Category — John Boswell

Apprising Ministries blog put up four phenomenal videos from 1986 which show a couple of gay christian clerics unable to defend their theology. Watching them, its clear that little has changed over the last 25 years except that they have become more sophisticated in how they explain their falsehoods and half truths. These four videos provide you with a stunning instructional look at just how shallow these people are.

Thanks also to Apprising Ministries for recognizing that the gay christian movement is a significant contemporary threat to the internal spiritual health of today’s church. And like GCM Watch, AM called attention to the so-called emergent church’s collusion with the gcm. GCM Watch is extremely disappointed at the larger apologetics sites for neglecting to provide more ongoing teaching on this. We contacted several of them but they seem to believe that gcm theology is so preposterous (as one person told me) no one would believe it. What a gross misjudgment.

The videos are from pioneer talk show host June Cain Miller, featuring Dr. Walter Martin (who died 3 years after this), gay MCC cleric Rev Brad Anderson (who later died of AIDS), Rev. Wayne Christiansen (now pastor of a progay Lutheran church) anda young  Andy Comiskey who founded Desert Streams Ministry and the Living Waters Program.

The exchanges are fascinating to watch as Dr. Martin reveals the shallow fallacy of homosexual religion. Historically, he notes there existed no protestant, catholic and orthodox belief which sanctioned homosexual religion. That concept was born and advanced largely through the work of gay christian theologian John Boswell.

Martin said “Gays can be religious and there are gays that are Christians,…but they are non practicing, just like there are adulterers and fornicators who are christian but theyre not practicing. So a gay can be a Christian if they are not practicing immorality.”

Martin comment seems to suggest agreement with the new gay christian argument which allows a person to claim a gay identity but not practice homosexual sexual activity. Exodus President Alan Chamber recently addressed that.

When the gay pastor attempts to make the issue one of relative normality, Comiskey corrects him with a quick lesson on God’s intent. I love how Comiskey explains that God’s perspective is soterical, not merely prohibitional. God blocks justification of sin so that the sinner can see his need for the saving blood of Jesus Christ. However, both of the progay reverends continue to throw up strawmen arguments, evasive answers, red herrings, half truths and emotional sidebars that are embarrasing to listen to. The exchanges reminded me of the panel I participated on in Greensboro, NC.

We’ve contended for sometime that the arguments of the gcm are inherently circular and are up against a wall in terms of honesty, integrity and legitimacy. All lies create other lies to sustain themselves but eventually will come to a dead end. Literally.

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. Rev 21:8

Its our urgent duty to inform you that Dr. Teresa Brown, the assistant pastor at New Bethel AME church in Lithonia, GA is spreading a deadly disease called SIV.  The Spiritual Immunodeficiency Virus is a highly infectious spiritual disease which disables an individual’s ability to know truth and defend themselves against false teachings. The consequence is those who are infected, infect others and can kill the spirit. SIV is an equal opportunity killer and those who do not embrace God’s truth are at high risk.

Brown, also a professor at the Chandler School of Theology, told NBC’s progay, African American flavored newsblog The Grio multiple lies and distortions about homosexuality, the bible and the church [source].

The article itself attempts to do in the “black church” what political homosexual activists have done in the military with the Dont Ask, Dont Tell policy. As we have told you before, the church activists have the same agenda as the political activists. Tear down any and all barriers to homosexuals gaining unrestricted access to positions of power within the church.

Long before Clinton’s time, the same issue was alive and well within the black church, said Dr. Teresa Fry Brown, professor of Homiletics and director of Black Church Studies at the Candler School of Theology in Atlanta, GA. And it began not long after integration.

Prior to integration, during, say, the Harlem Renaissance, a person’s sexual identity was not an issue, Fry Brown said.

“That was what you did and who you were,” she said. “But the more we identified with other cultures, the more we would step on one another. We became so mind-alteringly obsessed with others’ sexuality. It made us turn on one another.”

At one time, the black church was the home of unity, love, and acceptance. It was the black church that served as the home of the civil rights movement. It was the black church that helped strengthen the black community. But then the obsession with sexuality made its way into the church — thanks to the influence of some conservative capital.

Who a person slept with and how they lived became a cause of critique — that is, except when it came to the choir director or minister of music, in many cases.

Cultural Lies

Dr. Brown’s first set of lies center on the revisioning of a historical/cultural period.  Considering Brown has multiple educational degrees, its rather disconcerting to see comments devoid of any evidence to support her wild claims.

First, Brown attempts to make the church and the Harlem Renaissance one and the same. They are not and if history is correct, the Harlem Renaissance occurred within the confines of a small area of New York and ended abruptly with the onset of the Great Depression. A person’s sexuality may not have mattered in the Cotton Club and to the “new negro” elites that rose to prominence during the decade, but there is zero evidence that one’s sexuality “wasnt an issue” in the church.

In fact back in March, GCM Watch published a story showing  Brown’s claim to be false. In November 1929, prominent Harlem minister Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Sr. published a series of sermons on sexual perversion. Powell said sexual perversion was steadily increasing in large American cities, particularly among women and ministers.  Powell, whose church which was a landmark  institution in Harlem, had seen the effects of homosexuality during  the HR era and knew that if the church was to survive, someone had to combat it.

What’s more, if black folk were so “obsessed” with other black folk’s sexuality, how can  Brown claim in the same thought group that a person’s sexuality didn’t matter to anyone else? It can’t be both.

Brown uses the same illogical argument the deceased John Boswell promoted in his book Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality. Boswell argued that  homosexuality was always accepted and celebrated within the church. That is until mysterious outsiders changed everything. That’s not only historically inaccurate, but shocking coming from a teaching theologian in an institution of higher learning. Read Greco-Roman history as well as the background of Paul’s letters to Corinth and Rome to get your bearings.

Church lies

While the church version of DADT is in full effect in some predominately African American churches, the same is true of its counterparts with other predominately racial makeups. Its part of a biblically unacceptable undercurrent of sin in the church that will eventually collide with the judgment of God.

Growing up with a mother who was a choir director in Kansas City, Fry Brown said the main critiques of the choir director were that he, or she, was either sleeping with all the women in the church (if they were a man), or was gay or living with their mother.  No one talked about the sexual identity of the choir directors then, but everyone knew about them. Labels like, “He’s special” or “She’s special” were always placed upon the director. But that was as far as it went.

Why?

“It is because of the importance of their role in the worship experience,” Collins said of choir directors. “It is because of the pure benefit that these men and women bring to the church. They are creative; gifted, and I dare to say…anointed at the highest level. They add to the religious experience. And when done with excellence, as many of these folk are capable of achieving, the church experience comes alive.”

“Showstoppers” is how Philip David Hill, minister of music of the Victory Church [article does not identify this church as a progay with a homosexual leaning pastor] in Stone Mountain, GA, describes many choir directors in the black church.

“It seems as though the most talented singers in the church, the most talented musicians in the church just happen to be gay,” he said. “I don’t know why that is. People go where they are most talented. It just is what it is.”

Hill said it is not a matter of trying to hide the fact that these individuals are gay. It just is not talked about.
But is it okay that their sexual identity not be addressed?
Fry Brown considers it an issue of integrity on the part of the pastor. She calls it a form of dehumanization. When she was entering ministry, she was told she could be a minister, but as a woman, could not cry because crying was seen as a sign of weakness. It was like asking her to not be who she was.

The same is being asked of individuals who are asked to hide their sexuality, she said.

Brown is joined by another apostate teacher who repeats the very questionable claim. He says “the most talented musicians in the church just happen to be gay”.  According to what survey? What statistics  bear out this out? Who determines what constitutes “the most talented”? And since when does “talent” become criteria for right relationship with God? Hill admits he has no factual evidence to back it up his assertions, but in the same breath passes it off as if it was written in stone.

One of the issues the church hasn’t resolved and probably never will is that it has allowed the worship of music to eclipse the worship of God and devotion to his Word. That’s why churches easily fall into the trap where they can be at the mercy of homosexual musicians et al. Churches that do put music and Word in proper priority don’t have the problem of  asking homosexuals to “hide their sexuality”.

Emotional lies

False teachers like Brown capitalize on the emotional brokenness of homosexuals. They stroke the flames of isolation, alienation and hatred of the truth by telling homosexuals they are being “discriminated” against by the church. But this is another odd irony. How can homosexuals (according to Brown and Hill) command the top positions, lead the top choirs, be hailed as the most talented, and at the same time be discriminated against?

“You want them to lead your choirs, entertain you every Sunday, but they have to hold back a portion of who they are,” Fry Brown said. “As long as you are making money for the church, they don’t care what you do as long as you don’t self identify.”

So why do the choir directors and/or ministers of music do it? Not necessarily for the money and their livelihood, but because alienation outweighs accountability, Fry Brown said.

“Love is one of our basic human needs; it is critical,” she said. “It is at the core of our humanity. When there’s a threat that love will be withheld, then we will be who we have to be to keep from losing that love.”

And while it is an issue that needs to be dealt with, it is not safe to say that this goes on in every black church, said Fry Brown. Geography and denomination are major factors in whether or not a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is present.

But the bible does discriminate, separate and judge! That’s why Brown is a false teacher sick with SIV and no better than the people she accuses of taking advantage of homosexuals in church. False teachers dont teach the truth, they teach a socialized, political version of the bible.

How does the AME Church allow someone like an assistant pastor to make such anti-bible statements with no consequences?  Brown should be quarantined from preaching by her denomination until she is healed of SIV.

Bishop Vickie Gene Robinson, the Episcopal church’s first bishop of abominations quite possibly has lost any resemblance of a person who at some point in his life recognized truth. What’s more disturbing is that the multiple lies he spouts are commonplace teachings among gay christians. How can a person claiming Christ embrace and promote such things? Well, it doesn’t come overnight. It takes an enormous amount of spiritual energy to continually override the truth and embrace a lie. I dont say it often, but the bishop is demon-possessed. I don’t say that to “demonize” him, but because it is a recognition of what is speaking from inside him.

How do you explain the poison dripping from this collar wearing serpent? What about Jesus’s red letter words (for all the Tony Campolo fans):

If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! John 8:42-45 NIV (our bold)

Anyone who engages in this type of systemic lying and rejection of the truth, is not a child of God, but a descendant of the devil. That’s why those in the gay christian movement unless and until they repent and renounce these beliefs cannot even so much as consider them “brothers and sisters in Christ”. They are no more brothers and sisters than the people Jesus was addressing in the above passage.

GCM Watch has covered Robinson’s litany of lies and his vengeful reign as a so-called bishop before, so I wont revisit what’s in the video in detail here. But you can read here, here and here to see biblical responses to the doctrines of devils out of Robinson’s mouth. And as we explained before most of the articulation of contemporary gay christian theology is credited to John Boswell’s book Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality.

h/t: Americans for Truth about homosexuality

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

Nevermind that gay bishop Vickie Gene Robinson meets hardly any of the qualifications for a biblical bishop as set forth in 1 Timothy 3:2-7:

“A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behaviour, hospitable, able to teach, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. Moreover, he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.”

Much can be said of the gross error Robinson is steeped in, but the best proof comes out of the mouth of Robinson himself.

In a redux segment [May8 segment] on the Today Show with interviewer Matt Lauer, Robinson gorges himself with lies and hypocrisy seemingly without even being aware of it.

First, while comparing himself to Christ and the prophets, Robinson now claims he has lived under “death threats” while wearing bullet proof vests since he was consecrated by church liberals. This is astonishing, not to mention high drama.  When Lauer asks why Robinson is just now revealing this now Robinson side steps and lies.

Lauer asks Robinson if his reinterpretation of the scriptures is self serving. Although it is, Robinson claims he’s accepting that revisionism because of “scholars”. He fails to mention that the scholars  who concocted this lie are homosexuals who were also reinventing scripture for obvious self serving reasons. The gay christian movement’s crowning achievement is to reimagine scripture to exempt their sin. Imagine a liar using Ananias and Sapphira as justification for lying because they were “misunderstood” or simply afraid to tell the truth because they feared Peter’s “oppressive” leadership.

Since Robinson wont say it, we will. He’s hawking a new book and throwing out the “death threat” info to help push the book. In other words, its the old controversy sells promotions trick.  If we could suggest a new, but more appropriate title for the book it would be ”In the eye of a lie”.  Robinson is hawking his book “In the eye of the storm.”

This is the man the president-elect is “consulting” presumably for spiritual guidance.

Thanks to Scripture Refiners Fire, GCM Watch was made aware of an incredible body of biblical research on homosexuality by David Root, Jr. of Layhands.com.

Its amazing what an honest study of the scriptures will produce when you allow them to speak and the Holy Spirit to illuminate the logos. David has done an outstanding job writing this and more than ever it is clear that there is no justification whatsoever found in any of the 66 books of the Bible for homosexual conduct. Not even for those who self identify as so-called ”gay and celibate”.

Its sheer madness for the gay christian movement to stubbornly continue to uphold such an egregious lie just to please their flesh. Every possible mention (whether implied or explict) of homosexuality in the Bible speaks against the sin with the harshest, most condemning language possible. One wonders why people continue to soften the language and change the dire consequences of the sin to “save” homosexuals. If we change the language of the scripture no matter how harsh it is, will it actually save someone? I think not. Jesus said that only [his] truth can make us free.

Sin is deadly, vile and degenerative in all its forms. It is so pervasive and destructive in the human race that it took the blood of an innocent man to pay the price for freedom from it. And there was no one worthy enough to die except Jesus.  Dumbing down sin and its consequences can be nothing less than a rejection of the precious sacrifice of our Redeemer’s blood. Yet, those who argue homosexuality isnt a sin do just that. 

David shows how the flimsy argument that the Bible was only condemning temple idolatry and not “consensual, loving same gender relationships” is completely untrue.

Some homosexuals argue that Leviticus 18:22 (above) refers to cultic idolatry in the form of male temple prostitution, or that it refers to some other specific form of homosexuality rather than describing homosexual activity in general (our italics). Notice that the preceding verse (Leviticus 18:21, above) does refer to a form of idolatry, but it has nothing to do with male temple prostitution. It’s a huge stretch to use Leviticus 18:21 for making the argument that Leviticus 18:22 is referring to male temple prostitution. In fact, the very next verse (Leviticus 18:23, above) talks about having sex with animals, which has nothing to do with male temple prostitution. So the context of Leviticus 18:22 does not in any way indicate that cultic prostitution is the sin being described rather than general homosexual activity. In fact, we can prove this even further by looking at Leviticus 20:10-21 (above). In verse 13 we see the exact same reference to homosexuality, and the entire context of that verse relates to a variety of sexual sins. There is no idolatry in view here.”

What makes this so fresh is that David Root didn’t start out to prove some sort of predetermined thesis. He was simply responding to a question asked to him. Someone said their church was struggling over whether to ordain gay ministers and wanted to know “what does the bible say about homosexuality?”

David decided to intently study —without malice towards gays— and the result was his detailed exegesis of what the Bible says.

This is the type of honest exegesis that strikes fear in the hearts of the rebellious leaders of the gay christian movement. Knowing they cannot possibly refute the clear teaching of the scriptures, some are now informing their followers not to “argue the Bible”.  In doing so, like the church leaders of the dark ages they prevent people from finding out the truth for themselves.

We’ll place a permanent link to in under our resources column. Please feel free to reference it when you are confronted with the many lies, distortions and mischaracterizations of scripture originating out of the gay christian movement.

Related:
More than you know

John Boswell’s brilliant lie

Is gay sex sin according to the Bible?