It’s Better to Obey Husband Than to Burn – Part 3 (Final Part)


Genesis 3:16 “Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and [thy desire] shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”  

I know some people are going to say why am I revealing all of this? Why am I giving men all this power (Rom 1:16) over women in this series of “It’s Better to Obey Than to Burn”? Why didn’t I withhold this information “in righteousness” from the masses of men like Modern Preachers do? Why have I dared to teach that if a wife doesn’t obey her husband, she will not be forgiven by God for blaspheming the Holy Ghost (cf. Matt 12:31-32 with Titus 2:3-5), and that she will be thrown in the Lake of Fire for Idolatry (Rev 21:8)? I say why not! Women use the power of the Laws of the Land to rule over men, that men’s desire (their lively hood, income, freedom, seeing their children) will be unto them. And we have so many female appeasing preachers who use the Bible (i.e. I Tim 5:8) to cast men—who don’t “take care of their responsibilities”—into the Lake of Fire. So as preachers and these phony “Christian Women” who they appease, thought to do unto men—who don’t “take care of their responsibilities, in propagating that “disobedient husbands” are damned to be cast into the Lake of Fire. So, must the same thing be done unto these lying preachers and the disobedient wives they appease.

Deuteronomy 19:16-20 “If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong; Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days; And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.

Again, I know some people are going to say that I should’ve kept certain things hidden and not teach the things in the prior parts in this series, just because there will be husbands out there who will abuse those facts, so being, wives will be ruled over by their husbands. For knowing that their desire—even their prayers and salvation—shall be according to how they obey and treat their husbands. DUH!

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

When you read the parable of the unforgiving servant, you will understand what Desire ultimately meant in Genesis 3:16 when God said to the woman “and thy desire shall to be to thy husband.”

In the parable of the unforgiving servant, the unforgiving servant didn’t forgive his fellow servant an amount that was much lower than the amount he was previously forgiving for by his Lord. So, the Lord of the unforgiving servant had punished him for not giving the same mercy to his fellow servant that he had received. But that isn’t the part of the parable we are focusing on for right now. What we are to pay attention to is that the Lord of the unforgiving servant took into account all his servants, and the Lord saw that the unforgiving servant had owe him much, and the Lord than judged that the unforgiving servant pay the high debt with all that he had, including his wife and his children being sold into slavery. But the unforgiving servant came to his Lord and worshipped him and ask for his Lord’s forgiveness from his Lord’s judgment against him. And the Lord of the unforgiving servant forgave him because the unforgiving servant “DESIREDST” his Lord.

Matthew 18:23-35 Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt. So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou [desiredst] me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

The parable of the unforgiving servant shows that when a subordinate like a wife “desires” her Lord who is her husband—as according to Genesis 3:16, means that the husband has the power of judgment to have his wife destroyed or make non-effect the judgment to have his wife destroyed. Hint—

Numbers 30:1, 3-8 And Moses spake unto the heads of the tribes concerning the children of Israel, saying, This is the thing which the LORD hath commanded. If a woman also vow a vow unto the LORD, and bind herself by a bond, being in her father’s house in her youth; And her father hear her vow, and her bond wherewith she hath bound her soul, and her father shall hold his peace at her; then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she hath bound her soul shall stand. But if her father disallow her in the day that he heareth; not any of her vows, or of her bonds wherewith she hath bound her soul, shall stand: and the LORD shall forgive her, because her father disallowed her. And if she had at all an husband, when she vowed, or uttered ought out of her lips, wherewith she bound her soul; And [her husband] heard it, and held his peace at her in the day that he heard it: then her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she bound her soul shall stand. But if [her husband] disallowed her on the day that he heard it; then he shall make her vow which she vowed, and that which she uttered with her lips, wherewith she bound her soul, of none effect: and the LORD shall forgive her.”

As the scripture above indicates, God gave the husband the power of judgment over his wife to judge if she is going to be potentially destroyed or not by God for a vow that she makes. This power of judgment that a husband has over his wife accompanies the responsibility God gave a husband to take into account every action of his wife. As when the Lord—being offended by Sarah—came to Abraham about his wife Sarah laughing at God’s promise of Issac. The Lord put the responsibility on Abraham (not on himself) on how Sarah was going to be dealt with. Abraham appropriately just chided with Sarah for her unbelief.

Genesis 18:9-15 And they said unto him, Where is Sarah thy wife? And he said, Behold, in the tent. And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him. Now Abraham and Sarah were old and well stricken in age; and it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women. Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also? And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old? Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son. Then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And he (Abraham) said, Nay; but thou didst laugh.”

The point is, God came to Abraham to decide what was going to happen to Sarah for her actions. God didn’t do anything to Sarah himself, God put the responsibility on Abraham to decide how Sarah was going to be disciplined. God didn’t interfere with the chain of command that he set up. That God is not the head of the wife if you will, but the husband is the head of the wife.

It’s no different a scenario than an owner or CEO of a company coming to middle management or an immediate supervisor and letting them decide what the company should do to a recalcitrant employee. Since the middle management or immediate supervisor knows first-hand the recalcitrant employee’s actions. That’s how God handles the husband ruling over his wife. The wife’s “desire”—judgment of deciding what will or what will not happen to her—is unto her husband. Not necessarily a wife’s “desire” is unto God. For the husband knows his wife’s obedient or disobedient actions first-hand.

So, it’s really foolish for a disobedient wife to pray to or “desire” God to forgive her and not punish her for being recalcitrant against her husband. Her husband (not God necessarily) is really the one who has the power to decide what God is going to do unto her. Thus, the person a disobedient wife should be making up with FIRST is her husband. Before she even dare go pray to God.

Matthew 5:23-26 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother (a superior or equal, not a subordinate—unless you abuse them) hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.”

Again, the husband has his wife’s “desire” in his hands. His wife’s “desire” isn’t in God’s hands necessarily.

The husband like any other ruler must take into account (evaluate) his subordinate’s actions to his superior—which is Christ (I Corin 11:3). It’s profitable to the wife who her husband rules over, that her husband take her into account unto Christ in joy and not grief. For his grief will be unprofitable unto her.

Hebrews 13:17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls (i.e. Num 30:6-9, the husband watch for the soul of his wife, that she won’t make a vow unto God that she isn’t able to keep), as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.”

A husband’s grief in taking into account a disobedient wife ultimately means grief as well for the disobedient wife. A wife’s eternal salvation or eternal damnation will be given to her by God based on her behavior of obedience or lack of obedience toward her husband. For one’s “desire” and one’s “salvation” is one in the same.

II Samuel 23:1, 5 “Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant (Marriage), ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all [my salvation], and all [my desire], although he make it not to grow.”

The husband’s behavior of mercy toward his wife will be judge by God as well. But the husband’s “desire” (his salvation) however isn’t unto his wife, like the wife’s “desire” (her salvation) is unto her husband. The husband’s “desire” (his salvation) according to the chain of command is unto Christ his head and Lord, in whom the husband has to obey for his eternal salvation or disobey for his eternal damnation.

John 12:47-48 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

I Corinthians 11:1-3 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

II Corinthians 10:3-5 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.”

With all that’s been said in the first three parts of this series, I give women a word of advice, “choose your husbands wisely”! Don’t make the “wrong choice” (more on that in another post). As we just went over, a wife’s “desire” (salvation) is unto her husband. Therefore, it’s urgent that women choose a husband who is a good leader; a civil servant to his family; a man who is worthy to be followed and obeyed! Rather than them making the “wrong choice” and choosing a knucklehead for a husband. But, whether if he is a knucklehead or not, a wife is obligated unto God to obey him.  And when I say “obey,” I don’t mean as a slave, indentured servant, or for a wife to be walked all over by her husband. A wife’s opinion and presents does count, so a wife is to obey her husband as his assistant and as a satrap ruler herself under him.

A husband must show himself a man by keeping God’s commandments (I Kings 2:1-3) and being merciful unto his wife (I Peter 3:7). Likewise, a wife must show herself a woman (I Peter 3:1, 5-6) by keeping God’s commandments (Gen 3:16), in being obedient to her husband (I Corin 13:34).


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

Can’t Get No Satisfaction

Many Western Women can’t be satisfied because they are in a constant state of confusion. They walk around mincing trying to be sexy like a woman, yet they also want to be “the man” (in charge) and control the sexual relationship they are in with a man. Many men who they are in sexual relationships with, they treat like they are only good for money. But when these men give them money that is still not good enough to make them satisfied in the long run. How in the hell a man giving money isn’t good enough, when the woman thinks the man is only good for money? Do you get my drift?

Many Western Women don’t know what they want, because they are in constant state of confusion which brings them much dissatisfaction. You come at them as a very masculine man and they are offended and call you a male chauvinist or a male bigot. You come at them with a “gentleman” like persona and eventually they will be offended and call you a “pussy”, lose sexual attraction for you, and tell you they want a real man. You come at them with a balance between male bravado and a pushover (a “gentleman”), like a real man, and they still are offended and will call you a wanna be “mack daddy.” They don’t know what they want in a man because they don’t know who they are as a woman. They can’t figure out between are they a woman or are they “the man” (in charge). So, it’s impossible for a man to have a balance relationship with them of masculine and feminine energy circulating because these types of women keep switching their gender in search of their gender. They are stuck in this state of ambivalence (double mindedness) about their gender, so subsequently, their actions will be duplicity (double dealing) toward their mate. What man in his right mind wants to deal with a woman full of double dealing because she is double minded about her gender?

Of-course what I am saying here isn’t indicative of all western women but it’s just so many of them that this issue must be addressed and acknowledged.

When a man makes a Covenant of Life and Peace with a woman, he expects just that, Life and Peace. He wants to feel at ease when he is around his spouse; and should expect to feel at ease when he is around his spouse. There is no place in a marriage for a woman who is all about Death & War and Confusion & Duplicity. The man who is in that situation needs to get out of that mess, that type of woman can’t be satisfied.

Women primarily want their man to make them feel a certain way. And some women will still stick with a man no matter how he makes her look, as long as he makes her feel like she wants to feel. On the other hand, men in general primarily want their woman to make them look a certain way. And some men will stick with a woman no matter how she makes him feel, as long as she makes him look like he wants to look. With all that said, if a woman is confused on how she wants to feel—like a woman or like “the man”—than how is that going to make her man LOOK! It’s going to make her man look like he can’t satisfy his woman. And you know what follows a man who is known not to be able to satisfy his woman—Emasculation!

It isn’t a good look for a man to be unable to satisfy his woman in any capacity. A man understanding that he isn’t satisfying his woman because she is confused on how she wants to feel, between her wanting to feel like a woman or feel like “the man,” will be very important information to his ego and his “social alibi.” He will know that it isn’t his fault for some incompetence in him that he can’t “satisfy” his woman. But the fault lies upon his confused and insatiable woman who is dissatisfied with her own confusion in not knowing how she wants to feel—like a woman or like “the man.”

Considering the scripture “Can two walk together except they be agreed”—Amos 3:3, a man and a woman in a sexual relationship are not going to be able to walk together if they can’t agree on who is going to be “the man” (in charge) in the relationship.

Plus, you have the confused-dissatisfied woman who can’t agree with herself about whether if she wants to feel like a woman or does she want to feel like “the man.” So, since this type of woman can’t even agree with herself, meaning she can’t even be in harmony with herself, you know she isn’t going to be able to be in harmony with someone else in a sexual relationship.

You can see confused-dissatisfied women walking around teary eyed, mumbling to their self, looking sad for apparently no reason, petulant in their behavior, always expressing irrational anger, and more than anything, they complain and complain some more. They internally feel so much pain for being so confused and so dissatisfied. There is nothing a man can do for them, because these women must agree with themselves FIRST—finally deciding that they want to feel like a woman rather than feel like “the man,” before they will be able to “walk and agree” with a man (head of woman) in a sexual relationship.

Modern Ministers always see a dissatisfied woman as the fault of her husband. To them, the husband must not be doing something right and everything wrong (because women can’t do anything wrong according to them). So since in their eyes the man is guilty for the woman’s dissatisfaction, he can’t dare divorce her. He must be “a man” and fix the problem—this dissatisfaction—that he supposedly created in her.

Some men under these Minister’s tutelage fall for this. Man, if you don’t stop listening to these Preachers and let that woman go about her business, and let that woman depart in unbelief of God, because there is nothing you can do for her, she will always be in constant state of dissatisfaction. She is confused between does she want to feel like a woman or does she want to feel like “the man.” And you will be in a constant state of emasculation which will make you feel dissatisfied with you dealing with such a dissatisfied woman, because it will look like to you and everyone else that you can’t satisfy your woman.

You should know already that female appeasing Preachers are going to be bias toward the woman. Because to female appeasing Preachers, “there is no such thing as a dissatisfied woman, there are only incompetent men.” Not only are confused women impossible to satisfy, but Preachers—whose doctrine is that a man can’t put away his wife no matter what she does or say (except for adultery)—are hard to satisfy as well because they are confused! They are confused between husbands being the head of their wives versus husbands putting away their wives for their constant disobedience. Why even try to satisfy a Female Appeasing Preacher? Be strong a remove yourself from their exactions which includes but is not limited to, their doctrine of husbands not being able to put away their wives no matter what their wives do or say (except for adultery).

The confused woman’s dissatisfaction isn’t your problem it’s her problem. “If you didn’t break it, than you don’t have to fix it.” Let the dissatisfied woman depart in unbelief of God. “O husband, who is to say whether thou shalt save thy wife from her dissatisfaction.”                                                           

I Corinthians 7:15-16 But if the unbelieving depart, let him (or her) depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife.”

You don’t have to deal with the bull-shit brother, let the confused-dissatisfied woman depart in unbelief of God, and you depart in belief of God and put away the dissatisfied woman.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

The Civil Servant Husband Part 4 (Final Part)

“If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day… then they will be thy servants forever.”

Jesus was doing Peter and the Pharisee a favor when he was teaching them the virtue of serving the people who they were over and not being despots over them. Cause when you are a despot and don’t serve the people, eventually the people will not serve you. With an ample opportunity, the people will overthrow you, when they figure out a way to do it without costing them their life. But when you serve the people you are over, they will serve you perpetually without you even instructing them or commanding them to do so.

Remember Jesus demanded that his followers/disciples (male and female) serve him and he accepted their servile service, but at the same time he served them and delivered them from their sins by sacrificing himself on the cross. Two thousand years later we—the spiritual progeny of men and women who followed Jesus while he was on the earth—are still serving Jesus because he so valiantly served us long ago.

Civil service is a virtue and a skill that is learned by first doing and observing some form of servile service, it isn’t some innate knowledge that people are born with or something they can only be learned out of some political science book. Nor is it something that people innately have because they are of an affluent family. People’s hearts aren’t going to continually be toward a civil servant out of the respect of where or whom he came from. Their hearts are only going to continually be toward a civil servant if he looks after their best interest and work on their behalf (even if they initially disagree with him and he ruffle their feathers).

II Samuel 15:1-6 And it came to pass after this, that Absalom prepared him chariots and horses, and fifty men to run before him. And Absalom rose up early, and stood beside the way of the gate: and it was so, that when any man that had a controversy came to the king for judgment, then Absalom called unto him, and said, Of what city art thou? And he said, Thy servant is of one of the tribes of Israel. And Absalom said unto him, See, thy matters are good and right; but there is no man deputed of the king to hear thee. Absalom said moreover, Oh that I were made judge in the land, that every man which hath any suit or cause might come unto me, and I would do him justice! And it was so, that when any man came nigh to him to do him obeisance, he put forth his hand, and took him, and kissed him. And on this manner did Absalom to all Israel that came to the king for judgment: so Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel.”

Rehoboam made the mistake and thought that by him being Solomon’s son and the third king in the Davidic dynasty was going to secure his kingship over the ten northern tribes of Israel. He made the mistake of thinking that “birth” equals “power.” He also didn’t realize that his father Solomon in the latter years of his reign was starting to serve himself and not the people by taxing them grievously. For Rehoboam to remain king over all twelve tribes of Israel he had to serve them and not himself, unlike his father did in the latter years of his reign.

I Kings 12:1-5 “And Rehoboam went to Shechem: for all Israel were come to Shechem to make him king. And it came to pass, when Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who was yet in Egypt, heard of it, (for he was fled from the presence of king Solomon, and Jeroboam dwelt in Egypt;) That they sent and called him. And Jeroboam and all the congregation of Israel came, and spake unto Rehoboam, saying, Thy father made our yoke grievous: now therefore make thou the [grievous service] (being a despot) of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon us, lighter, and we will serve thee. And he said unto them, Depart yet for three days, then come again to me. And the people departed.”

Rehoboam had elder advisers who saw how good Solomon served the people in his earlier years as King and contrast that with the grievous service that Solomon did to the people in his latter years as King, and then gave Rehoboam the best advice I have ever read in anything far as admonishing someone in leadership.

I Kings 12:6-7 And king Rehoboam consulted with the old men, [that stood before Solomon] his father while he yet lived, and said, How do ye advise that I may answer this people? And they spake unto him, saying, If thou wilt [be a servant] unto this people this day, and wilt serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, [then they will be thy servants] for ever.”

This advice above that these old men gave Rehoboam was very wise, most likely they picked up such wisdom by standing before Solomon in his hey-day.

I Kings 10:1, 6-8 And when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon concerning the name of the LORD, she came to prove him with hard questions. And she said to the king, It was a true report that I heard in mine own land of thy acts and of thy wisdom. Howbeit I believed not the words, until I came, and mine eyes had seen it: and, behold, the half was not told me: thy wisdom and prosperity exceedeth the fame which I heard. Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom.”

But Rehoboam was pompous, full of ego, and he clearly had ambitions to make a great legacy for himself that was out of his father’s shadow. So, he leaned toward the foolish and unlearned advice, in the skill of leadership, of young men he grew up with, who stood before him, instead of being humble and diplomatic and leaning toward the advice of the wise old men who stood before Solomon.

I Kings 12:8-11 “But he forsook the counsel of the old men, which they had given him, and consulted with the young men that were grown up with him, and which stood before him: And he said unto them, What counsel give ye that we may answer this people, who have spoken to me, saying, Make the yoke which thy father did put upon us lighter? And the young men that were grown up with him spake unto him, saying, Thus shalt thou speak unto this people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke heavy, but make thou it lighter unto us; thus shalt thou say unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s loins. And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke: my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.”

Because of Rehoboam’s ego, ambition, and choice to serve himself and “lobbyist” instead of serving the common people he was over, he lost the majority of his kingdom to his father’s servant Jeroboam. All because he didn’t listen to his father’s servants—how ironic is that.

I Kings 12:12-20 So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam the third day, as the king had appointed, saying, Come to me again the third day. And the king answered the people roughly, and forsook the old men’s counsel that they gave him; And spake to them after the counsel of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke: my father also chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions. Wherefore the king hearkened not unto the people; for the cause was from the LORD, that he might perform his saying, which the LORD spake by Ahijah the Shilonite unto Jeroboam the son of Nebat. So when all Israel saw that the king [hearkened not] unto them, the people answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David. So Israel departed unto their tents. But as for the children of Israel which dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them. Then king Rehoboam sent Adoram, who was over the tribute; and all Israel stoned him with stones, that he died. Therefore king Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot, to flee to Jerusalem. So Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day. And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that [Jeroboam] was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.”                                                                                                               

II Kings 11:28 And the man Jeroboam was a mighty man of valour: and Solomon seeing the young man that he was industrious, he made him ruler over all the charge of the house of Joseph.”

What happen to Rehoboam in serving himself and “lobbyist” is what happens to any public official (whether secular or ecclesiastical) that don’t serve the common people who they are over, but rather they oppress them grievously or used them to make themselves rich. Such officials will lose their position and their substance. All will be taken away by God from them, who is the authority over all authorities, because they didn’t serve the people that God placed them over, instead they served themselves.

Ezekiel 34:1-2, 7-10 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel [that do feed themselves]! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the LORD; As I live, saith the Lord GOD, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock; Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the LORD; Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them.”                                                                   

Ecclesiastes 5:8 “If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they.”

Daniel 2:20-21 Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding.”

Again, the head over people supposed to serve the people as a civil servant not oppressed them as a despot like Rehoboam propose to do. As the old wise men that stood before Solomon said “If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day… then they will be thy servants for ever”—I Kings 12:7.

The old wise men weren’t advising Rehoboam to serve the people in the capacity of a servile servant. Cause how could Rehoboam “serve” the people while at the same time the people would “serve” Rehoboam forever as the old wise men said to him? If both the people and Rehoboam were servile servants to each other, you wouldn’t know the difference between the King and the subjects. It would be nothing but envy, strife, and schisms between them because they all would be jocking for position to rule over the other. Just like what goes on in the West between men and women jocking for position to rule over the other, with undefined gender roles and an undefined head of the household.

The old wise men in their wisdom were advising Rehoboam to serve the people as a civil servant and thus they will serve him as servile servants forever. Following the old wise men advice to Rehoboam, my advice to men is to serve their wife and children as civil servants, and so shall they be your servile servants forever. Also, my advice to women is to serve their husbands as servile servants and their children as civil servants, and so shall each be your servants in their allotted capacities forever. If you serve your spouse and your children in your allotted capacity and they don’t serve you back in their allotted capacity, then you judge against the vanity (Eccl 8:14) and stop serving them until they get their act together. Or put them away for good if they never get their act together

The old wise men not only told Rehoboam to be a civil servant, but they also told him how to do it, by answering the people and speaking good words unto them.

I Kings 12:7 And they spake unto him, saying, If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day, and wilt serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be thy servants for ever.”                                                                                                                              

These good words shouldn’t be seducing words and platitude words that are Lies and Hypocrisy. The good words that the old wise men were talking about were supportive, encouraging, and edifying words. While “to answer them” plainly means to communicate and cooperate with the people rather than to ignore them and be emotionally aloof from them.

Jesus, mankind’s civil servant, speaks to us in good words. Even the Gospel, which can be short for “the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” means good news! You can’t get nothing but “good words” (supportive, encouraging, edifying) from good news.

I Timothy 6:3-4 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not [to wholesome words], even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings.”

Also, Jesus as mankind’s civil servant “answers” (cooperate with, communicate with) all those servile servants who obey his commandments by answering their prayers (if it is the father’s will) and he comfort us with the Holy Ghost (angel in this instance) who will teach us all things, and lead and guide us into all truth. That we may be at peace from worrying and be a peace from being afraid of what will happen to us in our lives.

John 14:13-18, 26-27 “And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do (in other words he will “answer” us instead of ignore us), that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments (but we must keep his commandments and serve him as servile servants for him to “answer” us). And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. [Peace] I leave with you, my [peace] I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.”                                   

John 16:12-15 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you.”

Looking at Jesus the civil servant will be a good example for all other civil servants to follow, in providing “good words” (not slanderous and abusive words) and “answering” (not oppressing or using for money for their own self) the servile servants who are under them. So that the servile servants will be at peace and free from worry and fear of what will happen to them as pertaining to carnal things in their life. Knowing that you (their civil servant) are handling things on their behalf and always looking out for their best interest.

On the flip side, the servile servant also must speak “good words” (not slanderous and abusive words) and “answer” their superior (not clamor with him) when he is trying to communicate with them. The good words are still supportive, encouraging, and edifying words but now toward the superior.  For these good words the servile servant will be blessed by that superior for their support of him and the superior will serve the servile servant forever.

Malachi 3:16-17 Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name. And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.”                                                   

Job 2:9-10 Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die. But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.”                                                               

Job 42:7-12 And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as [my servant] Job hath. Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and my servant Job shall pray for you: for him will I accept: lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like [my servant] Job. So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the LORD commanded them: the LORD also accepted Job. And the LORD turned the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends: also the LORD gave Job twice as much as he had before. Then came there unto him all his brethren, and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance before, and did eat bread with him in his house: and they bemoaned him, and comforted him over all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him: every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an earring of gold. So the LORD blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning: for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses.”

Bad words (slanderous and abusive words) spoken against the superior by the subordinate(s)—unwarrantedly—will extremely offend the superior and possibly get the subordinate cut off for good by the superior.

Leviticus 24:10-16 And the son of an Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the children of Israel: and this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp; And the Israelitish woman’s son blasphemed the name of the Lord, [and cursed]. And they brought him unto Moses: (and his mother’s name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan:) And they put him in ward, that the mind of the LORD might be showed them. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp; and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin. And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.”

Isaiah 8:21-22 And they shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward. And they shall look unto the earth; and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; and they shall be driven to darkness.”

Malachi 2:17 Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment.”

Malachi 3:13-15 Your words have been stout against me, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, What have we spoken so much against thee? Ye have said, It is vain to serve God: and what profit is it that we have kept his ordinance, and that we have walked mournfully before the LORD of hosts? And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.”

As also the case of the superior who speak “bad words” (slanderous and abusive words) against their subordinate(s), the superior will be cut off for good by the subordinate(s). As we saw with the ten northern tribes of Israel who cut off Rehoboam from being there King for such [bad words] as “My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke: my father also chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions,”—I Kings 12:14. Since Rehoboam “answered” the people with the wrong choice of words, the people reciprocated and “answered” with words that he didn’t like.

I Kings 12:17, 19 So when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, [the people answered the king], saying, What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David. So Israel departed unto their tents. So Israel rebelled against the house of David unto this day.”

Both the superior and the subordinate(s) are required to have the utmost respect for each other (not contempt).

When Rehoboam (and his friends indirectly) addressed the people, he insulted them and spake “bad words” (slanderous, insulting) toward them as if he and his friends felt threatened and insecure. What Rehoboam and his friends were threatened and insecure about was living up to the great legacies and administrations of Solomon and David, Rehoboam’s father and grandfather respectively. Rehoboam and his administration were so worried about living up to Solomon’s and David’s legacy that they projected this fear onto the people with them going overboard of showing their dominance over the people.

Leaders can’t be fearful, they must be fearless, so that their subordinates might project their desires unto them and be at peace. In their subordinates removing their fear of what is going to happen in their carnal lives because they are confident in their leaders (because he is confident in himself), who will serve them as civil servants because they love the people.

I John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.”                                             

Lest the leaders project a repressed feeling of incompetence and oppress the people they are over because they consciously or subconsciously feel that someone (possibly among the people who they are over) is more competent to be in the high position they are in. Or they are trying to fill the big shoes of powerful and popular men who were before them. Thus, they keep the people in fear, so the people will inevitably choose another leader who will take away the people’s own fear out of them by love (civil service).

An abusive and oppressive leader is an extreme which shows that the leader really feels inapt for the position that he or she holds. The other extreme which shows the leader really feels inapt for the position that he or she holds is them being too agreeable and dependent on their subordinates’ approval. This is what “gentlemen” are to their women. Many “gentlemen” feel inapt juxtapose to “angelic” women, so they follow the woman’s lead and directives when they supposed to be the man and the leader in the relationship. Being such a “gentleman” is displaying fear. The “gentleman” is actually afraid that his subordinate (woman) is more apt a leader than he is. A good male leader can’t have such a fear of an “angelic” woman dominating him. A good male leader must be fearless and balance between serving and leading, not serving and appeasing, so that his woman may remove her fear of male authority and project her desires unto him (Gen 3:16). Knowing that her man is always working on her behalf and looking after her best interest.

Also keep in mind that a servile servant must “answer” (cooperate with, communicate with) there superior at all times. The Lord required his servile servants to be always ready to hear him and not harden their heart when he is speaking to them or trying to get their attention. If they hear him (or answer him), he will abode with them forever as a friend and a civil servant.

Luke 12:36-37 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately. Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and [serve them].”                                                                                                        

Revelation 3:20 “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door (open the door of his mind and “answer” the Lord), I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”

Hebrews 3:7-12 Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice, Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest. Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.”

If there are any servile servants who are stubborn and refuse to “answer” the Lord, the Lord will see to it that those servile servants go into calamity because they didn’t “answer” (communicate back) with the Lord, when the Lord was trying to communicate with him or her. In their calamity, they will try to communicate with the Lord but the Lord will be stubborn and refuse to answer-communicate with them (as they were before with the Lord).

Proverbs 1:24-33 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh; When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you. Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me: For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD: They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof. Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices. For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them. But whoso hearkeneth unto me (answer me) shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.”

Understanding all you have learned in this post, you can conclude that a good grounded relationship between a man and his wife or between a superior and his subordinate is when both parties speak good words (supportive, encouraging, edifying) to each other, and answer (cooperate with, communicate with) each other. Then, shall both parties be happy with one another, and so shall both parties serve and love one another forever in there allocated capacities. The allocated capacity is for the husband or superior to serve their subordinate as a civil servant. While the wife or subordinate is to serve their superior as a servile servant.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

“Women ‘were’ Equal With Men”

At least Modern Herodians (“religious” secular authorities) acknowledge with the words “now, women are equal with men,” that once upon a time, women were not equal with men. But contrary to Modern Herodian doctrine, I dare to go here and say that “women still are not equal with men.” And contrary to Modern Pharisee doctrine (callous ecclesiastiacal authorities), I dare to go there and say that “women have never been equal with men.”

In Modern Pharisees attempt to ingratiate themselves with secular authorities and westernized women, they have come up with the doctrine that “women ‘were’ equal with men” in the Garden of Eden before the fall. Which is nothing but them being politically correct while knowing based on scripture, that women ‘now’ are not equal with men in authority.

The Modern Pharisee doctrine that “women ‘were’ equal with men” takes out of context the biblical fact that God created male and female the same being (man). And God gave both the male and the female dominion over animals.

Genesis 1:26-27 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let [them] have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created [man] in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

But being the same being has nothing to do with being the same in rank and in authority. Yes, God do look at males and females as equal beings in his eyes, but God has never and will never look at males and females as equal in authority.

Modern Pharisees disregard the biblical fact (to appease women) that God created Adam FIRST, and then Eve second, because Eve was made [for Adam]; Adam wasn’t made for Eve.

Genesis 2:18, 20-23 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet [for him]. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet [for him]. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”

I Corinthians 11:7-9 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman [for the man].”

Since the reality is that God created Eve for Adam, how than would that reality make Eve equal with Adam? When she was created [for him]. The doctrine of “women ‘were’ equal with men” is nothing but a doctrine against reality, by Modern Pharisees.

It’s absurd to even fathom that Adam and Eve were ever equal in authority. If Adam and Eve were equal in authority than that means that man (the species) is equal with God in authority. Since God created man [for himself], and that creating a being for another being, doesn’t necessarily make the being who was created for another being, a subordinate to the being that they were created for. All according to Modern Pharisee doctrine concerning Adam and Eve.

Colossians 1:12-16 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things (including man) were created by him, and [for him].”

Obviously the two scenarios, God creating man for him and God creating Eve for Adam, are similar on purpose for a purpose. The purpose being that the being who is created for another being, is subjugated to that other being who they are created for. Thus, the being (such as Eve) who was created for another being (such as Adam) isn’t equal in authority with the being who they were created for.

I Timothy 2:11-15 “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. [For Adam was first formed], then Eve (for Adam). And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”                                                                                                              

Besides, God would have a big problem with some being (like man) who was created for him, calling themselves equal in authority with him.

Isaiah 40:13, 25 Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him? To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.”

So, should men have a big problem with women and other men (lying preachers and politicians) who claim that women, who were made [for men], were equal with men or are equal with men now.

Modern Pharisee contradiction comes into play when they state that “women ‘were’ equal with men,” but at the same time they say that Adam had the authority to check Eve from ever again eating of The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, while restraining himself from never eating of the tree. All before God cast a sentence of submission upon all women starting with Eve, who first ate of the forbidden tree.

Genesis 3:12-13, 16 And the man (Adam) said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. Unto the woman he (God) said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

Simply put, if Adam had the authority to check Eve before God cast the sentence of submission upon Eve from eating of the forbidden tree, then obviously, Eve wasn’t equal with Adam in authority, before God cast the sentence of submission upon Eve. Since Adam had the authority to check Eve before he ate of the forbidden tree himself, and before the sentence of submission was cast upon Eve, and subsequently all women thereafter.

This same contradictive doctrine also goes on ‘now’ with Modern Herodians, Modern Sadducees (Antinomians), and western society in general. Whereas, when a wife does something ill behaved, it’s all of a sudden her husband’s fault (never her own fault), because her husband should have checked her behavior or already had her in check. How can anyone have the authority to check someone’s ill behavior or have them in check already, when the ill behave person is supposedly equal in authority with them? Like ill-behaved wives are supposedly equal in authority with their husbands in western society. If western society feels that it’s the husband’s responsibility to check his wife’s ill behavior, than the reality is that wives are not equal in authority with their husbands. If again, the husband has the responsibility to check his wife when she acts ill behave.

Do you see what I am saying? Do you see these preachers and politicians’ hypocrisy when it comes to the gender equality of men and women that they advocate? Yet they allocate all the responsibility in the world to a husband to check his wife’s ill-behavior.

You will find the hypocrisy of all the responsibility they put upon men (without all the rights, privileges, and authority that accompanies all this responsibility), on top of them advocating that women are equal with men in authority, more and more asinine as you keep reading posts in this blog and books from this organization.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

It’s Better to Obey Husband Than to Burn – Part 2

[Disobedient Wives Will not be Forgiven By God]

As it is written in the Book of Titus:

Titus 2:3-5 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not [blasphemed].”

Any woman who doesn’t obey her husband blasphemes the Word of God.

Blasphemy means: “The act of expressing lack of reverence toward God. Irreverence toward something considered sacred.” And that’s what secular authorities, disobedient wives, and the religious preachers who advocate for secular authorities are doing, showing a lack of reverence toward God, when they teach that “wives don’t have to obey their husbands.” That is Blasphemy!

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost or the Word of God—which means purposely misteaching the Word of God, will not be forgiven according to the words of Jesus.

Matthew 12:31-32 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but [the blasphemy] against the Holy Ghost (Word of God—cf. Hebrews 3:7-11 with Psalm 95:7-11) shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

So according to what Jesus said above, all these female appeasing preachers and politicians “who know better,” will not be forgiven by God because they have blasphemed the Holy Ghost (The Word of God). When they covertly teach that “wives don’t have to obey their husbands” or they teach that it’s old fashion for wives to obey their husbands, when they know better.

Also, all disobedient wives “who know better,” will not be forgiven by God because they have blasphemed the Holy Ghost (The Word of God), when they don’t obey their husbands.

See, all sin is sin and all people have sinned (cf. Rom 3:23). As well, all blasphemy is blasphemy and every bible teacher has technically blasphemed against the Holy Ghost one time or another in his ministry. All bible teachers have made mistakes in their teaching of the Bible thinking it was the correct doctrine until they learned better. Then they corrected their mistakes and did better (or at least should have). But those truthful bible teachers (as myself) did mistakes in reverence of God or to Glorify God. We didn’t make mistakes to reverence or Glory man, or advocate “the commandments of men.” The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost that will not be forgiven by God comes into play when preachers LIE presumptuously. When they know otherwise, but they don’t give reverence or glory unto God and his true doctrine. They rather give reverence and glory to someone else like secular authorities and to the status quo of female appeasement that is created by the secular authorities.

All lying preachers who blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, in order to give reverence to “the commandments of men” instead of them giving reverence to the commandments of God, are holding the truth in unrighteousness. They have changed the glory of an incorruptible manly man God, into a female appeasing “gentleman” God.

Romans 1:17-19, 21-23 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them (like God’s Law—Gen 3:16); for God hath showed it unto them. Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God (“manly man”) into an image made like to corruptible man (such as a “gentleman”), and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”

As for the women who love this LIE which come from preachers and politicians that “wives don’t have to obey their husbands,” their blasphemy against the Holy Ghost mostly comes from their actions, instead of their words. The Christian women who “know better,” who know by the Word of God that wives are to be in subjection unto their husbands, but still they decide to be disobedient to their husbands anyway, and this disobedience to their husbands are witness by other people, than these women “who know better,” disobedient actions are teaching uneducated and ignorant women (and men) that it’s alright for “women of God” to be disobedient to their husbands.

You can’t claim to be a woman of God and don’t do according to its context of being obedient to your husband.

I Peter 3:5-6 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”

If these “women of God” decide to do contrary to the correct context of a woman of God, when they know better, than their malicious actions against their husbands are blaspheming the name of God (making it seem like God approves of a wife being disobedient to her husband) among women and men who are without the faith.

Romans 2:17-24 “Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.”

Therefore, disobedient wives “who know better,” will not be forgiven for their blasphemous actions against the Holy Ghost (Word of God) for not obeying their husbands as the Holy Ghost saith. And they will not be forgiven for their blasphemous actions against the name of God (among women and men who are without the faith) for being disobedient to their husbands in front of them.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel


Jesus taught us how to pray in Matthew the 6th chapter. He ended what is called “The Lord’s Prayer” with AMEN!

Matthew 6:9-13 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. [Amen].”

However, saying “Amen” is too politically incorrect in America and in other western countries now. The word “Amen” sounds to masculine for some “Christian Women.”

I happened to hear a “Christian Woman” a few years ago agree with what a preacher (a female appeasing preacher of-course) was saying at my former job and she said to my surprise “A-MAN-DA,” instead of saying “AMEN.” That is the blasphemy, the idleness, and the feminist junk that has penetrated the church going world. Which Modern Preachers have brought about with their appeasement of women.

Has it really become, so unbecoming, for women to say “AMEN”? Didn’t we just read Christ ending the Lord’s Prayer with “AMEN?” Don’t these “Christian Women” know that the Lord had women to say “AMEN,” “AMEN”?

Numbers 5:22 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell; And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And [the woman] shall say, Amen, amen.”

Amen means “so be it,” not “so be him.” What in the hell does “A-MAN-DA” means. Absolutely nothing!

This “A-MAN-DA” foolishness had to come from the words of an evil angel, right into the mind of some woman who doesn’t believe in God.

I dare these “Christian Women” to be in some type of danger, and then they must pray to God for deliverance and they end their prayer with “A-MAN-DA,” and see will God—who is a man—will deliver them. God won’t deliver them because they are praying AMISS!

James 4:2-3 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.”

Also, their prayers won’t get answered because with all that feminist mumbo jumbo, shows that these “Christian Women” don’t believe in Jesus of Nazareth—who was a MAN!

These same “A-MAN-DA” women when in distress will probably say “Jessica” instead of saying “Jesus,” which many people unconsciously say when they are in sudden distress or frustrated.

Or when they pray the Lord’s Prayer, it’s not “Our Father which art in heaven,” it will be “Our Mother which art in heaven.”

Or when they pray period, and end their prayers, it’s not in “Jesus’ name, Amen,” it’s in “Jessica’s name, A-MAN-DA.”

I know I am being sarcastic toward something that’s really serious, but the whole “A-MAN-DA” thing is funny as hell to me. THAT EVIL ANGELS WHO INFLUENCE WOMEN HAVE A SENSE OF HUMOR!

“A-MAN-DA” is the perfect example of the foolishness and the shame in the faith you’ll get when women aren’t made to be silent in the church, like the bible teaches they should be.

I Corinthians 14:34-35 “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is [a shame] for women to speak in the church.”


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

Like Single Mother, Like Son

A generation after the baby boomer born men’s manhood maladjustment, which I talked about in the last post, begin the single mother household epidemic. Whereas, there are many single mothers (“double mother and father”) who inculcate into their sons that they ought to be “gentleman” to every woman they come in contact with. Regardless how hoish, scandalous, wicked, and malicious the women are.

The Son of God wasn’t a “gentleman” to every woman he came in contact with. So how is it expected that the Son of a Single Mother must be a “gentleman” to every woman he comes in contact with.

Jesus called a Canaanite woman a DOG!

Matthew 15:21-26 Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to [dogs].”

Jesus calling the Canaanite woman a DOG is tantamount to a man in our present day calling a woman a “Bitch,” which literally means female dog. If Jesus a sinless man didn’t always show “the proper” respect for every single woman he came in contact with, as evident when he called a Canaanite woman a “Dog,” than how can it be accounted a “sin” for a man, who is a son of single mother, to not show “the proper” respect for a well-known “Bitch,” who has disrespected him.

Single mothers who teach their sons to show unconditional respect for women, even respect to women who are disrespectful to their sons, do it out of the bitterness of them not being able to maintain a substantial relationship with a man, because of their disrespect to men in general. Certain single mothers project their failure of womanhood (unable to obtain or maintain a relationship with a man—head of woman) unto their sons, in turn, their sons fail at expressing their manhood (head of woman) and become docile in their behavior like women—unto women. All because these sons were miseducated about manhood by their single mother.

It’s a ubiquitous thing in western households that grown women (not grown men) are teaching young boys on how to be grown men, which is against nature. I know it may sound unnatural to a maternalistic society, but a boy who needs to learn how to be a man, might actually need to be taught by a man (head of woman). Or at least by a woman who was woman enough to have been in a relationship with a strong man (head of woman).

If these single mothers failed at maintaining a relationship for being a domineering woman, what makes them think that the dynamic of submissive man-domineering woman is going to work for their sons in their interactions with women, if it didn’t work with their interactions with men? It all becomes a dynamic of “Like Single Mother, Like Son.” Their sons end up being alone just like their single mother by being disrespectful to women from first being disrespected by women. Women unconsciously don’t respect submissive men, they commit infidelity against them, then they abandon them for someone who they really like who acts like a man (a leader). Thus, over a space of time, these “gentlemen” who were taught to be this way by their single mothers become bitter toward women. They have no emotional gratifying relationships from that point on. All relationships with women are just for sexual gratification and P.R.

No man in his right mind will deal continuously with a domineering woman. If they do, they will commit infidelity against them, exploit and use them for some material gain, and then afterwards they will abandon them when they find someone who they really like who acts like a woman (an assistant).

Considering all of this, I don’t know why people (especially older women) say when they see a young man acting “ungentleman” like—not being submissive or chivalrous to a woman, that his mother didn’t teach him right. Thank God his mother didn’t teach him “right.” That he want be subject to the just aforementioned circumstance of “Like Single Mother, Like Son.”

A strong mother in the Bible didn’t teach her son to be a “gentleman” and do his best to appease women at all times, she taught her son otherwise. This mother actually taught her son to not appease women, and not give his strength (manhood) unto women. But to stand up and value himself as a man that he want destroy himself (emasculate himself), as many kings (affluent men) have done before him who gave their strength unto women.

Proverbs 31:1-3 “The words of [king Lemuel], the prophecy that [his mother] taught him. What, my son? and what, the son of my womb? and what, the son of my vows? Give not thy strength unto women, nor thy ways to that which destroyeth kings.”

Such good teachings as this by this mother above laid the foundation for her son to become a King (a strong leader) and not a “gentleman” (a weak follower). This mother teaching her son that in order for him to be a King, he must refrain from appeasing women was pure genius of her. Augmenting teaching her son on how to be a King, she also taught her son on how to recognize a virtuous woman (a queen). She taught her son that

1) a virtuous woman’s husband can safely trust in her (Prov 31:11); which means she isn’t a Hoe, because you can’t never trust a Hoe.

2) A virtuous woman will do her husband good and not evil all the days of her life (Prov 31:12); which means she isn’t a malicious woman who is extremely cruel and evil to her husband by emasculating him in public and in private.

3) A virtuous woman will work willingly with her hands (Prov 31:13); which means she isn’t lazy and will WORK for her man and WORK on his behalf, that she would deserve all the appreciation (gentleness) that her man will give her.

4) A virtuous woman’s husband is known among the elders in the land (Prov 31:23); which means she submits to her husband that he may be exalted among other men in a man’s world, and that she doesn’t reverence herself over her husband that she may be exalted among other insubordinate women in an evil angel’s world.

5) A virtuous woman opens her mouth with wisdom and kindness (Prov 31:26); which means she isn’t loud and stubborn and subtle of heart, going about trying to get the last word in every argument. She isn’t going about being so subtle that she will do something vile right in front of her husband and when he confronts her about it, she gets so belligerent and slick with her mouth that she actually convinces him that she didn’t do it when he was looking right at her while she was doing it.

Other mothers in the Bible taught their daughters Sound Doctrine! They taught their daughters to be good (gentlewomen) unto their husbands. Which indirectly was teaching their sons that their wives ought to be good (gentlewomen) unto them.

Titus 2:1, 3-5 But speak thou the things which become [sound doctrine]: The aged women (mothers) likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, [teachers of good things]; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, [good], obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

In the two different examples above, we have different mothers doing the same thing. The first mother taught her son (who became a King) that virtuous women (queens) are to be good and kind (gentlewomen) unto their husbands and in general. The aged mothers taught their daughters that they ought to be good and obedient (gentlewomen) to their husbands. So where in the hell did these present-day mothers come from who teach their sons to be “gentlemen,” and teach their sons to be good and obedient to their wives? They certainly are not spiritual progenies of the [holy] mothers in the bible. [Holy] mothers in the bible didn’t teach their daughters to be evil and deceptive toward their husbands like many mothers do in this day. In teaching their daughters shit like “don’t let your left hand no what your right hand is doing.” In other words, “get what you can out of these ‘dog ass men’ while not letting them know your true intentions.” That is straight up evil. What type of virtue is that to teach your daughter? The virtuous woman will do her husband good and not evil all the days of her life (Prov 31:12). This all shows that many of these present-day mothers (especially the single mothers) have no sound virtues to teach their sons or their daughters. Their teachings to their sons (be “gentlemen”) and to their daughters (be evil and deceptive) are not according to the bible, they are according to current western etiquette. Which is a western manhood maladjustment starting from baby boomer born men and a projection of failure from certain single mothers for not being woman enough to deal with a strong man (head of woman).


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

Giving Honor Unto the Weaker Vessel

A “gentleman” originally was defined as a mild-mannered wealthy man with social power, who didn’t do any manual labor.  Presently, a “gentlemen” is defined as a man who is chivalrous and helpful to women. But didn’t the Lord create women to be helpful to men and not vice versa?

Genesis 2:18, 21-23 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”                                                                                             

Isn’t it written that the woman is created FOR THE MAN and not vice versa?

I Corinthians 11:8-9 “For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

So where did this “gentleman” rhetoric—men being chivalrous to women—come from, because it definitely didn’t come from the bible?

What happened was “baby boomer” born men (from 1946 -to- 1964) who were babies or in their youths doing the first wave feminist movement of the 1960’s, got inculcated by a myriad amount of adult women that American men are notorious for being abusive to American women. Than, subsequently, these “baby boomer” born men—inspired by their feminist “teachers”—made a manhood maladjustment (being chivalrous to women). Whereas they inculcated all the generations of men born after them to be “gentleman.” All so that subsequent generations of men can show themselves as being “a man,” by being a “gentleman.”

The religious baby boomer born men took the merciful man (who gave honor to the weaker vessel), who did chivalrous acts to women in paucity, and made it into some ubiquitous observance for all men to do at all times for women.

Back in the day, merciful men will see a woman (who they knew) carrying a jog of water from a well that was a half of mile away, and then to give the woman some relief, merciful men will take the jog of water from her and carry it the rest of her journey. Even today, you see merciful men giving relief to an elderly woman (who they know) by carrying her heavy groceries for her. The key point is that THE MEN ALREADY KNEW THE WOMEN AND THE WOMEN WERE WOKRING! These “gentlemen” came in to give these women—who they already knew were hard working women—some relief from a physical burden that the men could very easily handle. In other words, these “gentlemen” (merciful men) were giving honor (mercy) to the weaker vessel (women).

I Peter 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving [honour] unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.”                                                     

In a lot of cases, these women who were working were being relieved by men for whom they were working for or working with. Merciful men in the past didn’t just be “gentlemen” so to speak to non-productive women and women who they didn’t know. But many baby-boomer born men, and men born after them are “gentlemen” to non-productive women and to women who they don’t even know, just based on the fact that they are women.

The general attitude from men before the “baby boomer and feminist years” was that women are not handicapped. If a woman was able to do it herself, then, she can do it herself. I know all that might be hard to believe for you baby boomer old timers but that is reality. You all are in La La land. If a woman drops her phone (or anything else), she can pick it up herself, she doesn’t need a man for that. If a woman needs a chair to sit down, she can get her own chair and sit down, she don’t need a man to go get her chair for her. Besides, women today are “independent” of men aren’t they? Women can’t be “independent women” and simultaneously expect that men should be a “gentleman” (merciful) unto them at the same time. That is a straight up contradiction.

It may seem like a sweet gesture for a man to be a “gentleman” to a woman, but really it is an indirect insult to a woman’s physical autonomy. The “gentleman” dynamic is no different than say a “gentlewoman” picking up after a grown man. These “gentlewomen” will complain that men are not children that they can clean up after themselves when it comes to simple task. Like cleaning up after themselves after eating, cleaning the bathtub after using it, etc. Same thing goes for women that they are not children. Men shouldn’t pull out chairs for women as if they are putting a little child in a booster sit to eat. Men shouldn’t have to open up doors for women as if women are little children that can’t reach the door knob or are not physically strong enough to turn the door knob and open the door. Thus, a man who is being a “gentleman” to a woman, and the woman who is letting a man be a “gentleman” to her, are both indirectly saying that the woman is handicapped to the equivalent of a little girl.

I am going to say it again, “being a woman isn’t a handicap.” Women are generally weaker—physically and mentally—than men, but that doesn’t make women all together disable because they are weaker than men.

Man is a little lower (weaker) than the angels;

Psalm 8:4-6 “What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet.”                                                                                                                               

So, angels being the stronger vessels do give honor (mercy) unto man (the species), the weaker vessel, by teaching man the Word of God. Like the angel Gabriel (the stronger vessel) came to give the Prophet Daniel (the weaker vessel) skill and understanding in the Word of God.

Daniel 9:20-22 And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God; Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.”                     

Yet it doesn’t make man (the species) altogether disable or handicapped because they are generally weaker than the angels. There are extraordinary men (the weaker vessels) who understand on their own merit such profound things in the Word of God that even some of the angels (the stronger vessels) don’t understand.

I Peter 1:11-12 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us (Peter and the rest of the apostles) they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.”                                                                                         

The dynamic above of angels and man is analogous to the dynamic of men and women. Although women are generally the weaker vessel juxtapose to men, yet some women are still extraordinary and can achieve and understand things that a lot of men wish they could do and understand. Even to the degree that great men like the general Barak who was skeptical of going to war without the presence of the extraordinary woman of his time (Deborah) going with him.

Judges 4:4-9 “And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time. And she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment. And she sent and called Barak the son of Abinoam out of Kedeshnaphtali, and said unto him, Hath not the LORD God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun? And I will draw unto thee to the river Kishon Sisera, the captain of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his multitude; and I will deliver him into thine hand. And Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go. And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the LORD shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman . And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh.”                                                                                                   

Thus, there is no excuse for a man to be a “gentleman” unto a woman, just because she is a woman, as if being a woman is a handicapped or a disablement.

God’s servant is to give honor (mercy) to those who have a handicapped of some sort. If someone has a handicap, then a servant of God should help them compensate for that, that the handicap person may be on the servant of God’s level of vitality. This is what Paul was talking about when he wrote that we should bestow more abundant honor (mercy) to those feeble members (handicap people) that lack. That there be no schism (envy and strife) in the body (church) of Christ, from making those feeble members seem like they are not pertinent in God’s house of prayer.

I Corinthians 12:20-27 But now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour (mercy); and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked. That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”

Paul was saying in the scripture above that we should appreciate the members who seem to be less honorable by bestowing upon them honor (mercy) that they want feel left out or not pertinent in the scheme of things. This is what men should do to women. A man ought to show his woman appreciation (but only if the woman has done certain things consistently to be appreciated for, otherwise it will be vanity to show her appreciation for little or nothing) for the work she has contributed to the scheme of things, although her work may be less honorable (less significant) than what the man has contributed. So that no schisms (envy and strife) between the man and his woman come about.

With all that said, a man shouldn’t be a “gentleman” in the aspect that western society thinks of it now. The western “gentleman” isn’t showing his woman his appreciation for her work or for the tangibles that she brings to the table (especially if he doesn’t even know the woman), he is just showing her some attention. Because in most cases, the woman hasn’t done any work consistently for the man (i.e. Gen 2:18, I Corin 11:9) that she deserves all the accolades (attention) from the man. The western man is devaluing himself by giving all this attention and accolades to some woman who hasn’t done anything noteworthy for him. If she has consistently worked, if she has consistently done good-wifey things for the man (i.e. Gen 2:18, I Corin 11:9), then the accolades isn’t attention, it’s deserve appreciation. Absolutely the only reason a man should be a “gentleman” and give accolades to his woman, is because his virtuous woman has worked consistently, and she consistently has done good things for the man (i.e Gen 2:18, I Corin 11:9). Therefore gentlemen, give women accolades (praise) for their works which they have done FOR YOU and on your behalf. Don’t give women accolades (praise) just for their beauty (which is vanity), or because of the fact that they are women (or mothers).

Proverbs 31:10, 29-31 “Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies. Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all. Favour is deceitful,[and beauty is vain]: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised. Give her of the fruit of her hands (appreciation); and let her own [works] praise her in the gates.”                                   

It would be absurd for a woman to appeal to a man’s primordial need (an orgasm) without the man doing something for the woman in return, like teaching her knowledge, protecting her from all harm, and providing for her. As well, it’s absurd for a man to appeal to a woman’s primordial need (attention), for a man to give her praise and accolades without the woman consistently doing any good [works] for the man.

Remember, giving honor to the weaker vessel as Peter says in I Peter 3:7 doesn’t mean that men should reverence their wife or women in general, it plainly means that men should give their wives or women in general mercy or appreciation when applicable. While women—according to scripture—are to give honor to their husbands or men in general by giving them respect and reverence because of their God giving positions over them. Women giving honor and reverence to men have nothing to do with being applicable, it’s automatic because it’s God’s due order. It’s analogous to a new boss (husband/man) coming in to an office (marriage-relationship). The new boss doesn’t have to prove himself to get his new subordinate’s (wife/woman) respect (honor). His natural position over his subordinates automatically warrants respect (honor) from his subordinates.  The subordinates are the ones who must prove themselves by consistently following the new bosses’ orders before they expect to get mercy or appreciation (honor) from their new boss. The just aforementioned example is how ALL superior and subordinate positions work. Men, the God ordained superiors of women, don’t have to earn the respect (honor) of their women, their God giving positions alone over their women, and over women in general, grants respect automatically to them. Now men can lose respect from being abusive, negligent, deceptive, and slanderous toward their women, nonetheless, men never have to initially earned respect from their women. Besides, how can a man be the head of woman (I Corin 11:3), if he must earn that privilege from the woman first. Look like the woman is the head of the man if that’s the case. Since she decides alone (not God alone) if her husband will be her head or not. Thus, the husband’s desire of being his wife’s head is unto his wife, which is so contrary to scripture (cf. Genesis 3:16).

Western society’s etiquette and laws have made it automatic that women are to be respected and reverence by men. While men in western society, have to both give mercy and reverence unto women unconditionally, but receive respect and reverence from women “when applicable”—at a woman’s own discretion. As if women are the “new boss” and the superior over men. Western society’s etiquette of being a “gentleman” is pure vanity and so contrary to scripture.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel


The Civil Servant Husband Part 3

“Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant”

Do you think that women who are being served by men in the capacity of a servile servant (“gentleman”) really think of these men as being their “Chief”? The only way a husband can still be considered “the chief” over his wife and yet still serve his wife is if he serves her in the capacity of a civil servant—simple and plain!

Matthew 20:27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.”

The scripture above is one of the main things that Jesus said in which modern preachers take out of context concerning superiors (husbands) toward their subordinates (wives). What Jesus said above shouldn’t be taken in the context of him telling his disciples that they should be servile servants to their subordinates.

It is written that IT IS EVIL for princes (chiefs) to be walking as servants (subordinates) upon the earth.

Ecclesiastes 10:5-7 There is [an evil] which I have seen under the sun, as an error which proceedeth from the ruler: Folly is set in great dignity, and the rich sit in low place. I have seen servants upon horses, and princes walking as servants upon the earth.”

So, it couldn’t be that Jesus was telling his disciples TO DO EVIL and be servile servants (princes walking as servants upon the earth) for the people whom he was going to set them over. The disciples had to exercise some ecclesiastical authority in some way to show that they were in authority. It is reasonable to believe that Jesus knew that. What Jesus was trying to do was teach his disciples [not] to be despots and tyrants over people like the secular authorities in their day (and in this day) were to people. Jesus rather his disciples be servants to the people who he was going to set them over. Specifically, Jesus wanted his disciples to be civil servants to the people he was going to set them over.

Jesus first taught his disciples the virtue of serving when they were at variance against each other on who was “the greatest” among them. At this moment of the disciples’ lack of humility, Jesus taught them that he came to serve or minister to the people who God the Father had put him over. He didn’t come to exercise oppressive dominion over people like a despot or tyrant.

Matthew 20:27-28 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man (Jesus) came not to be ministered unto, but to minister (minster means “to serve”), and to give his life a ransom for many.”

Luke 22:24-27 And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.”

Although Jesus said he came to serve (or minister), that didn’t mean Jesus passed up being served himself by people. Jesus commanded that those who wanted to be one of his disciples were to serve him, in so much that they had to hate (neglect) their own flesh and blood if they had to for his sake and to take care of his business.

Luke 14:25-27 And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple (servant). And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.”

Furthermore, Jesus was so adamant on being served by his followers and being served FIRST by them (before he was to serve them), that he gave a brief but substantive example to them to let them know that they weren’t doing him any favors by serving him and serving him FIRST. Since he was their superior as he told them he was.

Matthew 23:8-11 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.”                                                                                                                       

Luke 17:7-10 But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat? And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, [and serve me], till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not. So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.”

Jesus’ followers serving him (their superior) was nothing more than what was expected of them to do for him (i.e. Colossians 1:13-16) as them being his subordinates or servants.

Once again, Jesus didn’t pass up on people serving him as servile servants. He didn’t tell people “Oh, it’s alright, you don’t have to serve me, I am the one who came to serve & minister and to give my life for a ransom for many.” Instead, Jesus sat down and relaxed so to speak and allowed his [men] followers to serve him as a superior supposed to do. First, Jesus didn’t get his hands dirty “like a servile servant” because he didn’t baptize anyone, he had his [men] disciples do all the baptizing on his behalf.

John 4:1-2 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples.”

Jesus toward his [men] servants acted like “a Prince upon a horse as a Prince” (cf. Eccl 10:5-7). Nevertheless, when it was Jesus turn to get “his hands dirty” and serve as a civil servant, he did it and thus was beaten and crucified on the behalf of many.

Matthew 26:26-28 “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”                                                                                 

Matthew 27:26-31 Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had [scourged Jesus], he delivered him to be crucified. Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.”

Secondly, Jesus wasn’t a “gentleman” unto women “like a servile servant.” Jesus toward his [women] servants acted like “a Prince upon horse as a Prince.” The women who followed Jesus served him as servile servants, in so much that one penitent woman washed his feet with her hair and afterward she kissed his feet. While this penitent woman was doing this humble act Jesus didn’t tell her “Stop, kissing my feet, I am your servant, since I am FIRST (i.e. adult male), I should be last of all and servant of all (Mark 9:34-35).” Again, Jesus sat down and relaxed so to speak and allowed the penitent woman to wash his feet with her hair and kiss his feet. And Jesus allowed his other [women] followers to serve him in similar menial ways as he was supposed to, being that he was their superior and they were women.

Luke 7:36-38 “And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat. And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, [and kissed his feet], and anointed them with the ointment.”

Matthew 26:6-13 Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, There came unto him [a woman] having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat. But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye [the woman]? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always. For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial. Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that [this woman] hath done, be told for a memorial of her.”

Matthew 27:46, 50-51, 55-56 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; [And many women] were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him (serving him): Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children.”

Nevertheless, when it was Jesus turn to serve in a menial way [like women] he did it. In accordance with what we read that Abigail said she would do—wash feet!

I Samuel 25:40-42 And when the servants of David were come to Abigail to Carmel, they spake unto her, saying, David sent us unto thee, to take thee to him to wife. And she arose, and bowed herself on her face to the earth, and said, Behold, let thine handmaid be [a servant] to [wash the feet] of the servants of my lord. And Abigail hasted, and arose and rode upon an ass, with five damsels of hers that went after her; and she went after the messengers of David, and became his wife.”

Jesus washed his disciples’ feet “like a servile servant.” With this sentimental servile act, Jesus was teaching a lesson to his disciples of the good virtue of serving (which is showing someone that you truly love them when you serve them). As I said already in this post, servile service is the prerequisite of civil service, that is why Jesus taught his disciples the virtue of serving in this servile way of washing their feet. That his disciples may learn the virtue of serving and become good civil servants (not servile servants) to the people he would put them over. Jesus’ disciples wouldn’t understand this sentimental act of service to latter on when they would start their own ministries. Cause in many cases the disciples learned as they went.

John 13:3-17 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded. Then cometh he to [Simon Peter]: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet? Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter. Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head. Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all. For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean. So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you? Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. [For I have given you an example], that ye should do as I have done to you. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.”

Peter, who Jesus told while he was serving Peter in washing his feet “what I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter,” eventually learned the virtue of serving those who you are over (as Jesus said he would), instead of being a despot or tyrant over them.

I Peter 5:1-4 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed (serve) the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords (despots or tyrants) over God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.”

But again, the elders of the church, or male heads of households, are to serve the people in whom they are over as civil servants not as servile servants (or “gentlemen”).

Jesus, like he taught Peter, tried to teach a Pharisee who invited him over to his house the virtue of serving. Which again is showing someone that you love them. But the Pharisee at first rebuked Jesus from letting “a sinner” wash his feet with her hair. Afterwards Jesus rebuked the Pharisee from not being humble and showing him the “same love” by serving him, like the penitent woman was doing unto him.

Luke 7:36-48 And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat. And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, [and kissed his feet], and anointed them with the ointment. Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner. And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on. There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most? Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged. And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to [kiss my feet]. My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much (for she “served” much): but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.”

Hopefully the Pharisee learned this lesson of “love” as Peter did, and learned the virtue of serving the people he was over instead of being a despot and a “judge” over them. Cause a “prince upon a horse as a prince” should be upon “the horse” (pedestal) as a civil servant, not a despot. As a “servant walking upon the earth as a servant” should be “walking” (walking in God’s Law) as a servile servant not a usurper of ordain authority.

Far as Peter again, the Lord really focused on inculcating him on the virtue of serving more than any other of his disciples because Peter was going to be the head of the church under the new covenant. So, when the Lord asked Peter thrice “do he love him,” and Peter thrice responded “yes,” than the Lord after each one of the three times told Peter to “feed his sheeps/lambs” to show the Lord that Peter loved him. In other words, Peter must serve the Lord as a servile servant by being a civil servant to the Lord’s people. Thus, in both cases, Peter would be showing that he loved the Lord and the people of the Lord (who the Lord put him over), by serving both parties in the designated capacities—servile service to the Lord and civil service to the people of the Lord.

John 21:15-17 “So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that [I love thee]. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.”

Translating all I said above about the virtue of serving to a covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, if your spouse doesn’t serve you in their allotted capacity, whether that be the civil servant (husband) or servile servant (wife), then they don’t love you and you are not desirable to them—simple and plain.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel

“An Obedient Wife is Old Fashion”

Since the word “Obey” for marriage vows and the “Obedient Wife” is supposedly outdated or old fashion for today’s modern society, then the word “Provide” and the “Providing Husband” must also be outdated and old fashion as well. Because a Providing Husband is what accompanies an Obedient Wife.

How come in this advance, progressive, evolved, and cerebral modern society with all these “independent women,” that these biblical writings below are not old fashion and outdated.

I Timothy 5:7-8 And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless. But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”

II Thessalonians 3:6-12 “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.”

But somehow (watering down the bible’s doctrine on marriage and manhood), someway (legislating an unjust and unbalance marriage and parental system that favors women), and for some reason (tax monies for the government from prodigal spending women, and for the fact the government can be in control over people and over households for being the arbitrator over them), these biblical writings below are old fashion and outdated.

Titus 2:3-5 “The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

Ephesians 5:23-24, 33 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.”

Who do these Modern Secular Authorities think they are kidding? If an Obedient wife is old fashion and outdated for today’s society, then a providing husband and a providing father is also old fashion and outdated for today’s society. You cannot have one without the other, they are a package deal—A Providing Husband & An Obedient Wife. A man doesn’t have to provide for a disobedient wife. Nor does a man have to provide for children that a malicious mother is using against him, and taking away all of his glory of being the head parent in charge.

Again, if it isn’t old fashion for a man to have to provide for his wife and children, then it isn’t old fashion for a wife to obey her husband. But if it is truly old fashion for a wife to obey her husband, then by all reason it’s old fashion for a husband to provide for his wife and children—simple and plain.

Paul, who wrote all four of the biblical writings above, also wrote in another place that women are to be obedient to their husband as saith the Law!

I Corinthians 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”

Paul wrote the above because of his belief in something that was written by Moses (Gen 3:16) approximately 1,450 years prior to Paul’s birth. How come Moses’ writings were not old fashion to Paul although though they were written 1,450 years prior to Paul’s birth?

Also, Paul believed in something else that was written by Solomon, which was written anywhere from 970-to-930 years prior to Paul’s birth. That, whatsoever God does, it shall be forever.

Ecclesiastes 3:14-15 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him. That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.”

So what God said (and did) to Eve—who was representing all women—in the Garden of Eden, when he told her that “her husband shall rule over her,” he meant it Forever! Forever is a long time past the 1960’s feminist movement or even present day 2017.

Paul knew that whatsoever God does, he does it Forever! That’s why Paul’s writings are full of the notion that “man, is the head of the woman.”

I Corinthians 11:1-3 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

Moses lived in Egypt, in the Land of Midian, and then in the wilderness around 1527-1407 B.C. And Paul lived in the Roman Empire in first century A.D. But again, Paul didn’t look at Moses’ writings and advocate that An Obedient Wife was old fashion, even though Paul was living in the Roman Empire. However, concerning something else, Paul did look at Moses’ writings as old fashion for his time period in the Roman Empire. That something else was for certain men having the option to have multiple wives.

Moses wrote:

Exodus 21: 9-10 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.

Deuteronomy 21:15-17 “If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.”

But Paul wrote:

I Timothy 3:1-2, 11-13 “This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

Titus 1:5-7 “For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre.”

Since Paul wrote so contrary to what Moses wrote concerning certain men having multiple wives, we see in actuality that Paul didn’t believe in all things written in the law and in the prophets as he said he did.

Acts 24:10-14 Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself: Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship. And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city: Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.”

And that was a mistake by Paul, not believing in the Polygamy of a strong man having multiple wives, which I have addressed in Book V in the Man, the Head of Woman Series which will be published in a few months.

Paul’s stance against strong men having multiple wives, and him considering it to be “old fashion” in the Roman Empire puts even more affirmation on the biblical stance that “Wives have to Obey their Husbands.” And that it is a perpetual thing for “Wives to Obey their Husbands.”

Though Paul dared to contradict himself and go here “Polygamous Marriage is Old Fashion,” yet he didn’t dare to go there (like modern preachers have went) “An Obedient Wife is Old Fashion.” If Paul had gone there, he would have been blaspheming the Word of God as he wrote—Titus 2:5. Obviously, Paul knew the danger of going there “A Obedient Wife is Old Fashion,” so he didn’t go there. Though he had the audacity to go here “Polygamous Marriage is Old Fashion.”

Another thing that we read but didn’t really touch on was on how “God requires that which is past”:

Ecclesiastes 3:14-15 “I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him. That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.”

Of-course God doesn’t require the wicked things of the past, like all the idolatries, mass murders, child sacrifice, oppression of people, etc. God requires the “good things” of the past, because how can the “good things” of the past ever become Old fashion!

Jeremiah 6:16 “Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for [the old paths], where is [the good way], and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.”

As we see in the scripture above, people refused to walk in the old paths wherein was the good way, when they said “We will not walk therein.” Modern westernized women, with the stamp of approval of male secular and religious authorities, refuse to walk in the old paths wherein the good way is. Nonetheless, the old path is still the good way.

Certain things of the old paths were indeed good; therefore, God want these good things to be done in the present and forevermore. What are these good things that were done in the old path and in the past, which God requires to be done forever? One of the good things from the past that is to be done forever is certainly an Obedient Wife!

Titus 2:4-5 “That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, [good], obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Also, for modern women to do the good things of the past that God requires now, modern women must look to the good women of the past for an example in goodness and righteousness. Good women of the past like Sarah.

Isaiah 51:1-2 Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto [Sarah] that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him.”

Sarah is a good example, of a good woman, doing the good things of the past that God requires now. The [good] thing that Sarah did in the past that God requires now is that Sarah was Obedient to her Husband Abraham. Like all the other “holy women” of old time.”

I Peter 3:1, 5-6 “Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;  For after this manner in the old time the [holy women] also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”

Did you get that? Holy women are obedient to their husbands; not stupid women; not old fashion women; not weak women; and not just foreign women. But Holy Women are obedient to their husbands.

Titus 2:3-5 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh [holiness], not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Women who are disobedient to their husbands are not Holy Women. They are Wicked Women who don’t trust in God. And they are wicked women who don’t follow the [good] example of the holy women like Sarah of the old days. Such holy women who were obedient to their husbands because they trusted in God. Which is the good thing of the women of the past that God requires now in women.


This was the Doctrine of the Gathering of Israel


Jehoiada Israel