:: Unregistered? Register for a user account.

Christian Topics

Christian Friends

There are 7 unlogged users and 0 registered users online.

You can log-in or register for a user account here.


Preferred language:

Category: Say What?

The news items published under this category are as follows.
See all

Member's Lounge

Since it was a Baptist Church in Eldorado, Texas that assisted the Texas CPS in stealing over four hundred (400) children from their parents I thought it would be appropriate to provide you with the latest news about Baptist activity in that area of the nation.

Our Spurious Reporter* in Eldorado Texas overheard this conversation between the local Baptist Preacher and one of the members of his church.

So what's the problem with your daughter?

Well, she doesn't do anything I tell her. She wears her great-grandmother's clothing and claims virginity is something to save for her future husband.

How could she possibly think such a thing?

Well, she's been reading the Bible a lot lately.

How in the world did she get a Bible? Don't tell me. She got hold of both the New and the Old Testaments?

That's right, she got that Jew Bible, the Old Testament, but certainly not from our church. You only hand out New Testaments and your own books and writings. You never supply a new believer with an entire Bible. When a young person responds to the alter call you do your best to make them a member and get them into activities with the youth group. That's where my daughter belongs, with a bunch of young boys who've got more testosterone than they can handle. We can't trust the Bible to steer her right. We've got to get her in with some good Christian boys.

That's true, but I still don't understand. What's gotten into your daughter to cause her to read the Bible and to save her virginity as a gift for her future husband.

I don't know Preacher. I just can't put a handle on it. We've brought her up right. We even took her to the doctor so she could get on the pill but she refuses to take it. And then you remember how she had an allergy to Ritalin? The doctor says she can't be put on any mind controlling drugs and we haven't been able to stop her religious urges and it's getting worse. She's going off to Bible meetings every night.

Ah, sounds like she's in some kind of cult.

Yeah, cult. That's it. They rent the local Methodist church when it's not in use.

Oh, you've got to be kidding! A cult is meeting at the Methodist church? What do they call themselves?

Let's see now, oh yes, Bible believing Christians, that's it. They're Bible believing Christians. They've even got a website.

Well, here's the plan. You just call up Texas Child Protective Services and tell them that you truly believe that your daughter became a woman on the day she had her first menstrual cycle. They'll come over and pick her up and put her with a good family, one that believes in fornication, adultery, and homosexuality. Oh, don't worry about your safety. They won't touch you. It's the children they want.

Note: Note:Both the Old Testament and the New Testament are God's word. If you or your church teach that the Old Testament is of less value than the New Testament then it is very likely that you are a Jew hater and that you consider the people of the Old Testament to be less human than those born after the New Testament was written. Repent!

spurious: pretended

Copyright 2008 - Don Milton - All Rights Reserved
Pastor Don Milton is an Evangelical Christian

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on Apr 17, 2008 - 10:34 PM  

Golden Calf of Monogamy

   "We are not going to violate their civil rights until we have an outcry, a complaint, and I've said that from day one." Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran

   Another way to read Doran's statement is this:

   "After we have an outcry, a complaint: WE WILL VIOLATE THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS."

   The likelihood that a child will be abused while in [Texas] foster care is greater than if they were left where they are. (Bolton, Laner, and Gai, 1981; Pryor, 1991; Spencer and Knudsen, 1992.)1
   For the government to remove five hundred and thirty four American (534) citizens in Texas from their homes and put them into the care of homosexuals, fornicators, adulteresses, and worse -- teens with STDs is; well, you tell me what it is. When historians look back at the draconian measures taken against non-Muslims practicing polygamy versus the absolutely blind eye that is turned to Muslims practicing polygamy, and practicing it in nearly every neighborhood in the nation, they will wonder how ours could have ever been called a "Christian" nation.
   Exodus 23:1&2
   Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.
   Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; (stealing children) neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment. (trial by the media)
   Our streets are littered with the broken lives of teen prostitutes who may be abused one thousand times with impunity while teens who gave themselves to their one and only husband in purity are locked up. Their crime? Their husband failed to get a government consent form signed and notarized and then presented to a judge, despite the fact that their parents gave their full and complete approval for the marriage. Of course the parents gave their approval, they're part of that same community!
   Before proceeding, we must address one issue which has inflamed the discussion of polygamy, so-called "underage girls" marrying fifty (50) year old men. The first cue that such phrases are spoken by stupid people is the redundancy of "underage girls." The second is that underage is a government definition and has nothing to do with biology. According to the most simple logic, a girl is a girl until her first menstruation. After her first menstruation she is biologically a woman. Furthermore, it has been a long standing legal precedent that by the age of thirteen an individual has reached the age of reason where they will be held responsible for their deliberate actions. Pull out your homeowners insurance policy and you will find a statement very similar to this. "We will not pay for injuries or damages that are caused intentionally, UNLESS, the injury or damage is caused by a child 12 years of age or younger." So we have two definitions, one of them biological and the other psychological which put the age of thirteen as the age at which a female is capable both biologically and psychologically of giving consent. The Apostle Paul says, "I will, therefore, that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully." 1Timothy 5:14 And again Paul says, "She shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. 1Timothy 2:15 Saved from what? -- saved from a life of fornication so that the adversary (Satan or anyone else who opposes righteousness) may not have any reason to attack the virtue of the young women. The Greek word translated as "younger women" is "neos" which means recently come into being, young, youthful, new and in the context of marriage Paul is speaking of women who have recently become women. Ah, so Paul himself says that women should marry shortly after their first menstrual cycle which was also in accord with the Roman requirement that upon reaching puberty every citizen must marry.2 Need I remind you that it's America's current five year gap between biologically becoming a woman and legally becoming a woman (The Marriage Gap) that sets in motion the pattern of fornication from which few American women ever escape? Even then, they escape only by doing what Paul instructed them to do in the first place, by marrying.

Click Here to see a PDF of a typical insurance policy.
Search for "Voluntary Payments" after you have the Insurance Policy in your browser.

   Another aspect of the current mob mentality concerning young women marrying fifty (50) year old men is that the public just cannot believe that a thirteen year old woman would be interested in a fifty year old man. Have they never heard of Mick Jagger, he's sixty five years old and man is he UUUGLY! Yet he still has teens swooning over him. The fact is, in the enclosed society of the FLDS, the fifty (50) year old men are the MOST attractive men to their young women. They strut their little industrial complex with a charisma that politicians would envy. Their families are large and happy. They're famous teachers in their community. They are fearless in the face of mainstream society, willing to risk prison for their beliefs. These men are not just desirable to the young women in their society, they're what our mainstream whores would call HOT. (A whore is a woman who has lost her virginity willingly without wedlock.) But here is the issue that EVERY person who claims they are a Christian MUST deal with. The Bible defines marriage. If these women were given to their husbands by their fathers as wives then they indeed are wives and anyone who encourages them to be with another man is guilty of causing them to become adulteresses for they can only be released to marry another man by their husband with his giving them a Bill of Divorcement. If you are one of the mob running to encourage them to forsake their first husband and take another man then you are an accomplice to adultery. Jesus was very strict concerning marriage and He lived in an age where the average woman married at thirteen. At the time of Jesus, the Roman law, referred to as the Lex Papia Poppaea,2 decreed punishments such as the loss of inheritance rights for women who remained single after having attained puberty. Jesus never criticized that law which commanded that a woman old enough to bear children get married. Why would he? That law prevented pre-marital sex. So when Jesus made his pronouncements on marriage those words applied to all marriages, including those with thirteen year old women. Here is what Jesus said, "But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is so divorced commits adultery." Matthew 5:32 The same goes for you; if you cause a woman to be put away from her husband then you also are causing her to commit adultery. This is not a social issue. This is a theological issue and this is an issue of the right of religious groups to separate themselves from fornicators such as nearly every American reading this is.
   Still another hysteria inducing fact is that the Eldorado polygamists had a room in their temple for consummating marriages. For those of you who are so brainwashed by the Roman Catholic marriage ceremonies that today's Protestants gleefully imitate, every typical marriage in the Bible involves the guardian giving the bride and the groom taking her to his tent. What in the world do you think the implication is of what happens in the tent! Duh, what in the world is marriage? Are you dense or something? Marriage involves a willing giving of the bride and a consummation of that marriage. Without the consummation it is not a marriage even according to government law. The Bridal Canopy3 is a remnant of the Bridal Tent3 which was used by the Jews in times past. This Bridal Canopy3 is used in Jewish marriage ceremonies till this day. If you're going to attack the Eldorado group for having what amounts to a Bridal Tent3 then just remember that your attack is anti-Semitic in its roots.
   For those of you who think that the anti-polygamy hysteria is some new thing, please note that anti-polygamy laws have their roots in anti-Semitism and the two Semite groups that have been the brunt of this bigotry are the descendants of Abraham -- Jacob (the Jews), and Ishmael (today's Muslims). Both have a long record of regulated polygamy and both have been the butt of bigoted jokes and worse. It is hate, and hate alone that fuels this group think against polygamy. One thousand years ago Rabbenu Gershom declared that polygamy would be forbidden to Jews in Christian nations. Why did he do this? Well you guess. We see among us five hundred and thirty four American citizens ripped from their homes because of anti-polygamy hatred. If it were not hate that drives this anti-polygamy hysteria then the subject could be discussed openly and without bigoted jokes, accusations, and outright lies.
   To understand the hatred, let me give you an example. Let's say that you and your family chose to live in a neighborhood of five hundred plus like minded Christians and you were all practicing monogamists. Let's say that there was one sixteen year old teenager among you who called the police and said that one of the people in the neighborhood had sex with her after a private marriage ceremony when she was fifteen years old and that her parents knew about it and had approved of it but that they had not obtained a judge's waiver for their daughter to get married at that age. Do you think it would be fair for the government to come into your neighborhood and arrest (that's what it is no matter what else you claim) to arrest, more than five hundred of your neighbors, fellow Americans, yes, AMERICAN citizens, in the largest group arrest in the country in years? Do you think it would be right to take the children of your neighbors who had nothing to do with the fifteen year old's marriage and place those children, all virgins, among some of the most notorious teens of the country? It is a fact that many of the teens in foster care have been placed there because of their own delinquency. Is it right for virgins who have never left their household to be placed among such teens? I have cried over this. If you haven't, may God have mercy on your soul. If you say, "but they were taken out of the homes of polygamists," that's exactly my point. Your hatred for polygamists is so great that you think it's perfectly ok to rip people out of their homes, for what? For being polygamists just like so many Old Testament saints as well as many in the New Testament? Don't you realize that many of Paul's contemporaries were polygamist Christians? If that was not the case then why would Paul have exempted men who were not the "husband of one wife" from the thankless job of Elder, Bishop, and Deacon? He exempted the polygamists because they were being fruitful and multiplying in compliance with God's command and fulfilling that duty was enough to exempt them from unwanted tasks that were to be assigned by Timothy and the other apostles. If the selection was to be only those who were "husbands of one wife" then surely there were enough men with more than one wife that Paul thought it necessary to make such an exemption from troublesome lower offices within the church. Yes, Elder, Bishop, and Deacon were not high offices or they would have been called of God, not appointed by man. Click here to read my article entitled: "The Key to Understanding The Husband of One Wife."
   Now, back to Texas. Isn't it Texas where the governor assumes that teen girls are so promiscuous that he wants to force them to take anti-std immunizations? So the government bans teen marriage, a godly outlet for young women who choose marriage, yet the government not only permits but encourages them to fornicate? Not only does the government encourage their fornicating but they make it legal for them to fornicate with boys who have no ability to support them but make it illegal for stable bread winners to court them and marry them, even when the parents and the girls have given their consent as part of their system of stated community values. What? This has got to be the craziest system man has ever invented; to reward women who have sex with the boys who are least able to support them and penalize those who choose to marry men!

BREAKING NEWS--- Obama State Delegate for Colorado, Rozita Swinton, is the same Rozita Swinton who was arrested for calling in the hoax that triggered the Eldorado raid against peaceful American citizens. Article continues below as originally written on April 7, 2008.

   The quite probably non-existent girl4 who started the Eldorado hysteria is quoted as saying, "Church members told her that if she leaves the ranch, outsiders will ... force her to cut her hair, (TRUE) to wear make up (TRUE) and [different] clothes (TRUE) and to have sex with lots of men. (TRUE)" What is it that is not true about the alleged victim's statement concerning American culture and the environment of foster care today? Everything that this probably non-existent victim was told about the outside world was true. Who is the abuser in this situation? The fact is that American women think it is better to have sex with lots of men before settling on one. Don't you tell me anything different, you fake! Were you a virgin on your wedding night? Look at the actual behavior of people if you want to understand a culture, don't look at what the people in a culture say. We call that baloney. They're full of baloney, spelled BS. Any anthropologist with training knows this. You can go into a country where they say cannibalism is evil but if they're eating their neighbor's liver, don't believe them! When Americans say they believe in waiting till marriage for their first sex, don't believe them. Over ninety percent of Americans have pre-marital sex.5 Face it, we live in a country that says one thing about sex and does another. Forty-five percent of the country says fornication is evil but they fornicate anyway and forty-five percent of the country says fornication is good and they practice what they preach, at least concerning fornication. Now we find America in a situation where its filthy fornicators find a culture within theirs that says and does what it preaches and the fornicators send in armed government officials to arrest and detain five hundred and thirty four fellow American citizens in the most blatant violation of civil rights this country has seen in over fifty years. The pundits are afraid to discuss the issue in a clear and rational way because of the irrational hysteria generated in America by the mere mention of polygamy. Cowards! America's taboo against polygamy has few rivals in the modern world. Americans are willing to suspend the constitution when it comes to polygamists but wait, it's white polygamists who are really the focus of their hatred. "They got our white women in there! They better let lose of 'em or we'll string em up? What white man would do such a thing as have more than one wife! It's plain uncivilized." I can hear them now, their mouths frothing as they hold up their pitch forks... oh yes, it's 9mm weapons they use today. As for the five hundred and thirty- four innocent American citizen detainees in Texas, they remain jailed. What else do you call it when you are held against your own will?
   To quote a man who I was personally introduced to as a paid staffer on his campaign in 1980; "Government isn't the solution to our problem, government is the problem." Nearly every blessed mother in the Bible was a teen bride, usually married within a year or two of her first menstruation. Throughout history the average age of a princess has been between thirteen and eighteen and the same has been true for the common man. Men who break the law when they could have simply gotten a government license to marry their young bride are foolish but they are not brutes. Teen marriage license infractions, for that is all the Texas case concerns, are now being used to prosecute polygamists since prosecutors know that the next polygamy prosecution will be struck down by the Supreme Court. According to Texas law the only thing that stands between a woman under the age of sixteen (16) and her man receiving a marriage license is a court order. Take a look at the statute for yourselves.

Texas Marriage License Requirements

   It is of note that only after the FLDS moved to Eldorado, were Texas marriage laws changed to discriminate against them, raising the age without a court order to marry from fourteen to sixteen. Prior to the 2005 law being passed a woman age fourteen or older could marry simply by producing a properly executed parental consent form. No court order was required. The requirement of a court order was pass by the Texas legislature for the specific purpose of discriminating against the FLDS so that such court orders could be issued for marriage license requests made by any citizens of Texas EXCEPT unless that citizen were a member of the FLDS.
   If men who marry teen brides are brutes then so was President James Monroe who married his seventeen year old bride, Elizabeth Kortright as well as President Andrew Johnson who married his then sixteen or seventeen year old bride, Elizabeth McCardle. Neither did Monroe nor Johnson lift so much as one finger to get a license for their marriages. In fact, the marriage dates of the Presidents before the mid-eighteen hundreds are hard to determine since marriage licenses were not required in most localities. The declaration of the man and woman that they were husband and wife was deemed sufficient. Many states still give an exemption to marriage license requirements to Quakers. If men who marry cousins are brutes then Democrat President Martin Van Buren must also be a brute for he married his first cousin, Hannah Hoes. First cousin marriage which is a marriage that is permitted by the Bible is also the butt of anti-Semitic jokes. If men who marry women who are much younger than they are then President John Tyler must also be a brute for he married the beautiful, Julia Gardiner, who was thirty years younger than he was. Likewise, Grover Cleveland, at the age of forty nine, married Frances Folsom who was just twenty-two years old. June/December marriages are also a favorite topic of jokes by bigots who want to put their noses into the business of other peoples' marriages. This bigotry usually contains slanders against those who might marry their cousins like Jacob did, or who might marry a woman much younger, like Jacob did, or who might marry a woman who was under the age of eighteen, like Jacob did. The fact is, such marriages tend only to come to the attention of the public when they are done by polygamists or when they are done by members of religious groups that condemn fornication and homosexuality. The public considers it vulgar when a monogamist marries his cousin, a teen, or someone much younger but the public considers it evil when a polygamist or religious fanatic does the same.
   Must I bring up the fact that it was King David, the polygamist, who still had enough time with all his wives to write the beautiful Psalms. Do you forget that King Solomon still had time to write the godly and perfect Proverbs and the Song of Songs? Yes, it is a fact that the most poetic and beautiful love poem in the Bible was written by Solomon, the world's most famous polygamist. Furthermore, this King Solomon, wrote Ecclesiastes which was taken by a Sixties band for its melodic words -"To everything - turn, turn, turn There is a season - turn, turn, turn And a time for every purpose under heaven."  Well, it is the season to start recognizing that in a marriage, a man is joined to each of his wives by God, not by man. This is what many of our presidents recognized. Those of you who do not trust God to join you in marriage need our prayers. I don't expect my fellow Americans to agree with me. My fellow Americans refuse to hang the pornographers from the lamp posts along side the CEOs of the major hotel chains in America who pipe in pornography to their hotel rooms. Americans would prefer that one polygamist be sent to prison than one hundred million fornicators be told that sex outside of marriage is a sin but let me put you on notice. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, yes, Jesus Himself, is going to judge you and that day is not far away and He will punish you. Repent. He will punish you for forbidding what the Bible permits and for causing grief and suffering with your backwards and primitive, yes primitive and barbaric laws. For you reward young women with your welfare state who have sex with boys that cannot support them and you punish the wise virgins who choose marriage with an older stable man.
   1 Timothy 4:3 1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.


[1] The Welfare of Children by Duncan Lindsay - Published 2003

[2] Lex Papia Poppaea, A.D. 9, sometimes known as Jus Trium Liberorum granted special privileges to men with many children and punished celibacy by limiting the rights of single men. This can account for Paul's discussions on celibacy which should not be taken as encouraging celibacy but as defending the right of a man or woman to voluntarily choose marriage instead of feeling compelled to marry by government decree. The Lex Papia Poppaea decreed punishments such as the loss of inheritance rights for those who remained single after having attained puberty up to the age of fifty for women and sixty for men. A man or woman was given one hundred days to get married upon finding out they were the beneficiary of an inheritance or forfeit the inheritance. There are many more interesting details of this Roman law which I'll address in another article.

[3] Bridal Tent - "They pitched the tent, the bridal tent, of the Semites, which has survived in the canopy of the Jewish wedding ceremony to our own day." The International Critical Commentary - A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Books of Samuel by Henry Preserved Smith - Professor of Biblical History and Interpretation in Amherst College Published in 1902

[4] Rozita Swinton has been arrested and is currently being investigated for pretending to be a sixteen (16) year old woman; that same "sixteen year old 'girl'" who was the alibi for the Texas Jack Booted Thugs' raid on a peaceful neighborhood in Eldorado to steal over four hundred (400) children from their parents and place them with fornicators, homosexuals, and adulteresses. Rozita E Swinton is also listed on the El Paso County Colorado Democrats website as being a State Delegate from Precinct 269. I called the El Paso County Colorado Democrat Headquarters and spoke with Carol, the woman who answered the telephone, and when I asked her whether that Rozita Swinton who is listed on their website as a state delegate for Obama is the same Rozita Swinton who was arrested for being the polygamy hoax caller she said, yes.

As he that bindeth a stone in a sling, so [is] he that giveth honour to a fool.
Solomon -- Proverbs 26:8
The Texas CPS and Jack Booted Authorities gave honor to a fool, now the ammunition that they intended to fire at their opponents is blowing up in their faces!

[5] Trends in Premarital Sex in the United States, 1954­–2003 Lawrence B. Finer, PhD

Note: Copyright 2008 - Don Milton - All Rights Reserved
Pastor Don Milton is an Evangelical Christian

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on Apr 07, 2008 - 09:33 PM  

Food For Thought

Martin Luther often put a political spin on religious ideas as you will see from reading the following letter in which he and his fellow theologians gave consent to a polygamous marriage. I have only included the last portion of that letter as it includes the sections where Luther and his fellow theologians gave their approval of that polygamous marriage. The letter was written and signed by Luther and other well known theologians of the reformation, some of whom attended the marriage as well. Enjoy reading.

XXI. But after all, if your Highness is fully resolved to marry a second wife, we judge it ought to be done secretly, as we have said with respect to the dispensation demanded on the same account, that is, that none but the person you shall wed, and a few trusty persons, know of the matter, and they, too, obliged to secrecy under the seal of confession. Hence no contradiction nor scandal of moment is to be apprehended ; for it is no extraordinary thing for Princes to keep concubines; and though the vulgar should be scandalized thereat, the more intelligent would doubt of the truth, and prudent persons would approve of this moderate kind of life, preferably to adultery, and other brutal actions. There is no need of being much concerned for what men will say, provided all goes right with conscience. So far do we approve it, and in those circumstances only by us specified ; for the Gospel hath neither recalled nor forbid what was permitted in the law of Moses with respect to marriage. Jesus Christ has not changed the external economy, but added justice only, and life everlasting, for reward. He teaches the true way of obeying God, and endeavors to repair the corruption of nature.

XXII. Your Highness hath therefore, in this writing, not only the approbation [approval] of us all, in case of necessity, concerning what you desire, but also the reflections we have made thereupon; we beseech you to weigh them, as becoming a virtuous, wise, and Christian Prince. We also beg of God to direct all for his glory and your Highness's salvation.

XXIII. As to your Highness's thought of communicating this affair to the emperor before it be concluded, it seems to us that this Prince counts adultery among the lesser sort of sins ; and it is very much to be feared lest his faith being of the same stamp with that of the Pope, the Cardinals, the Italians, the Spaniards, and the Saracens, he make light of your Highness's proposal, and turn it to his own advantage by amusing your Highness with vain words. We know he is deceitful and perfidious, and as nothing of the German in him.

XXIV. Your Highness sees, that he uses no sincere endeavor to redress the grievances of Christendom; that he leaves the Turk unmolested, and labors for nothing but to divide the empire, that he may raise up the house of Austria on its ruins. It is therefore very much to be wished that no Christian Prince would give into his pernicious schemes. May God preserve your Highness. We are most ready to serve your Highness.

Given at Wittenberg the Wednesday after the feast of Saint Nicholas, 1539. Your Highness's most humble, and most obedient subjects and servants,


I George Nuspicher, Notary Imperial, bear testimony by this present act, written and signed with my own hand, that I have transcribed this present copy from the true original which is in Melancthon's own handwriting, and hath been faithfully preserved to this present time, at the request of the most serene Prince of Hesse ; and have examined with the greatest exactness every line and every word, and collated them with the same original; and have found them conformable thereunto, not only in the things themselves, but also in the signs manual, and have delivered the present copy in five leaves of good paper, whereof I bear witness. GEORGE NUSPICHER, Notary.

You have just read the letter of Martin Luther, et al, concerning the proposed marriage of Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, with Margaret de Saal. It was taken from:
The History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches By Jacques Bénigne Bossuet - Bishop of Meaux,
"One of his most Christian Majesty's Honorable Privy Council, Heretofore Preceptor to the Dauphin, and Chief Almoner to the Dauphiness."
In Two Volumes - Translated from the last French Edition. VOLUME I Published 1836

The Marriage Contract of Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, with Margaret de Saal.
In the name of God, Amen. Be it known to all those, as well in general as in particular, who shall see, hear, or read this public instrument, that in the year 1540, on Wednesday, the fourth day of the month of March, at two o'clock or thereabouts, in the afternoon, the thirteenth year of the Indiction, and the twenty-first of the reign of the most puissant and most victorious Emperor Charles V, our most gracious lord; the most serene Prince and Lord Philip Landgrave of Hesse, Count of Catznelenbogen, of Dietz, of Ziegenhain, and Nidda, with some of his Highness's Counsellors, on one side, and the good and virtuous Lady Margaret de Saal with some of her relations, on the other side, have appeared before me, Notary, and witness underwritten, in the City of Rotenburg, in the castle of the same city, with the design and will publicly declared before me, Notary public and witness, to unite themselves by marriage; and accordingly my most gracious Lord and Prince Philip the Landgrave hath ordered this to be proposed by the Reverend Denis Melander, preacher to his Highness, much to the sense as follows :—" Whereas the eye of God searches all things, and but little escapes the knowledge of men, his Highness declares that his will is to wed the said Lady Margaret de Saal, although the Princess his wife be still living, and that this action may not be imputed to inconstancy or curiosity; to avoid scandal and maintain the honor of the said Lady, and the reputation of her kindred, his Highness makes oath here before God, and upon his soul and conscience, that he takes her to wife through no levity, nor curiosity, nor from any contempt of law, or superiors; but that he is obliged to it by such important, such inevitable necessities of body and conscience, that it is impossible for him to save either body or soul, without adding another wife to his first. All which his Highness hath laid before many learned, devout, prudent, and Christian preachers, and consulted them upon it. And these great men, after examining the motives represented to them, have advised his Highness to put his soul and conscience at ease by this double marriage. And the same cause and the same necessity have obliged the most serene Princess, Christina Duchess of Saxony, his Highness's first lawful wife, out of her great prudence and sincere devotion, for which she is so much to be commended, freely to consent and admit of a partner, to the end that the soul and body of her most dear spouse may run no further risk, and the glory of God may be increased, as the deed written with this Princess's own hand sufficiently testifies. And lest occasion of scandal be taken from its not being the custom to have two wives, although this be Christian and lawful in the present case, his Highness will not solemnize these nuptials in the ordinary way, that is, publicly before many people, and with the wonted ceremonies, with the said Margaret de Saal; but both the one and the other will join themselves in wedlock, privately and without noise, in presence only of the witnesses underwritten."—After Melander had finished his discourse, the said Philip and the said Margaret accepted of each other for husband and wife, and promised mutual fidelity in the name of God. The said Prince hath required of me, Notary underwritten, to draw him one or more collated copies of this contract, and hath also promised, on the word and faith of a prince, to me a public person, to observe it inviolably, always and without alteration, in presence of the Reverend and most learned masters Philip Melancthon, Martin Bucer, Denis Melander; and likewise in the presence of the illustrious and valiant Eberhard de Than, counsellor of his electoral Highness of Saxony, Herman de Malsberg, Herman de Hundelshausen, the Lord John Fegg of the Chancery, Rudolph Schenck ; and also in the presence of the most honorable and most virtuous Lady Anne of the family of Miltitz, widow of the late John de Saal, and mother of the spouse, all in quality of requisite witnesses for the validity of the present act. And I Balthasar Rand, of Fuld, Notary public imperial, who was present at the discourse, instruction, marriage, espousals, and union aforesaid, with the said witnesses, and have heard and seen all that passed, have written and subscribed the present contract, being requested so to do; and set to it the usual seal, for a testimony of the truth thereof. BALTHASAR RAND.

You have just read the polygamous Marriage Contract of Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, with Margaret de Saal. It was taken from:
The History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches By Jacques Bénigne Bossuet - Bishop of Meaux,
"One of his most Christian Majesty's Honorable Privy Council, Heretofore Preceptor to the Dauphin, and Chief Almoner to the Dauphiness."
In Two Volumes - Translated from the last French Edition. VOLUME I Published 1836

A final note concerning the polygamous marriage of Philip, Landgrave of Hesse. There cannot be a claim that this was simply a divorce which was called polygamy. Philip's wives lived with him and both had relations with him. During the seven years following Philip's polygamous marriage, nine children were born to him by his wives; Christina of Saxony and Margaret de Saal. Each one of these nine children was conceived after the polygamous marriage had taken place. Between his two wives, Philip had a total of nineteen children; twelve sons and seven daughters. May we all be so blessed!

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on Jan 24, 2008 - 11:49 PM  

Get Involved
There is a huge difference between FLDS Mormon Welfare Wife Polygamy and Christian forms of marriage. In FLDS Mormon Welfare Wife Polygamy, the man uses marriage primarily for two things, to attain a higher level in heaven (good luck) and to receive goodies from the government to support his wives.* Most Christian polygamists, such as myself, want to do away with welfare entirely whereas most FLDS and similar Welfare Wife Polygamists want to milk the taxpayers for all they can get. If you are an FLDS mormon living polygamously and your family receives absolutely no welfare benefits then please write me and I will amend this article.

2 Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

If we eliminate all welfare we will rid ourselves of those who will not work and force them to integrate into the real world. This would do much to bring the non-Christian polygamists (including Muslims) out of isolation and would improve the lives of the women who are married to them. It might also cause women who are bound by the chains of fornication and harlotry to repent and come out of their apartments and into the workplace and become chaste members of society. Finally, it would put the churches on notice that it is the church and not the government that is to provide assistance to those who turn to God and need rehabilitation.

Like most social ills, the cure is not more laws and regulations; the cure is less government programs that turn people into dependent classes.

I'd like to know why the government is so concerned about all the FLDS Mormon Welfare Wife Polygamists and shows no concern whatsoever about the tens of thousands of Muslim Welfare Wife Polygamists who reside in urban areas. Anyone who has been to Seattle lately will see them all over the streets of Rainier Valley. The FLDS Mormon Welfare Wives wear long dresses and bonnets. The Muslim Welfare Wives wear coverings over their entire bodies except for their eyes. Which sounds more abusive to you?

Polygamist: One who practices polygamy, or maintains its lawfulness.

Welfare/Goodies* Food Stamps, WIC, Federal Housing

Evidence that those living in Hillsdale, Arizona (an FLDS community) are receiving Food Stamps and WIC at a rate many times higher than the general population of Arizona was reported in a 1998 article by Salt Lake Tribune Investigative Reporter, Tom Zoellner.

Note: If you have questions or comments concerning this article please
click here
to send a message to Pastor Don.

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on May 25, 2006 - 10:54 PM  


Warren Jeffs is not accused of having sex with a minor but match making.

Warren Jeffs has only been accused of arranging the marriage of a 16-year-old woman to a 28-year-old man yet he has been placed on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives List. The woman's parents agreed to the marriage and had it not been for the fact that the man was already married, this marriage would have been legal in every state if Jeffs would simply have followed a few simple procedures. All Jeffs would need to have done in order to have made sure that the marriage was legal would have been to have the first wife get a government divorce from her husband (an invalid divorce according to the Bible) and make sure that because of the age of the woman (16) that a marriage license was obtained and a notarized consent provided by the woman's parents as required by Arizona law. That's it. Polygamy is not illegal. Remarrying without a government divorce is illegal. Had the woman been 18 the state would likely not have pressed the case because it's believed that in today's legal climate, anti-polygamy laws will not be upheld by the Supreme Court.

Consider this, the following are wanted for murder by the FBI. They DID NOT make it onto the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives List. Will one of the following murderers kill again because a match maker was put on the list instead of them?

Kevin Lamont Carter

Claudio Gutierrez-Cruz

Duane Latoye Geiger

John Patrick Addis
Murder, Kidnapping

Saul Aguilar, Jr.

Fernando Arenas-Collazo
Murder with a Deadly Weapon

Richard Lynn Bare

Arnulfo Beltran-Barboza

Cyril L. Byrd

Jose Rosendo Carrillo-Padilla
Aggravated Murder

Antonio Carrillo-Vera
Aggravated Murder

Cesar Carlos Castaneda
Capital Murder, Burglary, Aggravated Robbery

Guillermo Peralta Castaneda

Calvin Maurice Cooley

Sukhrob Davronov

Christopher Allen Dean

Errol Anthony Domangue

Lawrence William Fishman

Gregorio Flores-Albarran

Rodolfo Flores-Albarran

Chiron Sharroll Francis

Moises Galvan-Gonzalez

Usiel Mora Gayosso
Murder, Attempted Murder

Rosemary Lorraine Godbolt-Molder

Sherry Halligan

Paul Joseph Harmon

Hazel Leota Head
Murder; Arson; Failure to Appear

Miguel Angel Hermosillio-Alcaraz

William Junior Jordan

Diego Trejo

Juan Antonio Pena

Tarek Ahmed El-Zoghpy

Lester Edward Eubanks

Daniel Keo Kung

David Gibson Lindsay
Murder, Theft of a Motor Vehicle

Michael David Marks
Criminal Homicide

Francisco Martinez

Juan Carlos Martinez

Juan Carlos Mayorga

Jesse Mendez

Marvin Aclaro Mercado
Murder, Attempted Murder, Burglary, Conspiracy

Morris Alex Mills

David Nam

Mahboob M. Pasha
Murder, Aggravated Assault

John Henry Ramirez
Capital Murder,
Aggravated Robbery

Bernabe Roman

Adolfo S. Sanchez

Daniel Scaife

Alvin Scott

Daniel Min Suh

William Claybourne Taylor
Murder, Aggravated Battery

Jorge Emmanuel Torres-Reyes
Murder, Attempted Murder

Hugo Varela

Jacobo Varela

Terrence Jerome Ward
Aggravated Murder with Firearm

Adam Mark Zachs
Murder, Failure to Appear

Note: If you have questions or comments concerning this article please
click here
to send a message to Pastor Don.

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on May 09, 2006 - 11:26 PM  

Register to Vote

President Bush has abandoned the Christian Right o­ne more time. (That's you and me if you're a born again prophecy believing Christian). President Bush, moving end times prophecy o­ne step closer to fullfillment, has abandoned the Christian Right concerning Israel. This leaves the president o­nly o­ne last area of loyalty to the Christian Right, the appointment of conservative judges. Will he now totally remove himself from any connection with the Christian Right by compromising o­n judges? If the president's recent behavior is any indication o­n this, the answer is an unfortunate yes.

In the president's most recent slap in the face at the Christian Right he has said that he will no longer honor United Nations Resolution 242 but that any agreement between the "Palestinians" and the Israelis must be based  o­n the 1949 armistice lines.

Click Here to Read Hal Lindsey's Article

Click Here to View An Alternative Analysis

Note: If you have questions or comments concerning this article please
click here
to send a message to Pastor Don.

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on Jun 11, 2005 - 09:05 PM  


As my readers know, I was appalled that the President of the United States allowed his wife to make a lewd speech at a recent dinner for the press. I sent an email to three major ministries in the United States and you'll find a copy of my email to Doctor James Dobson of Focus o­n the Family as well as the response provided by Amy Campbell, his representative. Their reaction was to be "uncomfortable with some of her remarks." That was not my reaction to her lewd remarks as you know from my article about Laura Bush's lewd remarks. When you read Focus o­n the Famly's response, please note that they o­nly referred to her remarks, not "lewd" remarks and they o­nly referred to their reaction and not to the effects of her remarks o­n the office of the presidency. We must ask ourselves, has Focus o­n the Family gone so mainstream that it can o­nly respond hypocritically to Laura Bush's comments while lambasting any media personality who offends public decency? I would like to see them lambast both, wouldn't you? Below you'll find my email and their response.

Below is my Email that I sent to Focus o­n the Family

"To whom it may concern:

Please send me the official statement of Dr. Dobson and/or Focus o­n the Family concerning First "Lady" Laura Bush's lewd jokes at the recent correspondents' dinner.

The President allowed her to make that speech. This incident is o­ne of the most significant in the history of the United States; a First "Lady" talking like a slut.

Sincerely, Pastor Don Milton"

Below is the Response that I received from Focus o­n the Family

"Greetings, Pastor Milton, from Focus o­n the Family.

We appreciate your taking a moment to share your candid reaction to First Lady Laura Bush's comments at the White House Correspondents Association dinner, held on April 30, 2005. Like you, we were uncomfortable with some of her remarks. Nevertheless, Dr. Dobson and Focus o­n the Family won't be addressing this matter in the manner you had hoped. Given our current emphasis on such front-burner issues as abortion, judicial tyranny, same-sex marriage, and religious freedom, we don't feel discussions concerning the propriety of the First Lady's speech should be allowed to distract us from investing our efforts in these critical areas.

Thanks again for writing. May God's richest blessings be upon you in the coming days!

Amy Campbell
Focus on the Family"

The above response was from Focus o­n the Family. ChristianMarriage.com condemns in the strongest possible terms Laura Bush's comments. You can find our article on her comments by clicking the link below:


Note: Pastor Don Milton is aware that powerful men in the United States would like to cause a problem for him because of his candid approach to morality.

If you have questions or comments concerning this article please
click here
to send a message to Pastor Don.

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on May 17, 2005 - 07:31 PM  


"First Lady Laura Bush" has decided that filthy jokes in public are just fine and her husband, President George W. Bush, has encouraged her to make such filthy jokes. What's worse is that the Christian Press and the Major Christian Websites are keeping their mouths shut about it!

This Silence of these "Christians" is the very reason that we take NO TAX EXEMPT STATUS at ChristianMarriage.com and we don't keep our mouths shut regardless of who is sinning and today it's the President of the United States! Do the other "Christian" ministries fear losing their precious government handouts? I certainly can think of no other reason why they have failed to comment o­n this incident.

Let me first frame the discussion so that you'll understand why I believe that President George W. Bush has sinned greatly. First, President Bush has stated repeatedly that he is a Born Again Christian and that he prays and that he knows when people are praying for him. My family and I often mention the president in prayer. We believe, as do most Christians, that leaders are chosen by God and deserve honor so long as they hold the office in high esteem. I have told you who I thought George W. Bush was.

Now here's who I am:

For you to know the depth of my convictions o­n this I have to give you some background o­n myself. In 1980 I was a paid staffer o­n the Reagan for Presdent campaign and have pay stubs to prove it. During the campaign I was personally introduced to President Reagan (Then candidate Reagan) o­n the tarmac of the airport in Seattle where he landed. I shook hands with him and exchanged words. During Bush senior's visit to Seattle I was in charge of coordinating security with the Secret Service at the downtown office for the Reagan For President office. I Met Bush senior at that time, shook hands, and exchanged words with him as well. I have a hand signed letter from both President Reagan and then campaign manager but later CIA director, Bill Casey. Both letters thanked me for my dedication and involvement in the Reagan for President campaign. In the 1990s I was the Chairman of the 37th district Republicans in Washington State. I voted for every Republican President since Ronald Reagan. I have high expectations of Republicans. In other words, I am a Right Wing Pro-Life Christian Conservative. I am not a group, I am a person with long ties to conservative Christian campaigns. I will speak out when betrayed.

At a recent event, President George W. Bush dishonored the office of the presidency and showed himself to be a weak man. Yes, Mr. President, you're weak! You have allowed your wife to go in public and joke that you grabbed the penis of a male horse and "milked" it thinking that its penis was a female horse tit!

Should things such as this even be talked about? You have forced decent people to discuss indecent things! I am tearing my metaphorical robes as I write this! The President of the United States allowing, yes encouraging, his wife to say such things in public?

The other joke that the First "Lady" made concerned going out with her friends to a bar with male strippers and giving the strippers dollar bills in a crude fashion. When I was 21 years old I was told by a woman who went to such a bar what they do with those dollar bills. They fold them in half lengthwise and make them into a cylinder connecting them at the ends. Then the woman giving the dollar billl puts it in her mouth and places it over the man's penis using her mouth! Is this what the First "Lady" joked about when she said that the Vice President's wife, Lynne Cheney was now known as "Dollar Bill?" Or was it o­nly that she was joking that Lynne Cheney, a married woman, was putting a dollar bill into the thong underwear of the male stripper as some have chided me. Oh, forgive me, she "only" stuck her hands down the male strippers pants. o­nly??? Please understand, I know that what she joked about did not actually happen but she joked about it as if such activity were not an abomination.

There is no mild way to take these jokes. It is disgusting that the behavior of the President in allowing this crude performance to go o­n stage has caused public discourse to become crude again. I am certain that I will be blamed for the crude discourse but it was not me who told the jokes. I just explained for those of you who are not news reporters, as the audience was, what the real meaning of the jokes was. I thought we were over the crudeness and the necessity to explain to children what kinds of sins the president committed after President Clinton left office. Shame o­n you President Bush. You have betrayed the Christians who elected you and worse yet, because of your great power, they fear speaking out against you! Your "Faith-Based and Community Initiative" has made their organizations so beholden to you that you have done what 50 years of liberalism could not do. You silenced the Christian Right.

Let me tell the reader here that if you don't think America should be fearing God's wrath right now then you are so backslidden that you cannot be helped. This is the kind of indecency that no practicing Christian ever expected of Laura Bush and never expected to be promoted by George W. Bush for it was George W. Bush who approved this rehearsed piece of trash and keeps such godless writers o­n staff at the White House and that brings up another question. Did the public pay the men who wrote this trash and which Laura Bush performed like a perfect piece of trash?

The most disgusting thing about this is that many of you will think that I'm joking about this; that this article is satire. Har har, you're saying. Everyone jokes. Sorry buddy, there are some things that any decent man would not allow his wife to joke about in public. The First Slut's behavior was worthy of a First Slut so that is the title she has earned herself. Laura Bush is the First Slut of America, not the First "Lady." I say, if you walk like a slut and talk like a slut then you're a slut. Now, since this article first appeared some have complained to me that my words were too harsh and that, after all, the "First Lady" was just pretending, it was a joke. Ok then, I'll change what I call her, she's now the "Faux First Slut."

The following are her filthy comments:

"I am married to the president of the United States, and here's our typical evening: Nine o'clock, Mr. Excitement here is sound asleep, and I'm watching Desperate Housewives" with Lynne Cheney. Ladies and gentlemen, I am a desperate housewife. I mean, if those women o­n that show think they're desperate, they oughta be with George.

One night, after George went to bed, Lynne Cheney, Condi Rice, Karen Hughes and I went to Chippendale's. I wouldn't even mention it except Ruth Ginsberg and Sandra Day O'Connor saw us there. I won't tell you what happened, but Lynne's Secret Service codename is now "Dollar Bill."

She also said:

"But I'm proud of George. He's learned a lot about ranching since that first year when he tried to milk the horse. What's worse, it was a male horse."


With her crude jokes, First "Lady" Laura Bush has made history. She's the first wife of a president to make lewd jokes in public but she didn't stop there. She made two Supreme Court Justices, the Vice President's wife, the Secretary of State, and the President of the United States the butt of those lewd jokes. In addition, she gave legitimacy to male strippers and the lewdest show on T.V., Desperate Housewives. As a member of the Christian Right I voted for George W. Bush thinking he was one of us but have learned with finality that he is not. I am not questioning his salvation. I am questioning whether he is walking with the Lord as he would like us to believe.

Since this article was published more than two years ago there has not been one ministry that has objected as I have to Laura Bush's lewd jokes. Do a search and you will find out that this is the ONLY ministry that has condemned her behavior condemned even more forcefully, the behavior of President George W. Bush for allowing taxpayer funded speech writers to produce such trash.

If you have questions or comments concerning this article please
click here
to send a message to Pastor Don.

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on May 06, 2005 - 02:53 AM  

Ethics In Practicing Your Faith

A husband who is limited in the number of wives that he may have at the same time is no longer a husband but has in fact become a wife.

Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.

How much worse if a man puts on a woman's behavior? A man who vows a woman's vow, that he shall not retain the right of a man to have more than one wife, has vowed an abominable vow. Renouncing such a vow and declaring it an abomination is an act of repentance, not an act of covenant breaking. If a man vowed at his wedding that he would forever wear a woman's garments, would such a vow be valid? God forbid! Abominable vows, abominable covenants, or abominable whatever you want to call them, are never valid. A man who vows an abominable vow must renounce the abomination and make clear to the world that he will not "put on a woman's behavior."

Permission Slip Polygamy should call itself what it is. Instead, supporters of Permission Slip Polygamy continue to refer to their belief system with the misandrist* invective; "Love Not Force".

This cruel invective does three things:

1.) It denounces men who would dare to disagree.

2.) It abuses men who disagree by insinuation.

3.) It censures discourse by insinuation.

Consider first the following weak statement that they don't use:

"I can't possibly agree with what you're proposing. We adhere to Permission Slip Polygamy."

Apparently the promoters of Permission Slip Polygamy know that their concept is so weak that they must turn to political tactics to attack those who disagree with them. Instead of debating Permission Slip Polygamy, they create a name that of itself condemns those who would disagree.

Consider the tactic they actually use.

"I can't possibly agree with what you're proposing. We adhere to Love Not Force."

The statement insinuates that the o­ne being spoken to is not loving and that they're proposing to force something o­n somebody.

Because the phrase doesn't say something like "love not brutality" or "love not bondage" the reader doesn't realize the intensity of the accusation but it's there all the same. It accuses those who don't agree with those who invoke this invective disguised as a doctrine of being unloving and of forcing something o­n someone, specifically of being mysogynists*. It shouts, "Either you're o­ne of us or you're a mysogynist."

Imagine if someone said to you,

"I can't possibly agree with what you're proposing. We adhere to Love Not Butchery."

You'd immediately know that they were calling you an unloving butcher!

The names we call our doctrines should not be invectives. I call upon all the "Love not Forcers" to call it what it is: Permission Slip Polygamy. And yes, I am most certainly questioning the motives for selecting an invective for the name of a doctrine and even moreso the motives for retaining it.

I've listed below some other well known invectives that have been used throughout history to accuse instead of define or debate. Have you ever been accused with o­ne of these invectives?

Love not Lust - against polygamy
Love not Gender - against biblical relationships
Love not Bondage - against different roles in marriage
Love not Legalism - against Sabbath keepers
Love not Words - against patient people
Love not Terror - against self defense
Love not Anger - against self defense
Love not Violence - against self defense
Love not Rebellion - against dissent
Love not Judgement - against Christians
Love not War - against self defense
Love not Greed - against private property rights
Love not Money - against private property rights
Love not Babies - against procreating
Love not Bloodshed - against self defense
Love not Religion - against Christianity

Invectives such as "Love Not Force" have no place in Christian dialog. The affect is to bring out the misandrist* in the reader by planting the thought: "Those beasts! How could they teach force instead of love!" We urge those who teach that you must get a Permission Slip from your wife in order to take additional wives to simply call it what it is: Permission Slip Polygamy

Note: Definitions:*"Love Not Force" - Permission Slip Polygamy*misogynist - woman hater*misandrist - man hater

If you have questions or comments concerning this article please
click here
to send a message to Pastor Don.

Posted by: Pastor_Don_Milton on Mar 10, 2005 - 09:09 PM  

Site Search


Beware of searching for truth anywhere but in the blessed word of God; dread as much to leave it for an instant, as a blind man would dread to walk amidst pits and precipices without a guide, or a mariner to sail among rocks and shoals without a pilot. Remember what the Psalmist says, 'Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.'

-- Rev. Martin Madan --

Other Stories

Chat with Pastor Don