Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Apostasy’ Category

H/T Stand up for the Truth:

Kim Clement is a self-proclaimed modern day prophet, who makes predictions that do not come true. (That means Kim Clement is a ___ ____.)  Clement is part of the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR), a dangerous movement that has ensnared many on the conservative side of Christianity. Here is his latest blood-moon Roman utterance:

Says Clement:

…I was in a state of an “ecstatic” perception, caught into a prophetic elevation, and during this moment I caught a glimpse of a variety of religious garments and oil being poured on them. Then I saw Pope Francis. Over the next few hours and especially when I went to my Garden to pray the next morning, I realized how BIG this global event was going to be. A few days later I received a phone call confirming that what I had seen was already in the making. This Easter weekend, the prophetic utterance will be released when we gather together on Saturday.

On the very night/day of the blood moon, April 14/15, this all unfolded without us actually realizing it until later.
Israel was affected by the blood moon in 1948-49 and in 1967-68, but this blood moon (April 15th) was the beginning of a global shaking that will affect the Roman Catholic Church.

Read Full Post »

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.”

Clearly a statement that reveals an inability or a refusal to look beyond ones self in regards to what is right and wrong!

In the first sentence he says that scripture does not state much in regards to morality! But then in the second sentence he says that he does not care what scripture says in regards to what is wrong! So which is it? Scripture does not say anything in regards to morality, or it does and you just do not care what it says!

This sadly is the core of subjective truth! Picking and choosing which parts of anything that you take in as right or wrong, but then being able to go back and say that what you originally accepted as wrong is now no longer wrong, with no coherent justification of any kind for the change in your beliefs!

And people accepted this guy as a “Christian musician”?

from Charisma News:

Beginning on Tuesday, April 21st, 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 10 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% 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 TurekMatthew D. StaverErwin 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. 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 5 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.

Read Full Post »

from Stand Up for The Truth:

I guess I don’t really expect musicians in Christian rock bands to be theological leaders. We follow them for their music, not their biblical literacy. Although at some point we do expect them to act like Christains, especially since they claim in their marketing to be one of us.

So when Jars of Clay frontman Dan Haseltine tweeted support of gay marriage yesterday, fans who expressed disappointment were called haters. In tweet after tweet these past two days, Haseltine doubled-down on his position:

Metro Weekly reported the story this morning, which quickly went viral:

“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.” He went on to write “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. I just don’t see a negative effect to allowing gay marriage. No societal breakdown, no war on traditional marriage. ?? Anyone?”

For many fans, this is all quite new and upsetting. Dan Haseltine is a Christian who has a Christian band playing for Christian churches and youth groups, so naturally we are heartbroken that he is shaking his fist in Jesus’ face. When did Dan depart from truth? Apparently he has been “out” about his beliefs – or rather about walking away from them – for quite a while. In ablog he wrote about his new album two summers ago, he’s pretty clear about what he no longer believes:

…since the themes of the record are very far from evangelical Christianity, the church community will most likely not embrace this record.  Which, on one hand, is a relief.  I am pretty weary from years of pretending to be more of something than I am.  I am tired of carrying evangelical expectations on my shoulders.  I have never been so sure of my faith that I was able to find a true home in the church communities where we played most of our shows.

Our particular style of writing and the perspective that we have written from has not been an easy fit into an artistic community that has such a massive agenda and only a single idea of how that agenda gets accomplished.  I don’t fit there.  I may have at one point.  I did grow up as a youth group kid wearing a t-shirt with a picture of Jesus on it.  I did drive a car with a “Christian” bumper sticker on it.  And at one point, I was sure of who God was, and how God operated.  But I am not that way now.  And so it is impossible to write from that old version of myself. I am in the middle space.          SOURCE

Here is the story that first alerted most people to Dan’s departure from Christianity. We need to be praying for this man, that he confesses and repents, and finds forgiveness through the shed blood of the One he mocks. . . .

Read full article here.

Read Full Post »

from lighthouse trails research:

By Roger Oakland
Understand the Times, International

In February of 2013, Understand The Times published a commentary on our website titledWhat’s Next For Rick Warren.

In this commentary, we provided evidence to show that Warren and Tony Blair were partnering together with the Roman Catholic Church in the formation of a P.E.A.C.E. Plan that leads towards the formation of a global religion in the name of Christ for the cause of peace. Documentation for this premise can be supported by numerous statements that both Warren and Blair have made publically from messages they have given or articles that have been written explaining their ideas.

While many who read that commentary doubted or denied such a Warren-Rome connection, a new YouTube interview with Rick Warren and Raymond Arroyo of EWTN (published and posted on Apr 11, 2014), reveals the statements we made about the Warren-Rome partnership were accurate prophetic warnings with regard to what would happen in the future.

The YouTube description of the interview with Warren and Arroyo states:

“Part II of our exclusive interview RICK WARREN, pastor of Saddleback Church in Southern California. Rick talks about the expansion of his ministry abroad, the Vatican delegation that recently came to Orange County to study his church’s style of evangelization, and which television channel he finds himself watching most often and the show that draws him.”

We highly recommend you watch the entire 30-minute interview, which was done at Saddleback Church at some date previous to the publishing date of April 11, 2-14. The interview is loaded with information that provides further insight into Rick Warren’s pathway to Rome that he has actually been supporting for quite some time. For instance, in 2005, Warren created the Purpose Driven Life Catholics program as you can see from the image below (which is taken from Rick Warren’s website). (To continue reading this article, click here.)

Read Full Post »

from Now The End Begins:

UPDATE MARCH 29/2014: This story caused an impact heard ’round the world, and within 24 hours it forced Hillsong United pastor Brian Houston to issue the standard quickie denial of the things he said in the video clip below. In interest of fairness, click here to read the full context his denial of Chrislam. You can make up your own mind if he is sincere or not, and if he meant what he originally said or not. We take it at his word and believe he meant what he said in the video segment below. The story stands.

One by one, the huge mega-churches with their 5,000+ member congregations are beginning to reveal their true agenda. The Emergent Church, powered by the Rick Warren machine, is a huge promoter of Chrislam, the demonic hybrid of Christianity and Islam. Now Hillsong United in Australia has thrown their hat into the same ring.

Listen to the word of Hillsong United leader Brian Houston:

“How do you view God? In a desert there’s two types of birds: there’s vultures and there’s hummingbirds. One lives off dead carcasses, rotting meat. The other lives off the beautiful, sweet nectar in a particular flower on a particular desert plant. In the same desert, they both find what they’re looking for.

Do you know – take it all the way back into the Old Testament and the Muslim and youwe actually serve the same God. Allah to a Muslim, to us Abba Father God. And of course through history, those views have changed greatly. But lets make sure that we view God through the eyes of Jesus, the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the beauty of a Saviour, the loving open inclusive arms of a loving God. And that way we’ll lead out of that and you’ll be purposeful about your leadership and you’ll draw people just like the Lord Jesus always does through the power of the Holy Spirit.”

Chrislam is a LIE, and it can damn your soul to Hell if you believe it. The God of the Bible and the god of Islam have nothing in common. One is real, and the other is fake. Obviously, Brian Houston cannot tell the difference.

Anyone who tries to tell you that God and Allah are the same is a liar, and you should run from that false teaching as fast as you can.

Read Full Post »

Humanist ideology looks at the story of Noah as just another cultural myth story, on a par with ALL other cultural myth stories from ALL other “religions” or belief systems.

They lump all of them together as attempts by each culture to impart some common “wisdom” in their own individual cultural context.

This is why it is so horrible that a supposed preacher of the Gospel would encourage members of their “flock” to go see the movie and even worse promote such an abomination!

As that is what this movie is, an abomination that is not even accurate to the original story, and the makers of the movie do not believe that they have to be accurate, as they are humanists as well, and they have the right to retell the story in their own contrived context to create a NEW myth story that fits in with their own goals!

from TruthKeepers:

I watched a portion of a church service in Birmingham, Alabama where the pastor declared that he was excited about the Noah movie and encouraged people to go see it. That church was promoting the movie with large background of the movie poster behind the stage and a series of teachings on the story of Noah. Although there are few leading professing Christians lending their support to it, I believe that Christians will still flock to see it. A precedent was set with the Christian promotion of the Son of God movie. There is no moral authority left for discouraging professing Christians from watching the Noah movie. But some people are wondering where are all the reviews and warnings from people like me about the Noah movie. After all, a lot of time and effort was spent on trying to warn Christians about the New Age Son of God movie. I will tell you why I haven’t spent as much time on the Noah movie as I did on the Son of God movie.

My first reason is simply because it would be completely fruitless. Professing Christians that would go to the Son of God movie in spite of all the evidence that it portrayed a New Age Jesus will go to see the Noah movie. Nothing can now stop them from doing whatever their flesh dictates in regard to religious Hollywood movies.

Second, there is nothing to expose about the producer or his intent in making the movie. The movie Noah was produced by an atheist that bragged about the fact that he avoided following the biblical script. Therefore, his true colors and agenda do not have to be pried out of the data about his past.

Third, the previews from people that have read the script or watched the movie were all consistent that it was indeed not a biblical movie. Some the reviews that were released today stated that Christians who were sticklers for biblical accuracy (uh, that would be me) would be disappointed in the movie. So why should I spend the time and effort attempting to expose what is already clearly exposed?

Therefore, I confess that I have nothing to say about the Noah movie that has not already been said. But I do have a few questions for the professing Christians that supported the Son of God movie. For the ones who supported the Christless Son of God movie, I wonder if they are going to support the Godless Noah movie as well. If not, why not? It’s a given that Noah is not as important to the integrity of Gospel as the Christ Jesus. Oh, I get it. With the Son of God movie, they were willing to accept a percentage of error that included distortion of the true Son of God. But now they have their limits as to how much distortion of the truth they will tolerate in Noah’s story. There were those of us that were not willing to tolerate any distortion of God’s Son, our Lord and Savior. They mocked and chastised us for sticking to our limit.  To be fair, they should practice what they preached.  They should violate their standard as they demanded of us.

So I say to Matthew Hagee, Rick Warren, and the rest, go ahead and support the Noah movie. After all, why be judgmental, tale bearers, demonic, and let’s see, what else was it that they called us? Oh, I remember now; haters and resisters of God’s kingdom work. After all, why should they hate on the kindly atheist “doing God’s kingdom work” producing the Noah movie when they defended the New Age heretics that produced the Son of God movie?

Read Full Post »

a little compromise here, a little compromise there!

from NBC News:

The prominent Christian relief agency World Vision said Monday it will hire Christians who are in same-sex marriages, a dramatic policy change on one of the most divisive social issues facing religious groups.

Richard Stearns, president of the international humanitarian relief group, announced the hiring change for the United States in a letter to staff. Stearns said the World Vision board had prayed for years about how to handle the issue as Christian denominations took different stands on recognizing same-sex relationships.

The board and I wanted to prevent this divisive issue from tearing World Vision apart and potentially crippling our ability to accomplish our vital kingdom mission of living and serving the poorest of the poor in the name of Christ,” Stearns wrote in the letter.

The agency’s new hiring policy was first reported by Christianity Today magazine.

Based in Washington state and started by evangelicals, World Vision now has an international operating budget of nearly $1 billion and conducts economic development and emergency relief projects around the world. Last year, the charity reported receiving 18 percent of its annual funding from the federal government.

Federal agencies have for several years faced pressure to require any group that receives federal funding to end any hiring restrictions on gays and lesbians. Stearns insisted the humanitarian relief group wasn’t responding to any outside lobbying or concerns about government funding.

“I want to be clear that we have not endorsed same-sex marriage, but we have chosen to defer to the authority of local churches on this issue,” Stearns said.

World Vision requires employees to affirm, through the agency’s statement of faith or the Apostle’s Creed, that they follow Christ. Stearns said the agency will continue to follow that policy, including requiring employees to remain celibate outside of marriage. World Vision says it hires staff from dozens of denominations with different views of gay relationships.

“I want to reassure you that we are not sliding down some slippery slope of compromise, nor are we diminishing the authority of Scripture in our work,” Stearns wrote. “We are the same World Vision you have always believed in.”

A few other conservative religious charities have tried to take similar steps, prompting controversy and a drop in donations, but World Vision is the largest and most prominent by far to do so.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 210 other followers

%d bloggers like this: