Category — antinomianism

Its extremely difficult to imagine that a group of people who so adamantly insist they are Christians would be the same ones to wage war against the Word of God. But gay christians do and get a pass for the most part. But not here. This vicious group of smiling barracudas have caused more spiritual damage than islamic terrorists on 9/11.

The latest homosexual cleric to declare his hatred for God’s word is the Rev Erwin Barron, a Presbyterian minister in Hayward,CA. Barron “married” another man and was subsequently brought up on charges for violating church policy. The so-called trial was little more than a dog and pony show, given the spiritually bankrupt condition of the Presbyterian Church. But it happened nonetheless. And with predictable results. Barron was acquitted. Its akin to foxes putting another fox on trial for raiding the hen house.

According to the Christian Post which reported on Barron’s “trial”, he used the opportunity to recommend the church reject using the Bible when deciding on issues of homosexual morality.

The panel of the Presbytery of the Twin Cities Area voted 3-3 after a trial at Oak Grove Presbyterian Church. The decision fell short of the two-thirds vote required to convict the Rev. Erwin Barron.

A complaint was filed against Barron, who teaches at Chabot College in Hayward, Calif., after he married his gay partner, Roland Abellano in 2008. The two married in California during the few months that same-sex marriage was legal there.

Shortly after the marriage, Barron (at right with male partner) wrote several commentaries weighing in on the ongoing debate over homosexuality within the PC(USA) – the largest Presbyterian denomination in the country. He suggested that Presbyterians not begin with the Bible when addressing the issue.

So, just how does one become or maintain a status as a “Christian minister” if the person believes that using the scriptures is “divisive”? 2 Timothy 3:15 says the scriptures are able to make us “wise” unto salvation. Thus, refusing the wisdom of scriptures makes one an institutional fool. It personifies the conundrum religious homosexuals have created in the contemporary church. Anytime a blind person is put behind the wheel of a car, there’s no question death and destruction are inevitable. But that’s exactly what happens when people like Barrow are given the reins. More of his fallacious ideology:

“While Protestants always look to God’s word to guide them, Barron contended that Scripture is not the only source of moral authority.

“We also look to the continuing revelation of God in our experiences in history and tradition, in science, in reasoning, and in everyday events to guide us. Scripture and experience both must guide our moral decision-making. And reliance on one without the other can be dangerous and offensive,” he stated.
“Experience should lead us into the Bible instead of beginning with the Bible and discounting the importance of personal experience.”
“In our debates in the Presbyterian Church over homosexuality, if we begin with the Bible, we will likely reach a polarized stalemate,” he wrote. “Bible discussions are too often divisive. When we begin with the Bible, we are not beginning with a natural place for all of us.”
Rather than the Bible, the beginning point for discussions on homosexuality, he maintained, should be “the personal experiences we all share.”

Homosexuals claim they cannot help themselves when it comes to their sexual choices. It also looks like they can’t help themselves when it comes to lying. Barron folds into his anti-truth diatribe slithers of an old heresy called antinominanism. Antinominianism is a trick used by false teachers to elevate personal experience over scripture or established truth.

On its face, the antinomianist view is inherently hypocritical in part because it minimizes the written word in sexual and moral circumstances, but selectively uses it to support its own positions. Such beliefs are a dominant component of gay christian theology and account for the movement’s ability to look and sound Christian to those unfamiliar with its real beliefs.

In this case Barron  wants us to not consider the Word of God as basis of what is right and instead use personal experience —which are as varied as the fish in the ocean— as a canon of what is right.  So what if a person’s personal experience says that adult sex with children is good and right as long as its consensual?  That only leads us into the state of relativity where every man does what is right in his own eyes (Judges 21:25). And this doctrinal vomit is supposed to be accepted as Christian teaching?

This, brothers and sisters, is the consummate madness of our times. Gay christian vomit is applauded and celebrated while the good and perfect will of God is treated as if it were Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

And please do not mistake the culprits as some do. These are agents of satan who have cloaked themselves in white to appear loving and docile. They are like an infectious disease. But inwardly they are vicious wolves whose main goal is to tear down the authority and applicability of the scriptures. Barron’s entire argument is based on his presumption that consulting the bible only causes problems. Following the blind will lead you into a ditch. Proceed at your own demise.

PART TWO OF TWO POSTS

One of the rather unfortunate side effects of false teachings is there is always someone vulnerable enough to become ensnared by it.  Some souls are truly ensnared; meaning they stepped into the clutches of a false teacher unawares. Others, link up with false religious movements out of a desire to scratch the itch of their ears for something other than what God has said. While some false teachings with a Christian facade have waned, others are going strong. Meanwhile, others are constantly attempting to reinvent themselves to seduce new victims.

The entire religious homosexual ideology is but a facet of a larger web cast wide by satan to deceive as many people as possible.  In case you forgot, satan is a doomed creature (Rev 20:7-10) with zero chance of redemption, forgiveness or escape. His destiny is an unimaginable horror set for an eternity in the lake of fire. He knows that and seeks to bamboozle as many humans as possible before his time is up. We’ve talked about satan and his agenda here and here before.

And false teachers, prophets and ministers are all under the delusion of the enemy. All false teachers and their false teachings are rooted in two things: rebellion and lust. In fact lust breeds rebellion. With a little study you can trace both to satan’s expulsion from heaven (Ezekiel 28).

The inclusion doctrine has spawned several hypothesis which are in some churches repeated as if an angel from heaven brought it to earth on golden tablets of stone. In this postmodern, westernized religious vacuum we live in, the impact and influence is so great, some churches and pastors who hold a biblical worldview on other issues allow these philosophies to color their thinking about homosexuality.

2.1 The theory of being born gay

Just like the theory of evolution is but an unproven hypothesis, so is the theory of being born gay.  It ranks right up there with pink elephants on Mars and little green men on Saturn.

The homosexual inclusion component of inclusion theology is a match made in hell. Its embedded with  just about every major element of apostasy known to us.

The born gay theory assumes that a person can’t and shouldn’t be forced to change or alter something about themselves that is genetic or hereditary. In order to respond properly, Christians must be able to answer the following questions with biblical context :

1. What is sexual orientation?
2. Is sexual orientation genetic?

„2.2 Gay churches:  evolution to evil

Are gay churches valid as Christian churches?  For an individual attending a predominately homosexual church, and claiming to be a Christian, the Apostle Paul offers these guidelines in I Corinthians 5:9-13 (Message Bible)

I wrote you in my earlier letter that you shouldn’t make yourselves at home among the sexually promiscuous.  I didn’t mean that you should have nothing at all to do with outsiders of that sort.  Or with crooks, whether blue or white-collar.  Or with spiritual phonies, for that matter.  You’d have to leave the world entirely to do that!  But I am saying that you shouldn’t act as if everything is just fine when a friend who claims to be a Christian is promiscuous or crooked, is flip with God or rude to friends, gets drunk or becomes greedy and predatory.  You can’t just go along with this, treating it as acceptable behavior.  I’m not responsible for what the outsiders do, but don’t we have some responsibility for those within our community of believers?  God decides on the outsiders, but we need to decide when our brothers and sisters are out of line and, if necessary, clean house.

Gay churches, I believe, are partially a result of the neglect and failure of the church to address homosexuality in a consistent and holistic manner.  In our society, credibility is everything.  Homosexual churches now have large buildings, thousands of members, talented “gospel” choirs and regular fellowship with well known Christian music artists and speakers.  All of which promotes credibility.

Such credibility, however, has considerably weakened the argument that the Holy Spirit is not with homosexuals who claim to be Christians.  Specifically, it postulates that due to grace and love, one’s personal sexual behavior is immaterial to God. That’s the same argument the heretical antinominians used in the first century church. Those arguments were refuted in 1 John 1, 2.

„2.3 The impact of “social justice”

Social Justice issues are concerns advocated by individuals in reference to basic human rights.  Advocates seek the eradication of these problems from the human family.  These issues have gained attention and include: environmentalism, equality (and inclusivity), racism, globalization, poverty, homelessness and violence (war).

Homosexual religious rights are seen as a major part of social justice.  Issues of equality and nondiscrimination are said to have its roots in Matt 25.  The inference is that barring  gays and lesbians from full and equal participation in the life and governance of the church is a violation of scripture.  Particularly, Jesus’ command to love.

How should you answer that charge?

Jesus did not come to set up an earthly kingdom, but rather to bring the Kingdom of God to the earth. While social justice should be a valid concern of the church, it should never overshadow or circumvent our primary purpose to reconcile lost, sinful souls to God through the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  The problem with social justice is that the definition continues to include whatever “injustice” man deems worthy despite what God says. Just because society declares something unjust, doesn’t mean the church must change its biblical meaning.

„2.4 The impact of biblical revisionism

Biblical revisionism is the alternate rendering of the Bible’s texts based on a more skeptical view of literary and archaeological sources than the traditional perspective. Supporters of homosexual inclusion often accuse us of “cherry picking” scriptures to make a point. That’s a silly charge simply because every Word of God is good for reproof, correction, rebuke and instruction in righteousness. We must rightly divide the Word, but it is all still in full effect. The real problem inclusion with God’s Word is that it is so sharp and clear, it cannot be denied. Because of this the gay christian movement is forced to  (a) discredit it (b) minimize it (c) circumvent it (d) falsely interpret it.

This has served the religious homosexual movement well in restructuring the meanings of scriptures which condemn homosexual conduct, thus seeding discord and confusion in the church.

Examples:

1. Ruth and Naomi’s relationship is an example of lesbian love in the Bible.
2. David and Jonathan’s relationship is an example of gay love.
3. The sin of Sodom was inhospitality, not homosexuality.
4. Jesus said nothing about homosexuality.

To give such claims a progressive air of theological credibility, revisionists have enlisted their own scholars, theologians and historians (see John Boswell), to sanctify the revised meanings.  Thus, individuals properly interpreting scripture are derided as fundamentalist, ignorant, bigoted, homophobic and intolerant.

Please understand that we have been warned (2 Pet 2:1) of such things would come and severely test our faith.  We should always be open to the Holy Spirit’s leading, but remain faithful to defend the faith once delivered to the saints.

Thanks to Emergent-see Posters

For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee. (Prov 23:7)

In my opinion, Proverbs 23:7 is almost always taken out of context to serve our own self interests or perhaps to explain something about someone else that may or may not necessarily be true. If the statement is to be contextually understood, the latter portion of it must be included as there is no period after “he” but a colon. This simply means what follows the first part proves and explains it. In this case, the point is more about hypocrisy than destiny or character. Taken out of context, the meaning can travel to Jupiter and back.

My point? Getting an understanding of things is very important if we are to rightly divide the word of truth not only for the edification of each other but to an unbelieving world we are called to witness to. Notwithstanding the Spirit of God giving what to say “on the spot”, we should avail ourselves to further study. The false prophets of our day are smart and glib of tongue. That’s a potent factor in deception.

The power of words, the meaning of words

There’s a growing lexicon of terms related to understanding or explaining religious concepts out there. This can be attributed to in part to the conflict over truth. Some terms describe false concepts which are popping up in churches everywhere. Others describe biblical perspectives which are embedded essentials of our faith. Then too, some may help to explain some of the perspectives that are espoused on this blog from time to time by non-believers who object to our biblical conclusions about homosexual conduct.

I decided to make a post highlighting the most prominent of them. Most  have the “ism” and “ology” subtext. Hopefully, as you hear these terms being dropped here and there in your studies you will have a working man’s knowledge of what they mean and its applicability. While I believe etymology is important in most cases, we have to be careful that etymology doesn’t eclipse other factors associated with a particular word because there are many. Primarily, their placement in scripture (or their inference in scripture) along with the Holy Spirit’s “illumination” is important. But even that has a check and balance. No meaning claimed to be derived from the Holy Spirit’s leading can conflict with other scripture particularly when the meaning is clear. The Word of God is one complete and harmonious system of doctrine. Thus, etymology is not an end all, but rather an appropriate starting point.

I’ve also linked scripture references for your consideration. If you know of any additional ones, please drop it in the comment section (with a working man’s definition) and I’ll add it.

antinominanism – taken from Greek: anti nomos “against the law”. In this case it is against God’s laws regarding sexual conduct, the promotion of lawlessness in the church. A belief which manifests in several different forms but mainly exalts one’s personal experience or ” the spirit” over scripture. Psalms 19:7-9
Determinism – a philosophical doctrine which holds that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision is the inevitable consequence of a previous event or series of events. Philippians 2:13
heterodoxy – any doctrine at variance with an official or orthodox position. Not to be used as a weapon against credible revelation, but as a deterrent against false teachings which have no root in established biblical doctrines.
perfectionism – the idea that once one has been saved, it is impossible or inadmissable to commit sin or sins. 1 John 1:6-10
existentialism – A philosophy that emphasizes the uniqueness of individual human experience in hostile or indifferent environments. It regards human existence as unexplainable and thus allows for one to claim human sovreignty; the “little god” teaching.  Eccl 12:12-14
epistemology – the study of how we know what we know
justification – the legal act where God declares the sinner to be innocent of his or her sins. Its not that the sinner is actually sinless, but that he is “declared” sinless. Justification is granted by God alone and only by faith. Romans 5:1
fallibilism – a philosophical doctrine that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken. Colossians 2:2-3
fatalism - a philosophical doctrine holding that all events are predetermined in advance for all time and human beings are powerless to change them 2 Kings 20:1-6
Nihilism – a radical doctrine that advocates destruction of the social system for its own good; annihilate Psalms 24:1
probability – part philosophical, part theoretical teaching that a random sampling process will result in all outcomes equally likely to happen solely based on chance. Romans 8:28-30
solipsism- a philosophical teaching that the self is all that you know to exist  Jeremiah 17:7-9;  Colossians 2:8
apologetics – defense of the Christian faith or its biblical doctrines from external enemies 1 Peter 3:15
polemics – defense of the Christian faith or its biblical doctrines from internal enemies. 2 Cor 11:13-15; Jude 3
theology – the study of the nature of God
christology – the study of and proper understanding of Jesus Christ as revealed in scripture 2 Pet 3:18
monergism – the doctrine that the Holy Spirit is the only efficient agent in an individual’s “new birth”. Monergism (Gkmono ergon “the work of one”) holds that the human will possesses no desire to holiness until it is born again, thus there is no pre-existing cooperation in regeneration.”
fundamentalism – a belief that every word in the Bible should be interpreted as literal truth. 2 Timothy 3:16-17
monogenes – a belief which suggests derivation, creation, origination of Christ. Rev 1:8
diaprax – the belief that Christian unity should and can be achieved without doctrinal consensus. Amos 3:3-7; 1 John 5:7-8
orthodoxy – can be applied across the spectrum of beliefs. In terms of Christian faith, it is adherence to a right set of beliefs as outlined in scripture.
orthopraxy – places emphasis on right conduct, both ethical and spiritual but not necessarily in opposition to faith and grace.
eschatology – The study of end times. A doctrine concerning the ultimate or final destiny of humanity and the earth including Christ’s second advent and God’s final judgment. 2 Peter 3:7-10

On Tuesday, I wrote a post called The curse of postmodernism. This is part two.  In a paper entitled Some Thoughts on Ecclesiology, Post-Modernity, and the Grace Fellowship of Churches, Atlanta area pastor Bishop Jonathan Alvarado explores what he calls the “secularization of the values of the church”.

It has been my observation over the past several years that a growing phenomenon has surfaced with respect to the church and its relationship to the world. It occurs to me that there has been a driving force from within the ranks of church leaders to manufacture a facade and foster a general disposition of the church attitudinally, that in my estimation is becoming more volatile and destructive. I do not speak of the necessary contextualization for the purposes of reaching and impacting the larger society with the gospel. Nor am I referring to some manifestation of the in-breaking of the Kingdom of God in some radical or “cutting-edge” ways. What I am directly addressing is the secularization of the values of the church beginning with the expressed value systems of some of the leaders of the church, many of whom having positions of great media notoriety and influence over the constituent Christian community.

Alvarado’s paper attempts to address what I believe is  more of a  reccurrent phenomenon rather than a “growing phenomemon”. Nevertheless, its another welcome look at what we are currently experiencing with such inbred doctrines like the prosperity gospel, the emergent church and the  gay christian movement.  Such errant beliefs aren’t new, just reconfigured as they all spring from various heresies [see antinominianism for example] assaulting the church since its formation.  Much of it is a mixture of contemporary culture, religious ideology and a sprinkling of scripture. Alvarado  is a self described “intellectual pentecostal and sophisticated theologian” among other things, so I’ll leave it to you to determine whether or not his paper hits the mark.  I do think the questions posed at the conclusion of the paper are excellent and should be answered.  That’s where I want to jump in. His questions are bolded.

1. What are some of the implications for a church whose faith is not being defined biblically or theologically?

The implications have actually progressed to realities. The church has already begun its slide into apostasy by leaving its biblical moorings and as a consequence is being redefined as a place where comfort is more desirable than commitment. The church has been redefined as a place of broad inclusion without the call to exclusive discipleship. I could go on. As Paul wrote in 1 Cor 10:11 These things happened to them [Isreal] to serve as an example[to us], and they were written down as a warning for us in whom the culmination of the ages has been attained. But we have ignored the warnings and ignored God’s voice speaking through his prophets. Instead, the church has gone whoring after the very things that precipitated the judgment of God upon Isreal.  We are well beyond the implied stage.

2. How does postmodern thinking affect our theological constructs today?

Postmodern thinking has reduced our once high Christology (referring to the preeminence of Christ) to a believe-as-you-want philosophy. When Christ and the Word are not extolled as the alpha answer to all of life’s complexities, contemporary theological constructs become meaningless exercises in religious pandering.  The impact is most seen in the high numbers of moral failures, criminal activity and sexual waywardness  in church leadership which is then excused and tolerated as simple mistakes.  Those expositing the Word do so not from a place of divine unction, but from their own compass of failures and struggles.  We see through a glass darkly, but postmodernism completely darkens our somewhat dim view. More succinctly, it  creates  an atmosphere where comfort is demanded and conviction is eschewed.

3. Does the changing face of the contemporary church pose a threat to classical Christianity?

Neither ethnicity, gender, nationality, age or any other immutable human characteristic pose any threat to “classical” Christianity. The threat emanates from our own failure to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints. There shouldnt be regionalized versions of our faith, but one faith, one Lord and one baptism.

4. How do we as church leaders handle the modern blending of ideologies and what implications does this have for orthodoxy in this postmodern era?

First, let’s make sure we understand orthodoxy as right belief, not traditionalism. We already have a fairly intact blueprint presented to us in the scriptures. Contemporary ideologies will always need to be examined in light of biblical truth/standards without variance. There should be a quality assurance approach to dealing with any ideology, no matter what its origin may be. Paul wrote to the Galatians 1:8, But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! (NASB)  Its no secret that there are many open heresies and heretics operating in the church, yet we are largely silent and passive because we fear offending people.  The apostles all dealt with such challenges and held fast to what was true as a way of rejecting foreign matter introduced to the body. They all used strong language and strong remedies (Jude comes to mind) to unite believers in a common orthodoxy. Today, we must follow their example if we expect to achieve the same results.

5. Does looking through an untrained or contemporary lens positively or negatively affect the church’s hermeneutic?

It depends of the extent of one’s “untraining”. That would be the greater concern, not whether the lens is contemporary. Relevance does matter, but not to the degree that we abandon the standards of our faith to appease or attract people into the Kingdom.

6. How do we as postmodern believers negotiate between contemporary thought and methodology and “the faith once delivered”?

The first hurdle is understanding and embracing a perspective greater than our own. A kingdom perspective which transcends our “visions” no matter how lofty they may seem to be. God’s goal is always greater than mine and when conflict arises, I should always defer to God’s will.  Im not sure I would apply the adjective term postmodern to believers as per the textbook definition. It would immediately restrict us to a way of thinking  certain to conflict with biblical directives. Contemporary thought shouldn’t arbitrarily be assigned a negative connotation unless it has indeed been determined to be a negative. Our filtering as believers in a contemporary environment needs to be one wary of subtle influences which incrementally could affect our vision and interpretation of what we see on a daily basis. A healthy suspicion of anything (berean principle?) is advisable until it can be indentified as friendly or hostile to our faith.

7. How do we as a church move from being followers of cultural change to becoming change agents in the earth?

On one level that is contingent upon leadership. Followers are taught to follow leadership. That’s the current prevailing paradigm of the church. But if leaders want to foster a “salt of the earth” mentality in followers, they have to drastically reduce sole dependence on leadership to live their lives for them. The unhealthy co-dependency fostered by many leaders only serves to cripple followers and render them incapable of independent ministry. Each believer should be taught from day one that they are called to ministry as we are all priests unto God. That’s one of our foundational concepts rarely emphasized in churches. We need to deactivate all language and concepts (particularly the church member[ship] concept)which facilitates this mentality and then actively require people to serve the kingdom as a collective individuals.

8. In light of question seven, can this be accomplished without becoming tainted with the filth of the systems of society, which are corrupt and self-serving?

Yes. It may be more a matter of personal character, fidelity and focus than the tainted systems of the world. Those systems are in place to tempt us and most likely will remain, thus our response to the seduction of the filth, should change. That ensures our purity in the midst of an impure world.

9. With the advent of high-speed everything, how should the church filter the information that its members are receiving? Is there a viable option for information discrimination?

The problem is not the information venue, but the intent of those presenting the information. When for instance a blog is portrayed as a purveyor of gossip without an individual looking at its content critically, people squander an opportunity to be empowered. All technological portals are to be employed in the promulgation of the gospel and not one of them should be ceded to the enemy.  The broader issue seems to be a fear that exists in leadership. The fear is that the “pew member” may learn something which conflicts with what the leader is attempting to instill. That has its pros and cons, but primarily the fault lies with leadership not encouraging honest berean research. 2 Tim 2:15 applies to every believer, not just those who elect to attend seminary with the intent to enter organized ministry. We cannot escape that we live in an information age, which was actually prophesied in Daniel (12, vs 4). Rather than looking for alternatives, we should ensure our character has integrity and then maximize use of the information to our advantage.

A theological/eschatological exposition.

Spoiler: this isnt a “dont vote for Obama, vote for McCain post”.

But I’m going to state the obvious right off the bat. Your support of Barack Obama for president is actually aiding (I’d like to believe unknowingly) the massive deception plan of the antichrist. Am I calling Obama the antichrist? Not at all. But  he does represent, with chilling accuracy, a portrayal of the antichrist and as such is a glaring sign that what the Bible told us about the last days and the entrance of the antichrist onto the world scene is much closer than we think. The Bible calls such representations “foreshadows”.  In a nutshell, here’s why:

(1) Obama has a glib tongue and uses his smooth finesse to accentuate his populist promises. Those promises capitalize on the fears and insecurities people have on three top issues: money, safety, and equality.

(2) Reports state that Obama has taken unusual steps to obscure or deny access to information about his origins and associations (i.e. birth certificate, medial records, law client list). Regarding his origin, Obama is the most secretive Democrat ever.

(3) Although most Americans (particularly separation of church and state fanatics) abhorred George Bush’s simple declaration of belief in Christ during his campaign, the sentiment has no such stigma with Obama. Obama’s religious beliefs (even interpreting the Bible), association with religious figures and overt religious references in his speeches have met no resistance from his supporters.

(4) Although Obama’s populist message promises “jobs and ecomonic growth”, the radical social change he preaches to the two most extreme ideological factions in American history –homosexuals and the abortion industry– is that he will champion their causes, even if it means as president him personally attacking and confronting the black church.

(5) Obama’s meteoric rise to international, historic reknown is not solely by his own machinations. His entrance not just onto center stage American politics, but the world stage is part of an image required to complete a mission. Additionally, that Obama is seen as a fulfillment of Martin Luther King’s “dream”, fuels the visceral feeling by Black America that he is some sort of promised messiah/savior.

These key elements of the still as of yet undetermined life of Barack Obama are connected to a larger eschatological event. What is it? The second coming of Christ.

Christ himself told us that no man knows the day nor the hour of his coming. No one, he said, except the Father knew the exact date and time. He also told us not to speculate about its exactness, but that because of the signs we would know that his second advent was near. Being aware of that should prompt us to go into a state of perpetual readiness as soldiers do in preparation for an imminent battle. It should prompt wise disciples to have their lamps “trimmed and burning” so that at his return, our swift departure would occur as he planned.

It was necessary to detail the issues about Obama, because as I noted he is a sign. Most will miss this sign because their fears have gotten the best of them. They are not concerned with the mandate of Christ, but with self preservation. Get me a job, give me money, take care of me. That’s the general sentiment pervading our nation. What most don’t realize is that it is a diabolical —but real life— practice session. In the aftermath of 9/11 most municipalities held mock chemical attack training for medical and emergency personnel. Why? Because every one is convinced that when the terrorists attack again, it will include unleashing deadly chemical agents against the general population. No one jokes about that.

But it seems with Obama’s rise to prominence, hardly anyone (in particular the church) believes that this is a eschatological training scenario. Hardly anyone has connected the dots that we’re being conditioned to react to our fears and consequently look for someone to save us. We are being conditioned to look for someone…like us, but appears to have an ability to resolve our problem after series of colossal failures. We’re being conditioned to accept that person even at the expense of our previously held beliefs. We’re being conditioned to accept a false hope for change. The unseen driving force behind that “conditioning” is the antichrist. What!, you say. Impossible! But is it?

1Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess 2:1{12 NKJV)

Please take note of a pivotal verse in this passage. “For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work”

In other words, the spirit of the antichrist is already at work in the earth influencing and conditioning governments and people for his arrival. Just like prior to the coming of Christ, there were signs, so will it be prior to the coming of the antichrist. There is little to argue about regarding what those signs will be. As stated before, the bible frequently uses “foreshadows” as a way of showing what is to come. Generally, a foreshadow was a person who embodied someone who had not come yet. Barack Obama is not the antichrist, but there is no doubt in my mind that he is a foreshadow of the antichrist.

Having noted above some of the peculiarities of Obama’s somewhat shrouded life, lets look at the same issues with antichrist. There are about 27 recognizable characteristics of the antichrist, but we will show only a few that Obama foreshadows. Keep in mind that his appearing ripens during a time called the great falling away. This “falling away” is not some mass exodus from the church, but a mass exodus from following the Word of the Lord.

(1) He will, with smooth words, win the hearts of people. His rise to power is during a time of unresolved economic, military and interpersonal chaos.

(2) He attempts to obscure his origin. He intentionally conceals it, lest someone sound the alarm. We previously covered this here and here.

(3) He will have an overtly “ecumenical” religious veneer acceptable to most people.  With the assistance of a false church (already formed) and false prophet (already in place), the antichrist will synergize religious and political solutions, thus securing in the eyes of the people his status as an saviour and benevolent emancipator.

(4) He despises laws intended to restrict and restrain sexual immorality and political anarchy. Additionally, any laws which guarantee religious freedom will be summarily demolished. Thus, Paul identifies him as “the man of lawlessness”.

(5) The antichrist’s arrival will be heralded with power, signs, lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception. Widespread deception provides the antichrist the cover he needs to rise without opposition.

WHY GAY MARRIAGE AND WHY NOW?

Not let’s deal with the question on the table. What has all of this got to do with homosexual marriage? If you are wise, you will know that signs begat signs of the same kind. A slouching away from the Word of God has birthed widespread deception which began in the church and spread to the world. This deception seeded back into the church a false concept of church and a faulty christological perspective. Back and forth the false seed in the church watered the rebellion of the world who gave the church back what it wanted. Out of this arose homosexual marriage and its “credible” supporter the gay church and “liberal” religious movement.

What’s the significance of gay marriage as a eschatological marker? More than any other sin, homosexuality represents a direct attack on the nature of God as creator and life giver. This is why it is an abomination. Not necessarily because of the same gender sex act. That’s too simple. With God, the intentional distortion of his nature merits death and special designation not afforded to other transgressions. Paul explained this phenomenal revelation in Romans 1 which incidentally was labeled “an obscure passage” by Obama.

Homosexual marriage is a portrait of the designs of the antichrist. Those who extol it as progressive equality are deceived. The rebellious church which affirms it and refuses to accept what God’s word says, is also deceived. Thus,  with deception as the marker,  homosexual marriage is the vehicle to spread it further.

BUT WHY NOW?

The hallmark of Jesus’ return to the earth is to receive his bride the true church. If John 14:1 has any bearing, Jesus’ departure from the earth is most importantly to “prepare a place” of eternal abode for his bride. In scripture, His bride is not personified as a same gender partner, but an opposite gender (and faithful) virgin. He also reveals that the time between his first and second coming is just ”a little while”.

15All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

16A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

17Then said some of his disciples among themselves, What is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me: and, Because I go to the Father?

18They said therefore, What is this that he saith, A little while? we cannot tell what he saith.

19Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him, and said unto them, Do ye enquire among yourselves of that I said, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me? (John 16 KJV)

The disciples were understandably confused by his statement that he would be gone a little while. It sounded like a riddle. And just what did Jesus mean by a “little while”?  If Jesus had said he would be gone about 3 days, would you say that is a little while? If that is a plausible explanation, then consider what the Apostle Peter later revealed about time in God’s eyes.

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing: that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat. The earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy manner of living and godliness… (2 Peter 3:8-11)

If a day is as a thousand years and vice versa with the Lord, then Jesus has only been gone a little more than 2 days (about 2,009 years to us)  thus his assertion that he would be gone “a little while”. If this little while is indeed true, then per the signs, we are in the season of his coming.

WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRACTION

Gay marriage is a weapon used by satan to distract us from the real issue: the Lord is coming soon. But perhaps unwittingly, he has revealed that he too knows the time of his doom is at hand. Homosexual marriage is a pandora’s box type of issue which given time will become the societal model for acceptance of every foul act that man is able to dream up and commit. Ellen Degeneres on her show yesterday asked “why can’t people just let people love who they want to love?” Thanks to this deception, every disgusting sexual act we previously thought to be out of the question will ask the same question and demand the same conclusion. Every societal norm will be broken down and destroyed and a new standardless society will celebrate its new definition of love without limits.

Gay marriage is a distraction not because we should not be paying attention to it, but because it is another abominable demonstration of satan’s hatred for the nature of God which is expressed in opposite gender relationship. If you have noticed there have been claims by gays and their supporters that not only is homosexual marriage equal to heterosexual marriage but in some cases superior. They cite heterosexual divorce and heterosexual child abuse and abandonment as reasons why homosexual marriage is not threatening to heterosexual marriage. But such comparisons are a false balance.  They also claim there are “more important issues” such as homelessness, the enviroment and education. But just look at the aftermath of homosexual marriage in Massachusetts and you will see that is another lie.

Sister Yvette Williams, ex-wife of progay music artist Tonex got it right by saying gay marriage is  part of satan’s agenda to deceive the whole world.

Make no mistake about it, the signs are clear, and a great deception has been launched. And more importantly, our Lord is soon to come. Prepare yourselves to meet him!

Sound like a broken record? Are you tired of hearing and reading about the rampant corruption in the church? Would you  rather only want to know how you can “tap into” the blessings of God and be prosperous instead?  Live your best life now? Don’t like hearing “negativity”?  Do you get angry when someone exposes the unbiblical practices of your “man of God”?

If this is you, you are a foolish person. Maybe a foolish virgin, but nonetheless a fool. All around us —within and without— the church is under unprecedented attack from false prophets of every stripe. Instead of contending for the faith, most are groveling after false teachers who throw them shards of rotten food. So I speak to those who have an ear to hear what the Spirit is saying. Beware false teachers, evildoers and workers of iniquity planted in the church by their master, satan. Most can’t remain hidden long because their very nature will soon expose them. Hint: there is a reason Jesus called them “ravenous wolves”.

While reading about the major debacle caused by false prophet Todd Bentley in Florida, I saw this quote by prolific Christian theologian, teacher and author Derek Prince:

“The Bible gives us no liberty to tolerate the incursion of evil into the church.”

How true and apropros. While misguided Christians are buying into the “dont judge” and “only God can judge”, evil is barreling into the church virtually unopposed. But God never told us to stand by silently while evil we can see mounts our pulpits and perverts the word of the Lord. Why are we comfortable with the house of prayer being a den of thieves?

As astute as Prince was in the faith, even he had a serious bout with involvement in a false movement.

In 1968, Prince joined the Holy Spirit Teaching Mission (HSTM), which linked him to three other Charismatic Christian pastors living in Ft. Lauderdale: Don Basham, Bob Mumford, and Charles Simpson. The HSTM had been founded by businessman Eldon Purvis; but after the discovery of Purvis’s homosexuality, Prince and the others formed Christian Growth Ministries (CGM). In 1974, CGM sought to counter what were seen as excesses within the Charismatic movement by emphasising the authority of a few shepherds over their “sheep”. The group was joined by Ern Baxter, and the five men became known as the Fort Lauderdale Five Their ministry became known as the Shepherding Movement.

CGM’s strong emphasis on submission was controversial. Lydia Prince herself disapproved, and as stories of abuses came out the movement was condemned by Pat Robertson>, Kathryn Kuhlman, and the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International. Lydia died in 1975, and when Prince later wanted to marry Ruth Baker, his fellow shepherds forbade him. However, they later gave permission, and Prince was remarried in1978. Derek later repented in public over being a member of this group.

Many people mislabel what is going on as “wheat and tare” situation (Matt 13:24-30). But its not so. The context of the wheat and tare is that they are indistinguishable spiritually to such a degree that only Jesus himself can accomplish the separation of the two without damaging the wheat. This is not the case with the well documented cases of false prophecy, immorality, and evil out in the open view of the church today. We are commanded to “try the spirits whether they are of God” (1 John 4:1). We test and try them not by our emotions, science, other spirits, traditions and creeds or church polity, but by sound biblical doctrine.

As Derek Prince stated, it is in this context we must oppose all people, spirits and practices in the church which are condemned  by the scripture. Did I just say “people”? Yes, people. People who are controlled by anti-Christ spirits. Reference Revelation 2:18-23. By oppose I mean to restrict their influence and voices by any biblical allowances at our disposal.

Like the example set by Noah, this message must be preached without fail until the end comes. The hope of redemption is not in horizontal love, but in repentance and relationship with the living God through his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. The church is being set up to fall without challenge to the antichrist. Todd Bentley and the numerous false prophets we have noted here are more than enough evidence to this fact

God is not calling for us to establish rapture cults, nor are we to going into hiding to “save” ourselves. But like true salt and light,  we should engage the culture and evil subcultures in the church with God’s Word, our sword. Until he returns let us not be weary in well doing, for we reap if we faint not. Even if it takes our very lives, I encourage you to cross the line of indecision and decide that you will not compromise the gospel and give sanctuary to demons and their destructive doctrines.

Related: The adultery of Todd Bentley