(This was originally written in April, 2009, but in light of the newest scandal involving Carrie Prejean, I think it fitting to publish it again. Let the tree be judged by its fruit, and let the church learn to judge righteous judgment.)

A woman stands nearly Unclad before many spectators, so that a gay, among others, can judge her “beauty” by the world’s false standards. She then says gay marriage is wrong. My sister in Christ? Not necessarily—let’s judge righteous judgment.



Since when do Christians go to the world to parade their dying flesh about on a stage, encouraging men to lust, and young women to covet, admire, and imitate what is evil?

Since when do whorish women become the heroes of Christendom?

Since when do we applaud and congratulate women—who are presently and unashamedly disobeying God’s will for women—for “defending the faith,” rather than rebuking them in love, and showing them the things that please the Father?

Has the church of Jesus Christ sunk so low? Is there no discernible difference between what is good and evil anymore? “Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean…” (Ezekiel 2:26)

Is Carrie Prejean a defender of the faith? Well, that depends. Are we talking about the faith of Jesus? Or some other faith that is rooted in tradition and personal opinion? Here are Carrie’s words:

“Well, I think it’s *great* that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I *think* that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anyone out there, but that’s how I was raised, and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman.”

So according to Carrie, it’s just wonderful that Americans get to choose if they want to marry the same sex or the opposite sex! And she means no offense, but she was RAISED to believe marriage is between a man and a woman.

Let me remind those who love God’s Word that homosexuality is not something we “can choose” or not choose without consequence. It is a judgment of insanity sent by God on those who worship the created being (women in beauty pageants, for example) more than the Creator (Romans 1). It is also a one way ticket to damnation (I Cor. 6:9-10) unless the gay repents and turns to Jesus Christ in obedient faith.

Any good Muslim, Jehovah’s Witness, or Catholic could have given the answer Carrie gave!

Carrie was apparently raised to believe in biblical marriage, but not raised to believe in biblical modesty. Her traditional Christianity allows her to cherry pick her truths according to her own desires. Her opinion is that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Her opinion is also (apparently) that women who profess to be Christ’s do not have to turn away from the sin of immorality, and cover their bodies modestly as befits a Christian. She has apparently decided to avoid these Scriptures:

“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.” (I Tim. 2:9-10)

Too bad the deceived are so busy giving this misguided woman applause, and not busy helping her to see the error of her ways. It’s pretty hard to stand up for Jesus with no clothes on, ladies. Spend some time with Jesus, and He will make this very plain to you.

A harlot is known by her dress, which is worn to purposely ensnare men (Proverbs 7:10). So please spare me the “people have differing views of what modesty is” line, which is an unacceptable excuse being used to justify the wicked. Please don’t write me and tell me that bikinis are acceptable public clothing for Christian women, unless you are willing to wear your underwear to church this Sunday or to your next Bible study. The presence of water does not baptize harlotry and make it acceptable! Even in cultures that instinctively wear more clothing than Americans, a harlot is known by her choice of clothing. Also, please notice in Proverbs chapter 7, that the harlot can be very religious and have a “form” of godliness; but by her dressing to entice unstable souls, she proves herself a spiritual murderer—”yea, many strong men have been slain by her.” If the strong men need beware, what will happen to the weak men?

As a Christian, our first commandment is to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength. Pretty hard to do while we are wowing the crowds with our flesh, isn’t it? My friends, NO FLESH should glory in His presence! (I Cor. 1:29) That’s pretty clear, isn’t it? We are either sowing to please our flesh, or sowing to please the Spirit. We are not doing both at the same time.

The second commandment is to love our neighbor as ourselves. Are we (ladies) loving men when we strut about half covered in front of them? Are we not concerned about their eternal souls? Are we not concerned about our own? Are we concerned about their wives and their daughters? Or are we only concerned with climbing some ladder of vain self-importance in the eyes of this idolatrous world? Do we think we can play the harlot and escape the wrath of God?

There is a reason God COVERED Adam and Eve’s unclothedness when they became sinners. There is a reason we will not return to the “Unclad state” even in heaven. We will be fully clothed. There is a reason He threatened idolatrous Israel with “uncovering her unclothedness.” There is a reason that many pagan tribes that turn to Christ suddenly decide to wear clothes. And there is a reason Americans, who run after idols—like “beauty” queens—have a love affair with unclothedness. And there is a reason the professing church doesn’t rebuke this wickedness, but instead praises it, displaying its own hypocrisy for all the world to see. She knows not that she is “wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and Unclad;” and that she needs to go to Jesus to receive “white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy unclothedness do not appear.” (Rev. 3:17-18)

I can no more commend Carrie Prejean for standing by her opinion, than I can commend Perez Hilton for standing by his. To do so would be hypocritical. The only opinion that matters is God’s “opinion.” Woe is me if I train my children to reject homosexuality, but to at the same time embrace the immoral behavior of the religious LovePeddler!

Please hear me: I am not trying to hurt Carrie Prejean. IF she wants to follow Christ, let her “that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.” (2 Tim. 2:19) Let her ask the LORD how she can make her body a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to Him. Let her seek out older women of faith who will show her a more excellent way. Let them teach her not to glory in her flesh, which is a fading flower, but to “let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.” (I Pet. 3:4)

I lay the blame for this hypocrisy at the feet of the church, which has no discernment to see that this woman is hell-bound unless she repents of her idolatry and wanton, fleshly ways. Dare we make a hero out of a person who is so blindly leading others into sin? All this little charade between Carrie and Perez does is further blur the line between good and evil. Homosexuality=Bad, Promiscuity=OK? NO! Both ways lead to death!

Carrie Prejean has become a facebook hero for her stand against homosexuality. I have an unsaved close relative who also believes men should not marry men. Does this make him a hero? No, my friends. The unsaved judge unrighteous judgment. They have their OWN standard of right and wrong. They might think Indecency is OK, but violation is wrong. They think drunkenness is OK, but getting high on drugs is wrong. And they think homosexuality is wrong, but immodesty and lifting oneself up as an idol to be worshiped by lust-driven crowds is OK.

If Carrie wants to be taken seriously as a Christian, she needs to obey Christ and his Word by turning from her OWN wickedness, dressing herself as befits a woman professing godliness, and standing up for what GOD thinks, ACROSS THE BOARD.

And if the church wants to be taken seriously by people like Perez Hilton, it needs to stop being so hypocritical and blind. It needs to go to Jesus for some eye medicine. It also needs to stop strengthening the hands of those who do evil, like Carrie Prejean, so that she will repent and follow after righteousness.

“I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness; they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.” Jeremiah 23:14

“But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother (or sister) be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” I Cor 5: 1-13

Article

this frosbel is about to burst out of christianity. watch.

INSHAALLAH.

^^

This is not just a matter of external dress but inner purity.

By inference, a woman can dress from head to toe in a long dress and wear a scarf , but still have a heart as rotten as a dead corpse.

Let me explain further using Peter's word regarding modesty :

"3 And let not your adornment be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; 4[b] but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit[/b], which is precious in the sight of God."

In other words if a woman dresses modestly , but does not have the quality of a gentle and quiet spirit , her profession of religion is worthless.

So let us look at things in perspective, judging by external dress alone is a no no, judging by character as well as dress is a yes yes.

Many Muslims girls and even wives , wearing hijab have been known to be agressive , non-submissive to their husbands, rude, vulgar and abusive. Their wearing of a Hijab in this instance is of no inherent value , seeing that they do not posses the character of a gentle and quiet spirit in the sight of God.

Hope this helps.

Thank You.

Brother Frosbel

By there fruit, even close to the tree trunk we shall know them:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/28/bethlehem-religious-fight_n_1172475.html?ncid=webmail20

^^^^

Are you going to do a  LagosShia on me and avoid my earlier comment 

Please you are more than that small boy LagosShia.

I expect you to respond ON topic not OFF topic.

Thank You.

I dont want a submissive wife. I am only interested in independent woman who can stand on her own, when it really matters.

i often don't read your post because i already now that you are a joke.

Sweetnecta:

I dont want a submissive wife. I am only interested in[b] independent woman[/b] who can stand on her own, when it really matters.

Thanks for borrowing a phrase from the 21st Century in contrast to 7th century values.  

Anyway let me address this point of interest.

Submissive is a relative word.

I understand where you are coming from, in the middle east , submissiveness to your husband , essentially means , a Door Mat kind of existence,.

On the contrary in the Christian church , Submissiveness means that a woman respects her husband ( obviously mutual respect ), honours him and gives him his rightful place in the home. She is not rude , abusive, self-seeking or overtly imposing.She seeks advice and direction from  her husband and his leadership is of utmost importance.

Still she is independent , in the sense that she is not bound by a set of strict rules or criteria to which she must adhere or be beaten, ridiculed and or ostracised. She is of equal value to a man and not half a man like we have in ISLAM.

Again thanks a million for your contribution.

Borrow from 21 century instead of 7 century?

First this is my time. I cook for my wife, among other things that I do.

I can take care of ma sef.

Now let me turn to the chairman who lived in the 7th century.

He was a husband, so I will explain his relationship with his wives.
It is recorded that in Madina, he was a poor man and didn't like our african forefathers sent the women to farm while he stayed to reap the labor. He worked hard in the house, even mending his own clothing, etc. None of his wives said he was over bearing or a burden on her.

And he did not indulge them in any unnecessary luxury because he was a head of state [take a look at President GEJ, falling our hands as the expression goes, yet has the gut to give 5 B Naira for his wife's NGO, saying that he and his VP will spend almost 1 B Naira for food, next year]. He helped in house duties and it is not the duties of wives in Islam to pic up after the husband [and that is not the same for christians].


I could talk about his [as] as a father, as a leader of dedicated followers. But I will be robbing your nose in the mud of disgrace, since Paul was a father and not really an able leader, but a usurper. See. Even in my clear effort to rubbish you, I avoided mentioning the name of Jesus in the example.

Sweetnecta:

Borrow from 21 century instead of 7 century?

First this is my time. I cook for my wife, among other things that I do

I can take care of ma sef,

Good to know that you have picked up some Western values and skills.

Now let me turn to the chairman who lived in the 7th century.

You mean Mo ( SAW ) 

He was a husband, so I will explain his relationship with his wives.
It is recorded that in Madina, he was a poor man and didn't like our african forefathers sent the women to farm while he stayed to reap the labor. He worked hard in the house, even mending his own clothing, etc. None of his wives said he was over bearing or a burden on her.

Was this before or after they raided and looted the treasury of the Jews and other Arabs ??

And when you say none of his wives, which one, they were over 14. Please be specific.

I could talk about his [as] as a father, as a leader of dedicated followers.

So ALLAH is not the father, Muhammad is      Wow !!!!!

But I will be robbing your nose in the mud of disgrace

Are you always out to disgrace  I can see LagosShia's bad habits are now rubbing off you .

since Paul was a father and not really an able leader, but a usurper.

But a more noble man than Mo, we have to agree on this.

See. Even in my clear effort to rubbish you, I avoided mentioning the name of Jesus in the example.

Good man.

@Frosbel: « #9 on: Today at 07:33:55 PM »
[Quote]Quote from: Sweetnecta on Today at 07:21:11 PM
Borrow from 21 century instead of 7 century?

First this is my time. I cook for my wife, among other things that I do

I can take care of ma sef,

Good to know that you have picked up some Western values and skills.[/Quote]Yes, the value of western Nigeria because I saw my father [ra] taking care of himself, without imposing on any of his brides. And some of my older brothers have copied the same value. I guess because we are Omo Ada Aran Bori Iyawo. {get a yoruba man to help you here, because I thin you already forgot all about UI}.

I can't respond to any of your playa responses, above.