More Apostate Wolves

Sorry, but there are simply no better words to describe such folks. They are clearly apostates. And they are clearly wolves in sheep’s clothing, just the kind Jesus warned about. They are seeking to drag the church down into the pit of hell, and take as many folks with them as they can.

We have yet more examples of apostate church leaders leading their flocks astray in order to push their detestable and sinful lifestyles. Instead of agreeing with God about their sin, abhorring it, repenting of it, and turning away from it, they champion it, celebrate it, flaunt it, revel in it, and promote it.

Romans 1:32, speaking directly about the sin of homosexuality, describes these false shepherds to a T: “Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”

Consider this astounding news item: “The Dean of St Albans, Dr Jeffrey John, accused the Church of England of hypocrisy on the issue of homosexuality and said it ‘frankly, doesn’t deserve to be listened to’. Dr John, who is in a celibate civil partnership, was twice in line to become a bishop but his appointment was blocked because of opposition from conservatives within the Church.

“It emerged earlier this year that he has examined the possibility of suing the Church for discrimination because of his treatment. He recently described it as the ‘last refuge of prejudice’. In a highly critical positing on the website of the Out4Marriage campaign, which backs the change, Dr John accuses his own Church of failing to have a Christian attitude to gay marriage.

“‘I am sad because the Church that I love and serve is opposing it, when it should be rejoicing at it,’ he said. ‘And [I am] sad because the Church is meant is show Christ’s face to the world and on this subject, it doesn’t.’ The Church of England has been accused of inconsistency in its attempts to reconcile traditional teachings on sexuality with more liberal interpretations.

“Its current stance is that homosexual people can be priests but must remain celibate because of the Bible’s teaching on sex outside marriage. Yet, at the same time, it is officially opposed to allowing gay couples to marry – although some senior clerics are in favour. In its official response to the Government’s consultation on same-sex marriage, the Church of England even suggested that the move could open the way to disestablishment. Dr John said: ‘If you are gay, please don’t judge God by the Church. The official Church doesn’t speak with integrity on this issue and so, frankly, doesn’t deserve to be listened to.

“‘If you are gay, then please understand that God made you as you are, and loves you as you are, and if you invite him into your relationship, then of course he will bless you and sustain your love just as much as he blesses and sustains any other marriage. I know that’s true from my own experience and that’s why I’m ‘out for marriage’, because I’m sure God is too’.”

OK, so let me see if I have this renegade right: If the church firmly stands on the Word of God on this issue, then it is being “hypocritical” for some reason. It seems the only hypocrite here is this false prophet who pretends to be a Christian and a church leader even as he rejects the clear teachings of Scripture and the church on human sexuality.

In addition, the church “doesn’t deserve to be listened to”. Instead we are supposed to listen to an openly rebellious and sinful church leader pushing his sacrilegious PC rubbish. His fallen and sin-soaked word is to be taken over the clear and unchanging Word of God.

And this rank apostate wants to sue the Church for “discrimination”. Oh really? So when the church is faithful to God’s Word and God’s standards, it is somehow being discriminatory. By this guy’s perverted reasoning if the church did not appoint atheists, Hindus and Muslims into positions of church leadership, it would be guilty of discrimination as well.

Not only that, but the “official Church doesn’t speak with integrity on this issue and so, frankly, doesn’t deserve to be listened to”. Oh really now? So he is telling us that only when the church denies its own doctrinal standards and throws them out in order to be chums with the world and its sin can it have integrity and be listened to. I see.

His last line is certainly a real lulu, the highlight of his degenerate and reprobate mind: “If you are gay, then please understand that God made you as you are, and loves you as you are, and if you invite him into your relationship, then of course he will bless you and sustain your love just as much as he blesses and sustains any other marriage. I know that’s true from my own experience and that’s why I’m ‘out for marriage’, because I’m sure God is too.”

Let me just try that one out with a few other words. “If you are adulterous, then please understand that God made you as you are, and loves you as you are, and if you invite him into your relationship, then of course he will bless you and sustain your love just as much as he blesses and sustains any other marriage. I know that’s true from my own experience and that’s why I’m ‘out for marriage’, because I’m sure God is too.”

“If you are bisexual, in love with a man and a woman, then please understand that God made you as you are, and loves you as you are, and if you invite him into your relationship, then of course he will bless you and sustain your love just as much as he blesses and sustains any other marriage. I know that’s true from my own experience and that’s why I’m ‘out for marriage’, because I’m sure God is too.”

“If you are into children, then please understand that God made you as you are, and loves you as you are, and if you invite him into your relationship, then of course he will bless you and sustain your love just as much as he blesses and sustains any other marriage. I know that’s true from my own experience and that’s why I’m ‘out for marriage’, because I’m sure God is too’.”

Yep, it all sounds perfectly logical and biblical to me. Aren’t we glad we have enlightened minds and progressive spirits like this to set us straight on Christian ethics? Silly old me – there I thought God said what he meant and meant what he said.

But now I have the real story: God’s Word is just a lot of tripe which we can take or leave as we like. It is not true, it is not absolute, it is not binding, and it is not authoritative. We can just treat it as so much mere good advice. And if we want to live in the cesspool of sin, we can just give it the old heave-ho altogether.

If I were in the UK and a leader in this church, I know full well who I would give the heave-ho to. This reprobate should have been dumped years ago. No wonder the church is in such an abominable condition – imagine allowing vicious wolves like this to remain and to destroy the flock of God.

I would hate to be this guy when he meets his Maker. He will have plenty of explaining to do.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9421350/God-backs-gay-marriage-says-Dr-Jeffrey-John.html

[1273 words]

20 Replies to “More Apostate Wolves”

  1. There was a very interesting, yet wholly “forgotten”, sex study done by J.D. Unwin in the 1930’s. This article written by Philip Yancey sums it up…
    “The Lost Sex Study”
    http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/1994/december12/4te080.html
    “If we make a god of sexuality, that god will fail in ways that affect the whole person and perhaps the whole society.”
    Excerpt-
    J. D. Unwin studied 86 different societies. His findings startled many scholars – above all, Unwin himself – because all 86 demonstrated a direct tie between monogamy and the “expansive energy” of civilization.

    Unwin had no Christian convictions and applied no moral judgment: “I offer no opinion about rightness or wrongness.” Nevertheless, he had to conclude, “In human records there is no instance of a society retaining its energy after a complete new generation has inherited a tradition which does not insist on pre-nuptial and post-nuptial continence.”

    God is surely in the details!

    Monica Craver

  2. The beginning of the problem was the 1st inkling of compromise. If it is true that “Its (Church of England) current stance is that homosexual people can be priests but must remain celibate because of the Bible’s teaching on sex outside marriage” then that allowed homosexuals to be in a position of influence. Not mentioning the fact that the “gentleman” in question is in a “celibate” civil union. Who’s he kidding? Would we believe that a heterosexual priest living unmarried with his female partner was actually in a “celibate” relationship?

    A conservative (Sydney) Anglican minister of my acquaintance said he supported the initial decriminalisation of homosexuality because he felt that would create an openness that would allow him to help them. Sadly 15 years after decriminalisation, he greatky regretted that support because he could see the inch turning into a mile turning into (defacto) unlawfulness of Christianity and possibly actual explicit unlawfulness of Christianity in the not too distant future.

    Graeme Cumming

  3. The truth is that this church has lost its integrity and its consistency as long as it allows homosexuals to be ordained as priests. People need to see that God, through his spirit and our repentance can make 180 degree changes in our lives. There are thousands of people who have left the homosexual lifestyle because they were willing to allow Jesus to take their broken lives and fix them, just as every sinner who ever turned to Christ had their broken lives made right by the blood of Christ.

    God does not give us a pat on the back and a license to sin with his forgiveness. He commands us to repent and to sin no more.

    Mario Del Giudice

  4. I agree with Graeme and Mario. If the church had not allowed priests to be homosexual then they would not have this problem. No wonder there is confusion, it is logical to say if homosexuals can be priests then they should be able to marry. But because the church allowed a compromise at the start now they look hypocritical. They should have not gone against Gods word in the first place, now they just look like fools. Very grievous that leaders in the church are allowed to live in open sin and clear disobedience to Gods word. How are to layman able to live holy if the leaders don’t model it.
    Blake Cannon

  5. A couple of years ago I heard an infamous now retired Anglican bishop say “Technically, I’m an atheist”. As an Anglican I know that there are fine, biblical, faithful bishops and other leaders in my denomination, but in some dioceses the bar is set so low that a snake would have trouble slithering under it.

    David Morrison

  6. I seem to remember a few years ago the Australian Uniting Church issued a survey of its membership – looking into attitudes to homosexuality. I can’t remember the exact questions asked but do remember being annoyed at the way the questions were asked and the interpretation of the answers. It asked, for instance whether members accepted gay persons as members but failed to distinguish between celibate persons with a homosexual orientation and those actively involved in gay relationships.
    I am sure there are some genuine Christian people who have a homosexual orientation but choose, in obedience to God, to not live out that inclination and instead live for Christ as celibates. There are many great Christian leaders who spent most or all their lives as singles devoted to Gods work (though it is impossible to know if some of them were dealing with a homosexual inclination).
    I personally have met and have no problem with persons who confess to having a homosexual orientation being members of the church so long as they live according to Gods laws and do not actively engage in homosexual relationships.
    The Uniting Church survey concluded that a large portion of members were supportive of homosexuals in the church of course, but I suspect this misrepresented the truth in that most those saying they supported gay persons in the church did not actually support active homosexual relationships but were only showing sympathetic support to those struggling with sin in their lives.
    I feel many churches (Anglican included) have failed to clearly distinguish between a person who struggles against same sex attractions and those who are actively engaged in homosexual relations in defiance of biblical truth.
    The former deserve our support and to be loved and welcomed in the church. We all need to be encouraged to fight sin whatever our sexual predilections. However the latter need to be consistently reprimanded and called to repentance for their behaviour.
    Gail Gifford

  7. Good point Bill, well made. This is the sort of unauthentic drivel that has turned people away from the church in droves. The clergy should humbly realise that they cannot “know what God thinks” but have to defer to the words of Jesus Christ. If only they would deliver more of the source material, which they should have studied, and less of their self-serving interpretations, then I think people, gay and straight, would be more interested. To say “I’m out for marriage because I’m sure God is too” is a presumption too far.

    Rachel Smith, UK

  8. The Bible says that the devil is out to make war against the saints at the end of time and its seems working from the within the church is one of his most effective methods. Many churches now look more like the world than the world does. Nothing will improve until people get back to the word and start studying for themselves and stop believing what dubious pastors and religious leaders happily feed them. “You are what you eat”, they say.
    Greg Sadler

  9. Dear Bill, In my late father-in law’s opinion, the Anglican Church lost its credibility when they followed the dictats of Henry Viii. That Anglican clergyman should realise that God does back gay marriage, so long as it is between a man and a woman. The homosexual activists have distorted the meaning of the word “gay”, and it seems you have fallen for it.
    Regards, Franklin Wood

  10. I made a comment on another of your posts, Bill a week ago about what Rowland Croucher said on the ABC. Since then someone suggested that maybe the media had misrepresented him like they often do to Fred Nile. So, if that is the case, I would rejoice and appologize for my comment.
    Gail, soon as churches canvas their members for their opinions rather than sticking uncompromisingly to what the word of God says, they are in trouble, we should hear the warning bells and see the flashing lights and turn back to “the Way” in repentance and contrition.
    Many blessings
    Ursula Bennett

  11. Thanks Ursula. Nothing at all to apologise about. He has bought the homosexual agenda hook, line and sinker, and is 100% is favour of homosexual marriage.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  12. Great point that you make Monica C. I “discovered” J. D. Unwin’s book in the ANU library. Old (1934) but the message had a huge impact on me. How is it that his unequivocal conclusions are so brushed under the carpet? He was no Christian, but he found without exception, in 86 different civilizations, that any society that stuck with monogamy flourished. It seems that Father God has set this drive as a powerful one, but one that must be properly bridled for us to be our best.
    Ian Brearley

  13. Hi Bill – slightly off topic – have you caught up with the controversy surrounding Chick Fil A after a recent media report in which one of the founders unapologetically admitted that they support true biblical marriage?

    The totalitarian attacks on their businesses are astounding. Lets hope that Christians in the US stand behind them and continue (or even increase) their patronage and that people see this for what it really is.
    Can you imagine if the shoe were on the other foot and City Mayors, Facebook, Universities, business suppliers declared boycotts towards businesses who supported same sex marriage?
    There would be the most tremendous outcry of discrimination and bigotry… If I was in the USA, I would be eating Chick Fil A for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

    Regards,
    Annette Williams

  14. The best evidence IMHO that homosexuality is not genetic comes from the study of identical twins. If it were genetic, then twins would be either both gay or both straight. But in fact there are plenty of examples of identical twins where one is gay and one is straight. They were featured in a TV doco on twins several months ago.
    John Bennett

  15. Another good blog post Bill,

    In my view it would do the Church of England good to stop being the established church. A state church is inevitably compromised with pressure to accept everyone regardless of whether they meet God’s standard or not. Pressure to lower standards to that of society rather than letting the Holy Spirit raise people up to God’s standards. Considering the Church of England’s beginnings due to the King of England wanting the blessing of the church on his adulterous intentions and that through the years other so-called Heads of the Church often (but not always) set a bad example it’s hardly surprising it’s hardly surprising that they’re still struggling with issues to do with sexual sin.

    It would be far easier for the Church of England to choose to maintain a biblical stance on issues such as homosexuality, remarriage after divorce, infant baptism etc. if they weren’t compromised by being a state church. Some of these issues are perhaps contentious such as remarriage after divorce and infant baptism but they would be more open to debate. Certainly most/all (depending on which view on a passage in Matthew is correct – I’m inclined to believe that Jesus didn’t contradict the other passages in the gospels where he said it wasn’t permitted) cases of remarriage today go against the teachings of Jesus. As for infant baptism there is debate there too. A household need not include any children (the household was merely everyone living in the house that the master owned including slaves), so the passage about a whole household being baptised shouldn’t really be used as proof there was infant baptism (though it could be used as something that might suggest there was). Indeed the general pattern in Acts is for people to believe then be baptised. Moreover some consider baptism to require full immersion (I wasn’t, but I was baptised as a teenager) which would be not a good thing to do to an infant.

    Regards,
    Matt Vinay

  16. GOLD!! I completely agree… this is crazy, that any church would allow a man to speak against the Word of God, and teach others his perverted opinions on the bible…

    …come on CHURCH lets get back to the BIBLE!!

    “I would hate to be this guy when he meets his Maker. He will have plenty of explaining to do.”
    AMEN! I think it’ll look something like the description in Matthew 7!!

    Elisha Mckenzie

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: