Tag Archives: gay marriage

CHURCH OF ENGLAND TO BLEND CHRISTIANITY WITH PAGANISM


The result of the New Methods movement. 
CHURCH OF ENGLAND TO BLEND CHRISTIANITY WITH PAGANISM TO ATTRACT SPIRITUALISTS
Christianity and Pagan
Stonehenge Summer Solstice 2013

Here’s a new twist on church growth: creating a pagan atmosphere and branding campaign for New Age spiritualists in order to increase the number of bodies in the pews. The Church of England is actually training its ministers to create “a pagan church where Christianity [is] very much in the center” to attract spiritual believers.

That means changing the Anglican church doctrine to make it more inclusive for people of alternative beliefs. The Church of England admits that its motive is to retain congregation numbers who have embraced paganism. The Church Mission Society, which is training ministers to “break new ground” in order to get spiritual people into churches.  If you’ve come from a Seeker-Driven model, that might actually sound like a good thing. Get them in the doors and tell them about Jesus, right? But make no mistake; that is not what is happening here. The Jesus the Church of England is re-creating is not the Jesus of the Bible.

A little update on the Church of England: It recently gave up its fight against gay marriage, and also went as far as to bless civil partnerships.

The Church Mission Society’s Andrea Campenale, said: “Nowadays people, they want to feel something; they want to have some sense of experience. We live in reflective England where there’s much more of a focus on ourselves. I think that is something we can bring in dialogue with the Christian society.”

The Church Mission Society’s webpage advertising their pioneer training scheme states: “Wherever in the world the mission of Jesus goes on, the church needs pioneer mission leaders to break new ground.”

This news release was actually coordinated a couple of days ago to align with the Summer Solstice, with events lining up around the celebrations at Stonehenge which recently underwent a multimillion dollar transformation. A couple of days ago 20,000 spiritual seekers celebrated the summer solstice there. Pagans and druids gathered to celebrate at the historic monument.

Leave a comment

Filed under Church, Uncategorized

The shattering of Jars of Clay


A question for Dan Haseltine with Jars of Clay: Do you think that God’s order for marriage and family, established plainly in the Word and recognized by virtually all societies in history, can be thrown aside without consequences?

 

Tweet to @DrMichaelLBrown
Beginning on Tuesday, Dan Haseltine, front-man for the popular Christian band Jars of Clay, took to Twitter to announce his apparent support for same-sex “marriage.” And for the life of him, he can’t figure out a single good reason to oppose it.
It is for reasons like this that we have been sounding the alarm these last ten years.
In a series of tweets posted over a three-day period, and prompted by a movie he watched while in flight, he wrote: “The treatment of people as less than human based on the color of skin is crazy … Or gender, or sexual orientation for that matter.”
Of course, to compare skin color with “sexual orientation” is to compare apples with oranges, as has been demonstrated many times before.
But that was only the beginning. He added, “Not meaning to stir things up BUT … Is there a non-speculative or non ‘slippery slope’ reason why gays shouldn’t marry? I don’t hear one.”
This really boggles the mind.
When you’re sliding down a dangerous slippery slope, you don’t say, “Give me one good reason we’re in danger, other than the fact that we’re careening down this deadly slope.”
No. You grab hold of something to stop your fall and then figure out how to climb back to solid ground.
Does this gifted artist not realize that the only reason we’re talking about redefining marriage today is because we are well down that slope already?
This is the day of full-blown incestuous relationships on popular TV shows like Game of Thrones; of other shows glorifying polyamory (married and dating!), polygamy (from Big Love to Sister Wives to My Five Wives), and teen pregnancy; of news reports about the “wedding” of three lesbians. It is the day of almost half of all first-time American mothers having their babies out of wedlock, with cohabitation rates up more than 700 percent since 1960, and it is against this backdrop that talk of same-sex “marriage” has become prominent.
Do we really want to accelerate the destruction of marriage?
Dan also tweeted: “I’m trying to make sense of the conservative argument. But it doesn’t hold up to basic scrutiny. Feels akin to women’s suffrage. Is the argument born of isolated application of scripture or is it combined with the knowledge born of friendship with someone who is gay? I just don’t see a negative effect to allowing gay marriage.  No societal breakdown, no war on traditional marriage. ?? Anyone?”
Assuming Dan’s sincerity, let me reply to his questions.
First, for years now, Christian leaders have been articulating many good reasons why it is not good for society to redefine marriage, quite apart from the (very valid) slippery slope argument, and some of them have not even used the Bible to prove their points. Important books on the subject include those of Frank Turek, Matthew D. Staver, Erwin Lutzer, and, most recently, Robert P. George, Sherif Girgis, and Ryan T. Andersen, among others.
My YouTube debate on the subject is readily available, and there are fine books outlining the biblical definition of marriage and sexuality, including studies by Andreas Kostenberger and Richard M. Davison. Second, while there is strong biblical support for gender distinction, there is no support for the oppression of women, which is why the spread of Christianity around the world has had a liberating effect on women over the centuries. In stark contrast, the Bible condemns all forms of homoeroticism (as is recognized by many gay scholars as well), while every single example of God-blessed marriage or romance takes place between a man and a woman.
I have an online lecture that addresses this issue, and I tackle the subject at length in my new book as well (Can You Be Gay and Christian?). There is simply no comparison between women’s rights and sanctioning homosexual practice.
Third, the argument against same-sex “marriage” is based on the consistent testimony of Scripture, affirmed by Moses, Jesus, and Paul, and it is never contradicted a single time from Genesis to Revelation. Again, I demonstrate this in my new book, and other scholars, most notably Robert A. Gagnon, have argued this persuasively in depth. (Despite many attacks on his work, his arguments stand strong.)
Fourth, many of us have gay friends or relatives, and our positions are motivated by love. But what does having a gay friend or relative have to do with understanding God and His Word? I have dear friends who are very religious Jews, and they are some of the finest people I know, yet I still believe they are lost without Jesus. (And they, of course, see me as gravely deceived.)
Do we rewrite the Bible to accommodate our sentiments towards others, just because they are nice people?
Fifth, as articulated in the books cited in the first point, above, there are many negative consequences to redefining marriage, including: the assault on the freedoms of conscience, speech, and religion of those who do not accept this redefinition; the establishing of households that guarantee that a child will have either no father or no mother; the transformation of children’s education to include the validation of all forms of “marriage”; the continued deconstruction of gender distinctions, leading to all kinds of societal confusion; and much, much more.
It is for good reason that gay activists have long declared that if they can redefine marriage, the rest of their goals will inevitably be realized.
In short, yes, redefining marriage declares a massive war on “traditional marriage” (better framed as “true marriage” or “natural marriage”) and yes, it leads to all kinds of societal breakdown.
Put another way (and this is a question for you, Dan): Do you think that God’s order for marriage and family, established plainly in the Word and recognized by virtually all societies in history, can be thrown aside without consequences?
Dan, you wrote: “Never liked the phrase: ‘Scripture clearly says…(blank) about… Because most people read and interpret scripture wrong.”
Perhaps this is the root of your problem? Is the Bible not clear about anything? Sin? Salvation? Forgiveness? Jesus being the only Savior and Lord? Adultery being bad? Fidelity being good? Shall I list 100 more items that are abundantly clear in Scripture?
But it appears you’re not really certain about many moral issues, based on your tweet that said, “I don’t think scripture ‘clearly’ states much of anything regarding morality,” and, “I don’t particularly care about Scriptures stance on what is ‘wrong.’ I care more about how it says we should treat people.”
Did you really mean to write this? Is it possible to spend five minutes reading God’s precious Word without recognizing that Scripture clearly states a tremendous amount regarding morality and that, without His moral standards, we will never treat others rightly?
You also asked: “Just curious what ‘condoning a persons [sic] homosexuality’ does. Does it change you? Does it hurt someone? What is behind the conviction?”
Do you not realize that couples involved in consensual adult incest (and other relationships) are asking this exact same question? What do you say to them?
Perhaps it is a Jesus-based, Spirit-led, scripturally-grounded morality that is behind our convictions? And if we condone something God opposes – which means that it is not good for the people involved – how are we showing them love? To the contrary, we are actually hurting them.
My brother, as an influential Christian leader, you have a tremendous responsibility before the Lord to those who follow you, especially to impressionable, young believers, and you have not acted wisely by opening up a volatile discussion like this on Twitter.
Were there no godly leaders you could counsel with privately? Was it good stewardship of your popularity and influence to announce your views on Twitter and then expect a substantive dialogue delimited by 140-character tweets? Are subjects like the meaning of marriage and the authority of God’s Word in the life of a Christian now decided by who can come up with the catchier sound bite?
You probably don’t know me from Adam, but I’ll be glad to spend time with you to help you address these issues from the position of grace and truth. My door is open to you, and as one who greatly appreciates the culture-impacting power of music and song, it would be my privilege to meet with you.
That being said, if these tweets expose the soft, scripturally weak underbelly of the contemporary Christian music scene, then let’s put on our seatbelts and expect the worst.
The good news is that this will separate the wheat from the chaff – and in the end, the light will outshine the darkness.

Dr. Michael Brown, a Jewish believer in Jesus, is a biblical scholar, apologist, worldwide speaker, and activist. He is the host of the nationally syndicated, talk radio program “Line of Fire,” and he serves as president of FIRE School of Ministry in Concord, NC, as well as adjunct professor at a number of seminaries. He is the author of 21 books, most recently “The Real Kosher Jesus.”

2 Comments

Filed under Commentary

Huckabee:Evangelicals Will Walk if GOP Backs Gay Marriage


Wednesday, March 20, 2013 05:49 PM

By: Jim Meyers and Kathleen Walter

Mike Huckabee warns that Republicans risk losing the vote from evangelical Christians if they back away from their opposition to gay marriage.

Last week, Ohio Sen. Bob Portman announced he has reversed his position and now supports gay marriage.

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV, former Arkansas Gov. Huckabee — and ordained Southern Baptist minister — was asked if he sees the GOP ever pivoting and backing gay marriage.

“They might. And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk,” he responds.

“And it’s not because there’s an anti-homosexual mood, and nobody’s homophobic that I know of, but many of us, and I consider myself included, base our standards not on the latest Washington Post poll, but on an objective standard, not a subjective standard.

“I have great sympathy and extraordinary admiration for Sen. Portman. I consider him a friend and I value his work in the Senate and think he’s a great person. The mistake is that we sometimes base our public policy decisions on how we feel, how we think, maybe even some personal experiences, and we don’t regard a lot of these issues from the standpoint of an objective standard.

“Let me explain what I mean by that. If we have subjective standards, that means that we’re willing to move our standards based on the prevailing whims of culture. Politicians have an obligation to be thermostats, not just thermometers. They’re not simply to reflect the temperature of the room, or the culture, as it were. They’re to set the standards for law, for what’s right, for what’s wrong, understanding that not everybody’s going to agree with it.
“On this issue, I recognize the culture is moving away from the traditional standard, but it’s almost like saying, well, we have a basketball team and nobody on the team can hit the goal that’s 10 feet off the floor so we’re going to lower the goal down to six feet and that way everybody can slam dunk the ball.

“So the question is, have you improved your basketball game? Or have you actually just changed the standard so it looks like you’re doing better? And that’s my concern.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Morality