Bishop Weeks is looking for the new Mrs. Weeks

[Nikkol]

Titus 2:3-5
3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

The ISSUE is not that he's leading on "desperate women" but rather a woe to the aged women who did not do their job.......

[stillfocused]

Question did mention his sex drive while he was married or after his divorce ? Because if he mentioned it within the confinements of marriage..he did nothing wrong. Yet, if this topic came up after his divorce then he has stepped over some boundaries. The other is thing the word of God tells husbands and wives that their bodies are not their own and they are not to withhold the coming together lest tempation will (parphasing). And secondly where are the older women ? Many are unmarried..and what younger people equate to success in relationships is this..if you have a "man" then you can talk to me about how I am to carry myself as a young lady; you don't have a man how you going to talk to me...the old breed of church mothers are a rarity...as many are trying to get married themselves. Sadly, with the mentality of many in the body of Christ which says "you ain't my Pastor, my Pastor's wife, the Prophet, or whatever you can't tell me nothing and I am not to receive it unless Pastor says it.

[nina2]

Titus 2:3-5
3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

The ISSUE is not that he's leading on "desperate women" but rather a woe to the aged women who did not do their job.......

Mm? “Woe”? Woe to the “aged women”? Woah.....

That’s a big U-Turn, Nikkol LOL I actually “like” that word, woe, just three little letters, at least in that form :-)

“What does "oy vey" mean?

By Eliezer Posner

"Oy" and "vey" are two very old Jewish interjections which both mean "woe."
Oy is found many times in the Bible (See Numbers 21:29, I Samuel 4:7, and Isaiah 3:11 for a few examples).
Vey is newer than oy; it is oy's Aramaic equivalent.

Today, oy and vey are often used together. Oy vey is the ethnically Jewish way to react when you find out how much your son's root canal will cost, or when you find out that there is a two hour wait time for a table at the restaurant at which you just arrived.

Sometimes you'll hear people groan "oy vavoy," which is Hebrew for oy vey.1 Those who prefer Yiddish lamentations will often cry "vey iz mir" which means "woe is to me."

Let's pray that God sends us Moshiach already, so we can stop waxing eloquent about our woes and expand our vocabulary of positive interjections!

1- Proverbs/Mishlei - Chapter 23

29. Who cries, "Woe!" Who, "Alas!" He who has quarrels. ........

Meaning:

King Solomon asks, "To whom is oy and to whom is avoy?"

The ISSUE is not that he's leading on "desperate women"...

I actually agree with you on that. Only for this reason – and in this case: it can't be because he is NOT leading on anybody!!! Everything about this entire situation and person, from beginning to this day, has been on display in great details for whosoever was interested in it.
So, it is and has been – right or wrong, true or false, good or evil – all out in the open, step by step, in great (and very graphic) details.
So, I honestly doubt that “should” anything take place from this point on, anybody could have a claim about being “lead on” in ANY kind of way....

I would also question the “desperate” in “desperate women”.
Many times, and about many topics, I am reminded of that quote from a preacher, years ago: “The question is how close can you get to hell without being burnt?”
And I am quoting it out of contest here.

However, imho, what is becoming sadder and sadder by the day is seeing how much is done, claimed to be done and carried on, in the name of God, especially among christians.
And, what is even more perplexing to me – and that’s a figure of speech, really – is that most of what is caught on and followed in the public eye, again including christians, is irrelevant, most of the time, to the real spiritual issues at hand related to what has been exposed.
And, a lot of what is said and done puts a whole new twist in “using the name of God in vain”.

As for the “woe to the aged women for not doing their job”, Nikkol, just betweeen you and me, I’ll take that bait, but not as far as I probably could :-)

So, let’s see:

1- Aged women: what was the average age of an aged woman during Paul’s time vs nowadays?
Does it matter? Yes, it does.
As a matter of fact, I do believe that younger women should (keyword!) be able to relate more today to “older” women.
Most of them don’t look their age anyway, they are very much in tune with what’s happening, here, there, and everywhere in fact, and whether they are married or have never been married, they are fit for the purpose mentioned by Paul. Being single doesn’t disqualify an older woman from teaching in the ways he spoke of.

2- I had to ask about the age factor when talking about aged women, because often today, there are “not so old” women who are already grandmothers for example. So, it is important to determine what old meant then and means now. Is it strictly age as in a number of years, or life experience?

3- You say they did not do their job. OK: Why?

-If, indeed, the issue was what you said it is, in the church, why did not they do their “job”?

-Did they ever do it?

-How did they do it?

-Under what authority and what overseeing did they do it?

-Were they at liberty to do it?

-Were they chosen, elected, voted in, just revealed as being the ones who ought to be doing it?

-If it was being done, what caused it to stop?

-Were they told to just go and sit down and not to do it anymore?

-Was it because suddenly their “job” was deemed not as relevant to our times and ways and/or put a damper on someone else’s style?

I do have more questions about all that, and I am still very intrigued by what can have brought you to this conclusion......

Finally, I love this portion of scripture so, that’s what I want to leave with for today :-)

Isaiah/Yeshayahu - Chapter 29

9. Stop and wonder; they became blind and they blinded. They were intoxicated but not from wine; they reeled but not from strong wine.

10. For the Lord has poured upon you a spirit of deep sleep, and He has closed your eyes; the prophets and your heads who stargaze, He has covered.

11. And the vision of everything has been to you like the words of a sealed book, which they give to one who can read, saying, "Now read this," and he shall say, "I cannot, for it is sealed."

12. And if the book is given to one who cannot read, saying, "Now read this," he shall say, "I cannot read."

13. And the Lord said: "Because this people has come near; with their mouth and with their lips they honor Me, but their heart they draw far away from Me, and their fear of Me has become a command of people, which has been taught.

14. Therefore, I will continue to perform obscurity to this people, obscurity upon obscurity, and the wisdom of his wise men shall be lost, and the understanding of his geniuses shall be hidden.

15. Woe to those who think deeply to hide counsel from the Lord, and their deeds are in the dark. And they said, "Who sees us and who knows us?"

16. Shall your perversion be regarded like the potter's clay? Shall the thing made say of him who made it, "He did not make me," and the impulse say to the One Who formed it, "He does not understand"?

[keita]

Sept 25, 2008 7:03:11 GMT -5 Nikkol said:

Titus 2:3-5
3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

The ISSUE is not that he's leading on "desperate women" but rather a woe to the aged women who did not do their job.......

Sept 25, 2008 13:30:29 GMT -5 nina2 said:

Mm? “Woe”? Woe to the “aged women”? Woah.....

That’s a big U-Turn, Nikkol LOL

WHOA!, indeed, sis nina!
Sis Nikkol, I think I got whiplash!
LOLOLOL!!!

Sept 25, 2008 13:30:29 GMT -5 nina2 said:

...I am still very intrigued by what can have brought you to this conclusion......

Me too, sis nina!
So, sis nikkol, RESPECT YOUR ELDERS, come on back here and 'splain yourself!

Sept 25, 2008 13:30:29 GMT -5 nina2 said:

...As for the “woe to the aged women for not doing their job”, Nikkol, just betweeen you and me, I’ll take that bait, but not as far as I probably could

LOL! Well, hand me that mic, sis...and I'll take it right on back to our topic, lol!

Im(in this case not so)ho, Juanita Bynum, like sis nina and myself, IS one of those "aged (like fine wine, LOL!) women".

AND...

she was not only born to and raised by, but came to this now-failed marriage fully equipped with, her very own "church mother".

Seeeeeee-lah!

Sept 25, 2008 7:03:11 GMT -5 Nikkol said:

,,,The ISSUE is not that he's leading on "desperate women"...

Sept 25, 2008 13:30:29 GMT -5 nina2 said:

...I actually agree with you on that. Only for this reason – and in this case: it can't be, because he is NOT leading on anybody!!! Everything about this entire situation and person, from beginning to this day, has been on display in great details for whosoever was interested in it.
So, it is and has been – right or wrong, true or false, good or evil – all out in the open, step by step, in great (and very graphic) details.
So, I honestly doubt that “should” anything take place from this point on, anybody could have a claim about being “lead on” in ANY kind of way....

[/size]

Sista nina.....girrrrrrl, that was M-M-M-M-M GOOD!!! ;D

I would also question the “desperate” in “desperate women”...

You too?

Earlier on in this thread, I wasn't particularly feeling the "silly" in "silly women" either, and probably for much the same reason.

Sept 25, 2008 13:30:29 GMT -5 nina2 said:

...However, imho, what is becoming sadder and sadder by the day is seeing how much is done, claimed to be done and carried on, in the name of God, especially among christians.
And, what is even more perplexing to me – and that’s a figure of speech, really – is that most of what is caught on and followed in the public eye, again including christians, is irrelevant, most of the time, to the real spiritual issues at hand related to what has been exposed.
And, a lot of what is said and done puts a whole new twist in “using the name of God in vain”.

Now I really appreciate your insight because I must admit I was truly baffled for a moment there, lol!

Thanks for getting me/us back on track.

[Nikkol]

1- Aged women: what was the average age of an aged woman during Paul’s time vs nowadays?
Does it matter? Yes, it does.
As a matter of fact, I do believe that younger women should (keyword!) be able to relate more today to “older” women.
Most of them don’t look their age anyway, they are very much in tune with what’s happening, here, there, and everywhere in fact, and whether they are married or have never been married, they are fit for the purpose mentioned by Paul. Being single doesn’t disqualify an older woman from teaching in the ways he spoke of.

Edited because I didn't know I had EVERYTHING in quotes....lol
So much I could say...... <<smile>> I think that although there may be an "easier time" relating, I don't know if that is a good thing. I think that for many women, we "grow up" too fast and things we can relate aren't things that we should be relating to. Being 29 and having a 12 year old that can relate to me because she's intimate and has a kid (and maybe one on the way) isn't what I would think is things that we should be able to relate with.....make sense.

I know that although nothing "disqualifies a single person talking to a married person, even as a married person, there are some things that I may not discuss with a single person. Granted as a married person I do know what it is to be single which isn't necessarily true vice versa.

2- I had to ask about the age factor when talking about aged women, because often today, there are “not so old” women who are already grandmothers for example. So, it is important to determine what old meant then and means now. Is it strictly age as in a number of years, or life experience?

I think it's age and life experience. But what I indicated before, many of us grew up too quickly..... which may be why there are ppl in their 20's, 30's and even 40's that are acting what we would call "immature" but it's that desire to be able to have fun and be "free" like a child.

3-

You say they did not do their job. OK: Why?

-If, indeed, the issue was what you said it is, in the church, why did not they do their “job”?

Became lax. Trying to "fit in" with the times. Lack of love..... lack of role models....lack of men in the home.....lack of separate/but equal gender roles...

-Did they ever do it?

Yes

-How did they do it?

Many would say in church or in their neighborhoods. Although I will admit that I have heard that there was a great shift once there was desegregation. (that's a WHOLE different discussion.....)

-Under what authority and what overseeing did they do it?

The husband/father/church

-Were they at liberty to do it?

Yes, even in that article about the women pastors, I don't believe that it has ever been shunned for women to teach women or even young children.

-Were they chosen, elected, voted in, just revealed as being the ones who ought to be doing it?

In talking to some older saints, many times, they just "knew" who to talk to. Granted you had/have the mothers of the church which I "guess" are elected? (not sure about that)

-If it was being done, what caused it to stop?

I really think part was blurred gender lines and therefore less time was taken for building up the women and nurturing them. That and the lack of the father in the home and sayings like "I don't need a man" type discussions going on in front of the kids which would cause their thoughts regarding men/fathers to change.....

-Were they told to just go and sit down and not to do it anymore?

I think based on some of the way they were teaching, that's possible. But I think that slowly over the years, it wasn't done much. But now, you are seeing an influx of churches trying to do what should've been done a long time ago and it's more difficult because of so many generations that have missed it. (almost like the fact that there are kids today that have NEVEr stepped in a church or even know who Jesus is........)

-Was it because suddenly their “job” was deemed not as relevant to our times and ways and/or put a damper on someone else’s style?

Think I answered that in the above thought. I think that it stopped (slowly) and only after it seems a major disaster are ppl trying to "pick up the pieces"...it's just more difficult with generation of thought that would have to possibly be retaught. Much is also harder with "marriage" being up in the air regarding who? (mm/ff vs mf) What the role of the woman is. Who's better? (ie old school vs new school)[/quote]

This is probably going into a totally new topic..... but it definitely hits on a lot of things that are concerning to me even as I begin putting my ideas about "women's ministry" on paper.....

[nina2]

This is probably going into a totally new topic..... but it definitely hits on a lot of things that are concerning to me even as I begin putting my ideas about "women's ministry" on paper.....

It is a new one, because of the original topic of this thread...

[keita]

GOD BLESS YOU BOTH, my sisters!

Around here, regardless of the topic, you just never know to what good places any discussion may take us.

To accomodate this change of direction, I've used your posts to start a new thread HERE.

I know that women's issues and ministry is a particular passion of many sistermembers of this board, and is certainly one of mine. So I'm looking forward to the continued fruitful discussion.

[keita]

Alrighty then!

Sept 24, 2008 18:54:05 GMT -5 keita said:

Paul said:


"Now, concerning the things that you wrote about: It's good for men not to get married.

But in order to avoid sexual sins, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband." (1Cor 7:1-2)

[/size]


I say to those who are not married, especially to widows: It is good for you to stay single like me.

However, if you cannot control your desires, you should get married. It is better for you to marry than to burn [with sexual desire].[/i](1Cor 7:8-9)[/b]

So, (apart from the publicity stunt method,) what's the problem with TW seeking a wife?



Sis at and sis heaven:

I'm straight calling y'all out!!!

Scripturally and specifically addressing your derision and criticism of Thomas Weeks' sex drive as it relates to his "wife search" was a major reason that I asked that question in the first place.

So I'm really and especially interested in your response to that...and still waiting.[/quote]



Sis AT, I truly appreciate that you finally responded but, with all due respect, I feel that you answered but did not really address my question, especially in its stated context.

Instead, in effect, you largely continued to mount an attempted assault against Thomas Weeks by:

combining public knowledge with what, unless you KNOW it to be fact, is nothing more than hearsay:[/i]

Sept 24, 2008 22:22:55 GMT -5 anointedteacher said:

TW made his sexual level and drive an open book...caused many of his members to leave his church

(Well, we do know that TW has certainly been quite publicly transparent regarding his sexuality. But may I ask how you know in what way that transparency (or anything else) may have affected the membership rolls of Global Destiny?)

mixing sarcasm with what, again, unless you know it to be so, is vicious slander:

I can't find any scriptures that say to have a reality show... or seduce saved and unsaved women and gay men.

(Sarcasm aside, the fact that there are also no scriptures that say NOT to have a reality show, is actually part of the point you seem to keep missing. Please do know that if TW's "reality show" concept is part of your outrage, I really do understand. That's exactly why I posed my question as I did. But if our brother TW's intended reality show is troubling you, please do pray for our sister JB... because she's planning and promising one of her own.

Feel free to just blame it all on the present culture and the media age we live in.

And exactly where's the evidence or even any indication of the remotest intention that TW's "wife search" includes "seducing" anyone, especially gay men? (?!))

following rightly applied scripture with deliberate misinterpretation:

Proverbs 18:22 Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the Lord....
It didn't say wives.... how many women he can have? That misuse

(Proverbs 18:22 would actually be among the very best reasons for TW, or any other brother, to be seeking a wife(singular).. You're absolutely right that it doesn't say "wives" (plural) and you know that TW is only seeking one. So unless you've changed your position about marriage after divorce as being permissible, your using Proverbs 18:22 to imply otherwise is indeed a "misuse". After all a brother does have to seek a wife in order to "find" ONE. )

not recognizing and/or acknowledging related scripture:

In Galatians 5:19 .... the work of the flesh.... the first four listed deals with sexual sin....

(Indeed. And "sexual sin" is precisely what Paul is addressing in chapter 7 of 1Corinthians, as per my question. In answering it, I would think you would have made that connection with your use of Galatians 5:19....and Proverbs 18:22 as well, for that matter.)

fixating on the brother's "sexual sin" :

He may not be an adulter or a fornicater ( Don't know), but he mention having sex with himself ...

(First off, let's be clear that adultery and fornication are clearly named among the "sexual sins" you referred to in Galatians 5:19. On the other hand (no pun intended, lol), the same is not true of masturbation.

So while our having no knowledge of TW practicing the "sexual sins" of adultery or fornication is nothing less than a reason to Praise GOD, whether his masturbation even is a "sexual sin", or a sin at all, remains seriously debatable. At any rate, imho, attempting to equate masturbation with adultery and fornication would be a stretch, scripturally speaking.)

using what, yet again, unless you know it to be fact, is hearsay, and exaggeration to form a spiritual opinion:

According to some of his former members... that what he focus on the most in his conferences/workshop, teaching and sermons... I believe it not just an burning desire, but a lust spirit...

(The first part of that sentence reminds me of the phrase, "Sources say..." found in the tabloids and even the suggestion, let alone an accusation, that the entirety of TW's ministry focused on masturbation is simply ridiculous. Any conclusion, spiritual or otherwise, drawn from that combo is, at the very least...questionable.)

blaming TW for grown women's own choices:

he causing thousand to response to he calling... some actually leaving their home thinking they are the one.

(OUR FATHER holds adult women responsible and accountable for their own behavior and so do I . Therefore, neither of us sees TW as "causing" anyone to do anything.)

offering a spiritual perception, not for judgment, but as a fact...even truth:

There is a seducing spirit being manifested

(Says who? What is a "seducing spirit" and what is the evidence of this manifestation?)


Now, I thought this was interesting:

He not a lay person... he a Bishop....

I Timothy 3:1-7
A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife (not wives), vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covertous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and snare of the devil.....

[/color][/size][/quote]

I've been delivered from the whole "clergy/laity" church paradigm, so I do need to say that the title of "Bishop", especially an inherited one, probably doesn't mean the same to me as it may to you.

But, as you've shared, the position of "a bishop" with its character/lifestyle requirements is certainly scriptural. And, as many know, the interpretations regarding the "husband of one wife" portion of 1Timothy 3:1-7 vary. But, since TW is not a polygamist, unless you're of the school which says that a divorced or even widowed man who marries again cannot be "a bishop", TW seeking ONE wife doesn't violate that portion of scripture.

If anything, with your use of 1Timothy 3:1-7, you are offering some possible reasons why, perhaps, TW, and a whole lot of other brothers, ought not be in the position of "a bishop". But I don't see anything in that scripture which would preclude any of them, including TW, from seeking a wife.


Sis at, I really do hope you know that I really meant what I said to you (and sis heaven) about sharing your issues with how TW's sexuality might impact his wife search:

Sept 24, 2008 18:54:05 GMT -5 keita said:

Btw, I actually do appreciate you both "going there". It led to what I thought was some really good scriptural discussion about sexual desire in Christians which resulted in a whole lot of getting and being real about that.

Interestingly, I also feel much the same way about TW's transparency on sexual matters. So, at least for me, you and TW actually have something in common, LOL!

But most significant to me was how, as I said:

In a way, you helped us to at least clarify that, at this point, no matter our opinions of TW, including how, when, where and why he's doing what he's doing, there is nevertheless nothing unscriptural, let alone sinful about his "wife search".

And I do respect your saying:

Sept 24, 2008 22:22:55 GMT -5 anointedteacher said:

I can't say...

in response to that. Leaving room and being willing for my present conclusion to be proven right or wrong is exactly why I qualified it with "at this point".

To your question of

How many women he going to disappoint, hurt and reject?

again, I would say that the answer to that largely depends more on women, themselves, than TW.

And I do think your asking

What happen to prayers, seeking God and being led by the Holy Spirit.... He nolonger hear from God?

voices some legitimate concerns regarding a man of GOD who is publicly seeking a wife. But merely assuming, or worse, concluding that these things have not and/or are not happening is just way more presumptuous than I'm willing to be.

Sept 24, 2008 22:22:55 GMT -5 anointedteacher said:

His desire to be re-married is outrageous, how he doing it is outrageous....My niece who is not saved... think he is outrageous... He is playing with desperate women...

Without a doubt, there are many folks who share that sense of "outrage". Actually, absent the characterizing of TW as "playing" and of any women who may respond to him as "desperate", I have an opinion (or 12, LOL!) along those same lines, myself.

But, apart from the word of GOD on this, or any other matter, much, if not most, of what I, and others, think about TW's, or anyone else's choices, is reduced to just and only that...opinions. I think even Paul recognized and acknowledged that distinction in his writings.

Which is why I believe, as I said, making

Sept 24, 2008 18:54:05 GMT -5 keita said:

...that clear distinction is especially important if and when the actions and character of the man or woman of GOD are being questioned, criticized and/or judged.
No matter who they are

Because unlike your niece, and others yet unsaved, we, as GOD's people, are those who are not only called to question, criticize, and judge the "fruit" of our fellow believers, but to do it both differently and better than the world.

[keita]

Sept 25, 2008 8:55:28 GMT -5 stillfocused said:

...where are the older women ? ...the old breed of church mothers are a rarity...as many are trying to get married themselves...

Well, sis sf, I think you may be onto something there.
As I said earlier, it's interesting to me that:

Sept 25, 2008 15:09:06 GMT -5 keita said:

Juanita Bynum, like sis nina and myself, IS one of those "aged (like fine wine, LOL!) women".

AND...

she was not only born to and raised by, but came to this now-failed marriage fully equipped with, her very own "church mother".

But, by the same token, and more to the point, at least in TW's case, it seems the question would be:

Where are the "older men", those "church fathers", so to speak

And, as in the case with JB, wouldn't TW's own daddy be among them?

Hmmmmmmm.....

[stillfocused]

You getting ready to start something Miss Keita !! We all need to be challenged to see if the foundation we say we are standing on is of Christ or of something else..

[Beulah5]

'cheering you on sis keita' u taking the words right out of my mouth but just wanting to chip in:

what is wrong with any individual male or female, bishop or archpope having a high sex drive? what is shameful about that? absolutely nothing!!

God has made sex a number one need for most men and we shd not let them feel ashamed of it. Of course self control must be exercised and it shd be within the confines of marriage however the need itself is not a sin or a crime.

If we personally have issues with sex let us not project it on others especially men because it is definitely one of life's major issues.

Which is exactly why i applaud any man who is honest enough to admit they want to settle down instead of those who go fornicating all in the name of waiting on the lord.

Now divorce can come with many issues and some of those issues depend on if one was actually a victim in a marriage and as to JB and TW the jury is still out on that one for me. however i believe that what would actually shame the devil is if both of them went on to do greater works for the lord and shd they choose to remarry other people it would be an even greater testimony if in their new marriages they went to greater heights in reaching the lost.

God can and does turn around every situation no matter how bad it may look if we are willing. selah

[vin]

we are often the most critical of people who have the same issues we have.

[And Such Were Some Of You]

Oct 4, 2008 17:35:47 GMT -5 vin said:

we are often the most critical of people who have the same issues we have.

absolutely!

I was waiting for someone to point this out.

<--------- Going back in my corner now

[anointedteacher]

Oct 5, 2008 15:48:18 GMT -5 And Such Were Some Of You said:

Oct 4, 2008 17:35:47 GMT -5 vin said:

we are often the most critical of people who have the same issues we have.

absolutely!

I was waiting for someone to point this out.

<--------- Going back in my corner now

I guess nmany have the same issue as J Bynum....

I received this in my junk mail... I usually don't even open his mail and don't know how I got on his mailing list.

No one see anything wrong with this:

The Title:
"Mrs. Weeks' Global Drama""

[zelica]

Sept 17, 2008 22:22:26 GMT -5 keita said:

Sept 17, 2008 21:34:50 GMT -5 anointedteacher said:

I believe the reason TW sent out this email, is to get to JB...

That could very well be, sis AT, but it's assuming that "getting to" JB is even an issue for him.



Well, lots of folks, including Christians, seek mates via the internet. Certainly widens the selection pool!

when sally women are knocking down each other to get to you.

Why do you (and sis heaven) refer to women who would be attracted to Thomas Weeks as "silly women"?

I mean, a well-known, educated, articulate "Bishop" is making plain that he desires a wife, wants kids, and enjoys sex...a lot.

Isn't that pretty much a dream come true for a whole lot of sisters, including JB?

Are you all saying that these sisters are "silly women"?

Sis kieta, yeah that would be a dream come true for any sistah but we cant forget the fact that He beat his wife He still on probation....The next wife He gets may not be so lucky...I hear it all the time about Husbands killing there wives........It just wouldnt be wise to go into a relationship like that IMO....