Liberty University Professor, Karen Swallow Prior, has been under a lot of scrutiny on social media for the last several days regarding her stance on homosexuality. The argument is that she believes homosexuality to be sinful, therefore, she does not affirm it. But do her actions say otherwise?

First, let’s define the term affirm. While the Oxford American College Dictionary defines affirm in one way as “to state as a fact,” it offers a second definition, in which we will focus on here since it’s more applicable and equally valid in this case.

2 [WITH OBJECT] Offer (someone) emotional support or encouragement: there are five common ways parents fail to affirm their children good teachers know that students need to be both affirmed and challenged
2.1Give (life) a heightened sense of value, typically through the experience of something emotionally or spiritually uplifting: it is a rich and challenging motion picture that both affirms life and emphasizes its fragility

I think everyone involved in this argument can affirm (no pun intended) that Dr. Prior has both offered emotional support or encouragement to homosexuals, as well as given them a heightened sense of value emotionally, and spiritually.

There is no way out of the argument that Dr. Prior is affirming homosexuals, according to this definition. So this leaves us with the question; is affirming homosexuals in this way biblical? Let’s examine this from a scriptural perspective, as Christians must always do.

How did Jesus treat unrepentant sinners?

After this he went out and saw a tax collector named Levi, sitting at the tax booth. And he said to him, “Follow me.” And leaving everything, he rose and followed him.

And Levi made him a great feast in his house, and there was a large company of tax collectors and others reclining at table with them. And the Pharisees and their scribes grumbled at his disciples, saying, Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners? And Jesus answered them, Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. Luke 5:27-32

Upon first reading this passage, one might think that this is no different than what Dr. Prior has been doing. After all, she “believes homosexuality is a sin,” right? But there are a few key phrases in this passage that should be looked at a little closer. First, Jesus said to the tax collector, “follow me.” When Jesus used this phrase, it was a call to repentance, not just the physical act of walking behind him. The next statement says that Levi “left everything,” and followed Jesus. This is an act of repentance. Further, Jesus tells the Pharisees that he is there for the purpose of calling them to repentance.

Is Dr. Prior asking her homosexual friends to drop everything, and follow Jesus? This is a question that should be answered.

I know Dr. Prior and her supporters have stated over and over that she “believes homosexuality to be a sin,” but does she call them to repentance? Do her friends know, without a shadow of a doubt, that if they don’t repent of their sin, they will perish, and have eternal conscious torment? Is she proclaiming this boldly and clearly?

Her writings, videos, pictures, and comments suggest otherwise.

Advocate of the grossly unbiblical idea of “Gay Christianity,” and gay activist, Rachel Held Evans came to defend Prior with the following comment:

@LoveLifeLitGod @TomBuck Here’s what it is: Karen’s clearly not affirming. But she doesn’t treat LGBT people like crap….

— Rachel Held Evans (@rachelheldevans) July 16, 2015

John 15:18-19 says:

If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.

Homosexuals love Karen Swallow Prior. Brandon Ambrosino, a gay student of Dr. Prior at Liberty University, has stated this. Pictures that Karen has taken with homosexuals, and homosexual advocates also suggest this (see here and here). And further, homosexual advocates like Rachel Held Evans have repeatedly come to her defense.

I want to be clear, anyone who thinks (like Rachel Held Evans) that one can continue to live in unrepentant sin is NOT a Christian.

So we can conclude one of the following from this:

1.) Either Karen Swallow Prior is loved by the world because she doesn’t proclaim the whole counsel of God.

2.) The Scriptures, according to John 14:18-19 are false.

The only logical conclusion for a bible-believing Christian to come to is number 1.

Prior’s supporters continue to defend her by leveling the accusation of hate against those who dissent from her manner of approach towards homosexuals. This is a grossly unbiblical position to take. 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 says:

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

Now, one can argue that this is Paul directing this command specifically to the Corinthians because they had a problem with sexual immorality that was visible within their church. Short of being legalistic about it, this is true. However, there are practical and applicable truths here that must be considered. The reason “Purge the evil person from among you” is in quotations, is because this is a quote from Deuteronomy 17:17. The idea is that immoral people were defiling God’s people by pretending to be part of them.

This is exactly what is happening in our church today. There are homosexual activists, and “Gay Christian” propagandists running rampant throughout the Church, and they are being made to feel comfortable.

Matthew Vines is not a Christian, but he calls himself one–we must not eat with him.

Brandon Ambrosino is not a Christian, but he believes himself to be one–we must not eat with him.

Rachel Held Evans is not a Christian, but she calls herself one–we must not eat with her.

We must not allow these people to think that we believe them to be Christians. They must be purged from our churches and congregations unless they repent.

We must love them.

It is not loving to allow people to believe that they can be a Christian, participate in Christian sacraments and call themselves Christians while identifying themselves as homosexuals. We must not give them emotional support, or comfort, outside of the strict proclamation of the truth of the Gospel.

The truth is this:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Cor 6:9-10

and

I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. – Luke 13:3-5

I write this, not to further condemn Dr. Prior, or anyone else, but to simply proclaim the truth of the Gospel. If anyone is failing to proclaim our state of depravity, our deadness in sin and failing to call people to repentance and faith in Christ’s saving work through his death, burial, and resurrection, then that, people, is affirmation.

1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.

2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)

3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.

4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)

5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.

7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

The decree by Caesar Augustus that all the world be taxed was a census, in which everyone must travel back to their familial city of origin. Many have argued that this census, according to the historian Josephus, was dated around 6 A.D., 10 years after Herod died. This is when Cyrenius (Quirinius) held the political title of “Governor.” However, the word translated “governer” in verse 2 is “ἡγεμονεύω,” or “hēgemoneuō” which means in a broader sense a ruling officer. Cyrenius (Quirinius) was likely a military officer placed in charge of the census by Augustus at the time. So this is probably not the same census are recorded by Josephus that occurred around 6 A.D. The practical solution to this problem was that there was probably another census that happened before Jesus birth. Most scholars date Jesus birth between 6 and 4 B.C. According to Caesar Augustus’ Deeds of the Divine, Augustus himself notes several major censuses that he decreed between 28 B.C. and 14 A.D.

And Joseph, being of the lineage of David went to the City of David to register along with Mary. Joseph’s lineage traced back to David is important. In 2 Samuel 7, God promises a savior that would be of the seed, or lineage of David. The Gospels provide this lineage in two ways. While Luke’s genealogy (Luke 3:23-38) traces the biological ancestors of Jesus through Mary, Matthew’s genealogy traces the kingly line of Christ through Joseph, his legal father. This leaves no room for doubt that Jesus was, in fact, the promised savior through the lineage of David.

The prophet Micah prophesied, over 700 years before Jesus’ birth, from this very town:

But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days. – Micah 5:2

It has been fulfilled.

While they were in the City of David (Bethlehem), Jesus was born, and laid into a manger. Likely due to the crowd draw to the city by the census, there was no room in the inn for Joseph and Mary to stay. It is unknown for sure what the exact location of the birth of Jesus was. It may have been a barn, or stable, but could have also been the lower level of a home, that was set aside for the animals to sleep. We do know that Jesus was born at night. At any rate, the fact that Jesus was born among animals indicates his intentions to humble himself as a meek servant. This fascinating display of humility right out of his mother’s womb would set the stage for who he would be during his entire ministry on this earth.

In this age of progress, religious opinions move at railway speed. Within the last few weeks many have made an open advance of a very special kind; we say an open advance, for we suspect that secretly they had for a long time harbored the errors which now they have avowed. And what a revelation it is! Here, one sees a “Moderate” declaring his advance to “another gospel” in the boldest terms; and there, another, highly esteemed for his supposed love of the truth, stubbing it after the subtle manner of its most malicious foes. While some of the most perverted cunningly endeavor to appear orthodox, others of a braver nature come out in their true colors, and astonish us with the glaring hue of their heresy. That which makes manifest is light; and, however much we may deplore the unwelcome discoveries of the present controversy, we ought to be thankful that they are made, for it is better for us to know where we are, and with whom we are associating.

The idea of a progressive gospel seems to have fascinated many. To us that notion is a sort of cross-breed between nonsense and blasphemy. After the gospel has been found effectual in the eternal salvation of untold multitudes, it seems rather late in the day to alter it; and, since it is the revelation of the all-wise and unchanging God, it appears somewhat audacious to attempt its improvement. When we call up before our mind’s eye the gentlemen who have set themselves this presumptuous task, we feel half inclined to laugh; the case is so much like the proposal of moles to improve the light of the sun. Their gigantic intellects are to hatch out the meanings of the Infinite! We think we see them brooding over hidden truths to which they lend the aid of their superior genius to accomplish their development!

Hitherto they have not hatched out much worth rearing. Their chickens are so much of the Roman breed, that we sometimes seriously suspect that, after all, Jesuitical craft may be at the bottom of this “modern thought.” It is singular that, by the way of free-thought, men should be reaching the same end as others arrived at by the path of superstition. Salvation by works is one distinctive doctrine of the new gospel: in many forms this is avowed and gloried in—not, perhaps, in exact words, but in declarations quite unmistakable. The Galatian heresy is upon us with a vengeance: in the name of virtue and morality, justification by faith and salvation by free grace are bitterly assailed. Equally a child of darkness is this New Purgatory. It is taught that men can escape if they neglect the great salvation. No longer is the call, “Today, if ye will hear his voice”; for the tomorrow of the next state will answer quite as well. Of course, if men may be gradually upraised from sin and ruin in the world to come, common humanity would lead us to pray that the process may go on rapidly. We are hearing every now and again of “a night of prayers for the dead,” among certain priests of the Establishment. Nor is it among Ritualists alone, or even mainly, for the other day, at a meeting for prayer, an eminent believer in this notion prayed heartily for the devil; and his prayer, upon the theory of the restitution of all the sinful, was most natural. Prayers for the dead and prayers for the devil! Shades of Knox and Latimer, where are ye? How easy will it be to go from prayers for the dead to payment to good men for special supplications on their behalf! Of course if a devout person will spend an hour in praying a deceased wife out of her miseries, a loving husband will not let him exercise his supplications for nothing. It would be very mean of him if he did. “Purgatory Pick-purse,” as our Protestant forefathers called it, is upon us again, having entered by the back-door of infidel speculation instead of by the front entrance of pious opinion.

Nor is this all; for our “improvers” have pretty nearly obliterated the hope of such a heaven as we have all along expected. Of course, the reward of the righteous is to be of no longer continuance than the punishment of the wicked. Both are described as “everlasting” in the same verse, spoken by the same sacred lips; and as the “punishment” is made out to be only “age-lasting,” so must the “life” be. Worse even than this, if worse can be, it is taught by some of these “improvers” that even the blessed of the Father are by no means blessed overmuch; for, according to the latest information, even they will have to undergo a sort of purgatorial purification in the world to come. There are degrees in the inventiveness of the nineteenth- century theologians; but, to our mind, it is the license given to this inventiveness, even when it is most moderate, which is the root of the whole mischief. What is to be taught next? And what next?

Do men really believe that there is a gospel for each century? Or a religion for each fifty years? Will there be in heaven saints saved according to a score sorts of gospel? Will these agree together to sing the same song? And what will the song be? Saved on different footings, and believing different doctrines, will they enjoy eternal concord, or will heaven itself be only a new arena for disputation between varieties of faiths?

We shall, on the supposition of an ever-developing theology, owe a great deal to the wisdom of men. God may provide the marble; but it is man who will carve the statue. It will no longer be true that God has hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes; but the babes will be lost in hopeless bewilderment, and carnal wisdom will have fine times for glorying. Scientific men will be the true prophets of our Israel, even though they deny Israel’s God; and instead of the Holy Spirit guiding the humble in heart, we shall see the enthronement of “the spirit of the age,” whatever that may mean. “The world by wisdom knew not God,” so says the apostle of the ages past; but the contrary is to be our experience nowadays. New editions of the gospel are to be excogitated by the wisdom of men, and we are to follow in the wake of “thoughtful preachers,” whose thoughts are not as God’s thoughts. Verily this is the deification of man! Nor do the moderns shrink even from this. To many of our readers it may already be known that it is beginning to be taught that God himself is but the totality of manhood, and that our Lord Jesus only differed from us in being one of the first men to find out that he was God: he was but one item of that race, which, in its solidarity, is divine.

It is thought to be mere bigotry to protest against the mad spirit which is now loose among us. Pan-indifferentism is rising like the tide; who can hinder it? We are all to be as one, even though we agree in next to nothing. It is a breach of brotherly love to denounce error. Hail, holy charity! Black is white; and white is black. The false is true; the true is false; the true and the false are one. Let us join hands, and never again mention those barbarous, old-fashioned doctrines about which we are sure to differ. Let the good and sound men for liberty’s sake shield their “advanced brethren”; or, at least, gently blame them in a tone which means approval. After all, there is no difference, except in the point of view from which we look at things: it is all in the eye, or, as the vulgar say, “it is all my eye”! In order to maintain an open union, let us fight as for dear life against any form of sound words, since it might restrain our liberty to deny the doctrines of the Word of God!

But what if earnest protests accomplish nothing, because of the invincible resolve of the infatuated to abide in fellowship with the inventors of false doctrine? Well, we shall at least have done our duty. We are not responsible for success. If the plague cannot be stayed, we can at least die in the attempt to remove it. Every voice that is lifted up against Anythingarianism is at least a little hindrance to its universal prevalence. It may be that in some one instance a true witness is strengthened by our word, or a waverer is kept from falling; and this is no mean reward. It is true that our testimony may be held up to contempt; and may, indeed, in itself be feeble enough to be open to ridicule; but yet the Lord, by the weak things of the world, has overcome the mighty in former times, and he will do so again. We cannot despair for the church or for the truth, while the Lord lives and reigns; but, assuredly, the conflict to which the faithful are now summoned is not less arduous than that in which the Reformers were engaged. So much of subtlety is mixed up with the whole business, that the sword seems to fall upon a sack of wool, or to miss its mark. However, plain truth will cut its way in the end, and policy will ring its own death-knell.

Not with this man, or that Council, or that Union, are the lovers of the old gospel at war at this present; but with the whole body of unbelief which is now attempting to borrow the Christian name, and effect a settlement within Christian territory. This spirit is in all the churches, more or less; indeed, it seems to be in the air. The prince of the power of the air is loosed in an extraordinary manner for a season, misleading even the godly, and triumphing greatly in those whose willing minds yield full assent to his deceitful teachings. On this account our fears are great for the Baptist churches, which have in former ages been the strongholds of the gospel of the grace of God. Those communities which avowedly confess the truth of God can deal with the spirit of unbelief, at least in a measure; but those bodies of men which hold no settled doctrines, and make no profession of believing anything definite, are like houses with open doors, inviting the unclean spirit to enter, and take up his abode. We have tried to deal with the spirit of error in its abstract form; but we have also recommended, as a practical action on the behalf of the Baptist Denomination (which we believe to be upon the whole sound in the faith), that it should accept an Evangelical basis. Its churches and Associations in most cases have such a basis; why not the Union which is made up of them? This question is to come before the Baptist Union at its next general meeting. Should the proposal of an Evangelical basis be carried out, we shall greatly rejoice, for it may be a rebuke to the incipient party of error, which has of late talked so exceeding loudly; but if this is not done, other and stronger measures must be taken, which will enable faithful men to bear their testimony without having it marred by their fellowship with evil. The faithful will take steps to enable them to carry out practical work for the Lord, without the depressing suspicion that their zeal may, after all, be only building nests to be in the future occupied by the hatchers of false doctrine. It may be that, in the Baptist Denomination, the purifying process will be long and painful; but we trust that grace will be given to true believers to persevere till it is accomplished, or else to come forth from the baseless Union, and separate themselves for the defense of the truth of God. We fear that the outlook for certain other denominations is not nearly so hopeful. In their case, what is wanted in the gracious remnant is “a larger hope” than they have at present, that even yet the forces of falsehood can be overcome, since the battle is the Lord’s.

Christians, are you outraged at Planned Parenthood for trafficking human body parts? Are you absolutely livid that a 21 year old kid can go into a church and kill 9 innocent people? Are you fed up with economic problems, government failures and the loss of individual rights and freedoms?

What are you going to do about it?

Why should it come as such a surprise to us that Planned Parenthood could do such a horrific thing? Are they not already murdering innocent children? Where are you? Are you on the front lines protesting at abortion clinics?

Why should Dylann Roof not have murdered those people? He obviously wasn’t afraid of the consequences.

Do you really expect the lost to have any semblance of Godly compassion towards human life? They can’t, they’re lost. This isn’t to say that all non-Christians are murderers, however, it is to say that only Christians believe that the unborn are human beings, made in the image of God, knit together by Him in their mother’s womb (Psalm 139:13). And it is only upon this foundation that we can objectively argue that life is sacred, to be preserved, respected, and protected. All other arguments are subjective.

Further, does it come as any surprise that the SCOTUS defamed marriage, and stripped the states of their individual rights? Are you outraged about it? Were you outraged before it happened?

All of these, while outrageous, are not the problem. They are merely symptoms of the problem. The problem is sin–our sinful state.

While a righteous indignation toward these atrocious acts of violence and persecution are good, why do we wait until it’s too late to be outraged? We absolutely should be offended by the blatant attack on our Father. John Calvin once said,

A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God’s truth is attacked and yet would remain silent.

Why does the selling of human body parts of murdered children for profit outrage us, but abortion didn’t? What makes abortion worse now than it was before this news came out? Is this not God’s judgement upon a nation that has thumbed it’s nose at him for decades?

Are you now more motivated by these events to do something about it? Or are you going to sit there and complain, and act infuriated by it for a while, then forget about it? If you weren’t affronted by sin before all of this, then your silence speaks speaks volumes about what’s in your heart. I’m certainly not innocent of this either, but it’s high time we recognize the real issue here.

We cannot expect a sinful world to act like Christians. They are lost, unregenerate, and in need of a savior. Their passion is their own lusts (1 Thes 4:5). Romans 1:28-31 gives us the description of a lost person’s state:

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

And Romans, Chapter 6 has this to say about those who have been saved:

But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness… For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness… But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. (Romans 6:17-18, 20, 22)

So, unless you’re going to get up and go take the only solution to the world’s problem of sin to them, then you really have no reason to complain. The solution is Christ crucified for our sin, and raised to conquer death, and our work begins in the Church. Our church has become tolerant of sin. We have hid behind the comfort of our suburban lives and constitutional freedoms for far too long. We’ve been too lazy to engage the world with the Gospel, but quick to get behind politics. The Church has become a social and cultural engagement program, rather than a testimony of God’s grace through His Son Jesus Christ.

You call yourself a Christian. You pretend to be taken back by the sin you see in the world, yet you’re lying to yourself. If you really cared, you’d do something about it. But you don’t, because your faith is dead.

So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. – James 2:17

It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist and as to what Antichrist is no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the Popery in the Church of Rome, there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name. . .It wounds Christ, because it robs Christ of His glory, because it puts sacramental efficacy in the place of His atonement and lifts a piece of bread into the place of the Savior and a few drops of water into the place of the Holy Spirit and puts a mere fallible man like ourselves up as the Vicar of Christ on earth. If we pray against it, because it is against Him, we shall love the persons though we hate their errors; we shall love their souls though we loathe and detest their dogmas. And so the breath of our prayers will be sweetened because we turn our faces toward Christ when we pray.

– Charles H. Spurgeon ¹

By far, the greatest evil in the church are the works of darkness that creep in unaware to dilute the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, while building a false church that serves the interest of man. One of the major players in these days of iniquitous works is the world-wide organization known as Hillsong Church. Hillsong has fed much to the evangelical church in the way of wickedness through it’s many programs, especially its music production program. Hillsong’s music is played in nearly every evangelical church in the world, as well as many Roman Catholic churches. The purchase of every piece of “worshipful art” from them goes to support their works and pays homage to their apostasy.

Does your church worship service include Hillsong’s music?

Hillsong church is a breeding ground for false converts. Some of their New York campus’ flagship products include the homosexual couple, Reed Kelly and Josh Canfield, in which Canfield volunteers as a choir director ² and Justin Bieber, who has continual run-ins with the law. ³

Hillsong Australia’s former worship pastrix, Darlene Zschech, has taken the apostate nature of Hillsong’s artisanship to the highest level.

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. – Eph 5:11

Zschech has chosen instead to bear false witness to the world, blaspheming the Holy Spirit by attributing evil deeds to Him that he did not do. ⁴ In a recent blog post, she wrote,

I am writing this mid-air on my way home from Singapore after an amazing time away speaking, leading worship, writing songs, being with dear friends. It has been wonderful. And, to see what the Holy Spirit is doing around the earth is completely breathtaking. Even in all the expressions that make us different as God’s colourful church, its incredible to me that when the Holy Spirit draws near, His role in our experience of following Jesus makes us so very similar.

What is she referring to? Her recent capitulation to Rome–the Vatican, at an ecumenical worship event lead by the Roman Catholic Church. Don Moen, an American “worship leader” with close ties to Zschech and Hillsong ⁵, who also participated in the event was quoted as saying in an article at Christianity Today,

This ecumenical event brings Protestants, Catholics, and Jews together as we pray for our brothers and sisters in Christ who are being martyred and persecuted all over the world today ⁶

I find it extremely difficult to reconcile this mindset, the acceptance that contradictory beliefs can all be from the same God, as a work of the Holy Spirit. She refers to it as “different characteristics, faces, tastes and giftings.. yet a DNA running through our veins that draw us together.” In Philippians 2:2, Paul teaches us to be “of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.” True Christians can only be united around the truth because God is truth.  She goes on to say,

A few months ago a very interesting email turned up in my office inviting me to sing at a beautiful event called the ‘Catholic charismatic renewal’ at St Peters Square, to actually lead songs of worship with others as the Pope called people to prayer and unity…Most invites I receive, I am unable to say yes to, but when Mark and I feel a peace about it, I go…This invite to Rome was about many different denominations coming together to pray for the world…

The Holy Spirit does not lead Christians into an ecumenical, multi-god “praise and worship” event put on by the ancient enemy of the Gospel, the Roman Catholic Church. It’s quite the opposite. The Holy Spirit leads people out of Rome, and out of apostasy (Revelation 18:4). The Holy Spirit finds what Zschech claims she was led to do by Him as totally unacceptable (Eph 5:11).

Zschech has been deceived, as many from Hillsong have, that doctrine is of no importance in the Christian life ⁷, and that all who name the name of Christ–Roman Catholics, homosexuals, unrepentant sinners–as long as you name Christ, we are all united in that confession. She goes on to say,

I was not there to judge, I was not there to become a Catholic, I was not there to sightsee. But I WAS there to lift up the name of Jesus.. without any hesitation or compromise.. for as I have learned over many years, that once Jesus is the centre.. anything can happen.

Right Darlene, let’s not judge, let’s just jump on the bandwagon of feel-good music, man-centered pep talks and motivational speaking, all while we judge those who truly want to hold to sound doctrine and see people come to a true saving faith in Jesus Christ. “Once Jesus is the center, anything can happen,” she says. The center of what? Your blasphemous, idolatrous event that mocks who he is, and what he has done? Jesus will not be mocked (Gal 6:7). You can rest assured that the Jesus of the Bible was not the center of that event–rather he was looking down at you, calling you to repent. You have more than compromised his name, you have outright denied him.

Nonetheless, she believes that the Holy Spirit has brought her together with the Pope, the Roman Catholic Church, to lead thousands of lost people in an ecumenical worship service, united under a false Gospel, and a false Jesus. But this isn’t surprising considering apostasy coming out of the church she was brought up in. Hillsong has focused on a works-based gospel–a social gospel, nearly identical to that of Rome ^{8 9}. She continues,

A message was preached about the power of the Holy Spirit at work in our midst, and about the great grace of God which we are all dependent. Pope Francis asked the crowd to declare loudly,’Jesus is Lord’ three times and each time it grew in confidence and intention. Worship was lifted up which had the many thousands of people who attended all singing in free-flowing moments which to be honest, was reminiscent of a time I sang on a John Wimber crusade in New Zealand many years ago.

So the Pope asks the crowd to repeat a mantra, and their “confidence and intention” grew with each repetition? Strangely, this sounds a lot closer to Eastern Mysticism than to Christianity. Besides the fact that vain repetitions are forbidden in Scripture (Matthew 6:7), we are taught to humble ourselves before the Lord. We don’t use him as a wishing well. However, this practice is nonetheless rooted in the heretical Word of Faith movement that teaches that our words have the power to speak things into being. Proponents of this heresy, such as Kenneth Copeland, have argued that since God was able to speak things into existence, that man has been endowed with the ability to do the same, equating faith to a “creative force.” ¹⁰

She closes her blog with some very troubling statements–statements that are indicative of the lost state of her soul, as well as many others. She says:

It all comes down to a seeking heart. And a God, who is seeking us, is NOT defined or intimidated by denomination, liturgy, age or preferences… the TRUTH of our hearts toward Him is what He is after. Not controlled or manufactured, outside in expressions of lives trying to present a Holy life. Jesus, only Jesus is the answer. He takes us as He finds us. He works with us every day, from the inside out, patient and kind in His love for us and His ultimate work in our lives, leading us daily in our life’s purpose.

She’s right that Jesus is the only answer, but which Jesus? The Jesus of the Roman Catholic Church is not the same Jesus of the Bible. The Roman Catholic Jesus is a Jesus who is summoned by a priest, and dwells within the body of a wafer during his repeated sacrifice on the altar of the Satanic temple daily.

So yes, I did meet Pope Francis. And yes, I did witness something truly miraculous…Change is happening all over the planet. There is a hunger for the truth of being a Christ follower, and so Christ followers need to be found EVERYWHERE.. that we will be a witness BY OUR LOVE.

Change is certainly happening all over the planet, but it’s not for the truth. The Bible teaches there will be a great falling away, a rebellion against God in the last days (2 Thes 2:3), and we see it happening right in front of our eyes. The apostate church of Rome is leading the way, andZschech, and Hillsong are right behind them. 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 says that people like Zschech are “false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.” Zschech, is following a false path, and teaching a false Gospel. Her ends will correspond to her deeds.

Finally, she has this to say,

C’mon church. Isaiah 60 says to ARISE SHINE Thy light has come that even as the earth grows darker, Christ’s light in us shines brighter. Let’s not be dulled down by a lack of understanding, or a judgmental attitude. I had to continually remind myself that I was there to announce and declare the Kingdom of God and not to fault find but to be aware and awake to something very precious. And so on we go, hearts and hands ready for all God is calling us into.

Folks, this lady is totally, and completely lost. She has absolutely no idea who Jesus Christ is, what he has done, or why he has done it. Yet, her music is played in solid churches and listened to by faithful people all around the world. Why do our churches continue to promote and support the rank heresy that comes out of Hillsong Church? Is it because we don’t any better? Arguably, most evangelical churches are on the same page as Zschech, but some would openly reject this false doctrine, and preach it back to the pits of Hell where it belongs, yet they are completely blind to the fact that they are supporting it, and feeding it, by purchasing the rights to this music to lead their faithful congregations in worship of the one true God. Can we not see the absolute hypocrisy here? Why?

For an explanation of the true Gospel, see here.

I know this is a difficult subject for many, and a tough pill to swallow. This is not a subject matter I cover often on this blog, however, since this affects Christians who are against the slaughtering of innocent children, it’s certainly worth a second look. Christians, if you vaccinate your children, you are supporting Planned Parenthood, and abortions.

During an interview with CNN’s New Day co-anchor Alisyn Camerota, David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress who is behind the controversial videos of Planned Parenthood’s peddling of murdered children’s body parts, Camerota admitted that many of today’s vaccines are created using aborted fetal tissue. See the video below:

This is an extremely rare admission on mainstream media of this little-known fact, however, opponents of mandated vaccinations have been reporting on this for a long time. ¹

According to know-vaccines.org, most of the popular vaccines in use today are derived using aborted fetal tissue, including Chickenpox, Hepatitis A and B, MMR, Polio, Rabies, Shingles, some Flu vaccines, and others. ²

Parents, as a Christian, I urge you to do you due diligence and research this subject matter thoroughly before vaccinating your children. There are alternatives, and there are exceptions.

On July 30, a woman by the name of Rebecca Watson makes a startling statement on Twitter admitting that she is in favor of killing innocent children.

Just for the record, if a fetus could write poetry & make pottery, I’d still favor abortion because no one has a right to my body.

— Rebecca Watson (@rebeccawatson) July 30, 2015

This vile admission is beyond disgusting, it’s hellish. How can she consider herself human? This is nothing more than a thorough display of the depravity of man’s (and woman’s) soul. Her selfish, prideful lusts and desires completely trump the rights of all others, in her mind.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! – Isaiah 5:20

But there is hope, and that hope is Jesus Christ. Christ, Son of God and man, came to earth, bore our sin, took God’s wrath for our sin on the cross, was buried, and three days later He rose again to conquer death. There is no other way out of this Hell we live in.

For a presentation of the Gospel, click here.

Here are a few Facebook memes by Psalm 12 Outreach that you can share if you like. For more, please visit us on our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/psalm12outreach. Enjoy!

Remember Dr. Ben Carson, the Seventh Day Adventist that David Uth and other SBC leaders pushed so hard for to speak at the 2015 Convention? You know, the one that those pesky “Calvinistic” bloggers “bullied” Willy Rice into dropping from the line-up?

Uth, a convention leader and speaker said this,

I was hopeful that our convention could hear from him because of his incredible gifting from God.

Then there was Maxie Miller, a black SBC pastor and former director of the African American Ministries Division at the Florida Baptist Convention who turned it into a racial issue by saying:

It’s a sad day when bloggers can control the platform of the convention or the Pastors’ Conference,…if the bloggers can do that, that takes away from the voters that place leaders in those positions…Cultural sensitivity a must in the church, especially where there is an understanding of grace.

Yet, none of these leaders had any problem with Carson’s anti-Christian cult membership. But now Dr. Carson’s un-Christian worldview is coming to light. Yesterday, Carson was asked by Neil Cavuto on Fox News if he thought it was okay to abort children for rape or incest. His response was,

In cases of rape and incest I would hope that they would very quickly avail themselves of [the] emergency room. And in the emergency room, they have the ability to administer RU486, other possibilities, before you have a developing fetus.

Cavuto then interjects, saying “that is at the point of conception, do you see that as life?” Carson responds,

Certainly once the heart starts beating.

Therefore, Dr. Carson, an accomplished neurosurgeon, does not see life beginning at conception. His worldview is not grounded in any way upon Scripture, yet, the SBC treated him as an evangelical hero, and a great gift of God. Will Willy Rice, David Uth, and others admit they were wrong for inviting him?

Why does the SBC continue to play politics, and immerse themselves in the world?

You can see the entire interview on Fox News here:

Famous CBN televangelist and false prophet, Pat Robertson, was questioned on his show by a viewer via email asking where he gets his information during the show when he performs healings. The viewer asked:

I have started watching the 700 Club recently. At the end of the program, you call out people who are sick and need healing. How do you know about these people? I would call this a psychic ability of sorts. Are these real healings? I just want to know how you pick these people. Have they sent prayer requests, or are you going with what you’re told inside from our Lord? – EMMA

Now, perhaps this viewer is relatively new to the faith, or isn’t a believer at all. Regardless, she rightly questions Robertson’s ability to communicate directly with God.

Robertson then goes on to support his practice of divination by proclaiming that 1 Cor. 12 teaches that the Holy Spirit will “give us a word of knowledge,” in which God tells him who to perform healings on during his show. He claims that his practice has nothing to do with psychic abilities, but as with all false prophets, two way communication with God outside of Scripture is essential, and central to their practice. Since their prophecies are purposely vague and ambiguous, they become difficult to verify and or disprove in some cases, and in most cases, creates confusion and causes divisions.

God is not the author of confusion (1 Cor 14:33).

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already. Little children, you are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are from the world; therefore they speak from the world, and the world listens to them. – 1 John 4:1-6

In a not surprising tweet yesterday on Twitter, Dr. Russell Moore of the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission makes an outlandish claim, insinuating that if you are against illegal immigration, then ultimately, you will sell out to the pro-choice abortion camp.

Abortion lobby & nativism both see people as problems, not as persons. A politician who’ll sell out to the one will sell out to the other.

— Russell Moore (@drmoore) August 18, 2015

Moore has been a champion of amnesty for quite some time. At one point, he referred to Jesus as an illegal immigrant. In another article that Moore wrote, he says:

I’m amazed when I hear evangelical Christians speak of undocumented immigrants in this country with disdain as “those people” who are “draining our health care and welfare resources.” It’s horrifying to hear those identified with the gospel speak, whatever their position on the issues, with mean-spirited disdain for the immigrants themselves.

Russell Moore doesn’t seem to have any regard for the law of the land, that has been established, and ordained by God. Speaking ill of people who are against illegal immigration, and promoting amnesty for those has nothing to do with the Gospel. In fact, those who have been changed by the Gospel would expect law and order in a civilized country.

So once again, Russell Moore is using his persuasive position of leadership to discredit, defame, and vilify people who don’t stand for what he stands for by making an absurd, illogical comparison between those who respect the law, and those who are pro-murder.

Shameless!

The visible church today is undoubtedly full of false gospels. There is of course the cults, like Mormonism and the Watchtower Society. There is the Roman Catholic church, who is the world leader in false gospels. We have the Prosperity Gospel, the Word of Faith movement, the New Apostolic Reformation, Charismania, easy-believism, and so on. Satan’s attack on the Church is relentless and never-ending. But there are a few, less noticeable false gospels that have crept into even the most sound of churches over time. I would like to go over a few of those today.

The Gospel of Niceness. Growing up, I was always taught to be nice to people. “You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar,” the old saying goes. The teaching is prevalent, and usually involves parents, or teachers encouraging kids to be thoughtful and kind to others. “Share your candy,” or “play nice with others.”

Christianity is often confused with niceness; “you seem so nice, are you a Christian?”

While the Scriptures do teach us to be kind and compassionate towards others, it does not teach us to do so at the expense of truth. This is where the gospel is compromised, and becomes a false gospel. We don’t want to offend people. It’s okay to talk about the positive things in Christianity, but we don’t want to upset anyone by telling them they’re a sinner. The church is afraid that if we tell people they’re sinners, and they need to repent, that they won’t come back.

We’re afraid of spoiling a friendship, or disturbing a close relationship by speaking the truth. While we’re called to engage the world, and share the love of Christ, we must not put our relationships above the work of the Holy Spirit. As a Christian, you should expect to be hated by the world (Matthew 10:22). If you have close friendships with those in the world, it need only be based on the truth. If you aren’t sharing the whole counsel of God with your friends who are lost, you are leading them to eternal torment.

The Bible says in 1 Peter 2:8 that Jesus is offensive–a “rock of offense.” The Word of God is foolishness to those who are lost (1 Corinthians 1:18). God is love, and God is kind, but God is also righteous and just, and full of wrath (Nahum 1:2). Yet he is merciful, and sent his son to die on the cross for our sins and be raised from the dead,  so that those who would repent and believe in him would be saved. We must not short change people by only being nice. We must offend people with the truth.

The Gospel of Unity. This one we hear all the time, the church must be united. In fact, it’s becoming clear that the evangelical church’s focus is becoming centered around unity. The call to unity in the Bible is very clear, and repeated often. 1 Corinthians 1:10 says,

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment,

1 Peter 3:8 says,

Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind,

and Phillipians 2:2 says,

Complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

So there is no doubt that the Church is to be united–but around what?

So many churches today have watered down the truth so much so that there is no truth left in what they preach. They have set aside sound doctrine in order to, once again, not offend people. It is around this watered down system of religiosity, usually focused on “love,” “tolerance,” and “acceptance” of everyone that they can remain united. Sound doctrine has become less important, and unity has become the central theme. Many sound churches are even falling into this trap. Solid churches standing in ecumenical unity with Rome for political and cultural advancement is becoming normal.

But the illusion of unity among these religious systems is false, and dangerous. It is not sound doctrine that causes divisions and destroys unity, as many have been led to believe. Romans 16:17 says,

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them.

It’s false doctrine that creates divisions, as there can be many, many false doctrines, all contrary to each other, but there can only be one truth. The true church is united around God’s truth, not error. There can be no true unity around error. Truth has no accord with error, and must be exposed to the light of truth in Jesus Christ.

The Gospel of Love. Love, who doesn’t want to be loved. The pulpits are filled with stories of God’s love for us, for the world, and for all of his creation. We are taught from a young age to love one another as Christ has loved us (John 13:34). After all, the greatest commandment is love, right?

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. – Matthew 22:37-39

But what is biblical love?John 13:34-35 says,

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.

From this passage alone, many believe that they are disciples of Christ–Christians, simply because they “love one another.” But here is what biblical love is not. Love is not an emotion, or a feeling. Love is not receiving, it’s not getting something out of a relationship. And love is not accepting or tolerating sin.

Love is sacrificing, giving, and seeking the best for someone. The greatest example of love ever demonstrated to mankind was Christ’s sacrifice on the cross for our sins. Why did he do this? Because God loved us (John 3:16). God did not accept our sin, or accept us for “who we are,” for if he did, there would be no need for justice. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). God did not receive anything from us for his sacrifice on the cross. Ephesians 2:8-9 says,

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

This was truly an act of selfless, unconditional love from God, to all who would repent and believe in him. The church cannot just teach love, it must teach the whole counsel of God, including his wrath. But this false gospel of love has become very prevalent, even in well meaning pulpits, yet it is sending people straight to Hell.

If your church doesn’t condemn sin, and call it what it is, but only preaches “love,” or if your church is focused on “unity,” or “niceness,” or any other aspect of visible Christianity in an unbiblical way, at the very least you should speak up. But if your church is not teaching the the whole truth of God, then you aren’t in a church at all, and it may be time to move on.

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you,let him be accursed. – Galatians 1:6-8

Also See Is Rededicating Your Life to Christ a Thing?

A popular concept within evangelical churches, especially college-age and young adults, is the idea that one can “rededicate” their life to Christ. The assumption is that he or she was saved at a young age, but either didn’t have a complete understanding of the grace of Christ, or has otherwise “fallen away” into an unrepentant sinful lifestyle, and now desires to return to Christ, and begin to follow Him again.

Some people may even turn to an endless cycle of sin and rededication, with multiple “rededications” over their lifetime. There are events that are devoted to rededication services, and some claim hundreds, or even thousands have “rededicated” their lives to Christ. But is this practice biblical, and does this concept exist in Scripture?

In Luke 9:23, Jesus says, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.” As Christians, we should be growing daily, through sanctification, in conformation to Christ. This is not to say that Christians will never have moments of weakness, be tempted to sin, or even fall into sin for a while. But one who is genuinely saved will be under the sanctifying ministry of the Holy Spirit, having their sin exposed, and will repent of it regularly. 1 Corinthians 9:24 says, “Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it.” The Christian’s walk with Christ is a constant rejection of sin, and faith in Jesus.

In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, “There is no God.” – Psalm 10:4

We don’t choose God–He chooses us. In John 6:44, Jesus says “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him…” and Romans 3:11, “no one understands; no one seeks for God.” We are dead, completely unconscious and immobilized, in our sins and transgressions (Eph 2:1, Col. 2:13). We have no ability to choose Christ, but thankfully, he has decided to choose us (John 15:16, Eph 1:4), and when he does, he promises,

I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. – John 10:28

So does this mean that Christians can’t fall into sin? No, it doesn’t. Christians will be tempted by sin, and even fall into sin for short periods. But the Holy Spirit will expose our sin (Hebrews 4:12).

The Holy Spirit is like a man with a lamp entering a dark and dirty room. And what you have learned to live with in the dark becomes repugnant in the light. ¹

Repentance is not rededication. When you are born again, and come to Christ in repentance and faith, you are given a new heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26). Under the ministry of the Holy Spirit, repentance is an ongoing, constant change of heart and mind to the alignment of God’s will–and it’s a gift of God, not a work of man (2 Tim 2:25).

If you find yourself in a cycle of “rededication,” sadly to say, you may be deceiving yourself. If your life is not marked by genuine repentance, and a true desire to follow Jesus, and obey God’s word, you very well may be lost.

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. – 1 John 2:19

Further, Paul considered a complete understanding of the Gospel necessary for salvation (2 Cor 11:4, 1 Cor 15:1-4). If you prayed a prayer, signed a document, or otherwise believe you have come to Christ, but you show no fruits of salvation, or you didn’t understand the basic tenets of the Gospel, (i.e. your sinful state, and Christ’s death, burial and resurrection) (Matt 7:16) or otherwise have continued to live a life of unrepentant sin, it’s not rededication that you need, but salvation.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. – 1 Cor 6:9-10

For a presentation of the Gospel, see here.

Also See Three False Gospels You May Not Realize Are in Your Church.

** Note, this was originally posted at Justin Peters’ website and is being reposted here with permission. You can view the original post here, or visit his website here. **

If you do not know the Kendrick brothers by name, you almost certainly know them by their films: Flywheel (2003),Facing the Giants (2006), Fireproof (2008), and Courageous (2011).  Stephen, Alex, and Shannon Kendrick have just released their fifth faith-based film, War Room.  War Room, starring popular Bible teachers Priscilla Shirer and Beth Moore, looks like it may well be the most successful of their films to date bringing in $11 million just on its opening weekend; more than triple it’s $3 million production budget.

Given the popularity of Christian themed films and the considerable buzz about this one in particular, my wife, Kathy, and I went to see War Room on the evening of September 3rd so that I could write a review.  For those of you who read my review of Mark Burnett and Roma Downey’s movie, Son of God, you know that I am a bit skeptical of the Christian movie genre as a whole.  Nonetheless, I do want to offer what I hope to be a fair review. This review will not touch on every single facet of the movie or even on every theme it presents, but I do hope to address what I believe to be the most important of them.

Plot Overview

War Room is centered around Tony and Elizabeth Jordan, their ten year old daughter, Danielle, and Elizabeth’s real estate client-turned Christian friend, Mrs. Clara. The Jordan marriage is in serious trouble.  Tony, a pharmaceutical salesman who travels extensively in his work, is the kind of husband and father one loves to hate.  Though a hard worker, he shows little interest in his daughter and pursues a female work interest behind his wife’s back. Elizabeth, played by Priscilla Shirer, goes to Mrs. Clara’s home discuss the particulars of putting it on the market.  The meeting, however, went far beyond deciding on a listing price for the house.

Mrs. Clara, an older widow, is a Christian fiercely devoted to prayer which she does in a closet she has dubbed her “War Room.”  Mrs. Clara goes to war here, battling Satan who is portrayed as the source of every form of evil plaguing mankind. Rather than plotting troop positions on a military map, Mrs. Clara pins

 Slowly but surely, Elizabeth is changed by her newly found prayer life and by reading the Bible. One day in her war room, she discovers via a friend’s text that Tony has been seen in a restaurant with another woman.  Elizabeth immediately prays for her husband and asks God to stop him. God gives Tony a stomach ache in the restaurant preventing him from following through with his adulterous plans.  

Shortly after this, Tony is fired from his job. Rather than the anger and sarcasm he expected to receive from Elizabeth upon hearing this news, she offered him love and support. The change he sees in his wife eventually changes Tony as well. He confesses his sin and turns back to God. He seeks and is granted forgiveness from both Elizabeth and Danielle, and the Jordan family is on the fast track of restoration.

 Despite his new life, Tony is fired from his job.  What his boss did not know, though, was that Tony had been stealing drugs from the company, selling them and pocketing the profits. Though he had gotten away with it, his now sensitive conscience drove him to return to meet with his former boss, confess his theft and make restitution.  His boss could easily have turned Tony in to the authorities to face prison but chose not to do so. The Jordan family was spared the loss of being torn apart again just as it had begun to heal.  Tony eventually found a new, though less lucrative job, his family grew closer to one another and the Lord, Mrs. Clara’s house sold to a pastor and his wife, and all was well because of the battles fought in the War Room.

 Strengths

The movie was, of course, clean.  There was neither foul language nor any innuendos (other than what was about to happen between Tony and his almost-mistress at the restaurant) anywhere to be found.

 War Room emphasized the importance of fidelity to one’s spouse and cutting off any potential threats to the sanctity of the marital covenant. The film championed the virtues of character, integrity, and selflessness. The importance of family, and the need for regular church attendance were stressed. Mrs. Clara (a very winsome character in the film) taught Elizabeth the importance of reading Scripture and, of course, prayer. The movie did teach the biblical truth that man is unable to reform himself.  “You can’t fix Tony. Only God can.” said Mrs. Clara to Elizabeth.

The Gospel was, well, mostly there.  Mrs. Clara presented the Gospel to Elizabeth in one of their meetings and she talked about sin, that Jesus died on the cross to pay the penalty of sin, was raised from the dead and that a person must believe in Jesus and repent. These are all essential elements of the Gospel and I am glad that they were included. That having been said, even though the proper biblical terms were used, often these terms were not explained. The term “repent,” for example, was used but never fleshed out.  The lingo was there to be sure, but without a biblical understanding of these terms they are just that, lingo.

 Weaknesses

As I’m sure you are expecting, I did find much with which to be concerned. Some of the film’s failures could have been avoided with more careful attention to doctrine and theology and some of the failures, as I will explain in the conclusion, are inherent to the genre itself and unavoidable.  I will outline my concerns in a series of “Outs:” Out of Home, Out of Order, Out of Focus, Out of Bounds and Out of Context.

Out of Home

I may as well begin with the most politically incorrect and probably the most controversial point I will make in this review and get it out of the way. Not everyone reading this will agree, but truth is truth.

That men and women are of equal value before God is beyond dispute (Gal. 3: 28-29). That having been said, men and women do have different roles and the role of a young wife and mother is to be a worker in the home.  The Apostle Paul writes that older women are to teach “the young women…to love their husbands, love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be blasphemed” (Titus 2:4-5). Note the “workers at home” part.

The context makes it quite clear that the “young women” are those who are married and have children in the home. This text makes it quite clear that such women’s primary place of service is not to be outside of the home but within.

 Pastor and teacher Dr. John MacArthur has written that if a young woman is adequately fulfilling all seven of the requirements listed in this passage then she “will probably be a very busy individual” and have little time for work outside of the home. If, however, “she still has time left over, then she would be free to pursue enterprising and creative activities outside the home.”¹ It is not that a young woman should never engage in wage earning work of any kind. Proverbs 31, in fact, depicts the godly woman who may do some enterprising work from within the home.

 One of the first things I noticed in the film is that Elizabeth worked outside of the home as a real estate agent. Had she been adequately fulfilling all of her duties inside the home, then the case could have been made that this was permissible. This was not the case, however. In fact, the movie actually makes a point that Elizabeth was so involved at her job that she did not know what her daughter, Danielle, was doing at school or in her jump-rope team.

 The sad reality is that the fallen world in which we live often requires young women to work outside of the home. Some “young women”² have been abandoned by their husbands and some may have husbands unable to work due to some type of infirmity. In situations such as these work outside of the home is, unfortunately, unavoidable.

 When a young woman can avoid working outside of the home, though, she should. If a young woman works outside of the home out of preference rather than absolute necessity, then a biblical principle has been violated. The issue is not a minor one. Note that if a young woman works outside of the home at the expense of her biblical household duties, then the result is that the Word of God is βλασφημῆται (blasphemetai), literally, blasphemed.

Writes Dr. MacArthur:

The home is where a wife can provide the best expressions of love for her husband. It is where she teaches and guides and sets a godly example for her children. It is where she is protected from abusive and immoral relationships with other men and where, especially in our day, she still has greater protection from worldly influences—despite the many lurid TV programs, magazines, and other ungodly intrusions. The home is where she has special opportunity to show hospitality and devote herself to other good works. The home is where she can find authentic and satisfying fulfillment, as a Christian and as a woman.³

 Out of Order

War Room is a theological train wreck chronologically speaking.  In other words, it totally gets out of order the Holy Spirit’s work of regeneration in a person with the fruits of regeneration.  

 Save the prayer that one may prayer at conversion, prayer is a spiritual discipline that can only be done by the saved. The movie gives the impression that praying for one’s spouse or asking God to bless the evening meal can be done by one who is lost. This, of course, is an impossibility. Before coming to Christ we are enemies of God (Col. 1:21), dead in our sins (Eph. 2:8-9), and cannot seek Him (Rom. 3:10-11); a condition which precludes any ability to pray (Is. 59:2).

 Now, this having been said, I am not saying that this was the intention of the Kendrick brothers. It is probably the case that they were simply portraying how people normally speak. I am not at all saying that theologically they would believe that lost people can pray. The problem, though, is the vagueness in which it was portrayed.  

 Additionally, and even more worrisome is that the film gives the impression that one can live a life of habitual, unrepentant sin and still be a believer. In her own war room, Elizabeth petitioned “Lord, I pray for Tony that you would turn his heart back to you.”

My issue here is not that Elizabeth is praying for her husband, but that her prayer gives the viewer the impression that Tony was a just backslidden Christian.⁵ “Turn his heart back to You,” she prayed. Again, Tony was an absolutely loathsome individual at this point in the movie who displayed zero evidence he had ever experienced regeneration.

Christians can and do sin (1 Jn. 1:8) but their lives are not to be characterized by sin. It has been said that a Christian can stumble into sin, but he cannot swim in it. A believer is a new creature in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17) indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God Who produces in him good fruit (Gal. 5:22-23). Many people living lives of habitual sin are told they are just “backslidden” when they’ve never slid forward in the first place. Charles Spurgeon stated, “Unless our faith makes us pine after holiness and pant after conformity to God, it is no better than the faith of the devils, and perhaps it is not even so good as that.” Whether intentional or not, there is a danger of this film giving some of its viewers a false assurance of their salvation.  

 Out of Focus

War Room certainly did deal with sin, but it did so, I thought, primarily on a horizontal basis. In other words, though it showed the damaging consequences of sin in relation to our fellow human beings, it did not focus nearly so much on sin’s deadly consequences in our relationship to God.

 Tony and Elizabeth both sinned in that they focused on their employment at the expense of their daughter, Danielle. Tony, of course, sinned in his pursuit of a woman who was not his wife. Eventually both came to see how their sin hurt others and they repented. In and of itself, this is good.

 What I did not see – or at least what I believed was not emphasized nearly enough – was the vertical nature of sin. There was no mention anywhere in the film of the wrath of God that our sin incurs. There was no mention of God’s wrath abiding on the unbeliever (Jn. 3:36) or that we are saved from it (Rom. 5:9). There was no mention of eternal judgment for those who die in their sins (Lk. 16:19-31).

 Without first understanding the wrath of God, one cannot rightly understand the mercy of God. Without first realizing that our sins are storing up God’s wrath (Rom. 2:5) which will be poured out on the ungodly for all of eternity (Rev. 14:10), we cannot truly appreciate His mercy. It is only in understanding God’s deserved wrath that we can fully understand His undeserved mercy. It is His wrath that makes His mercy so precious.

 In watching the film both my wife and I were looking for one thing which is a hallmark of every genuine believer: a godly sorrow over sin.

 The Bible speaks of two types of sorrow over sin. There is a worldly sorrow which is merely a guilty conscience. A worldly sorrow is one that is concerned only for the horizontal consequences of sin and it leads to death (2 Cor. 7:10).  

 The other type of sorrow, however, is a godly sorrow. A godly sorrow comes about when we understand that our sin is first and foremost against God. A godly sorrow is when we grieve over our sin because we understand that our sin grieves God and we desire to turn from sin because we do not want to grieve Him. It is this godly sorrow which “produces a repentance without regret leading to salvation” (2 Cor. 7:10).

 Out of Bounds

The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 4:6 exhorts the immature believers in Corinth “not to exceed what is written.” In other words, we as believers are not to exceed biblical parameters. Whether in our theology or in our practice we are to stay safely within biblical parameters for when we exceed these God-given parameters we are opening ourselves up to demonic influence and demonic deception.

 In one of the more emotionally rousing scenes of the film, upon discovering her husband’s philandering ways, Elizabeth retreats to her war room. As she repeatedly cites to herself James 4:7b, “Resist the devil and he will flee from you,” indignation swells within her and she begins to talk to the devil. “No more, you are done! Jesus is Lord of this house and there is no room for you anymore! Go back to Hell where you belong and leave my family alone!” she shouts.

 There are at least two significant problems with this. First, Satan is not in Hell. Only when the eschatological events of Revelation 20 take place will he be thrown into the lake of fire and “tormented day and night forever and ever” (vs. 10).⁷ The Bible makes it very clear that, for now at least, Satan is quite free “prowling about like a roaring lion seeking someone to devour” (1 Pet. 5:8).

Secondly, and more significantly, we as believers are not to be addressing Satan. Ever!

Consider that in Jude we have the record of Michael the archangel disputing with the devil and arguing over the body of Moses. Jude records for us that when he disputed with the devil, Michael the archangel “did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you!’” Think about that for just a moment and let it sink in. If Michael the archangel – the archangel – did not “dare” to rebuke Satan then I think it’s probably a safe bet that we should not do so either. Pastor Jim Osman in his excellent book Truth or Territory writes, “What God’s highest holy angel would not dare to do, sinful, fallen men presume the authority to do. It is unthinkable. I have been in the presence of Christians who boldly declare, ‘Satan, I rebuke you in the name of Jesus,’ and I wonder, ‘Who do you think you are?’ Rebuking, commanding, or ridiculing the devil are not tools of effective spiritual warfare; they are marks of prideful, arrogant, self-willed false teachers.”⁸

 It is troubling that noted Bible teacher Priscilla Shirer does not know this and would model such a dangerous and unbiblical practice. By exceeding biblical parameters, people are exposing themselves to the very enemy that they fancy themselves as rebuking.⁹

Incidentally, given that so many people are rebuking and binding Satan, have you ever wondered how he seems to keep getting back out? It seems that as soon as someone binds him, he’s free again. All of these people binding Satan don’t seem to be tying him up very tightly. And if we can bind and rebuke Satan (Be sure to bind him first. The last thing you’d want to do is rebuke an unbound Satan as he might give you a nasty uppercut when you’re not looking.), why not just bind him from all places at all times and be done with it?

But I digress.

The movie also has a decidedly mystical bent. Towards the end of the film, an older pastor named Charles and his wife, clients of Elizabeth, are shown the home. Charles notices the closed door to the “war room,” opens it and slowly walks inside. He looks around, pauses, backs out of the closet, and then walks back in as though he feels something different in the atmosphere. His wife asks him what he is doing and he says that there has been a lot of praying in this room. “It’s almost like it’s baked in,” said the old pastor.

This is pure mysticism. God speaks to us through the Bible and we speak to Him through prayer. Prayer is an act of obedience that serves to conform our will to that of the Father but it in no way changes the atmosphere in a closet, house, hospital, gymnasium, state or country. This is hyper-charismatic, Word-Faith mysticism.

In another scene Mrs. Clara, Elizabeth and Danielle were on their way to get ice cream when their trip was interrupted by a knife wielding thug demanding their money. The unflappable Mrs. Clara stared him in the eye and commanded, “You put that knife right down in the name of Jesus.” All of the sudden the thug looked dazed and confused. Powerless to follow through with his criminal plans, he fled the scene. Saying “in the name of Jesus” to this miscreant was like giving Kryptonite to Superman.

Throughout the film the name of Jesus is used in this way. It is used almost like a magical incantation, a Christianized version of Abracadabra, to manipulate the physical realm toward one’s desired outcome. Whether used in prayer to restore a marriage or to thwart a mugging, the name of Jesus always got results in War Room.

Contrary to the way in which it is portrayed in the film, saying “in the name of Jesus” is not like putting in coins in some theological vending machine. The name of Jesus is synonymous with the will of Jesus. When we pray for things in Jesus’ name rightly, we are praying for Jesus’ will to be done (Jn. 14:13-14; 1 John 5:14-15). Using the name of Jesus does not always bring the results we desire.

It was fidelity to the name of Jesus that led nearly all of the Apostles to gruesome deaths. It is fidelity to the name of Jesus that has brought horrific persecution to untold millions of Christians during the last two thousand years. Many Christians throughout the world face persecution to this day because of the name of Jesus. Sometimes the name of Jesus gets us not what we want, but what we may not want. Often it is in times of trial and persecution for the believer that God is most glorified.

Out of Context

The thief comes to steal, kill and to destroy; I have come that they might have life and have it abundantly” (Jn. 10:10) was quoted several times throughout the movie. In War Room the “thief” is identified as Satan who has come to steal people’s joy and marriages.

While it is not necessarily incorrect to identify the thief in John 10:10 as Satan, the context of the passage argues for a much broader view. The context indicates that the thief includes not only Satan, but any false teacher who claims any way of salvation other than that which is found exclusively in Christ. What the “thief” is attempting to steal is not one’s joy or marriage but rather one’s reception of the Gospel itself. The context is that of salvation, not one of life enhancement.

The movie concluded with one of the most familiar, beloved, and yet taken out of context passages in the Old Testament, 2 Chronicles 7:14: “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” The text was shown superimposed on a shot of the United States capitol the insinuation, of course, being that if we will repent that God will heal our nation’s many societal ills.

Though a thorough treatment of this passage is beyond the scope of this article, to apply this verse to the United States of America (or any other country for that matter) is to employ poor hermeneutics. The context of this verse is that it is God’s answer to Solomon’s prayer dedicating the temple recorded in the previous chapter. There has only been, is now, and only will be one country in a covenant relationship with God – Israel.

Another aspect of the movie that was out of context is the entire premise of having a prayer closet in the first place. The film portrayed this room almost as having magical powers. If you want your prayers to be effective, it’s best to pray them in a closet emptied of its contents. Upon first consideration, this idea appears to have biblical support:

When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father Who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you. – Matthew 6:5-6.

As we were driving home from the theater that night, Kathy and I talked about how we would be willing to bet that thousands of people will see this film and then go to their homes, clean out a closet and make their own “war rooms” believing that their prayers will become more effective.

Sure enough, just this morning as I was writing this piece, I was watching the Daystar channel as presidents and hosts Marcus and Joni Lamb played a clip from Eyewitness New Fox 58 as Aaran Perlman interviewed two of the Kendrick brothers. A visibly emotional Perlman said, “I saw this movie last weekend with a group of people, I’m gonna start crying before I even get into this. It changed my life so much. This movie, it’s about prayer. It’s about finding a room called the war room and immediately after this movie I went home and ripped everything out of my closet and made my own war room.”  “Wow, that’s incredible, awesome! You will see a difference in the days ahead. Write ‘em down so you can keep up with them. It’s great to be able to check off those prayer requests to realize God is alive and well and at work in your life,” Stephen Kendrick responded.

While there is certainly nothing wrong with praying in a closet if that is what one wants to do, the location is not the point. The point Jesus made in this text was not about location but attitude. The point is that we are not to make a show of our prayers as did the scribes and Pharisees and should remove any distractions which may divert our attention away from the One to Whom we are praying. Sincere, humble prayers offered in a living room, a backyard, or in an airplane at 40,000 feet halfway across the Pacific Ocean are heard just as well as those offered in an empty closet. Believing that there is some special power in the location itself is not only mystical, but borders on idolatry. The Object of our prayers and the condition of our hearts are the important things – not the location.

Conclusion

Some will read this review and undoubtedly think that I am being too nitpicky and critical. I have talked to some who have seen War Room and thought that it was great and that it had a solid biblical message. There is no doubt that the film was Christian themed – an element that has drawn the ire of numerous secular critics – but we are enjoined to “test all things” (1 Thess. 5:21) through the lens of Scripture and to “study to show ourselves approved unto God” (2 Tim. 2:15). Charles Spurgeon once said, “Discernment is not a matter of simply telling the difference between right and wrong; rather it is telling the difference between right and almost right.”

Finally, as I hinted at the beginning of this piece, I am not a fan of the whole Christian movie (I am not including documentaries in this) thing in general. It is not that I am inherently opposed to the genre per se, but rather that I believe there to be an inherent danger in them. For one, in order to be successful at the box office, Christian movies must be intentionally vague when it comes to many doctrinal matters. Christian films never really go past the basics of the Gospel and, sadly, often even fail at that. Yet the Bible says that we are to pay close attention to doctrine (1 Tim. 4:13) and to persevere in it (vs. 16).

It is a sad commentary, in my estimation, that so many professing believers get so excited about the latest thing to come down the evangelical pike, but show little enthusiasm in and put precious little effort into reading, studying and obeying God’s Word. Watching a movie is easy. Laboring in the Word is not. But only the latter will bear fruit that remains.  

 For another excellent review of this movie, see War Room: A Review of the Movie and the Industry Surrounding It, by G. Seth Dunn

Sources   

1 Source: http://www.gty.org/resources/questions/QA188/is-it-wrong-for-wives-to-work

2 For the purposes of this article when I write “young women” I am referring to the biblical definition of the term per Titus 2.

3 Source: https://www.gty.org/resources/bible-qna/BQ101712/Does-Scripture-Permit-Women-to-Work-Outside-the-Home

4 No matter how he may argue to the contrary, if a man cheats on his wife (or vice versa) he does not love her. Such a sin breaks the marriage covenant and is in direct contradiction to the biblical definition of love.

5 The New Testament never uses this word. It is only used in the Old Testament in reference to Israel.

6 New Apostolic Reformation is a twin movement of Word-Faith but has even more emphasis on signs and wonders and modern day Apostles. Some of its prominent leaders include Bill Johnson, John Arnott, C. Peter Wagner, Cindy Jacobs and Heidi Baker.

7 Technically, there will never even be a time when Satan resides in Hell. Revelation 20:14 states that Hell and death are thrown into the lake of fire where Satan and the demons will already be by that time. It is a distinction with probably little meaningful difference, but a distinction nonetheless.

8 Osman, Jim (2015-01-24). Truth Or Territory: A Biblical Approach to Spiritual Warfare (Kindle Locations 1905-1908). Jim Osman, Kootenai Community Church. Kindle Edition.

9 For an excellent book on spiritual warfare from a biblically sound perspective see Truth or Territory: A Biblical Approach to Spiritual Warfare by Pastor Jim Osman. Also available is a 6 CD set of 12 interviews with Jim Osman and this writer on the topic of Spiritual Warfare. It is available at http://justinpeters.org/store/

10 All of these mentioned have massive doctrinal errors.

For the past two days, I have had an interaction with Joe Carter, a colleague of Russell Moore at the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission (ERLC). The interaction revolved around the ERLC’s position regarding Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk of Court, Kim Davis, and her decision to not resign from her position while dissenting from issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals. Though our interaction was cordial and appreciated, I nonetheless still believe that the ERLC’s position is dangerous and contradictory. Our disagreement seems to revolve around three issues; Is she breaking the law, have accommodations been sought and/or denied, and should she resign from her position?

The Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell vs. Hodges that banning same-sex “marriage” by the states is unconstitutional. While Carter and I both agree that this ruling is faulty, it appears the technicalities of the ruling’s effects is a major factor in our disagreement on Kim Davis’ current, and future actions regarding her duties as Clerk.

First, after a bit of back and forth, Carter says he’s unsure if Davis was breaking any laws.

Later on in the conversation, he admits that he believes her to be breaking the law.

So, I keep pressing him on what law the she is breaking, and he says “The law which requires a clerk to do the duties required by her oath of office.” Therefore, I proceeded to lay out what that law is.

According to Kentucky state law, the duties of the elected clerk, in regards to issuing marriage licenses are:

The county clerk issues marriage licenses and files and records all marriage certificates…On or before the 10th day of each month, the county clerk reports to the state registrar of vital statistics all marriage licenses issued and all marriage certificates returned. Each county clerk must furnish each applicant for a marriage license with a copy of a marriage manual to be prepared and printed by the Human Resources Coordinating Commission of Kentucky. [page 54]

And according to this same manual, the penalties for not performing these duties are:

Any clerk who knowingly issues a marriage license in violation of KRS Chapter 402 shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Any clerk who knowingly issues a marriage license to any persons prohibited by KRS Chapter 402 from marrying shall be fined $500 to $1,000 and removed from office by the judgment of the court in which convicted.

Now, apparently, this KRS Chapter 402 is what the Supreme Court struck down, as it states in its definition of marriage, in section 005:

As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, “marriage” refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.

So, if the Supreme Court ruled that this definition is unconstitutional (which it isn’t, but that’s another argument), and henceforth struck it down, that leaves the state of Kentucky without a definition of marriage, until the legislature takes action to write a new definition.

So Carter has alleged that Kim Davis has broken the law by not performing her duties as clerk, yet, the law states that she must carry out her duties as defined in a non-existing law. The law is to issue marriage licenses in accordance to the state’s definition of marriage. The state currently has no definition of marriage. The Supreme Court did not rewrite the state’s definition of marriage, they simply ruled that the state’s definition is invalid. Therefore, if the state has no definition of marriage, Kim Davis is correct in not issuing any marriage licenses until she can legally do so according to her state’s laws. Doing otherwise would make her guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

Therefore, I conclude there is no law being broken by Kim Davis.

Secondly, Carter says that Kim Davis should seek accommodation from the state protecting her religious freedoms, and after all accommodations have been sought and denied, she should resign from office.

But what does she need to seek accommodation from. She isn’t breaking any laws. Further, Russell Moore insinuates that Kim Davis should resign as well, as he wrote in an article on the ERLC website:

Fourth, we must recognize the crucial difference between the religious liberty claims of private citizens and government officials. Let us be clear: Government employees are entitled to religious liberty, but religious liberty is never an absolute claim, especially when it comes to discharging duties that the office in question requires. While government employees don’t lose their constitutional protection simply because they work for the government, an individual whose office requires them to uphold or execute the law is a separate matter than the private citizen whose conscience is infringed upon as a result of the law. It means the balancing test is different when it comes to government officials because of their roles as agents of the state. Government officials have a responsibility to carry out the law. When an official can no longer execute the laws in question due to an assault on conscience, and after all accommodating measures have been exhausted, he or she could work for change as a private citizen, engaging the democratic process in hopes of changing the questionable law.

As of the time of Moore’s article, accommodations had been sought and denied by the Kentucky governor, therefore, we can conclude from Moore’s words that Kim Davis should have chosen to resign.

However, Carter continues to defend Moore by saying that Moore, and the ERLC never said that she should have resigned.

Now, without assigning motives to the reasoning behind the change of heart at the ERLC here, it’s clear to see that the position here is contradictory at best. Whether or not the contradiction is intentional, it is nonetheless a contradiction. Here’s the flow of events leading to the conversation.

1. Accommodations and changes to state law protecting Kim Davis, and other KY officials were denied consideration by the governor until January.
2. After Davis’ arrest, the governor continued to deny consideration for accommodations.
3. Russell Moore writes and article stating that if accommodations aren’t met, Kim Davis should resign from office.
4. Kim Davis doesn’t resign from office, and several high-profile Southern Baptists and politicians, including Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee, are seen standing with her and defending her.
5. Joe Carter writes an article stating why he believes Kim Davis was right not to resign and defends it on Twitter.

Now, whether or not this was intentional, this is undoubtedly seen as a back-pedaling on the ERLC’s position regarding Kim Davis as viewed by the public, and other news reports. It’s not surprising that Russell Moore would support such a position as resigning, as it’s not the first time that he’s publicly done so. In February, Moore stated that a judge who is “faced with a decision of violating his conscience or upholding the law would need to resign and protest against it as a citizen if he could not discharge the duties of his office required by law in good conscience.”

Well respected theologian and seminary professor, Robert A. J. Gagnon had this to say about it:

I find it hard to believe that the majority of Southern Baptists would support Russell Moore’s untenable position that Judge Roy Moore is wrong when he courageously defies the dictatorial edict of unelected rogue federal judges to invalidate his state’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union between one man and one woman. The Constitution does not in fact support the role of federal judges to act as legislators in redefining the nature of marriage. The absence of the mention of marriage from the Constitution (though, to be sure, presumed and accepted by all the Founders of the Constitution as male-female in character) indicates that it is a matter for the state legislatures to resolve.

The ERLC, and especially Russell Moore has been known to take a more progressive liberal position on issues as they relate to the church and culture. Moore has called Jesus an illegal alien in his unpopular push for amnesty, advocates “creation care” environmentalism, who has appointed a gay-affirming feminist who endorses gay and pornographic propaganda as an ERLC research fellow, and has said that Christians should attend gay wedding celebrations. It’s extremely difficult not to come to any other conclusion that the ERLC is pushing for social progressivism.

But I digress.

I believe that ERLC’s current position, though obviously different from the original, is still a dangerous position to take. It sets a dangerous precedent that Christians should flounder to the culture rather than fight using all that is available. Even after all accommodations have been sought and denied, I still believe that Kim Davis should not resign. The ERLC has been advocating for Christians to avoid any form of civil disobedience. However, civil disobedience is most certainly a biblical concept when civil law contradicts biblical law. If we don’t have Christians, especially in government, who are willing to fight, and even martyr themselves to jail to stand up for the faith, then that weakens the cause of Christianity, and ultimately the Gospel.

What the ERLC should be doing instead is advocating for Kim Davis, and calling on all Christians to do the same, and represent Jesus Christ while doing so. Instead of calling Kim Davis the law-breaker, they should be boldly calling five lawless Supreme Court justices the law breakers, and calling them to repent, and believe the Gospel.

Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked. – Proverbs 25:26

In the end, God will be glorified, and Christ reigns victorious.

If you like ruffling feathers, Twitter is the place to go. It doesn’t matter what you say, or how you say it, somebody is going to disagree with you–and vehemently. This is what happened as I engaged in conversation with a Southern Baptist pastor recently on Twitter. While discussing the doctrine of the Roman Catholic church with others, A pastor chimed in with the following tweet:

This certainly came as no surprise, as the Southern Baptist Convention is now infiltrated by Catholic sympathizers, and loaded with ecumenical propaganda. Nevertheless, it sparked a conversation between us to which he went on to defend the Roman Catholic church by claiming they have had theological reforms since the reformation. But have they?

Canon IX of the Council of Trent, on justification, in which is still the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church today says,

If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. ¹

However, we can see from Scripture that this is doctrine is diametrically opposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in Ephesians 2:8-10.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.  For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

So God’s word says that we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and that our faith results in good works. However, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that both faith and works are necessary for salvation. Both of these cannot be true, so either Scripture is wrong, or the Roman Catholic Church is wrong.

Further, the Roman Catholic Church says that grace is not the free gift of God,

If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema. ²

But Romans 3:24 says, “…Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”

So it baffles me that a Southern Baptist pastor would claim to be edified by Roman Catholics.

Yet the bigger question here is, “Can a Roman Catholic be saved?” Well, the short answer is “Yes!” The Gospel is freely available to all who will trust and believe in Christ.

But the long answer is “No!” Here’s why.

To be a Roman Catholic, you must believe the doctrines of the Catholic Church. As I have shown above, the doctrines of the Catholic Church are opposed to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, I would take it a step further to say that the doctrines of the Catholic Church are intentionally designed (by Satan, through his anti-Christ organization) to forbid its members from believing the true, biblical Gospel. Therefore, if one does truly believe the doctrines of the Catholic Church, you must, by default, reject the doctrines of saving grace as taught in Scripture, as they are contradictory.

So what about the non-devout Roman Catholic who trusts Jesus alone?

Is it possible? Yes. But, I would say this about this situation. Anyone who is truly saved, and regenerated by the Holy Spirit is going to have a desire to grow in their relationship with Christ, and be made holy by the Spirit. This is called sanctification. Why you are regenerated by the Spirit, you are now freed from your bondage of sin and made alive in Christ (1 Cor 15:22, etc). Therefore, as we grow in our relationship with God through prayer and studying his Word (2 Tim 2:15, John 5:39, 2 Peter 3:18, etc.), one would have to see the error of the Catholic Church, and reject it. While many Roman Catholics have been saved by grace through faith, by the hearing and preaching of the Word of God (Romans 10:17), these would no longer be Roman Catholics, and would be on their way out.

But that would not include staunch Catholic apologists and mystics and homosexuals, as claimed by this Southern Baptist pastor below. These are the ones that he claims edify him while reading them.

Though he claims there is much to disagree with, but much is useful, why not read Islamic material? Why not read and be edified by the Koran? Why not purchase reading material by Wiccans? I’m sure there is some good moral stuff mixed in there too. But why read and “be edified” by those who are lost, and teach lies? To be lenient with those who teach doctrinal error is to support lies, and by doing so, you are enslaving yourself to continue sinning (John 8:32). As Christians, we should have no tolerance for false Gospels.

But what about those Catholics, like Augustine or Athanasius?

What we must understand is that before the Protestant reformation, generally speaking, there existed only the Roman Catholic church, officially. Yes, there were small sects of true believers like the Waldensians who completely rejected the Catholic Church, but the RCC was the law of the land. Not only was it the religious authority of the day, but for much of its existence, it was the political authority as well. During this time, there were many in the church who rejected the teachings of the papacy and stood on biblical authority. However, they were not free to leave the Roman Catholic church and go down the street to a Baptist church, or a Presbyterian Church. People like Augustine and many of the pre-reformation reformers accepted and taught biblical doctrine in spite of the church’s official teachings.

Further, it wasn’t until the Council of Trent after the Protestant reformation that Biblical doctrine and authority were anathematized by the RCC. While the Roman Catholic church has always been infiltrated with bad doctrine, it wasn’t until this Council that false, anti-biblical doctrine was officially canonized and made permanent.

The Roman Catholic Church today has never repented of or recanted the Council of Trent doctrines, and therefore are still the official doctrines of the institution. Further, visiting any Roman Catholic church in the world today would lead any intellectually honest, bible-minded Christian to believe they were in Satan’s synagogue. There are no two-ways about it. The Roman Catholic Church is counterfeit Christianity and forbids and discourages people from the truth. Simply put, it leads people straight to Hell. God does not save people through a false Gospel, or a false Jesus. If you are truly saved, and you are still in the Roman Catholic church, God has called you out of this demonic institution.

Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, “Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues;” – Revelation 18:4

For a presentation of the Gospel, click here.

Below are some articles I found interesting and worth a read.

*Disclaimer* Please note that linking to an article on the Daily Roundup does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the author, article or website.

Pro-gay, Pro-Abortion, Bernie Sanders Given Wild Applause at Apostate Liberty University.

Robert Jeffress Prays Special Blessing On Donald Trump

Shemitah is Over But Nothing Happened

103-year-old Georgia woman banned from her church

Convenient Christianity is not Genuine Christianity

Republican presidential hopeful and former neurosurgeon, Dr. Ben Carson, has been surging the polls lately for the Republican nomination.  Dr. Carson, a Seventh Day Adventist, has received scrutiny in the past for his religious beliefs when he was invited to speak at the 2015 Southern Baptist Convention, in which he was ultimately uninvited from.

But his being uninvited from the convention didn’t stop widespread evangelical support for his nomination, in which is now growing rapidly. In fact, a recent Gallup poll showed that Protestants favored Ben Carson over both Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz, both Southern Baptists.

But does Ben Carson, a Seventh Day Adventist really represent Evangelical and Christian interests? I would like to pose the following questions to Dr. Carson.

1.) Dr. Carson, since you are a Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA) member, do you believe, as does your founder Ellen G. White, that people who don’t tithe are cursed from God?

According to SDA founder, Ellen G. White, Seventh Day Adventists hold to a number of unconventional, and unorthodox beliefs regarding those who don’t tithe. Some of these beliefs include God striking your horse or cow dead, unfaithfulness to God being written in the “heavenly record,” church members not praying for you when you’re ill, and even not making it into heaven.

Ben Carson has advocated tithing as a method of tax reform. During the August 6, 2015 Fox News debate, he stated:

…we need a significantly changed taxation system. And the one that I’ve advocated is based on tithing, because I think God is a pretty fair guy.  And he said, you know, if you give me a tithe, it doesn’t matter how much you make… And that’s why I’ve advocated a proportional tax system.

2.) Dr. Carson, do you agree with your founder that the U.S. government, in which you would be leading if you are elected president, is the beast of Revelation as described in the Bible?

According to SDA founder, White says that this about the prophecy of the beast as described in Revelation 13,

One nation, and only one, meets the specifications of this prophecy; it points unmistakably to the United States of America. Here is a striking figure of the rise and growth of our own nation. And the lamb-like horns, emblems or innocence and gentleness, well represent the character of our government, as expressed in its two fundamental principles, Republicanism and Protestantism.

In case you were wondering if Dr. Carson isn’t a thoroughly devout Adventist and doesn’t hold very strongly to Adventist beliefs, I would encourage you to read this interview that he had with his institution’s official news agency, the Adventist News Network, in 2013. During this interview, he was asked, “Are there ever any times when you feel it’s best to distinguish yourself from the Seventh-day Adventist Church and what it teaches?” to which he replied, “No, I don’t.”

Does he believe so strongly in his religious system that he is willing to apply it to our government if he’s elected? If so, I believe evangelicals should take a serious second look at what Dr. Carson believes. Further, Dr. Carson isn’t sure if life begins at conception and has advocated for the use of an abortion drug. Are these the issues that evangelicals are willing to concede on?

If you’re not already aware, the antichrist is visiting the USA this week. He will be visiting Philidelphia September 26-27 for the World Meeting of Families, an interfaith gathering led by the Roman Catholic Church that seeks to promote traditional family values in today’s culture.

Thus far, with the exception of closet-Catholic, Rick Warren, Southern Baptists have refrained from (at least publicly admitting) that they are going to the event. However, President Obama plans to be there, and he will be there with flying colors–literally.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama’s guests include transgender activists, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop and a nun who criticizes church policies on abortion and euthanasia. And oddly enough, the Vatican objects because they are worried that any photographs of these dissenters may be seen as an endorsement of them by the Vatican. (Sound Familiar?)

And oddly enough–or not–prominent evangelicals care, and are even defending the Vatican. Two prominent Southern Baptist Leaders, Ed Stetzer, Executive Director of Lifeway Research, and Russell Moore, President of the Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission both tweeted messages in support of the Vatican’s opposition to Obama’s guests.

Dr. Moore posts an article by the Wall Street Journal that says “The White House is more afraid of offending China’s president than the pope.” Then Stetzer tweets “Pres. @BarackObama, it’s hard to tell people you are not hostile to traditional faiths when you do things like this.”

My follow-up question to Moore would be, “who cares?”

First of all, this is no defense of Obama at all, I think he’s the worst president ever. But do these men not realize that there is a far greater, far more deceptive visitor coming to Philadelphia–the pope himself? Why do they care if the pope is offended by our president’s homosexual guests? I’m offended by the antichrist pope’s visit to my country. Isn’t that what we should be more concerned about?

But this isn’t the first time our SBC leaders have cozied up to the unholy father. Last year, Rick Warren and Russell Moore went to visit him at the Vatican for a very similar conference. During their visit, there was no call for the leader of counterfeit Christianity to repent of his sins, and turn to Christ. There was only a “melging” of religiosity with a pragmatic view of winning a culture war at all costs–including the expense of the gospel. Further, Stetzer will be speaking at a Christ-hating Muslim-interfaith gathering in October to further a cultural cause.

So do we really care that the pope is offended by Obama’s homosexual and transgender guests?

I don’t.

I’m more concerned that we aren’t offending the pope with the message of the cross. Are these men worried about losing their friendship with the pope?

Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth? – Galatians 4:16

It’s easy to think that you’ve done something so terrible that God would never forgive you. After all, abortion is murder, and what sins are graver than murder. Does God forgive murderers?

Good news. Yes, he does!

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. – 1 John 1:9

You see, the good news is that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:8). There is nothing so grave that we can do as sinners, that we can’t repent and turn to Jesus Christ for his love, mercy and grace.

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. – Romans 8:1

God didn’t send his son to die on the cross to save righteous people. He came to save sinners (Mark 2:17). And yet, the Bible says there is nobody righteous–not even one (Romans 3:10). There is nothing you can do to earn a righteous place with God, but at the same time, there is nothing you can do to out-sin God’s grace and mercy. Without Christ, your “good works” are like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). Yet his death, burial, and resurrection was completely sufficient to cover all of your sins, including abortion.

As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us. -Psalm 103:12

And he will never stay angry with you if you repent and believe in Jesus Christ for your forgiveness.

Who is a God like You, pardoning iniquity. And passing over the transgression of the remnant of His heritage? He does not retain His anger forever, because He delights in mercy. – Micah 7:18

If you want to receive God’s mercy, let go of your sin, and trust Jesus. For a presentation of the Gospel, click here.