Like

      • Verbs:
        I repeat:
        YOU state that Jesus uses fornication withing context of marriage:
        YOU say that husband and wife= marriage.
        I have just shown you where the terms husband and wife are used BEFORE marriage, by YOUR own defintion.

        Nowhere have I attempted to define fornication at all, Verbs.
        I am merely faulting your logic;

        Your whole argument hinges on your saying that Jesus uses fornication within a marriage context.

        I rest.
        God Bless.
        🙂

        Like

      • Leon,

        In other words you simply came here to waste time which is the typical behaviour of the so called “believer”. You knew that you couldn’t prove me wrong on the topic at hand so instead you decided to argue on a side issue and claim a victory via trickery???

        That says it all, you couldn’t even finish on the original subject, good day sir!

        Like

  36. @Leon: There is a difference between the terms PUT AWAY and DIVORCE. I wrote an e book on the subject entitled: What the Bible Really Says About Divorce! It’s Not What You’ve Been Taught! The e book is available worldwide for 2.99. The main premise is that in the bible in English, Greek , and Hebrew the terms PUT AWAY and DIVORCE are spelled differently and have different definitions. Joseph was going to PUT AWAY Mary privately which had nothing to do with divorcing her. Below is a short article I wrote concerning the matter.

    ARE COUPLES WHO GET DIVORCED REALLY LIVING IN SIN ??????? DOES THE BIBLE REALLY SAY THAT GOD HATES DIVORCE?????????

    One of satan’s biggest tricks is to call what isn’t sin sinful in order to dupe the religious masses into trying to walk with God from within the power of their own human strength—-thus placing themselves under the Old Testament curse—-which the bible refers to as a ministry of death and condemnation (2 Corinthians 3: 7-10).

    Divorce is yet another topic that exemplifies why it is imperative that we honor the word of God enough to study it for ourselves verses allowing others in positions of spiritual leadership to interpret the bible for us. Ever since I was a child I have heard preachers preaching and teaching that God hates divorce——and those who get divorced are living in sin——-and a divorced person who has the audacity to remarry is committing adultery every time they have intimate physical relations with their husband or wife. They use as a scriptural backdrop Malachi 2:16 even though Malachi 2:16 says no such thing concerning divorce.

    Malachi 2:16—– “For the Lord God, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth PUTTING AWAY: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the Lord of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.”

    When studying the bible it is imperative to ALWAYS divide/separate the terminology. Words in the bible that are spelled differently have totally different meanings or at least slightly different connotations. The terms PUTTING AWAY and DIVORCE are clearly not the same terms.

    In ancient Israel—-not to be confused in anyway with the modern day Body of Christ (In other words, the scriptures we are about to study were never written to us in the first place; our instructions concerning marriage are found in Romans-Philemon.); in ancient Israel men were PUTTING AWAY their wives without giving them a legal BILL OF DIVORCEMENT. This meant that the official marriage covenant—-witnessed by God Himself—-was still in effect. An example of why God hates PUTTING AWAY is because married men were dealing treacherously with the wives of their youth. Many of these men would take up with younger prettier women thus leaving their aged wives in the cold (Malachi 2:14). They would coldly send their wives away without going through the legal trouble to give them a legal WRIT OF DIVORCE. In ancient Israel if a woman did not have a male support system such as a husband, son, or a male relative in general to take care of her she could literally starve to death. A lot of PUT AWAY wives were forced into prostitution in order to survive, while yet other PUT AWAY wives would simply remarry. When it was discovered that these women were still legally married to their husbands because they could not produce a legal BILL OF DIVORCEMENT they were promptly executed. The standard form of execution is ancient Israel for adultery was stoning. This was an extremely brutal and vicious practice. It’s also sad to note that in ancient Israel that a woman who did not have a legal BILL OF DIVORCEMENT was considered to be her husband’s property and was legally prohibited from remarrying. This is exactly why Jesus blamed the men who PUT their wives AWAY for causing their wives to commit adultery (Matthew 5: 32—–”But I say unto you, That whosoever shall PUT AWAY his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:……..”).

    The New Testament Greek word for “put away” is APOLUO while the Old Testament Hebrew word for “put away” is SHALACH.

    The New Testament Greek word for “divorce” is APOSTASION while the Old Testament Hebrew word for “divorce” is KERIYTHUWTH.

    Other scriptures to consider that discuss PUTTING AWAY and/or DIVORCE under the Old Testament covenant are: Deuteronomy 24:1; Nehemiah 13: 25-30; Malachi 2 & Ezra 9.

    A wonderful resource where one can check New Testament Greek terminology side by side with accurate English translation is known as The Textus Receptus:

    http://www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/textus_receptus_king_james/greek_english_kjv_index.htm

    A wonderful resource where one can check Old Testament Hebrew side by side with accurate English translation (with the apocrypha included) is known as The Greek Old Testament Septuagint:

    http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/septuagint/default.asp

    Matthew 5: 31-32—–”It hath been said. “Whosoever shall PUT AWAY (apoluo) his wife, let him give her a WRITING OF DIVORCEMENT (apostasion): But I say unto you, That whosoever shall PUT AWAY (apoluo) his wife, saying for the cause fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced (apoluo/ apolelumenhn NOT apostasion) committeth adultery.”

    Like

    • Eric,

      My reason for raising the text around Matt 5:32, is to demonstrate that consummation, or sexual union, was not the only prerequisite condition for “espoused” or “betrothed” or couples, to be called “husband” and “wife”:
      ……. which is why I used Matt 1: 18-21, the story of Mary and Joseph.

      Divorce as a subject on its own, interests me as far as Jesus “abrogates” Mosaic Law, and replaces it with BUT I SAY UNTO YOU, destroying at the same time the traditional Oral Tradition of the 3 main schools of thought in Rabbinical teaching, based on different applications on what Moses “allowed because of their hardness of hearts”.

      I am one who holds to the view that:
      1. One should pay attention to “causes” in Matt 5:32…. and,
      2. One should pay close attention to the word “and” in the second part of Jesus’ statement, regarding the commission of adultery.
      These are separate ideas.
      The commission of adultery is an ABSOLUTE….
      This is borne out by the repetition of this ABSOLUTE, in Romans 7 v 2-3, and also in 1 Corinth 7:11 [ but if she depart, let her remain unmarried]
      The Scriptures do not contradict one another.
      They harmonize perfectly.

      So then, that is the extent of my interest in divorce as a subject; as it pertains to the adulterous nature of re-marriage.

      I will read your aricle, and see if it covers any ground, or contains anything I have not already covered in my own reseach.

      God Bless
      Leon

      Like

  37. @Leon: I support this article but I also agree that the author should give you a direct answer to your very pertinent question—-because it is a very fair question. To me, your tone seems to be against the article it it’s entirety. The author clearly missed a needle in the haystack. This is the author’s exact statement:
    {“the Hebrews with the marriage was the sexual union first, then if one wished to celebrate the marriage that had already taken place, then they would organise a marriage event. “}. The author clearly made an error on that point, but it is still a good article. You are 100% correct! Mary and Joseph were indeed husband and wife before they had intimate physical relations—and actually so was Isaac and Rebekah. I will try to post another article in just a few minutes that explains the marriage customs and traditions back then.

    Like

    • Eric,

      My only mistake was allowing Leon to take me around the houses and debate on issues that had nothing to do with the topic at hand, I am disappointed that I was caught out by such a technique because I already talked about this and other stunts those calling themselves “christians” or “believers” like to pull when they realise that they cannot win the debate in my book on the institutional church beast.

      The issue here is what does fornication mean, as I have explained before fornication has nothing to do with marriage, it has its own separate definition. I used the example of Christ stipulating the only grounds for divorce being fornication to simply illustrate that married couples can also be guilty of fornication. The definition of marriage is irrelevant here, the definition of fornication is the subject matter being discussed.

      Again, you are making the same mistake as Leon and focusing on marriage which has nothing to do with the subject at hand. The definition of fornication equating to “pre marital sex” comes from institutional church beast pastors aswell as the Roman Catholic church who have intertwined fornication and marriage together in order to institutionalise and monetise the natural covenant of marriage, I have stated this before.

      Because of this false teaching the so called “church” is full of believers who now are addicted to pornography and who masturbate profusely in secret. The fallout from this bogus teaching alone should be clear to anybody that this fornication equals pre marital sex doctrine cannot possibly be correct. What, is the Most High a dunce, is he a fool?

      When a person feels sexually aroused they are going to release that sexual energy through either masturbation or sex, period. The majority of unmarried christians today are carrying out one or the other of the above, even though they will come on this site and pretend to act as if they are living the lifestyles of highly disciplined monks.

      Revealing the truth about this false teaching is actually beneficial to them, it is meant to bring peace of mind, however as I have seen with most believers, they would much prefer to keep themselves restricted by the institutional church beast chains and shackles rather than do what Paul instructed the Philippians and work out their own salvation.

      Like

      • @Verbs
        Logical argument is hardly a “stunt” brother.
        Joseph was referred to as “husband” BEFORE he “arose and took unto him Mary his wife”

        You need to re-look at the terms husband and wife and how it was used, before saying that “fornication” was used in a marriage context, simply because the terms husband and wife are used.

        That, is hardly a “stunt”.

        Like

      • Leon,

        Again, the issue here is in relation to the word “fornication” and what the correct definition of that word is, why you continue to return to scriptures where the word “fornication” is nowhere to be found is a complete mystery.

        You are not going to perform that Kansas City shuffle on me again sir, deal with the word fornication instead of attempting to sidestep proving your position via raising issues that are not part of the discussion.

        Since you are so adamant that fornication equates to pre marital sex, you ought to be able to prove this position from scriptures where the word “fornication” is mentioned, just in the same manner that I was able to illustrate that fornication cannot possibly equate to pre marital sex from scriptures that actually contain the word “fornication”.

        This is logical thinking right here sir, dealing with the word directly instead of sidestepping it.

        Like

      • Your “cannot possibly” argument hinges on the use of the terms “husband and wife”

        The object here, is to rightfully divide truth, not just stand and defend the indefensible.

        No matter, at least others have read this exchange.

        Go well brother

        Like

      • Leon,

        Not at all sir, not at all, fornication has more than one meaning which I am quite capable of demonstrating from other scriptures which also contain the word, however you didn’t give me a chance to do so because you continued to focus upon Joseph and Mary.

        You’ve done exactly what I stated folks will do when it comes down to defining this word, they will point to the word “fornication” however thereafter they will immediately fall back upon the institutional church beast’s interpretation of that word without fail as if it is a given.

        If we were looking at a definition of the word “marriage” then your position would have been in line with that topic, however seeing as we are not discussing the issue of marriage your approach is completely off.

        The real issue here is that you refuse to believe that the definition of fornication that has been taught to you for years is wrong.

        Like

      • Here’s a quote from your article;

        “Fornication is simply “unlawful sex(eg homosexuality, lesbianism, beastiality, pedophila, incest etc) and rampant sexual relations with many different people”.

        I would stop at “unlawful sex” ;
        Your examples should just include sex-outside-of-marriage.

        If you use ANY of your examples of fornication, and insert in place of “fornication” in 1 Corinth 7:2

        The category assigned by you, that is,
        “Rampant sex with many different people” is only true by virtue of the fact that it is, by DEFINITION, sex with singles outside of marriage.

        If asked the question “is it Lawful to have sex before marriage ”
        Jesus would probably have started His answer in this fashion:
        “From the beginning, He created them male and female: ….”
        …and then quote Genesis:
        “Therefore shall a man leave his mother and father, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall become one flesh”

        Paul speaks further on the “one flesh” teaching;
        1 Corinth 6:16
        NOWHERE does Paul say: “sex with a harlot is a bad thing, but go ahead and have sex with someone you can call your “concubine”, or “special friend”;

        But you know these things, Verb.

        Just know that those who teach are held to a higher standard than the rest. James 3:1

        1. Flee fornication
        2. To avoid fornication, get married

        ..therefore, fornication is……..?
        Sometimes the answer is just all-too-apparent
        Derive a definition out of those truths.

        Like

      • Leon,

        The definition of fornication according to the scriptures is: promiscuity and sex that is contrary to nature(homosexuality, lesbianism, incest, pedophilia, beastiality). There is nowhere in the scriptures where you can derive the conclusion that fornication equates to sex before marriage, the fact that you have been unable to do anything more than ride your pastor’s definition of the word proves my point.

        Again, you continue to jump all over the place without actually dealing with the definition of the word fornication, you are riding upon the church’s definition as if it is a given. You point to the word “fornication” and as I stated before you immediately fall upon the pastor’s definition as if it has been handed down from heaven.

        Whoever taught you that fornication equates to sex before marriage has fed you a load of rubbish, this is the standard teaching within the institutional church beast infrastructure and this teaching has been proven to be 100% wrong. By the way 1 Corinthians 5:1 correlates with one of the definitions of fornication that I have listed(incest). You need to go back to the drawing board on this one sir.

        Like

      • I don’t think Leon made a mistake since he was merely questioning what you yourself wrote. I agree, that to say the definition of fornication is simply ‘sex before marriage’ is inaacurate—because as you pointed out Jesus Himself proclaimed that fornication can take place from within the context of being married. There are 16 protocols that prove to us that the definition of fornication cannot be ‘sex before marriage.’ I will post a short video link in just a few minutes. Clearly Joseph was married to Mary BEFORE they had sexual relations therefore what you yourself stated concerning intercourse being the marriage ceremony is inaacurate. Below I posted an article with other biblical examples that disprove your hypothesis in this regard. Sir, I support your article yet I also think it is very sad that you are now claiming that what you yourself worte is irrelevant to the topic at hand. THEN WHY DID YOU WRITE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE??????

        Like

      • Eric,

        I never mentioned Joseph or Mary anywhere in my article, this is why I have dismissed that argument because it genuinely has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Christ simply pointed out the fact that married couples can be fornicators, again fornication has nothing to do with marriage. On a side note in relation to Joseph and Mary, you do realise that Joseph never had sex with Mary until after Christ was born? Sexual intercourse as I have stated before is supposed to be the seal of the marriage union, I never stated that sex intercourse is supposed to be the ceremony, read over my article again please because I did.

        Like

  38. I apologize if this seems a bit lengthy but it only takes a few minutes to read.

    THE MARRIAGE DOWRY Reason for dowry for bride’s family. In the Orient, when the bride’s parents give their daughter in marriage, they are actually diminishing the efficiency of their family. Often unmarried daughters would tend the flock of their father (Exodus 2:16), or they would work in the field, or render help in other ways. Thus upon her marriage, a young woman would be thought of as increasing the efficiency of her husband’s family and diminishing that of her parents. Therefore, a young man who expects to get possession of their daughter must be able to offer some sort of adequate compensation. This compensation was the marriage “dowry.” It was not always required that the dowry be paid in cash, it could be paid in service. Because Jacob could not pay cash, he said, “I will serve thee seven years for Rachel” (Genesis 29:18). King Saul required the lives of one hundred of the enemy Philistines as dowry for David to secure Michal as his wife (I Samuel 18:25). Reason for dowry for the bride herself. It was usually customary for at least some of the price of the dowry to be given to the bride. This would be in addition to any personal gift from the bride’s parents. Leah and Rachel complained about the stinginess of their father Laban. Concerning him they said, “He hath sold us, and hath quite devoured also our money” (Genesis 31:15). Laban had had the benefit of Jacob’s fourteen years of service, without making the equivalent of at least part of it as a gift to Leah and Rache1. Since a divorced wife in the Orient is entitled to all her wearing apparel, for this reason much of her personal dowry consists of coins on her headgear, or jewelry on her person. This becomes wealth to her in case her marriage ends in failure. This is why the dowry is so important to the bride, and such emphasis is placed upon it in the negotiations that precede marriage. The woman who had ten pieces of silver and lost one was greatly concerned over the loss, because it was doubtless a part of her marriage dowry (Luke 15:8,9). Special dowry from the bride’s father. It was customary for fathers who could afford to do so to give their daughters a special marriage dowry. When Rebekah left her father’s house to be the bride of Isaac, her father gave her a nurse and also damsels who were to be her attendants (Genesis 24:59, 61). And Caleb gave to his daughter a dowry of a field with springs of water (Judges 1:15). Such was sometimes the custom in olden times. [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Apparel of the Bride The adorning of the bride, was a very costly and elaborate affair. Much time was given to the preparation of her person. Every effort was put forth to make her complexion glossy and shining with a luster like unto marble. The words of David must have been their ideal for her: “that our daughters may be as corner stones, polished after the similitude of a palace” (Psalm 144:12). Her dark locks of hair were often braided with gold and pearls. She was decked with all the precious stones and jewels that the family had inherited from previous generations. Those who were too poor to afford much themselves would borrow what they could from their friends. The wedding festivities, and especially the bride’s adornment, would always be remembered by her. The prophet Jeremiah made reference to this thought, “Can a maid forget her ornaments, or a bride her attire?” (Jeremiah 2:32). The Apostle John saw New Jerusalem “prepared as a bride adorned for her husband” (Revelation 21:2). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Apparel of the Bridegroom When the night arrived for the wedding festivities to begin, and it was time to go for the bride, the groom was dressed as much like a king as possible. If he were rich enough to afford it, he wore a gold crown. Otherwise it would be a garland of fresh flowers. His garments would be scented with frankincense and myrrh, his girdle would be a silken one brilliantly colored, his sandals would be figured and carefully laced, and all of this would give effect to the “flowing drapery of the loose robes and to the graceful bearing peculiar to the lands of the East. For the time, the peasant seemed a prince among his fellows) and all paid him the deference due to exalted rank.”17 This preparation of the groom for the wedding has been aptly described in the prophecy of Isaiah, “He hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments” (Isaiah 61:10). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Arriving at the Bridegroom’s House ARRIVAL AT THE HOUSE OF THE BRIDEGROOM The most important moment of the entire marriage festivity was that in which the bride entered her new home.23 And as both groom and bride usually wore crowns, the Psalmist must have pictured this important moment in the marriage of the king: “She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needlework: the virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee. With gladness and rejoicing shall they be brought: they shall enter into the king’s palace” (Psalm 45:14-15). After arriving at the bridegroom’s house, some of the older women had the task of arranging the bride’s hair. Her flowing locks were hidden beneath a thick veil. From this time on, the custom would dictate that her face was not to be unveiled in public. She was led to her place under a canopy, which was located either inside the house, or if the weather permitted, in the open air. Her place was beside her husband, where both would hear new words of benediction given by one of the fathers, or by some important person who might be present. In the wedding at Cana of Galilee, JESUS was the most prominent guest present, and doubtless He was asked to pronounce His benediction upon the newlyweds (John 2:1-11). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Betrothal THE BETROTHAL Difference between a promise and a betrothal. A promise of marriage among the Jews of Bible times might mean an engagement without anything definite. There could be a number of engagements broken off. It was the betrothal that was binding, rather than a mere promise of marriage. The promise might be set aside, but a betrothal entered into was considered as fina1. The betrothal a covenant. Among the ancient Hebrews the betrothal was a spoken covenant. Ezekiel pictures GOD as marrying Jerusalem, and the following words are used of her: “I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the LORD GOD, and thou becamest mine” (Ezekiel 16:8). After the exile, the betrothal included signing a written document of marriage. The ceremony of betrothal. The Jewish betrothal in CHRIST’s time was conducted thus: The families of the bride and groom met, with some others present to serve as witnesses. The young man would give the young woman either a gold ring, or some article of value, or simply a document in which he promised to marry her. Then he would say to her: “See by this ring [or this token] thou art set apart for me, according to the law of Moses and of Israel.” Difference between betrothal and marriage. The betrothal was not the same as the wedding. At least a whole year elapsed between the betrothal and the actual wedding. These two events must not be confused. The Law said, “What man is there that hath betrothed a wife, and hath not taken her?” (Deuteronomy 20:7). Two events are differentiated here: betrothing a wife, and taking a wife, i.e., in actual marriage. It was during this period of about a year, between the betrothal and the wedding, that Mary was found to be with child of the HOLY SPIRIT (Matthew 7:18). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Coming for the Bride GOING OF THE GROOM TO GET THE BRIDE Sometimes the bride’s relations would conduct her from her father’s house to the house of her fiancée, where her new home was to be. But more often, as was the case of the Ten Virgins in CHRIST’s parable, the bridegroom himself went in person to bring her to his home for the wedding festivities to take place there. Before leaving the house that had been her home, she would receive the blessing of her relatives. Thus Rebekah’s relatives sent her away with a typical Oriental marriage blessing, “Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them” (Genesis 24:60). The bride left her father’s house adorned and perfumed, and with a crown on her head. Ezekiel’s description of the bride is very appropriate) “I decked thee also with ornaments, and I put bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain on thy neck. And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head” (Ezekiel 16:11, 12). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Divorce in the Ancient World DIVORCE IN OLD TESTAMENT TIMES For centuries it has been possible for a husband in Arab lands, to divorce his wife by a spoken word. The wife thus divorced is entitled to all her wearing apparel, and the husband cannot take from her anything she has upon her own person. For this reason, coins on the headgear, and rings and necklaces, become important wealth in the hour of the divorced woman’s great need. This is one reason why there is so much interest in the bride’s personal adornment in Eastern countries. Such customs of divorce were no doubt prevalent in Gentile lands in Old Testament times. It was for this reason that the Law of Moses limited the power of the husband to divorce his wife, by requiring that he must give her a written bill of divorcement (Deuteronomy 24:1). Thus the Jewish custom of divorce was superior to the Arabic. It is important to remember that the sin of adultery did not have anything to do with the matter of divorce under the Jewish law. That sin was punishable by death (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22), and that by stoning. If a husband found any unseemly thing in his wife, he could give her a written bill of divorcement, which made it possible for her to marry another man (Deuteronomy 24:2). A man guilty of unfaithfulness was considered to be a criminal only in that he had invaded the rights of another man. A woman was not allowed to divorce her husband. The prophet Malachi taught that GOD hated “putting away” and condemned severely any man who dealt treacherously with the wife of his covenant (Malachi 2:14-16). Such was the attitude of the Hebrew people on the subject of divorce.4 The LORD JESUS swept away all grounds for divorce under the Law, and made unfaithfulness the lone grounds for divorce under the Christian dispensation (Matthew 5:31, 32). [Manners And Customs of Bible Lands]
    http://www.bible-history.com/links.php?cat=39&sub=400&cat_name=&subcat_name=Marriage+Customs

    Jesus spoke of the Pipe JESUS spoke of the children playing in the market place. “We piped unto you, but ye have not danced. We have mourned to you, and ye have not wept” (Luke 7:32). There are two groups of children represented here. One of them has a pipe, perhaps a shepherd’s flute, and plays upon it as is done at a wedding procession all the way to the feast, saying: “Let’s play wedding.” But the other group refuses to join in the play. Then the one group begins to sing and wail as is done in a funeral procession, suggesting, “Let’s play funeral,” but the other group

    Like

  39. This is another great article that answers tons of questions concerning this topic.

    Question:
    I am 21 years old. I have been dating a girl my same age for about 6 months. We are both baptized Christians, but have made serious mistakes. About a month ago, she gave me a hand-job. This happened three times but after the third time I felt awful about it and have told her we cannot do that anymore. She agreed.
    She had done this sexual act with her previous boyfriend, but I had never done anything sexual with anyone before her.
    My question comes from Matthew 5:32. “But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.” My concern is in the last part. I know that she wasn’t “married” in the world’s view, but many people say that the first person you have sex with is the person you are forever married to in God’s eyes. Is this true?
    And my girlfriend did not have total sex with her previous boyfriend, but it was still the sexual experience, as was ours. I find myself in between a rock and a hard place. Since the girl I lost my virginity (any intentional sexual act resulting in climax and the loss of innocence) to had lost her virginity to another man before me, am I an adulterer according to Matt 5:32? Are she and her previous boyfriend still married in God’s eyes? And if so, if I marry this girl am I committing adultery every time we have sex?
    The other option is for me to marry a virgin, but then I would be committing adultery if the same principles were applied to me. The only option seems to be a life of celibacy, to avoid being an adulterer. Am I to remain single for the rest of my life? Will it be a lasting “lifestyle sin” if I marry my current girlfriend or someone else? Please help me understand God’s view of marriage and adultery.
    Best regards,

    Answer:
    Your question is covered in Is a marriage only bound after sex?
    Sex does not create a marriage. If it did, then there would be no fornication, only adultery.
    What you two did was fornication, even though you didn’t put your penis into her. It was still an act of sex. It was proceeded by lewdness and lust as well. I’m glad you stopped, but don’t make compromises and think that as long as you don’t go all the way, that part way isn’t so bad.
    Thank you so much for the quick reply. However, I am still a bit cautious. You stated that if sex equaled marriage, then there would be no fornication. But doesn’t fornication mean any sexual sin, such as incest, homosexuality, or bestiality? Those are sexual sins that wouldn’t be adultery.
    I am not saying you’re wrong, if I thought you had no credibility I wouldn’t be asking. But I am still concerned by I Corinthians 6:16.”Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, ‘The two will become one flesh.’” I am so confused by this. It seems that if we have sex (of any kind) with a prostitute (or anyone that is not a virgin) we are “one flesh” with them. Does one flesh not mean the same thing as marriage? I just don’t know what else it could mean.
    I understand that “one flesh” could mean literally one flesh, they are physically connected at the waist. But it refers to Genesis 2:24 in the verse. And in Genesis, I think God was specifically referring to how marriage ought to be. So what is Paul saying here? Why is he saying we become one flesh with a prostitute or non-virgin?
    I am also confused by the woman at the well. “He told her, “Go, call your husband and come back.” “I have no husband,” she replied. Jesus said to her, “You are right when you say you have no husband. The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true”” (John 4:16-18). Surely this woman was not married and divorced five times. I think that to be impossible for a woman to do in that time without being stoned or put to death. Is Jesus saying that everyone she has had sexual relations with is one of her husbands? I can’t seem to comprehend what these verses tell us.
    Fornication means sex without being married. It includes homosexuality, but it is not limited to it as you are trying to claim. For definitions with documentation, see: Sex.

    Sex is a mechanism that helps create a bond between individuals, but the act of sexual intercourse is not the marriage. Married couples have sex, which facilitates the two becoming one, but sex does not create the marriage. This is one reason why God restricted sex to married couples. You don’t want people forming intimate bonds without a prior commitment to remain with each other.
    We can see this throughout the Bible. In the story of Shechem and Dinah we find that Shechem went about finding a wife the wrong way. “Now Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she had borne to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her and lay with her, and violated her. His soul was strongly attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman and spoke kindly to the young woman. So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, “Get me this young woman as a wife.” And Jacob heard that he had defiled Dinah his daughter. Now his sons were with his livestock in the field; so Jacob held his peace until they came. Then Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to speak with him. And the sons of Jacob came in from the field when they heard it; and the men were grieved and very angry, because he had done a disgraceful thing in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter, a thing which ought not to be done” (Genesis 34:1-7). Shechem had sex with Dinah and by doing so violated her. In the Hebrew, the word is ‘anah which means to lower or to humble. In other words, his action reduced Dinah’s position in society, yet it did not create a marriage. In fact, notice that Shechem didn’t even feel love toward Dinah until afterwards (here is an example of sex creating a bond). He wanted his father to negotiate a marriage but did not realize why Dinah’s father and brothers were so upset with what he had done. It was a thing that ought not to be done. Sex was to come after a marriage, not before. But for our point, it demonstrates that sex did not create a marriage.
    The marriage of Isaac and Rebekah is another example, “Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent; and he took Rebekah and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death” (Genesis 34:67). We are not told the full marriage ceremony — there is no reason to assume that all of it was recorded for us — but it appears that a part of their marriage customs was the bringing of the bride into the chambers of a man’s mother. (In fact, it is from this that we get the custom of a man carrying his bride across the threshold.) But notice the order: Rebekah became Isaac’s wife and then he loved her. This particular Hebrew word has the similar broad meaning for love that our English word has. It is both a general love between two individuals, but when used between married couples it can include the idea of lovemaking, or sex.
    Judah gives us another example, “And Judah saw there a daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua, and he married her and went in to her” (Genesis 38:2). There is a distinct timeline being given: 1) Judah met Shua, 2) Judah married Shua, 3) Judah had sex with Shua. The function of the word “and” is to show the sequence of action and not to indicate simultaneous action.
    If sex created a marriage and all subsequent attempts at marriage are adultery, then you end up with God commanding Hosea to commit adultery. “When the LORD began to speak by Hosea, the LORD said to Hosea: “Go, take yourself a wife of harlotry and children of harlotry, for the land has committed great harlotry by departing from the LORD”” (Hosea 1:2). Gomer was not a virgin when Hosea married her. Yet, you are claiming that this makes it an adulterous relationship. But “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone” (James 1:13). What God commanded Hosea to do was not wrong.
    You also end up with a contradiction since Joseph married Mary before they had sex. “Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son” (Matthew 1:24-25). Joseph and Mary were married and sex did not come until after Jesus was born.
    In I Corinthians 6:16, Paul proves that sex binds the participants. It is not a permanent or stable bond, but it is a bond nonetheless. Those who engage in sexual sins are physically coupled during the act. They become for the moment one body (the Greek word soma). This is different from sex in marriage where the two become on flesh (the Greek word sarx). Illicit sex is just a joining of bodies, which is unstable. Marital sex is the joining of two human beings into one life. And our joining to the Lord is an even greater bond, being a spiritual fellowship. Marital sex is compatible with our spiritual bond because the Lord blesses it (Hebrews 13:4). Illicit sex is not compatible with our spiritual bond with Christ.
    Why should we take what God has freed from sin (Romans 6:1-7) and then bind ourselves to sinners, even on a temporary basis? We are a part of Christ (Ephesians 5:30) and when we sin, we are attempting to force sin to join with Christ through us. It won’t work because what is flawed is cast off. Our reaction to sins, such as fornication ought to be run away from it as far and as fast as we can.
    In “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24), the steps are:
    1. Leave parents
    2. Join to spouse (get married in other words)
    3. Become one flesh (move toward being a single person form of two people, which includes sex). This last step is an on-going process, not a moment in time.
    Fornication does make you one body while you are coupled, but it doesn’t lead you to becoming one flesh.

    The woman at the well had five husbands and she was currently living with a man whom she had not married. That is why she said, “I have no husband” and Jesus agreed. The fact that she was having sex with someone did not make her married.
    Before I go, I would like to point out that you already knew this. You said that you sinned three times by doing sexual acts with your girlfriend. If a sexual act made you married, then you did not sin because sex is supposed to take place in a marriage (Hebrews 13:4). Yet, you recognized that you and she had no rights to sex and still have no rights to sex. In addition you aren’t certain that you married. You question the possibility. But marriage is a covenant (Malachi 2:14). You can’t accidentally enter into a covenant. There has to be witnessed vows before God with records and a reminder of the covenant. You did not enter into a marriage covenant and deep down you know it.

    Like

  40. In other words, according to the bible ADULTERY is a type of fornication. The true definiton of fornication is NOT ‘sex before marriage’.

    Like

  41. @verbs2015: I can no longer respond underneath the direct comment but nevertheless, this is direct quote from your article:

    {verbs2015: “Marriage is simply 2 people deciding that they wish to commit themselves to each other for life and sealing that commitment via sexual union, in other words the sexual union is the marriage. This is proven with our father Isaac in Genesis 24:65-67 reads:Hmmmmmmmmmmmm, now I wonder what could have happened in that tent to make them become husband and wife? No second guesses are needed here. You see, the world has marriage backwards, they believe walking down the isle during a ceremony is the marriage when in fact the way of the Hebrews with the marriage was the sexual union first, then if one wished to celebrate the marriage that had already taken place, then they would organise a marriage event. This is what Christ was attending in John 2:1-11.”}.

    I have already posted 3 excellent articles along with a great video that clears up all of the confusion. NO SIR, the way of the Hebrews with marriage was NOT the sexual union first!!!!! Mary and Joseph prove that point as does the story pertaining to Isaac and Rebekah, etc… In the material I posted it explains this protocol very clearly and concisely.

    Like

    • Eric,

      I wrote this article four years ago, it requires a little tightening and refining in certain places however the sexual union was always the seal of the marriage amongst the Hebrews, that was the normal practice, it clearly states with Isaac and Rebekah that she became his wife after she entered Isaac’s tent, read the account again. The ceremony coming before the sexual union is a European concept, the original Hebrews were Negro in descent, they did not subscribe to or practice European ideologies when it came down to marriage.

      Mary and Joseph are the exception to the rule, there are always exceptions, however exception to the rule does not buck the general trend.

      Like

  42. Actually Rebekah became Isaac’s wife first then he had sex with her. Here is a direct quote from some of the material I posted.

    {“The marriage of Isaac and Rebekah is another example, “Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent; and he took Rebekah and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death” (Genesis 34:67). We are not told the full marriage ceremony — there is no reason to assume that all of it was recorded for us — but it appears that a part of their marriage customs was the bringing of the bride into the chambers of a man’s mother. (In fact, it is from this that we get the custom of a man carrying his bride across the threshold.) But notice the order: Rebekah became Isaac’s wife and then he loved her. This particular Hebrew word has the similar broad meaning for love that our English word has. It is both a general love between two individuals, but when used between married couples it can include the idea of lovemaking, or sex.”}

    A ceremony which included a written covenant which made the marriage official ALWAYS came before the act of sealing the marriage by way of sexual union. Joseph and Mary were NOT the exception to the rule. God did the same thing with Israel when he took them to be his spiritual wife. There is plenty of posted material that details how they performed ancient wedding ceremonies back then.

    Like

  43. Hi verbs ,tnx for your article
    Wats ur thought on this pls
    My guy n I have been dating for four months now,from the scratch I made it known to him that we were going to bang after we get married n not anytime sooner,he is catholic n am the charismatic type,he visits my church sumtyms,we even fast n pray occasionally too…along the line,this issue of sex came up,my guy sees sex as an expression of affection and love jus to each other ,but on the other side av been taut that sex was sacred n should be performed only in marriage..this has always brought confusion between us,not like am a virgin,am 21 and have had multiple sexual partners in the past…am the typical bad girl gone good..I have had sex with my guy on four different occasion jus cus I seemed to be denying him of something he needed,anything we av sex,this guilt jus descends on me of disappointing God,I break down n cry most of the time…my guy lost his mom this very year,n he is mostly lonely,I cant spend too much time with him cus I know the issue of sex would pop up n we Wud start having arguments,and he keeps saying am denying him of something which would make him feel much better,I feel good wen we are romancing n having sex ,but right after that,this guilty n disappointing feeling comes up…we seem to have the best of relationship but this sex thing is eating us up..I was searching for answers and I stumbled into your blog

    Like

    • Darleneze,

      You have to remember that the fornication equates to “sex before marriage” slogan is an empty mantra, it means nothing, it is not scriptural. It was manufactured by the Roman Catholic Church in order to institutionalise and thereafter monetise the natural covenant of marriage. FORNICATION DOES NOT EQUATE TO SEX BEFORE MARRIAGE. As for you and your boyfriend the only issue to resolve is the one concerning deprogramming and decontaminating yourself from the guilt of having sex with him, in the eyes of the Most High you guys are doing absolutely nothing wrong.

      I was much like yourself at one point, I felt very guilty when I used to have sex with my ex girlfriends, because of the false doctrine of fornication equating to sex before marriage a serious battle was raging in my mind everytime I would engage in sexual relations. Of course when the Most High pressed upon my spirit to look into this issue further, once I discovered the truth I was very angry indeed. There are alot of women that I would have liked to have had sex with as the opportunity was present, however because of that false mantra I missed out on those opportunities.

      As long as your are both committed to one another and are not having sex with anybody else then there is absolutely no problem. I wish I could find fault with both of you having sex, however alas I cannot. The church you are attending is the main problem here because it is continually reinforcing this indoctrination. It is your church that taught you that sex before marriage is a sin. I talked about this in my book entitled The Institutional Church Beast Infrastructure which is available on Amazon:

      http://www.amazon.co.uk/Institutional-Church-Beast-Infrastructure-Deconstructing-ebook/dp/B015S48KCW/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1455572505&sr=8-1-fkmr1&keywords=church+beat+infrastructure

      The issue with what fornication really means is one of the first topics I deal with in the book. I also deal with many of the other lies that are being taught in these churches. My advice to you is to leave the church and establish your own relationship with the Most High without the interference of the church beast system, the Most High won’t penalise you for wanting to work things out by yourself. To be honest until you leave that church you are going to be continuously battling with this issue in your head. In order to de-program and decontaminate yourself from this lie you will have to walk away from your church.

      Honestly the modern day church is a joke within itself anyway, the church beast system is all about controlling people from the beginning of their salvation right up until their death. There is no personal relationship with God when you are in attendance at a modern day church because you are forever making adjustments according to the pastor’s instructions, plus the fact that everybody wants to know your business. I hope this response helps you out.

      Most High Bless

      Like

  44. @Darleneze: Check out the youtube video by Wendy Walsh entitled: When Should Couples Start Having Sex. It is only 2 minutes long and it clears up a lot of confusion.

    Like

    • Chris,

      It’s more of a dysfunctional. It is simply a steam let off valve when no sex is available or when the person is too shy to command sex. Unlike the institutional church beast infrastructure the Most High looks at all of the personal circumstances of the individual that have created the habit to begin with.

      It is not the best habit to practice, you would be far better off having sex to be honest. Sex is far more pleasurable and satisfying.

      The viewing of pornography while masturbating is the person simply attempting to fill the void of wanting to have sex with a real person. Yes this part of it is technically a sin however as I have already stated the Most High looks at all of the events that have lead up to the habit being practiced.

      The Most High won’t penalise somebody who masturbates, rather instead he will repair the areas in their life that are causing them to carry out this practice, and mend the breaches which will automatically cause the individual to eventually drop the habit.

      Like

      • Dear Verbs: I am an evangelical — but a liberal one. (We are a rare species!) Literal readings of the Bible lead to a rejection of evolution, which sets science back. A literal translations of the Bible mean women cannot be ministers. A literal interrpretation of the Bible means all homosexuals are condemned to Hell. Also, fundamentalists in America, starting with the Pilgrims, viewed Native Americans as the Israelites viewed the Moabites, Philistines, Canaanites, etc. — meaning they are vermin to be eradicated in the name of God. Also, have you ever watched the 700 Club, Jimmy Swaggart, Hal Lindsey, etc.? Their interpretation of the Bible is that the Republicans are the Party of God, the Russians are evil because they are Gog in the Bible and will invade Israel. So President Trump must push the Russians into war. And by the way, for fundamentalists, Israel can do no wrong because Jews are still the Chosen People. This means Israeli crimes against humanity and Israeli oppression of Christians is ignored. Get the picture? Finally, fundamnetalists have always been opposed to — or the last on board with: women’s rights, worker’s rights, civil rights, environmentalism and rock & roll.

        Like

      • Christ,

        The Most High is NOT a liberal, he also expects his words to be taken seriously. Any other reading of the bible is implying that it literally is a joke, literature that is not to be taken seriously and held to any value. The problem with most so called Christians today is they wish to pick and choose what part of the scriptures they feel comfortable with, yet Christ stated in John 16:13 that the Spirit would guide true believers into ALL TRUTH. That would also include the truths that are uncomfortable to deal with.

        All you are doing at this moment is simply attempting to impose what the bible says to the fundamental sect of Christianity. The words remain the same regardless of who is reading them out. The bible itself speaks against homosexuality and women ministers, the words were in place before the fundamental sect of Christianity came along. I don’t follow or listen to any Christian sects, I follow what the bible says and I listen to the Spirit who brings me the correct interpretation.

        Christ himself stated that he has revealed these things unto babes and not unto those who consider themselves wise and learned(Luke 10:21), thus clowns like Swaggart, Hal Lindsey, 700 Club, Benny Hinn, Joel Osteen etc are all irrelevant because the Most High is not working through them, he instead is dealing with the individual, the nobody, the person of no reputation.

        In dealing with the Jewish people even Christ himself stated that there are those calling themselves Jews who are nothing of the sort(Rev 2:9/3:9), the Jewish people in Israel today are not the descendants of the biblical Hebrews, they fully well know this hence why they refer to themselves as “Israelis” not “Israelites”. An Israeli is of the STATE of Israel which is only around 68 years old, an Israelite however is of the land of Israel and is related to the biblical Hebrews.

        Evolution genuinely is a crock of nonsense, in 2017 it is all about the scientists who believe in the theory keeping their grant money flowing in, if you look at the data none of it is ever conclusive. I’ve debated with many evolutionist before, whenever I ask them for the evidence the write ups will always be vague, wishy washy and open to continuation, thus evolution has become a lucrative and convenient racket for many of those at the forefront of the campaign.

        The woman’s rights should come from her husband or her father if she is not yet married, not from the state, the state has no right to interfere in relationships. This is the problem right here, the government sticking its nose into things that are none of it’s business. Though I don’t follow them fundamentalists at least recognise the raging pestilence government can become when it begins to steep its tentacles into everything.

        Lastly, the Most High states that all evil doers will be punished, even those of his own people. Nobody is getting away with anything. Those fake Jews have their recompense coming and they will not escape it.

        Like

      • Dear Verbs, I read everything you wrote with interest. I reckon balance and education is needed with all Christians. So often what Jesus said is not what casual readers actually think he said. Deeper study as to the meaning of His words and the context are required. This is not always the case, but it often is. As for the Jews of Israel, they are a generally bad people — so I hope you are right on that issue.
        Thanks for your input. – Chris

        Liked by 1 person

  45. I’m 14 and there is this girl I like and I wanted to know if I will be charged with lust if I flirt or show affection, I ask because every time that I google “what does the bible say about things” there are always debates and I’ve suffered pain from confusion

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      A lot of folks think that the Most High is going to punish them for making mistakes, that is not how a true relationship with the Most High works. The church deliberately puts out lies and disinformation in order to confuse the individual so they will be afraid to walk in faith without the church’s guidance and approval, thus the church keeps its members locked in ignorance and returning attending empty and profitless services each Sunday for most of their lives.

      The church paints the false narrative that seeing a nice woman, finding her attractive and flirting with her equates to lust, however nothing could be further from the truth. Why would the Most High criminalise a natural feeling that he put in men to begin with? Answer, he doesn’t, the church does. You need to lean on the Spirit for guidance, this is very hard to do in the beginning because you will always be looking to lean on something else fearing that horrible consequences will come upon you if you make an error.

      That is not how the Most High works, remember Christ stated that the Spirit would bring you into all truth(John 16:13), therefore all you need to do is rely on the Spirit. Walking in true faith as opposed to looking for rules and regulations to follow is very hard, but this is what the Most High requires of us. The church’s lies are all over the internet, you have to be very careful. This is the reason why I came out with my church beast book, to cut through the endless lies and propaganda the church has been teaching for years.

      Like

  46. Now I want to ask if I ever do get a girlfriend would it be sinful to make out with her. I mean like when I know her very well. I’ve had basorexia since I was 7.

    Like

    • @Verbs2015
      Advocating “extra-marital” sex, between exclusive partners……
      How is this not “fornication”, if there is no marital commitment?

      So, in your world, a person might have 3 or 4 or 5 sexually exclusive relationships, before, ONE DAY, they decide they have found ‘the one” and get married.
      And this, you say, is what pleases God?
      So how long, in your model, ( not God’s ), do these people have sex with one another before deciding that they should use a ‘different” sexual partner?
      And how many sexual partners are they allowed, before this is counted as fornication, by your standard? ( Not God’s )

      I put it to you, sir, that what you are advocating, is simply YOUR OWN DEFINiTION OF FORNICATION, just spread over a longer time, as opposed to a ONE NIGHT STAND.
      In essence, they are the SAME.
      And here you are, dressing it up with SCRIPTURE.
      And misleading the flock.
      Advocating “dealing treacherously” with the opposite sex

      Paul says, and i repeat AGAIN, for clarity,
      “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”
      what he DOES NOT SAY, is….
      “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own sexual partner ( sex-buddy, concubine, special friend, lover, mistress, girlfriend, boyfriend…etc ) [ this is what Verbs2015 says ]
      OBVIOUSLY, we must AVOID FORNICATION….AGREED?!

      And This is how to deal with sexual desire:
      “If they burn ( with passion, desire, sexual lust ), LET THEM MARRY!”

      I’d sooner take Paul’s advice over yours any day of the week, no offense.

      Paul’s qualifications:
      1.Pharisee, having intimate knowledge of the Scriptures ( Old Testament ); an Apologist, refuting many arguments
      2.Apostle, called directly by Jesus
      3.Having all the gifts of the Apostle
      4.Wrote half the New Testament
      5. Writings endorsed by Peter as being equivalent to Scripture
      6. Taught by Revelation of Jesus Christ Gal 1:12
      7. “Imitate me, as I imitate Christ”

      I have 2 words for you to ponder on:
      1. ear
      2. tickle

      Search for those words in Scripture together.

      Like

      • Leon Paterson,

        You are going to have to show me where I have advocated extra marital sex between exclusive partners. Please provide me the sentence or paragraph where I have stated that extra martial sex is not a problem. You are setting up a straw man right from the beginning. Again, you cannot show me from the scriptures that the word fornication equates to pre marital sex, like typical believers you show the word fornication in the bible but then immediately fall back upon the pastor’s or the church’s interpretation of it.

        So what if you have to go through many exclusive partners to find the one, that is life in the 21st century for most folks especially in the western world where some men and especially women have lost their way. The bible defines fornication as promiscuity and sex that is contrary to nature and I have provided several scriptures to validate my position unlike yourself who could only provide a few.

        I would rather accept the words of Christ any day of the week over the words of Paul as Christ is the person my salvation is founded on, not Paul. Christ himself was talking to MARRIED MEN when he stated that they could only divorce under the grounds of fornication(Matthew 19:9), yet according to your narrative fornication equates to pre marital sex.

        Christ is clearly stating that married folks can also be fornicators, therefore how can fornication equate to pre marital sex? You have yet to deal with this and the many others scriptures that I cited. The rest of the argument you have brought forward is invalid because you are outlining your position still based on the assumption that fornication means sex before marriage. Deal with Matthew 19:9 first then we can talk further.

        Starting using the Spirit for guidance(John 16:13) instead of these fraudulent, decadent pastors, preachers and church clergy. On the contrary, it seems that you have the itching ears towards the truth.

        Like

  47. Brother I have two questions people also say it is a sin to have friends of opposite sex or if you show affection. This people use Ephesians 4:18 and I also wanted to ask are you a black person, I’m not trying to discriminate anyone is just that in this website there is something called negro wars. Greetings from Mexico. 🙂

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      Greeting from the United Kingdom. I am indeed a black man sir, Negro Wars is in reference to my second book available on Amazon which critically examines the modern day black woman of westernised society:

      You’ve probably noticed many articles on my site in relation to black women, this is do so with the same.

      Now dealing with your first question, now I know for certain that the people giving you this crooked information are trying their best to control you. Ephesians 4:18 isn’t even talking about male/female relations, those people are throwing random scriptures at you hoping you will simply accept what you are being told without first conducting your own research and double checking the information to test its validity.

      There is nothing wrong with having friends of the opposite sex, that doctrine is absolutely ridiculous and those people cannot even provide you with relevant scriptures to back up their claim. I wrote in depth about this kind of deception going on in churches internationally in my Institutional Church Beast Infrastructure book:

      You are doing the right thing by coming here in order to get a second opinion. Always research and verify the information that you are given from any source including myself. Ask those people to give you a direct scripture that states that a man cannot be friends with a woman, I’ll wait.

      Like

  48. Hey another question now outside of my first question, my second question was about if you are black, now You mentioned the UK, I just wanted to know, do you have parents from an Africa country is because I watch soccer and when I look at biographies from players that play in Europe and are black they most have European and African nationalities one example would be a player with parents from Senegal but the player chooses to play for the French national team I see it quite common, I’m half white, with curly hair and my grandmother is black.

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      My parents are from West Africa. The money is better for footballers in Europe, this is why African footballers will typically join a European team based upon the language spoken in their home country.

      Like

  49. Well thank you for sharing, hey in America black people with straight hair is becoming kind of a common thing what about UK

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      That would be black women, I talk about the epidemic of black women and their addiction to wearing weaves and wigs in my book Negro Wars. This problem is international from the US to Africa to Australia to France, it’s the same no matter where you travel to in the world.

      Like

  50. I love asking questions, but what do you think when a white person has natural curly hair, do you see it common, is it surprising. What is your opinion?

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      I see white folks with curly and straight hair all the time. The difference between them and black women is their hair is natural ie it grows out of their own head.

      Like

  51. Hey, you said your parents are from West Africa, when you are in the UK do your parents keep traditions and cultural traits like do they still eat food from Africa, Speak their native language from Africa and other things. I have friend whose parents are from Congo, and his family lives in America but still have their cultural traits with them.

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      My mother used to speak the native language years ago, however because she hasn’t been back home in such a long time she cannot speak it anymore. She still eats the traditional food though.

      Like

  52. What is food in Africa like in your home, I’ve tried food from Togo and it is like paste that you eat with your hands, which is pretty good.

    Like

    • Oscar Guzman,

      The food is pretty similar across Africa with a number of different alternatives here and there. Ground rice made into a paste using water eaten together with soup is a pretty common food across the continent.

      Like

  53. Hey Verbs I did saw your arguments with other persons I want to know what your point of view was and what the point of view of the other persons were.

    Like

  54. Pingback: What Exactly Is Physical Fornication? Not What We Have Been Lead To Believe – A True Definition! | Afro Futurism

      • Thank You for replying, also I read my comment is seemed to come across rude im sorry i didnt intend for it to sound like that I really wanted to know your answer to this, also I said the scripture wrong. It said it better a man not to touch a woman. I dont remember what book and verse its in but its there Im sure youll find the Book and verse if you type it in google and then you can read it in the Bible. When you have found what Im talking about can you please give an answer, Thank You 🙂

        Like

    • Kira,

      I checked out the scripture you were talking about, that was Paul speaking in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9 about it being good to remain celibate IF the person can handle that type of lifestyle. Paul recognised that his lifestyle of celibacy was dysfunctional, this is why he put this forward as a recommendation if feasible rather than a commandment.

      Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s