*UPDATED* ED YOUNG JR SAYS HE’S SETTING THINGS STRAIGHT

As a follow-up to SBC Pastor Ed Young Jr In Luxury Cover-Up? here at Apprising Ministries I point you to Ed Young Jr’s blog where he tells us he’s Setting Things Straight and Moving On.

In introducing his video of the same title at his blog today Young, Jr says:

I took the opportunity to thank the church and address some recent news coverage. And now, we will continue to move forward and follow God in the work He is doing here. (Online source)

As I watched the video a couple of things came emerging in my view; 1) it seems the board members protesteth too much, and 2) The first to plead his case seems right, Until another comes and examines him (Proverbs 18:17, NASB). So stay tuned; indeed, likely we ain’t seen nothing yet.

*UPDATE*  Christian apologist Chris Rosebrough, host of the Fighting for the Faith (FftF) program on Pirate Christian Radio (PCR), has been examining this issue further and shares his findings in Ed Young’s Admissions Are More Damning Than The Original News Story.

In addition tonight Rosebrough tweeted:

I’m gonna put @EdYoung ’s admissions in proper perspective on tomorrow’s program. His admissions are VERY damaging. (Online source)

Rosebrough’s FftF program airs on PCR weekdays at 6pm EST

See also:

BUT SOUTHERN BAPTISTS SAY OK TO “BISHOP” T.D.JAKES

LETTER TO ED YOUNG, JR. REGARDING ONENESS PENTECOSTAL DR. T.D. JAKES SHARING THE PULPIT IN HIS SBC CHURCH

SOUTHERN BAPTIST PASTOR ED YOUNG, JR.: CHURCH LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE IS NOT ABOUT THEOLOGY

WORD FAITH MOGUL “BISHOP” T.D. JAKES – A SOUTHERN BAPTIST PREACHER?

SBC SECOND VICE PRESIDENT DR. WILEY DRAKE COMMENTS ON ED YOUNG, JR. SHARING HIS SBC PULPIT AGAIN WITH ONENESS PENTECOSTAL T.D. JAKES

RESPONSE FROM GARY LEDBETTER OF “SOUTHERN BAPTIST TEXAN” CONCERNING DR. T.D. JAKES AT ED YOUNG, JR’S CREATIVE CHURCH CONFERENCE 2007

KEEPING YOU APPRISED OF: T.D. JAKES ON THE TRINITY

AN INSIDER LEAVES THE EMERGING CHURCH

As I told you e.g. in Emerging Church And TransFORM’s Steve Knight ”Communication + Mission” specialist Knight founded this latest network of the sinfully ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—that morphed into Emergence Christianity—(EC). Today Knight wants us to know that:

just posted a comment for Jeremy @Bouma on his post “Goodbye Emergent”: http://bit.ly/b1rziT (Online source)

You may recall Jeremy Bouma from the Apprising Ministries piece Did Rob Bell Forget The Cross? There Bouma, who used to refer to himself as an “emerging- missional follower of Jesus,” shared his experience at the Poets, Prophets, Peachers (PPP) conference put on last year by Emerging Church icon Rob Bell, which also featured his equally heretical friends Peter Rollins and his now co-teaching pastor Shane Hipps.

Bouma was live blogging from PPP where, concerning Bell’s mystical musings, he pondered:

I also am curious why The Story that Rob was encouraging us pastors to tell was missing the Event of the Cross, the point at which God objectively dealt with the three objective realities of evil, sin, and death… While he also emphasized the resurrection as key to the New Creation, I am confused HOW even the resurrection is made possible or actually does something for US without the Event of the Cross. (Online source)

Well, possibly that event may have had something to do with Bouma looking at the sinfully ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—that morphed into Emergence Christianity—(EC) in a new way. The above link from Steve Knight takes us to Bouma’s post today Goodbye Emergent: Why I’m Taking The Theology of the Emerging Church To Task where he informs us:

Once upon a time I was enamored by the “I-am-not-a-movement-but-a-conversation” known as the emerging church (In fact, at my seminary I’ve been known as Emergent Jeremy!) Five years ago, I stumbled upon an “emerging” author known as Brian McLaren (even attending his church for a stint). I gobbled-up his “A New Kind of Christian” trilogy because it’s question-asking permissive narrative gave flesh to the phantom that was haunting me at the time… (Online source)

Bouma goes on to tell us that as his “relationship with Emergent progressed” he began “wonder” about a few things concerning the EC; for example, “why it was cool and trendy to disregard Paul, pity the fool who believed in real judgment, ignore the cross, and downplay individual participation in rebellion/sin.” He writes that he “became uncomfortable” with, and has apparently, “grown downright tired of the theology that has bubbled-up out of the emerging church.”

As Bouma then goes on he gives us some serious reason to be quite alarmed that this type of EC theology, not only is being openly embraced within the mainstream of evangelicalism, but has been fed to your youth for years now. It also becomes all the more important to remember here that Bouma’s writing from an insider’s viewpoint when he candidly shares:

I’m not exactly sure when my saucy love affair with emergent and liberal Christianity ended. My “I don’t” isn’t as crystalized as my “I do.” Maybe it was when I read Pelagius‘ writings and realized much of Emergent theology really does mirror his 5th century theology.

Maybe it was after the former head of Emergent Village, Tony Jones, rejected original sin, a historic part of the Rule of Faith, claiming that it is “neither biblically, philosophically, nor scientifically tenable. “.

Maybe it was when I read Fredrick Schleiermacher and realized his and modern liberalism’s vapid, gospel-less faith are being repackaged and popularized to an unsuspecting, ignorant Christian community as a wholesome alternative to what has been.

Maybe it was after I read Karl Barth and realized the natural theology pushed by popular emergent theologians is not revitalizing Christian faith, but killing it; it is the same kind of faith Barth so vociferously fought against in order to preserve the historic Rule of Faith.

Maybe it was after reading a leading emerging church voice suggest that God and grace and the Kingdom of God are not tied directly and exclusively to Jesus Christ; ultimately its not really about Jesus, but about a vanilla, generalized World-Spirit god (lower-case “g”)… (Online source)

In fairness to Jeremy, let me also draw your attention to where Bouma quite specifically informs his readers that he’s not on a “heresy hunt”; nor has he suddenly become one of “the hyper-fundamentalists who exalt themselves as Truth Defenders.” And I agree with Bouma concerning the importance of what he says in his post today because he is saying “au revoir” having “been on the inside of and involved with this conversation for half a decade.”

He then reiterates and points out that he:

I attended Brian McLaren’s church; I helped host the Church Basement Roadshow at my church for Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, and Mark Scandrette; I’ve had several interactions with Doug Pagitt, someone I like as a person and who even introduced me to my wife and attended our wedding; and I am personal friends with the coordinator of the Emergent West Michigan cohort who is also a member of the new Coordinating Council for Emergent Village. (Online source)

Bouma’s correct in that he’s writing here as “an insider who is simply leaving the inside.” It also looks to me that Steve Knight realized the EC now needs to swing into damage control mode as the new book by EC guru Brian McLaren, which is as close to a systematic theology of EC beliefs as we’ve seen, is about to drop. You see, it will essentially confirm what Bouma’s just told us above concerning the EC as a Liberalism 2.0 i.e. a reimagined form of quasi-univeralist Progressive Christianity.

See also:

THE EMERGING CHURCH SOWING ITS NEO-ORTHODOX CONFUSION ON SCRIPTURE

PHIL JOHNSON ON THEOLOGICAL LIBERALISM

TONY JONES, THE EMERGING CHURCH AND PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIANITY

SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION AND “INSIGHTFUL” EMERGING CHURCH HERETIC TONY JONES

IN THE EMERGING CHURCH OOZE CONVERSION IS OUT 

APPRISING MINISTRIES WITH A PEEK AT THE COMING SOTERIOLOGY OF EMERGENCE CHRISTIANITY

THE MORPHING EMERGING CHURCH MOVEMENT

DR. ROBERT REYMOND: EFFECTS OF REGENERATION

By this divine work the sinner is re-created in and to newness of life, has the defilement of his heart cleansed or “washed” away (Ezek. 36:25-26; John 3:5; Titus 3:5), and is [supernatually] enabled to “see” and to “enter” the kingdom of God by faith (John 3:3, 5).

He is also enabled to believe in Jesus (John 1:12-13), to believe Jesus is the Christ (1 John 5:1), to love others, particularly other Christians (1 John 4:7; 5:1); and to do righteousness and to shum the life of sin (1 John 3:9; 5:18). (A New Systematic Theology Of The Christian Faith, 719)

Dr. Robert L. Reymond

PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIANITY

IS DALLAS WILLARD A CHRISTIAN?

In articles like Dr. Jay McDaniel And Mysticism At Northwest Nazarene Universary and Southern Baptist Convention Embracing The Emerging Church and Rick Warren And Peter Scazzero With Messed-Up Monk-ee Bizness here at Apprising Ministries I continue to warn of the crippling effects of corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM) ala Living Spiritual Teacher and Quaker mystic Richard Foster, with an assist from his spiritual twin Dallas Willard, now that it’s penetrated mainstream evangelicalism.

As a former Roman Catholic I can tell you that Foster/Willard’s stupid CSM shtick, masquerading as supposed Spiritual Formation, is nothing more than a romanticized Roman Catholic Counter Reformation spirituality such as that promulgated by apostates (at best) like Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the militantly pro-Roman Catholic Church spiritual Gestapo Unit known as the Jesuits. It’s rather amazing people don’t realize this spurious CSM is what led Rome to the false doctrines dealt with at the Reformation.

Do you really not see that, by far, the vast majority of mystics appealed to by Foster—and Willard teaches precisely the same CSM as his former pastor and friend Foster—were Roman Catholics? You really can’t follow that Foster/Willard and their ilk rarely, if ever, quote men e.g. like Charles Spurgeon or Jonathan Edwards concerning the proper Christian spirituality of Sola Scriptura. Well, the fact is they can’t; because CSM must approach the Bible in a highly subjective manner e.g. neo-orthodox in order to “find” CSM in it.

Now you’ll see that I have very good reason to ask: Is Dallas Willard A Christian? As you listen below to the Fighting for the Faith program of Christian apologist Chris Rosebrough from Pirate Christian Radio beginning at 07:22 you’ll hear Willard share his law-based non-gospel as he muses, “Now, I believe that everyone who deserves to be saved will be saved no matter where they are or what they do.” And Willard then goes on to flatly contradict the Scripture when he opines:

It’s so important to understand that God is not biased about these matters [being saved and devout] and He is open and in touch with evryone in the world, and for all who seek them with all of their heart—and that is defined in terms of coming to love Him, and not just have the right beliefs about Him—but coming to love Him, and loving their neighbor as themselves.

Being that Willard is a minster, as am I, in the Southern Baptist Convention I can tell you the above is not biblical doctrine, let alone being in accord with the SBC’s revered The Baptist Faith & Message. It is, however, right in line with the uber-inclusive and sinfully ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—that morphed into Emergence Christianity—(EC). That’s little wonder because EC guru Brian McLaren himself already clearly told us in the 2004 Christianity Astray Today article “The Emergent Mystique” that Foster and Willard were “key mentors for the emerging church”.

And if you’re tempted to think Willard merely misspoke let me remind you that last year in So You Want To Be Like Christ… Ditch The Disciplines Of Dallas Willard I showed you from his own website Willard also informs us that people who are “worthy of being saved” will “be saved” as he just did above; not only that, but in Willard’s fantasy even those who don’t know Jesus can still be saved:

What Paul is clearly saying is that if anyone is worthy of being saved, they will be saved. At that point many Christians get very anxious, saying that absolutely no one is worthy of being saved. The implication of that is that a person can be almost totally good, but miss the message about Jesus, and be sent to hell.

What kind of a God would do that? I am not going to stand in the way of anyone whom God wants to save. I am not going to say ‘he can’t save them.’ I am happy for God to save anyone he wants in any way he can. It is possible for someone who does not know Jesus to be saved. (Online source, emphasis mine)

This is the kind of reasoning we get from “Protestant” SBC philosopher Dallas Willard; and you’ll also find this eternally fatal view quite common among practitioners of CSM, “if anyone is worthy of being saved, they will be saved.” As well as their mystic speculation, “It is possible for someone who does not know Jesus to be saved.” But the Spirit of Jesus has already told us…THREE different times; in Psalm 14:1-3, in Psalm 53:1-3, and then because sheep aren’t too bright, He tells us once again:

as it is written: ”None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” (Romans 3:10-12)

See also:

DALLAS WILLARD: “WHICH SPIRITUAL DISCIPLINES?”

DELUSIONS OF DALLAS WILLARD

DALLAS WILLARD ENCOURAGES CONTEMPLATIVE/CENTERING PRAYER

“CELEBRATION OF DISCIPLINE” BY RICHARD FOSTER AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THEOLOGICAL ERROR

CONTEMPLATIVE SPIRITUALITY OF RICHARD FOSTER ROOTED IN THE EASTERN DESERT AND THOMAS MERTON

DISCIPLINES TO DECEPTION IN SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION

VIRGINIA SOUTHERN BAPTISTS ENCOURAGED TO EMBRACE THE EMERGING CHURCH

CHARLES SPURGEON: GAMES LIBERALS PLAY

Now-a-days, if a man is very reverent towards the word of God, and very desirous to obey the Lord’s commands in everything, people say, “He is very precise,” and they shun him; or, with still more acrimony, they say, “He is very bigoted: he is not a man of liberal spirit;” and so they cast out his name as evil.

Bigotry, in modern parlance, you know, means giving heed to old truths in preference to novel theories; and a liberal spirit, now-a-days, means being liberal with everything except your own money—liberal with God’s law, liberal with God’s doctrine, liberal to believe that a lie is a truth, that black is white, and that white may occasionally be black. That is liberal sentiment in religion—the broad church school—from which may God continually deliver us.

Charles Spurgeon

HT: Pyromaniacs

See also:

PHIL JOHNSON ON THEOLOGICAL LIBERALISM

TONY JONES, THE EMERGING CHURCH AND PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIANITY

SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION AND “INSIGHTFUL” EMERGING CHURCH HERETIC TONY JONES

IN THE EMERGING CHURCH OOZE CONVERSION IS OUT 

APPRISING MINISTRIES WITH A PEEK AT THE COMING SOTERIOLOGY OF EMERGENCE CHRISTIANITY

THE MORPHING EMERGING CHURCH MOVEMENT

ACTIVELY-GAY “BISHOP” GENE ROBINSON SAME-SEX ACTS ONLY UNNATURAL FOR NON-GAYS

DR. JAY MCDANIEL AND MYSTICISM AT NORTHWEST NAZARENE UNIVERSITY

Along with other online apologetics and discernment ministries such as Lighthouse Trails Reseach (LTR) here at Apprising Ministries I’m doing what I can to alert you as to how far corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM) ala Living Spiritual Teacher and Quaker mystic Richard Foster, with an assist from his spiritual twin Dallas Willard, has now penetrated mainstream evangelicalism.

You need to understand that this refried Roman Catholic Counter Reformation CSM masquerades as supposed Spiritual Formation. With this in mind I point you below to a 2006 lecture by Dr. Jay McDaniel to a class at Northwest Nazarene University in Nampa, Idaho. In his address you’ll hear from one very familiar with the practice of CSM and the doctrines of its major proponents.

For more background information and clarification of the issues involved I encourage you to read the LTR post Northwest Nazarene University President Responds Regarding New Spirituality Speaker as well as the emails below . Please also know that I have personally been in contact with each of the authors and they’ve both given me permission to publish the following for context:

Mr. McDaniel,

I just finished listening to a video of you at Northwest Nazarene University. I must say that I was surprised that a Nazarene University would allow you to actually come and speak to the students . Your views and ideas are completely opposite to not only Nazarene doctrine but God’s word. Your comment on your Hindu sister makng it to heaven and then realizing that her lifes journey was now made complete when she finally saw Jesus is absolutely non sense. The bible says no one will enter heaven unless they have aknowledged their sin and asked for forgiveness. They must have that personal relationship before death not after. Jesus is the ONLY way to heaven.

With all [due] respect. I do not need to talk with a buddist or muslim to grow deeper in my walk with God. The word of God is the only thing we need to teach us about God and what being a christian is all about.  Please take your false teaching away from the Nazarene church and our youth. I have emailed this video to our General Offices of the Nazarene church and will be making it a point to be sure that your false teachings are not allowed at another Nazarene school.

I will be praying for you that God will get a hold of your heart and show you the confusion and heresy that you are spreading. ”You shall have no other gods before me.”

Protecting the truth,

Darren Krauter 

Dear Darren,

Thank you for your e-mail.

I haven’t seen the video, Darren, and it has been a long time since I gave the talk at Northwest Nazarene College. Please forgive me if I don’t quite remember what I said. But as I recall, I was describing what some theologians call “the fulfillment model” as developed by Catholic theologians since Vatican II. Their general idea is (1) that people are saved if they are honest to the best of their lights and if they inwardly aspire to live in a spirit of love and hospitality; but that (2) their salvation will be fulfilled in heaven by a recognition that Jesus completes the movement toward divine love, toward which their hearts were already drawn. I find this a plausible perspective, but as it happens, the fulfillment model is not my own position. I am less certain about who is saved and who is not.

Nevertheless, my own view differs from your own, because I trust that God is more mysterious, and more generous, than you. The mystery of God’s love is that it transcends human preoccupations with reward and punishment. I discern from your e-mail that you believe there are limits to God’s generosity, because God first requires that a person be a Christian in order to be saved. Perhaps you think that God is too holy and too pure to receive us into his heart after death, without our first accepting the sacrifice he made on the cross. I know many Christians who think this way.

I understand the cross differently. For me the cross reveals a side of God which has been loving and forgiving from the very beginning of time: a side which is hospitable even to the Roman soldiers who nailed Jesus’ hands to the cross. Thus the cross is, for me, not a substitute for a punishment we all deserve, but rather a revelation of a love that is infinitely tender and deeply mysterious. Moreover, the cross is not simply a symbol for this love, it is an incarnation of this love. Like the sun, God’s love shines on all of us: the just and unjust alike. That’s part of the mystery. Why is there so much grace? Shouldn’t the other people — those who are different from us — get what they deserve?

Nevertheless, I do think there are some limits. I know that God loves the hard-hearted but I know that God wishes their hearts were not so hard. Surely there must be much pain in God, given the arrogance and violence of which we humans are capable, sometimes in God’s name. But I would not define the limits in terms of what a person believes. My own view is that God judges a person’s heart, not a person’s beliefs. As we approach the gates of heaven, I think the question will not be “What did you believe? How fervent were you in claiming a Christian identity?” but rather “How open was your heart? How well did you love?” Let’s imagine that the person standing at the gates is not Saint Peter but rather Jesus himself. Let’s let Jesus decide whether or not to open those gates. Like you, I trust him.

I think there is something Wesleyan about my perspective, too, insofar as it focusses on love. His central concern was how the Holy Spirit transforms a life into love. But my aspirations are not to be “Wesleyan.” My desire, like your own, is to be faithful to Jesus and to walk with him in daily life. I trust that we — you and I – can agree on the importance of such fidelity and such walking, even if we have sharp disagreements on other matters. So I close this response to you with a prayer of my own, namely that both of us walk in the light of God’s love as best we can.

In peace,

Jay McDaniel

PS If you send the video to others, you might also include your e-mail to me, and my response to you, in the interests of fairly representing my own point of view. This is not because I aspire to speak at Nazarene schools. I am happy to do so, and I consider myself a Wesleyan in spirit. However, I do not want to go where I am not welcome. But I want to be known for who I am; that’s why I encourage you to send copies of our interchange. I am also sending this note to Dr. Thomas Oord, because I know him and admire him, and I want him to be apprised of our interchange. I trust Dr. Oord’s judgments on these matters, too. He is among my very favorite Wesleyan theologians. His own definition of love is from which I continue to learn.

Dr. Jay McDaniel

Willis T. Holmes Distinguished Professor of Religion

Nancy and Craig Wood Professor of Engaged Education

Hendrix College

1600 Washington Avenue

Conway , AR 72032

Jay,

Thank you for your quick reply. I will be honest I did not expect a reply so soon or even at all. I will definitely forward your response along with the video link. I believe your response does show a drastic difference in our beliefs.

I do believe that Jesus does represent an unbelievable love for all people of all races and religions. That being said, I do not believe salvation is not made complete when we arrive in Heaven and see Jesus. Jesus said when he was calling the disciples to “Follow Me”, he did not say, do what you think is right , love people and when you see me in Heaven, you will understand that what you did is now allowing you to enter heaven. I believe you are saying that as long as we walk in what light we have in the religion we are practicing, we have an opportunity to make it to heaven. My bible says, I (Jesus) am the way, the truth and the light . No man comes to the father but by me. I can not think of anywhere in the word that it says that can be accomplished after death. I do not fine anything in my bible that gives credence to your view. We need not look any further than the word of God to learn we are in need of a Savior. That same bible gives us all the direction we need to grow and be the Christians that God wants us to be. The fruits of the spirit will be evident. I must admit I am not sure what part of your Wesleyan roots you formed these views from.

I believe that before Jesus returns he will give everyone an opportunity to accept or deny Him as Lord and Savior. I believe that when our lives on earth are complete and if we have not repented of our sins and accepted Jesus Christ as our personal savior, we will be eternally separated from God. That is not a popular view in the world today. People always just like to concentrate on God is love and not deal with what you need to do, salvation not works, in order to spend eternity in Heaven. God has laid out in His word very clearly what we need to do. Not only for salvation but what our lives as Christians should be. God does not send anyone to hell. I can not and will not make a determination on anyone’s salvation. If we choose not to accept Him as Lord and Savior we are turning our back on His greatest gift and condemning ourselves to eternal separation.

Thank you for the discussion. As you said in your video, you probably will not change any of the “exclusive” believers view and you haven’t. I would ask you to be very careful in what you tell your students. You have an awesome responsibility when you are presenting your views. I am not a theology major, not even close, and in no way would even come close to your education. Jay all I can tell you is I am a sinner that found a savior. that changed my life. I want to tell as many people about his unbelievable love and that this love and forgiveness I found is available to everyone. We both have an awesome responsibility!

I also want to apologize for my initial email. I know I came across a bit angry. I was!!! I could have expressed my concerns better.

God bless you and your family.

In His service,

Darren Krauter

Dear Pastor Silva,

 Thank you for your thoughtful e-mail. I do give you permission to post my e-mail. I would appreciate it if you would add this e-mail, too. I would like for those who view the talk to know two things. First, that the hospitality extended to me by NNU was a wonderful example of Christian witness. And, second, I would like viewers to know that I am grateful for the many people who visited with me after my talk, who shared with me their conservative theologies in firm yet kindly ways. I learned from them. I wish the video you post could include those conversations, so viewers would understand that NNU community includes conservative thought at its very best.

In Christ’s peace,

Jay McDaniel

See also:

WHO IS THOMAS MERTON?

THOMAS MERTON AND THE BUDDHAS

CONTEMPLATIVE SPIRITUALITY OF RICHARD FOSTER ROOTED IN THE EASTERN DESERT AND THOMAS MERTON

RICHARD FOSTER AND THE INFLUENCE OF THOMAS MERTON

RICHARD FOSTER’S LEGACY ENDURES: CHRISTIAN LEADERS HELP TO MAKE IT SO

RICK WARREN AND PETER SCAZZERO WITH MESSED-UP MONK-EE BIZNESS

PASTOR KEN SILVA—THE HIJACKING OF EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANITY

ACTIVELY-GAY “BISHOP” GENE ROBINSON SAME-SEX ACTS ONLY UNNATURAL FOR NON-GAYS

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17, NASB)

Thus Saith The Lord; Or Human Authors Of Scripture?

Apprising Ministries brings to your attention Gene Robinson: Same-sex acts unnatural for heterosexuals, which Christian Today (CT) carries in their World News section today. And you should also know it’s largely because of the sinfully ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—that morphed into Emergence Christianity—(EC) that we would even have to be discussing the man-centered musings of apostates (at best) like Gene Robinson within the mainstream of the church visible in the first place. 

For a little biblical perspective, Gene Robinson is the overseer of Episopal churches in New Hamphire, where I was raised and currently reside. Eric Young of CT tells us:

Robinson, who was married and has two daughters, divorced his wife and is now involved in a homosexual relationship. He currently serves as the ninth bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire in The Episcopal Church.  (Online source)

In the real world of the historic orthodox Christian faith someone who’s unrepentantly “involved in a homosexual relationship” would be disqualified from being in Christian ministry. However, in our tepid times of postmodern pudding what “Bishop” Robinson dreams makes “world news.” Young begins his CT article informing us:

When the Apostle Paul wrote of the “perversion” of men and women who committed “indecent acts” with those of the same sex, he was talking about people he understood to be heterosexuals engaging in same-sex acts, according to The Episcopal Church’s first actively-gay bishop.

“It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionately-oriented to people of the same sex,” Bishop V Gene Robinson stated this week. “So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so,” he added, referring to the exchange of “natural relations for unnatural ones” by men and women, as Paul recorded in Romans 1:26-27. (Online source)

First of all, this is really an old argument originally advanced when the original cult of liberalism invaded the now almost spiritually dead mainline denominations. And secondly, as you can see, the reasoning here is that “Paul” was writing thus and so; as if what is written in the Bible would then simply be Paul’s ignorant, and uninformed, opinion. And this would be true if the Bible was a book containing writings of men who were only recounting their own subjective experiences with God, i.e. simply sharing their own opinions about issues relating to religion; but it is not.

Of our opening text above Dr. Ralph Earle is dead-on-target when he says: 

“All Scripture is God-breathed.” That is exactly what the Greek says. The adjective theopneustos (only here in the NT) is compounded of theos, “God,” and the verb pneo, “breathe.” This is one of the greatest texts in the NT on the inspiration of the Bible…

Another outstanding passage is 2 Peter 1:21, which indicates something of how the divine inspiration took place. Here in 2 Timothy we have the fact simply and plainly stated; the process of inspiration is not dealt with. (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 11, 409)

But today there’s a steadily growing number within mainstream evangelicalism—bolstered by erroneous teaching oozing out from warped and toxic EC circles—who would dare to call themselves Christians, when all the while, they’re attempting to cause people to doubt the verbal and plenary inspiration of the Bible. And as you can see e.g. in Emerging Church And Adele Sakler TransFORM Gay Agenda In Evangelicalism one of their pet doctrines right now is the attempt to convince us that the deviant lifestyle of having sexual relations with a member of one’s own sex i.e. homosexuality is a viable one for the evangelical Christian.

And the growing stature within mainstream evangelical circles of gay-affirming “pastor” Jay Bakker and his Outlaw Preachers [read: no law] shows there’s a very dark and threatening same-sex storm, which is right now approaching hurricane force, growing ever closer to the coast of your own local evangelical church. However, despite their insolence, the Body of Christ has always taught that God the Holy Spirit is the Author of the Bible; though He chose to do so through human instruments. Take for example:

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20-21)

It’s high time that we need to remind men like Gene Robinson that, because all Scripture is God-breathed, what’s being discussed e.g. in Romans 1 it isn’t merely “Paul’s view”; rather, what Scripture says, God says. And no one in their right mind is going to argue that our Creator doesn’t know what He’s talking about. But here we see yet another example of the fetid fruit of the highly subjective Spiritual Formation aka Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM) ala Living Spiritual Teacher and Quaker mystic Richard Foster and his spiritual twin Dallas Willard, which attacks Sola Scriptura.

The fact is, all mystics have to jettison reason i.e. critically thinking skills in order to go on to create their own synthetic version of reality; another reason why postmodernism, which is actually the flawed philosophy of relativism, is completely incompatible with the genuine Christian faith. Specific to Robinson’s tired argument above, he’s “responding to a question” Young tells us was:

posed by a reporter for conservative CNSNews.com following a press conference in Washington this week. Upon engaging Robinson, the reporter had brought out Romans 1:24-27 and asked the New Hampshire bishop if he thought Paul was correct in describing homosexual acts as being against nature.

Robinson, in response, said the question would take about two days to answer, but to explain simply, the bishop told the reporter that the passage – like any other in the Bible – needed to be understood in its own context. (Online source)

Actually It’s Progressive/Liberals Attempting To Twist Scripture Out Of Its Context

Here we see a straw man argument designed to obscure what the text itself says; but no one’s arguing that we shouldn’t understand Scripture “in its own context.” As I previously pointed out in Brian McLaren, Emergence Christianity, And Homosexuality: What’s So Hard About That? in Romans chapter one we are informed that the LORD God Almighty’s patience one day will run out; and based upon the kind of lunacy in the Lord’s Name we’re discussing here, quite possibly has already done so. In verse 26 we read — Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.

As we use our critical reasoning skills, it should be obvious enough to see we’re being told here that what we are about to read next in the text would be things which are considered shameful lusts by our Creator; and His opinion is the only one that matters. And notice also that this has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any one particular culture; no rather, it has to do with what God Himself as Creator judges universally to be shameful lusts. Consider now the b part of verse 26 — Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.

The logical question which should now arise is: What are these natural relations women are exchanging here for unnatural ones. God the Holy Spirit anticipates this question for us and then provides our answer in Verse 27 — In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. We see then — In the same way as the women the men also abandoned — or exchangednational relations with women for unnatural ones; “understood in its own context” it becomes quite clear. 

Now we can understand that, according to His created order, the LORD God Almighty—the very Creator of the universe Himself—has in fact outlined for us that He considers “natural” sexual relations to be those which occur between one man with one woman after marriage. As a result therefore, Scripture then also defines sexual activity between members of the same sex as being “unnatural.” And this is also reinforced in the b part of verse 27 — Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

With this in mind, we can now put all of this together and come to the realization that, according to the Bible, God refers to sexual relations between members of the same sex as shameful lusts. Homosexual relations, which will always be outside of the marriage covenant as designed by the Lord, is also said to be abandoning natural relations and being inflamed with lust (a sin in and of itself) for a member of one’s own sex. Verse 27 then lists this among indecent acts and clearly refers to homosexuality as perversion.

There’s just no way around what these texts are saying because this passage of the Bible concerns proper sexual conduct for men and women of any culture—period. This is part of the created order itself, and so, it would apply to all of mankind regardless of cultural mores of any generation. Robinson and his ilk are the ones attempting to twist the Scriptures out of their context; and in closing this for now, the following from James White and Jeffrey Niell in their 2002 book The Same Sex Controversy proves most edifying concerning Robinson’s old argument above:

This perspective, presented in some of the most popular revisionist works, tries to find a way to allow for a “natural” homosexuality by reading out of the text the basic meaning. [The] exegesis [above] has already shown, however, that this viewpoint is untenable. The entire context would be completely disrupted by such an eisegetical [presupposed] reading.

The focus upon the willful twisting of God’s truth, and resultant “giving over” of men to the results of their own refusal to worship Him and acknowledge Him, is utterly lost if, in fact, the only point here is that of homosexuality itself is not sinful in God’s sight, but rather it is wrong to engage in it if you have “natural” [heterosexual] desires. (126, emphasis theirs)

See also:

THE SIN OF HOMOSEXUALITY IS DIFFERENT

GROWING GAY AGENDA IN EVANGELICALISM

BIBLE OUTS GAY MARRIAGE

QUICK WORD ON SIN OF HOMOSEXUALITY

RICK BRENTLINGER OF GAY CHRISTIAN 101 AND KEN SILVA

ANDREW MARIN METHODOLOGY

EX-HOMOSEXUAL FRIEND OF APPRISING MINISTRIES

VIRGINIA SOUTHERN BAPTISTS ENCOURAGED TO EMBRACE THE EMERGING CHURCH

Apprising Ministries told you in Southern Baptist Convention Embracing The Emerging Church about a grievous mistake being made by the Baptist General Association Of Virginia (BGAV) aka the Virginia Baptist Mission Board. You may recall that the BGAV is one of the two Virgina state conventions aligned with the national Southern Baptist Convention; the other being the Southern Baptist Conservatives Of Virginia.

In that previous piece I pointed you to the April 2010 Parish Paper called What Can We Learn from the Emerging Church Movement? As I said before this foolish edition is woefully misinformed and not only promotes the heretical Phyllis Tickle, the Empress of the sinfully ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—that morphed into Emergence Christianity (EC)—but it’s also a full-on embrace of the EC.

You need to realize that this very decidedly anti-Protestant de-formation of the Christian faith is a cult of a postliberalism that’s now firmly entrenched within the mainstream of pretending to be Protestant evangelicalism. Subsequent research shows that it’s no real surprise why The Parish Paper: Ideas and Insights for Active Congregations (TPP) would wish to promote the EC. BGAV tells us concerning TPP:

The Virginia Baptist Mission Board is proud to provide copies of the Parish Paper free of charge to members of our constituency!

Co-edited by knowledge experts Herb Miller, Lyle Schaller, and Cynthia Woolever, monthly issues of The Parish Paper provide ideas, insights, research-findings, and practical methods that strengthen the effectiveness of congregations in accomplishing God’s purposes through their various ministries. (Online source)

For those who don’t know TPP is not produced by the BGAV; rather, TPP is written by the aforementioned “knowledge experts.” As a matter of fact TPP is actually the brainchild of “America’s foremost church consultant” one Dr. Lyle E. Schaller, who interestingly enough has been involved with Peter Drucker and Leadership Network:

The Parish Paper began in 1971, pioneered by Dr. Lyle E. Schaller, often called America’s foremost church consultant, and the author of more than fifty books on church leadership during the last four decades, many of which were published by Abingdon Press, Nashville. During the 1990s, research by The Alban Institute identified The Parish Paper as the best-known publication of its type among leaders of American Protestant denominations.

Throughout those decades The Parish Paper has had clergy, lay, and middle-judicatory subscribers in more than twenty-eight denominations in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. It has never been connected with a single denomination or publishing company or theological viewpoint. Thus, it is ecumenical in the broadest sense of that term. Due to their large memberships, the greatest numbers of Parish Paper readers are in seven denominations: Episcopal, United Church of Christ, Presbyterian, United Methodist, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), American Baptist, and Lutheran (ELCA). (Online source)

TPP being “ecumenical in the broadest sense of that term,” combined with its popularity in dying mainline denominations such as the Episcopal Church, United Methodist Church, and the ELCA, explains why knowledge expert Dr. Cynthia Woolever, who wrote the edition of TPP in question, would be so enamored with the EC. It’s also telling when we know that Dr. Woolever:

directed the U.S. Congregational Life Survey. About 300,000 worshipers in more than 2,000 congregations in the United States completed a survey during worship services in April 2001. Worshipers in Australia, England, and New Zealand completed similar surveys. Together, the international effort included about 2 million worshipers and 17,000 congregations across three continents.

The survey included Jewish, Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Buddhist, Unitarian and Protestant denominations. Its purpose was to develop resources to help congregations better understand themselves, identify their strengths, assess their ministries and relate more effectively with their communities. (Online source, emphasis mine)

As we read further we see Dr. Woolever herself has long been involved with the same kind of egregiously ecumenical interfaith/interspiritual “finding God in the Other” as the EC. We find out from Hartford Seminary President Heidi Hadsell that Dr. Woolever:

“has a deep commitment to the vitality of congregations, across denominational lines. She has worked extensively to help faith communities understand what it takes to remain, or become, organizationally vital,”… (Online source)

So it’s really no wonder Dr. Woolever’s musings about the EC in What Can We Learn from the Emerging Church Movement? are so superficial and enthusiastic when she says, “The emerging church movement poses no threat to Christianity. Rather, it enhances its spread and health” (2). The question now becomes: Why is the BGAV pushing this pro-EC propaganda and encouraging Southern Baptists in Virginia to read it?

See also:

SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION AND “INSIGHTFUL” EMERGING CHURCH HERETIC TONY JONES

IN THE EMERGING CHURCH OOZE CONVERSION IS OUT 

APPRISING MINISTRIES WITH A PEEK AT THE COMING SOTERIOLOGY OF EMERGENCE CHRISTIANITY

RADICAL APOSTATES, RICK WARREN AND PETER SCAZZERO

BOB ROBERTS, JR: CHRISTIAN, JEW AND MUSLIM “TRIALOGUE”

PASTOR KEN SILVA—THE HIJACKING OF EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANITY

“INWARD JOURNEY” ESPOUSED BY RICHARD FOSTER IS A FORM OF DIVINATION

SBC PASTOR ED YOUNG JR IN LUXURY COVER-UP? *UPDATED*

*UPDATE* The interested reader is encouraged to examine the additional information in ED YOUNG JR SAYS HE’S SETTING THINGS STRAIGHT.

More bad news for those of us still with the Southern Baptist Convention. In the video below we’re told of an alleged cover up involving popular Southern Baptist pastor Ed Young Jr.

At his A Little Leaven website Christian Research Network contributor Chris Rosebrough adds in Ed Young Luxury Cover Up Uncovered **Updated**:

**Update February 5th at 1:44 PM EST**

I’ve contacted Fellowship Church and given them the opportunity to ’set the record straight’ on my radio program. So far I cannot get straight answers to simple questions.

The questions I believe need to be answered are:

1. Does the church own an $8 million dollar private jet?

2. If the church owns and $8 million dollar private jet then why was it NOT public knowledge?

3. Has Young used the $8 million dollar private jet for personal trips to tropical resorts in the Bahamas and Mexico?

Fact: Until Ed Young answers those questions then there ARE secrets that he’s keeping from his congregation despite his cliams to the opposite. (Online source)

See also:

BUT SOUTHERN BAPTISTS SAY OK TO “BISHOP” T.D.JAKES

LETTER TO ED YOUNG, JR. REGARDING ONENESS PENTECOSTAL DR. T.D. JAKES SHARING THE PULPIT IN HIS SBC CHURCH

SOUTHERN BAPTIST PASTOR ED YOUNG, JR.: CHURCH LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE IS NOT ABOUT THEOLOGY

WORD FAITH MOGUL “BISHOP” T.D. JAKES – A SOUTHERN BAPTIST PREACHER?

SBC SECOND VICE PRESIDENT DR. WILEY DRAKE COMMENTS ON ED YOUNG, JR. SHARING HIS SBC PULPIT AGAIN WITH ONENESS PENTECOSTAL T.D. JAKES

RESPONSE FROM GARY LEDBETTER OF “SOUTHERN BAPTIST TEXAN” CONCERNING DR. T.D. JAKES AT ED YOUNG, JR’S CREATIVE CHURCH CONFERENCE 2007

KEEPING YOU APPRISED OF: T.D. JAKES ON THE TRINITY