Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Sexual Abuse Or Sexual Relationship?

For quite some time now, brewing under the surface of the shouting, dancing, ecstatic preaching and speaking in tongues that Holy Ghost filled believers do in the Church Of God in Christ, were questions regarding the accusations against Auxiliary Bishop James L'Keith Jones of Albuquerque, New Mexico and allegations of sexual abuse and clergy sexual misconduct.
 Allegedly, it was Jones who at his then age 29 entered into an illicit relationship (of some kind) with a 15 year old church member Ms. Kimberly Pollard. Supposedly, Jones groomed Ms. Pollard and tainted her mind, sweeping her of her feet, and basically making a sex slave out of her not only at the time, but off and on for the majority of the next 20 years all the while continuing in relationship and fellowship with the church. 

Read more!

Thursday, November 24, 2016

Academic Confusion...Class DISMISSED!

Although I feel that a "higher education" in ministry is not required to be an effective minister, pastor or church leader, I certainly do not discourage them that pursue this avenue. However, and with that said, I feel for some of our families who send their children to Universities expecting that their faith in Jesus and in the bible to flourish often are disappointed when those same children come back confused and sometimes disillusioned by professors that are either agnostic about God or just flat out atheistic in their approach to explaining away the bible and the God presented within it.

Individuals such as Dr. Hector Avalos, a Professor of Religious Studies at Iowa State University, who is an atheist (see my debate with him HERE, HERE and HERE) and Dr. Robert Price, who was once the Chair of Theological Studies at Johnnie Coleman Theological Seminary, and of course, Dr. Bart Ehrman who is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.(Evidently a position of certain distinction) Along with Dr. Ehrman at UNC is Mr. "Jesus Dynasty" himself, Dr. James Tabor who continues to attempt to prove that not only is Jesus buried, but he was not the Messiah, is of no special concern upon history, certainly is not God, had a human father that was certainly not God and had a secret family here on earth. You certainly don't expect to be confronted with atheist dogmas when trying to learn the bible, but that's par for the course.

Dr. Ehrman, who is a sort of a reluctant favorite of mine, as I will purchase a book here and there to see his latest and greatest mis-hits, or should I say, mis-directions, is one that is a preeminent scholar in New Testament Literature and, whether you agree with him or not, is a staunch advocate for a real Jesus as opposed to the Jesus mythers who seem to believe the garbage and stink of Richard Carrier's ideas are somehow "fresh" and enlightening. 

So, even though I gave Dr. Ehrman my anti-Christ Advocate award, I will commend him for vehemently arguing the historicity of Jesus. It seems that when Dr. Ehrman believes something to be true, he acquiesces to that truth and what he believes, as long as there is evidence in support of his position. So all of my critique of Dr. Ehrman is not necessarily negative, and if we were to meet, I would be honored to discuss matters with him I'm sure. (provided that he didn't charge me like he does to be a member of his blog)

WITH THAT SAID, I MUST still continue to condemn atheists and agnostics in seminary leadership positions such as Ehrman, for making it a mission to de-convert students who have trusted that they will grow in their faith and learn truth. It seems that many will be confronted with a healthy dose of misdirection, confusion and flat out deceit.

There are two things to be said about this however. First, it could be that some non-believing individuals attend seminaries directed by atheists, so that they can further develop their unbelief. There are some individuals who graduate from seminary, see opportunity to only make money in and from ministry. I am reminded of a theology school student who said, he didn't believe in God, but he was only taking the course because the church offered him a pastoral leadership job. For these hirelings, there is no conviction or call of God. It is only a money making venture, or a place to gain accolades and attention. Still there are others who only want to expand there pursuit of seeking to "bring down" the Christian faith. Teachers and professors such as Ehrman are the gurus they need to employ to help them increase in knowledge and to gain some sort of credibility.

Secondly, and this may be the case, maybe the expectations of sincere students and families are misplaced. It comes down to this for them, they should do better research,  I believe that it is ultimately the responsibility of the student and their family to research these institutions just like they research everything else. So I can't lay the total fault at Ehrman's feet.However, having placed a child in college, I understand that sometimes individuals are so overwhelmed with college acceptance and the name and prestige of a University acceptance or chance to be a part of a University, that research sometimes takes the back seat and emotions take control.

The Opportunity

This is where Professor Ehrman comes in. As I've stated, I believe that studying under him will   enlighten any student to certain truths and also certain errors. Certain materials that students would not normally be exposed to, appear to be discussed indepth. In addition I believe that he has a command of history and literature and would not relish a debate him on those singular issues. However, Dr. Ehrman's interpretation of biblical fact is very problematic and from the way his written material reads, the Professor seems to make whole cases off of a partial interpretations of scripture, and that is my problem with his presentations in general.e

Although I have never sat in or been a part of his class, I have however read some of his books and continue to review them from time to time (too much mis-information at once makes my head hurt) Dr. Ehrman does examine some complex Christian biblical "difficulties" but in most cases he conflates these "difficulties" to the level of faith breakers. In other words his presentation is one in which it would seem that he is saying, because this alleged "discrepancy" or proposed "contradiction" exists (whatever they are according to him) that the bible should be abandoned as the word of God and that the early church leaders did not know what Jesus they were referring to. Of course, this sort of narrative fits snugly into his overall premise as he seeks to hold out for his German predacessor, F.C. Bauer's theory of "competing Christianities", which seems to have been debunked ad nauseum by many in the scholarly community and especially by many of the fine authors and graduates of the Dallas Theological Seminary, and Biola University graduates, who's scholars produce some of the best reading available on religious studies. 

It seems that Dr. Ehrman's objective is to encourage believers to jettison the bible if something does not make sense to him or doesn't fit what he views as "evidence" for the Christian faith and faith belief. Rather than look for and present solid answers to his question, even if he maintains his question, Professor Ehrman takes the route that Christianity and the search of God through and by it is some kind of hopeless venture and that we are ultimately left to follow the dictates of our own minds and hearts.

The Heart Of The Matter
In this article, I will present one such topic about which Professor Ehrman makes a whole case without a thorough examination of the evidence and a point which may catch some of his students unprepared.

When Was Jesus God, Son Of God And Messiah?

Once such subject that Dr. Ehrman confuses the biblical text on is what the bible teaches about the deity of Jesus. This is the fundamental tenet of the Christian faith. One cannot be a Christian unless one considers Jesus as divine. Professor Ehrman however believes that Jesus being divine was nothing that was attributed to him in life but was only attributed to him after his resurrection. This is his argument in his book "How Jesus Became God" . The book Description says this:
"Ehrman sketches Jesus’s transformation from a human prophet to the Son of God exalted to divine status at his resurrection. Only when some of Jesus’s followers had visions of him after his death—alive again—did anyone come to think that he, the prophet from Galilee, had become God. And what they meant by that was not at all what people mean today.
As a historian—not a believer—Ehrman answers the questions: How did this transformation of Jesus occur? How did he move from being a Jewish prophet to being God? The dramatic shifts throughout history reveal not only why Jesus’s followers began to claim he was God, but also how they came to understand this claim in so many different ways."
Ehrman makes somewhat of the same argument in his book, "Jesus Interrupted" [Harper Collins 2009].

On pgs. 94-95 speaking of Paul's preaching and teaching about Jesus, Ehrman notes:
"In Paul's speech to potential converts in Antioch of Pisidia, he speaks of God's raising o Jesus in fulfillment of Scripture: "What God promised to our ancestors he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, "You are my Son, today have I begotten you'(Acts 13:32-33)"
He then goes on to say:
"In this text the "day" Jesus became begotten as God's son was the day of the resurrection. But how does that square with what Luke says elsewhere? In Luke's gospel the voice utters the same words, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you"(Luke 3:22) when Jesus is baptized"
He draws it out further by pointing to Gabriel's instructions to Mary in confirming that the child that she would have would be divine (Lk. 1:35) saying:
"In this instance it appears that Jesus is the Son of God because of virginal conception: he is physically God's son"
He concludes by asking:
"How can Luke say all three things? I'm not sure its possible to reconcile these three accounts: it may be that Luke got three different traditions from three different sources that disagreed with one another on the issue."
This appears to be the argument that Professor Ehrman is making in his book, "How Jesus Became God" 

A student may have a difficult time answering this. Ehrman, certainly takes literally the term "this day" as to mean, that precise moment, locking Paul into a narrative that he taught that Jesus was only Messiah after his resurrection which may be in conflict with what the gospel writers contend. Again Ehrman sews the seed of hopelessness and non clarity. 

Are things as hopeless as Ehrman claims?

I think NOT. Here is the primary reason why:

Interestingly, in the same book, "Jesus Interrupted", Ehrman lists a number of reasons why he does not believe in the authority of scriptures and why he believes that the church has either mis interpreted Jesus words, or that Jesus words just do not exist to affirm that Jesus was deity prior to his resurrection. 

Since Ehrman contends that the gospels are late creations "around" what is believed about Jesus and are an amalgamation of sources, then let us revert to a minimal facts argument. Let's agree that there are other works that are not in dispute which may help us settle this issue. Surprisingly enough, without saying a word, Professor Ehrman agrees that there are such books which are authentic and not in dispute about what is said within them 

On Pg. 112 of the same book in the chapter "Who Wrote The Bible" under the section, "Are There Forgeries In The New Testament?" Professor Ehrman states the following:
"Of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, only eight almost certainly go back to the author whose name they bear: the seven undisputed letters of Paul (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon) and the Revelation of John (although we aren't sure who this John was)"
Interestingly, in most scholarly circles, it is believed that these letters, the ones that Ehrman names, were written prior to the gospels. In fact according to the late F.F. Bruce in his 1943 work, "The New Testament Documents Are They Reliable?" the most preeminent work and authority on New Testament documents and their dating, the dating of the works that Ehrman names are as follows:

Romans: 57 AD
1 Corinthians: 54-56 AD
2 Corinthians: 54-56 AD
Galatians: 48 AD
Philippians: 54 AD
1 Thessalonians 50 AD
Philemon: 60 AD

Now, that creates somewhat of a conundrum for Ehrman at this point. He has previously argued that the gospels were late developments. (I mean read the book and his works on the subject and you'll see). However, these works, some of the first that Paul wrote, were early developments. Most if not all prior to AD 60 and one, Galatians some 15 to 18 years after Jesus crucifixion (depending upon the date) Because of this, Ehrman, like most critical scholars would contend that what these books say are the actual teachings of the early church on the subjects that they embark upon. 

Paul On The Deity Of Christ

Interestingly enough, Paul says specifically what he means about Jesus and who he was and when he was deity. 

Philippians 2:5-115-Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6-Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7-But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8-And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9-Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:10-That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11-And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 

This what scholars have deemed a "hymn" was delivered to the New Testament church by Paul from an early account within ministry. It is clear that Paul did not contend that Jesus was deity only after the resurrection. He contends, rather clearly that Jesus was deity, PRIOR to his virgin birth because he was/IS God!

Here is another that conforms to the thought that Jesus was pre-existent as God:

1 Cor. 8:6But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Remember, Paul was a monotheist in the most strict sense of the word. The attribution of the one God by "whom are all things" is not in contradiction or contrast to the Lord Jesus Christ "by whom are all things, and we by him". The statements are in accord with one another. 

Then  Paul further affirms that Jesus was the "Son", once again, from the beginning and not just after his birth or resurrection. 
Gal. 4:4 ~ But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, (ESV)
According to what Paul alludes to, his teaching did not just simply begin with him. He says in 1 Cor. 11:23. "For I have received of the Lord..." Certainly the resurrected Christ met Paul on the road to Damascus. This would allow a further revelation of Jesus to Paul as he records in Galatians 1.
There is somewhat of a scholarly consensus that Paul receives his instructions directly from the Lord in regards to the sacrament of the church that was already in existence as something commonly held and believed among the church. In other words, what Paul receives, by revelation, is in accord with what the believers of the "Way" were already practicing and teaching among one another. This would be a confirmation to believers that Paul had indeed either met Jesus by revelation or had been with church leaders and was versed in the early creed of the faith. 

I present the 1 Cor. 11 passage to address issues that the church was not aware of these things and that these issues were developed by Paul. Clearly they were not his creation. The church already had a "high view" of Jesus prior to Paul's interaction with them.  


Here we have a claim of Ehrman that the church and followers of Jesus was inconsistent as to when Jesus was God and Messiah. However, when we examine the scripture it does not display the discord that Ehrman claims. 

We see that from early documents, agreed upon to clearly have been written by the person claiming to have written them, that Jesus was taught to be not only God at birth or resurrection, but also preexistent and God before he came to earth. 

I haven't touched on the book of Revelation but if we go there, it is chalk full of more of the same information. At either rate, we do not see a church in conflict over when Jesus was Lord, Messiah or God. We see a church accepting that Jesus was God in a preexistent form, working miracles on earth and rising again from the dead to demonstrate his power over all life and death, ie: acting as God!

What are we to make of Luke's account in Acts 13 that Paul invoked Psalms 2 to say that "this day" or the day that Jesus was resurrected that he became the Messiah? Or that Jesus was somehow the Messiah only because he was born of a virgin?

Personally, I say not much!

Obviously, Paul taught that Jesus was God in a preexistent condition and therefore the Messiah at birth. To the Jews or Greeks who did not know, which was the context of Paul's preaching at Antioch, the resurrection, though having occurred prior to that day, would have been the day in which this revelation would have been made known unto them. Paul did not teach, in the early letters, neither did the church contend that Jesus became Lord or Messiah over time or because of some event that occurred during his lifetime no matter how special that event was. 

Further, Psalm 2 is a prophetic Psalm and was also alluded to by the writer of Hebrews to point to the deity of Christ as well. Similar to Peter's use of the book of Joel in Acts 2, Luke displays that Paul alludes to the time in which Jesus would reveal himself to the world, even the unbelieving Jew, by the irrefutable fact of the resurrection. 

What neither he nor Luke intend to convey is that the resurrection is the time in which Jesus would be made Messiah. While some would say that interpretation renders the use of the word "day" or "Yom" in Hebrew with undue ambiguity, because of the prophetic intent it is a moot point and one that does not have any bearing on the communication that Jesus was deity before he was born, was Messiah when he was born and is our savior because he shed his blood and demonstrated who he is through the act of resurrection. 

Clearly, that is what the church taught and what the church believed. Paul affirms this early as recorded in Acts. 


Read more!

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Above The Line Book Review Parts 1 & 2

I received a copy of the book "Above The Line" by Ohio State University Head Football Coach Urban Meyer, and boy did it add a dimension to my life and challenge and even change the way I approached various adversity. I recommend this book to every church leader and everyone that is attempting to lead just about anything, especially their family. 

I was so impressed and blessed by the concepts that the coach shared that I decided to do a live Facebook book review of the entire book in segments. I've placed segments one and 2 here for your review. I am also rewriting our coaches training for team culture for my track club, Peoria Inner City Track Club

I do not know Coach Meyer and I am certainly not receiving a kickback or anything for promoting his material and although most of my family in Michigan are everything BLUE (if you know what I mean) I am treading into waters that takes an act of God to navigate-LOL...(it's not really that bad, but then it is)

Anyway, hopefully you enjoy parts 1 and 2. Please feel free to let me know your thoughts as well. 

Part 1 "Above The Line" Book Review

Part 2a "Above The Line" Book Review

Part 2b "Above The Line Book Review


Read more!

Monday, November 21, 2016

Donald Trump's "New Deal" To The Black Community

Last week, by way of Media Takeout, of all sites, President elect Donald Trump laid out a plan and proposal to the Black community stating specifically what he would like to accomplish during his term in office. 

Say what one will, the is the first time I have seen any political official at the highest office specifically and publicly address the Black community and its needs from a social and political standpoint. 

Trump is certainly "Whitening Up" the White House and top levels of Government, but I hope that he is sincere in addressing these issues and more, because the Black community needs a change, politically, socially and a renewal of faith beginning in the faith community. 

Tell me what you think about these things:
Nobody needs to tell African-Americans in this country that the old new deal from the Democratic Party isn’t working for them. In election after election, Democratic party leaders take African-American voters for granted and year after year the condition of Black America gets worse. The conditions in our inner cities today are unacceptable. Too many African-Americans have been left behind. 
African-Americans need a new deal from their next president. Donald Trump is proposing just that. The following are ten promises announced by Donald Trump on October 26, 2016 in Charlotte, NC that will define a new deal for Black America: 
1. Great Education Through School Choice. We will allow every disadvantaged child in America to attend the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. School choice is the great civil rights issue of our time, and Donald Trump will be the nation’s biggest cheerleader for school choice in all 50 states. We will also ensure funding for Historic Black Colleges and Universities, more affordable 2 and 4-year college, and support for trade and vocational education.

2. Safe Communities. We will make our communities safe again. Every poor African-American child must be able to walk down the street in peace. Safety is a civil right. We will invest in training and funding both local and federal law enforcement operations to remove the gang members, drug dealers, and criminal cartels from our neighborhoods. The reduction of crime is not merely a goal – but a necessity.

3. Equal Justice Under the Law. We will apply the law fairly, equally and without prejudice. There will be only one set of rules – not a two-tiered system of justice. Equal justice also means the same rules for Wall Street.

4. Tax Reforms to Create Jobs and Lift up People and Communities. We will lower the business tax from 35 percent to 15 percent and bring thousands of new companies to our shores. We will also have a massive middle class tax cut, tax-free childcare savings accounts, and childcare tax deductions and credits. We will also have tax holidays for inner-city investment, and new tax incentives to get foreign companies to relocate in blighted American neighborhoods. We will empower cities and states to seek a federal disaster designation for blighted communities in order to initiate the rebuilding of vital infrastructure, the demolition of abandoned properties, and the increased presence of law enforcement.

5. Financial Reforms to Expand Credit to Support New Job Creation. We will have financial reforms to make it easier for young African-Americans to get credit to pursue their dreams in business and create jobs in their communities. Dodd-Frank has been a disaster, making it harder for small businesses to get the credit they need. The policies of the Clintons brought us the financial recession – through lifting Glass-Steagall, pushing subprime lending, and blocking reforms to Fannie and Freddie. It’s time for a 21stcentury Glass Steagall and, as part of that, a priority on helping African-American businesses get the credit they need. We will also encourage small-business creation by allowing social welfare workers to convert poverty assistance into repayable but forgive-able micro-loans. 
6. Trade That Works for American Workers. We will stop the massive, chronic trade deficits that have emptied out our jobs. We won’t let our jobs be stolen from us anymore. We will stop the offshoring of companies to low-wage countries and raise wages at home – meaning rent and bills become instantly more affordable. We will tell executives that if they move their factories to Mexico or other countries, we will put a 35% tax on their product before they ship it back into the United States. 
7. Protection from Illegal Immigration. We will restore the civil rights of African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and all Americans, by ending illegal immigration. No group has been more economically harmed by decades of illegal immigration than low-income African-American workers. Hillary’s pledge to enact “open borders,” – made in secret to a foreign bank – would destroy the African-American middle class. We will reform visa rules to give American workers preference for jobs, and we will suspend reckless refugee admissions from terror-prone regions that cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. We will use a portion of the money saved by enforcing our laws, and suspending refugees, to re-invested in our inner cities. 
8. New Infrastructure Investment. We will leverage public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years, of which the inner cities will be a major beneficiary. We will cancel all wasteful climate change spending from Obama-Clinton, including all global warming payments to the United Nations. This will save $100 billion over 8 years. We will use these to help rebuild the vital infrastructure, including water systems, in America’s inner cities. 
9. Protect the African-American Church. We will protect religious liberty, promote strong families, and support the African-American church. 
10. America First Foreign Policy. We will stop trying to build Democracies overseas, wasting trillions, but focus on defeating terrorists and putting America First.

We all know that the so called vanguards of the Black community, the NAACP doesn't like #1. Why? Because of the too close relationship and annual contributions of the teacher's union. Yes, they sell out our Black children for annual contributions from some of the same one's promoting policies that abuse our children. 

Anyway, when has any party, even the party under the so called "first Black President" (Bill Clinton) or the REAL first Black President, Barack Obama, every reached out in such a manner? It seems that President Obama was afraid that he would be perceived as being too "pro-Black" all the while elevating homosexual rights to civil rights and rights similar to those based on race. Shame on him! That was certainly a bad move, as as it is being talked about now, by Black men and women all over the country, was the wrong thing to do to respect and honor the Black community and our REAL and unique struggle from slavery to civil rights. 

I guess they will learn....


Read more!

Sunday, November 20, 2016

Sexual Abuse,Unfolds At Any Level, Any Income

Sexual abuse continues to be a life changing horrific event that imposes itself on many individuals all over the country and in every profession and or vocation. I would hope that the church sees more of an urgency to combat this cancer both now and in the future more than it has shown a willingness to do so in the past.

I Am My Brother's Keeper Christian Advocacy Council continues to push the agenda of church reform and the implementation of a "Safe Church Plan" that will help guard against and root out potential causes of sexual abuse within the context of the church. After watching this, I hope that you will agree that money, vocation nor the color of one's skin can insulate from this insanity. We need JESUS 4-real!

ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos


Read more!

Saturday, November 12, 2016

Liberals Still Asking, "What Happened"? Pastor Marlin Reid Answers.

After listening to the pundits give their spin on why Hillary Clinton and the Democrats lost the 2016 Presidential election I was enamored with a recent Facebook assessment by my friend and fellow pastor from Detroit, Pastor Marlin Reid of New Wine Glory ~ The River Church.

Unlike pundits who contend that the election was a "whitelash" which is the DUMBEST assessment of a serious issue I've ever heard, or that it was the POOR AND UNEDUCATED WHITE-TRASH and racists (which are additional dumbfounded assessments) that put Trump in, Pastor Reid breaks it down giving a TRUE assessment of the real issues that voters across our nation felt as they visited the polls during the recent Presidential election.

In short, the Liberal strategy to rely upon the courts and a sidestep of the will of the people and eject objective moral values, in particularly Christian values upon which our society has long had a history and foundation, failed. At this point, I'll simply allow Pastor Reid to speak because I believe he says it much better and more concisely than I can:

"Everybody is asking What happened! How did this happen!
Simple, the LBGTQ & the Liberal Left overplayed their hand.
They shouted and danced when the Federal Gov. overruled The will of the people and ratified same sex marriage 
Then they praised Bruce Jenner and the mutilation of his body to look like a woman - they even made him woman of the year ! (what a insult to women everywhere)
Then they pushed genderless Bathrooms and it failed to pass.
They tried to pressure a whole state to bend by threatening to pull the All star game and millions of dollars from them.
They constantly push images of weak men and powerful women beating up men & dominating them in all almost every TV show.
They pushed homosexuals in all media as the best & brightest.
They pushed images in the media of Christians as stupid, hypocrites or delusional fools & the church as being a joke.
They tried to brainwash America into the nonsense of political correctness and turn the country Into a bunch of nice talking 2 faced liars.
And America set Back and let them entertain & talk all their liberal junk on every venue of media -music,movies, talk shows (like the View) etc..
Their supposedly "smarter than us" entertainers tried to tell us how to think and what to believe.
They told us we were not a Christian nation any more.. never was
They put everybody else ahead of Americans
They thought America bought into it all!! hook,line & sinker
They thought America was finally ready to be totally sodomized and shifted to their new world order consciousness.
But when it came time to vote!!
The American people said enough .. ! no more !
We Will not give you the power to control the Supreme Court or seats in congress to rewrite the moral compass of this nation.

It's quite simple ..they are totally out of touch with the heart of the common person in this country and they overplayed their hand.

That's all" ~ Pastor Marlin Reid, New Wine Glory ~ The River Southfield, MI 
Thank you Pastor Reid and to that I say a hearty AMEN!!!!


Read more!

Friday, November 11, 2016

False Prophet Carn Strikes Again

Deut 18:22~ when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.

Please believe me, I don't know Brian Carn, I have no axe to grind against Brian Carn and have no sort of negative interaction or ill feelings towards Brian Carn...but THIS displays what cannot be denied according to the word of God. This prophet has NO word from the Lord. Time to repent Elder Carn!

Don't forget THIS STORY that we've already done on the utterances of this man.


Read more!

Thursday, November 10, 2016

At The 109th COGIC Holy Convocation... Pray For Our General Board Bishop

Thursday Nov. 10th at the end of a dynamic message from the Lord, the Bishop and General Board Member of the Church Of God In Christ, J. Drew Sheard collapsed. 

We suspect that dehydration may have been the culprit here. The Bishop does have a superhuman schedule. One thing we know, GOD IS a healer and a very present help in time of trouble!

A second thing we KNOW is that Bishop Sheard is a holy man that fears the Lord and DOES live right!!! My message to these internet idiots claiming otherwise...PLEASE SHUT-UP!!!!

May the Lord bless Bishop J. Drew Sheard. We are praying for his quick and full recovery. 

Read more!

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

WE Are Americans

We are Americans and We DO NOT want liberal left policies that drive a liberal left agenda
We want our freedom and our freedom to live UNDER GOD! We REJECT your liberal leanings to remove God from us and to rationalize your material belief system as "progress". Just in case you didn't know, We are Black Americans, we are White Americans, we are Latin Americans, We are Asian Americans, We are Christians, We are Jews, We are Muslim, We are Hindus, We are Buddhists, and a host of other religious beliefs, but WE ARE AMERICANS!!!!

We are Republicans, We are Democrats, We are Independents, We are business owners, We are homemakers, We are traditional and non traditional families, We are single moms and dads, We are Grandparents raising our grandchildren, We are CITIZENS...

We are AMERICANS who want and value our freedom  and right to live out the values of our faith without fear and intimidation and public shame. We desire to live out our freedoms above your rhetoric of "tolerance", that uses the courts to beat down individuals and business who stand for religious values and freedom, all the while claiming that you believe in "legal reform".

You've told those of us who struggled through hell, by nothing more than FAITH and the God of the bible, that we are the ones "discriminating" and "unpatriotic"???

We REJECT your assessments as the garbage it was when the very thought came from the embers of hell!!!! WE are patriots, no less than you and true to the values that has made us strong!

You allowed a foriegner, someone who pays NO TAXES, George Soros,  to try to reshape us, and create us in his image. But George Soros your money cannot buy the good, common and everyday people of America! We KNOW who we are and what we believe!

Your propaganda machines, called "news organizations", so blind in their hate and so against traditional moral values, only want blood and WE see it and turn their talking heads off the air. Today, you sit around tables flabbergasted, and shocked and yet still YOU can't even discern that not only did White & Rural America back this President elect, but Inner City and Suburbian Black America, religious America, men, women and  foreign nationals backed the IDEA that AMERICA can be great again and DOES NOT wish to be the social dumping pot of the world, embracing any and every moral value proposition because it makes us "feel" good!

It is RIDICULOUS to question the safety of our women and daughters in public restrooms, yet you made it so important to place OUR families in compromising situations!!!! Our ladies sports and athletics should be reserved for WOMEN born biologically as women. Yet you allow boys to compete against them calling it a requirement of Title IX, when ALL of us know better!!! RESPECT our women and girls!!! You elitists protect yours, do the same and protect ours!

You Allowed George Soros to fund anarchy and unrest, to promote feminism, racism, and hatred all the while claiming that it was "progress:"...
SHAME on you, SHAME on you!!!!

President Obama, you and Hillary under your leadership, planted homosexual rights all over the globe. You redefined citizenship, you redefined marriage and TOOK AWAY, our American freedom in the process. Our freedom to educate our children in values that we believe in...our freedom to serve causes we believe in publicly and openly without being shamed or publicly denigrated.  Our freedom to protect the rights of innocent, unborn babies who a blind Supreme Court said are not "people with rights" while they are in the womb.

YOU did all of this, without doing a thing to help Chicago, Ohio, Michigan or any of the cities in which we BLACK people had high rates of poverty and suffering. YOU CAUSED THE DEMOCRAT TO LOSE THIS ELECTION CYCLE!

You told Planned Parenthood, to stay with you as you "handled" us religious people, coming to our churches "pretending" that you would stand for our morals and values. You DIDN'T You failed the religious, even making laws against us and not defending our values. You stabbed us in the back, appointing some of our leaders who loved their position in your White House atmosphere, more than calling for you to repent and reform. 

News, tell parents to tell their children THE TRUTH!!! Tell them that their government and many of its officials shunned them and their needs and wanted to create something that the Constitution of the United States did not create...That America was and is a place where freedom and personal achievement is valued.  

It was your choice to denigrate our rights and religious freedom, rights paid for by the shedding of blood, which is the highest covenant, that caused your PARTY TO LOSE TO THE REPUBLICANS!!!!

I HOPE you can understand. Black America wants safe streets and we know better than believing if all the police were Black that things would be better, we KNOW that is not true!!!We need a morals and values revolution, because WE ARE AMERICANS, and no matter what that meant when this country was founded, it means that much more for me, a BLACK man, my children, and all fellow citizens regardless of race, creed, color or nationality. 

Read more!

Saturday, November 5, 2016

Open Boarders, Open Society & The Desire To Control The World

UPDATE 11/13/2016
NEW: See the Soros 60 Minutes interview referenced in this article at the end of the article. 

As the Presidential election draws near, I can only hope that our nation, and its voters as a whole, makes a decision to uphold traditional values, which include the restoration of traditional family values and rejects continued interference in moral propositions from activist courts. Yes, there are many issues to vote for even if one is not excited about the candidates for whatever reason.

There are issues and things being said that the average voter has no clue about. It is my intent to reveal a slight bit of the rhetoric being said this election and why certain individuals are so intent on placing their candidate at the top of the world's greatest and most powerful free nation.

It all begins in Hungry in about 1930.

Tavidar and Elizabeth Schwartz gave birth to a son named George. Tavidar had served in a POW camp in Russia during WWI giving himself to the aspects of a cult language and belief system called "Esperato". The reason I say "cult" language and system, is because Esperato was and is what is called a universal language that all men on Earth are encouraged to learn and use. ie: it is natural man's reversal of Babel and the language confusion that God brought about on Earth. It is the foundation of the "one world" vision of globalism encouraged by secularists, materialists, and metaphysical naturalists. The idea is that if we speak the same know the rest...

In about 1944, when George was just 14 years old, Jewish persecution was at an all time high. During the invasion, Jews were marked for death. At that time Tavidar, who was a lawyer, saw to it that the family name was changed to "Soros" which in Hungarian meant "successor" {Interestingly enough, Soros in Greek, the biblical language, means "Coffin" and is used 1 time within scripture.}

Simultaneously with the name change, was the conspiracy to not be identified with or as a Jew. It seems that Elizabeth hated her Jewishness anyway and Tavidar did not see it as profitable either. Besides, all the Jews around the family were dying or being sent to death camps. Therefore, George learned at a young age to conform, relate, pretend and collaborate, even against his own lineage. As the Jews were sent to death camps and as their property and wealth was confiscated, it was George Soros, a 14 year old boy that assisted the death squads and took the material spoils for himself as well.  In 1998 Soros stated the same sentiments to all Americans on the news broadcast magazine show "60 Minutes" . He said that although the threat of death was very real, the 2 years (44-46) were the "happiest times in his life". Here is a statement from him on the show:
"I could be on the other side or I could be the one from whom the thing is being taken away. But there was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was — well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in the markets — that is I weren’t there — of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would – would — would be taking it away anyhow. And it was the — whether I was there or not, I was only a spectator, the property was being taken away. So the — I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.” ~ George Soros, 1998 "60 Minutes" CBS. 
Then again, on Sept. 29,2006 George told the United States Congress that he had "no sense of guilt" in helping the German's take the property of the Jews, just in case they didn't believe him previously. Remember, he was riding with a man making decisions to have people committed to death camps that he called his godfather, covering his identity as a Jew. He changed his name and went by the name of Sandor Kiss during this time. So Soros became an actor, playing a role, watching his fellow countrymen taken away from their homes, families split, assets taken, consigned to death and he called it the "greatest time" of his life.

From there, he escaped Hungry, attended a Esperanto conference in Bern, supposedly met agnostic philosopher of science, Karl Popper, the father of the requirement of "falsification" for scientific method, and adopted an "Open Society" world view that he has developed over time and that he is attempting to promote all over the world. The term "Open Society" means a society in which "freedom is maximized so that individual citizens can live as they desire to live"...

Go HERE to find out what Hillary Clinton's supposed vision is regarding this...It is nothing more than a mini-Soros version

Interestingly enough, while promoting the "open society" concept he operates in secret bankrupting countries while making profits. He promotes that the "rich should pay their fair share of taxes" and even pay more than they owe if necessary or the benefit of all. However, he does not do that. His office is located in New York, however his business and business assets are located offshore, where taxes are not due and the United States has no right of review of his books or records. In fact, his client list and investors and investment holdings are not subject to SEC regulation. His political theory and "Open Society" concept which is different and more encompassing than Popper's, is only a rouse to get the common man interested in his rhetoric, to spark appeal so that he can then mesmerize them with his words.
"I am basically in business to make money. I cannot and do not look at the social consequences of what I do" ~ George Soros, 1998 "60 Minutes" CBS
He is wealthy. He is said to be worth over $24 Billion. (Forbes 23rd in the world) In 1992, he bankrupted the Bank Of England, and made $1 Billion in the process. He has bankrupted the currencies of poor nations as well, including Malaysia who's Prime Minister openly said that Soros is one of those "Rich people from rich countries, who have no compunction about impoverishing the poor in order to enrich themselves"

As stated, his aim and the way he makes money, is by the control and collapse of financial systems and banks worldwide. The Rothschilds have to fear him and what he has learned to do to them and their money cartels all around the world.

He is a philanthropist to this degree...he funds causes that he likes, causes from which he can benefit, and causes which he can control, by setting up and establishing "foundations", appointing his own employees and using other methods for the purpose of promoting his agenda. 

Although he is a Jew by birth, he denies his heritage as a Jew, and he is anti-Israel. He claims to be in favor of Middle East peace, but reading through the tea leaves reveals that the peace he espouses, funds anti-Israeli groups and claims that Israel is the problem in the Middle East and should not have a state or at the very least share a state with the Palestinians, who have NEVER had a state in the Middle East or anyplace else. One such group that carries out his anti-Zionist agenda is a group called Telos, which is known to provide disinformation even blaming Israel for the Middle East problem. This group is funded by Soros. Read HERE

He is politically engaged both around the world and in the United States. He has funded Occupy WallStreet, Black Lives Matter, and a host of other organizations for the cause of changing the landscape and political agenda of America. HERE 

The Soros social agenda in the world and for America:

*Legalize drugs
*Promote euthanasia
*Promote abortion and abortion rights
*Promote atheism
*Promote sex education (population control)
*Promote gun control
*Promotes the LGBT agenda
*Promote Unfettered immigration (path to citizenship not necessary)
*Make religion simply another choice like all others in society

Why homosexuality? Soros believes that the world is overpopulated by 6 billion people. He believes that we only need about 1 billion people in the world. The way to decrease population is to increase homosexuality and promote assisted killing for people with dreadful diseases.

Recently Wickileaks, released  how Soros, not President Obama nor the United States White House, directed Hillary Clinton, then Secretary Of State, on what to do in Albania. This is what he told the Secretary of State to do:

“two things need to be done urgently” “bring the full weight of the international community to bear on Prime Minister Berisha” “appoint a senior European official as mediator.” After which Soros gives Clinton three names to choose from.
Who is in control if international affairs of the United States? The united States or George Soros? Could this be why Hillary deleted emails?

Finally, George Soros is the main contributor to the Hillary Clinton campaign for President, wouldn't you know it...also, who would have thought, the Clinton Foundation...Remember he gave more than $27 Million to defeat George Bush, and almost went into seclusion when the Supreme Court's decisions went against the democratic party efforts. He is said to have given roughly $10 Million to Hillary's super PAC, Priorities USA which directly contributes to her campaign, $2 Million to American Bridge 21st century which is a super PAC that only focuses on negative or anti-trump efforts, $5 Million to Immigrant Voters Win, that is dedicated to getting out liberal and democratic Hispanic voters to the polls, another $5 Million to PCS dedicated to stopping Republican efforts for voter integrity, and over $700,000 to various PACs to promote democratic ideals, goals and agendas.

Why Should you be concerned?

The vision of the Democratic Party IS the vision of the world of George Soros. His vision does not simply happen to align with the democratic party views. His vision inspires the Democratic Party's views. His views are responsible for the shape and political landscape and agenda for the Democratic Party. God has no place of significance in the Soros world and is only a "private" act in the Democratic Party world. Soros  controlled the Clinton State Department and significantly influenced if not led the Obama Presidency. George Soros is doing in America, what he has done elsewhere, creating a country in his own image:
“I fancied myself as some kind of god …” “If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble.“
Later he said again, just in case you didn't understand:
“It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.“
Soros, is, in his mind, a god. he is a controller of the way things are, and if he cannot control things he will do what he can, by way of using his influence and money to make things the way he wants them to be.

The ONLY thing that prevents Soros agenda from becoming the right now reality that he wants it to be is God himself and the prayers of HIS people. It is the TRUE AND LIVING GOD that is using George Soros to do his bidding. George will die like any other man when God is finished using his evil intent for the glory of God in this world. 

Clinton or Trump, we BETTER pray!

The influence of Soros is so much of a factor that Hollywood elite have arisen to address the issues. Here is a video from actor Jon Voight regarding the issue.


On a free and tolerant society.
George Soros was supposedly so influenced by Karl Popper that he adopted his open society constructs from him. Soros has taken Popper's concepts further than Popper did by saying that his "open society" is a source of truth, which is something that Popper did not contend. Here popper identifies the limits of his open society construct, introducing the "paradox of freedom" concept. 

Atheist Philosopher Karl Popper
“The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. The idea is, in a slightly different form, and with very different tendency, clearly expressed in Plato.
Less well known is the paradox of toleranceUnlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”  ~ Karl R. PopperThe Open Society and Its Enemies


Read more!

Thursday, November 3, 2016

Bishop EW Jackson To Open Letter Pastors: "You Answer To God Not Hillary Clinton"

In a short, but very hard hitting open letter to the pastors who recently sent an Open Letter to Hillary Clinton, Bishop EW Jackson and the group Ministers Taking A Stand, stand to take aim at some of the inconsistencies of the letter sent from the pastors to Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. 

Bishop EW Jackson has long been an outspoken proponent of traditional and biblical moral values preservation, even calling for Black people to leave the Democratic Party based on how the party has consistently failed to deliver on its promises to Blacks and how it has driven God and biblically based moral values off of its platform adopting a secular humanist approach to morals, morality and inclusion. 

Signed by 21 pastors and ministerial leaders and AMEN-DED BY SUPT. PASTOR HARVEY BURNETT of the NEW BETHEL COGIC and THE DUNAMIS WORD, the letter, which can be found HERE gets right to the heart of the matter and issues and makes no bones about the shortcomings of the letter that the pastors delivered to the Hillary Clinton campaign. 

On the tone and tenor of the Open Letter to Mrs. Clinton:
In the first paragraph you say, “we, clergy and intellectuals who serve the poor, Democrats and independents, appeal to you.” Do I understand that you have no Republicans in your churches? I can assure you that you do. They may be in the closet because of the hatred they are likely to feel from their “fellow Christians” and the accusations leveled at them as “traitors” and “sellouts sell-outs.” By refusing to acknowledge them you are perpetuating an unGodly attitude toward black Americans who identify as Republicans. How can you allow that when they are the very people who cannot reconcile themselves to the wrongs of the Democrat Party that you yourselves point out – e.g., disregarding the lives of unborn children and arrogantly redefining marriage in direct defiance of God. Your silence implies that God blesses membership in the Democrat Party in spite of its utter moral bankruptcy.
More on the pro-Democrat tone:
"Your silence implies that God blesses membership in the Democrat Party in spite of its utter moral bankruptcy. Or perhaps you mean to convey your own approval of the Democrat Party and disapproval of the Republican Party. Either way, God will not bless sin and you should not bless it either."
The continued endorsement of the Democratic party:
"First, you assume she will be elected, but take no stand one way or the other. You never mention Republicans or Donald Trump so there is implicit endorsement. You imply that for black people there is only the Democrat Party, but you don’t say it explicitly."
On police brutality
"Secondly, it is encouraging that while you raise the issue of police brutality, you do not make the fatal error of many black leaders. You do not ignore the scourge of black on black crime which is killing thousands every year at disproportionate numbers from any other intra-ethnic violence. The reality is that the number of black people killed in police confrontations pales in significance to the number who die on our streets – including innocent women and children – at the hands of black criminals. I congratulate you because many who claim to be the intellectual elite of our community refuse to discuss this. They are so captivated by the racism paradigm, that they cannot see the bodies piling up right in front of them.
In short, I TOTALLY AGREE with the sentiments and statements of Bishop Jackson. As I said in the Previous article on the subject, the pastors and bishops in the open letter, seem to have been silent for at least 8 years while President Obama was seeking to entrench the nation in many of the immoral positions that have been adopted through our courts and within our communities. They enjoyed the attention and association of the Obama presidency even using it to their advantage... For instance, COGIC claim to fame has been the recent "bringing in" of Bobby Rush...Bobby Rush however ENDORSES abortion and abortion rights...He has a 0% rating from the NRLC (National Right To Life Committee) and believes that children should have unfettered access to abortions and abortion services.
Then there is Bishop Talbert Swan, also an endorser of the Clinton Open Letter. We are in receipt of certain electronically generated information directed from Talbert Swan to certain other clergy that does not place Bishop Swan (COGIC Assistant General Secretary) in the most positive light. So much so until COGIC recently released a communique to clergy members directing them to avoid electronic and phone correspondence from persons "investigating" the church or calling on behalf of individuals within the church because their identity may have been hijacked. In this case however, there is no possibility that identity of Swan has been hijacked as IP addresses (the computer fingerprint) has been both identified and confirmed. This, if true, and we believe that it is, is not only shameful, but is proof that the Bishop has not acted in accordance with his credentials and could be sanctioned when and if charges are accepted by the COGIC Board Of Bishops....

What am I saying...I am saying that it seems that Bishop Jackson's concerns are on point...the open letter to Clinton appears to be a play for relevance and an appeal to be a gatekeeper rather than a demand and direction to change the moral climate and temperament of this country and as such is unworthy and well beneath the intent of the power of God in the earth. Many of the people who support discord are speaking against the SAME discord they endorse and make the letter inconsistent if nothing else. 

Although I would love to agree with Bishop Charles E Blake, because I respect him as a leader, once again the company he keeps disallows me from endorsing the full  message of the Open Letter to Clinton, but it does allow me to endorse and to continue to endorse the messages that both this blog and others have consistently called for even through an Obama Presidency.  

One thing is for sure, JESUS IS COMING BACK and when he does....


Read more!

The "Black" Church Open Letter To Hillary Clinton...We'd Like To Talk Now

In an effort spearheaded by Jacquelyn C. Rivers, executive director of the Seymour Institute on Black Church and Policy Studies, a group of pastoral leaders representing the "Black Church" and in particularly the "Pentecostal-Charismatic" wing of the Black church,  delivered a thesis to the Hillary Clinton campaign, on Halloween of all days, making the assumption that 1- she would prevail in her effort to become President and 2- that she, in her first 100 days, would take the time to unravel and stand down on nearly all of the rhetoric that she has endorsed heavily in recent times, which includes her belief in the normalization of homosexuality, and the force-feeding of the LGBT agenda to the American public, and the continued proliferation of abortion rights under the guise of "women's rights". 

Signed by nearly 26 pastors, most of which are COGIC, some of whom have some "questionable" backgrounds and history on the same issues that the letter addresses, the Pastors and Bishops seem to hit Hillary Clinton and the DNC platform in the breadbasket very hard:

On Abortion:
"For the same reasons that we as black Christian leaders oppose racism, unjust wars, capital punishment and euthanasia, we oppose the violent denial of life to the unborn through abortion. It is our view that human life is a gift of God that we are called upon to protect, nurture and sustain, because we are created in God’s image." (pg. 3)
On Education & Employment: 
"One writer has observed that as entry into labor markets has become increasingly dependent upon education and highly technical skills we are witnessing, perhaps for the first time, a generation of black youth ill-equipped to secure gainful employment even as productive slaves." (pg. 2) 
On Violence:
"The structural failures which stalk inner-city communities and promote nihilism and violence among our young men are a challenge to the courage and faith of the black church. As the primary institution of our neighborhoods, the church has the resources to minister to these young men both materially and spiritually, to give them hope in the future and a path to a new life. The work of the black church in our poor communities is of the utmost importance and the importance of our freedom to operate in accordance with our faith cannot be overstated." (pg. 4)
Religious Freedom for Black America:
"There is no analogy between the apartheid of Jim Crow and the religious freedom laws in force across this country. It is the very same faith that is protected by religious freedom laws that inspired our black ancestors to lead the movement for the abolition of slavery and the end of Jim Crow apartheid in the American South. It is absurd to demean the defense of this faith as the equivalent of the injustices that we have fought and overcome." (Pg. 5)
"The drive to normalize immoral sexual behavior has inspired some to dishonor the memory of courageous blacks who experienced the unique horrors of white supremacy, slavery, rape, terrorism and apartheid in the U.S. Their argument that religious freedom laws are historically and existentially equivalent to Jim Crow laws rests on false assertions." (pg. 5)
A late appeal...why not meet and demand to meet now instead of after an election?
"We request that you set a place and time, during your first 100 days in office, where
we may meet to learn more about your position on these issues. Then we will be better able to inform our community about what they can reasonably expect from a Clinton administration."
The Hillary Clinton campaign has not responded to this open letter as of the writing of this article, however Bishop EW Jackson Sr. & the group Ministers Taking A Stand has. Please see their response HERE

My take: The Clinton campaign and the Democratic party has been so thoroughly led down the line of socialism and social re-engineering, that it will take much more than a letter, to close the FLOOD GATES that President Obama opened and wants to see  continue.

The CURRENT White House has done everything it could to start the nation on a course where God is simply an "opinion" among many others and where religious freedoms are no more than pieces of a grand chess game to be manipulated and changed when and where it can.

Thank God that the Bishops are standing, but THEY SHOULD HAVE STOOD AT THE BEGINNING of the demise of traditional family values and the proliferation of the LGBT agenda when President Obama used nearly every thing at his disposal to prop the agenda up, while many of them took positions, pictures and sought political significance.

To stand now is like placing a thumb in a 50 foot gap of the Hoover Dam. It may look like you're doing something, but it's way too late. And if you think that the person who is committed to doing all of what you have allowed to be done over the last 8 years, will suddenly change direction over the next 8, I also have some swamp land in Arizona that I would love to sell's a steal at only $5,000 per square foot, with a 100,000  square foot minimum....



The Open Letter

Read more!

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

Is All Sin And Reconciliation Of Sin The Same? Pt. 1

Please allow me to shed light on a particular subject. This is for those who are bible believers. I would say that this is not for the general public in the sense of examining what is right or wrong outside of a biblical context. This article has no regard for governmental legislation on court process in determining truth, right and wrong. So if I may...

The Case

Some have taken to task to say that "all sins are the same" and that there is no sin greater or worse than another. Therefore, we should treat all sin and all sinners the same.

Sentiments such as these are invoked in particularly as it pertains to homosexuality within the church. Some say,
"Since we have adulterers and fornicators in the church and some of them are in position, if there is a homosexual, they are no worse off than some others caught in sexual sin and therefore should be allowed to participate in the church and in church leadership like any other person."
Bishop O C Allen &
1st Gentleman
Rashad Burgess
Because of this, some conclude that to exclude homosexuals from opportunities within the church, such as the opportunity to lead congregations and various aspects of ministry, that such restrictions are no more than an arbitrary standard of men where closeted and even open sexual impurities are rewarded while openly gay men and women are discouraged and held down. In fact, some say that at least the open gay is living their truth and to say that they are worse than anyone else, including those perverts hiding behind the pulpit, is simply hateful and from a secular point of view, discriminatory.

Now, at first glance, this argument and the relevant issues, seem to have some merit. We would have to admit that although the sin of homosexuality has been around for quite some time, we have known adulterers, fornicators and other sexually immoral persons among our ranks and some of them fill positions, and some even do their deeds openly. There are pastors and bishops and other church leaders, who have not just simply failed or committed sins, but who actively live and lead lifestyles contrary to biblical teachings. 

Look at the men caught on video and film, having sex with both women and men in recent times. Then, there are baby and even adult child scandal dramas regularly. The Greenleaf series on OWN, the source of much recent controversy, is said to deal with and expose the ultra lavish lifestyle and sins of former COGIC Presiding Bishop J O Patterson, who fathered children outside of marriage and lived opulently while the majority of the church was filled with common and ordinary people dedicated to living godly and holy. As stated some of them are "leaders", caught in open heterosexual sins, aspire and achieve to the highest heights of the church.

Because noone sins alone, there are women, within the church, who feel that they are confirmed and affirmed to live in and out of the bed of individuals to whom they are not married. Some even feel that it is their mission and duty, to seek out men for illicit relationships and then "expose" them for what they themselves have contributed to, and spent a great deal of time creating. Recently a woman, seeking to expose a married Bishop, made a videotape of him in a hotel room naked. Although she created the video, if it wasn't for her voice you would never know she was in the room. Certainly he was wrong, but she was a willing agent in destruction, making herself available for sex with a married man. What I am saying is that neither of them had anything to brag about or be proud of.   

To be frank, the church must admit that we have some nasty, slimy, filthy dogs (both male and female) that make it a sport to go through the church, manipulate both men, women and even children, and keep on moving under the pretense of "serving the Lord" in some fashion. 

What We Know:

I would say that although the act of sin has changed, expanded and gone to new levels of perversion, none of the sentiments regarding perversion within the church is new to the scriptures or the church:

2 Tim. 3: 5-6 ~ 5-Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6-For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 

Phil. 3:18-19 ~ 18-(For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19-Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.) 

In fact, the church has known for years that it has adulterous, fornicating and gay singers, and even other leaders within the church that live immorally. Knowing that sexual immorality and impurity exists within the church does not allow or extend a license in any way for such immorality to continue to exist, thrive or proliferate. God's plan is still one of purity, sanctification and holiness within the life of the believer and ultimately within the context of the church. 

1 Thess. 4:3-8 ~ 3-For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: 4-That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; 5-Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: 6-That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified. 7-For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness. 8-He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit.

"No need to single out gays and lesbians". Sincere critics, who make this assertion, assume that to single out the gay and lesbian is an act of injustice and man made judgement and therefore not "Christlike" because, "all sins are the same" and heterosexual sin is no better or worse than homosexual sin. 

This is and can be rather complex, and there are some believers who sincerely believe in a holy lifestyle that struggle with this observation and these sentiments. So let's examine this for a minute.


Is it unjust to address homosexuality within the church, while being silent about heterosexual sins? Does God view that all sexual sins are the same? Is it not "Christlike" to call homosexuality a sin and exclude homosexuals from service within the church? Should the church be an open field of opportunities in leadership to homosexuals embracing the homosexual lifestyle? These are some major questions and issues within many of our churches today and many leaders are struggling with the issues. 

I will attempt to wade into these waters of church introspection. In a couple of parts, I will address and attempt to answer the following issues:
Bishop Allyson D, Nelson Abrams
I ~ Are there varying degrees of both righteousness, sin and reward, punishment or judgement?
II ~ Is homosexuality from a biblical perspective a sin?

III ~ Is there a difference in the nature of homosexual sin, vs. the nature of sin in general in church and within society?
IV ~ Should the church embrace active homosexuals as leaders within the church?
Section I 

A ~ Are there varying degrees of both righteousness, sin and reward, punishment or judgement? 

B ~ Are all sins the same? 

Rev. 20:12 -14
 ~ And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13- And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.14- And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Admittedly, there is a lot about judgement that we don't know. Just the unimaginable scene of judgement itself is beyond our capacity to fully understand. However, there is a lot that we do know and are told from scripture. 

For sure all people and sins will be judged. There will be a day when all men will give an account for their sins. The Saint will give an account through and by the grace and mercy of God from a blood-washed condition. His/her sins will be thrown into the sea of forgetfulness, because of their faith in Jesus. Those sins will not be used against us in judgment and will be remembered no more.

According to 1 Cor. 6, the believer will also have part in judgement of angels and will be called to witness against the sins of the world as well. Believers will receive a reward as Jesus referenced in John 14:1.Unbelievers will receive their reward also and will know exactly what and why they are being judged...for rejecting the saving work and power of the Son of God. 

For both sin and for righteousness, there will be a reward. What is often not considered is that scripture indicates that there will be rewards commensurate to sins and there will be rewards commensurate to righteousness as well. 

We often associate our faith or our level of blessing in heaven with a "reward" or commensurate with what we have overcome on earth. Jesus says as much in Mt. 5 in his sermon on the Mount as he was encouraging those who would suffer persecution for the Lord's sake:

Mt. 5:11-12 ~ 11-Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.12-Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

"Great is your reward in heaven" specifically points out that not only will a person be rewarded with heaven itself, but shall be rewarded in a comparatively great manner with additional rewards aside from heaven only. 

In heaven, there are four and twenty elders who sit around the throne. (Rev. 4:10, 5:8, 14, 7:13, 11:16, 14:3). In Mt. 20:20-23 when responding to the request of  the mother of Zebedee's sons, aka the "sons of thunder" Jesus indicated that only God had the power to place anyone on the right and left, indicating the place of great reward, recognition and honor. As Jesus explained this "position" or honor was commensurate with the work of suffering that would be done by the individual and by the will and command of God. 

Jesus responds to Peter's "we have left all" after speaking to the rich young ruler saying: 

Mt. 19:28-29 ~ 28-And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29-And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life

Jesus reveals who at least half of those 24 elders were and would be that sat upon thrones in heaven and on his right and left hand saying that not only would they receive "everlasting life" but also the reward of "an hundredfold" which was Jewish idiom of the day to indicate a great or wonderful blessing.  

Then there is Paul in 1 Cor. 3: 11-15. Paul here speaks of the works that we do and how some of them would be "burnt up" and others remaining. He indicates that both individuals who present works will be saved, but only the one whose works are not burned up will receive "a reward" (1 Cor. 3:14b). Yes, the ultimate reward is heaven, but there are degrees of gifts that shall be received by each believer. 

On The Flip Side
We often, however, overlook that sins and failure will be met with the same degree of temperament and reward as well. Here is what Luke records:

Luke 12:47-48 ~ 47-And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.48-But he that knew not, and
did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him
they will ask the more.

In Luke, Jesus illustrates that the one who "knew" the will of the lord, but failed in that was beaten with "many" stripes, while the other was beaten with "few" stripes simply because those who had been given much to work with shall have a greater responsibility for their failure in refusing to do what God has said to do (in this case an earthly lord would even be cognizant of this difference). This is a principle that Jesus outlines that cannot simply be overlooked. 

I believe that this is a direct allusion to the varying penalty for sin and wrongdoing. For one, there is "less" of a judgment or penalty to pay, even though there is or has been a violation. For another there is a greater punishment or penalty, because the person, though equipped, refused to prepare and hear. Men appear to be judged according to what they have received or been given.   

David cries that the Lord will reward the wicked according to their own works and evil deeds: Ps. 28:4) Yet other scriptures agree that men shall be paid according to their works (Mt. 16:27, Rev. 20:12,13, 2 Cor. 11:15, Rom. 2:6 (the repetition of Ps.28:4) 

B) Are all sins the same? 

Obviously, what is sin is sin. There is no question about what is wrong being wrong. However, if there are different or varying degrees of reward, punishment and judgement about both righteousness and sins, then not only is every reward the same but neither is every sin is equal. Because of justice neither is every sin rewarded the same.

"Thou shalt not steal" (Ex. 20:15, Deut. 5:19) We all know the command. However, there is a difference between a parent who steals 3lbs. of ground beef from a grocery store to feed his family, and a person who steals from individuals to enrich themselves. 

Yes, both have violated both natural law and the law of God. However, like Jesus' views on the Sabbath, Jesus often views the application of the law through the lens of humanity and human experience. Not that he is soft on sin, but he tempers his judgement with righteousness.

David & The Shewbread (1 Sam. 21:6 & Mt. 12:4)

We all remember David in escaping from Saul along with his men. They became hungry and went into the temple at Nob asking to eat bread that was dedicated to the use and consecration of priestly service. (1 Sam. 21) In this scenario, David was reminded of the Law which restricted the use of the bread. However, the priest after giving a very minimal test regarding holiness, gave to David and he ate the bread along with his companions and was not chastised by the Lord for doing so.

Jesus, in Mt. 12:4, when confronted about doing good on the Sabbath Day, argued that although it was unlawful to eat the bread, the bread served a greater purpose and that was to fulfill the will of God toward HIS people. As a type, the bread actually represented Jesus himself, who by the breaking of his body (bread) would actually sustain the word and allow a new Kingdom to enter the world giving us life by his reign.

In this case, what was obviously a "sin" according to the literal interpretation and rendering of scripture, was not judged as so. The reconciliation of the event was in accord with the purpose and command of God.

By Contrast

Adolph Hitler and many with him were responsible for the extermination and genocide of over 7 million Jews and people who sympathized with the Jewish people in Nazi Germany. Families were destroyed, broken up, children, boys and girls, raped, property stolen and people left to suffer. Even over 70 years removed from the events, the atrocities are yet being revealed.  

Is there anyone willing to argue that Hitler's reward in his judgement will be the same as one who has never murdered or broken up families nor embraced racism? Or the same as a person who has not offended humanity on the scale of Hitler's offense? Certainly Hitler will be made to pay for and be judged according to his sins.  The same with Caesar Nero, Stahlin, Pol Pot and a host of others that have used and abused humanity. They will not escape neither judgment nor the reward of their sins! However, their sins will not be rewarded on the same scale as one who stole a biscuit or a pack of ground beef or steaks because they were hungry.

At this point, I can say with confidence that I don't know how God will judge and adjudicate all situations. However, I can say with confidence that God is a JUST judge and he will judge justly.

Final thought in this section: During the Mt. Olivet discourse, Jesus spoke of adultery. Prior to his missive, people thought that there was a difference between their actions and their thoughts. (Mt. 5:27-28) Theirs was a strict, literal interpretation of scripture's teaching against such sins. However, they missed that an evil heart is ultimately equally as bad as wicked actions. Jesus said that if a man, "looks upon a woman" with intent  "to lust after her" has committed adultery. Those who thought that they can lust inwardly without judgement, were caught in their sins with the realization that God saw them and was a judge of the "intents" of the heart as well as the actions of the flesh. So they would not escape judgement by embracing sin on any level.

However, sin by a man's actions creeps into other parts of a person's life. Sin in the heart is worthy of judgement, but sin acted upon could be even worse. A man thinking about an affair, takes it to a new stage of unrighteous reward by acting out upon his thoughts. A man thinking of murder, may be guilty in his heart, but by acting out takes his unrighteous reward to a new level. Same with any sin. Carrying these things out create and produce a greater level of unrighteous reward. 

Yes, in an ultimate sense, sin is sin. All sin is unworthy of a holy God. However, there is a difference and additional penalty for those acting out on their sins or lust. A man looks at a woman and has an inordinate desire. The same man pursues the object of his lust, establishes an illicit relationship. Judgment comes. BOTH will be judged in their sins, but God will distribute the reward as well, as he has promised to personally judge "whore mongers and adulterers I will judge" (Heb. 13:4) It is there that God will look at and see the heart, intents and actions and judge righteously. The actions of unrighteousness will not receive a pass, but God will correct and set the record straight.

All sins are not the same. Some are worse than others. Only God will distinguish the difference in judgment and with regard for unrighteous deeds. However, on earth we can obviously see that all evil does not have the same outcome even though all evil is offensive to a holy God. The other problem with sin and evil is when people seek to normalize it and make it seem right or just. This in and of itself is a great evil and a sin. To rationalize sin as righteousness, is an offense! 


In this part, I believe that I have established from a scriptural perspective that although heaven in and of itself is a reward, there are additional rewards in heaven that will be given based on faithful service and the work of the believer. I have also established that there is a variation of punishment and judgement that will be delivered as well. So on its face, if there is a variation of the punishment of sin as we can see from scripture, all sins are not the same.

The ultimate reconciliation of unrepentant sin is the same. Hell. However, the rewards and degrees of punishment is unequal and based on the depth of sin that a person embraced, even in their unbelief.

In Pt. 2 I will deal with homosexuality and reconcile the actions of a practicing homosexual with the actions of the heterosexual and with those who engage in various types of relationships and answer the questions, "Is homosexuality a sin? Should homosexuals be promoted or encouraged in ministry positions within the church?" and more.


Read more!