I am married to one wife, never divorced but Kingsley resonates with me very deeply in all aspects of his teaching. God bless 🙌 you sir and your wife and marriage.
Great teaching, PK. I, too, have misunderstood the scriptures about the man being the sole provider. I entered marriage with that mindset, thank you so much for explaining this. God bless you richly.
I'm very grateful for the spirit of wisdom in you sir. This hour presentation of truth has set me free and will set anyone with an honest & humble heart free
Thank you for wisdom dear Pastor k....but I desagree with the saying that women should not go for a man of their choice.....in Christ we(man/woman) all have the rights to go for whomever we want to friend/marry.... christ....Jesus gave us that rights
@eddy calyo, the bible has its principles and what we call civilization cannot stop the biblical truth. The bible made the man the head of the home and the initiator of marital love hence the man should take the lead. A woman asking a man out should also get ready to lead at home
In the French world women don’t change their name. They are not expected to change their name. But there is a line in the passport that says : Spouse of …..(husband name)
Sir, I really appreciate your work and how God is using you. My name is Runny Jons I do follow most of your teachings, yours and pastor M's. Just that I am a bit confused about your point number #6 where you mentioned that providing for the family is not a man's sole responsibility. But then Sir, I need clarity about that looking at Genesis 3:16_19, where God had to address the man and the woman based on the fact that they both ate from the fruit in which he commanded them not to eat. So I need clarification please. Please note: I am not against men and women joining heads to build their homes in every aspect, in fact that is how I feel it should be in the ideal kingdom marriage. Thank you Sir.
I really enjoyed this . What i found very interesting and eye opening is in your explanation of that scripture "the lord giveth and the lord taketh". According to you, and the explanation made sense, it was Job speaking, and not God. That makes a lot of sense. Meanwhile, "women submit to your husband" and "men love your wife" it is God speaking? Correct me if I'm wrong but from the way you explained it, it was God instructing us. Yet, that isnt so, is it? Cos it was Paul who gave that instruction, not God. So how come with Job, it was Job speaking, yet with Paul, it is God speaking. And before anyone steotypes or tries to psychoanalyse me, I have no issue with submitting or being loved by a man. Submitting and love are principles of marriage that have been studied even outside religion and proven to be accurate. Its just interesting how you explained this two similar things yet one is God speaking when is obviously not. Or I'm i missing something? You can correct me if I'm wrong.
Whenever Paul spoke from his own opinions, he always said so. He will say something like, 'this is from me not God' paraphrasing. Job's story reads like a play so you can easily identify who is speaking. So it's assumed that when Paul does not inject his own opinions ( and this is not often at all), it is rightfully accepted as God's own Words instead of Paul's opinion. Open the Bible to see this for yourself. Bless.
good day sir, on the interpretation of the scripture about divorce and remarriage, you explained the concept of putting away and divorce certification and stressed that in Jesus' statement, he referred to putting away and remarrying while you're in that first stage... however, its kind of confusing and doesnt add up that an exception for sexual immorality was made... does that mean that its okay to remarry if the reason for putting away is infidelity ? thank you
No, I suggest that you watch that part of the video again and this time, slowly. Although divorce has never been God's idea from the beginning... The Scriptures says it is ADULTERY to put away (BE SEPARATED) from your spouse then marry or sleep with another (man or woman). A marriage is not 'annulled' until proper divorce is done just like the process taken to get married. You are permitted to be divorced(done legally) in the case of adultery of one party, violence or any situation that's a threat to your life. You can remarry in this case if you're on the receiving end. As long as you're properly divorced, you can remarry. It is with separation that you cannot remarry until a proper divorce is done. Unless it's by death. I hope this helps
@@DeborahBriggsDB I understand what he said... its a new concept he introduced, one I had not heard prior to now... the concept of separation and divorce... its hard because I can only trace such translations of those texts to the KJV and ylt... other say divorce and dont split it into two stages... notwithstanding, thats not the issue at hand... pastor k says that Jesus meant that the one who remarries while not being fully divorced is the one that sins... however, my confusion is that when you look at the text, Jesus clearly says that (and I'll borrow the KJV here since it seems to separate divorce into two) but I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. Matthew 5:32 KJV.... the question remains, does this mean that the only ground on which remarrying while not completely divorced is not a sin is if the reason for putting away in the first place was adultery??? that is the question... can one remarry even before the divorce is completed if the reason for separation was adultery???
@@lordazimotheus5487 I actually answered this too. The answer is no. You can't remarry until you're properly divorced even on grounds of adultery. Based on Scriptures. Of course, there are complex circumstances e.g where the other(the wicked person) is not consenting to the request for a divorce. Remember that the goal for divorce is not to satisfy our own desires but to be free(to save a life) from the wickedness and selfishness of your spouse. Sometimes, the answer will be dependent on that situation so we must/should be careful not to encourage sin in any way. So much to say here... Ideally, God sees marriage as a covenant so an act of adultery cannot and should not separate a home but if it's consistent and persistent, a SEPARATION should be encouraged while she/he's being kept accountable. The home can still work if the spouse repents and this would take time. Otherwise, if they're non repentant and unwilling to grant you divorce, it's a different conversation. This is just one instance. Remarrying in circumstances like this is adultery as God still sees you both as one. See it's beyond should they remarry but what is God's idea? I believe humility, wisdom and honesty is key as believers otherwise, we would keep missing God out.
@@DeborahBriggsDB then what scripture are we talking about because the one I quoted clearly states that an exception is adultery... so no, you havent answered that... neither did pastor k in his video... hence my continued confusion and tendency to not really accept the whole context of separation of divorce into stages
@@lordazimotheus5487 I updated my last response, please check it out. No, we didn't separate divorce into two. I think you did. Separation is not divorce. It may lead to divorce but it doesn't have to. Infact, it shouldn't. Please take your time to read those verses, the whole chapter and every teaching on marriage in different versions to get the goal. 🙏
Can the couple not choose a new surname they will answer as a couple? I believe that as long as the couple are okay with having the compound name, there is no problem. Some ladies are the only child of their parents. Their birth family name is important to be continued. So compound name should not be a problem.
A woman does not have the responsibility of passing on her family name except it’s a cultural thing (some matrilineal societies) which is very rare. A married woman cannot also transfer her father’s name to a child belonging to another man and another family. Her child is not her father’s child except she was unmarried and the father of the child did not acknowledge the child (cultural too). If she keeps a compound name, it still ends with her.
What’s the point of getting married and moving to his house if that’s even an issue? Once you get married, you become a part of his family, so why not change the name to reflect that? Why would you keep your fathers name? That’s what your mother has done. You’re not your father’s wife.
I am neither for nor against a woman bearing her husband's name or not. All i am trying to do is analyze each point that he is raising. Well, saying that a woman must bear her husband's name on the ground that it will avoid issues when going through immigrations, is questionable to me. Interestingly, a woman whose surname is different from her children's will not cause issues even at the airport or while passing through immigations. Having their birth certificates where it is clearly stated that she is the mother of the kids will suffice. If that didn't suffice, it implies that divorced or single mums who bear their own father's surnames will also have problems proving that the kids with different surnames belong to them. Immigration officers are more enlightened than what we are made to believe.
I have a business/ professional name -maiden name as established and a married name. In the western world it is not frowned upon and appropriate EG Cherie Blair is QC Cherie Booth at work but still happily married to her husband Former Prime Minister Tony Blair
In most acceptable cases, the wife already has an established household name and changing the business name might negatively impact the brand. There are some people who this does not apply to. They just think that they cannot change their name for a man, yet they want to be housewives - doing nothing 😂
@@IphieTheSlickBoss agreed. She probably changed her name to her husband’s name legally, but due to branding and reputation, is keeping her brand name. If that does not apply to you, what’s the big deal?
I keep wondering why Christian women are arguing about changing of names to their husbands names If you can accept a man wholly then why the fuss about bearing his surname and it's funny how we make other women who change to their husband's name feel like they are not woke. We are one in marriage and there is no separation whatsoever. I see many argue that they have built their brand with their maiden name but we also have many who changed to their husband's name and are performing credibly well. We should be guided by the scriptures as Christians and not the civilization concept of the world
I understand everything and the oneness thing but changing name doesn’t do anything at the airport. Any immigration person stopping you from traveling because you didn’t do name change is trying to bully you and trample on your fundamental right due to their position. Your birth certificate, children birth certificate, marriage certificate, DNA test is what the law states is needed when in doubt of any fishy act
The issue of divorce and putting away is not clear from your explaination, if Jesus was making reference to putting away and not divorce why did he( Jesus) put an exception of immorality even when he was talking about putting away, it is very clear here that putting away and divorce are same because for Jesus to say except on the ground of sexual sin freed the other party to.....
These Jewish men who were polygamous because of their cultures, still worked with God. God endorsed their faith, they made heaven. God's work is mysterious, I don't support polygamy, I just believe there are certain things we should not consider too much, because we could get confused and lose our faith. God still used them as examples.
These were men in the old testament, dont forget we have the new testament, in the new testament jesus came and died for us and preached against polygamy, there was no polygamy recorded in the new testament.
It is good you mentioned that 'you believe'. Bible is clear on somethings despite our feelings or beliefs 🙂🙂. Also what reference do you have to their 'making heaven'?
Hey! It was never in God's will for men to be polygamous. However, because men have their permissive will they decided to be polygamous. All these men you believe were polygamous and walked with God in the bible never had a stable home. Study the bible throughout, from Solomon whose wives and concubines turned him away from God (Note: The kingdom was divided in Solomon's regime because of this and two tribes was just giving to his son) to David whose Children were against each other to Abraham. The issue is that people never share the consequences with you they only share the sweet little part to support their own hardened heart. God never supported Polygamy, God does not see a woman as something to acquire but a person. Notwithstanding, now we have the HolySpirit and the HolySpirit will teach us all things. I will advise that we work with the HolySpirit in everything we want to do, so we don't get confuse.
@@olatomiwa224 thank you. As much as God loved David, he still tore his family apart when he was disobedient. How about Jacob? His son was sold into slavery and he never saw his son become successful. So yeah, you’re allowed to disobey because let’s face it, we can. There are consequences.
The fact that you usually explain your points with
Scriptures
Science
Research
Makes your teachings inspiring.
Thanks you PK🙌🙌🙌🙌
The
My mind is enriched!!! My heart is Open!!! I have truly been filled up by this Word!! 🙏🏽
Wonderful teaching.God bless you.
I am married to one wife, never divorced but Kingsley resonates with me very deeply in all aspects of his teaching. God bless 🙌 you sir and your wife and marriage.
I am blessed by this message. More wisdom sir
Great teaching, PK. I, too, have misunderstood the scriptures about the man being the sole provider. I entered marriage with that mindset, thank you so much for explaining this. God bless you richly.
This was soo good!!! debunked alot of myths especially pertaining to divorce! You are loaded! God bless you Sir!!
I'm very grateful for the spirit of wisdom in you sir. This hour presentation of truth has set me free and will set anyone with an honest & humble heart free
Study to show yourself approved indeed. I'm really blessed by this video
God bless you sir
Thank you for wisdom dear Pastor k....but I desagree with the saying that women should not go for a man of their choice.....in Christ we(man/woman) all have the rights to go for whomever we want to friend/marry.... christ....Jesus gave us that rights
@eddy calyo, the bible has its principles and what we call civilization cannot stop the biblical truth.
The bible made the man the head of the home and the initiator of marital love hence the man should take the lead.
A woman asking a man out should also get ready to lead at home
Awesome! Very enlightening, instructive and refreshing. God richly increase your blessings PK
Very enriching. Thank you
God bless you sir for sharing 😌
In the French world women don’t change their name. They are not expected to change their name. But there is a line in the passport that says : Spouse of …..(husband name)
More Grace PK 🙏🏿
Thank you for the knowledge 🙏🏿🥰
Let there be light, there was light, this real light in many relationship and marriage, thanks to pst k
Pastor K is an amazing teacher like it or not he backs up what he teaches with the Word! It may bite in some places! Ouch
Thanks so much sir, May the lord continue to increase his anointing upon your life and your entire family
Wow, incredible teaching
Luckily in Eritrea and Ethiopia we don’t really need to change our surname 🎉🎉🎉
Submitting yourself to one another .
1. Genesis 2:24
2. The entire book of Ruth
3. Proverbs 18:22
4. Ephesians 5:22 Submission
6. Men should be the sole provider
7. Remarriage
Thank you Pastor kinsley for this great knowledge of Marriage.
THANK YOU FOR THE WISDOM PACKED TEACHINGS ALWAYS SIR. MORE GRACE SIR 🙏
I can’t wait to see you guys in CANADA
Pk sir. No. Dr Pk sir. This is deep and exquisite. Merci beaucoup
Thank you for this Sir. More wisdom, knowledge, and understanding to you in Jesus's name. Amen
Very insightful and deep
God bless you Pastor Kingsley 😊
God bless you Pastor K
Thank you so much PK for this profund clarity. God bless you always sir.
Awesome lessons pastor K enjoying and learning from Zambia 🇿🇲
Thank you thank you sir.
This is so good! 🔥🔥
Sir, I really appreciate your work and how God is using you. My name is Runny Jons I do follow most of your teachings, yours and pastor M's. Just that I am a bit confused about your point number #6 where you mentioned that providing for the family is not a man's sole responsibility. But then Sir, I need clarity about that looking at Genesis 3:16_19, where God had to address the man and the woman based on the fact that they both ate from the fruit in which he commanded them not to eat. So I need clarification please.
Please note: I am not against men and women joining heads to build their homes in every aspect, in fact that is how I feel it should be in the ideal kingdom marriage. Thank you Sir.
Thank You Pastor 🙏
Thank you for the clarification sir ❤️
Nice session. Many thanks PK
I really enjoyed this . What i found very interesting and eye opening is in your explanation of that scripture "the lord giveth and the lord taketh". According to you, and the explanation made sense, it was Job speaking, and not God. That makes a lot of sense.
Meanwhile, "women submit to your husband" and "men love your wife" it is God speaking? Correct me if I'm wrong but from the way you explained it, it was God instructing us. Yet, that isnt so, is it? Cos it was Paul who gave that instruction, not God. So how come with Job, it was Job speaking, yet with Paul, it is God speaking.
And before anyone steotypes or tries to psychoanalyse me, I have no issue with submitting or being loved by a man. Submitting and love are principles of marriage that have been studied even outside religion and proven to be accurate.
Its just interesting how you explained this two similar things yet one is God speaking when is obviously not. Or I'm i missing something? You can correct me if I'm wrong.
Whenever Paul spoke from his own opinions, he always said so. He will say something like, 'this is from me not God' paraphrasing. Job's story reads like a play so you can easily identify who is speaking.
So it's assumed that when Paul does not inject his own opinions ( and this is not often at all), it is rightfully accepted as God's own Words instead of Paul's opinion. Open the Bible to see this for yourself. Bless.
Why is it assumed that Jewish culture is to be adopted by all?
Pastor K, 56mins is short?!😊
good day sir, on the interpretation of the scripture about divorce and remarriage, you explained the concept of putting away and divorce certification and stressed that in Jesus' statement, he referred to putting away and remarrying while you're in that first stage... however, its kind of confusing and doesnt add up that an exception for sexual immorality was made... does that mean that its okay to remarry if the reason for putting away is infidelity ? thank you
No, I suggest that you watch that part of the video again and this time, slowly.
Although divorce has never been God's idea from the beginning...
The Scriptures says it is ADULTERY to put away (BE SEPARATED) from your spouse then marry or sleep with another (man or woman). A marriage is not 'annulled' until proper divorce is done just like the process taken to get married.
You are permitted to be divorced(done legally) in the case of adultery of one party, violence or any situation that's a threat to your life. You can remarry in this case if you're on the receiving end. As long as you're properly divorced, you can remarry.
It is with separation that you cannot remarry until a proper divorce is done. Unless it's by death. I hope this helps
@@DeborahBriggsDB I understand what he said... its a new concept he introduced, one I had not heard prior to now... the concept of separation and divorce... its hard because I can only trace such translations of those texts to the KJV and ylt... other say divorce and dont split it into two stages... notwithstanding, thats not the issue at hand... pastor k says that Jesus meant that the one who remarries while not being fully divorced is the one that sins... however, my confusion is that when you look at the text, Jesus clearly says that (and I'll borrow the KJV here since it seems to separate divorce into two) but I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
Matthew 5:32 KJV.... the question remains, does this mean that the only ground on which remarrying while not completely divorced is not a sin is if the reason for putting away in the first place was adultery??? that is the question... can one remarry even before the divorce is completed if the reason for separation was adultery???
@@lordazimotheus5487 I actually answered this too. The answer is no. You can't remarry until you're properly divorced even on grounds of adultery. Based on Scriptures.
Of course, there are complex circumstances e.g where the other(the wicked person) is not consenting to the request for a divorce.
Remember that the goal for divorce is not to satisfy our own desires but to be free(to save a life) from the wickedness and selfishness of your spouse. Sometimes, the answer will be dependent on that situation so we must/should be careful not to encourage sin in any way.
So much to say here...
Ideally, God sees marriage as a covenant so an act of adultery cannot and should not separate a home but if it's consistent and persistent, a SEPARATION should be encouraged while she/he's being kept accountable. The home can still work if the spouse repents and this would take time. Otherwise, if they're non repentant and unwilling to grant you divorce, it's a different conversation. This is just one instance.
Remarrying in circumstances like this is adultery as God still sees you both as one.
See it's beyond should they remarry but what is God's idea? I believe humility, wisdom and honesty is key as believers otherwise, we would keep missing God out.
@@DeborahBriggsDB then what scripture are we talking about because the one I quoted clearly states that an exception is adultery... so no, you havent answered that... neither did pastor k in his video... hence my continued confusion and tendency to not really accept the whole context of separation of divorce into stages
@@lordazimotheus5487 I updated my last response, please check it out.
No, we didn't separate divorce into two. I think you did. Separation is not divorce. It may lead to divorce but it doesn't have to. Infact, it shouldn't. Please take your time to read those verses, the whole chapter and every teaching on marriage in different versions to get the goal.
🙏
Can the couple not choose a new surname they will answer as a couple?
I believe that as long as the couple are okay with having the compound name, there is no problem.
Some ladies are the only child of their parents. Their birth family name is important to be continued. So compound name should not be a problem.
Sorry, do you mean that the man will now agree to add his wife's father's name to his own as well so that her family name will not go extinct?
A woman does not have the responsibility of passing on her family name except it’s a cultural thing (some matrilineal societies) which is very rare. A married woman cannot also transfer her father’s name to a child belonging to another man and another family. Her child is not her father’s child except she was unmarried and the father of the child did not acknowledge the child (cultural too). If she keeps a compound name, it still ends with her.
What’s the point of getting married and moving to his house if that’s even an issue? Once you get married, you become a part of his family, so why not change the name to reflect that? Why would you keep your fathers name? That’s what your mother has done. You’re not your father’s wife.
I am neither for nor against a woman bearing her husband's name or not. All i am trying to do is analyze each point that he is raising.
Well, saying that a woman must bear her husband's name on the ground that it will avoid issues when going through immigrations, is questionable to me.
Interestingly, a woman whose surname is different from her children's will not cause issues even at the airport or while passing through immigations.
Having their birth certificates where it is clearly stated that she is the mother of the kids will suffice. If that didn't suffice, it implies that divorced or single mums who bear their own father's surnames will also have problems proving that the kids with different surnames belong to them. Immigration officers are more enlightened than what we are made to believe.
I have a business/ professional name -maiden name as established and a married name. In the western world it is not frowned upon and appropriate EG Cherie Blair is QC Cherie Booth at work but still happily married to her husband Former Prime Minister Tony Blair
In most acceptable cases, the wife already has an established household name and changing the business name might negatively impact the brand. There are some people who this does not apply to. They just think that they cannot change their name for a man, yet they want to be housewives - doing nothing 😂
@@IphieTheSlickBoss agreed. She probably changed her name to her husband’s name legally, but due to branding and reputation, is keeping her brand name. If that does not apply to you, what’s the big deal?
I keep wondering why Christian women are arguing about changing of names to their husbands names
If you can accept a man wholly then why the fuss about bearing his surname and it's funny how we make other women who change to their husband's name feel like they are not woke.
We are one in marriage and there is no separation whatsoever.
I see many argue that they have built their brand with their maiden name but we also have many who changed to their husband's name and are performing credibly well.
We should be guided by the scriptures as Christians and not the civilization concept of the world
Hmmm PK....THIS name thing is myopic. It does not really matter. People change names and that does not mean they are not part of their family
Polygamy is not clear, I don't want to say anything cos of religious people but it's not a sin just that you won't be a bishop.
I understand everything and the oneness thing but changing name doesn’t do anything at the airport. Any immigration person stopping you from traveling because you didn’t do name change is trying to bully you and trample on your fundamental right due to their position. Your birth certificate, children birth certificate, marriage certificate, DNA test is what the law states is needed when in doubt of any fishy act
The issue of divorce and putting away is not clear from your explaination, if Jesus was making reference to putting away and not divorce why did he( Jesus) put an exception of immorality even when he was talking about putting away, it is very clear here that putting away and divorce are same because for Jesus to say except on the ground of sexual sin freed the other party to.....
These Jewish men who were polygamous because of their cultures, still worked with God. God endorsed their faith, they made heaven. God's work is mysterious, I don't support polygamy, I just believe there are certain things we should not consider too much, because we could get confused and lose our faith. God still used them as examples.
These were men in the old testament, dont forget we have the new testament, in the new testament jesus came and died for us and preached against polygamy, there was no polygamy recorded in the new testament.
It is good you mentioned that 'you believe'. Bible is clear on somethings despite our feelings or beliefs 🙂🙂. Also what reference do you have to their 'making heaven'?
Hey!
It was never in God's will for men to be polygamous. However, because men have their permissive will they decided to be polygamous. All these men you believe were polygamous and walked with God in the bible never had a stable home. Study the bible throughout, from Solomon whose wives and concubines turned him away from God (Note: The kingdom was divided in Solomon's regime because of this and two tribes was just giving to his son) to David whose Children were against each other to Abraham. The issue is that people never share the consequences with you they only share the sweet little part to support their own hardened heart. God never supported Polygamy, God does not see a woman as something to acquire but a person.
Notwithstanding, now we have the HolySpirit and the HolySpirit will teach us all things. I will advise that we work with the HolySpirit in everything we want to do, so we don't get confuse.
@@olatomiwa224 thank you. As much as God loved David, he still tore his family apart when he was disobedient. How about Jacob? His son was sold into slavery and he never saw his son become successful. So yeah, you’re allowed to disobey because let’s face it, we can. There are consequences.
Thank you pastor sir ❤