Prophet, with no disrespect or maliciousness intended, I'm afraid this is why the church is in the terrible shape it is. Doctrines are formed from the experiences of men. It is not what saith Scripture, but what saith the man with the experience. That either Scripture conforms to a person's experience or Scripture is negated. There are a lot of people that have formed opinions and doctrines based ...more

Prophet, with no disrespect or maliciousness intended, I'm afraid this is why the church is in the terrible shape it is. Doctrines are formed from the experiences of men. It is not what saith Scripture, but what saith the man with the experience. That either Scripture conforms to a person's experience or Scripture is negated. There are a lot of people that have formed opinions and doctrines based on how they feel from experiences that are not biblical. Some have turned into disaster. My dear friend, I will stick with God's Word over your experience. This is why I liked Edward Ridenour's message. He shows much through the Word. He may not know everything, but he seems to be getting to root of the problem. Your concept of dealing with the problem seems to be the same old church that is loosing the battle. Best wishes to you and a Merry Christmas.less

Prophet, sorry about not getting back sooner. It has been a busy week. On your last response to my comment, I'm not quite sure about how you come up with all of what you preached on. After the "adultery with her in his heart" quote (Matt. 5:28) Jesus gives instruction on what a man should do to eliminate the offense. He says to extract a part of the body. However, He points out the pu...more

Prophet, sorry about not getting back sooner. It has been a busy week.

On your last response to my comment, I'm not quite sure about how you come up with all of what you
preached on.

After the "adultery with her in his heart" quote (Matt. 5:28) Jesus gives instruction on what a man
should do to eliminate the offense. He says to extract a part of the body. However, He points out
the purpose of it is to save the "whole body from being cast into hell" and not the soul, even
though "it was in the heart" (Matt. 5:29,30). There is no mention of the soul as you emphasized.

Each and every Scriptural reference I listed in my last comment deals with and refers to the
physical act of fornication, adultery. Others to include with that is:

(Ro.7:3) The woman is an adulteress if she is married to another while her husband is alive.

(Acts 15:20) That Christian's were to abstain from abominable deeds, including fornication.

(Jude 7) Jude said men "gave themselves over to fornication and were set forth as an example of
destruction.

If so many Scriptures emphasize the physical deed and not the heart lust, why and how do you carry
on so about the "defiled soul" and all the other things you declared as fact, as you did in your
last response?

It sounds and appears more like a doctrine which you have concocted of a mix of secular and
spiritual psychology.

Do you have any Scripture to back up this theory of the effects you declared that fornicated heart lust's
have upon the soul? I'd like to know how you came to this conclusion.

Even James 1:15 states, that a man is led by his lust and when that lust is acted upon, it then
brings forth sin and that sin brings death.less

Prophet, Thanks for understanding my mistake. Your question on whether they can marry after fornication or get a divorce, I can't answer you on, because Ridenour does not describe "biblical marriage" as we are used to. As he consistently points out, "you can't apply our traditional marriage concepts to his thesis on biblical marriage." You will have to understand his position for us to hav...more

Prophet, Thanks for understanding my mistake. Your question on whether they can marry after
fornication or get a divorce, I can't answer you on, because Ridenour does not describe "biblical
marriage" as we are used to. As he consistently points out, "you can't apply our traditional
marriage concepts to his thesis on biblical marriage." You will have to understand his position for
us to have any legitimate discourse about your question. After reading his book and his articles,
I am seeing his point.

Now, here is my view of your comments and questions: The one who lusts in his heart is different
from the one who acts upon the deed. The thought might be defiled, but the flesh has not been
defiled. It is the act that defiles the flesh. The thought is sinful and God will judge it as so,
but if the thought is checked and repented of there are no tangible consequences from that thought.
However, if it is carried out and then repented of there are still consequences from the act.
Neither does God need two or three witnesses. He is witness enough.

It wasn't the thought that Paul referenced when stating it is a sin against the body, as Ridenour
makes clear. Neither was it the thought when addressed about:

1. "Not being once named among you as becometh Saints."
2. The Corinthian taking his father's wife and was to be put away from among them.
3. The putting away of a wife or husband.
4. "Let every man have his own wife and every woman have her own husband to avoid it."
5. The member of the body of Christ becoming one in the flesh with a harlot.
6. The bed being defiled in Hebrews.

Not one illegitimate child will be born or any STD acquired from a thought. Jesus said,
"fornications proceed from the heart defiles the man." What comes out and is put into action
defiles. To proceed is to carry that thought out. However, if the thought is checked and
repented of there is no consequence. Yet, if it is carried out and then repented of there are
still consequences from the act. Everyone of the examples illustrates that and
also involves another to make it fornicated.

Pornography is not fine. It is evil and sinful. It is viewing anothers nakedness and lusting over
it. Masturbation is the carnel self-gratification with self of that lust. There is no act of
fornication committed where the mind was not involved, but there are fornicated thoughts without
the involvement of the body. The consequences are different and will be judged that way.less

Prophet, I apologize for saying that you deleted your comment. It was my mistake. I lost in the mix of all the other added comments that were posted. Also, I had just made a list of answers to the comments that were given, but I went too long and the page refreshed and I lost them. I was doing it at lunch time and now I don't have time. I will try to post them again when I am able. Again, sor...more

Prophet, I apologize for saying that you deleted your comment. It was my mistake. I lost in the mix of all the other added comments that were posted. Also, I had just made a list of answers to the comments that were given, but I went too long and the page refreshed and I lost them. I was doing it at lunch time and now I don't have time. I will try to post them again when I am able. Again, sorry for the mistaken accustation.less

I'm afraid to debate this issue will be unfruitful. You are not an honest debater. You go back and delete your comments and make new one's with what I corrected you on and then it makes my comment look wrong and stupid. You want me to answer to all that you present, but you do not answer any of my arguments. I am more convinced that you are wrong and Ridenour is right.

Prophet, you are wrong about me. Just because I can see where he is coming from doesn't mean I am blindly following him. I analyze what people say and have studied the Scripture myself. You stated " Jesus said that if a man looks upon a woman with lust, he has committed adultery." You don't even quote the Scripture right. Jesus said it is committed "in his heart." And you tell me that I need ...more

Prophet, you are wrong about me. Just because I can see where he is coming from doesn't mean I am blindly following him. I analyze what people say and have studied the Scripture myself. You stated " Jesus said that if a man looks upon a woman with lust, he has committed adultery." You don't even quote the Scripture right. Jesus said it is committed "in his heart." And you tell me that I need to study the Scriptures. I've never heard of a baby being made, an STD being obtained, or a person being joined as one to a harlot by any fornication of thought. If it is a secret in heart how could " not onced named among you as becometh saints" be known? I don't think the fornicator In 1Corinthians Paul said to put away from among them was someone who had the thought, do you? Just maybe you don't comprehend the intent of that Scripture as well as what you think you do. The way you quoted it, I can see why.less

I want to clarify something. Ridenour didn't say that the act of fornication can't be forgiven, but that there are consequences that go with the act. If you think the thought of fornication, it is between you and God and needs repentance. But, when the thought is carried out now it involves another person. I see a big difference in these two things. Prophet, are you guilty of murder if murder i...more

I want to clarify something. Ridenour didn't say that the act of fornication can't be forgiven, but that there are consequences that go with the act. If you think the thought of fornication, it is between you and God and needs repentance. But, when the thought is carried out now it involves another person. I see a big difference in these two things. Prophet, are you guilty of murder if murder is the thought that you might have? Are the consequences of guilt the same as someone who carries that thought out and murders somebody? Even though they both need to be repented of.less

"But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be ONCE be named among you, as becometh saints." (Eph. 5:3) If I were the sexual vagabond that I am thought to be, I would believe in your doctrine of shame and blasphemy. Edward Ridenour's message is much harder to swallow, yet has so much more merit in Bible standards, expectations, and holiness as he proclaims. You who have cr...more

"But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be ONCE be named among you, as becometh saints." (Eph. 5:3) If I were the sexual vagabond that I am thought to be, I would believe in your doctrine of shame and blasphemy. Edward Ridenour's message is much harder to swallow, yet has so much more merit in Bible standards, expectations, and holiness as he proclaims. You who have critciized me have no standards, except do it and then repent. That's probably why there is fornication named so much among Christians. However, there is a difference between Scriptural truth and legalism. Some will hear it and some will not. Keep hanging on to your failed doctrine of marriage and the world will just keep laughing at you as they are now. In Ridenour's article he never alluded to the "thought" as being the same as the act. Prophet, this is your declaration. It seems to me that a thought has much more of a chance to be forgiven than acting it out where as Jesus said "two become one," and "a member of Christ's body can become one with a harlot." You don't become one with a harlot just thinking about it. So, assume what you will.less

According to Edward Ridenour on Today's Christian Marriage blog Marcus is a fornicator and has brought his fornication home now making her a fornicator for taking him back knowing that he committed fornication. Now they are both living in fornication. I guess this is what Christianity is coming to.

Yep, here is another example of the grace of God being misused and abused, making Christ the minister of sin. Howbeit, it seems to mostly involve sexual perversion or infidelity.

Any act deemed abominible, will never and can never be holy, approved, or considered as marriage before God. You might get an unholy government to condone an abominable joining and assign a piece of paper authorizing it, but it is still an abomiination and shall be judged as such when judgement poceeds for those involved. It seems to me that Mr. Mohler, along with many other church leaders, is tr...more

Any act deemed abominible, will never and can never be holy, approved, or considered as marriage before God. You might get an unholy government to condone an abominable joining and assign a piece of paper authorizing it, but it is still an abomiination and shall be judged as such when judgement poceeds for those involved. It seems to me that Mr. Mohler, along with many other church leaders, is trying to convince the world to abide in a secular tradition of marriage so the church will abide in it - since the church is emulating and embracing the world. The church needs to get a true understanding of marriage first, and then clean its own house by adhering to it before it should expect anyone else to respect its declarations.less