TAVEAU CREATIVE LEADERSHIP

MINISTRY AI AND I

 PART 1 of 4

Christian Ministries Views of Christian Women

The Double Standard History (Part 1) In America, LP Colonizer Roots

“It was the Best of Times and the very WORST”

 “Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did unto all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.” 1 Samuel 2:22 High Mega LP Office

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”Paul Galatians 3:27-28 

(C)2025 Taveau D’Arcy all copyrights reserved under international copyright laws,in conjunction with AI

Servant Apostle Taveau Examine USA Christian Church history

of the ‘Christian men, Christian women and the double standing , biased thinking forms

2 Forms of Christian  Churches: Christian Governing  Men and Christian Women

Servant leader Bible “Organic Church” Role Model Church and

the Evolved Authoritarian, Hierarchal “Top Down” Church

Taveau asks Chat GPT

Please give a definition of First Church Christ  “pure bible organic church” and the fruit of that in Christian leadership, authority also the relationships of Christian men and the women women (and is it prone to double standard or not) then mini definition and authority, men and women in the evolving (more the common form today) of what is called a “top down church” (more authoritarian, hierarchal, like now0

Please examine First church Bible organic ministry and this..versus the evolving Authoritarian from surrounding carnal, Rome and Greek societies

Chat GPT responds

1. Style: Pure Bible Organic Ministry

Definition:
“Pure Bible organic ministry” refers to a form of Christian ministry that is deeply rooted in biblical principles and led by the Holy Spirit, without human manipulation or rigid institutional structures. It seeks to follow the organic flow of the early church, where leadership was based on genuine relationships, servant leadership, and spiritual maturity, rather than hierarchy, control, or tradition.

Explanation

This type of ministry is flexible, relational, and community-based. Leaders in pure Bible organic ministry prioritize the word of God and the leading of the Holy Spirit, allowing the ministry to be shaped by biblical truths rather than man-made systems. There is an emphasis on accountability, mutual edification, and humility. Leadership is exercised through servanthood, where leaders model Christ-like behavior by nurturing others in their spiritual growth, not exerting control over them.

Fruit of Christian Leadership and Relationships (with respect to men and women):

In a pure Bible organic ministry, Christian leadership involves servant-heartedness and self-sacrifice, echoing the example set by Jesus Christ. It values genuine relationships between Christian men and women, based on mutual respect, honor, and partnership in the gospel. There is no room for exploitation, gender inequality, or controlling behavior. Christian men and women work together in unity, both in leadership and in everyday ministry, recognizing one another’s unique gifts and callings.

This approach is not prone to double standards, as it honors all people equally, reflecting the teachings of Jesus, where leadership is based on love, respect, and humility, not domination or gender biases. There is no hierarchy that diminishes the value of women or marginalizes them.

 2. Style:Top-Down Church Leadership:

Definition:
A top-down church refers to a ministry model where leadership is authoritarian and typically centralized. In this structure, the senior leader or pastor holds the highest level of authority, and decisions are made at the top before being disseminated down to the rest of the congregation. The leadership structure often reflects a hierarchical system, with less emphasis on shared authority or collaborative leadership.

Explanation:
In a top-down church, authority is typically concentrated in the hands of one or a few individuals, often making decisions that affect the whole congregation without much input from other members. This model tends to emphasize obedience to leadership and submission to a hierarchical structure. Leadership in this type of church is often more directive and control-oriented, with a strong emphasis on order and discipline.

Comparison to Organic Ministry:

Unlike the organic ministry, where leadership is based on servanthood and mutual respect, the top-down church model may create an environment where authority is misused, potentially leading to control or manipulation. This can lead to double standards, where leaders may expect obedience without modeling the humility and service that Jesus demonstrated. In contrast, organic ministries value the equity and participation of all believers, regardless of position or gender, and prioritize shared leadership and personal relationships.

Church Growth Produced “Authoritarian and Christian Woman Accusation

The bias and oppression of women in the church, as well as the double standards in leadership, can be traced back to several historical and theological shifts over the centuries. It is essential to understand that these tendencies are not inherent to the gospel message or the pure example of Jesus Christ. Rather, they arose as a result of human nature and various cultural influences that infiltrated the church over time.

Early Church:

In the first few centuries of the church, women played active roles in the ministry. Many women served as deaconesses, patrons of the faith, and were even involved in the early church leadership. This was consistent with the example set by Jesus, who honored women, such as Mary Magdalene, the Samaritan woman at the well, the women who supported his ministry, and others.

In the apostolic era, the Apostle Paul recognized women in ministry, including Phoebe (a deaconess), Priscilla (a teacher), and Junia (called “outstanding among the apostles”). Paul’s letters reflected the equality of men and women in Christ (Galatians 3:28), and there is no evidence in the early church of systematic oppression of women.

3. STYLE: The Shift in Church History (4th Century and beyond):

The shift toward the marginalization of women and the development of double standards began after the Constantinian shift in the early 4th century. With the rise of Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, the church began to integrate into the structures of imperial Rome, which included patriarchal cultural values. As church leaders aligned themselves with political and social powers, they began adopting secular and cultural norms, many of which were biased against women.

1. The Influence of Greco-Roman Culture:

The Greco-Roman worldview, which deeply influenced the early church, viewed women as inferior to men. While early Christian thought was radical in its inclusivity, these secular ideas about gender roles crept into church doctrine and practice over time. Roman law and societal structures were patriarchal, and the church began to mirror these structures. Women’s roles were relegated primarily to the private sphere (as mothers and wives), and their presence in leadership positions in the church began to diminish.

2. The Rise of Clericalism and Hierarchical Structures:

As the church hierarchy developed, especially in the medieval period, there was an increasing concentration of power in the hands of the clergy, most often men. Church leadership took on a top-down approach, where priests, bishops, and popes held centralized power, often isolating women from positions of authority. Women were excluded from priesthood, and church offices became reserved for men, reinforcing patriarchal structures both in the church and society.

3. The Role of Augustine and the Church Fathers:

***NOTE THIS***

Augustine (354–430 AD), one of the most influential theologians in the early church, contributed to the shift toward gender inequality by adopting certain aspects of Platonic philosophy, which viewed women as subordinate to men. His views on original sin also painted women in a negative light, as he suggested that Eve’s sin was a sign of inherent female weakness. This thinking was adopted by many other church fathers, who argued that women were spiritually inferior to men and should thus not have authority over men, even in the church.

Medieval Church and the Inquisition:

The medieval period saw increasing oppression of women, particularly in the form of the Inquisition. The Church endorsed witch hunts, particularly in Europe, where thousands of women were accused of being witches. These women were often blamed for natural disasters, illnesses, or societal misfortunes and were executed in brutal ways. This was rationalized by the church as a way to preserve moral order, but it was based on misogyny, fear, and ignorance.

In Germany, the book Malleus Maleficarum (The Hammer of Witches) was written by Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger in 1486. It justified the persecution of women accused of witchcraft, suggesting that women were more susceptible to the devil due to their perceived spiritual weakness. This view continued to influence church practices and attitudes toward women for centuries.

The Reformation and Puritan Influence (16th-17th Century):

During the Reformation, some Protestant reformers, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, reaffirmed patriarchal gender roles. Luther, for example, believed that women’s roles were limited to the home and childbearing. Even the more egalitarian reforms were largely restricted to the private life, and church leadership remained almost entirely in male hands.

In Puritanical America (17th century), the Salem Witch Trials were a manifestation of this bias. Women who were seen as outsiders or who defied social norms were often accused of witchcraft. This period epitomizes the misogyny that was embedded in the theology of many branches of early Protestantism and their tendency to demonize women who exhibited independence or went against patriarchal norms.

Modern Times:

In the modern church, these historical biases still influence the treatment of women in many Christian contexts. The rise of complementarianism (the belief that men and women have distinct, complementary roles in the church and home) has often led to the exclusion of women from leadership roles, especially in conservative denominations. While many churches now ordain women as pastors, double standards remain in many church cultures, with male leadership being treated with more respect and authority than female leadership.

Human Nature vs. Theological Development:

While human nature is prone to selfishness, pride, and bias, the evolution of gender roles in the church is deeply influenced by the theological shifts and the cultural context of the times. Patriarchy, which began as a cultural and social framework in ancient civilizations, became woven into church tradition. This history has perpetuated the double standards and gender biases seen in much of modern Christianity.

Conclusion Of This Section:

The bias against women and the double standards in church leadership have evolved over time through the influence of cultural norms, theological misinterpretations, and human nature. These were not present in the pure Bible teachings or in the early church, where Jesus and Paul promoted the equal treatment of men and women in ministry. The history of the church, influenced by patriarchy and institutional power, gradually led to the marginalization of women in leadership roles. However, a return to the organic, servant-leader model of ministry—modeled by Jesus Christ—offers a path toward a more equal and respectful treatment of men and women in ministry, rooted in biblical principles of love, service, and equality.

Pastor Taveau asks ChatGPT
Please give modern reasons for Christian 5 fold office, elders, leader, and lay “men and women” Double Standard

ChatGPT replies

There are several modern reasons to address the gender double standards and the misogynistic practices that continue to plague certain sectors of Christianity today. Despite the progress in societal attitudes toward gender equality, churches and ministries still struggle with gender roles, particularly regarding the treatment and leadership of women. Addressing this issue is essential for several key reasons:

1. Biblical Integrity and the Call to Equality:

As we look at the scriptures, it’s clear that God’s heart was always for the equality of all believers, irrespective of gender. Verses like Galatians 3:28 (“There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”) remind us that Christ’s sacrifice and the Great Commission are for everyone, not just certain groups.

By upholding double standards—where women are treated as second-class citizens or leaders are allowed to abuse their power—the modern church is not living up to the example set by Christ. Addressing these issues aligns with biblical principles and acknowledges that God’s kingdom operates on a foundation of justice, holiness, and integrity.

2. Leadership Accountability:

In today’s world, there are growing concerns about leadership abuse in the church. This includes not only sexual misconduct but also emotional manipulation, control, and marginalization of women in ministry. Ministers, elders, and pastors need to be held accountable to biblical standards of holiness and integrity in how they treat both men and women. There should be no room for hypocrisy, especially when gendered double standards are often in place.

Many modern church scandals, especially those revolving around sexual abuse, financial corruption, and spiritual abuse, have been exposed in recent years. In many of these cases, the focus on male leadership and subjugation of women has contributed to a toxic culture where certain leaders feel empowered to abuse their position without consequences. By addressing the misogynistic double standards and advocating for gender equity, the church can restore trust and promote healthy, accountable leadership.

3. Reaching the Next Generation:

Young people, particularly those in younger generations, are increasingly looking for a church that reflects the values of justice, love, and equality. Many of them are turned off by the gender biases they see in church leadership and teachings. The youth and young adults of today are more vocal and demanding when it comes to authenticity and gender equality. If the church continues to hold to outdated views of gender roles that limit women’s involvement in leadership, it risks losing the next generation.

In addition, these younger generations are increasingly influenced by social justice movements and diversity issues. A church that reflects these values will resonate more deeply with them, while a church that maintains archaic, patriarchal practices will be seen as out of touch with the cultural moment. By addressing gender inequality, churches can position themselves as places of healing, growth, and hope for both men and women, young and old alike.

4. Healing from Historical Trauma:

For many women, the church has been a place of hurt and abuse. Whether it’s the Salem Witch Trials, the Inquisition, or modern-day sexual abuse scandals, the church has historically been a source of oppression for women. Many women have been marginalized, silenced, or punished for their voices and roles in ministry.

Addressing these gendered double standards is an essential step in healing from this historical trauma. The church must be a place of restoration, empowerment, and equality, where women are not only protected but are also celebrated as co-laborers in the work of the Gospel. Acknowledging this history and working to rectify it is an important part of moving toward wholeness for all believers.

5. Cultural Relevance and Social Justice:

There is a broader cultural conversation around gender equality, sexual harassment, and justice that is being driven by secular society. If the church does not engage with these topics in a biblical and thoughtful way, it risks being seen as irrelevant and outdated. In a world where gender equality is increasingly being discussed, the church has an opportunity to model what biblical equality looks like in its leadership and ministry practices.

Churches that address these issues will not only be more relevant to their communities but will also be able to impact the wider world by showing that the church cares deeply about justice, holiness, and God’s heart for all people—both men and women.

6. The Call for Holiness and Authentic Ministry:

There is a biblical call to holiness for all believers, but especially for those in leadership. The holy priesthood of the New Testament (1 Peter 2:9) calls all Christians to live as examples of holiness, purity, and integrity. This is especially important for leaders, who are held to a higher standard (James 3:1).

In the context of gender equality, holiness means that leaders must also practice respect, love, and self-control in their relationships, especially with women. This includes respecting women’s dignity, calling them to their full potential in Christ, and guarding against abuse in all forms. Holiness should be reflected in how leaders treat both men and women in their care.

Conclusion:

There is a critical need today for churches to address the gendered double standards and misogynistic attitudes that persist in many Christian communities. By aligning church practices with biblical principles of equality, justice, and respect, the church can become a place of healing, empowerment, and authentic ministry for both women and men.

In this context, addressing these issues not only aligns with the biblical call to holiness but also makes the church more relevant and attractive to the next generation of believers, who are increasingly seeking a church that practices what it preaches in terms of equality and justice for all. By examining the historical patterns of abuse and misogyny, churches can repent, restore, and transform into ministries that reflect the love, justice, and equality of Christ’s kingdom.

USA Christian Patriarchal LP History

The Witch Inquisition and the Hammer of the Witches (Malleus Maleficarum):

The Malleus Maleficarum, or “Hammer of Witches,” is one of the most infamous books in the history of witch hunts. Written in 1486 by two German monks, Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger, this book became a central text used to prosecute witches during the European witch craze. It was essentially a manual for identifying, prosecuting, and executing accused witches. The authors argued that witchcraft was a dangerous heresy, and they promoted the idea that women were more susceptible to witchcraft due to their supposed weaker nature and moral inferiority.

Key Points from the Malleus Maleficarum:

1. Women as the Focus: The book attributed witchcraft mainly to women, asserting that women were more prone to evil due to their susceptibility to temptation, inferior nature, and weaknesses in resisting demonic forces. This deeply misogynistic view laid the foundation for the idea that all women could potentially be witches, particularly those who were considered unruly, independent, or non-conformist.

2. Witchcraft as a Tool of Satan: The authors argued that witches were in league with Satan, and they described severe punishments for women accused of practicing witchcraft, including torture, imprisonment, and execution.

3. Inquisitorial Power: The book empowered the church authorities, especially inquisitors, to use torture and interrogation techniques to extract confessions from the accused, often without evidence or a fair trial.

Sr Pastor Taveau asks
Was this book Hammer of the Witch influentional to the Church of England, the American Puritan First Colony Settlers?

ChatGPT AI states:

Yes, The Malleus Maleficarum (Hammer of the Witches) had a significant influence on the Church of England and Puritanical thought, especially during the period of the witch hunts in the late 15th and 16th centuries. Though the text itself was primarily written by Heinrich Kramer and Jacob Sprenger in 1486 and focused on Catholic doctrine, its ideas permeated across Europe, influencing both Catholic and Protestant regions, including England and the American colonies.

Impact on the Church of England:

In the 16th century, during the Reformation, the Church of England (under King Henry VIII and later Elizabeth I) was deeply influenced by Catholic theology, even as it distanced itself from the papacy. This meant that some of the theological foundations of witchcraft persecution, which were rooted in earlier Catholic thought, still resonated in Anglican circles.

The Malleus Maleficarum was widely circulated in Europe and was used as a manual by both Catholic and Protestant authorities in the identification, prosecution, and punishment of accused witches. Although the Church of England did not officially endorse the Malleus Maleficarum, the ideas it propagated were consistent with the biblical interpretation common at the time: the belief that witchcraft was a dangerous, demonic practice, and women were particularly susceptible to demonic influence.

Puritans and the Influence of the Malleus Maleficarum:

The influence of the Malleus Maleficarum was direct in the Puritan communities—both in England and later in America. The Puritans were a group of strict Protestants who broke away from the Church of England and sought to establish more pure forms of worship and living, often in direct opposition to the perceived corruptions in both Catholic and Anglican traditions. Their interpretation of the Bible often focused on the moral purity of society, and they were highly suspicious of any practices that could be seen as non-conformist or devilish.

The Puritans had a strong belief in the reality of witchcraft and the dangers of the Devil. The ideas presented in the Malleus Maleficarum, including the demonization of women and the idea that women were more likely to be involved in witchcraft due to their weakness and susceptibility to sin, influenced Puritan witch hunts. In fact, the Salem Witch Trials in 1692, one of the most notorious episodes of witch persecution in the United States, was in part influenced by ideas contained in the Malleus Maleficarum and the Puritan fear of witchcraft. The Salem trials were deeply influenced by biblical interpretations that women, particularly those who were socially marginalized, were more likely to be witches or involved in demonic practices.

Puritanical Views on Women and Witchcraft:

The Puritans held a patriarchal worldview, where women were seen as inferior to men. This aligned with the misogynistic ideas presented in Malleus Maleficarum, where women were depicted as more vulnerable to demonic influence because of their frailty. This doctrine, combined with the Puritanical mindset, led to the stigmatization of women who were seen as rebellious, unruly, or outspoken.

In this context, women who did not fit neatly into the role of the obedient wife or mother were often targeted during witch hunts. This was especially true if they were independent, widowed, or socially marginalized, as these were traits associated with women who were considered threats to societal norms or who could be seen as engaging in witchcraft.

The Salem Witch Trials and Its Links to Malleus Maleficarum:

(The USA Modern Acquiring Cultish, Patriarchal, Germanic controlling Brethren)

Though the Malleus Maleficarum was not directly referenced in the Salem Witch Trials, the ideas contained in it were deeply ingrained in the Puritanical culture that dominated New England during that period. The Salem trials occurred in an environment where the Puritan church had a stronghold over the community, and the fear of the Devil and the moral purity of society were central concerns.

The trials were marked by the accusations of witchcraft directed primarily at women, many of whom were seen as socially outcast or non-conforming. Witnesses testified that these women were practicing witchcraft and had been in league with the Devil. The cultural fear of witchcraft, rooted in both biblical and cultural misogyny, was fueled by the same beliefs found in Malleus Maleficarum. Even church leaders in Salem, like Reverend Samuel Parris, believed that the accusations of witchcraft were part of a divine mission to rid the community of evil. This created a situation where women, particularly those seen as socially independent or unorthodox, were accused, persecuted, and executed based on accusations with little evidence.

Conclusion:

While the Church of England did not directly endorse the Malleus Maleficarum, the ideas within it about the demonic influence of women, and the association of witchcraft with women’s weakness, had a significant impact on Puritan communities both in England and in the American colonies. This influence helped establish a theological and cultural climate in which women were disproportionately accused of witchcraft and subjected to violence, persecution, and social marginalization. These ideas, rooted in patriarchy and misogyny, were perpetuated in many Christian communities for centuries, leading to a legacy of double standards and gender inequality that continues to affect the treatment of women in many church cultures today.

The Witch Hunts in Germany and Their Spread:

The Malleus Maleficarum quickly spread across Europe, contributing to the witch hunts that raged through the 16th and 17th centuries. While the witch trials were not limited to Germany, the book significantly influenced other regions, including France, Italy, and eventually England. In Germany, the inquisitions reached a peak during the Early Modern Period, with thousands of women and men persecuted, tortured, and executed under accusations of witchcraft.

The Salem Witch Trials and the Influence of the Malleus Maleficarum in the USA:

The witch trials in the United States, particularly the Salem Witch Trials of 1692, were undoubtedly influenced by the European witch trials and the ideas promoted in the Malleus Maleficarum. By the time the Puritans settled in New England, the witch craze was already in full swing across Europe. The Puritans were deeply influenced by their religious convictions, which were rooted in Reformation thought and beliefs about the supernatural, which included the fear of witches.

Salem and the Influence of European Witch Trials:

1. Religious Hysteria: The Puritan society in Salem was extremely devout, and there was widespread fear of the devil and witchcraft. Puritans believed in the literal reality of the devil, and any unusual behavior or unexplained events (especially those involving women) were often attributed to witchcraft.

2. Social and Gender Dynamics: Much like in Europe, women, especially those who were socially marginalized, were disproportionately targeted during the Salem witch trials. The book Malleus Maleficarum had perpetuated the notion that women were inherently more vulnerable to witchcraft due to their physical and emotional weaknesses. In Salem, this was reflected in the prosecution of women, often widows, social outcasts, or those who defied authority. Many of the women accused were seen as rebellious or acting outside the norms of the community, which was often enough to brand them as witches.

3. Influence of Europe on Puritan Ideology: The Puritans brought with them the same medieval fears of witchcraft that had plagued Europe, and the church’s role in maintaining moral and social order. The Puritan authorities, like their European counterparts, used scripture to justify their actions, often misinterpreting biblical texts to support their claims about witches.

The Double Standard in Salem:

Just like the Malleus Maleficarum suggested, the witch hunts in Salem disproportionately targeted women. The double standard at play was that women, especially those who were seen as influential, non-conforming, or challenging societal norms, were often labeled as witches. This was despite the fact that the men in positions of power, such as the ministers, magistrates, and elders, rarely faced the same scrutiny or accusation for their own moral failings or potential transgressions.

The Tribal Anti-Woman Sentiment and the “Jezebel” and Witch Labels in Church:

As the witch hunts and trials spread across Europe and later into colonial America, the concept of “witchcraft” became intertwined with the demonization of women. This idea continued to influence Christian doctrine throughout history, particularly in relation to women who were seen as rebellious, too independent, or unconventional. Even as the witch trials faded, the witch and Jezebel labels were used to disempower women, especially in patriarchal church systems.

The Jezebel Label:

• The term “Jezebel” is derived from the biblical story of Queen Jezebel in 1 Kings 16-21, who was seen as a manipulative, idolatrous figure, and enemy of the prophet Elijah. Over time, the Jezebel spirit came to be used in the church to refer to any woman who was perceived as usurping male authority, manipulative, or rebellious.

• In modern contexts, women in leadership or those questioning authority have been labeled as having the Jezebel spirit, often regardless of their actions or behavior, simply because they are seen as challenging the patriarchal norm.

The Witchcraft Label:

• The “witch” label has been similarly used against women in both historical and modern contexts to silence and oppress them. Women who are strong, independent, or have their own voice are often portrayed as witches or demonic in some church environments, especially those that embrace extreme patriarchal values. This is sometimes seen in the way certain women who speak out against abusive church practices, or defy authoritarian control, are labeled with derogatory terms like “Jezebel”, “witch”, or “rebellious”.

Where Does This Tribal Anti-Woman Sentiment Begin in the Church?

1. Cultural Influence: The historical treatment of women as inferior, particularly in Greek, Roman, and Hebrew cultures, heavily influenced early church teachings. Women were often seen as property or second-class citizens, and this mindset infiltrated church doctrine, especially in the medieval period and later.

2. The Early Church and Pauline Teachings: Early church fathers, such as Augustine, Tertullian, and Jerome, often held negative views of women. Paul’s letters, particularly 1 Timothy 2:12, were used to justify the exclusion of women from leadership roles, though it’s important to note that Paul himself had several women working as leaders and ministers in the church (Romans 16:1-7).

3. Medieval Church Influence: The medieval church propagated ideas of women as temptresses, especially during the witch trials. This was compounded by the Catholic Church’s doctrine, which taught that women’s sexuality was inherently dangerous and uncontrollable, leading to their persecution as witches.

4. Puritan Legacy: The Puritans brought this European mindset to the New World, where it continued to influence their doctrines and treatment of women. Misogyny and fear of female power persisted, particularly in church teachings, which labeled outspoken or defiant women as witches or Jezebels.

Conclusion for This Part

The double standard created by the Malleus Maleficarum and its later influence, particularly in Puritanical witch hunts like the Salem Witch Trials, set a precedent for gendered treatment of women in the church and broader society. Women were often punished, ostracized, or demonized for behaviors considered inappropriate, while male leaders often escaped accountability for their actions. This pattern of misogyny, manipulation, and spiritual abuse persisted into modern times, contributing to distrust and harmful power dynamics in church environments.

The tribal anti-woman sentiment that began in medieval times, particularly with the association of women with witchcraft or the Jezebel spirit, has continued to infect certain parts of the church, where women’s roles and their voices are often suppressed in favor of patriarchal systems that refuse to properly address abuse and double standards. This history must be confronted in order to restore respect, equality, and holiness within the church today.

MORE LATER Conclusion PART 4 “The traits of LP Eli and more: “Carnal Human Nature”

(C)2025 Taveau D’Arcy All copyrights reserved under international copyright laws, in conjunction with AI