The reason being is that the very Christians who are trying to hold the flock together, and give you and I instruction on how to live could be they very people who kill their spouses, rob their flocks, make up lies about Islam, inspire hate filled documentaries about other faiths and cultures, molest children, vote for wars against sovereign nations and so forth.
A local pastor, businessman and community leader shot his wife dead and turned the gun on himself, police said.
The Rev. Willie Guiden, 60, pastor of the Unity in Prayer Ministry and owner of Guiden's Fish Market and Restaurant on Line Avenue, was found dead in his living room with a gunshot wound to his head. Jane Guiden, 60, was found shot dead in the hallway, police said.
The Shreveport Police Department was called to the home in the 800 block of Elmdale Street in west Shreveport about 10:30 a.m. when a relative called saying the Guidens were missing from their usual routine and wouldn't answer their door or phone, police department pokesman Sgt. Bill Goodin said.
Police found nothing out of place and no sign of forced entry, so officers forced open a rear sliding glass door, Goodin said. They found the bodies and a handgun inside, he said. Caddo Parish Coroner Todd Thoma was initially careful describing the scene but said it had "all the appearances of a murder-suicide."
Shreveport police detectives later said their preliminary investigation led them to the same belief. Neighbors were shocked such a crime could have taken place in a neighborhood where many said nothing ever happens.
"I was totally surprised," neighbor John Wroten said. "I would never have thought he could do that from talking to the guy, even only saying what we did to each other."
Matt Van Winterswyk, who lived next to the Guidens for almost 30 years, said everything seemed normal with the couple. He said if there were family troubles, neither of them showed it.
"If someone had just broken in, that'd be shocking enough," Van Winterswyk said. "But a murder-suicide, I wouldn't have ever thought that unless it was an accident, and he couldn't handle it afterwards."
Van Winterswyk said he knew the Guidens kept a gun in their home. He called them good neighbors.
Willie Guiden was an active member of the Shreveport community for years.
In 1994, he ran for the District D spot on the Shreveport City Council but lost. For 17 years Guiden was a pastor at Oakhill Baptist Church, a Greenwood house of worship that burned down in May 1999. By September of that year, ground was broken on a replacement structure, and Guiden was still preaching.
After Hurricane Katrina flooded New Orleans in 2005, Guiden opened Unity in Prayer Ministries to refugees who planned to make the Shreveport-Bossier City area their new homes.
"I think I should show kindness to other folks when others have shown kindness for me," Guiden said at the time.
In 2007, he turned a former nursing home facility into an outreach ministry and day care aimed at the youth in needy Shreveport neighborhoods.
Detectives have said nothing about the motivation for the crime, and neighbors had little insight into any incidents that would have brought Guiden to murder and suicide.
Grandverbalizer19 wrote:
ReplyDeleteWhere do people get the inspiration to kill their wives and than themselves from? The Bible of course!
Where is that in the Bible? It is not. That statement of yours is unfair since no where in the Bible is that commanded or encouraged.
There is probably a lot more to this story - It says he was a baptist pastor, but then Katrina hit and sometime after that he founded "The Unity in Prayer" group - something seems not right about that in itself.
Being a "Baptist" does not necessarily make one a true Christian. There are some "Baptist" churches that allow homosexual "partners", etc - and they were expelled from the Southern Baptist Convention, even though they may have "Baptist" on their sign on the door or on their order of worship printed programs.
One can claim to be a Christian, and not really be one.
Isa Al Masih said,
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them and they follow Me . . .
I and the Father are One. "
John 10:27-30
There is more to that story that we don't know about. It is definitely a very sad and grievous tragedy.
Ken, do not pretend that you are ignorant of what the Bible says about men who are unhappy with their wives...
ReplyDeleteThe misogyny and villainy is laid bare for all to see in Deuteronomy 22.
Who do these people who are elders turn to in their time of hurt of need of looking for answers?
Obviously something very dark was afoot. Your very sad cop out is typical for you Ken! It's disgusting!
To use the words in brackets "Baptist" "Christian" ....and yet on every occasion you take opportunity to way lay into Muslims about anything and everything that is done in the name of Islam.
Yet you dare never say "Muslim" Oh no.
I guess using your standards Ken Luther was "Christian" and Calvin was "Christian" too!
It is very telling that yet another Christian was not comforted by the Holy Spirit in their time of need.
As far as the Creator SUPPOSEDLY given commands for us to kill our wives if suspect them of foul play all one has to do is to turn to Deuteronomy 22 and see what it has to say.
Keep in mind that this man is a Protestant Ken. He doesn't have to go and ask Piper, and R.C Sproul, or a Priest, or the Pope what the interpretation of the scripture is. He doesn't need to seek clarification.
Protestant Christianity is a Pandora's box in that you can ultimately be your own sole authority, especially with the Holy Spirit guiding you along the way. You become the authority.
One can easily see how he can get his inspiration from passages like this one.
13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[b] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.
ReplyDelete22 If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, 27 for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[c] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
30 A man is not to marry his father’s wife; he must not dishonor his father’s bed.
Let us not forget the following little gem from scripture either Ken,
Numbers chapter 5!
ReplyDelete11 Then the LORD said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[c] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.
16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the LORD. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the LORD, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you.
But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the LORD cause you to become a curse[d] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
ReplyDelete“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”
23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the LORD and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
29 “‘This, then, is the law of jealousy when a woman goes astray and makes herself impure while married to her husband, 30 or when feelings of jealousy come over a man because he suspects his wife. The priest is to have her stand before the LORD and is to apply this entire law to her. 31 The husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing, but the woman will bear the consequences of her sin.’”
WOW!
I MEAN WOW!
Hello
ReplyDeletethose were OT laws for Israel for that time. No more. Biblical Israel with laws like that ceased to exist in 70 AD - Jesus spoke about this and clearly took the Kingdom of God away from Israel - see Matthew 21:43-46 (larger context verse 33 -46. No Theonomy.
They are actually closer to laws that Muslim countries actually carry out today. I saw a Turkish film where they had that same custom of waiting for the evidence of virginity cloth outside the door of the wedding night - in Ottoman Turkey context - just under 100 years ago. I said, what is that? my senior colleague said, "haven't you read Deut. 22 - it is in the Mosaic law. Islamic law, Sharia, has many similarities with Mosaic law. Politics and religion are ONE UNITY in OT Judaism and Islam; but not in NT Christianity or the west.
so sorry, you lost the argument on this one.
You did not show any evidence of showing where the bible told that guy to kill his wife, since he and his wife did not seem to be newly weds (no evidence that I saw of that) - as the Deut. 22 is talking about fornication (sex before marriage ) and adultery.
Jesus had a different response to the woman caught in adultery - John 8:1-11 - that is what Christians mostly go by in today's world - mercy and grace on that issue. Especially since the Pharisee hypocrites did not bring the man to trial.
It is actually Muslim countries that have those laws today.
the guy in the article sounds like he was depressed and had other issues going on in his life - we don't know - maybe he was mentally unstable.
There is not enough info on the other factors that might have caused him to "loose it".
Also, you gave NO New Testament passage, because there is none.
The punishments in the OT are no longer - western civilization and history is the outworking of applying the legal punishments to today's world. Only capital murder is death penalty and that is by the state. Israel was the state in those OT passages.
What the "Baptist pastor" did was disgusting and evil and he took the law into his own hands. The Bible never sanctions that - neither in OT nor NT.
You wrote:
". . . and yet on every occasion you take opportunity to way lay into Muslims about anything and everything that is done in the name of Islam."
No, I actually have had to explain to American church audiences that most Muslims are peaceful people and only believe in Jihad as self - defense if their country is invaded first; and that the Muslims can look you straight in the face and say "all the jihadist movements are false, because their is no official Khalifate since 1924; therefore, the Al Qaeda and Jihadist type stuff is illegal according to Islamic law."
At the same time,
In todays world, many Jihadist Muslims write their testimonies or go on the internet and make a film and quote the Qur'an and Hadith and explain why they do what they do. That is a big difference.
this "baptist" preacher was 60 years old, seemingly just depressed and mentally unstable - and gave no manifesto; yet the Jihadist Muslims always give their manifestos and quote from Qur'an and Hadith and Sirat. He did not leave a paper quoting Deut. 22 or Numbers 5. Numbers 5 cannot be valid for today because there are no Jewish priests anymore. No temple, no sacrifices, no priests, no more political Israel that is "the Kingdom of God on earth".
See the big difference?
Are you going to post my answer?
ReplyDeleteWith the name of Allah,
ReplyDeleteHave some patience Mr. Ken Temple. Your comments are posted above. However you are up to your same deceptive ways Ken.
I know you are embarrassed about what God is supposed to have given in the Old Testament so you simply wash your hands of it and walk away. O.k That is one approach.
For example you say,
"I saw a Turkish film where they had that same custom of waiting for the evidence of virginity cloth outside the door of the wedding night - in Ottoman Turkey context - just under 100 years ago. I said, what is that? my senior colleague said, "haven't you read Deut. 22 -"
So since you watched this film with a colleague could you please tell me what was the name of that film? Or you don't remember huh? Long time ago correct?
And finally what does that have to do with Islam? So your colleague made a statement that the Turks had a custom. Where is that in the Qur'an and where is that oral tradition ascribed to the Prophet (saw)?
So why did God give such a law to the people of Israel? What wisdom was there in this law?
"Politics and religion are ONE UNITY in OT Judaism and Islam; but not in NT Christianity or the west." So Ken are you willing to go on the record that Gary Demar, Rousas John Rushdoony, John Calvin, Gordon Clark, and Greg Bahsen are incorrect on this issue?
ReplyDeleteSo of course you have embraced the liberal view that Christianity is better served not engaging the State. (except for making occasional stands against abortion and same sex marriage).
I guess my question is that since the Holy Spirit guides into all truth why is that God has decided to guide them into the truth of the matter but leave you groping in the darkness?
Why is your friend Turetinfan and yourself on opposite ends of the theological spectrum yet you both claim to drink from the cup of Christ?
This is indeed puzzling.
"You did not show any evidence of showing where the bible told that guy to kill his wife, since he and his wife did not seem to be newly weds (no evidence that I saw of that) - as the Deut. 22 is talking about fornication (sex before marriage ) and adultery."
ReplyDeleteKen Ken Ken I did indeed show you. Notice now that you have taken a step back from your initial response above.
You said, "Where is that in the Bible? It is not. That statement of yours is unfair since no where in the Bible is that commanded or encouraged."
Than you turn around and said above.
"You did not show any evidence of showing where the bible told that guy to kill his wife, since he and his wife did not seem to be newly weds (no evidence that I saw of that) - as the Deut. 22 is talking about fornication (sex before marriage ) and ADULTERY."
Well Ken since you are not a major can of CSI I guess I won't hold it against you. Yet, if you see the word ADULTERY you can easily see where a person (especially a Protestant-Holy Spirit guides you into all truth etc). Can find impetus to kill his wife.
My educated guess is that the man did find that his wife cheated on him. He was drowned in grief and he felt that she deserved death as John Calvin would have demanded.
However, once he was driven to kill his wife he also knew that there was no turning back. He turned the gun of himself.
However, I guess we will have to wait for more details won't we?
"and that the Muslims can look you straight in the face and say "all the jihadist movements are false, because their is no official Khalifate since 1924; therefore, the Al Qaeda and Jihadist type stuff is illegal according to Islamic law."
ReplyDeleteSo Muslims can look you 'starlight in the face' and lie. Nice!
However, the sad thing is Ken is that you are with the Jihadist and the Terrorist. You believe them that they are credible and what they say about the Qur'an and the Sunnah is credible.
That is where we stand apart. However, do know this as much as you try and divert the topic away from things that you find embarrassing any comments that are not directly related to the story above will not go through.
it's not about censorship it's about you respecting the subject of the post.
If the man killed his wife because of adultery, then that fact may come out in the trial. However, he still had no right to that - that was unjust and cruel and wrong. You don't know why he did that yet. And even it was for OT and Israel, that is, capital punishment for adultery, the state was to do that; not individual taking the law into his own hands.
ReplyDeleteYou can give no NT verse. You lost that argument. Even with OT verses, it was only for Israel of that time and only the state government could do that after a trial.
since NT does not give permission that, and it fulfilled the OT (Hebrews chapters 8-10), then the Bible did not inspire him to kill his wife and himself. He did that himself from his own anger and despair and hopelessness. (or mental illness)
On the Turkish film:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0839017/
It was one of these films, starring the famous Turkish actor, Kemal Sunal.
So, you are proved wrong again.
Here in my response, I was very fair and yet you still twisted it and ignored what good I wrote. Amazing!
ReplyDeleteYou (GV19) wrote:
". . . and yet on every occasion you take opportunity to way lay into Muslims about anything and everything that is done in the name of Islam."
Ken wrote:
No, I actually have had to explain to American church audiences that most Muslims are peaceful people and only believe in Jihad as self - defense if their country is invaded first; and that the Muslims can look you straight in the face and say "all the jihadist movements are false, because their is no official Khalifate since 1924; therefore, the Al Qaeda and Jihadist type stuff is illegal according to Islamic law."
Is not all of that true?
With the name of Allah.
ReplyDeleteI have not seen you explain anything of the kind to church audiences and based upon your affiliations with people who say it's o.k to lie and be deceitful (and that God sends lying spirits to make people believe a lie)-James White.
I was a bit cautious. I have not seen you respond to that particular post. I have not seen you take Robert Morey, James White and other Christians to task who say that God deceives us.
If indeed you are being truthful and you are telling this to your Christian congregation good on you! Very good on you! However, some times I believe there is a still a tendency for you to agree with the extremist and suggest that their interpretation of Islam stands correct.
"You can give no NT verse. You lost that argument. Even with OT verses, it was only for Israel of that time and only the state government could do that after a trial."
ReplyDeleteKen you have some good points. But what you fail to recognize is that not all Protestants agree with you. I have given you a list of Protestants who differ with you.
You never addressed this part "Gary Demar, Rousas John Rushdoony, John Calvin, Gordon Clark, and Greg Bahsen are incorrect on this issue?"
That's note worthy.
The interesting thing is you also ignored the Pandora's box that is Protestant Christianity.
it's a pick and choose ordeal. You, Samuel Green and Turretinfan are all correct on the Trinity, yet you differ on the issue of baptism.
You, Gary Demar and Calvin will agree with the Trinity yet differ on the issue of God's laws still being applicable and executing Christians for apostasy.
What you fail to appreciate is that Protestant Christianity is truly a mixed bag. In fact the scriptures do not guide you into eternal truth accordingly the Holy Spirit does.
Now rather or not the Holy Spirit guided this man to do what he did I agree is debatable. Rather or not this man as a Protestant had his own way of interpreting the scripture I agree is also debatable.
Ken Ken Ken...you posted,
ReplyDelete"On the Turkish film:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0839017/
It was one of these films, starring the famous Turkish actor, Kemal Sunal.
So, you are proved wrong again."
Gosh you are so wrapped up in scoring points, and winning arguments that your own silliness flies right over you.
Go up and read again.
It is plain as day to all who read this that you did not even begin to address the issue.
I said, and look up...
"And finally what does that have to do with Islam? So your colleague made a statement that the Turks had a custom. Where is that in the Qur'an and where is that oral tradition ascribed to the Prophet (saw)?
So why did God give such a law to the people of Israel? What wisdom was there in this law?"
So you found nothing in the Qur'an or the Sunnah. You simply mentioned Turkish custom because you were grasping at straws to try and find something in Islam that matches this disgusting edict attributed to the Almighty.
Also you didn't address why the Almighty Creator allegedly gave such a law and the wisdom placed behind it.
Epic fail
Since it was clearly a custom in Turkey among the Turks, who are Muslims; and it is also in Deuteronomy 22; I assume that it is somewhere in the vast Sirat or Tafsir or Hadith or Tarikh Islamic literature. since a lot of the Qur'an got laws from Judaism - OT laws - it seems reasonable to assume that they are there somewhere, but I admit I don't know. That is something I would like to find out.
ReplyDeleteWith the name of Allah.
ReplyDeleteYou know my teacher told me about the word ASSUME she said never ASSUME because it makes an ASSume out of assUme and assuME. I can tell you now that there is no such law. What is in Sirat or Tafsir is irrelevant since none of the schools of law in either Sunni or Shi'a jurisprudence derive legal code from those sources.
Good God man at least get some descent sources and I would recommend them to you and White, and Hayes, and Turretinfan and all those who are interested if you truly want to argue with us using our best sources.
So I guess I would say is please do find out before you ASSUME. The same way with educated guesses about statistics and so forth. That's all Ken.
they don't use the Sirat or Tafsir for Fiq and Sharia ?
ReplyDeleteI thought they also used those sources also, along with Qur'an and Ahadith and Tarikh and Qias and Ijtima - right?
With the name of Allah.
ReplyDeleteNo Ken none of the schools of jurisprudence use Sirat or Tafsir for Fiqh and Shariah.
They use primary sources (the Qur'an) and the Sunnah. However, you are correct that some of them use Qias (analogy) while others do not.
You do not use Sirat (Prophet's biography to derive hukum or legal rulings). You also do not use Tarikh( that is history) What would you use history for? Just because something happened in history does not mean that it has a legal basis in the Qur'an or the Sunnah.
Ijima is consensus and that is what the legal schools hope to arrive to by deduction from the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
Let me give you a quick break down of the four madhab and their approach.
ReplyDeleteAll Muslims believe we should follow the Qur'an and the Sunnah. However the schools of jurisprudence differ in terms of their usul (approach) to the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
Madhab simpy means way. The way of all the Sunni Muslims is the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
For example for the Hanafi school of jurisprudence a woman can get married without a mahrim (male legal custodian) as long as that woman is of sound mind. In the other three legal schools she needs permission from her mahrim (male legal custodian).
They will all look to the same set of evidence but derive different conclusions. I guess in a way that Lutherans, Calvinist, Pedobaptist etc may look to the same text and derive different understandings from it.
You have the Maliki school of fiqh and for the Maliki school (the one that I follow).
We take the Qur'an and than 2nd the Sunnah of the people of Madinah. Why? Because for us the mass oral transmission of the people of Madinah is more weighty the lone narrator reports that are dispersed throughout the Muslim regions.
So for example you could have many Hadith in Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Al Baihaqi, and others which are Sahih (meaning they meet certain criteria in the chain of transmission and are all trust worthy narrators) However, Imam Malik (May Allah be pleased with him) would not act upon it if it CLASHED with the practice of the people of Madinah.
Because for Imam Malik (raheemullah) the mass transmitted practice of the people from the Prophet had more weight than a lone narrator report passed from one individual to the next.
As Imam Malik's teacher said, "I would rather take 1000 from 1000 than one from one because that one from one can strip the Sunnah from your hands"
If you have a Church address or organization I will try and send you some goods books on the understanding of Islamic jurisprudence. Though I am not a rich individual.
This really only just a small very small introduction but I think allot of what you are mentioning is terminology and it's important to understand that terminology and context.
My sincere apologies if I have ever been heavy handed with you in your understanding of those terminologies. Just like there is much about Christian terminology and theology that I myself do not understand.
It's a learning process.
once people realize that everyone that claims to be saved isn't Holy Ghost filled and being baptized doesn't save a person maybe then they will stop trying to attack the Bible every time a "Christian" acts ungodly.
ReplyDeleteWith the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous maybe one day people will wake up and realize that not every "Christian" who interprets the Bible represents the whole of Christianity in the same way that not every "Muslim" who interprets the Qur'an represents the whole of Islam. Maybe than we could get some where.