Category Archives: inclusion doctrine

Gospel of inclusion selfie

goitrash

Gay christians usher in division and destruction to accepting denominations

splitsvilleAll 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.”

False prophet Carlton Pearson defensive about being called gay

False prophet du jour Carlton Pearson used to be pentecostalism’s golden boy. Then, he found a wooden nickel and began a crusade to prove that wooden nickels have more value than gold. He’s never been the same since. Strangely, in a March 26th facebook post, Pearson defends his heterosexuality. Strange because he gives no reason as to why he has to defend it. But his defensiveness does bring to scrutiny an oft used accusation against people who preach against homosexuality. Over and over homosexuals (especially the religious type) assert that those who oppose homosexuality are secretly homosexual themselves. They are “repressed closet cases” they say. But what of those who obsessively advocate for homosexuality? Wouldn’t the logic apply to them as well? It did in this case. Apparently, its been put to the test and Carlton Pearson is upset and on the defensive.

His words follow, verbatim:

pearsonI am not gay, but wouldn’t apologize nor be ashamed if I were. I love my wife dearly and have been married to her for over 20 years. We have scores of married and single gay friends we love and respect. You don’t have to be gay to love gay people and even hang out some with them. You don’t have to be a divorcee to love, support and respect them. Neither do you have to be Muslim or Jewish to have friends from those religious disciplines. As Inclusionists, we teach that we don’t have to go along to get along and that we can mind many of the same things without necessarily having the same mind about everything. Inclusionists believe Peace is possible, both individually and globally.
Jesus was accused of eating with “sinners” (Mark 2:15) and protecting prostitutes and adulteresses from the stones of the religious right of his day, called Pharisees. The word Pharisee translates “separatist” or “separated” in both Hebrew and Greek. I am an Inclusionist and proudly so.
Many of my self-righteous detractors accuse me of being gay because I am so outspokenly supportive of gays. Next to the Jewish community, the same gender loving (SGL) community were the first to reach out to me after hearing my Gospel of Inclusion. Do these same people, suspicious of my sexuality, also say I am atheist, a Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Scientologist because I hang with, love and accept them all and others, including those hypocritical so- called Christians who hate themselves and everyone else?
I’m not preaching false doctrine, just exposing it while dealing with some 2000 years of entrenched and mostly erroneous indoctrination. I love Christ and so- called “Christian values” but those taught more by Christ than most Christians.
It both amazes and amuses me that so many Christians simply cannot believe that someone loves unconditionally in the way they like to proclaim Jesus taught and did. Most so-called “people of faith” actually have more fear than faith or more faith in their fears than in God. Or perhaps when I say God as it relates to fundamentalists, it is commensurate to fear of God or faith in their fear of his wrath, in effect is their worst fear. Their God, in order to keep them from sinning, something they presumably would prefer and habitually do, threatens to send them to an eternal customized torture chamber. I once feared that god and his hell too, but I no longer do and I don’t even believe in that manmade and presumably bible supported god or his hell. Even the heaven I believe in is not the one in the Christian bible. That one is too gaudy for my taste. I never liked the streets of gold thing. Reminds me too much of my old TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Stage). BTW, my dear 84 year old mother keeps one of the 3 TVs in her bedroom tuned to TBN 24/7 Lol! . I actually prefer sands and beaches to walls of Jasper and topaz as the book of Revelation describes and prescribes. And why would heaven need walls anyway? Moreover, as I close, most gays I know are much more like Christ than many of the Christians I know. And most of my same gender loving (SGL) friends, both male and female, seem to be better (not bitter) and more responsible and loving Christians than most common fundamentalists. Same is true of many of the non-Christian SGL people. I could say the same thing about several of my atheist, Jewish and Muslim friends as well. Again, this is not a criticism, but an observation and an important one that must not be ignored. Being in church or a church no more makes you Christlike than being in a garage makes you an automobile. What say ye?

This is nothing more that perverse and self serving apologetics. Pearson has so deeply invested himself in his inclusion delusion, he may never recover from it. We can only hope he will, but the father of lies has a hook in his mouth and God may just allow it to remain in place. Still, Pearson has a following. That’s not necessarily a good thing, because Jim Jones had a following as well. If one does not escape the clutches of a false teacher it will lead to death: most certainly spiritual and sometimes naturally.

Atlanta minister Mark Moore writes that Pearson’s inclusion delusion will force the church to abandon its foundational anchors.

“To view inclusion as a viable Christian doctrine, we would have to throw away the Old Testament and its big mean God who had the nerve to punish people. We would need to censor the radical Jesus of the Gospels on that whole “must be born again” thing and silence Paul and his admonition to “come out from among them.” We would certainly have to walk through revelations with a white out paint brush and cover up all of that lake of fire and judgment stuff. In short, we would have to completely disregard the word of God in order to make inclusion make sense. Jesus is not simply a way, He is the only way. Yet and still, it seems that more and more people are living lives and promoting lifestyles that suggest Bishop Pearson was right in his assertion that the church is moving closer to his position.”

For more on Pearson and his journey into ignominy see our past reports here, here and here.

The ‘Imago Dei’ campaign has another face

IMAGE

A very good read and alternative perspective on Rev. Samuel Rodriguez’ Imago Dei campaign. The religious PR effort was launched to widespread fanfare, but all is not what it seems according to Dr. Robert Gagnon, a top Christian theologian. Rodriguez  said his intent was only to end the “rhetorical bullying” and facilitate “redemptive and reconciliatory” interactions — not to “condone any behavior” or “endorse anything that runs counter to a biblical worldview.”

Although he drops a new social buzzword, Rodriguez doesn’t provide any examples of “rhetorical bullying”. For instance is it “rhetorical bullying” to say publicly that homosexuality is a sin and homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God?” Or is he referring to the Westboro Baptist Church?

The ID campaign’s ideology also includes a fair measure of diaprax.  Diaprax is an emergent church concept which attempts to forge unity between believers and nonbelievers under a false banner.

Writing in the Christian Post, Gagnon acknowledges the campaign as “well meaning, but flawed”. In particular the ID tries to hard to diminish the severity of homosexuality by couching it as some benign social disparity like the homeless. The problem is that ID is more about —as a previous article stated— converting Christians on the issue of homosexuality than it is about converting homosexuals by the gospel of Christ.

The ID seems to be a religious version of the famous Rodney King line “Cant we all just get along?”

I appreciate the fact that this “campaign” apparently continues to view homosexual practice as sin (though in extremely muted tones) and that it wants to promote love for those who engage in it. However, its half-orbed message that “the image of God exists in all human beings: black and white; rich and poor; straight and gay; conservative and liberal; victim and perpetrator; citizen and undocumented; believer and unbeliever” is flawed.

It lumps together very different categories. There is nothing intrinsically immoral about ethnicity, social status, party affiliation, citizen status, or even the mere experience of sexual attractions to do what God forbids.

I have a suggestion: In order to make clearer the message that affirmation of one’s creation in the image of God does not lead to support for all behaviors, the organizers of the campaign should add something more explicit like: “serial pedophiles, rapists, murderers, and the people they victimize.

The framers of the document probably won’t be amending anything they wrote but in case they are interested in comprehensive critique, here it is:

(1) It appears to regard a strong expression of disapproval of homosexual practice as equally at fault with a strong expression of its approval.

(2) It fails to address the crucial point that homosexual activity, like egregious immorality generally, threatens to mar the image of God stamped on people, dishonoring and degrading what God created in his image by treating another’s gender as only half intact in relation to its own sex.

The theme of marring the image of God is clear enough from Genesis 1:27 where the proclamation of the Imago Dei is immediately followed by an implicit affirmation of a male-female requirement for sexual relations: “In the image of God he created [the human] / male and female he created them.” It is clear too from Romans 1:24-27 where Paul speaks of the “dishonoring” or “degrading” effect of males having sex with males and females with females, with Gen 1:27 echoed in the background.

(3) This “campaign” will do nothing to stifle the advance of coercive and abusive homosexualism in this country but may deceive many faithful Christians into silencing their own resistance to this advance as incompatible both with a positive proclamation of “a relationship with God … through Christ” and with “loving actions,” as mere “rhetorical bullying” and “polarizing rhetoric” toward the “marginalized” and the “oppressed.”

As Gagnon pointed out the false unity espoused by the ID is a sad reality of the contemporary church’s lust to hold hands with sinners in an attempt to make them comfortable and less resistant to the church’s “love is all we need” message. It is an epic failure. Offering sinners love and friendship while treating truth like a red-haired stepchild, is a grave disservice to their souls.

The Imago Dei hasn’t moved any mountains. Homosexuals and liberals have had a blase reaction to it. The only ones who seemed to be celebrating its release are Christians who desperately want the homosexual community to accept them. Like its predecessors, the Covenant of Civility , the Manhattan Declaration and the abominable Affirmation Declaration, the Imago Dei campaign will become another sad example of failed religion attempting to circumvent the Great Commission.

 

African bishop rejects deceptive offer to “dialogue” on homosexuality

The religious left’s invitation to “dialogue” is more than enough reason to refuse it.  The religious left is made of a compendium of deceptive movements that have no intention of acknowledging the truth and authority of scripture. So what’s there to talk about?

africanbishopIn a prelude to his visit to Africa, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby issued a statement reminding Anglicans of the commitment the Church of England made eight years ago to the pastoral care and support of everyone, including homosexuals. But African Anglican leaders made no such covenant. Providing “pastoral care and support” is deceptive. What Justin Welby means is that they want homosexuals to be accepted as equal members of the communion WITHOUT having to repent of their sins like everyone else who desires the fellowship of the saints.

Its pastoral to tell homosexuals the truth and not lie to them about the eternal state of their souls should they reject God’s call to repentance. God loves everyone, but has been clear about his kingdom. Those who refuse to repent will not have part in it. 1 Cor 6:9-11. It is a pastor’s sacred duty to firmly convey this in love to all sinners, including homosexuals. That’s the real gospel of inclusion.

Kenya’s Archbishop Eliud Wabukala, chairman of the Global African Future Conference Primates’ Council, said the move would project the Church of England’s problems onto the communion as a whole.

“Without clear understanding of biblical authority and interpretation, such dialogue will spread confusion and open doors for false interpretation of the gospel,” said Wabukala in a pastoral letter. “I cannot commend the proposal.”

Wabukala termed the College of Bishops’ proposal deeply disturbing, given the intensive debate within the communion on the subject.

“The underlying problem is whether or not there is a willingness to accept the Bible for what it is, the word of God,” said Wabukala.

In Uganda, Anglican Archbishop Stanley Ntagali said in a statement that homosexuality is incompatible with Scripture.

Archbishop Wabukala takes the same wise reasoning stance as Nehemiah. When there is no admission of submission to biblical authority on the part of the religious leftists, there is no basis for dialogue.

 

A sad and tragic end to Exodus International looming?

edeath The Overcomers Network will prepare a public statement pending the outcome of Alan Chambers’ appearance on the Lisa Ling show June 20th.

In the video clip, the demonic voice of archenemy Michael Bussee, his eyes almost glowing with anger, demands: ” The organization needs to shut down. Shut down! Dont tweak it. Shut it down!”

Related Posts with Thumbnails