Protesting TRUTH & A Frazier Knock-Out

It seems that the confusion over sex and sexuality continues at the intersection of sin and ungodliness.

It seems that gay advocacy is alive and well within the city of Chicago. Apparently, there was a rally against the Apostolic Church Of God over the weekend due to the church's faithfulness to scripture and traditional marriage.

It seems that a former member of the church, who evidently recently entered into a lesbian marriage, was dis-fellowshipped because of her marriage. While intricate details here are unknown, what is known is that the gay community, with the biblically illiterate in tow, is attempting to paint the picture that the bible somehow endorses the SIN of homosexuality and vicariously homosexual marriage.

Of certainty, we can say that they are wrong, have been wrong, and will not be right until such time as they repent of their sins and stop bullying the church by falsely accusing it of discrimination. Here's the video: 

The "pastor" of Lighthouse Church, Jamie Frazier,appears to be one of the apostate conduits for this argument against the church and traditional biblical truth. He raises some questions in effort to capture the attention of the community. Therefore, briefly, let's answer and address some of "pastor" Jamie Frazier's rambling and biblically confused assertions:

First, Frazier asserts: "The pulpit is not a weapon with which to silence, but rather it is a beacon from which to shine light," 

To that we all agree. The LIGHT is the light of Christ to the world. That light says that there is a difference between what is clean and what us unclean, and a difference between what is holy and unholy. That light says that we (the church and individual believers) are the "salt of the earth" and if we loose our savor, all we are good for is to be trodden under the foot of men. The LIGHT points men and women in the right direction and shows the world our "good works" so that God may be glorified. (read Mt. 5) The problem is, living in and endorsing sin is NOT a light, but is DARKNESS!

You see Mr. Frazier, the pulpit is not to be used to endorse, glorify or encourage SIN. The pulpit is not yours. It is not mine. It belongs to God and those of us who approach it are to do so faithfully as it pertains to HIS word, and HIS truth, not ours!

Frazier asks: "How could we say two men or two women in a committed god honoring relationship are sinning?"

First, "pastor", two men and or two women cannot be "married" to one another and that be considered "god honoring" relationship from a biblical perspective. We are not talking about secularism. You did not protest City Hall or the Statehouse. You protested a church. The church's first mission is faithfulness to the WORD of God, not adherence to political correctness or to moral relativism. 

The bible teaches that homosexuality is a dishonorable act. Rom. 1:24 ~ "Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:"

The very act of homosexuality (otherwise referred to as uncleanliness within the text) and consequently, within our society, homosexual marriage, is not anything that God "honors". Why would God honor something that dishonors men and mankind? It (homosexuality) is a behavioral sin like others and yet more. It is an encapsulated lifestyle contrary to biblical and scriptural truth, and is aggressive in nature. For example, one cannot find an adulterer or hardly a pedophile, (both behavioral sins) that believe that their sin should be embraced and accepted prima-facia by others. Many of them do not wish to be seen, yet alone known for their sin. However, the homosexual advocate seeks to gain acceptance of their homosexuality from everyone in their community, subjugating every institutional moral value to its acceptance. This is why they are saying (you are saying) that the church is "discriminating". This is name calling, shaming and out right bullying. Bullying in effort to "make" people accept your behavioral issue as an acceptable moral value.  

The sin of homosexuality, having gained acceptance within liberal facets of society due to political means, processes, bullying and other reasons is something that many of those who advocate for it attempt to present as an argument simply about "diversity" and equal rights, as opposed to moral truth. However, homosexuality is a behavior, and a product of existential thinking where man creates his own purpose as opposed to seeking the purpose of God for his existence. (Read HERE for more information on existentialism and what you are actually endorsing by endorsing this sin) 

Therefore your question is logically incoherent. Men cannot honor God in homosexual relationships because God views that relationships of the sort, are dishonoring to themselves and to humanity. So try that one again "pastor" and give us a question that makes sense so that we can address it!

Finally, Frazier says: "Show me how two men or two women loving one another diminishes their capacity to love god, to love themselves and to love other people,"

Let's start with the latter red-herring arguments...1- no one claims that homosexuals do not "love themselves" and cannot "love other people" neither of those are the arguments...2- the bible commands us to 'love one another" so that is not in question. 

What the homosexual does is lust with and or have sex with one another. In modern times this leads to what has been deemed "homosexual marriage". It is homosexual marriage and the normalization of the practice of homosexuality that the church correctly and properly stands against. Not the ability or inability of the homosexual to function, display love, care and concern for any and all individuals in life. 

To what I believe the "point" of your challenge is: 

Jesus, speaking in the context of money, reveals that no man can serve 2 masters. They will either hate one and love the other. (Mt. 6:24) Our love leads to our service, allegiance, self-sacrifice and faithful adherence to HIS word.

If it can be demonstrated that our "love" or how we carry out our love, is either honoring or dishonoring to God, as I believe that it can, then we can firmly make the statement and set forth the truth that if our love is dishonoring to HIM by virtue of our actions, we cannot say that we love HIM, if the meaning of that is to live in a state and condition of submission to HIS truth and word. under those conditions, we can certainly say that we love ourselves, and possibly considerations for God, but we cannot truly say that we love HIM if we do not intend to forsake that which is dishonoring to HIM and that which HE does not honor. 

Therefore, by demonstration of what a man does by his actions, a revelation of the capacity of the individual to "love God" can be determined. When a person embraces homosexual activity, their capacity to "love God" is diminished, hindered and severely limited or restricted. In this ethos, self becomes greater than God and personal fulfillment of desire is central to the person and that person lives in union with self, rather than in union with God. 

Anything greater than God, HIS truth and HIS word in our life is an idol and is therefore "another" god, not the God of the bible!

Final Thought:

This attack has nothing to do with the "denomination" of the church. All churches faithful to traditional biblical values are targets. 

The church in general does not and cannot not prohibit anyone from simply attending. After all the church should be a place of healing to them who are spiritually sick and ailing. However the church has an obligation to restrict the ungodly from leadership. Without compromise, the church should not look like and act like the world...though it does...it (the church in general) and those who lead people astray such as Mr. Frazier, will pay the price!

Blessed!         

Read more!

Does Existence Precede Essence?

French atheist, humanist philosopher and Marxist, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) asserted within his writings that a proof of God's nonexistence is wrapped up in the existential theory that human beings do not have essence (aka: core property or ultimate purpose) prior to their existence. Due to this "blank slate" of being at existence, we are therefore "condemned to be free" acting separately or independently from the past with the ability to make ourselves or our lives whatever we wish it to be, to espouse whatever moral values we individually choose, and to suffer the consequences and full weight of such decisions. eg: Each individual can self direct their own purpose as there is no purposeful intent of our existence except that which we assign to it.

Now, think of this for a minute. If there is no creator, and we have not been given any purpose other than a self-assigned temporary purpose which we have chosen for ourselves, which is only as relevant as as a speck of dust in the wind, then the universe itself, ultimately has no essence (purpose) and the existence of all things, no matter how wonderful or majestic they may be only lead to a cold uncelebrated death and meaninglessness. This is the world of existence preceding essence and the logical conclusion to the theory itself. In its end, it will lead to nihilism or the meaninglessness of life.

The Fight For Essence (Purpose): Thank God for TRUTH!

I suppose that we could give what Sartre had to say some real credence and credibility "if" it were true and "if" God had not already addressed this same issue through his word thousands of years prior to Sartre's existence and the existence of others who think like him. Although Sartre has claimed that all men are prophets, incidentally enough it was the calling of a prophet that settled the issue a long time ago:

Jer. 1:5 ~ “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

As God spoke to Jeremiah calling him to be a prophet to the nation of Israel, HE reveals that God's purpose for Jeremiah extended to a time BEFORE Jeremiah's existence. God, not being a respector of "any man's person" reveals to us, by that statement and calling alone, that each person that he has allowed to enter this realm has an "essence" or purpose, prior to their existence. There is no such thing as a purposeless existence.

According to the truth of the word of God, our essence or purpose clearly precedes our existence. God has a purpose and he further has a plan for every human being and for every individual and that plan doesn't just prop up when we show up in the womb. God therefore moves and directs HIS actions with intention and by virtue of that, has created and filled a universe with intention or purpose as well. 

To drive the point home, let's look further:

Ps. 139: 16 ~Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.

The Psalmist also reveals that prior to our formation as individuals, God has already number the days appointed for us here on earth. Before any days or times existed, eg: before existence as a person, God saw and created essence (purpose) by giving each individual a place and space within this time continuum called life. That is purpose.

Is There A "Blank Slate" Of Humanity:

Crossexamined.org recently produced at article entitled "What The Fighting Over Gender Issues Is Really About", pointing out the flawed Sartreian philosophy as mentioned above that further suggests that because existence precedes essence that we have a moral "blank slate" which will allow everyone to create his or her own purpose in life to the fullest degree.

Read more!