Category Archives: gay theology
That’s the question Dr. Michael Brown is asking in his latest commentary on BarbedWire. The MIA phenom among religious gay activists is something GCMW has noticed as well.
If you believe you are on the side of truth, you need not be insecure.
Then why are “gay Christian” activists and theologians so unwilling to debate the issues publicly? Why do they consistently refuse public dialogue, especially when those who want to dialogue with them are committed to doing so with civility and grace?
Bear in mind that they are writing books, preaching messages, using social media, and holding conferences, all with the goal of actively challenging the views of conservative followers of Jesus, seeking to overturn the Word and 2,000 years of consistent Church tradition. Yet at the same time, when openly invited to debate their controversial new viewpoints, they grow silent. Why?”
We’ve seen them pop up and down almost like jack in the boxes as if they are afraid their shallow logic and superficial religious platitudes cannot stand the white hot scrutiny of the truth. In fact, one of the tainted fathers of the gay christian movement, pointedly told them “don’t discuss the bible”. Mel White told attendees at a Soulforce conference to opt out of discussions about the bible with “Conservative Christians”. Writes Karen Keen:
“After debriefing the “chalk-talk” experience, we are sent off to our first workshop. I decide to attend, “What the Bible Says and Doesn’t Say About Homosexuality” presented by Rev. Nancy Wilson and Rev. Dr. Mel White. Mel White is a passionate and articulate man who makes it clear from the beginning of the workshop that he has absolutely no desire whatsoever to discuss the biblical passages on homosexuality. Over the years he has suffered a barrage of debates on the issue and he is thoroughly burnt out. He refuses to engage in the discussion any longer. Instead, he passes out a booklet he has written on the subject and tells us to read it. Then, he encourages us to refrain from discussing the Bible with conservative Christians because fundamentalists have no interest in sincere dialogue. Mel also encourages us not to engage in the debate for another reason. By having the conversation, we expose ourselves over and over again to the “lie” that homosexuality is wrong, and when heard repeatedly, “deep down inside you will wonder if they are right.”
We’ve pointed out numerous times how the cookie cutter style comments of gay christians are devoid of scripture. While we believe that extra-biblical resources are welcome compliments to scriptural enlightenment, the line of acceptance is drawn when any resource conflicts with clear foundational teachings of the Bible. With that being said, and despite our critics charge of “bible worship”, even the average Christian accepts that the Bible is our blueprint, our “magna carta”. Therefore, Christians fully assimilate its language, concepts and principles into our vocabulary and more importantly how we live. But we don’t find this bond with God’s Word when it comes to the gay christian movement. But don’t be surprised, this is no mere coincidence.
Karen Keen who attended the event noted the bizarre interpretations gay christian leaders made about the scriptures. At the same event Nancy Elder, chief of the Metropolitan Community Church said the magi or three wise men were homosexuals and that its okay to use one’s “imagination” when reading and interpreting the Bible.
After pressuring him for a reason for an agreement to debate, Matthew Vines, the gay christian movement’s false teacher du jour, finally told Dr. James White why he was putting debates with opposing Christians on the skids:
“I am happy to do dialogues, debates, etc., with anyone when I feel that the event is likely to be constructive, respectful, and relationship-building. I did a ‘debate’ with Michael Brown this summer that was largely a waste of time, because Brown is not interested in listening to and learning from LGBT people, only pontificating about them.”
Its important to note Matthew Vines has been crisscrossing the country proclaiming his readiness to challenge the church’s teachings. But when the challenge confronts him, we find out he doesn’t like it when people won’t “learn from him”.
San Francisco based author Erik F. Wait has jumped to the forefront of scholarly exposition on gay christian theology with his new book Do Not Be Deceived: A Christian Worldview Response to Gay Theology and a blog of the same name.
We’ve known Erik for many years and his work is a welcome addition to the massive task of educating the church and equipping the saints on one of the most insidious attacks on the faith in recent memory.
The 674 page book is no lightweight read. It thoroughly addresses flawed epistemological foundations, as well as the hermeneutical errors of this growing movement and provides a thorough exegesis of the relevant Biblical texts on human sexuality.
Sadly the gay church movement and its parasitic theology has caused massive damage to foundational beliefs which have sustained the church through many challenges. But this is an internal spiritual infection and its unassuming until the symptoms began to appear.
Deception and spiritual identity fraud is just as much a growing problem for the church as it is in the secular world. They take it very seriously and have developed all types of protective measures but the church still treats identity fraud as a low priority issue. This is why gay church theology has been able to deceive so many so quickly.
You can protect yourself and innoculate yourself with this powerful resource Do Not Be Deceived.
Dr. James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries, an apologetics ministry based in Phoenix, is part of a growing cadre of Christian leaders responding to the threat of the gay christian movement. Fueled by the rise of new false teachers like Matthew Vines, more and more Christian leaders are taking on the apostate movement head on and with determination. In a newly released video White, dismantles many of the shallow gay christian theological arguments.
Watch Part 2 here.
During his illegal trial by the Sanhedrin Council, false witnesses were brought in to lie on Jesus. The Pharisees had no evidence to support what he was accused of, so false witnesses were needed to make the case against him stick. Well, it seems like some things never change because people are still lying on Jesus. The latest is gay singer Elton John who ignorantly claimed, sans evidence, that Jesus would have supported homosexual marriage.
The comments were widely reported by the world press.
Sir Elton John has said he believes that Jesus would be a supporter of gay marriage. The “Daniel” singer, who hopes to marry filmmaker David Furnish next year, said he thinks that the Christian figure would have supported the union of gay members of the clergy.
Speaking to Sky News on the same weekend as the London Pride parade, Sir Elton said: “If Jesus Christ was alive today, I cannot see him, as the Christian person that he was and the great person that he was, saying this could not happen.
“He was all about love and compassion and forgiveness and trying to bring people together. And that is what the Church should be about.”
But the chart-topping artist said that the Church deserved credit for the progress that has been made in recent years. He heaped particular praise onto the Archbishop of Canterbury and Pope Francis, whom he described as a “wonderful” man who had stripped back church teaching to reveal its fundamental message of love.
Of course Elton John has no theology degree, has not attended any seminary, does not cite any supporting scripture, is not a member of any Christian church, and doesn’t even profess to be a follower of Christ, but he blindly repeats debunked gay christian ideology. That defies all types of basic logic. So lets just with a few points, prove that Elton John lied on Jesus.
1. Jesus strongly and clearly affirmed the Old Testament position that the only legitimate relationship recognized by God was a biological male and a biological female in a covenant marriage relationship. He stated this to the exclusion of all other relationship pairings whether consensual or not. Mt 19
2. Jesus was God come in the flesh. He said that he came to earth specifically to do the will of God. He had no other agenda except to fulfill God’s will. John 10:30, 6:38
3. Jesus absolutely showed sinners love, compassion and forgiveness but thats only part of the story of Jesus. To paint Jesus as such is one dimensional heresay. Jesus said and did things the gay community considers hateful. (a) He said he did not come to bring peace but division Luke 12:51 (b) said that the world (unredeemed people like Elton John) hated him and would hate anyone who followed him. John 15:18 (c) said if you didnt accept everything he said, you were not his disciple Luke 9 (d) he physically beat people in the temple defiling it with greed John 2:15 (e) called false religious leaders snakes, fools, hypocrites and blind guides.
If the church was truly like Jesus, then it would not accept homosexual sin, but rather tell them that although the church does not condemn them, go and sin no more.
Finally, Jesus said nothing about homosexual weddings, never attended one, never had friends who attended one and never even insinuated that he would ever support homosexual marriages. So Elton John, please stop lying on Jesus.
Former Exodus International President and Author Joe Dallas responding to new Matthew Vines book of overcooked gay theology:
“The messages he had received referred to articles or news items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the official phrase had it, to rectify.” (George Orwell, 1984)
“When plain truth condemns what we love, our choices are few. We can abandon what we love in obedience to the truth, we can rebel openly against the truth, or we can attempt to re-write the truth to appease our conscience and silence our critics. When we choose Option 3 we join Winston, the main character in Orwell’s classic 1984 quoted above, as he alters (or rectifies) the inconvenient, unwanted facts. Matthew Vines essentially does the same in his new book God and the Gay Christian, by taking scriptures plainly saying one thing and re-interpreting them to mean another.”
All the evidence proves the case over and over. Every single time a denomination, church or religious group has allowed the existence of a “gay christian” entity within its spheres of influence division, rebellions, chaos and war ensues. It should be a stark warning to those organizations and church leaders observing the current hostile takeover of those carrying this spiritual virus to protect themselves, but it continues. Too bad we don’t have the spiritual equivalent of the Centers for Disease Control to warn churches of the high risk of accepting gay theology, but I digress. The only good thing that has come out of it is that the mainline denominations who are turning are also in the process losing much more than they gain. See here, here and here. For the sake of a few homosexual religion-mongers, the churches are losing millions of members, influential congregations, prolific speakers and leaders.
The latest announcement comes from well known pastor and author Kevin DeYoung who writes that his church University Reformed Church had voted almost unanimously to leave its parent organization over its acceptance of homosexuality among other equally serious issues.
On April 27, 2014, University Reformed Church (URC) voted 282-9 in favor of leaving the Reformed Church in America (RCA) and affiliating with the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA).
The following Wednesday, the consistory of URC voted unanimously (14-0) to file a petition with the Classis of South Grand Rapids that we might leave the RCA with all our real and personal property and join the Presbytery of the Great Lakes in the PCA.
For the past three years, our church has wrestled with our place in the Reformed Church in America. We have prayed, studied, strategized, spoke, listened, prayed, asked questions, explored options, tried to discern what is in the best interest of the Kingdom, and prayed some more. We did not come to this decision lightly.
And this decision on our part does not mean that we have already left the RCA. Now that our petition has been filed, we will enter into a formal process with the classis—a series of meetings and reports which will take place over the next 6-8 months, as spelled out in detail by our Book of Church Order. We anticipate a final vote on our petition sometime in the first part of 2015.
This painful revelation comes on the heels of another announcement in April. The mortally wounded United Methodist church is facing an imminent major division over the bull headed desires of its leadership to sell the denomination out to a few religious homosexual activists. The same brutal struggles follow until there is no choice left but to leave these people to wallow in the mud they have created.
That decision didnt come after a long period where Methodist leaders despite, strong words on paper, didn’t follow their OWN laws when it came to homosexuality. The results were quite predictable. Amy Frykholm writes in the Christian Century:
A similar legislative move transpired in 1984. This time, the General Conference was considering qualifications for ordained ministry. A proposal from the floor led to the adoption of this statement: “The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Therefore self-avowed, practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in the United Methodist Church.”
These two changes ushered in an era of “don’t ask, don’t tell” for United Methodist clergy. Many gay and lesbian clergy were, in fact, ordained over the next 20 years. As long as they were not vocal about their sexual orientation and no problems emerged in congregations, many bishops and district superintendents chose to ignore the language in the Book of Discipline. According to Scott Campbell, a pastor in Cambridge, Massachusetts, “The preferred style of bishops and district superintendents was: if you don’t embarrass me publicly, I won’t embarrass you.”
Activism on the issue did not cease. Some clergy announced their sexual orientation or performed same-sex ceremonies, and some were dismissed from ministry. In 1996, 1,300 United Methodist clergy signed a letter urging the General Conference to grant full acceptance to gays and lesbians. “We believe it is time to break the silence and state where we are on this issue that is hurting and silencing countless faithful Christians. We will continue our responsibility to order and discipline of the church but urge our United Methodist churches to open the doors in gracious hospitality to all our brothers and sisters in the faith.”
Unless church leaders hold fast to scripture‘s admonition to put out individuals who continue to undermine the unity of our faith, they might as well expect the same. Their churches and organizations will be torn asunder by those who come in the name of “love and acceptance.”