Month: June 2013

EXCERPTS FROM SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA’S 26 PAGE DISSENTING OPINION ON GAY MARRIAGE




From Supreme Court records: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf, via Culture News article: https://ratherexposethem.org/2013/06/supremes-new-morality-means-justice-for.html.

Excerpts from Scalia dissent regarding Defense of Marriage Act ruling of 6/26/13:

“This case is about power in several respects. It is about the power of our people to govern themselves, and the power of this Court to pronounce the law. Today’s opinion aggrandizes the latter, with the predictable consequence of diminishing the former. We have no power to decide this case. And even if we did, we have no power under the Constitution to invalidate this democratically adopted legislation. The Court’s errors on both points spring forth from the same diseased root: an exalted conception of the role of this institution in America.

[The majority opinion] is jaw-dropping. It is an assertion of judicial supremacy over the people’s Representatives in Congress and the Executive. It envisions a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere “primary” in its role.

There are many remarkable things about the majority’s merits holding. The first is how rootless and shifting its justifications are. For example, the opinion starts with seven full pages about the traditional power of States to define domestic relations—initially fooling many readers, I am sure, into thinking that this is a federalism opinion. But we are eventually told that “it is unnecessary to decide whether this federal intrusion on state power is a violation of the Constitution,” and that “[t]he State’s power in defining the marital relation is of central relevance in this case quite apart from principles of federalism” because “the State’s decision to give this class of persons the right to marry conferred upon them a dignity and status of immense import.” But no one questions the power of the States to define marriage (with the concomitant conferral of dignity and status), so what is the point of devoting seven pages to describing how long and well established that power is? Even after the opinion has formally disclaimed reliance upon principles of federalism, mentions of “the usual tradition of recognizing and accepting state definitions of marriage” continue. What to make of this? The opinion never explains. My guess is that the majority, while reluctant to suggest that defining the meaning of “marriage” in federal statutes is unsupported by any of the Federal Government’s enumerated powers, nonetheless needs some rhetorical basis to support its pretense that today’s prohibition of laws excluding same-sex marriage is confined to the Federal Government (leaving the second, state-law shoe to be dropped later, maybe next Term). But I am only guessing.

Equally perplexing are the opinion’s references to “the Constitution’s guarantee of equality.” Near the end of the opinion, we are told that although the “equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment makes [the] Fifth Amendment [due process] right all the more specific and all the better understood and preserved”—what can that mean?—“the Fifth Amendment itself withdraws from Government the power to degrade or demean in the way this law does.” The only possible interpretation of this statement is that the Equal Protection Clause, even the Equal Protection Clause as incorporated in the Due Process Clause, is not the basis for today’s holding. . . .

Moreover, if this is meant to be an equal-protection opinion, it is a confusing one. The opinion does not resolve and indeed does not even mention what had been the central question in this litigation: whether, under the Equal Protection Clause, laws restricting marriage to a man and a woman are reviewed for more than mere rationality. . . .

The majority opinion need not get into the strict-vs.rational-basis scrutiny question, and need not justify its holding under either, because it says that DOMA is unconstitutional as “a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution,” that it violates “basic due process” principles, and that it inflicts an “injury and indignity” of a kind that denies “an essential part of the liberty protected by the Fifth Amendment,” The majority never utters the dread words “substantive due process,” perhaps sensing the disrepute into which that doctrine has fallen, but that is what those statements mean. Yet the opinion does not argue that same-sex marriage is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” . . . a claim that would of course be quite absurd. So would the further suggestion (also necessary, under our substantive-due-process precedents) that a world in which DOMA exists is one bereft of “‘ordered liberty.’”

Some might conclude that this loaf could have used a while longer in the oven. But that would be wrong; it is already overcooked. The most expert care in preparation cannot redeem a bad recipe. The sum of all the Court’s nonspecific hand-waving is that this law is invalid (maybe on equal-protection grounds, maybe on substantive-due process grounds, and perhaps with some amorphous federalism component playing a role) because it is motivated by a “‘bare . . . desire to harm’” couples in same-sex marriages. It is this proposition with which I will therefore engage.

As I have observed before, the Constitution does not forbid the government to enforce traditional moral and sexual norms. . . . I will not swell the U. S. Reports with restatements of that point. It is enough to say that the Constitution neither requires nor forbids our society to approve of same-sex marriage, much as it neither requires nor forbids us to approve of no-fault divorce, polygamy, or the consumption of alcohol. However, even setting aside traditional moral disapproval of same-sex marriage (or indeed same-sex sex), there are many perfectly valid—indeed, downright boring—justifying rationales for this legislation. Their existence ought to be the end of this case. For they give the lie to the Court’s conclusion that only those with hateful hearts could have voted “aye” on this Act. And more importantly, they serve to make the contents of the legislators’ hearts quite irrelevant: “It is a familiar principle of constitutional law that this Court will not strike down an otherwise constitutional statute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative motive.” Or at least it was a familiar principle. By holding to the contrary, the majority has declared open season on any law that (in the opinion of the law’s opponents and any panel of like-minded federal judges) can be characterized as mean-spirited.

The majority concludes that the only motive for this Act was the “bare . . . desire to harm a politically unpopular group.” Bear in mind that the object of this condemnation is not the legislature of some once-Confederate Southern state (familiar objects of the Court’s scorn . . .), but our respected coordinate branches, the Congress and Presidency of the United States. Laying such a charge against them should require the most extraordinary evidence, and I would have thought that every attempt would be made to indulge a more anodyne explanation for the statute. The majority does the opposite—affirmatively concealing from the reader the arguments that exist in justification. It makes only a passing mention of the “arguments put forward” by the Act’s defenders, and does not even trouble to paraphrase or describe them. I imagine that this is because it is harder to maintain the illusion of the Act’s supporters as unhinged members of a wild-eyed lynch mob when one first describes their views as they see them.

To choose just one of these defenders’ arguments, DOMA avoids difficult choice-of-law issues that will now arise absent a uniform federal definition of marriage. . . . Imagine a pair of women who marry in Albany and then move to Alabama, which does not “recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex.” When the couple files their next federal tax return, may it be a joint one? Which State’s law controls, for federal-law purposes: their State of celebration (which recognizes the marriage) or their State of domicile (which does not)? (Does the answer depend on whether they were just visiting in Albany?) Are these questions to be answered as a matter of federal common law, or perhaps by borrowing a State’s choice-of-law rules? If so, which State’s? And what about States where the status of an out-of-state same-sex marriage is an unsettled question under local law? . . . DOMA avoided all of this uncertainty by specifying which marriages would be recognized for federal purposes. That is a classic purpose for a definitional provision.

Further, DOMA preserves the intended effects of prior legislation against then-unforeseen changes in circumstance. When Congress provided (for example) that a special estate-tax exemption would exist for spouses, this exemption reached only opposite-sex spouses—those being the only sort that were recognized in any State at the time of DOMA’s passage. When it became clear that changes in state law might one day alter that balance, DOMA’s definitional section was enacted to ensure that state-level experimentation did not automatically alter the basic operation of federal law, unless and until Congress made the further judgment to do so on its own. That is not animus—just stabilizing prudence. Congress has hardly demonstrated itself unwilling to make such further, revising judgments upon due deliberation.

The Court mentions none of this. Instead, it accuses the Congress that enacted this law and the President who signed it of something much worse than, for example, having acted in excess of enumerated federal powers—or even having drawn distinctions that prove to be irrational. Those legal errors may be made in good faith, errors though they are. But the majority says that the supporters of this Act acted with malice—with the “purpose to disparage and to injure” same-sex couples. It says that the motivation for DOMA was to “demean,” to “impose inequality,” to “impose . . . a stigma,” to deny people “equal dignity,” to brand gay people as “unworthy,” and to “humiliat[e]” their children.

I am sure these accusations are quite untrue. To be sure (as the majority points out), the legislation is called the Defense of Marriage Act. But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to “disparage,” ”injure,” “degrade,” ”demean,” and “humiliate” our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homosexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence—indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.

The penultimate sentence of the majority’s opinion is a naked declaration that “[t]his opinion and its holding are confined” to those couples “joined in same-sex marriages made lawful by the State.” I have heard such “bald, unreasoned disclaimer[s]” before. Lawrence, 539 U. S., at 604. When the Court declared a constitutional right to homosexual sodomy, we were assured that the case had nothing, nothing at all to do with “whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter.” Now we are told that DOMA is invalid because it “demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects,” —with an accompanying citation of Lawrence. It takes real cheek for today’s majority to assure us, as it is going out the door, that a constitutional requirement to give formal recognition to same-sex marriage is not at issue here—when what has preceded that assurance is a lecture on how superior the majority’s moral judgment in favor of same-sex marriage is to the Congress’s hateful moral judgment against it. I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.

. . . In my opinion . . . the view that this Court will take of state prohibition of same-sex marriage is indicated beyond mistaking by today’s opinion. As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’” couples in same-sex marriages. How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status. . . .

In sum, that Court which finds it so horrific that Congress irrationally and hatefully robbed same-sex couples of the “personhood and dignity” which state legislatures conferred upon them, will of a certitude be similarly appalled by state legislatures’ irrational and hateful failure to acknowledge that “personhood and dignity” in the first place. As far as this Court is concerned, no one should be fooled; it is just a matter of listening and waiting for the other shoe.

By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition. Henceforth those challengers will lead with this Court’s declaration that there is “no legitimate purpose” served by such a law, and will claim that the traditional definition has “the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure” the “personhood and dignity” of same-sex couples. The majority’s limiting assurance will be meaningless in the face of language like that, as the majority well knows. That is why the language is there. The result will be a judicial distortion of our society’s debate over marriage—a debate that can seem in need of our clumsy “help” only to a member of this institution.

As to that debate: Few public controversies touch an institution so central to the lives of so many, and few inspire such attendant passion by good people on all sides. Few public controversies will ever demonstrate so vividly the beauty of what our Framers gave us, a gift the Court pawns today to buy its stolen moment in the spotlight: a system of government that permits us to rule ourselves. Since DOMA’s passage, citizens on all sides of the question have seen victories and they have seen defeats. There have been plebiscites, legislation, persuasion, and loud voices—in other words, democracy. . . .

In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more complicated. It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s Court can handle. Too bad. A reminder that disagreement over something so fundamental as marriage can still be politically legitimate would have been a fit task for what in earlier times was called the judicial temperament. We might have covered ourselves with honor today, by promising all sides of this debate that it was theirs to settle and that we would respect their resolution. We might have let the People decide.

But that the majority will not do. Some will rejoice in today’s decision, and some will despair at it; that is the nature of a controversy that matters so much to so many. But the Court has cheated both sides, robbing the winners of an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from an honest victory, and the losers of the peace that comes from a fair defeat. We owed both of them better. I dissent.”

To read the entire Supreme Court justice’s writing above, CLICK HERE.

_____________________________________________________________

THE “INNER CALLING”, SEDUCTION & DECEPTION OF BUDDHIST MINDFUL EATING JUST NOT BIBLICAL

    We would like to “judgmentally” introduce you to Lorrie Jones of Seattle, Washington State, a self-described mindful eating “coach” and/or “facilitator”. This biblical judgment is based on God-given discernment, using our God-given minds, understanding the Word of God and implementing its commands and doctrines. 

Mark 13:22-“For false christs and false prophets will rise and show signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.”

2 Timothy 3:13-“But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.”

Ephesians 6:12– “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.”

Jones’s profiles are at her two websites:
http://www.simpleserenity.com/about.php.
http://www.livingmindfullytoday.com/about/.
    We are confused as to which is the real Lorrie Jones. Are these two pictures of the same person? Is one an earlier photo, and one a later photo? Which is the earlier and which is the later? If she lost 1,900 pounds of weight, as she maintains, give us the medical evidence and the photos! We ask this because if mindful eating is not deceptive, the public should know the truth! Just like psychoheresy is a pretentious, un-Godly mixture of pseudo-science with Christianity, mindful eating is a deceptive, integrated approach of pseudo-science mixed with pagan Buddhist practices, and should be avoided.
    In any case, mindfully speaking, using God-given common sense, one has to ask if the first picture is the result of mindful eating or a radical facelift, or is it simply from an earlier era before Eastern pagan practices were imported to the West, when she did not eat mindfully. The proof would be in a portfolio of dated, full figure photos over many years, so we can see for ourselves where the 1,900 pounds went! Maybe it was all in the hips and thighs, but when?

See her websites: http://www.simpleserenity.com/ and http://www.livingmindfullytoday.com/.
In her promo videos on YouTube, she explains slowly and in a purposely “monotone” way of speaking:
“Meet Lorrie Jones”:



“What is Mindfulness and How do I Use it Daily?”:


“Welcome to Simple Serenity”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9NgwsdVwF0.

FOCUS ON THE FAMILY: A SHAM AND A SHAME~THREE PART ANALYSIS BY MARTIN BOBGAN OF PSYCHOHERESY AWARENESS MINISTRIES

Part 1:

Focus on the Family: A Sham and a Shame
Part One

by Martin & Deidre Bobgan

Sometime back we did a series of articles on the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC) in which we called the AACC “A Sham and a Shame” and then demonstrated why they deserve that epithet.1 We now apply that same epithet to Focus on the Family (FOTF). We wrote extensively about FOTF during the years that Dr. James Dobson founded and headed the organization. We wrote a book titled James Dobson’s Gospel of Self-Esteem & Psychology2 and numerous articles, which expose FOTF’s unbiblical and unscientific support of self-esteem and psychology. Simply said, Dobson, during the entire time he headed FOFT, was guilty of what we call “psychoheresy” and its spread world-wide, which we document in our writing.

We contend that the influx of psychology and humanism into the church is one of the greatest heresies, subtle seductions, and demonic deceptions in the American church today, and Dobson has been a powerful contributor. What is that heresy, seduction, and deception? It is “bowing down” to the unproven, unscientific wisdom of men rather than having total confidence and dependency upon the miraculous power of God and His Word in matters of the soul.

We use the term psychoheresy because what we describe is a psychological heresy. It is a heresy because it is a departure from the fundamental truth of the Gospel. It is a denial of the sufficiency of Scripture for the issues of life now treated with psychological and humanistic ideas, which utilize the very wisdom of man about which God has warned His people (1 Cor. 2). Psychoheresy is this Last Days’ seductive psychological and humanistic wisdom of man that has been one of the greatest ruinations of the visible church, because it undermines the sufficiency of the Word of God, thereby opening the door to other worldly philosophies and practices.

Before demonstrating that FOTF is a sham and a shame, we say up front that FOTF is a mixed bag of biblical and unbiblical teachings. We are not ruling out the use of factual information or human knowledge that may be helpful. However, while Jim Daly, Dobson’s replacement, has a biblical grasp of the orthodox doctrines of Scripture, it is his unorthodox application of those biblical doctrines and their often notable absence that we will note in this review.

We will reveal that FOTF, like the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3 is a picture and practice of the church in the Last Days. Jesus says to the Laodicean church:

I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth (Rev. 3:15-16).

When one mixes cold and hot water together, the result is sickening lukewarm water. When one mixes biblical orthodoxy together with psychological and humanistic wisdom of men, as does FOTF, the result is a watered down, lukewarm Christianity. This lukewarm FOTF form of Christianity is popular because it appeals to a lukewarm Last Days Laodicean-like church.
In addition, FOTF is guilty of resembling aspects of 2 Timothy 3:1-7, which begins with “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves” and ends with “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” While teaching sound doctrine at times, the FOTF’s deep involvement in this psychological and humanistic wisdom of men ends up being only a lukewarm knowledge of the truth. Daly inherited the leaven of Dobson that had come to full loaf, but he should have heeded the apostle Paul’s admonition to “Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened” (1 Cor. 5:7).

Enter Jim Daly

In 2005 Jim Daly succeeded Dobson and is now the main host of the Focus on the Family radio program, which reaches an estimated 220 million listeners all over the world.3 FOTF is a world-wide organization and its web site is extensive, covering its various involvements and influences. The FOTF half-hour program is “carried daily on 2,000 radio outlets in the United States.”4

To examine whether Daly and FOTF are continuing Dobson’s psychoheresy and humanistic tradition, we looked at several facets of its vast world-wide ministry. While Daly is the main host of the FOTF radio program, Dr. Julie Slattery, a licensed psychologist, is a co-cost. Having Slattery on as co-host continues the pro-licensed-psychology position of Dobson, also a licensed psychologist. The use of Slattery and other psychologists continues the FOTF position of the Bible plus psychology and humanistic ideas, and at many times it ends up being just plain psychology or humanistic ideas without the Bible.

Daly also continues Dobson’s practice of referring those who call FOTF to only licensed professional counselors in one’s local area. In addition, FOTF provides those who call FOTF an opportunity to speak with a staff “licensed Christian counselor.” Local pastors are never referred to callers unless the pastor is a licensed professional counselor.

To put this Daly/Slattery duo to the test, we read a number of the Daly and Daly/Slattery “Dear Abby” type of newspaper columns. Before commenting on these articles, we quote from the annual Federal 990 Form, which requires an answer to the following: “Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities” (bold added). In answer to the question the FOTF yearly 990 Form states: “FOCUS ON THE FAMILY SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHILE PROMOTING BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES” (upper case in original). Because that is their mission (i.e., commitment, aim, goal, purpose, objective), we looked at each activity of FOTF through the prism of their mission statement.

We read a number of FOTF articles that were in newspapers across the country. In none of these articles did we find either a direct or indirect reference to “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” or “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES.” As a matter of fact, the name of Jesus is entirely absent from every one of those articles, and no mention is made of “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” or “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES.” None of the biblical doctrines related to Jesus’ teachings or the Gospel itself can be found in them. No mention of sin, salvation, justification, new life in Christ, or sanctification can be found in these articles. No reference to the depravity of man, the need for redemption and the cross of Christ, or His coming again. These newspaper articles are strictly the humanistic, psychological wisdom of men (i.e., opinions) absent “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES.” If one did not know that FOTF purports to be a Christian ministry, one would never conclude that from their answers to the questions posed in the newspaper articles.

At the end of each article there is, like other “Dear Abby” types of columns, an email address to “Email your question.” Let’s say that this is a ruse and their rationale is to attract the reader to FOTF and then to give them “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES.” However, these newspaper articles are just like many other articles on their web site which are without “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES.”

This is also true of the Chinese Outreach of FOTF. In checking with Deanna Goa, who heads the Focus on the Family Chinese Outreach, we learned that any FOTF messages going into China have a potential audience of 230 million, but do not include “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” since they would not be approved by the Chinese government. We wonder how many of the FOTF messages to 220 million people world-wide are also purged of any “GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES” messages. Absent the Gospel message, what is left is an opinionated humanistic and psychological message; so why do Christians support the spending of huge amounts of money to send such messages to the world?

FOTF Web Site Q & As

We went to the Questions and Answers (Q & As) on the FOTF web site and found the following to be the first three questions:
“I suspect that my spouse is viewing pornography. What should I do?”
“Our marriage has lost its spark. How do we get out of this rut?”
“How should I act when my spouse is overly sensitive?”

The answer to the first question contains no Bible, but is filled with the humanistic wisdom of men and suggests as a couple they “seek professional Christian counseling.” The answer to the second question contains no Bible, but again includes much humanistic wisdom of men (i.e., opinions) and suggests the following: “At some point you may also want to consider the option of enlisting the help of a marriage counselor,” licensed, of course. FOTF also offers to “provide you with a list of referrals to qualified professionals in your area,” who are, of course, all state-licensed psychological therapists. The answer to the third question does include three Proverbs in one sentence, but the Bible is absent from the rest, and once more FOTF gives humanistic opinions and humanistic psychological wisdom of men, absent “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” along with the usual offer to “provide you with referrals to qualified marriage and family therapists in your area who specialize in communication issues.”

We also read a number of other Q & As on the FOTF web site, particularly the ones on marriage, and found a potpourri of biblical, psychological and humanistic opinions, which even at their best give recommended “Resources,” “Referrals,” and “Articles” that are often psychological and humanistic rather than being biblically oriented.5 There were a number that did promote “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” but none that we found with “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” in terms of the evangelistic Gospel message. Because of FOTF’s vast Q & A resources, there may have been some with a Gospel message, but we did not find them. Yet, if they follow their mission statement, these would be in abundance. The face of FOTF with Dobson was primarily psychological and humanistic and remains primarily psychological and humanistic with Daly.

Through the years we have seen the intrusion of psychology and humanism into the thinking of most Christians. As Christians think according to these psychological and humanistic ideas, they compromise what the Bible says about the nature of mankind and the source of sin and use man-made means. Instead of preaching and teaching a pure Gospel, they attempt to alleviate the symptoms of sin. They are treating the symptoms of sin rather than getting to the root. So much of what FOTF does is dealing with the symptoms of sin rather than taking people to the cross, not just to receive the love of God, but to understand the depth of their own depravity that requires the blood sacrifice of the perfect Lamb of God. Unless sin is dealt with at the cross and a person receives new life, people may work to improve external conditions and people may even get along better, but they will continue in their lost condition. What we see in so much of what we have read from FOTF is that the Bible is too often absent.
When sinners are given psychological and humanistic means of help, they may misunderstand the Gospel and be further deceived into thinking they do not need a Savior. When believers incorporate the thinking of the world, they will also incorporate the world’s tactics in their families and in their ministries. FOTF has been doing this from the beginning and we see these in their distorted attempts at “evangelism” as Daly attempts to deal with the symptoms of sexual sin.

A Half-Baked Gospel

The next seven Q & A’s on the FOTF web site are about homosexuality and are as follows:

“If I suspect my teen is gay, how do I approach this?”

“How should we respond to our children befriending our gay neighbor?”

“Why did God create homosexuality?”

“How should we respond to the school pushing ‘gay’ curriculum?”

“Why don’t Christians care about homosexuals and their families?”

“What should we do about our son who says he’s a ‘gay Christian’?”

“Can you explain and defend your ministry’s perspective on homosexuality and same-sex marriage? (Bold in original for each question.)

In the seven answers to the above questions with serious biblical consequences four lack any Bible verses and there is a repetitious encouragement to “provide you with a local counselor referral [state-licensed, of course] from our carefully screened data base” or to call FOTF directly to speak with a licensed professional counselor. FOTF even says, “We can’t overemphasize the importance of enlisting the help of a professional counselor.” In none of these answers is there a quote from the Bible regarding homosexuality.6

As we reveal Daly’s theology about and fellowship with homosexual activists, keep in mind the following verses: Lev. 18:22; 20:13 and Romans 1:21-32, which shows the progression of sin from not honoring God to “dishonor[ing] their own bodies between themselves” (sexual sin in general) to the point where:
God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient. (Romans 1:26-27.)

Our children used to play a game called “Where’s Waldo?” Waldo is a character whose picture is hidden in the art work amid many distractions, and the one who finds Waldo first wins. We looked throughout the FOTF web site. In addition to the above Q & As, we looked at others, read articles, listened to many broadcasts, and have not yet found an exegetical explanation of what the Bible teaches about homosexuality from Romans 1:21-32 or Leviticus 18:22; 20:13 and its application to practicing homosexuals. Why should it be easier to find a well-hidden Waldo than expository teaching on homosexuality that should be easily apparent in responses from a ministry that claims to be Christian, is so well-endowed, and reaches so many people world-wide?

In contrast to God’s clear condemnation of homosexuality, the FOTF answer to the second question above includes the following statements:

Perhaps the best place to begin is to be reminded of this important biblical truth: lesbians are no greater sinners than anybody else. Why mention this? Because the challenges you’re facing with these neighbors are in many ways no different than those confronting you in connection with any other family on the block.

Take the lead by inviting the lesbian couple and their kids over for dinner. Prepare a hot meal and deliver it to their front door. Look for changes to chat with them over the garden fence and help them out in practical ways. (Bold added.)

In answer to the third question above, FOTF says:

Please don’t misunderstand. In arguing this way, we’re not suggesting that homosexuals are somehow “sicker” or more “diseased” and “defective” than anyone else. Far from it. What we are trying to say is that there’s an important sense in which we’re all “abnormal”—some in one way, some in another. (Bold added.)

The FOTF answer to the fifth question above is:

It doesn’t matter who you are and what you’ve done, or how you feel about your sexual identity. God loves you unconditionally. He wants you to know His love in a deep and personal way. This is the Christian message in a nutshell. (Italics in original.)

In the answers to questions two and three above, replace the words lesbians, lesbian, and homosexuals one at a time with the words bisexual and transgender and read them again and you will get the full impact of what FOTF is saying. Note that FOTF refers to what they call an “important biblical truth: lesbians are no greater sinners than anybody else” and “we’re not suggesting thathomosexuals are somehow ‘sicker’ or more ‘diseased’ and ‘defective’ than anyone else.” In another place Daly warns “evangelicals to be ‘careful to not create a “super sin” out of homosexuality.’”7 This reveals that Daly and those at FOTF must be biblically ignorant of the fact that while all sin is an offense against God, there are some sins worse than others.8

Ron Merryman, in his article “Sexual Sins & the Culture,” says, “All sin is evil, pernicious, and destructive but some sins are more so than others.” He quotes 1 Corinthians 6:18-20:
Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.
Merryman then concludes: “Fornication involves the complete personality (mind, soul, and spirit) and in turn damages the same. This passage dramatically illustrates that some sins are more destructive than others.”9

This one unbiblical belief that one sin is no worse than any other underlies much of Daly’s unbiblical teaching and probably influences his view of how to work with LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) and other activist groups. We will discuss more in Part Two about Daly’s fellowship with both LGBT and abortion activists.10

When used in this context, these answers are seriously half-baked and therefore a half-baked Gospel, which disregards the eternal punishment of those homosexuals who continue to sin and to reject God. What love is this when Daly fellowships with homosexuals who are in grievous sin and yet does not warn them of their eternal consequences? God loves us but we must believe the Gospel (condition) and receive new life (condition) for personal benefit, which should then result in walking according to the new life in Christ. Otherwise the homosexual could just go on sinning with the idea that “grace may abound,” but as the apostle Paul said, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” (Romans 6:1-2.)

Daly repeatedly refers to God’s unconditional love outside the context of the rest of the Bible in his speaking, teaching, and writing, as one of his reasons to fellowship with LGBT and other activist groups, which is another one of his major flaws. In one of his daily broadcasts Daly tells a story of fellowshipping with a homosexual activist, where he says to the man, “I know that God loves you as much as he loves me,”11 but he neglected to say more than that. What a perfect place to at least begin to fulfill the FOTF mission to present “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST”! However, nothing was said about that in Daly’s story and is also absent in many of his similar stories that we have heard and read. Daly’s half-baked Gospel message is as bad as only referring to such verses as “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23) without presenting the full Gospel. That would be another half-baked Gospel message just as seriously in error as Daly’s half-baked version.

In support of practicing God’s unconditional love with homosexual activists without the rest of the Gospel, Daly quotes Titus 3:9, which says: “But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.” Daly uses this verse to teach against argumentation and for conversation with the LGBT activist groups, but Daly’s error is again in promoting a half-baked message. First, no mature believer we know evangelizes by arguing. Note that Daly avoids the rest of the passage, which is found in the next two verses:

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself. (Titus 3:10-11.)
Many homosexuals claim to be Christians. In none of Daly’s reported conversations have we seen an attempt to find out if a homosexual claims to be a believer and in none of his reported conversations have we seen one “admonition,” let alone a second “admonition,” as the apostle Paul would recommend. While believers, because of God’s love, are called to evangelize the lost, whether or not they are homosexuals, Paul warned believers “not to keep company” with those who claim to be believers but who continue in fornication, which, according to the Bible, would include the sexual activities of homosexuals. (See 1 Corinthians 5 and Romans 1:18-32.) Daly is possibly in violation of these verses as he keeps company with these LGBT activists.
Daly also quotes 2 Timothy 2:23-26:

But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

The above passages support loving kindness to one another and indeed to all, but there needs to be wisdom in what God would have us say and do in particular situations. Indeed, we are to treat all people with the love of God, but remember that God’s love includes both mercy and truth. Therefore if a believer is to have intentional meaningful dialogue with LGBTs who continue to adamantly live in sin and promote a sinful lifestyle by being an activist for it, there must be much more than saying, “I know that God loves you as much as He loves me.” This is a half-baked teaching on the part of Daly. There must be prayer that the Holy Spirit would use the truth of Scripture to convict the sinner and the Gospel message needs to be given so that people might be saved and glorify God. If the message is refused, the believer is not called to be argumentative, but to be “gentle unto all men.” Besides Paul’s admonition against strife, such would be a waste of time and effort.

Those we know who minister individually to homosexuals and others do not “get involved in foolish arguments”; neither do they give them half the message as Daly does, which may inadvertently affirm them in their self-condemning lifestyle. As followers of Jesus Christ, we may speak forth the truth of God and give reasons for our faith in Christ and our concern about any unbeliever’s lost condition while being “gentle to all men,” but Daly’s approach is to not confront these activists with the biblical truth of their lost condition. At the same time, we support those who struggle with homosexual temptations and keep themselves pure in the Lord.

[In Part Two we will continue to present Jim Daly’s fellowshipping with homosexual activist groups and reveal that he has done likewise with Planned Parenthood. In contrast to Daly’s expressed views, we will present quotes from two of Dr. John MacArthur’s messages that conflict with Daly’s position on homosexuality and abortion.]
(Endnotes)

1 Martin and Deidre Bobgan, “American Association of Christian Counselors: A Sham and a Shame,” parts 1, 2, 3, PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2, 3.

2 Martin and Deidre Bobgan. James Dobson’s Gospel of Self-Esteem & Psychology. Santa Barbara, CA: EastGate Publishers, 1998.

3 Electra Draper, “Focus on Family asks abortion-rights advocates to help make abortion less common,” http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17367578.
4 http://www.focusonthefamily.com/about_us/broadcasts.aspx.

5 When we use the word psychology we are referring to the field of clinical psychology with its theories and therapies, which prepares individuals to become licensed therapists or to become educators of this counseling mentality.

6 When we refer to homosexuality or homosexuals in this paper we are referring to those who are active unless we say otherwise.
7 “Jim Daly Aims to Broaden Focus on the Family Beyond Anti-Gay Marriage, Anti-Abortion Record,” http://huffingtonpost.com.
8 Go to an internet search mechanism and type in “Are some sins worse than others?” and read some of the results.
9 Ron Merryman, “Sexual Sins & the Culture.”

10 “Fellowship” is “friendly relationship.” Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary. New York: Gramercy Books, 1996, p. 707.

11 Jim Daily, “Refocusing Our Lives,” Focus on the Family, 10/15/12, hppt://www.focusonthefamily.com.

(PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, January-February 2013, Vol. 21, No. 1)
Article Topics | Titles | Top
PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries
4137 Primavera Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93110
www.pamweb.org
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Part 2:
Focus on the Family: A Sham and a Shame
Part Two

by Martin & Deidre Bobgan

In Part One of this article we demonstrate that Jim Daly, the successor to Dr. James Dobson, remains as psychological and humanistic as Dobson. We also reveal that Daly has moved in a different direction from Dobson. Unfortunately and unbiblically, Daly has chosen to exercise his role as head of Focus on the Family (FOTF) to relate his organization to homosexual activists by seeking fellowship with them.1 In Part One we also present Daly’s theology and his reasons for seeking fellowship with homosexual activist leaders absent any genuine evangelism on his part. In this Part Two we begin with Dr. John MacArthur’s teaching on homosexuality as a contrast to Daly’s views.

MacArthur versus Daly on Homosexuality

Rarely have we heard pastors preach whole messages on homosexuality and abortion. However, Dr. John MacArthur has given an entire message on each subject. MacArthur’s views on homosexuality are based on Romans 1:18-32. The following is from the transcript of his sermon:
What you see in Romans chapter 1 is the sequence of what happens when God abandons a nation. First, verse 24 says, He gives them over to “the lust of their hearts to impurity,” sexual sin, the dishonoring of their bodies among them. When God abandons a society, the first thing that happens is it becomes pornographic. It becomes obsessed with sex, obsessed with fornication, adultery, every kind of sexual behavior. We have gone through that already in the sexual revolution a couple of decades ago.
The second thing that happens when God abandons a culture is found in verse 26, “God gave them over to degrading passions…their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural…in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” At the end of that verse, “Receiving in their persons the due penalty” is the diseases that come consequent to homosexual behavior. And as you know, they unleashed on the world the horror of AIDS.
But what it’s saying here is that when God abandons a nation or a culture under His wrath, there will be a sexual revolution followed by a homosexual revolution. And we are living in this very condition.2
MacArthur further says:
Our responsibility is to tell people about the Kingdom of God and who can be in the Kingdom of God and who is excluded from the Kingdom of God. That’s the ministry of the church; that’s what we do; that’s what every preacher must do. And I’m not the one who makes the terms. I am only the one responsible to God to proclaim what God has revealed. And I’m here to tell you that if you advocate a life of sexual sin, adultery, fornication, effeminateness, or homosexuality, you will not inherit the Kingdom of God. What that means is, you’re on your way to hell, not heaven. This is the spiritual kingdom of those who are in Christ. The church is made up of people who were like this. Please notice, here’s the good news, verse 11, “Such were some of you.”
In answer to the accusation that what MacArthur says is “hate speech,” he says that hate speech is when anyone:

…will allow them [homosexuals] to go the direction they’re going, affirm that knowing that it will take them to hell. That’s hate speech. This is love speech. You either warn them or you affirm them. And Romans 1 warns them and any faithful Christian warns this is dangerous, this is deadly. It’s better to warn them than to affirm them. You might be the nice guy to affirm them, but that’s not love speech, that’s hate speech.3 (Bold added.)

What MacArthur teaches here should be a biblical understanding for any believer who converses with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender individuals or organizations. That does not mean that a Christian should unwisely unload everything in the face of one who has entered that satanic web of deception, but the Christian should speak the truth in love, gently, and according to the Lord’s leading and timing. These LGBTs need to hear the Gospel and believe in Jesus and receive new life. Then they will be ready to obey what God says about sexual sin. We have not seen Daly take this approach with them.

An explanation for Daly’s unbiblical pussy-footing around the issue of LGBT with activists is found in an article that reveals the contrast between Daly’s and Dobson’s views as follows:

Daly shares Dobson’s views in the public policy arena, but has taken a different approach than his predecessor. Daly refers to himself more of an evangelist than a prophet. He believes that the Christian community should demonstrate the values it wishes to promote and maintain civil discourse.

While Dobson’s approach was highly political and partisan, Daly and his colleagues have said that he is trying to make it less so.

Similar to his predecessor, James Dobson, Daly opposes abortion and same-sex marriage, but also wishes to address issues other than these typical evangelical hot button issues; he, along with other Focus on the Family leaders, “want[s] to frame political work as an inspirational call to do good—not just to oppose what they view as sinful behavior.”

Daly says that he wishes to make abortion much rarer as a step toward eliminating it.

In addition to abortion rights groups at the state and local levels, Daly has also met with organizational leaders who are traditionally at odds with conservative evangelicals, including the Colorado-based gay rights organization, the Gill Foundation.4 (Bold added.)

The Gill foundation reports: “An American software entrepreneur and philanthropist, Tim Gill started the Denver, Colorado-based Gill Foundation in 1994…. Tim and his husband, Scott Miller, live in Denver, Colorado.”5

The above article obviously explains Daly’s milquetoast approach to homosexual and abortion activists. But we ask: Where is the “common ground”6 (discussed in Part One) on which Daly says he wants to meet with such organizations as the Gill Foundation, which is “one of the nation’s largest funders of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender equal rights work“?7 (Bold added.)

The Christian Index reports that “Tim Sweeney, president of the Gill Foundation, when asked about his first private meeting with Daly last fall,” said, “It’s sort of a wait-and-see, but I’m hopeful.”8The reason Sweeney is hopeful is because his belief is summed up at their website as follows: “Our thinking is that if people keep talking, they will come to some accord,”9 which seems to agree with Daly’s desire to find “common ground” through “civil discourse.”

Compare what Daly says, which we quoted in Part One, about lesbian neighbors and other homosexuals with what MacArthur teaches from the Word about the practice of homosexuality and the biblical fact that they “will not inherit the Kingdom of God.” How can parents have fellowship with practicing homosexuals, as Daly does and recommends, and yet teach their children what the Bible says about how those individuals who practice such sins are excluded from the Kingdom of God? (1 Cor. 6:9-11.)

Regarding Daly’s desire for “civil discourse,” the two of us have had civil discourse with individual homosexuals, both professionally and personally, but never have we initiated, as does Daly, any fellowship with homosexual and abortion activists and their organizations, because there is no biblical precedence for doing so. We do not see this reaching out and fellowshipping in this way in the ministry of Jesus or Paul. Also, we have not seen or heard a message on the FOTF website that is even close to the one preached by MacArthur. We ask our readers to go to the FOTF website and read the questions and answers on homosexuality and then listen to or read MacArthur’s views on homosexuality and see, in the light of eternity, which one is involved in love speech versus hate speech.10

MacArthur versus Daly on Abortion

The Denver Post reports:

Focus on the Family president Jim Daly on Friday said he will bridge a great divide by asking abortion-rights advocates to work with his conservative Christian ministry to make abortion less common.
Reproductive-rights supporters say they want abortion to be legal, safe and rare, Daly said, and so his Colorado Springs-based media powerhouse will try to walk that common ground with them — lessening demand for abortion.
The “let’s talk” offer to reproductive-rights groups signals a sea change in Focus’ uncompromising approach to the abortion issue. It is bound to engender controversy about whether détente advances or hinders Daly’s ultimate goal of making abortion illegal.11

In the same Denver Post article, the Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains spokesperson, Monica McCafferty, said, “Most of what we do is prevention”; “abortion must remain legal”; and “We certainly never want to see the day when women can’t make this personal, private decision for themselves.”12

To see if Daly’s détente approach was successful or had any impact on Planned Parenthood, we spoke with McCafferty, who said there was a meeting early in 2012 with FOTF. She said the meeting was “informational and educational,” but that Planned Parenthood “has not changed with respect to its policies and practices.”13 In other words, there was much hoped for by Daly, but nothing accomplished and particularly nothing accomplished for “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” which is the sole mission of FOTF!

Keep in mind that abortion activists have been on the forefront of a government-approved killing of 55 million innocent unborn babies to date in the U.S. We quote from MacArthur’s message on abortion that should convict the minds and hearts of all people regarding the horrors of murdering the most innocent in their vulnerable life in the womb.
In a message on abortion, MacArthur says:
To me it is ironic that those who pride themselves on defending the rights of the weak, murder them in the womb when they are the most weak. What kind of hypocrisy is that? Self-congratulating pseudo-humanitarians advocate a deadly force of violence unleashed against infants that makes the Nazi Holocaust look mild by comparison. In our world, we’re slaughtering between fifty and sixty million babies a year. In the United States on record is 1.5 million abortions a year. Every third baby conceived is murdered in the womb. Four thousand a day plus, 170 an hour—Planned Parenthood alone kills one every ninety-five seconds.
The Physicians Association of Planned Parenthood released this statement, quote: “Abortion is a treatment for unwanted pregnancy, the second sexually transmitted disease.” Pregnancy is a sexually transmitted disease. Our nation and others are murdering a whole generation of humans in mass infanticide that was legalized in January of 1973 by the Roe v. Wade decision made by an unrighteous group of people on the Supreme Court. Now forty-three percent of all women have an abortion and forty-seven percent of abortions are repeats. It’s legal to do to a child what you might be arrested for doing to a cat, or a dog, or certainly an eagle. 14

LGBT(P) and Planned Parenthood

According to a report from the Family Research Council (FRC) and contrary to homosexual activists “insisting that there is no connection between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of children”:

Homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex offenses: Individuals from the 1 to 3 percent of the population that is sexually attracted to the same sex are committing up to one-third of the sex crimes against children.15 (Bold in original.)

FRC further says: “The evidence indicates that disproportionate numbers of gay men seek adolescent males or boys as sexual partners.”16 In addition, The Gay Report states, “In the study, 23% of the respondents [gays] admitted to having had sex with youths aged 13-15.”17 We assume that the figure is actually higher because of the reluctance of reporting on the part of the gays. Also, the study was conducted over 30 years ago and much has happened to expand this evil practice. Thus the LGBT organizations should be called LGBTP (Pedophile), which may be the next wave of attempted acceptability.18

Planned Parenthood is an organization that is just once removed from the temples in the apostle Paul’s day where babies were sacrificed to imaginary gods. Why, oh why, would Daly cozy up to two such Last Days organizations of such significant sinful underpinnings? The apostle Paul would certainly never be cozying up to such organizations, not only based upon the extremity of the sins that are promoted, but also because of the biblical warnings to the contrary! That is not to say that the apostle would not evangelize them along with everybody else. This major flaw of Daly in fellowshipping with these sinful activist groups is actually prohibited in Scripture. Ephesians 5:11-13 clearly says:

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.

The prohibition against fellowship goes beyond participating in their sinful acts. In his commentary on Ephesians 5:11-13, William MacDonald warns about “any attitude that might indicate tolerance or leniency” and says, “The believer is called not only to abstain from the unfruitful works of darkness, but positively he is called to expose them” (bold his).19 Daly is not affirming sinful acts, but his fellowshipping with sinning activists in order to find a common ground, totally without one glimmer of the Gospel, violates the biblical admonition against such a relationship.

The call for reproof is in the same sentence: “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” While the LGBT and abortion activists may certainly know the FOTF stand on these issues, they are not hearing a word of reproof from Daly, which is also missing from all the FOTF material we read on line. They may therefore receive Daly’s invitation to meet as a change in FOTF’s direction to show some degree of tolerance from their perspective.

In all the stories we read and heard about Daly’s fellowshipping with homosexual and abortion activist leaders, we could not find one iota, one jot, one scintilla, one grain of FOTF’s sole mission: SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHILE PROMOTING BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES.” In one interview Daly and Dr. Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, made their opposition to same-sex marriage clear and discussed biblical reasons for their stand.20 However, to our knowledge Daly has never said directly to homosexual activists and organizations what he said on the broadcast.

By Daly’s new direction to fellowship, at least one opponent (FOTF) of the LGBT and abortion activists has softened through fellowship. Daly’s new direction for FOTF shines no stoplight for these activist organizations.
One cannot help but think about the Bible’s prohibition against unequal yoking:
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? (2 Cor. 6:14).

According to Louw and Nida’s Greek-English Lexicon, “one can translate 2 Cor 6:14 as ‘do not attempt to work together with those who are unbelievers’ or ‘do not become partners with those who do not believe.’”21 In referring to being “unequally yoked together with unbelievers,” Albert Barnes states clearly: “Christians are in no way to patronize them, or to lend their influence to them, or to promote them by their name, their presence, or their property.”22 The concern here is that Daly appears to be yoking FOTF together with Planned Parenthood and LGBT activist groups through fellowship and conversation.

Common Ground?

In seeking to work together on “common ground,” Daly has joined FOTF with organizations whose beliefs and practices are enmity to God. It is one thing to personally extend kindness to people in the world; it is another thing for a Christian organization to join hands with an organization which has as its primary purpose something that opposes God and His Word, as do the LGBT and abortion groups. In so doing Daly is violating James 4:4, which clearly says, “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.” In the context of this verse the “adulterers and adulteresses” are those who are not faithful in their relationship with God by forming a friendship with the world, and the “world” has to do with the people and “their motives and acts” that are “aliens to God.”23

FOTF formed a friendship with the world from its inception by teaching and utilizing psychological and humanistic ideas about mankind and giving them a biblical façade. Now the friendship has been extended to organizations that promote lifestyles and activities that are anti-biblical and anti-God. In commenting on James 4:4, Warren Wiersbe says: “How does a believer declare war against God? By being friendly with God’s enemies.” He further says, “By the ‘world’ James means, of course, human society apart from God. The whole system of things in this society of ours is anti-Christ and anti-God.” He also says, “The world is the enemy of God, and whoever wills to be a friend of the world cannot be the friend of God.”24 Daly has chosen this path of friendship with the world and attempted to justify it in his book ReFocus. This is not an accidental friendship with the world that he fell into, but rather a chosen friendship with the world by which he has joined FOTF along with the FOTF board members, staff and supporters, with enemies of God.

In Part 2 of a broadcast titled “Refocusing Our Lives to Reflect God’s Heart,” an audio clip is played of Daly speaking to the staff at FOTF. In it Daly tells of a meeting in Minneapolis during which, after he spoke, “Sarah, the president of the Minneapolis Planned Parenthood, said, ‘Can I give you a hug? What you said tonight really spoke to my heart.’” In response, Daly’s FOTF staff gave him a rousing ovation.25 One has to question the degree to which Daly and FOTF can join hands in their so-called “common ground” of working towards prevention. How can their efforts be truly common ground when their means to an agreed-upon goal is so diametrically opposite? It is like joining Christian purity with Planned Parenthood’s education in the use of contraceptives and its free dispensing of them without parental approval. It is like joining the light of encouraging self-restraint with the darkness of “protected” sexual self-indulgence. One of the reasons for the admonition against the yoking together of believers with unbelievers is to prevent Christians from compromising their faith and actions. While believers are to love even their enemies, their words and behavior should not produce a confused message that could lead others into compromise.

In summary, Daly’s dialog with the LGBT and abortion activists and organizations is based upon half-baked biblical teachings. His rationale for détente with the LGBT and abortion community could be extended to activist atheist, cultic, Satanist, and occultic individuals and organizations, a practice that is wholly without biblical support. Daly has accomplished nothing by his détente approach with homosexuality and abortion activist groups and has failed to be the evangelist he claims to be for the biblical truth about both. In contrast, MacArthur has biblically brought forth the dreadful fact that unrepentant homosexuals “will not inherit the Kingdom Of God” and described the ungodly horror of abortion to prick the consciences of all who will listen.Consider MacArthur’s approach versus Daly’s and decide which is more biblical regarding the seriously sinful practices of LGBTs and abortionists.

Chick-fil-A

Dan Cathy, the president of Chick-fil-A, created a storm of controversy when, in an interview, he expressed support for the biblical definition of marriage. On the heels of the controversy it was claimed that Chick-fil-A “has stopped funding some pro-family groups as a concession to gain approval for a restaurant in Chicago.” In contrast, Cathy said that “the company [Chick-fil-A] had not altered its position on support for traditional pro-family groups.” In the midst of the controversy Daly “confirmed that the company [Chick-fil-A] and its owners would continue their commitment to pro-family groups and causes.”26 Daly is quoted as saying:
Dan and Bubba Cathy are my Christian brothers and good friends…. They and their company have long shared Focus on the Family’s commitment to helping build strong and thriving families—and they have in no way deviated from that deeply held and biblically inspired passion, while working with the city of Chicago to open Chick-fil-A restaurants there.27

We have presented two views of the way to deal with homosexuality and abortion activist leaders and organizations. According to the full context of MacArthur’s talk on homosexuality, Daly and FOTF are in error and may be guilty of “hate speech,” as MacArthur describes it. In regard to abortion, is it biblically better to convict (MacArthur) or converse (Daly)? Is it better to evangelize (MacArthur) or compromise (Daly) by conversing with two organizations that espouse and promote nationally and internationally sinful activities that God clearly condemns and say nothing about what the Bible teaches in Romans 1:18-32 or Leviticus 18:22;20:13 and about the murdering of human life? Dan Cathy and other supporters of FOTF need to “choose you this day” with respect to who is being biblical on the issues of homosexuality and abortion, MacArthur or Daly?

To be continued….
Endnotes

1 “Fellowship” is “friendly relationship.” Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary. New York: Gramercy Books, 1996, p. 707.

2 John MacArthur, “Homosexuality and the Campaign for Immorality,” Grace to You, http://www.gty.org.

3 Ibid.

4 http:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Daly_(evangelist).
5 http://gillfoundation.org/about/tim-gill/

6 “Focus on the Family Chief Ready to Start Dialogue,” The Washington Post, 6/27/2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com.

7 Gill Foundation, http://gillfoundation.org/about/.

8 “For Daly, Focus on Family Is Personal Crusade,” The Christian Index, http://christianindex.org/6226.article.

9 http://gillfoundation.org/equal-opportunity/spirituality/

10 John MacArthur, “Homosexuality and the Campaign for Immorality,” op. cit.

11 Electra Draper, The Denver Post, “Focus on Family asks abortion-rights advocates to help make abortion less common,” 2/12/11, http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17367578

12 Ibid.

13 Phone call to Monica McCafferty, November 15, 2012.
14 John MacArthur, “Abortion and the Campaign for Immorality,” Grace to You, http://www.gty.org.
15 “Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse,” Family Research Council,” http://www.frc.org/issueanalysis/homosexuality/homosexuality-and-child-sexual-abuse.

16 Ibid.

17 Carla Jay and Allen Young. The Gay Report. New York: Summit Books, 1979, p. 275.

18 Cord Jefferson, “Born This Way: Sympathy and Science for those Who Want to Have Sex with Children,” http://gawker.com/5941037.

19 William MacDonald. Believer’s Bible Commentary: New Testament. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1980…1990, p. 759.

20 http://www.focusonthefamily.com, June 19, 2012.

21 Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. Vol. 1: Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition). New York: United Bible Societies, 1996, p. 446.

22 Albert Barnes. Notes on the Bible. www.e-sword.net.

23 Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Jas 4:4). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

24 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Jas 4:4). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

25 Jim Daly, “Refocusing Our Lives,” Focus on the Family, 10/16/12, http://www.focusonthefamily.com.
26 http://thenewamaerican.com.

27 Ibid.

(PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, March – April 2013, Vol. 21, No. 2)
Article Topics | Titles | Top
PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries
4137 Primavera Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93110
www.pamweb.org
 _______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Part 3:

Focus on the Family: A Sham and a Shame
Part Three

by Martin & Deidre Bobgan

In Parts One and Two of this series we reveal that Focus on the Family (FOTF), under the leadership of Jim Daly (Dr. James Dobson’s successor) remains sometimes entirely psychological and humanistic and sometimes entirely or partially Scriptural. In addition, Daly has taken FOTF on a dramatic and radical change of direction in that he is courting the favor of both LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) and abortion activist groups by initiating fellowship with them. In contrast, in Part Two we quote from two messages by Dr. John MacArthur and suggest that Daly’s new approach may be what MacArthur would call “hate talk.” In this Part Three we add more concerns about Daly’s position and conclude by saying that FOTF is a Last Days’ psychological and humanistic organization that reflects the psychological and humanistic church—lukewarm like Laodicea.

ReFocus

In his desire to convince people of his soft-sell approach, Daly presents the views of other Christians with whom he disagrees, at times referring to these others as “we” and saying such things as, “We act as if the people who oppose us are beyond God’s reach.” He accuses others of a “fortress mentality” and, regarding the woman taken in adultery, says, “We too would be ready to throw the first stone.”1 Daly creates a group of strawmen Christians and their so-called treatment of others as a contrast to his own views. In his book ReFocus: Living a Life that Reflects God’s Heart, Daly defends his initiating relationships with LGBT and abortion activists. He often refers to other Christians as “they” and “them” and casts aspersions on “they” and “them.”
In ReFocus Daly is less charitable and more critical of other Christians than of those LGBT and abortion activist leaders with whom he has fellowshipped.2 The book is a justification for his initiating fellowship with LGBT and abortion activist leaders and at the same time it is critical of those who do not share his so-called biblical understandings. His reason for doing so is to promote his new-to-FOTF, so-called “evangelistic” approach (minus THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST) to LGBT activists, abortionists, and, by extension, to people of other unbiblical “cultural,” religious, and irreligious persuasions.
Daly expresses satisfaction with his new fellowship with those activist organizations that should be regarded as God’s enemies, and his book ReFocus is a justification for it from beginning to end. One of the stellar examples of how Daly practices this new-in-the-history-of-the-church approach is how he boasts about working together with the local Independent (Indy) newspaper through its editor.3 The Indy is a radically pro LGBT and abortion rights sentinel of the news. We use this one example to demonstrate how Daly wants the entire church to follow his example of fellowshipping with those who adamantly oppose God’s Word and His doctrines of the faith.
In his book ReFocus Daly begins describing an award given by the Indy by saying:
In early 2011, Focus [FOTF] was mockingly awarded the “Claim to Shame Award” for, among other things, our continued support of traditional marriage and our ongoing advocacy to protect the sanctity of life… this award was clearly a tongue-in-check [sic], acrimonious gesture, but two of my associates decided to respond in Christian love and have some fun at the same time. I’m glad they did.4
The two employees accepted the invitation and attended the banquet. We digress to say that the editor of the local, LGBT- and abortion-friendly newspaper is John Weiss, whom Daly refers to as “my friend” and, as it turns out, a friend of many years. Daly indicates that, as a result of the two FOTF employees appearing and receiving the award, FOTF “forged a unique friendship” with Weiss, who is pro-LGBT and pro-abortion. Daly contends that “they didn’t compromise any principles.” The two FOTF employees “simply treated John as a fellow traveler along this road of life.”5
As a result of this friendship, the Christian ministry FOTF and the radically pro-LGBT and abortion-rights Indy have partnered together on a number of community projects. When Focus on the Family joins together with the Indy for a concert to raise funds for a good cause—to help families who had suffered loss from the Colorado Springs fire—one has to wonder why they had to yoke together for any such local event. The loud message here is that FOTF needs to join with the world and its ways in order to be heard. Warren Wiersbe rightly warned: “The attitude of too many Christians today is that the church should court and please the world in order to try to win it. Nothing could be further from the truth!”6
Daly shockingly ends this book chapter by saying:
Our neighbors may know we are Christians by our love, as the old song goes, but they will only know about the love of Jesus if we also share with them the truth about His life poured out as a sacrifice.7
We say “shockingly” because, in all the Indy and other newspaper interviews with Daly and all his personally described conversations and relationships with these LGBT and abortion activists and organizations, we have never heard him describe the details of “the love of Jesus” or any conversation where he did “share with them the truth about His life poured out as a sacrifice” for their grievous sins against God.
In all the interviews, we found only one mention of the Gospel in Daly’s brief response to the Indy question, “What should the ultimate goal of Focus be?” Daly answers, “Our primary mission” is “to introduce people to who Jesus Christ is and what his claims are, and what they mean to us today.” But he does not perform that “primary mission” during that very interview, where there appears to be an open door. Notice that even though Daly knows and states the “primary mission,” in none of his interviews that we found does he introduce the interviewer to “who Jesus Christ is” (Messiah, Savior, Son of God) and “what His claims are,” e.g., the only “name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
It is interesting to note that in effect, without realizing it, Daly justifies his position by misrepresenting those Christians who oppose him as having a half-baked Gospel (our term). To overcome what he regards as one evil, Daly has introduced another equally bad evil. In ReFocus and in many other places, Daly criticizes what we would call a half-baked Gospel of some Christians in order to justify his own half-baked Gospel, not realizing that what he criticizes others for is exactly what he himself is guilty of.

Fellowship with Works of Darkness

To follow Daly’s biased biblical justification for fellowship with activist leaders, one would have to rewrite Scripture and have Peter seeking fellowship with the Pharisees and with the money changers in the temple and saying to them, as Daly does to a homosexual activist, “I know that God loves you as much as He loves me.”8 In following his half-baked Gospel, Daly shows too little respect for all of God’s Word and too much respect for LGBT and abortion activist leaders by mollycoddling them.
Daly seeks a common ground of agreement, such as with LGBT activists helping children who are without parents get taken care of and with abortion activists preventing pregnancy. Does he realize that he is thereby promoting the practice of like-sex adoptive parents and pregnancy prevention through condoms and birth control pills? His tone is, “Let’s love and respect each other”; but it is absent THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST. By doing so he is inadvertently following a “cultural” mandate that has no biblical grounds. Daly’s initiating fellowship with LGBT and abortion activist leaders is light years away from how Jesus and the apostles ministered to sinners. He fails to preach THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST to these activists whose practices, politics, and activities are leading people to perdition, in contrast to the way Jesus ministered to sinners.
In explaining and justifying his fellowshipping with LGBT and abortion activist leaders, Daly says, with a bit of false modesty:
In my role at Focus on the Family, I’ve felt convicted to do what I can do to break down the barriers in my little corner of the kingdom. This is why I’ve engaged homosexual activists and even abortion providers in conversations. I want to get to know them. I want to listen to them and hear the pain in their hearts.9 (Bold added.)
In addition to fellowship with Planned Parenthood, Daly has also fellowshipped with the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL). NARAL “is an organization in the United States that engages in political action to oppose restrictions on abortion and expand access to abortion.”10 To justify his flirting with Planned Parenthood and NARAL, Daly says:
While some abortion rights activists truly are unconcerned about the senseless deaths of pre-born children, my research and conversations with individuals from these opposition camps suggest many are deeply troubled and riddled with guilt. I have personally met with people inside the abortion industry, and some of them are distressed about the consequences of legalized abortion.11 (Italics his, bold added.)
Jeremiah 17:9-10 tells us that:
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.
Daly is grossly out of touch with the hearts and minds of the LGBTs and abortionists. The activists are as confidently militant and zealous for their causes and beliefs as committed activists of any religion or cult are.
Our experience with LGBT and abortion activists is that, almost to a man and woman, they differ from Daly’s description. Daly, saying that there is “pain in their hearts,” would imply that there are some pangs of conscience about their beliefs and practices. We challenge Daly in his next fellowship time with LGBT and abortion activist leaders to suggest to them that they have “pain in their hearts” because of their sinful lifestyle and separation from God, something, to our knowledge, he has never done!

Daly’s comment that abortion rights activists have “pain in their hearts” and that “many are deeply troubled and riddled with guilt” is contrary to our own experiences. We have never heard any abortion activists confess that they have “pain in their hearts” or that they “are deeply troubled and riddled with guilt” because of their involvement in murdering innocent preborns. If they were, they would certainly abandon their involvement in the wholesale slaughter of the innocent. It is doubtful that Daly would even dare to suggest this in conversations with them! It is also doubly doubtful that Daly has ever picked up on the “many” that, according to him, “are deeply troubled and riddled with guilt” to give them the Remedy for their guilt.

In making the case for his new approach, Daly refers to the apostle Paul’s defense to King Agrippa and to Jesus’ response to the woman taken in adultery.12 Daly repeatedly uses these two examples to support his position on how one should approach activist groups. In describing how Paul and Jesus dealt with these situations, Daly overlooks the fact that the apostle Paul, as a prisoner needing to appear before Agrippa, was directly defending the faith while he respectfully addressed King Agrippa and gave a compelling testimony to such an extent that Agrippa said to him, “Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian” (Acts 26:27). This could never happen in Daly’s initiated contacts with activists, because he never, to our knowledge, shares THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST with them.
Jesus said to the woman taken in adultery, “Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more” (John 8:11). Notice that Jesus said, “Go and sin no more,” which is missing in Daly’s contacts with activist leaders and groups. We have read a number of Daly’s interviews and read much advice given by him, but in no case did we see him either giving a compelling testimony to LGBT and abortion activists, as did the apostle Paul to Agrippa, or speaking as Jesus did to the woman taken in adultery, “Go and sin no more”!

After quoting Titus 3:9, Daly says, “If there are two neon signs in the New Testament: Salvation is through Christ and Christ alone and don’t become a Pharisee.”13 There are, of course, many “neon signs” throughout the New Testament, but we know of no biblically knowledgeable Christian who would highlight “Don’t be a Pharisee” as one of only two. Two serious omissions from Daly’s two “neon signs in the New Testament” are the Great Commandment and the Great Commission! Daly has a habit of inferring that his approach is irenic and the other approach is Pharisaic so he uses Titus 3:9 and 2 Timothy 2:23 to prove his case. However he has quoted Titus 3:9 out of context and utilized 2 Timothy out of the context of the whole counsel of God.
In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus says: “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets” (Matt:7:12). Therefore those of us who are Christians should give others what we ourselves would desire if we were in their shoes, that is, the biblical truth about God’s love and His provision for salvation from a sinful life of homosexuality, abortion, atheism, cults, the occult, and those personal sins associated with the flesh.

A Sham & a Shame

We repeat from the FOTF Form 990 Federal IRS return: “Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities”; and the FOTF answer: “FOCUS ON THE FAMILY SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHILE PROMOTING BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES” (upper case in original).
We say bluntly that the FOTF is a sham. The dictionary defines sham as “something that is not what it purports to be; a spurious imitation…a cover or the like for giving a thing a different outward appearance.”2 FOTF is “not what it purports to be” and it is a “spurious imitation.” FOTF has a Christian façade with a sound biblical mission statement that serves as “a cover…for giving a thing [psychological, humanistic integrationism] a different outward appearance.” At first glance the “SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” mission statement sounds like the “faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3), but the faith that is really often being celebrated by Daly and promoted at FOTF is faith in psychological and humanistic ideas and their therapeutic mindset. The FOTF sham attracts and deceives naïve Christians, including those who are the promoters, as well as the ones who buy into the Bible plus psychological and humanistic ideas.
The FOTF web site offers both current and past radio programs. We listened to a number of them and conclude that they vary from humanistic advice to questionable information, said with confidence by those who are on the program, and to advice that is psychologically oriented and/or tainted. Yes, in some radio programs FOTF “SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” but in those we heard there was no Gospel message about Jesus Christ dying in the place of sinners and being the only way to salvation by grace through faith. However, the web site has such a plethora of broadcasts that we may have missed some with a truly “GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” message, but why should one have to go fossicking about to find one?
FOTF is an integrationist organization, which varies at times from the sole use of psychology and humanistic opinion to integration or amalgamation with Scripture in varying proportions, depending on the personal judgment of the individual. Such integration combines theories, techniques, and ideas and ideologies from psychotherapy, clinical psychology, counseling psychology and their underlying theories with the Bible.
Christian integrationists use psychological and humanistic opinions about the nature of man, why he does what he does, and how he can change in ways that seem to them to be compatible with their Christian faith or their view of the Bible. But, by their unnecessary integration, they demonstrate a lack of confidence in the sufficiency of the Word of God for all matters of life and conduct (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:3-4). Instead of searching Scripture and relying on what God has provided through His Word, they use the humanistic and psychological theories and techniques as the base, often absent THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST, even though people’s problems beg for its inclusion.
One of FOTF’s greatest errors is that they too often preach psychological and humanistic messages without one iota of their sole mission to “PRESENT THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST.” FOTF’s nationally syndicated Q&A columns in newspapers across America are good examples of the disconnect between FOTF’s sole mission and their literal practice. Every Question has potential for sharing “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHILE PROMOTING FAMILY VALUES,” but not one Answer includes even a hint of their mission statement. And much of the other material on their web site follows the same error.
The editor of our local newspaper who is in charge of the page with FOTF articles, as well as another nationally syndicated column, “Chicken Soup for the Soul” by Jack Canfield and Victor Hanson, was surprised when we told him that FOTF is a Christian ministry. He commented that “Chicken Soup for the Soul” articles seemed more religious to him than the FOTF articles. From reading both, we agree.
Part of our expose of the American Association of Christian Counselors (AACC) is that they are a psychological integrationist organization. The AACC believes in the Bible plus psychology and therefore does not believe in the sufficiency of Scripture for the nonorganic issues of life. Dr. H. B. London, Jr., a vice President of FOTF, recommends the AACC by saying:
In our ministry at Focus on the Family, we are finding that a high percentage of pastors we meet feel ill-prepared to deal with the complex pastoral counseling issues that come their way. AACC is on the cutting-edge as they seek to equip the “called out” minister for the 21st century.14
As one listens to the FOTF broadcasts, a plethora of names of numerous AACC psychological and humanistic teachers and speakers appear and are interviewed as authorities. The few instances in which Daly deals biblically with a topic are overwhelmed by the many psychological and humanistic presentations, which include a whole raft of these AACC types. While integrationists may use the Bible at times, their ongoing reliance is too often on psychological and humanistic ideas. Utilizing unverified psychological and humanistic theories and techniques instead of biblical truth reveals an insufficient confidence in Scripture. FOTF broadcasts a constant signal that the Word of God and the work of the Holy Spirit are not enough for life and godliness. Such integration implies that God gave commands without providing all the necessary means of obedience until the recent psychological and humanistic age.

We repeat, Daly regards himself as “more of an evangelist than a prophet.” Oh, really? An evangelist, to quote the FOTF “mission,” is one who “SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST.” According to the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, “Evangelism” is:
The proclamation of the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ with a view to bringing about the reconciliation of the sinner to God the Father through the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit.
Each and every evangelist, including Daly, knows the Great Commission, in which Jesus says:
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matt. 28:19-20.)
Each and every outreach of FOTF, including the Q&As, newspaper and online articles, radio broadcasts, help offered to individuals, etc. should be put to the Great Commission evangelism test.Grievously, FOTF too often gives psychological and humanistic answers to questions that have obvious spiritual implications, which leads us to conclude that those at FOTF do not believe in the full sufficiency of the Bible for the issues of the soul or else there would not be the extensive use of psychological and humanistic answers often absent the Bible.

These FOTF answers to the newspaper article Q&As and many of the Q&As elsewhere, as well as online articles, along with many of their broadcasts, are too often a shameful dodging of biblical responsibilities TO SHARE THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST to a world-wide audience, for which they are generously supported. The good news is that after Daly took over in 2005, the total support for FOTF declined, from a total support of $144,770,424 in 2006 to a total support of $95,797,047 in 2010, which was a decline of $58,983,377! The bad news is that FOTF is still one of the largest parachurch ministries in the world, often avoiding their biblical responsibilities TO SHARE THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST and propagating psychological and humanistic ideas world-wide with Daly receiving an annual income over $250,000.
Each of the numerous world-wide FOTF outreaches that leave out THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST would be ideal places to name the name of Jesus, to proclaim the Gospel, and to give biblical answers to the questions posed rather than the psychological and humanistic opinions of men. Often instead of “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES” FOTF is promoting PSYCHOLOGICAL AND HUMANISTIC FAMILY VALUES. The Q&As on homosexuality are ideal places to confront this heinous sin of Romans 1 and Leviticus 22 with biblical love talk that could save souls. Furthermore, dialog with LGBT and abortion activist leaders and groups, as Daly does, should be filled with biblical love talk that would present them with the biblical truths that would save their souls if they would receive and believe, but not a word from Daly about that to them.
For much of what we examined, we conclude that, shockingly and shamefully, “THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST” and “BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” which constitute the FOTF sole mission (i.e., commitment, aim, goal, purpose, objective) and should be obvious in all the FOTF material, are too often absent or down-played.

FOTF is a Last Days’ psychological and humanistic organization that reflects the psychological and humanistic church—lukewarm like Laodicea. Those at FOTF, led by Daly, have become so psychologically and humanistically minded that their newspaper and online articles, many of their Q&As, and their radio broadcasts often neglect even the slightest practice of their mission statement or else they have compromised it.

Many people who call themselves Christians have become so blinded by a psychological and humanistic mindset that they have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to FOTF since its inception. This is truly a shame, which adds to the sham of their failed mission, which is “FOCUS ON THE FAMILY SHARES THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST WHILE PROMOTING BIBLICAL FAMILY VALUES,” and which they have failed to do in too many instances, particularly in their initiated contacts with LGBT and abortion activists.
Conclusion

Daly and those at FOTF have truly bollixed up the Bible in their rush to embrace the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (some of whom are biologically destructive), and the abortionist individuals and organizations who, unless they repent, will not be in the Kingdom of God and who are politically and personally active in leading others into these biblical abominations before God!! In closing, we ask: Where are the voices of those in the faith who are against the Daly/FOTF embrace of the biblically loathsome corrupters of God-given sexuality and murderers of those whose lives have been given by God and are the most vulnerable? Why are those Christians who are gifted and known nationally and internationally not crying aloud about the FOTF fellowship with the LGBT and abortion activists and organizations and their biblical reprehensible activities that are a serious offense against God and His Word?!!!
Endnotes
1 Jim Daily, “Refocusing Our Lives,” Focus on the Family, 10/16/12, http://www.focusonthefamily.com.
2 Jim Daly. ReFocus. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012.
3 Ibid., p. 106.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid., p. 107.
6 Warren W. Wiersbe. Wiersbe’s Expository Outlines on the New Testament. Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1992, p. 492.
7 Daly, ReFocus, op. cit., p. 108.
8 Jim Daily, “Refocusing Our Lives,” Focus on the Family, 10/15/12, hppt://www.focusonthefamily.com.
9 Ibid., p. 103.
10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NARAL_Pro-Choice_America.
11 Daly, ReFocus, op. cit., p. 43.
12 Jim Daily, “Refocusing Our Lives,” Focus on the Family, 10/16/12, op. cit.
13 Jim Daily, “Refocusing Our Lives,” Focus on the Family, 10/15/12, op. cit.
14 http://www.aacc.net/about-us/. [Note: Christians feel “ill-prepared” because of the intimidation of organizations like AACC and FOTF!]
 

(PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, May-June 2013, Vol. 21, No. 3)
Article Topics | Titles | Top
PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries
4137 Primavera Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93110
www.pamweb.org
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
 
 
 

PSYCHOHERESY: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL SEDUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY BY MARTIN & DEIDRE BOBGAN

Martin and Deidre Bobgan of Psychoheresy Awareness Ministries http://pamweb.org/, and/or http://psychoheresy-aware.org/, have been involved with exposing psychoheresy infiltrating the Christian churches for many years. Their latest updated book is described below.

Revised & Expanded

PsychoHeresy: The Psychological Seduction of Christianity



Twenty-five years ago, after being rejected for publication by three publishers of our former books, as well as by other publishers, we published our PsychoHeresy manuscript. We chose the subtitle The Psychological Seduction of Christianity because even then we could see the leading edge of a psychological tsunami that during the past twenty-five years has almost entirely engulfed the church.

After these twenty-five years of PsychoHeresy, an enigma exists over the fact that on the one hand the current research more strongly supports our original conclusions and concerns, but on the other hand psychoheresy is more deeply and broadly imbedded throughout the church.
Almost everywhere one turns in the church one sees psychology. The psychologizing of Christianity has reached epidemic proportions. We see it throughout the church, from psychologized sermons to psychologized persons. However, as we have repeatedly demonstrated, the psychologizing of the church is neither biblically nor scientifically justifiable. Beneath all the biblical reasons why Christians should not pursue psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies is this one fact: The use of psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies denies the sufficiency of Scripture for the issues of life normally taken to a psychotherapist.

PsychoHeresy demonstrates the fact that psychological explanations about life and psychological solutions to life’s problems are questionable at best, detrimental at worst, and spiritual counterfeits at least.
Just as with all of our other books still in-print, this revised and expanded edition of PsychoHeresy will be available on our web site as a free pdf ebook to be read on line or downloaded and printed. The online edition is the same word for word as the printed edition and is thus available world-wide. Our web site has over one thousand visitors a day and is visited by individuals in over 110 different countries throughout the world each month.
We ask for the prayers and financial support of those of you who are like-minded to get this message out to all believers who value the sufficiency of Scripture for the issues of life normally taken to a psychotherapist.

(PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, July-August 2012, Vol. 20, No. 4)
Article Topics | Titles | Top
PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries
4137 Primavera Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93110
www.pamweb.org

______________________________________________________________________
The Bobgans have many resources including books, articles, etc. An example would be the following:
Syncretism & PsychoHeresyby
Martin and Deidre Bobgan


All religions involve caring for souls. Shamans or medicine men, for instance, were considered to be healers of the body and the soul (the physical and nonphysical) and much of their preparation involved secret knowledge and occult practices. The study and treatment of the soul is a religious activity because it deals with the unseen realm of the inner man and includes morals and taboos. As various people groups intermingled through the ages they often incorporated one another’s cultural and religious beliefs and practices. This syncretism is an ancient as well as modern practice.

Syncretism can easily occur when there are similarities between two systems of belief and practice. Particularly in the matter of soul care one can see similarities between cultures and religions. Because God created mankind with a conscience and a moral recognition of right and wrong, there are definite similarities among some of the beliefs and practices of numerous religions. In addition to the God-given conscience, all people groups have the same ancestors from which oral and written tradition would have originated. Nevertheless, because of sin and human error, the information and teachings God gave to Noah would have been corrupted while being passed down through the generations of nations not following God. Even the account of the flood varies throughout different people groups.
If one were to read various religious and philosophical admonitions for how to live righteously and peacefully, one would find many similarities. There was no doubt a great deal of borrowing between cultures. However, God provided His Word and wisdom and He forbade the Israelites from assimilating beliefs and practices from the nations around them. The only source of uncontaminated truth about the soul (mind, will, emotions) is the very Word of God. Thus, even when there are seeming similarities between the Bible and wisdom literature from other cultures, one can know that what God gave in Scripture is the pure truth. Moreover, God has consistently forbidden His people from incorporating foreign religious and philosophical ideas and practices having to do with worship and with the unseen realm of the soul and spirit.

Long History of Syncretism

Thus, from the very beginning, God opposed syncretism among His chosen people, Israel. They were to worship and follow Him alone and not add anything from the faith systems surrounding them. It is very clear that once Israel began dipping into the ways of the surrounding cultures, they assimilated more and more idol worship, as well as human wisdom and occult practices. The fallen human nature is prone to look for pragmatic solutions apart from God, especially when God does not act immediately according to their needs and desires. The Old Testament is filled with Israel’s syncretism, including the golden calf at the base of Mount Sinai and the priests bringing pagan idols into the very temple of God (Ezekiel 8). Rather than trusting God alone, they turned to the pagan world with its idols and idle promises.
Paul warned the early believers in Colosse of the dangers of syncretism when he said: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ” (Col. 2:8). Syncretism could only distract and subtract from their Christian walk. God had given them new life in Christ. But, rather than becoming established in the faith, the Colossians were contaminating their faith in Christ by adding religious and philosophical elements from the world around them.

Syncretism is defined as “the combination of different forms of belief or practice,” and that is exactly what they were doing. Syncretism is one of Satan’s most deceptive and appealing techniques devised to destroy the true faith and undermine the Christian’s faith in and dependence on Christ. Syncretism can happen in different ways. One way is accommodating customs and religious beliefs and practices by renaming and redefining them, such as cultures turning native deities into Catholic saints.1 Another way is using facets of philosophical systems that seem compatible with Christianity, such as assimilating aspects of Greek Stoicism having to do with morality and consolation.

Our concern is with the syncretism of psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies with Christianity. As we have demonstrated in our writings, psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies are actually religious in nature and practice.3 Robert C. Fuller, in his book Americans and the Unconscious, states this very clearly:

Insofar as psychological theories purport to interpret reality and orient individuals within it, they inevitably assume many of the cultural functions traditionally associated with religion. And to the extent that psychological concepts are used to guide individuals toward life’s intrinsic values and ultimate mysteries, their religious character becomes prominent.4

We call this syncretism psychoheresy, which is taking psychological ideas, theories, and practices and mingling them with Christianity.
The euphemism for this kind of syncretism is “integration,” which occurs when two or more ideas or systems are able to be combined. However, those who take the psychological counseling theories and attempt to combine them with Scripture cannot truly integrate them. They are as different as oil and water! One works with the old man of the flesh (carnal); the other works with the new man in Christ (spiritual). They are at enmity with each other, just as the flesh and the Spirit are contrary to each other (Gal. 5:17) and just as the carnal man is at enmity with God (Rom. 8:7). They cannot mix because they are enemies, just as the idols of the nations around Israel were at enmity with God. Thus these so-called Christian psychologists and other mental health professionals are not practicing and promoting ordinary integration, but rather religious syncretism. They are overlaying their psychology with the Bible, which ultimately serves to disguise the psychological religious systems they are using. As we have shown through the years, this psycho-syncretism subverts and subtracts from the faith.
Psychoheresy began years ago as pastors sought to use the latest information about the mind gleaned from men in the world of science and medicine. Pastors who struggled to help their people thought that the more they could learn about the mind, the better prepared they would be to minister to those in need. They thought that the information about psychological counseling theories that they were learning and using was safe because they believed these ideas came from the world of nature and medicine rather than from another religion. Did any realize that research into the unconscious involved occult practices, putting clairvoyants into trances, and then creating elaborate scientific-sounding theories out of what was spoken by those in the trance state?5 Some suspected the origins; others eagerly embraced what the world offered, often in place of the Bible.

Syncretism and Mesmerism

Franz Anton Mesmer, an eighteenth-century Austrian medical doctor, theorized that all physical and mental problems were the result of an imbalance of a universal, invisible fluid permeating all of life, which he called “animal magnetism.” At first Mesmer had patients swallow tiny bits of iron so that as he moved magnets around their bodies he could attempt to balance this invisible fluid. Later he believed that he could transmit his own personal animal magnetism to the patient as he established a certain kind of rapport. Under his influence and treatment many fell into a trance and some appeared to achieve some element of healing. Mesmer’s followers brought his techniques to England and it became quite the rage, especially between 1830 and the early 1850s. Christian clergy were extremely curious about its possibilities and implications regarding the care of souls. In her book Mesmerized: Powers of Mind in Victorian Britain, Alison Winter says:
Mesmerism … held out the tantalizing possibility of teasing apart proper and improper, spiritual and satanic, legitimate and false, forms of influence of the sinful, sick, and suffering. One reason was mesmerism’s similarity to forms of possession and divine inspiration.7
Winter says, “Many clergy became involved in mesmerism.” That is syncretism.
There was great controversy over mesmerism during the mid-nineteenth century in England in both the scientific community and in the church. The clergy could not agree among themselves if mesmerism was the work of the devil or a useful discovery from the natural world and therefore a gift from God. Some clergy used mesmerism in their pastoral care and became masterful in utilizing the techniques. Winter says, “Clerical mesmerists … lulled patients to sleep with mesmeric anesthesia; they claimed to have cured nervous diseases, insanity, and internal disorders.”8
A pastor by the name of William Scoresby believed that “mesmerism revealed the underlying character of divine influence: of the magnet over iron filings, or the earth’s poles over the needle of the compass, of the preacher over his flock, or the social reformer over the community.”9 He believed that proper use of what he called “zoistic magnetism” (animal magnetism) could be used to transform society, since he believed that “God designated a mysterious ethereal fluid or fluids … that enforce his will on earth.” He further contended that this fluid is conducted among people in varying degrees so that some were stronger and others weaker in being conductors of God’s will.10 While there was much debate as to the source of this seeming power, the nineteenth-century clergy continued to use it until the fad ran its course.
But, why even write about pastors using mesmerism, which had no real scientific basis and was found to be on the same plane as séances and occult “table turning,” which were also popular in Britain during the nineteenth century? We do so because mesmerism was a precursor to psychotherapy, which is on the same pseudoscientific plane as mesmerism. The syncretism of mesmerism and Christian soul care gives us a glimpse into the horror of syncretism and should serve as a warning to pastors who look outside Scripture for methods to minister to souls.
Talk therapy (psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, psychological counseling) evolved out of mesmerism, first through hypnosis and later through conversation.11 In his book The Discovery of the Unconscious, Henri Ellenberger describes the general sequence of events that preceded the modern psychological counseling craze:
Historically, modern dynamic psychotherapy derives from primitive medicine, and an uninterrupted continuity can be demonstrated between exorcism and magnetism, magnetism and hypnotism, and hypnotism and the modern dynamic schools.12
As mesmerism came to America, it evolved into three forms: hypnotism, positive thinking, and psychotherapy. In fact Fuller says, “Mesmerists became the first Americans directly to study the psychodynamic nature of interpersonal relationships.”13 One can also see how the positive thinking extension of mesmerism affected the church through Norman Vincent Peale and Robert Schuller. These men and their followers have been strong supporters of psychological counseling therapies and theories that include the idea that people have suffered some sort of deprivation which is what causes them to act as they do. As Fuller puts it, sin came to be “understood as a function of ignorance or lack of self-discipline or as the result of faulty social institutions. Man’s ‘lower nature’ was, therefore, considered to be potentially correctable through humanly initiated reforms.”14
If pastors further believed that spiritual change could be wrought through human effort and human methods, they were ready to embrace human means and methods in their soul care and to seek to know more about the secular study of the soul called “psychology.” The natural next step was to syncretize twentieth-century psychotherapy with Christianity and to continue to expand this syncretism into the twenty-first century.

Faith in God & His Word or Syncretism?

The syncretism of psychology and Christianity appeals to those Christians who believe that what is being discovered about the mind, the will, and the emotions is science, that it is part of God’s creation yet to be discovered in the same way as discoveries are made in physics, chemistry, and biology. Since psychology presents itself as a science and psychotherapeutic ideas are organized into theories, many pastors mistakenly believe that there is no syncretism of religion when adding the models and methods of counseling psychology. This faith in science and belief in a “scientific psychology” goes quite far back. Fuller says:
Underlying the ability of late nineteenth-century Americans to embrace scientific psychology as a source of spiritual edification was a long tradition of seeing nature as fraught with theological significance. Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century, American Protestants were increasingly fascinated by scientific method.15
In addition, there are subtleties and similarities between certain ideas from psychology and Christianity that increase the vulnerability for one to begin thinking and ministering psychologically rather than biblically. That is why Christians need to be spending time in the Word and in prayer rather than in looking for answers to life’s dilemmas outside Scripture. Psychotherapy and its underlying psychologies are not science.16 They are human speculations about the soul with a pseudo-scientific façade. Those who are Christians attempt to accommodate the faith, but this syncretism will activate the flesh rather than minister to the spirit, because what is added comes from the world rather than the Word.
There has been so much searching outside Scripture to find ways to minister to suffering saints that a whole cadre of psychologically trained or at least psychologically tainted professionals and lay counselors are prepared to minister the ways of men and the wisdom of men along with Scriptures that seem to support their practice. Others who are also guilty of syncretism are: (1) Those Christian schools and seminaries that positively promote the use of counseling psychology and/or prepare individuals to become licensed to practice psychotherapy, especially those Christian schools that have programs accredited by the American Psychological Association (APA), such as Baylor University, Biola University, Fuller Theological Seminary, George Fox University, Regent University, and Wheaton College; (2) Those pastors or others who promote and affirm those psychological ideas and/or refer congregants out to psychotherapists; (3) Those authors and organizations that promote a psychological understanding of man; (4) Those professing Christians who are deeply committed to this syncretism, which comes from not believing that Scripture is sufficient for life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3). Thus many have formed a new faith, which is not “the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3).
Instead of following the ways of the world, Christians need to search the Word to find out how God changes individuals from the inside out without one human being probing into another person’s inner man, which only God can know. God does the primary work of change and has clearly set forth what believers are to do for one another: preach, pray, admonish, instruct, help, and encourage one another to seek the Lord daily through praying; worshiping; giving thanks; reading, studying, memorizing, and meditating on Scripture; thinking biblically; walking by faith; loving, serving, and obeying God; and loving and serving one another. This care of souls is to be practiced mutually in the body of Christ so that all may grow and flourish in the “faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). There is no system or program. Instead, it is the very life of Christ in every believer bearing fruit and bringing each to maturity through the Word of God, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the fellowship of the saints.

As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power (Col. 2:6-10).

(Endnotes)

1 Omar Rodriguez, “Afrocuban Religion and Syncretism with the Catholic Religion,” http://scholar.library.miami.edu/emancipation/religion1.htm.

2 John T. McNeill. A History of The Cure of Souls. New York; Harper & Row, Publishers, 1951, pp. 45-46.

3 Martin and Deidre Bobgan. PsychoHeresy. Santa Barbara, CA: EastGate Publishers, 1987, pp. 11-25.

4 Robert C. Fuller. Americans and the Unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, p. 6.

5 Henri F. Ellenberger. The Discovery of the Unconscious: The History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry. New York: Basic Books (Harper Collins Publishers), 1970, p. 85.

6 McNeill. op. cit., p. 45.

7 Allison Winter. Mesmerized: Powers of Mind in Victorian Britain, p. 246.

8 Ibid., p. 252.

9 Ibid., p. 255.

10 Ibid., pp. 256-257.

11 Ellenberger, op. cit., pp152-153.

12 Ibid., p. 48.

13 Robert C. Fuller, op. cit., p.37.

14 Ibid., p. 42.

15 Ibid., p. 21-22.

16 Bobgan, op.cit., pp. 27-41.

(PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, January-February 2011, Vol. 19, No. 1)


Article Topics | Titles / Titles | Top
PsychoHeresy Awareness Ministries
4137 Primavera Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93110
www.pamweb.org

YOUTUBE’S OWN “PROUD TO LOVE” LGBTQ VIDEO PROMO

QUOTE FROM YOUTUBE:
“At YouTube, we believe that everyone has the right to love and be loved. We strive to make YouTube a place where all communities can feel proud to express themselves and connect through video. That’s why we’re proud to stand with the LGBT community and support equal rights and marriage equality for all.”

LILA ROSE OF LIVE ACTION REPORTS ON TEXAS SENATOR WENDY DAVIS 10-12 HOUR FILIBUSTER AGAINST ABORTION BILL WITH AID OF DISRUPTIVE PRO ABORTION MOB

Democrats Defeat Texas Abortion Law 

which would have stopped abortions after 20 weeks:


From Lila Rose:
On Tuesday, a pro-abortion mob flooded the Texas Capitol to ensure that Planned Parenthood can continue to literally tear babies to pieces in the womb, or to kill them with a lethal injection in their heads and hearts.

Don’t doubt for a second that the baby feels all of this – or that Planned Parenthood kills these children for tremendous profit.

After a ten-hour (some say 12-13 hour) filibuster by State Senator Wendy Davis, elected officials in Texas tried to vote on a bill to protect pain-capable infants in the womb – but the screaming mob, encouraged by Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards, drowned out the vote until midnight, when the legislative session had to close.

Remember: State Senator Davis was fighting legislation that would save 20-week-old babies and older from excruciating death by dismemberment and poison. That is what is being praised by pro-abortion leaders and media outlets across the country.

Live Action has firsthand knowledge of Planned Parenthood’s long and gruesome record in Texas. We have investigative footage from Texas exposing Planned Parenthood’s eagerness to facilitate late-term sex-selective abortions – specifically because the baby is a girl!

Watch our shocking video from Austin and see how Planned Parenthood will do anything for abortion money – even target late-term baby girls, old enough to survive outside the womb.

Sex-Selection in America: Part 1 – Undercover in Texas:



This is the same Planned Parenthood that is against any and all regulations on abortion, including protections against babies born from a failed abortion. Planned Parenthood’s vision for America means abortion on demand, for whoever wants it, and funded by you. 

Texas Governor Rick Perry decided not to allow a mob to threaten the lives of children endangered by late-term abortions. He has called a new special legislative session so that Texas’s representatives can do the work their constituents hired them to do.

Pro-abortion bullies want abortionists to be allowed to rip apart pain-capable children in the womb, or kill them with poison injections through their heads or hearts. They will do anything to maintain this gruesome status quo. But these are unique human beings, and no amount of yelling and screaming can ever be enough to deny them the right to live.

Screaming for the “right” to dismember babies twenty weeks and older in utero. For the “right” to poison them to death.

Sen. Davis? Planned Parenthood? You have no shame. You have no compassion.

Americans oppose late-term abortion by huge margins. In a state already reeling from the news of abortionist Douglas Karpen’s Gosnell-like “House of Horrors” in Houston, it’s essential that the people’s will be carried out, and that we defend our children.

As Live Action has documented, there are horrors going on even in Texas’s capital, where the special session on safeguarding Texas’s children will take place. I thank Governor Perry for combating human rights abuses in his state.

Texas is not a state where the most basic and fundamental human right – the right to life – can be shouted down. America is not that kind of nation. Let’s pray that Texas stands strong to protect these children from the violence of abortion!

Yours in the fight for life,
Lila Rose

Lila Rose
President
Live Action


______________________________________________________________
Governor Rick Perry of Texas condemns “mob rule” & filibuster:

CHAOS on Senate floor during abortion vote in Texas:

And here:

Perry vows to fight for abortion bill:

Gov. Perry calls another special session:

PENTAGON CELEBRATES GAY TROOPS

From the Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/pentagon-celebrates-gay-troops/, and 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/t-2jpg/,
which reports that: 
“The Pentagon on Tuesday toasted gays in the military, with a top adviser to President Obama declaring the country is “safer” now that they may serve openly in the ranks.”

Army Brig. Gen. Tammy Smith (right) became the military’s first openly gay flag officer when she was promoted to her current rank in an Aug. 10, 2012, ceremony. She received her new decorations from her wife, Tracey Hepner (left). (Servicemembers Defense Legal Network)

PETER LABARBERA OF “AFTAH” SLAMS “CRAVEN” JUSTICE KENNEDY OF THE SUPREME COURT FOR STRIKING DOWN “DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT”

From Peter LaBarbera: 
June 27th, 2013

Contact: Peter LaBarbera: 312-324-3787; americansfortruth@gmail.com
The following statement was issued June 27 by Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality:
Yesterday’s decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and effectively invalidating Californians’ vote to preserve marriage as between a man and a woman — continues America’s godless trajectory toward sexual and gender chaos.  We have become a Profane Nation at war with our own heritage and the Judeo-Christian moral values that helped make us great.
Healthy societies discriminate against sexually immoral behavior: homosexuality, sex outside marriage, pornography, incest, etc. This benefits children and adults by using the law to reinforce stable moral boundaries and steer citizens away from destructive (sinful) behaviors. So it was stunning to read the majority decision by Justice Anthony Kennedy – a Reagan appointee – overturning DOMA’s pro-natural-marriage provision in the name of the children.
Kennedy surely has earned his future laudatory obit in the New York Times for capitulating to “gay” activist ideology — but among clear-thinking Americans who still know right from wrong he will go down in history as one more craven elitist who sold out Almighty God for a place in the Gay Hall of Fame.
Jettisoning the dictates of his own Catholic religion – which has some pretty strong words for putting children in homosexual-led households – Kennedy declares that by not recognizing legalized homosexual “marriages” in New York and other states, DOMA:
…“places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage. The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects….And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples.”
What philosophical drivel. Only a decadent society — in which God and common sense have been kicked to the curb – would use its laws to enforce the egalitarian nightmare whereby government treats households that are fatherless or motherless ‘by design’ as if they are morally and practically equivalent to normal mom-and-dad homes. (And if you dare to disagree, you’re a hateful bigot.)
Homosexual practice is a perversion and homosexual role models are NOT healthy for kids. Neither is replacing dad with a “second mom,” or mommy with Daddy Number Two.
The Kennedy majority’s legal insanity is what emerges from an Isaiah 5:20 culture (evil is good and good evil) that puts deviant sexual identities on a pedestal, to be celebrated as protected “civil rights.” The LGBT Pandora’s Box has been flung open, and there will be much more folly and destruction to follow — including the public policy madness of establishing “gender identity” (read: extreme gender confusion) as a parallel “civil right.”
At least the Supreme Court did not create a national “right” to homosexual “marriage.” But we must be vigilant, as future LGBT litigation, coupled with the appalling self-righteousness of Kennedy’s liberal court majority, will combine to make this the next goal of the judicial supremacists.
______________________________________________________________
And from the National Journal’s article:http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/scalia-high-handed-kennedy-has-declared-us-enemies-of-the-human-race-20130626?print=true, titled:

(Supreme Court Justice) Scalia: ‘High-Handed’ Kennedy Has Declared Us ‘Enemies of the Human Race’


PETER LABARBERA OF AMERICANS FOR TRUTH ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY ON THE COLLAPSE OF EXODUS INTERNATIONAL

See Rob Gagnon article referred to by Peter LaBarbera here: http://robgagnon.net/ExodusCollisionCourseWithJesus.htm, with full text below:
Exodus on a Collision Course with Jesus

Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D.
Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, 616 N. Highland Ave., Pittsburgh, PA 15206
gagnon@pts.edu
May 20, 2013
 Exodus Leadership now contradicts the Lord’s Prayer, refuses to take a stand on “gay marriage,” and severs ties with Evangelicalism. What’s next?
The Exodus leadership of Clark Whitten, Alan Chambers, and Randy Thomas are teaching believers to violate our Lord’s own instructions about how we are to pray. Jesus teaches us that when we pray to God, we should say words to the effect: “Forgive us our debts as [i.e., to the extent that] we ourselves also have forgiven our debtors.”
Yet Rev. Whitten writes, and Mr. Chambers and Mr. Thomas concur, “There is no biblical basis for believers to confess sins to God for forgiveness. To each other for healing, yes; but not to God for forgiveness. How much time will that free up!” (Pure Grace, p. 20). Mr. Thomas, the no. 3 person at Exodus, adds that believers who continue to pray to God “Forgive us our sins” engage in “a self-righteous ritual” and “deny the righteousness of Christ that is already present” (http://exodusinternational.org/2013/05/concerning-sin-confession/).
Who are you going to believe? The Exodus leadership or Jesus?
This statement is just one of what I term “The Seven Pillars of Rev. Whitten’s Wisdom.” Rev. Whitten is the chair of the Exodus Board and Alan Chambers’ and Randy Thomas’s pastor, whom Alan and Randy follow down the doctrinal line. Indeed, Alan Chambers, the President of Exodus, has stated: “To say that I recommend [Clark Whitten’s book Pure Grace] is the understatement of the century.” With Whitten’s book, “God has unveiled something that has been veiled for hundreds and hundreds of years.”
Rev. Whitten doesn’t identify in his book “seven pillars.” The enumeration is mine. Yet what I identify as the seven pillars are all quoted strong positions taken from Rev. Whitten’s book. They should alarm all Christians. What are the other six?
(1) “Listen, Jesus did not die to modify your behavior!”
(2) “My bad works don’t move God any more than my good works move Him. He simply isn’t moved by ‘works’ of any kind. If you are motivated to do a great work for God, good luck!”
(3) “We are free to [do anything, good or bad] … all without condemnation from God…. Our liberty isn’t negated by our sin.”
(4) The “anti-gospel” says: “God is pleased when you act right. When you don’t, He will clean your clock! [As a believer it is foolish to think that you can do anything to] tick the Big Guy off.”
(5) The “anti-gospel” says: “Fear God and keep his commandments.”
(6) The “anti-gospel” says: “The Holy Spirit was given to you to empower you to act better and better and convict you of your sin when you stray.”
Every one of these principles contradicts the truth of the gospel (see previous critique, “Cheap Grace Masquerading as Pure Grace: The Unfortunate Gospel of Rev. Clark Whitten” athttp://www.robgagnon.net/Clark%20Whitten%20Critique.htm). They epitomize what the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (martyred near the end of Hitler’s reign) defined as “cheap grace” in his classic book The Cost of Discipleship (1937): “Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, communion without confession.” That is exactly what Rev. Whitten, Mr. Chambers, and Mr. Thomas teach: Forgiveness without having to repent of grossly immoral behavior, an end to church discipline since all sin is equal and all believers sin regularly, and a view of confessing our sins to God for forgiveness after conversion as a waste of time. Bonhoeffer adds: “Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ.” I’m not suggesting that the Exodus leadership wants believers to experience grace without discipleship, dying to one’s self, and letting Christ live in them. I am saying, though, that they assure self-professed believers (falsely) that the nature of grace is such that believers can have one without the other. Again Bonhoeffer: Cheap grace is the notion that “you can stay as you are and enjoy the consolations of forgiveness.” The Exodus leadership says that one shouldn’t but they also assure Christians that one can.
Alan Chambers now calls “evangelical” a “dirty word” that he no longer applies to Exodus or to himself (“Guests in an Ever Changing Culture—Letter from Alan Chambers March 2013” athttp://exodusinternational.org/2013/03/guests-in-an-ever-changing-culture-letter-from-alan-chambers-for-march-2013/?shared=email&msg=fail). He complains that Evangelicalism is too “black and white” and he assures us that God is not “black and white,” which presumably means that God’s aim is to shade the light into gray. The story of Christ is now the story of Gray breaking into the darkness.
Evangelicalism, Mr. Chambers complains, gives too much attention to “right and wrong” and requires one to “take a stand” on moral issues. Chambers cries: “Gone are the days of evangelizing through scare tactics, moral legislation, and church discipline.” So instead the Exodus leadership prefers to assure self-professed Christians who engage in unrepentant homosexual practice that they are going to heaven irrespective of whether they bring their life into line with a confession of Christ’s lordship. The Exodus leadership refuses to take a stand against “gay marriage” even as it takes public policy stances on issues that homosexual activists support. And the Exodus leadership categorically rejects church discipline despite the fact that it is commanded by Jesus and Paul.
Earlier this month Alan Chambers even went so far as to insert secretly the e-mail address of Jeremy Hooper, an abrasive homosexual activist, into the middle of a private group email thread containing a number of pro-family leaders (including moi). This led to a number of misrepresentations online by homosexual activist sites and even Salon.com. This deceitful alignment with a person who maligns those who believe in a male-female foundation for marriage is not exactly a model for Christian conduct, certainly not for someone leading what is supposed to be a Christian ministry.
At the end of April Randy Thomas gushed over John Paulk’s repudiation of his previous books about coming out of a homosexual life and his flirtations with his homosexual past:
“I told him that while I related to him more after his gay bar visit in 2000, I could relate to him even more now that he is genuinely questioning past actions and motivations. While I don’t agree with all of his conclusions he shared on the phone, I can say I agree with about 95% of what he shared including renouncing the term ‘ex-gay.’’ I love that he is pursuing the true meaning of God’s grace…. Listening to John and his apparent newfound depth of honesty made me happy for him…. He is … now more authentic than I have ever known him to be…. John, … I love that you are wrestling with various issues with humility and honesty. In His grip of grace, you are safe” (http://randythomas.co/2013/04/22/john-paulks-shocking-secret/).
In an Exodus post a couple of weeks ago Leslie Chambers affirmed her husband’s severance of the transformed life from genuine saving faith, saying that while obedience to God is preferred it is not “required” (http://exodusinternational.org/2013/05/leslie-chambers/). Neither Leslie nor Alan appears to realize that a necessary byproduct of true faith is a life lived for God.
Who ever thought we would reach the day when it would be necessary for faithful followers of Jesus to exodus out of Exodus?
________________________________________________________
Renew America has an extensive article written by Rev. Mark H. Creech:
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/creech/130622, with full text below:

June 22, 2013

Exodus International flees the Promised Land

By Rev. Mark H. Creech

It is considered a landmark announcement, proof that the cultural winds are shifting in favor of the acceptance of homosexuality by the evangelical community. Exodus International, a ministry devoted to helping people overcome same-sex attractions is shutting down. Alan Chambers, the ministry’s president, is apologizing for much of the hurt he believes the ministry has caused the LGBT community.

Chambers, who now rejects the view that sexual orientation can be changed through the Gospel, wrote that he believes there is a sense in which his apology is for the whole church. “[I]f the church is a body, with many members being connected to the whole, then I believe that when one of us does right we all do right, and when one of us does wrong we all do wrong,” he said. “We have done wrong, and I stand with many others who now recognize the need to offer apologies and make things right.” [1]

But Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention takes umbrage with Chambers’ apology, arguing: “I think there is a tendency to see Exodus folding as a parable of Christian capitulation and ethic. That is not what is happening. Instead what you have is an organization that has some confusion about its mission and purpose…What is not happening here, is an evangelical revision of a biblical sexual ethic.” [2]

Peter LaBarbera, who leads Americans for Truth About Homosxuality, would agree with Moore. When OneNewsNow recently asked LaBarbera about Exodus shutting down, he said, “I think Alan Chambers, who basically ruined the organization, had no choice because the affiliates were leaving. All the people who support the truth that homosexuals can change and overcome this perversion through Jesus Christ were leaving Exodus.” [3]

LaBarbera, who called Exodus’ closing one of the greatest tragedies he had witnessed in the pro-family movement, also shared where he believes the ministry made its fatal mistake. He said, “Homosexuality is about behavior, and behaviors can be changed with the help of God and through Christ…That’s what Exodus used to be about. But once they started talking about so called ‘gay sexual orientation,’ as if this is the inherent state of somebody’s being, they got in trouble.” [4]

LaBarbera makes a critical point that raises a fundamental question: Is the concept of “sexual orientation” biblical? It is my contention that this expression, which finds its source in modern psychology and is so easily bandied about, doesn’t have a biblical leg to stand on.

The Scriptures say, “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them (Genesis. 1:27). When Jesus spoke to the religious leaders of his day about marriage and divorce, a passage certainly related to human sexuality, Jesus referenced the same Genesis passage repeating, “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.'” (Mark. 10:6).

The point is that the language of “sexual orientation” is an imposition today on much of what the Bible says about sexuality. According to the Bible no one was born heterosexual or homosexual, each was born ether a male or a female biologically. Heterosexual or homosexual behaviors are sexual acts, with heterosexual acts blessed and sanctified in some cases and condemned in others, while homosexual acts are condemned one hundred percent of the time.

It’s interesting that the concept of “sexual orientation” is based strongly upon one’s feelings. How does one know that one is gay? Conventional wisdom says because of the way one feels. Numerous are the individuals who have said, “I’ve felt that I was gay since I was a child.” But if one felt that he or she was a squirrel, would that qualify as proof that one was justified in risking life and limb by climbing trees and eating only nuts? The entire concept is nuts and symptomatic of a postmodernist relativity out of control.

The Bible often speaks about feelings, thoughts, and urges. And what are such but emotions and processes of the intellect that 2 Corinthians 10:5 commands must be brought in subjection to Christ’s Lordship.

Jesus said, “From within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man ‘unclean,'” (Mark. 7:20-23). Here Jesus describes a “sinful orientation” that is the inner nature of every person and demonstrates itself in outward behaviors unacceptable with God – acts that estrange a person from God.

The apostle James forewarned about arguments like “sexual orientation” saying they are the same as blaming God for evil. It appears similar arguments were apparent even in his day. He wrote, “When tempted no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed” (James. 1:13-14). To blame homosexuality on heredity is no less than to blame the Creator for one’s failure – an argument which is unconscionable.

To those who would contend the Bible is silent about “sexual orientation,” let it be said this is because no such notion is based in truth. It is a broad term developed in modern times to provide credence for the growing number of sexual perversions. Even the polygamists and the pedophiles want to get on board.

There is one final point that also ought to be noted. Chambers said something in his apology quite telling. He said regarding the convictions that he and his wife hold: “Our beliefs do not center on ‘sin’ because ‘sin’ isn’t at the center of our faith.” [5] This author begs to disagree with that point of view. Unfortunately, without a clear understanding of sin, there is no need for faith – no need for Christ – no need for a Savior – no meaning to grace.

Central to the message of Christianity is that all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glorious ideal for life (Romans. 3:23). Apart from repentance, the remission of sin, and the grace of God in Jesus Christ to transform a life to live according to God’s standards, the Gospel becomes no more than a soppy code of self-help. What distinguishes it from any other religion or moral force is its promise that Christ suffered, died and rose again not simply to eliminate sin’s shame and condemnation, but also to remove its power.

To water down this message with outside worldly, unbiblical influences, is to risk the loss of Christian identity and collapse, which is exactly what happened to Exodus International.

Indeed this is a landmark event. And every Christian denomination, church, church school or university, organization and ministry, should take note with fear and trembling. Exodus International took flight from its own promised land of deliverance and exists no more.

Resources:

[1] “The Expanded Public Apology from Alan Chambers,” KansasCity.com, 20 June 2013 http://www.kansascity.com/2013/06/20/4303773/the- expanded-public-apology-from.html

[2] Anh Do, Kate Mather, Joe Mozingo, “‘Gay Cure’ Ministry Exodus International to Close,” latimes.com, 20 June 2013http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me- 0621-exodus-international-gays-20130621,0,1731583.story

[3] Charlie Butts, “Supporters Flight from Exodus Cited as Reason for Shutdown,” OneNewsNow.com, 20 June 2013,http://www.onenewsnow.com/culture/2013/06/20/supporters%E2%80%99-flight-from-exodus-cited-as-reason-for- shutdown#.UcS6HZzm1I0

[4] Ibid

[5] “The Expanded Public Apology from Alan Chambers,” KansasCity.com, 20 June 2013 http://www.kansascity.com/2013/06/20/4303773/the- expanded-public-apology-from.html

___________________________________________________________________

NAZARENES ELECT NEW GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT, ADMIRER OF INTERFAITH MYSTIC PHYLLIS TICKLE

Apprising has many posts about Tickle, clearly showing her extreme apostasy:
http://apprising.org/2008/09/30/who-is-phyllis-tickle/.
http://apprising.org/2009/07/06/phyllis-tickle-the-reformation-is-over-and-reformers-have-new-names-today/.
http://apprising.org/2009/06/09/phyllis-tickle-preaches-for-mars-hill-bible-church-and-rob-bell/.
http://apprising.org/2009/05/27/rob-bell-peter-rollins-and-phyllis-tickle-together-advancing-emergence-christianity/.
http://apprising.org/2008/12/09/phyllis-tickle-where-now-is-the-authority/.
http://apprising.org/2008/11/18/phyllis-tickle-tickling-itching-emergent-ears/.
http://apprising.org/2011/02/21/doug-pagitt-and-phyllis-tickle-set-to-infect-st-lukes-methodist-church/.
http://apprising.org/2008/10/01/phyllis-tickle-emerging-church-dominating-influence-over-protestantism/.
http://apprising.org/2009/05/19/christianity-21-and-alleged-innovative-voices-in-the-faith-phyllis-tickle/.
http://apprising.org/2009/07/04/phyllis-tickle-and-the-great-emergence-to-infect-canada/.
http://apprising.org/2009/11/14/andrew-marin-and-phyllis-tickle/.
http://apprising.org/2009/11/15/andrew-marin-and-phyllis-tickle-part-2/.
http://apprising.org/2009/07/08/tony-jones-on-phyllis-tickles-emergence/.
http://apprising.org/2009/03/19/peter-rollins-and-phyllis-tickle-discuss-emergence-christianity/.
http://apprising.org/2009/09/25/phyllis-tickle-mormonism-fourth-great-abrahamic-faith/.



Manny Silva of Stand For Truth Ministries reports:

A New General Superintendent: Cause For Celebration, Or Concern?
After many rounds of voting, the Church of the Nazarene has elected the first of two general Superintendents that are needed to replace two retiring Generals.  His name is David Busic.
Dr. David Busic, at the time of his election, was the president of Nazarene Theological Seminary, and professor of Preaching and Pastoral Theology.  He has an impressive resume, and seems like a nice guy.  But let us consider some issues that may of great concern to many Christians.
Concern #1: Emergent Connection or Lack Of Discernment?
At his inaugural address, Dr. Busic made many references and quotes of Phylis Tickle, a major leader in the emergent church movement, of which she has coined the phrase “the great emergence.”  Tickle promotes contemplative spirituality.  Phylis Tickle likens heretic Brian McLaren to Martin Luther who helped bring about the Reformation.  She is probably correct, but this new current reformation is not a good thing.  Tickle receives high praise from emergent heretic Doug Pagitt, calling her “the best friend the emergent movement could ever have.”  Tickle is currently a Senior Fellow of Cathedral College of the Washington National Cathedral, which has a heavily interfaith message.
Quote: “Washington National Cathedral is a church for national purposes called to embody God’s love and to welcome people of all faiths and perspectives. A unique blend of the spiritual and the civic, this Episcopal Cathedral is a voice for generous-spirited Christianity and a catalyst for reconciliation and interfaith dialogue to promote respect and understanding. We invite all people to share in our commitment to create a more hopeful and just world.”
 The Cathedral College also is known for its heavy promotion of all forms of contemplative prayer: centering prayer, silence, stillness.
Tickle is also on the editorial board of explorefaith.org, and the recommended spiritual experts on the site are a veritable who’s who of “Christian” mystics and non-Christian gurus such as Guru Ram Dass, Buddhist Master Thich Nhat Hahn, the Sufi Muslim Rumi.
Finally, I give you a dubious quote from her book The Great Emergence:
The new Christianity of the Great Emergence must discover some authority base or delivery system and/or governing agency of its own. It must formulate—and soon—something other than Luther’s Sola Scriptura which, although used so well by the Great Reformation originally, is now seen as hopelessly outmoded or insufficient …(Phyllis Tickle, The Great Emergence, pg. 151)
Imagine that Luther’s Sola Scriptura, so critical within the Reformation movement, of which many left the persecution of the Catholic Church, some under pain of death, is no longer relevant according to Phylis Tickle.  What does this say of her regard for God’s word?  In fact, Phylis Tickle does not believe that the entire Bible is God’s word.
Conclusion: Why would a learned man such as David Busic want anything to do with Phylis Tickle, even if just to quote her and speak highly of her in his messages?  If a well respected man quotes someone favorably and praises them, would not most Bible believing Christians think that this person is a good source for them to go to?  I would like to find out what Dr. David Busic really thinks of Phylis Tickle, in the light of all the heretical things that she stands for.  Is it really wise that a church has just elected a General Superintendent who at the very least, seems to have some really impaired judgment and discernment?
Interfaith Connection?  Or Simply Carelessness?
The following is an excerpt from an email I wrote to Dr. Busic in 2011.  The entire article can be read here: http://reformednazarene.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/does-nazarene-theological-seminary-support-the-interfaith-movement/
11/18/2011
Dear Dr. Busic,
Congratulations on your appointment as President of NTS.  It is my prayer that God will guide you in leading NTS in upholding biblical truth at the school.  I and other Nazarenes have had concerns in the past regarding some things sponsored by, promoted by, or taught at the seminary.
I was concerned about something I ran into the other day, and wondering if you were aware of it. At the CRES website, the Seminary is listed favorably as a recommended institution friendly to the CRES organization.  My concern is that it is an interfaith group that works closely with practically any kind of religion in the world.​
Here is the link to the site where it mentions NTS favorably:  http://www.cres.org/pubs/KCInterfaithOps.htm

On their vision statement page, they say this: “CRES values the contribution of each distinctive faith in healing the crises of our age — and finds it important to honor and preserve their distinctions. “These faiths include: Buddhists, Muslims, Native American religions, Hindu, Sufi, Unitarian Universalists, Taoism, Confucianism, Wiccans, and Zoroastrians!
They also say: “CRES envisions the greater Kansas City area as a model community honoring interfaith relationships where interfaith relationships are honored as a way of deepening one’s own tradition and spirituality, and
where the wisdom of the many religions successfully addresses the environmental,  personal, and social crises of our often fragmented, desacralized world.”
Does NTS have any kind of real connection with CRES?  If so, on what basis?  And if not, would it not be prudent to ask this group to remove any reference to NTS as a good resource?  If this is not the type of group NTS wants to associate with, that would certainly remove any appearance of an endorsement of this organization.  If this is the kind of group that NTS wants to associate with, then I humbly will say that it would be a serious problem that all Nazarenes should be aware of.

I did not receive any response from Dr. Busic.
Does the Church of the Nazarene approve of the idea of working with interfaith groups on a regular basis?  Does not the word of God speak against that?  It is written in 2 Cor. 6:14-17:

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.
It is clear to me, a non-seminary educated man whose father always wanted him to be a pastor, that this scripture passage alone answers the question.  We are not be joining ourselves with those who are pagan and do not preach the Gospel of Christ.  And if these pagans are recommending us favorably, as if we also are favorable to them, it would do us good to have no connection at all with them, and no hint of any kind that we are aligned with their ungodly agenda.
There is only one right thing to do, and the president of NTS has not done it yet.  I call on him to do the right thing, remove the connection with this ungodly group, and make it clear that we do not stand with them in any way, no matter what “good” causes they may be involved in.
 Conclusion: Is this a matter of discernment?  Is this a matter of lack of knowledge?  Dr. Busic never answered me.  Perhaps others can bring this egregious connection to his attention, and he will do the right thing.  If not, then we have a serious concern on our hands, with a man who has just been chosen to the highest office of a denomination of over 2 million people.  To be favorably and knowingly linked to such a group, which cannot even be called a Christian organization, is a clear indication of lack of discernment, or an indication of solidarity with their ideas.  Either way, it not good for the Church of the Nazarene.

We have elected David Busic.  The question is, was that the right decision?

 Manny Silva

Stand For Truth Ministries

MILLIONS IN FRAUDULENT TAX REFUNDS TO ILLEGALS USING IDENTICAL ADDRESSES

The New American reports in http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/item/15795-irs-refunded-tens-of-millions-of-dollars-to-unauthorized-illegal-workers, that illegal immigrants have received millions of dollars in fraudulent tax refunds as follows, following an audit:
1) 23,994 tax refunds totalling $46,378,040. all to the same address in Atlanta, Georgia.
2) 11,284 tax refunds totalling $2,164,976. all to another single address in Atlanta, Georgia.
3) 3,608 tax refunds totalling $2,691,448. all to another single address in Atlanta, Georgia.
4) 2,386 tax refunds totalling $1,232,943. all to another single address in Atlanta, Georgia.
5) 2,507 tax refunds totalling $10,395,874. all to another single address in Oxnard, California.
6) 2,408 tax refunds totalling $7,284,212. all to another single address in Raleigh, North Carolina.
7) 2,047 tax refunds totalling $5,558,608. all to another single address in Phoenix, Arizona.
8) 1,972 tax refunds totalling $2,256,302. all to another single address in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
9) 1,942 tax refunds totalling $5.091,027. all to another single address in San Jose, California.
10) 1,846 tax refunds totalling $3,298,877. all to another single address in Arvin, California.

FIFTH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION TRAMPLED BY SUPREME COURT

The New American reports in http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/15787-supreme-court-bombshell-no-right-to-remain-silent, that:

“The Supreme Court handed down a decision on June 17 that has been ignored by most media outlets, despite its devastating effect on one of the most fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.
In a 5-4 ruling, the justices ruled that a person no longer has the right to remain silent as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. In relevant part, the Fifth Amendment mandates that no one “shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”
Thanks to the Supreme Court’s decision in Salinas v. Texas, that part of the Bill of Rights has been excised — and has joined the list of so many other fundamental liberties that now lie on the scrap heap of history.”
That, despite the Miranda rights:

PETITION TO BAN CREATIONISM FILED ON WHITE HOUSE WEBSITE

From the white house website: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/ban-creationism-and-intelligent-design-science-classroom-federal-law/pNY6mCBg:

“WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:


Ban Creationism and Intelligent Design 

in the science classroom as federal law.

Since Darwin’s groundbreaking theory of Evolution by Natural Selection, scientists all around the world have found monumental amounts of evidence in favor of the theory, now treated as scientific fact by 99.9% of all scientists.
However, even after 150 years after the establishment of evolution, some schools across the US are “teaching the controversy,” including Creationism and Intelligent Design. Both of these so-called “theories” have no basis in scientific fact, and have absolutely zero evidence pointing towards these conjectures. These types of loopholes in our education are partially to blame for our dangerously low student performances in math and science.
Therefore, we petition the Obama Adminstration to ban the teachings of these conjectures that contradict Evolution.
Created: Jun 15, 2013″

“PRACTICING & RESPECTFUL CATHOLIC” NANCY PELOSI DEEMS LATE TERM ABORTION “SACRED GROUND” FOR WOMEN

PELOSI’S MORAL RELATIVISM ON DISPLAY:

Back in 2008, “ardent, practicing Catholic” Pelosi 
said that the Catholic Church has never been clear 
about when life begins:

Pelosi on the Word of God: 
“Fill it in with whatever you want”:



As you will hear, Nancy Pelosi condemns abortionist Kermit Gosnell of Philadelphia, but defends a woman’s right to choose in her dismissal of a reporter’s question about the “moral difference”:

Nancy Pelosi: Late Term Abortions Are Sacred Ground:


American Family Association Radio critique:
Outrage from Catholics expressed by 
priest Frank Pavone:

Letter to Nancy Pelosi by Frank Pavone:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/pelosi/:


Full Text:

Open Letter to Nancy Pelosi

Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Dear Mrs. Pelosi,
Last Thursday, June 13, you were asked a question in a press
briefing that you declined to answer. The question was, “What is the 
moral difference between what Dr. Gosnell did to a baby born alive at 
23 weeks and aborting her moments before birth?”
Given the fact that the Gosnell case has been national news for months
now, and that Congress, where you serve as House Democratic Leader, 
was about to have a vote on banning abortion after 20 weeks fetal age, this 
was a legitimate question.
Instead of even attempting to answer the question, you resorted to
judgmental ad hominem attacks on the reporter who asked it, saying, 
“You obviously have an agenda. You’re not interested in having an answer.” 
Mrs. Pelosi, the problem is that you’re not interested in giving an answer.
Your refusal to answer this question is consistent with your failure to provide
an answer to a similar question from me and the members of my Priests for 
Life staff. Several years ago, we visited your office with the diagrams of 
dismemberment abortion at 23 weeks, and asked the simple question, 
“When you say the word ‘abortion,’ is this what you mean?” In response, 
nothing but silence has emanated from your office.
In what way is this refusal to address an issue of such national importance
consistent with the leadership role you are supposed to be exercising?
Public servants are supposed to be able to tell the difference between 
serving the public and killing the public. Apparently, you can’t. Otherwise, you 
would have been able to explain the difference between a legal medical procedure 
that kills a baby inside the womb and an act of murder — for which Dr. Gosnell 
is now serving life sentences — for killing the same baby outside the womb.
Moreover, you stated at the press briefing on June 13, “As a practicing and 
respectful Catholic, this is sacred ground to me when we talk about this. 
I don’t think it should have anything to do with politics.”
With this statement, you make a mockery of the Catholic faith and of the
tens of millions of Americans who consider themselves “practicing and 
respectful Catholics” and who find the killing of children — whether inside or 
outside the womb — reprehensible.
You speak here of Catholic faith as if it is supposed to hide us from reality
instead of lead us to face reality, as if it is supposed to confuse basic moral 
truths instead of clarify them, and as if it is supposed to help us escape the hard 
moral questions of life rather than help us confront them.
Whatever Catholic faith you claim to respect and practice, it is not the faith
that the Catholic Church teaches. And I speak for countless Catholics when I 
say that it’s time for you to stop speaking as if it were.
Abortion is not sacred ground; it is sacrilegious ground. To imagine God
giving the slightest approval to an act that dismembers a child he created is 
offensive to both faith and reason.
And to say that a question about the difference between a legal medical
procedure and murder should not “have anything to do with politics” reveals
a profound failure to understand your own political responsibilities, which start 
with the duty to secure the God-given right to life of every citizen.
Mrs. Pelosi, for decades you have gotten away with betraying and
misrepresenting the Catholic faith as well as the responsibilities of public
office. We have had enough of it. Either exercise your duties as a public servant 
and a Catholic, or have the honesty to formally renounce them.
Sincerely,
Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life

SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE TWO CASES ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE ON JUNE 24, 2013

From American Family Association, a request for prayer:

A Personal Note from Tim Wildmon
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook   Share on TwitterShare on Twitter   Online VersionOnline Version
 

Pray for the Supreme Court and the Nation

June 20, 2013

This weekend America is poised at the edge of a moral cliff. On Monday the United States Supreme Court will decide two cases that ask it to redefine marriage to include homosexual couples. We do not know whether the Court will declare homosexual marriage to be a constitutionally guaranteed right or will leave the definition of marriage to be decided state by state. Neither of those options are a clear victory for the institution of marriage as God created it.
The cases:

Hollingsworth v. Perry – Proposition 8
U.S. v Windsor – Defense of Marriage Act

The question is: Does a law that defines marriage to be only between a man and a woman deny homosexual couples the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of “Equal Protection of the Law?”
We are at a crisis point similar to the weekend before the Roe v Wade decision was announced, which declared abortion a constitutional right. It is a horrible time to face, but a good time to pray.
AFA asks you to pray this weekend for our country and especially for the Supreme Court. A sample prayer is printed below. Please forward this call to prayer request to your praying friends and family.

Prayer for the Supreme Court and the Nation
Heavenly Father, we praise You for Your unchanging truth, holiness, righteousness, mercy and grace. You have given us a nation founded upon the principles of Your word. You have blessed us, but we have squandered Your grace and turned away from Your principles. So we come to You to plead for our nation.

Specifically, we pray for the pending Supreme Court decision on same sex marriage. We pray that next week the Court would not impose a false definition of marriage on our nation. Father, we confess that we in the Church have already sinned against You and have not been good stewards of the gift of marriage through our own issues with unfaithfulness, selfishness, pornography, homosexuality and divorce. Forgive us, Lord. Now our nation is following our imperfect example and seeks to redefine and corrupt the gift of marriage in order to satisfy its own lusts.

We acknowledge that through Jesus Christ we can repent and turn to You. So help the people of this nation to turn to You with repentant hearts, that we all may be covered in Your grace. Lord, have mercy on us. Lord, let Your purity and truth shine in this situation. Help us to proclaim to those enslaved by homosexuality, and any other sin, that liberty and identity is available in Jesus Christ. Help us to lovingly embrace the repentant.

Fill us with Your Spirit so that our thoughts, words and actions reflect Your love and not our judgment. Help us to trust in Your plan, and to act justly throughout it. We ask this in the name of Jesus Christ, Your Son and our Savior. Amen.

God is faithful to His Word and shall accomplish that which He has spoken.
(Isaiah 55:11)
Please forward this to others who will also pray.

Sincerely,

Tim

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association
 

MARK DRISCOLL WHO “SEES THINGS”~NOW AN AVOWED “REFORMED CONTINUATIONIST”~GLOSSOLALIA (TONGUES) TO BE USED AS PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE

About a year ago, Mark Driscoll of Seattle, Washington’s Mars Hill Church, a “Reformed Charismatic”, delivered was has been described as an offensive sermon because of its pornographic descriptions. At least Phillip Johnson of Team Pyro called it 
“Pornographic Divination”. 
https://ratherexposethem.org/2011/08/pornographic-divination.html, with transcript:

Todd Friel of Wretched Radio reveals that Driscoll believes that cessationism is like atheism. Driscoll believes in continued revelation to him personally in dreams and visions:

The Christian Post reports that Driscoll believes that cessationism is wrong:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/cessationists-are-wrong-about-speaking-in-tongues-says-pastor-mark-driscoll-95341/.
More recently, Mark Driscoll on

“Common questions about the gift of tongues”:


There is a parallel here with Wayne Grudem’s continuationism. See our previous posts:
https://ratherexposethem.org/2013/01/randy-clark-bill-johnson.html.
_____________________________________________________________
Ex Catholics For Christ http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/, recommends 
John MacArthur’s book, “Charismatic Chaos”:



Also see their full article: “Are Tongues And Healings For Today?”:
http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/articles.php?PageURL=tongues.htm:

Are Healing and Tongues for Today? (1 Corinthians 12) John MacArthur:

Published on Apr 23, 2013
http://www.macarthurcommentaries.com/
A thorough examination will yield the truth that spiritual gifts fill two major purposes: the permanent gifts edify the church and the temporary gifts are signs to confirm the Word of God. God will continue to give the permanent gifts to believers for the duration of the church age, and those gifts are to be ministered by His people at all times in the life of the church. Those gifts include first the speaking or verbal gifts—prophecy, knowledge, wisdom, teaching, and exhortation, and, second, the serving or nonverbal gifts—leadership, helps, giving, mercy, faith, and discernment. The temporary sign gifts were limited to the apostolic age and therefore ceased after that time. Those gifts included miracles, healing, languages, and the interpretation of languages. The purpose of temporary sign gifts was to authenticate the apostolic message as the Word of God, until the time when the Scriptures, His written Word, were completed and became self–authenticating…

John MacArthur on the charismatic movement. 

“The reason the Church is in the mess it’s in today”:


The Modern Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit – John MacArthur:


Why Confront the Charismatic Movement – John MacArthur:


John Piper: 

Have You Ever Seen a Vision or Spoken In Tongues?


What Is Speaking in Tongues By John Piper: A Middle of the Road:






OBAMA SWEET TALKS THE IRISH AND THEY FAWN OVER HIM~IRISH DEPUTY CALLS OBAMA A HYPOCRITE AND WAR CRIMINAL~OBAMA LECTURES STUDENTS AND PROPOSES ELIMINATING CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT SCHOOLS, REPLACING THEM WITH STATE SCHOOLS


Obama fever sweeps Ireland, 

“home of his great, great, grandfather”,



anointed there as the personification of
“The American Dream”:


Barack Obama calls on children to protect Northern Ireland 

peace process:

Published on Jun 17, 2013 on YouTube:



US President Barack Obama addresses students at the Waterfront Hotel in Belfast after being introduced by his wife Michelle. The Obamas made a joint appearance at the Waterfront Hall conference centre in Belfast, where the president and his wife spoke to an invited audience of 2,000 young people about the future of Northern Ireland.

They were introduced by sixteen-year-old student Hannah Nelson 


Belfast schoolgirl Hannah Nelson steals show before 

Barack Obama speech:


whose essay on the peace process had impressed the White House. The president is in Northern Ireland for the two-day G8 economic conference at the luxury Lough Erne golf resort in Enniskillen, Co Fermanagh, where the leaders of the world’s eight wealthiest countries are meeting to discuss trade deals and the crisis in Syria.

MUST SEE:



“Irish Patriot Calls Out Obama’s 

hypocrisy on Ireland and Syria:



Published on Jun 21, 2013 on YouTube: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUwjohTQ5mY:





An inspiring woman ! Lioness Clare Daly accuses parliament of 
pimping out her nation like prostitutes for Obama. 
She accuses Obama of absolute hypocrisy calling for peace in northern Ireland but not in Syria . The Collaborator who answers her questions shows an affinity to other cockroaches and collaborators around the world, such as his counter parts in Syria.”

COLLECTIVIST/MARXIST OBAMA PROPOSES DOING AWAY WITH CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT SCHOOLS IN IRELAND, BECAUSE HE THINKS THEY ARE DIVISIVE. YOU MUST REALIZE THAT HIS GLOBAL ONE WORLD PLAN WILL REPLACE THEM WITH STATE SCHOOLS DEVOID OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION, SPEECH AND THOUGHT. OBAMA THE DRONE KILLER AND TERRORIST BACKER, LECTURES IRISH STUDENTS ABOUT PEACE AND OFFERS HIS SECULAR HUMANIST REASONING:








ALAN CHAMBERS OF EXODUS INTERNATIONAL ISSUES APOLOGY TO GAY COMMUNITY, EXPANDS ON STATEMENT FROM AUGUST 2012

ALAN CHAMBERS OF EXODUS INTERNATIONAL WAS ONCE NAMED 
“2011 DANIEL OF THE YEAR” 

BY WORLD MAG NEWS IN A GLOWING FOUR PAGE ARTICLE.
SEE: http://www.worldmag.com/2011/12/2011_daniel_of_the_year. 

APPARENTLY HIS MARRIAGE TO A WOMAN WAS ENOUGH TO CONVINCE THEM HE WAS “REPAIRED” FROM HIS HOMOSEXUAL TENDENCIES. BUT AFTER TWENTY YEARS OF DENYING SELF PRODUCED A HURTFUL SHAME FOR HIM AND OTHERS HE HAS A NEW AND BETTER PERSPECTIVE ON GAY FEELINGS. WHEN COUPLED WITH A TWISTED UNBIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF THE ASSURANCE OF SALVATION MARRIED TO DEEP SEATED HABITUAL UNREPENTANT SINFULNESS AND A JESUS OF HIS OWN MAKING, IS IT ANY WONDER? HIS OWN WORDS REVEAL HIS INCOMPLETE TRANSFORMATION BASED ON A FAULTY CONCEPT OF CHRIST. NOW HE IS SORRY, NOT FOR HIS SIN NATURE, BUT RATHER FOR ALLEGEDLY HURTING HIS PEERS IN THE SO-CALLED “GAY CHRISTIAN” COMMUNITY. MAYBE THE EMPHASIS OF EXODUS WAS “REPAIRING” BASED MORE ON HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY ALL ALONG, AND NOT REALLY BIBLICAL?



First,
AMERICANS FOR TRUTH ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY REPORTED THAT ALAN CHAMBERS APOLOGIZED TO GAY CHRISTIAN NETWORK LAST YEAR:
http://americansfortruth.com/2012/09/02/exodus-international-president-alan-chambers-apologizes-to-gay-christian-network/:

UPDATE: Gay militant smears AFTAH, again: Shortly after we posted the article and video below about Exodus International’s tragic embrace of “gay Christianity,”  AFTAH founder Peter LaBarbera was attacked by notorious homosexual militant Wayne Besen (who came up with the hateful smear “Porno Pete”): see Besen’s lie-filled “report” here:http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2012/09/29105/
____________________
Words cannot express my disappointment in Exodus International President Alan Chambers’“exodus” from biblical truth on homosexuality. This 17-minute video of Chambers addressing a pro-homosexual, ostensibly ”Christian” group (Gay Christian Network) aptly sums up his tragic defection. [For a rebuttal, see Prof. Rob Gagnon’s paper, “Time for a Leadership Change at Exodus?] Poor Alan is way beyond his pay grade here: imagine heading up an “ex-gay” umbrella group — which is how Exodus once described itself — and apologizing to unrepentant homosexuals for the simple slogan “Change is possible.” Shame. Substitute another sexual sin (say, pornography) for homosexuality (“sexual orientation”) – and Chambers’ “apology” makes no sense at all. (For that matter, would anyone take a “Porn-using Christians Network”–or a “Christian Lusters Network”–seriously and “dialogue” with them?)
Sad but true: these days when Christians ”dialogue” with homosexual activists, as Chambers often does, it is usually the Christians who bend toward the world (sin) rather than vice versa. Stay tuned for more on this stunning story of Exodus’ and Chambers’ break with historic Christian teaching on homosexuality. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH
This video was produced by Oklahoma City-based First Stone Ministries, led by our friend and former homosexual Stephen Black. First Stone recently broke away from Exodus International and is now part of a new, biblically-faithful umbrella group for sexual struggers, 

From YouTube
Published on Aug 31, 2012

Recently, Alan Chambers, President of Exodus International, has communicated controversial statements revealing a shift toward emergent theology and an acceptance of gay Christianity:
Published on Jun 6, 2013 on YouTube:
The story of Exodus International, the LGBT men and women who have been affected by the organization and the nationwide dialogue that surrounds this topic continues in an Our America special report.

For almost 40 years, Exodus International claimed to offer a “cure” for homosexuality. Alan Chambers, the leader of Exodus, decided last year to stop endorsing the controversial practice of gay-reparative therapy. And now, he has a new message: an apology.

In a special episode, Lisa Ling is joined by a group of survivors of the (so-called) condemned and damaging practice of “reparative therapy” as they confront Alan Chambers. Chambers recently asked Ling to help orchestrate an opportunity in which he could formally apologize to those who felt deceived and defrauded by Exodus’ practices and to announce that the organization will cease to be an “ex gay” organization.

Here is the more recent full apology from 
Alan Chambers of Exodus International. 
Bold and underlining is ours for emphasis. 

I Am Sorry

JUNE 19, 2013 BY 
Alan ChambersThree years ago, Leslie and I began a very public conversation with Our America’s Lisa Ling, from the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) regarding some of our deeply held beliefs about Christianity and the LGBT community.  Today, we have decided to carry this public conversation even further. While this conversation has and may well continue to be met with many different responses from supporters and critics, it is our desire to keep having these honest discussions in the hopes of arriving to a place of peace.
Several months ago, this conversation led me to call Lisa Ling to take another step on this messy journey.  I asked if she would, once again, help us add to the unfolding story by covering my apology to the people who have been hurt by Exodus International.  Our ministry has been public and therefore any acknowledgement of wrong must also be public.  I haven’t always been the leader of Exodus, but I am now and someone must finally own and acknowledge the hurt of others. I do so anxiously, but willingly.
It is strange to be someone who has both been hurt by the church’s treatment of the LGBT community, and also to be someone who must apologize for being part of the very system of ignorance that perpetuated that hurt. Today it is as if I’ve just woken up to a greater sense of how painful it is to be a sinner in the hands of an angry church.
It is also strange to be an outcast from powerful portions of both the gay community and the Christian community.  Because I do not completely agree with the vocal majorities in either group and am forging a new place of peaceful service in and through both, I will likely continue to be an outsider to some degree. I imagine it to be very much like a man I recently heard speak at a conference I attended, Father Elias Chacour, the Melkite Catholic Archbishop of Israel. He is an Arab Christian, Palestinian by birth, and a citizen of Israel. Talk about a walking contradiction.  When I think of the tension of my situation I am comforted by the thought of him and his.
My desire is to completely align with Christ, his Good News for all and his offer of peace amidst the storms of life. My wife Leslie and my beliefs center around grace, the finished work of Christ on the cross and his offer of eternal relationship to any and all that believe. Our beliefs do not center on “sin” because “sin” isn’t at the center of our faith. Our journey hasn’t been about denying the power of Christ to do anything – obviously he is God and can do anything.
With that, here is an expanded version of the apology I offered during my recent interview with Lisa Ling to the people within the LGBTQ community who have been hurt by the Church, Exodus International, and me.  I realize some within the communities for which I apologize will say I don’t have the right, as one man, to do so on their behalf.  But if the Church is a body, with many members being connected to the whole, then I believe that what one of us does right we all do right, and what one of us does wrong we all do wrong. We have done wrong, and I stand with many others who now recognize the need to offer apologies and make things right.  I believe this apology – however imperfect – is what God the Father would have me do.
To Members of the LGBTQ Community:
In 1993 I caused a four-car pileup.  In a hurry to get to a friend’s house, I was driving when a bee started buzzing around the inside of my windshield. I hit the bee and it fell on the dashboard. A minute later it started buzzing again with a fury. Trying to swat it again I completely missed the fact that a city bus had stopped three cars in front of me.  I also missed that those three cars were stopping, as well.  Going 40 miles an hour I slammed into the car in front of me causing a chain reaction. I was injured and so were several others.  I never intended for the accident to happen. I would never have knowingly hurt anyone. But I did. And it was my fault. In my rush to get to my destination, fear of being stung by a silly bee, and selfish distraction, I injured others.
I have no idea if any of the people injured in that accident have suffered long term effects. While I did not mean to hurt them, I did. The fact that my heart wasn’t malicious did not lessen their pain or their suffering. I am very sorry that I chose to be distracted that fall afternoon, and that I caused so much damage to people and property.  If I could take it all back I absolutely would. But I cannot. I pray that everyone involved in the crash has been restored to health.
Recently, I have begun thinking again about how to apologize to the people that have been hurt by Exodus International through an experience or by a message. I have heard many firsthand stories from people called ex-gay survivors. Stories of people who went to Exodus affiliated ministries or ministers for help only to experience more trauma. I have heard stories of shame, sexual misconduct, and false hope. In every case that has been brought to my attention, there has been swift action resulting in the removal of these leaders and/or their organizations. But rarely was there an apology or a public acknowledgement by me. 
And then there is the trauma that I have caused. There were several years that I conveniently omitted my ongoing same-sex attractions. I was afraid to share them as readily and easily as I do today. They brought me tremendous shame and I hid them in the hopes they would go away. Looking back, it seems so odd that I thought I could do something to make them stop. Today, however, I accept these feelings as parts of my life that will likely always be there. The days of feeling shame over being human in that way are long over, and I feel free simply accepting myself as my wife and family does. As my friends do. As God does.
Never in a million years would I intentionally hurt another person. Yet, here I sit having hurt so many by failing to acknowledge the pain some affiliated with Exodus International caused, and by failing to share the whole truth about my own story. My good intentions matter very little and fail to diminish the pain and hurt others have experienced on my watch. The good that we have done at Exodus is overshadowed by all of this.
Friends and critics alike have said it’s not enough to simply change our message or website. I agree. I cannot simply move on and pretend that I have always been the friend that I long to be today. I understand why I am distrusted and why Exodus is hated. 
Please know that I am deeply sorry. I am sorry for the pain and hurt many of you have experienced. I am sorry that some of you spent years working through the shame and guilt you felt when your attractions didn’t change. I am sorry we promoted sexual orientation change efforts and reparative theories about sexual orientation that stigmatized parents. I am sorry that there were times I didn’t stand up to people publicly “on my side” who called you names like sodomite—or worse. I am sorry that I, knowing some of you so well, failed to share publicly that the gay and lesbian people I know were every bit as capable of being amazing parents as the straight people that I know. I am sorry that when I celebrated a person coming to Christ and surrendering their sexuality to Him that I callously celebrated the end of relationships that broke your heart. I am sorry that I have communicated that you and your families are less than me and mine. 
More than anything, I am sorry that so many have interpreted this religious rejection by Christians as God’s rejection.  I am profoundly sorry that many have walked away from their faith and that some have chosen to end their lives. For the rest of my life I will proclaim nothing but the whole truth of the Gospel, one of grace, mercy and open invitation to all to enter into an inseverable relationship with almighty God.
I cannot apologize for my deeply held biblical beliefs about the boundaries I see in scripture surrounding sex, but I will exercise my beliefs with great care and respect for those who do not share them.  I cannot apologize for my beliefs about marriage. But I do not have any desire to fight you on your beliefs or the rights that you seek. My beliefs about these things will never again interfere with God’s command to love my neighbor as I love myself.   
You have never been my enemy. I am very sorry that I have been yours. I hope the changes in my own life, as well as the ones we announce tonight regarding Exodus International, will bring resolution, and show that I am serious in both my regret and my offer of friendship. I pledge that future endeavors will be focused on peace and common good.
Moving forward, we will serve in our pluralistic culture by hosting thoughtful and safe conversations about gender and sexuality, while partnering with others to reduce fear, inspire hope, and cultivate human flourishing.
__________________________________________________________________
Feedback from ex-homosexuals:
Excerpt:
But many individuals and groups who have successfully helped people deal with unwanted same-sex attraction questioned the motives of Chambers and the other Exodus officials. “We do not owe an apology to the gay community,” said Regina Griggs of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, http://pfox.org/default.html, an organization that supports those leaving homosexuality. “Nobody’s ever forced to change. That’s an individual’s right.”
Janet Boynes, http://www.janetboynesministries.com/, a former lesbian who now uses her Christian faith to help people leave homosexuality, recalled how in 2010 she appeared with Chambers on Our America With Lisa Ling, where “we were able to share how our behavior had changed and how we were no longer living the homosexual lifestyle. But just three years later, here we are again, and the message Alan Chambers has for those struggling with same-sex attraction is very different.”
At the time Chambers declared: “Change is possible. I stand by that phrase, and I live by it. The opposite of homosexuality isn’t heterosexuality; it’s holiness.”
Boynes said she was puzzled by what message Chambers could offer homosexuals if not that they need to abandon their lifestyle. “I know many men and women who, with the help of different ministries, have walked away from homosexuality, and their freedom has always come through the truth of God’s Word,” she said. She conceded that leaving homosexuality is not easy, but through faith in God it is possible. “For me, coming out of homosexuality did not happen overnight,” she recalled. “It was a long process, during which I increasingly chose to let go of everything that had the slightest power to drag me back into a lesbian lifestyle. It took the work of a dedicated team that included God (the most important one), the many wonderful people He put in my life, and me as a willing participant. You see, each of us is given a free will, and it is ultimately up to us to decide how we will live our lives.”
R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, told Baptist Press News that Chambers’ apology and the decision to shut down Exodus International appeared to be “a capitulation” rather than a “course correction.” Mohler said the organization’s statement indicated that Chambers and others at Exodus had “lost confidence in both the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The normalization of homosexuality contradicts the Bible’s consistent condemnation of all same-sex sexuality as sin. The rejection of the hope for change for homosexuals … indicates a tragic loss of confidence in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”
Mohler added that “while Alan Chambers is right when he insists that our beliefs do not center on ‘sin’ because ‘sin’ isn’t at the center of our faith, he seems to have lost sight of the fact that Christ came to save us from our sin. Thus, sin is inseparable from our story of salvation in Christ.”
The Baptist leader expressed deep concern that the ministry’s closing will send the wrong signal to those struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction. “The greatest tragedy” about the closure “is that persons experiencing same-sex attractions or involved in same-sex sexuality will be further confused by the capitulation of Exodus International,” Mohler said.

GOVERNOR RICK PERRY OF TEXAS SIGNS RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS BILL

Gov. Perry Signs “Merry Christmas” Bill into Law:

                                      

See: http://www.governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/18649/ for more videos and pictures.
Thursday, June 13, 2013  •  Austin, Texas  •  Press Release:

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry today signed House Bill 308, which allows public school students and staff to use traditional holiday greetings and display religious scenes and symbols on school property. The governor was joined by bill author Rep. Dwayne Bohac and sponsor Sen. Robert Nichols for the signing ceremony.
“I’m proud we are standing up for religious freedom in our state,” Gov. Perry said. “Freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from religion, and people of faith often feel like they can’t express that faith publicly. HB 308 works to address that by ensuring that people of all faiths are free to use traditional holiday greetings, and display religious scenes and symbols, even on school property. It ensures freedom of expression where, for many students, teachers and administrators, it’s most important.”
HB 308 ensures that adherence to one particular religion is not in practice, but rather allows the freedom of expression toward religious holidays to be a part of our schools. By allowing teachers to display various holiday symbols associated with certain religions, they are able to educate students about the history and roots of different religions.
“I am proud to have authored the Merry Christmas Bill which allows students, parents, teachers and administrators the freedom to acknowledge traditional winter holidays like Christmas and Hanukkah in Texas public schools without fear of litigation or punishment,” Rep. Bohac said. “When I picked up my 6-year-old, first grader from school and found out school districts and teachers felt pressured by political correctness to change the way they refer to ‘Christmas trees’ and Santa and holiday music, I had enough. HB 308 protects schools and teachers from ridiculous litigation and restores common sense by placing Supreme Court precedent into Texas Law.”
“I have heard from many constituents who dislike that it is becoming less culturally acceptable to openly celebrate these holidays in the ways past generations have,” Sen. Nichols said. “To me, this is a matter of helping our teachers and administrators feel safe talking about these holidays at school without fear of legal action being taken against them, and of letting our children know that it’s okay to say ‘Merry Christmas.'”

NANCY LEIGH DEMOSS “HEARTS REVIVED”, BUT AT WHAT PRICE? A VENEER OF CHRISTIANITY HIDING SPIRITUAL FORMATION DISCIPLINES, CONTEMPLATIVE MYSTICISM & WITCHCRAFT?

BEFORE:
AFTER:



BACKGROUND:
From: http://www.newreleasetuesday.com/authordetail.php?aut_id=121#_:
A native of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Nancy grew up in a family that was deeply committed to Christ and to the mission of world evangelization. At an early age, she surrendered her life to Christ and to His call to serve His Kingdom.
Nancy graduated from the University of Southern California, with a degree in piano performance. After completing college, she served as the Primary Children’s Ministries Director at Thomas Road Baptist Church, in Lynchburg, Virginia. Since 1980, Nancy has served on the staff of Life Action Ministries, a revival ministry based in Niles, Michigan. Until 2001, she served as the Director of Women’s Ministries and as the editor of Spirit of Revival magazine.
For more than 25 years, Nancy has communicated her burden for both personal and corporate revival in conferences and retreats throughout North America and abroad.
Nancy is author of Choosing Forgiveness, A Place of Quiet Rest, Lies Women Believe, Walking in the Truth, A Thirty Day Walk with God in the Psalms, Brokenness: The Heart God Revives, Surrender: The Heart God Controls, Holiness: The Heart God Purifies, and she co-authored Seeking Him, an interactive Bible study on revival. She is also the general editor of Biblical Womanhood in the Home. Her books have sold over 1,000,000 copies.
Nancy is the host and teacher for Revive Our Hearts and Seeking Him, two nationally syndicated radio programs, heard each weekday on nearly 1,000 radio station outlets.


From: http://powertochange.com/blogposts/author/ndmoss/:
Nancy Leigh DeMoss is an author, speaker for both personal and corporate revival in conferences, and teacher on two nationally syndicated radio programs. Nancy has served in various roles: Primary Children’s Ministries Director at Thomas Road Baptist Church; staff member of Life Action Ministries; Director of Women’s Ministries and editor for “Spirit of Revival” magazine.
________________________________________________________________________


Nancy Leigh DeMoss ministers to Christian women along with other prominent Christian women who are self appointed and unbiblical “church leaders” and ministry heads, some being Pentecostals, Dominionists, feminists and/or contemplatives. 
Priscilla Shirer is covered at Apprising here: 
http://apprising.org/2010/07/26/priscilla-shirer-and-contemplativecentering-prayer/, and here:
http://apprising.org/2012/02/27/women-pastors-priscilla-shirer-and-the-southern-baptist-convention/, and here: http://apprising.org/2010/08/28/priscilla-shirer-promoting-contemplativecentering-prayer/, and here: http://apprising.org/2010/09/23/priscilla-shirer-points-us-to-richard-rohr/ (Catholic monk), and here: http://apprising.org/2012/08/23/true-woman-conference-speaker-priscilla-shirer-hears-gods-still-small-voice/.
Janet Parshall is reported by Apprising as supporting the Catholic leaning Alpha Course of Nicky Gumbel, and has connections with other dominionists. See Mark Batterson endorsement of the Alpha Course and his use of it at all six of his churches here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKJ1WAhMvH and below.
http://apprising.org/2012/11/20/the-alpha-course-receives-praise-from-moody-radios-janet-parshall/, and
http://www.worldviewweekend.com/worldview-times/article.php?articleid=7390.




Her “Revive Our Hearts” website https://www.reviveourhearts.com/, an outreach of “Life Action Ministries” https://www.lifeaction.org/, offers “freedom, fullness, and fruitfulness in Christ” and schedules “tours” focused on the female perspective. 
In addition to her questionable associations, there are some troubling concerns about DeMoss’s recommendations not generally known or reported on:



Ken Silva of Apprising has disclosed at:

NANCY DEMOSS TURNS LISTENERS TO 

RICHARD FOSTER FOR GUIDANCE

http://apprising.org/2012/06/28/nancy-demoss-turns-listeners-to-richard-foster-for-guidance/,

that DeMoss has quoted Richard Foster, contemplative proponent, and Brother Lawrence, Catholic Carmelite monk, in her radio address.



Brother Lawrence: http://www.carmelites.net/news/brother-lawrence-of-the-resurrection/.




Additionally, but no less important is DeMoss’s incorporation of occultic chalk magic prayer circles to help women meditate and receive inspiration:

See: Wikipedia article “Magic Circle”, an analysis 
of the occultic witchcraft uses of chalk circles here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_circle. 



See: The Velvet Covered Brick blog’s story “Prayer Circles” http://velvetbrick.blogspot.com/, describes how Jamie McMullan attended a True Women conference and saw and heard the following:
Quote: 
“I recently attended the True Women Conference with Nancy Leigh DeMoss via simulcast. During the simulcast Nancy shared an illustration of a British gypsy evangelist from the 1860s, 
Gipsy Smith, 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gipsy_Smith, and http://www.biblebelievers.com/gypsy_smith/, and http://bennieblount.com/Books/Smith,%20Gipsy/Gipsy%20Smith%20His%20Life%20and%20Work/Gipsy%20Smith%20His%20Life%20and%20Work.pdf, who encouraged people to 
“Go home, lock yourself in your room, draw a circle around yourself, and pray fervently that God would start a revival within that chalk circle.”  
Then Nancy, pointed out they have chalk circles around the auditorium for people to go pray in and she had a circle around herself at the podium; they were used throughout the conference. 

DeMoss with other women standing in a chalk circle around podium:
A Rope Circle is also used by witches:



At the end of the conference, two men named Byron Paulus and Bill Elliff gave a presentation of their ministry movement called OneCry http://www.onecry.com/, inspired by the teachings of Gipsy Smith. See 20 page manual from One Cry on how to use chalk circles here: http://www.onecry.com/media/filer/2012/03/07/draw-a-circle-digital.pdf.
Nancy Leigh DeMoss on Gipsy Smith.” See: http://www.truewoman.com/?id=2250.
Jamie McMullan also points out:
Quote:
“Seeing all this at the True Women conference gave me pause. The first time I saw circles like this in the church is from a book I saw being promoted on YouTube called The Circle Maker, by MarkBatterson, the Pastor of National Community Church(es) in Washington D.C., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Community_Church, and which meets in movie theaters http://theaterchurch.com/.
    Mark Batterson is the pastor of National Community Church, a multisite church in Washington D.C. Mark has been a church planting pastor since 1994. He and his wife Lora have three children—Parker, Summer, and Josiah. Batterson is the author of five books, including his most recent one, the Circle Maker. Batterson went to the University of Chicago on a basketball scholarship, majoring in pre-law. His life was drastically turned around when God called him to full-time ministry. His ministry in D.C. began as an inter-city ministry, and God has prospered it to grow into a six-location church with a thriving network of local and international ministries. They even manage the biggest coffee shop on Capitol Hill. Batterson’s ministry is all but conventional. Besides the fact that he doesn’t wear suits when he preaches, several of the church sites actually meet in movie theaters. 

Batterson actually says “You can’t just read the Bible; you need to start ‘circling the promises'” here:

Mark Batterson promotes, uses and recommends the Alpha Course:

Apprising reported that Chris Rosebrough of Fighting for the Faith experienced having his biblical critiques deleted from Batterson’s blog and being called a Pharisee at: 

“THE COMMENTS THAT MARK BATTERSON DOESN’T WANT YOU TO SEE“:

See: http://apprising.org/2010/01/02/the-comments-that-mark-batterson-doesnt-want-you-to-see/, in which Rosebrough says “Please note how Batterson NEVER addresses the content of my critiques. In fact, minutes after deleting my comments Batterson posted a blog post response where he calls me a Pharisee.”


Instead of calling people to revival, Mr. Batterson promotes a prosperity message that is centered on praying for God to make your hopes and dreams to come true by praying in a chalk circle or circling the promises in scripture. In his book and website, http://www.markbatterson.com/uncategorized/the-one-thing-you-cannot-delegate/, Mark Batterson, sites as his examples, Gipsy Smith and Honi the circle maker, a Jewish legend in the Talmud who drew a circle on the ground and sat in it until God answered his prayer for rain.” See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honi_ha-M%27agel.
HONI THE CIRCLE MAKER & CAROB TREE PLANTER ON YOUTUBE VIDEO: 

Honi Comes Full Circle (A Tale for Tu B’shvat):

Trip to Honi’s hometown in Israel: See YouTube video: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZZuctwJx1M.

Published on Mar 3, 2012

This was taken at Honi’s tomb in Hatzor HaGlilit, a small village in the Galilee. While the events mentioned in Mark Batterson’s book took place in Jerusalem, his home was here. It is the story about praying for rain, told in Hebrew and translated.

Challies reviews the “Circle Maker here: 
http://www.challies.com/book-reviews/the-circle-maker.

Pilgrim’s Light Ministries exposes the “Circle Maker” in this video. See: http://www.pilgrimslight.org/articles.cfm?feature=2348102&postid=1573535:

Chris Rosebrough of Fighting for the Faith has a three part analysis called
 “Debunking the Circle Maker”:
Part 1 of 3:
Part 2 of 3:
Part 3 of 3:
                                      



Published on Mar 5, 2013 on YouTube:
False teaching in the book called Circle Maker by Mark Batterson discussed on Worldview Weekend Radio program with Chris Rosebrough & Brannon Howse:

________________________________________________________________________

Report from True Woman  ’12 

http://www.reviveourhearts.com/radio/revive-our-hearts/report-true-woman-12/:

Quote:
“Nancy (conf): There was an old-time revivalist whose name was Gipsy Smith. Perhaps you’ve heard of him. The story is told that Gipsy Smith would go to a town to preach—he was an itinerant preacher. He would come to the town where he had been invited, and he would come to the outskirts of the town. He would stand and draw a circle in the ground, in the dirt on the outskirts of town. Then he would step inside that circle, and he would begin to pray for God to move in that town. He would say, “Lord, please send revival to this community. But, oh God, let the revival start inside this circle. Let it begin in me.”
Holly Elliff: I loved that during the conference around the auditorium and in various places there were circles.
Leslie: Here’s workshop leader Holly Elliff. 
Holly: And those circles were symbolic because they represented the fact that every woman wanted to put herself there, draw a circle around her own life and say, “God, what do You want to do in me?”
Nancy (conf): And as you pass by those in the days ahead, I want to encourage you, if there is room, to just step inside one of those circles.
Bill Elliff (conf): And those circles just remind us that it’s always personal.
Leslie: This is Pastor Bill Elliff.
Bill (conf): We can get real theoretical about revival and awakening. But it starts with me. And if it doesn’t start with me, if it doesn’t start with you, then it doesn’t start.
Leslie Bennett: I can’t live on yesterday’s revival.
Leslie: This is workshop leader Leslie Bennett. 
Leslie Bennett: The white chalk circles all around this conference center were a constant reminder that I need revival. Every moment of every day I must humble myself before God and ask Him to come into my heart to do what only He can do as I seek Him and I’m repentant before Him—that He will make my heart afresh. He will make my heart anew and fan the flames of my heart for Jesus. I so appreciated that reminder as we went about the conference all weekend long. Revival starts with me.
Nancy (conf): Your face, Lord, I will seek.
Leslie: Not with anybody else. It’s not them. It’s me.
Nancy (conf): It’s not my brother, not my sister, not my mother, not my pastor, not my friend who came with me. It’s me, oh, Lord, standing in the need of You.
Bob (conf): One of the unique things about the way the stage is set up this year is that the speaker’s podium, the platform podium, there’s a large white circle around it.
Nancy (conf): Because seeking Him starts right here in our hearts as we’re speaking.
Bob (conf): And so as we’re calling women to seek God and to seek Him for revival in their own lives and then in their churches and then in our nation, we’ve drawn a circle around the podium.
Joni: Because all the speakers had an opportunity to stand in it. And of course, I had an opportunity to wheel inside that circle. May revival begin with me.
Juli: I’m preaching to myself first. I’m the first one who needs the very messages coming out of my mouth.
Bob (conf): You can’t go and call women to a place if you’re not ready to go there yourself. That’s hypocrisy.
Joni: May renewal in the church begin with me inside that circle.
Nancy (conf): And to step inside that circle and say, “Lord, would You send revival to my family? Would You send revival to my church? Would You send awakening to our nation, to our world? We desperately need it. But oh, Lord, would You start the revival inside this circle? Let it begin in me.
Janet: So let me tell you what happened for me as a speaker when I stepped into that circle. I was under very strong conviction. David said, “My sins are ever before me.” That’s what I felt when I was in that circle. I thought, “Lord, I’m not here to teach these women. I’m here to seek Your face.””
_______________________________________________________________
From Living With Power: http://www.livingwithpower.org/words-with-friends/: Lina Abujamra reports: “In the course of my 2 day “True Woman” experience I heard Nancy Leigh Demoss mention that she liked to play ‘Words with Friends'”. Lina Abujamra prayed in her chalk circle and her prayer was answered sometime later:  “I was being invited to play Words with Friends with my new “friend” Nancy Leigh Demoss.”
_______________________________________________________________

Michelle Obama requests prayer circles and clean spirits:


Even the Obamas cannot seem to function without the support and help from “prayer circles” whose members are “keeping the spirits clean around us”:










NAZARENES FINDING LIKE MINDS IN THE APOSTATE CLUB

General Assembly 2013: Death Of The Church of the Nazarene, Or Repentance?
A warning to those who are leading the Church of the Nazarene astray: you need not fear those of us who are trying to wake up the church.  You ought to fear a Holy God whose wrath will come down on those who reject Him and who are leading the sheep astray. 
When I think of apostate denominations, I think of the ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, which just recently elected its first openly homosexual bishop.  It has long been an apostate church.  Another apostate group is the Presbyterian Church (USA), which among other things, continues to accept practicing homosexuals as members in good standing who can also participate in the Lord’s Supper; and also the church is okay with ordaining celibate gays.  The apostate Episcopalian Church appointed Eugene Robinson in 2003 as its first openly gay bishop.  The Metropolitan Community Church is a homosexual denomination.  There are many more, but there is a pattern that one of their failings always involves – the question of homosexuality, which has been clearly answered in Holy Scripture.
As a lifelong Nazarene, I have been watching closely for four years what is going on in the churches and the universities.  What I and other Nazarenes have seen leads us to believe that the Church of the Nazarene is moving down the road of apostasy as hard and as fast these others.  And one of the issues that could be its downfall is the same issue that has helped destroy the aforementioned denominations.  There are many other problems: the emergent church, spiritual formation (contemplative mysticism), open theism, process theology, evolution, the G-12 movement (Master’s Plan), extreme environmentalism, social justice, ecumenicalism, hyper-pentecostalism, dominion theology.  Now, add acceptance of homosexuality to the list of what is creeping in – one church, one pastor, one university at a time.
The Church of the Nazarene will hold its General Assembly from June 19-27, in Indianapolis, IN, with about 35,000 Nazarenes attending from around the world.  Worship services will be held; dozens of workshops conducted; resolutions will be passed and voted down; and new leaders will be appointed, including at least two new General Superintendents. Many Nazarenes will be hopeful and celebratory; but many others are grieving.  Quite a few have left the denomination, and it is possible many will leave after this Assembly ends. Much will depend on what happens.
We have documented the many concerns regarding homosexuality in the denomination, including the universities.  Point Loma Nazarene University with its former student chaplain who came out as a homosexual at the school, and its LGBT group; the welcoming of Soulforce, a radical pro-gay group, at Northwest Nazarene, Southern Nazarene University, Mid-America Nazarene, and Trevecca Nazarene University; an LGBT support group, called “Love Of God Bringing Triumph” approved by the administration of Eastern Nazarene College.  I also wrote on how Corey McPherson, the chaplain at ENC, preached a message last year in chapel (Homosexuality: What Does God Think?) that one would think would warrant his removal by the leadership.  Among the things he was proud of was when his church got together with a homosexual pastor and his congregation to worship together and take communion.  That is an abomination.  You can read the entire transcript of this message, along with comments from a Nazarene pastor, here.
Something related to General Assembly that was said by Corey McPherson in his message is the following:

​”​

This afternoon, the chaplains from the Nazarene schools will be gathering together for our development sessions and we will be working on a proposal to submit to the General Assembly of the Church of Nazarene next year to change the wording and statement of the wrath of God and other changes in the statement in our manual.  We’re not changing the theological stance but the wording behind it must change.  We will submit it to the church and hopefully it will [bring] it to vote next year.

​”​
It remains to be seen if this is submitted, but it is troubling that the chaplains of the Nazarene schools could be planning to go against God’s word and water down what Scripture clearly tells us will happen to those who reject God and live in unrepentant sin.  What else are the Nazarene college chaplains teaching the students?
So, the idea of affirming homosexuality as compatible with Christian living is making headway in the Church of the Nazarene.  Thanks to heretics such as Rob Bell, who revealed his approval of gay marriage, as well as others such as Brian McLaren, Nazarene pastors are following suit and defending people who promote such foolish thinking.  There is no biblical conviction in their words, but instead they sound like the secular world of today with its politically charged promotion of and demand for complete acceptance of homosexuality.
Proposed Resolutions At The Assembly
God’s word never changes, but in the fickle lives of humans, there is constant changing of positions and doctrinal statements.  Dozens of resolutions have been submitted for consideration, and the passage or rejection of some of these could be a further indication of the spiritual direction of the church.  Two resolutions (CA-701 and CA-703) by the North Florida District make a powerful statement to clarify the biblical position on homosexuality, which would effectively push back at those who want to water down the biblical view of homosexuality to one of “affirmation” and “acceptance.”  In a section of document CA-703, the authors rightly state that “the Christian church has been invaded, the authority of Scripture has been challenged, and the laws that govern our civilization are being overturned by the world-wide homosexual community that wants nothing less than the complete acceptance and normalcy of homosexual behavior.”
Another resolution from the Tennessee District (CA-712) fights back against the dangerous ideology of process theology, a heresy which teaches that God learns from His mistakes.  Will it pass, or will it be rejected in deference to false teachers such as Tom Oord who also promote open theism and theistic evolution?
Resolution JUD-815 proposes amending the Manual to include new language regarding infant baptism.   It is interesting to note that the Church of the Nazarene has traditionally performed infant dedications, rather than baptism.  This could be a result of the Roman Catholicization that has been happening in the church, from emphases on Lenten season, to Ashes To Fire, to prayer rooms, prayer labyrinths, and retreats to Roman Catholic monasteries.
Resolution SR-752 proposes a theology conference, at a cost of about $14,000, to discuss redefining the meaning of the doctrine of atonement.
Resolution MED-500 proposes the establishment of a new College of Theologians, which would have much influence in deciding theological matters for the church.  If successfully passed, this could spell disaster for the church, depending on who is chosen to be on this select group.
There are other resolutions, some innocuous compared to others, but others will be of great importance in reflecting the “emerging” theological re-birth of a denomination that has always emphasized “holiness unto the Lord.”  The full set of resolutions can be viewed here.
The Forgotten Resolution: The Inerrancy Of Scripture
We have great concerns for a resolution that does not appear to be listed, which is now four years old.

 At General Assembly in 2009, the following amendment submitted by the Southwest Indiana District failed to be voted on, and instead was referred to the Board of General Superintendents for further study.  The recommended change is highlighted in bold:

RESOLVED that Manual paragraph 4 be amended as follows:
IV. The Holy Scriptures
4. We believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, by which we understand the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments, given by divine inspiration, [inerrantly revealing the will of God concerning us in all things necessary to our salvation] inerrant throughout, and the supreme authority on everything the Scriptures teach so that whatever is not contained therein is not to be enjoined as an article of faith.
(Luke 24:44-47; John 10:35; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Peter 1:10-12; 2 Peter 1:20-21)
Where is this now?  Why has this not been re-submitted?  Is there a reluctance to strengthen this statement by acknowledging the inerrancy of God’s Word?   Is the district from Southwest Indiana and other Nazarenes being ignored?  Are the General Superintendents hoping that this all goes away after they committed this to four years of study?  Is this resolution going to be re-presented for consideration and vote, as it should?
The answer could simply be that the leadership of the church does not believe in the whole of Scripture as being infallible, but only partially inerrant.  What a tragedy if that is the case.  But  these leaders, who are responsible for the doctrine of the church, have a duty to respond this year to this question.  If they don’t, it would be total neglect and dereliction of duty on their part.
Final Thoughts
From what many of us have seen, and from the lack of meaningful leadership action to stem the tide, we do not hold out much hope for the denomination as an organization. That does not mean I am saying it is absolutely lost. Yet it looks like that to many Nazarenes, barring a work of God in the hearts of the leaders and the people who know what is going on.  There are Nazarenes sitting around for the last four years who don’t like the false teachings going on, but are sitting in their pews totally asleep – by choice.
We see most likely a continued move down the apostasy road, with “pockets of resistance” in the form of individual churches trying to resist their district’s attempts at indoctrinating them with emergent heresies.  More  pastors will be punished for their opposition, as has already happened.  As in one prospective pastor’s case in the New England District, ordination will be denied because of taking a stand that you believe in biblical inerrancy.  Yet, if you believe in evolution and that Adam did not exist, you may have no problem.  Trouble-making pastors may also see their churches closed and merged with other churches.
Then there are districts such as North Florida, and others, whose leadership is strong – at the moment. What happens when the leadership changes, and an emergent D.S. comes in? What happens when a strong church’s pastor retires, and the replacement is straight out of NTS and is a heretic in sheep’s clothing?  What then?  We have received reports regarding large churches whose attendance has plummeted because of the introduction of emergent heresies.
A warning to those who are leading the Church of the Nazarene astray: you need not fear those of us who are trying to wake up the church.  You ought to fear a Holy God whose wrath will eventually come down on those who reject Him and who are leading the sheep astray.  The Bible has clearly called faithful Christians to not only preach the Gospel but to also bring to the light for all to see the evil deeds and teachings of the false teachers.  The call from us to the leaders is to come to repentance before it is too late.  And if the leaders do not repent and do not unambiguously reject all these false teachings, then separation must occur, and Bible-believing Nazarenes must not stay in the denomination out of a misguided loyalty.
There will most likely be the many individuals and families who will leave the denomination for lack of a decent Bible-believing Nazarene church in the area. However you look at this, it does not look like a bright future for the Nazarene denomination. The leadership may declare a bright future at the end of this General Assembly and may declare that God is blessing the Church of the Nazarene. But apostasy, in God’s eyes, is not the plan He has for us.
We’ll have to wait and see, but time is running out.
Related Articles:

 
Manny Silva
Stand For Truth Ministries
“The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever.” Psalm 119:160

Blogging at www.reformednazarene.wordpress.com
Podcasting at: http://standfortruthministries.podbean.com/

KRAFT FOODS SLEAZY ADVERTISING-TIME TO E-MAIL YOUR COMPLAINT

American Family Association   Take Action Now
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook   Share on TwitterShare on Twitter   Online VersionOnline Version

Kraft – from cheesiest to sleaziest with latest ad

Kraft has gone too far and needs to hear from you today!

June 13, 2013

,Last week’s issue of People Magazine had the most disgusting ad on the inside front cover that we have ever seen Kraft produce. A full 2-page ad features a n*ked man lying on a picnic blanket with only a small portion of the blanket barely covering his g*nitals. It is easy to see what the ad is really selling.
You can see the ad here, but be warned, it is offensive.



A person has to look closely to see the item the company is marketing because the salad dressing bottle is so small next to the male model, picnic basket and other food items. There is also a small Kraft logo in the upper corners with the words “Silverware Optional – Let’s Get Zesty.” The website getmezesty.com is listed in the bottom corner.
Kraft has gone too far and will push away loyal, conservative customers with this new ad campaign. The consumers they are attempting to attract – women and mothers – are the very ones they are driving away. Who will want Kraft products in their fridge or pantry if this vulgarity is what they represent?
TAKE ACTION
Please send Kraft an email letter and urge them to discontinue their offensive “Let’s Get Zesty” campaign immediately. Kraft has gone too far and needs to hear from you now!
1. Most effective: Make a personal phone call to Kraft Foods at 1-877-535-5666. Be kind, but firm, in sharing your feelings.
2. Very effective: Copy and paste (or write your own) this message on Kraft’s Facebook page at www.facebook.com/KraftDressing:
I find your latest “Zesty” advertising campaign distasteful and offensive. I’m disappointed to know Kraft has lowered its corporate standards to this level.
3. For Twitter users: @Kraftdressing Kraft goes from cheesy to sleazy. Shame on them. #kraftdressing
4. Email Users: Our OneMillionMoms division is swamping Kraft with emails. You can send your email here.

Take Action Now Send Your Email to Kraft Now!

It is very important that you forward this alert to your friends and family members.

Sincerely,

Tim

Tim Wildmon, President
American Family Association
Help us Financially
Donate Online to AFA

One-Time Monthly
Text the letters
“AFA” to 20222
to give $10

Standard messaging rates may apply.
Spiritual Heritage Tours
Experience Washington, DC and Mount Vernon from a Christian perspective.

More Information
P.S. Follow @AFAActionAlert on Twitter.
Action Link
* http://secure.afa.net/afa/activism/TakeAction.asp?id=447

CHOSEN PEOPLE OF GOD?-TEL AVIV ISRAEL TWENTIETH GAY PRIDE PARADE-THE MODERN REPLAY OF THE GOLDEN CALF ORGY

YouTube video of Tel Aviv Gay Pride Parade 2013:

                           

And from the Times of Israel, their own glorification of sin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_FYpQfQ38g.

    There were reports of 100,000 people in attendance at the 20th gay pride parade/festival in Tel Aviv, Israel. 
    Obama sent his well wishes to them all. Christians would do well to re-think their fascination with the Hebraic Roots/Messianic movement being spread by Jewish missionary organizations within the U.S. and around the world. How can a country which gives support to the gay agenda have any moral authority in the Christian world or anyplace else?
     US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro conveyed warm wishes from President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and the American people. Mayor Ron Huldai on the left, ambassador Shapiro on the right:

Mayor Huldai surrounded by gays in adoration:



                                

                                

See story and photo slideshow in The Times of Israel article: http://www.timesofisrael.com/tel-aviv-gears-up-for-annual-gay-pride-festival/.

Incumbent Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai and openly gay MK Nitzan Horowitz courted the LGBT community at Friday’s Gay Pride events.

Tel Aviv Gay Tourism: Israeli city tries to sell itself to 

same-sex couples and gay tourists:


1 2 3