D – GLBTQ Pressure Within Churches

Study: Liberal Church Political Participation Growing, Conservative Church Political Involvement Decreasing

Wednesday, July 20th, 2016

“Evil prevails when good churches do nothing.”

Godless Morality Adovcates...are filling the void left by biblical pastors who refuse to get involved in the Culture War over morality in America.

Godless ‘Morality’ Advocates…like “gay Christian” activist Matthew Vines are filling the void left by biblical pastors who refuse to get involved in the Culture War over morality in America. In what might be termed a form of “Satanic evangelism,” Vines’ Reformation Project trains people to go into evangelical churches with appealing, homosexuality-affirming and “gay theology” messages–“to create an environment in which Christian leaders will have the freedom to take the next steps toward affirming and including LGBT people in all aspects of church life.” In other words, to infiltrate churches to get them to accommodate a sexual sin that the Word of God calls an abomination. For some actual truth on the subject, see Prof. Rob Gagnon’s paper, “How Bad Is Homosexual Practice According to Scripture?”

Dear Readers,

This piece by my friend Micah Clark, who ably runs the Indiana Family Association, confirms what many of us already knew: pastors are copping out of the Culture War over moral values. As it turns out, liberal (apostate) churches–usually pro-abortion “rights,” pro-LGBTQ and socialist-leaning–are filling the Public Square void. In other words, an organized onslaught of secular and religious liberals is working to radically change transform this nation. And remember: leftist “change agents”–the same fellows who used to scream: “Don’t impose your morality on us!”–do all their destructive modernist work in the name of “morality.”

The Left marches lockstep to aggressively push its humanist, anti-God “morality.” What has happened to the real people of faith who should be today’s moral leaders? @PeterLaBarbera, AFTAH

________________________________

How to Lose Freedom in One Easy Step

By Micah Clark

Millions of Americans may be watching the Republican national convention this week.  Some data is finding that this in an election year in which record numbers of voters seem to be interested in deciding who will be our next president.   For example, the Republican primary has seen a 62% increase in voter turnout this year over 2012, from 19.2 million votes four years ago to 31 million this year.

This may be why a new study of church engagement has caught pollsters by surprise. The new study from the American Culture and Faith Institute is being described as “nothing less than astounding.”
At a time when religious hostility is on the rise and recognized as a problem among a majority of all Americans, the very institutions targeted by such bigotry are in full retreating from the battle.

The study of 600 theologically conservative evangelical pastors finds that they are “unlikely to call their congregations to participate in any meaningful way” in the 2016 election.

Read the rest of this article »

VIDEO: Anne Paulk Interviews Frank Worthen, Dean of Ex-‘Gays’ – at Restored Hope Network Conference

Monday, July 18th, 2016

There are lots of hidden gems in the pro-family movement because we don’t have the media helping us get the word out. Frank Worthen, the dean of the “ex-gay” movement, is one of them. This interview occurred at the 2015 conference of the Restored Hope Network, the ex-“gay” umbrella group that replaces Exodus International (which imploded through failed, unbiblical leadership). RHN Executive Director Anne Paulk conducts this interview, which is also posted on her YouTube channel.

Frank was “in” the homosexual lifestyle for 25 years and he’s been “out” of homosexuality and married for decades. Think about that. How many times have you heard the lie that people cannot overcome the pull of homosexuality? That being “gay” is “who they are”? That people are “born gay,” etc.? Also, note how a religious man whom Frank respected sought to confirm him as a homosexual. How evil is that? Please share this interview with your network of friends–especially young people swimming in cultural myths and falsehoods about disordered sexuality.

Come to think of it, Anne Paulk, who herself came out of lesbianism and who is doing terrific work running RHN, is another one of those gems. Please support Restored Hope Network with your prayers and gifts–and buy Frank’s books. They would make a wonderful gift to anyone who struggles with same-sex attractions or claims a “gay” identity. Yes, lasting, wholesome change for homosexuals is possible! Frank Worthen is proof of that. But more importantly, his life is a shining testimony to the love, mercy and grace of Jesus:

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation.” — 2 Corinthians 5:17-18

 — @Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH

Read the rest of this article »

Janet Mefferd on Dr. Al Mohler’s Criticism of Reparative Therapy – Are Southern Baptists Moving the Goalposts?

Wednesday, October 7th, 2015

Al-Mohler

Special Sin? Has Dr. Al Mohler of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary failed the “Sexual Sin Substitution Test” on homosexualism?

[UPDATE: to listen to Janet Mefferd’s interview with AFTAH’s Peter LaBarbera, go HERE or click play in the player above (it starts at the 24:00 mark)]

Dear Readers, once again the pro-family, Christian movement falls into “Kvetch and Retreat” mode, which is another way of saying we are constantly backing up in our interactions with the homosexual juggernaut. This is why we lose. Needless to say, homosexual activists and their fellow travelers are not appeased by Dr. Al Mohler’s high-minded retreat on pro-heterosexual Reparative Therapy, as my friend and talk show host Janet Mefferd notes with regard to the Huffington Post columnist and “liberal Christian” professor Derek Penwell below.

I appreciate that Janet applies what I am calling the “Sexual Sin Substitution Test”: simply replace “gay” with another sexual sin and see if it makes sense. This helps to lay bare the pitfalls of making special accommodations, theological caveats–and even questionable apologies–in our approach toward those caught up in the sin of (proud) homosexualism and gender rebellion. With regard to Mohler’s curious apology–on behalf of non-consulted Christians everywhere–to people caught up in homosexual behaviors and feelings, I would ask–as a flawed Ambassador of Christ myself:

Why hasn’t Mohler apologized to the porn-using “community”? The adulterous “community”? And certainly the very large but misunderstood fornicators “community” deserves an apology, too. Why are he and other guilt-ridden Christians not apologizing to these sin groups?

The practical answer to that question, I submit, is that these other sins are not the beneficiaries of a powerful lobby that has turned ungodly yet changeable behaviors into proud self-identities–and a supposedly victimized “minority” with massive media, corporate and government clout behind it. And I say to Prof. Penwell— in the spirit of Jeremiah 17:9 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11–repent, humble yourself before Almighty God and turn away from all anti-biblical attempts to justify proud homosexuality in the lives of others. Because no amount of cultural power and liberal propaganda can turn sin into righteousness. –Peter LaBarbera, Americans For Truth; @PeterLaBarbera; americansfortruth@gmail.com

P.S. I will be appearing tonight (Oct. 7, 2015) as a guest on Janet’s new radio show, “Janet Mefferd Today”  to discuss Mohler’s ill-timed criticism of pro-hetero Reparative Therapy. To listen to the interview, go HERE — it starts at the 24:00 mark.

__________________________

Mefferd writes:

Reparative Therapy, Southern Baptists and Moving the Goalposts

“When even Al Mohler is embarrassed to talk about ‘reparative therapy’ in straightforward terms everyone understands, it means that cultural standards are evolving toward greater hospitality to our LGBTQ sisters and brothers.” – Pro-homosexual liberal activist  and “liberal Christian” Derek Penwell

*           *          *

Read the rest of this article »

Michael Brown Responds to ‘Gay Christian’ Activist Matthew Vines’ 40 Questions on Homosexuality and Christianity

Thursday, August 6th, 2015
The Answer Is No: Michael Brown ably answers the lie of "gay Christianity" in his book, "Can You Be Gay and Christian?"

The Answer Is No: …if “gay” means positively and proudly homosexual. Dr. Michael Brown ably answers the lies of “gay Christianity” in his book, “Can You Be Gay and Christian? Responding with Love & Truth to Questions About Homosexuality.” He similarly responds with “love & truth” to homosexual activist Matthew Vines’ self-serving “40 Questions” below. Buy the book: Readers can purchase Brown’s book–while supporting AFTAH’s ministry–by purchasing ” for $17 postpaid. Two-Book Discount: You can also add Michael Brown’s in-depth book, “Something Queer Happened to America”–and receive both books postpaid for $29. Pay securely online or send your check to: AFTAH, PO Box 5522, Naperville, IL 60567-5522.

“I cannot see our [Heavenly] Father responding positively to the threat of, ‘Unless you let me have a relationship that satisfies me, I will kill myself.’ [Answer # 9]

“What is explicitly affirmed over and again in the Bible is that God requires holiness of all His people and that the only outlet for sexual intimacy is in the confines of marriage, which…can only be the union of a man and woman. This is as explicit as anything in the Word. [#25]

“…the Word never says that an inherently sinful act somehow becomes sanctified by repeating it with the same person. [#27)]

“…your [Matthew Vines’] emphasis is all wrong. In fact, it’s the common theme through your questions, namely, ‘Surely God wouldn’t want me to live without sex and intimacy, therefore I must reinterpret the Bible in that light.'” [#39] — Dr. Michael Brown, author of Can You Be Gay and Christian?

This essay first appeared July 10, 2015, on the Charisma magazine website:

________________________________

Dear Readers,

My prolific author friend Dr. Michael Brown–whose book, “Can You Be Gay and Christian?” is available for purchase from AFTAH at right–does a terrific job below answering homosexual “Christian” activist Matthew Vines’ 40 tendentious questions. As Brown notes, Vines’ line of questioning is built on false premises and spurious analogies. For example, Vines repeats the tired homosexual talking point comparing infertile straight couples to same-sex partners (see Brown’s response to Questions 30 and 31).

I would like Michael to try a “do-over” on #12: it is bizarre and, indeed, blasphemous for young Vines (misapplying Galatians 5–which mentions “sexual immorality”) to associate unnatural, sexual-sin-based “relationships” with Holy Spirit-led “goodness” and “self-control,” etc. I understand what Michael is saying, but I would not compare these disordered relationships with normal unions between husband and wife–including marriages that are not Christian.

Vines’ questions themselves are a study in the error of homosexuality-positive “Christianity”: can you see the intense self-focus in them, as Vines does his biblical “exegesis” backwards:–starting with his politically correct premise (committed homosexual relationship are fine) and trying to rationalize it as somehow being compatible with Scripture? He utterly fails. It is no wonder that Vines will not publicly appear in the same debate forum with Dr. Brown or Prof. Rob Gagnon. By the way, Dr. Brown received AFTAH’s “American Truth-Teller Award” in 2014; we commend him for his diligence and faithfulness in defending Truth. — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera; Like the AFTAH Facebook Page

________________________________

Dr. Michael Brown Has 40 Answers and 2 Questions for ‘Gay’ Christian Matthew Vines

By Michael Brown; Twitter: @DrMichaelLBrown

I am answering the 40 questions put forward by “gay Christian” advocate Matthew Vines, after which I will put two simple questions to Matthew (and his allies). What is absolutely stunning, though, is that in these 40 questions, he failed to ask the only one that really matters, namely, “What does the Bible say about homosexual practice?” The reason for that is self-evident, namely, it is impossible to make a case for homosexual relationships using the Word of God alone.

That’s why, for the last decade (and until this moment), I have offered to debate the issue of the Bible and homosexual practice with any qualified representative of the “gay Christian” position, yet I have had no takers. (Matthew and I did engage in a brief debate hosted by Moody radio, but as is well known, Matthew agreed to do the broadcast before realizing he would be debating me, after which he felt it would be worse publicity to drop out rather than do the show. Those interested can watch the debate here. (For a relevant follow-up article, go here.) I also address many of the questions Matthew raises in my book Can You Be Gay and Christian?, but for the benefit of those who don’t have the book, and so as to answer all the questions conveniently in one place, I’ve responded to each of them here.

Before addressing the questions, it’s important to address Matthew’s premise, namely, those of us who uphold Scripture “oppose marriage equality.” Actually, we oppose redefining marriage; as for so-called “marriage equality,” as I have pointed out, advocates of “same-sex marriage” represent just one group clamoring for changes in marriage laws, including polygamists, polyamorists, and adult incestuous couples. That’s why the Marriage Equality Blogspot calls for “Full Marriage Equality,” specifically, “for the right of consenting adults to share and enjoy love, sex, residence and marriage without limits on the gender, number or relation of participants.” So, from that point of view, Matthew also opposes “marriage equality.”

To answer the 40 questions:

1. Do you accept that sexual orientation is not a choice? Sexual orientation is a relatively modern construct, but if you mean is it true that, generally speaking, homosexual men and women did not choose to be attracted to the same sex, the answer would be yes, it is not a conscious choice they made, any more than someone who struggles with angry desires, violent desires, or adulterous desires consciously chose to have those desires.

2. Do you accept that sexual orientation is highly resistant to attempts to change it? Again, using your definition, in the majority of cases, certainly. However, we must not downplay the many successful stories of change through counseling and, more importantly, the possibility of change through the gospel. Cannot Almighty God change a homosexual into a heterosexual if it so pleases Him? Has the church really devoted itself to seeking God to help men and women who struggle with same-sex attractions?

3. How many meaningful relationships with lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) people do you have? My first organ teacher, when I was barely 7-years old, was openly gay, and he and his partner would come to our home and have dinner with our family. Over the years, I’ve had good friends who came out of homosexuality (including someone very close to my family), and I interact as often I can in as much depth as I can with those who identify as LGBT.

4. How many openly LGBT people would say you are one of their closest friends? None that I know of, but that is not because of my rejection of them. I have never turned away from a person because of their sexual brokenness or sexual desires. If, however, they openly scorned God’s Word and God’s ways, I’m afraid it would be hard for us to be close friends. That being said, I have close friends who are very religious Jews, yet they still believe my faith in Jesus is wrong and I still believe they are lost without Him. In other words, friendship with people (or lack thereof) has absolutely nothing to do with determining the truth of God’s Word.

Self-described "gay Christian" Matthew Vines refuses to debate Bible scholars and apologists with expert knowledge on Scripture and homosexuality, like Dr. Michael Brown and Prof. Robert Gagnon.

Dodging Debates: Self-described “gay Christian” Matthew Vines refuses to debate Bible scholars and apologists with expert knowledge on Scripture and homosexuality, like Dr. Michael Brown and Prof. Robert Gagnon.

5. How much time have you spent in one-on-one conversation with LGBT Christians about their faith and sexuality? Many hours, and many more hours reading their stories prayerfully, sometimes having to put down the book I’m reading and get on my knees in prayer, even with tears and a heavy burden. I hurt deeply over the pain they have experienced and I long to see them find wholeness in the Lord.

6. Do you accept that heterosexual marriage is not a realistic option for most gay people? Probably so—again, with God, all things are possible—but this too has nothing to do with what God has to say about homosexual practice. It calls for great compassion from the church, but not for rewriting the Bible. Also, unless we get caught up with the spirit of the age, it’s important to realize that “heterosexual marriage” is the only marriage God acknowledges.

7. Do you accept that lifelong celibacy is the only valid option for most gay people if all same-sex relationships are sinful? I accept that our Father knows best, that His ways are ways of life, and that if He does not enable someone to enter into a heterosexual relationship then He will give grace to that person to be celibate, just as He gives grace to a believer suffering decades of imprisonment and torture, just as He gives grace to a drug addict to get free from addictions, and just as He gives grace to many heterosexuals to live in lifelong, non-chosen celibacy.

8. How many gay brothers and sisters in Christ have you walked with on the path of mandatory celibacy, and for how long? Less than 10, and not more than 10 years so far, but the term “mandatory celibacy” is misleading, since I’ve walked with heterosexual believers for decades who did not choose celibacy but never met their mate, and they found Jesus to be more than enough to carry them through. Plus, Jesus requires all of us to deny ourselves and take up the cross and follow Him, and He does not promise any of us a spouse. I also have close friends whose spouses divorced them and who believe they cannot remarry as long as their spouse is alive, and they too have survived and even thrived by God’s grace despite years of singleness imposed on them by their convictions.

9. What is your answer for gay Christians who struggled for years to live out a celibacy mandate but were driven to suicidal despair in the process? This is a heartrending issue that I do not take lightly, but my answer is that anyone who says, “I will kill myself unless I can have sex and be intimate with another human being” is not taking hold of what God has for them. Generally speaking, it’s also true that people who commit suicide are struggling with other emotional issues; otherwise, no matter how acute their problems, they would not take their own lives. Ultimately, though, I cannot see our Father responding positively to the threat of, “Unless you let me have a relationship that satisfies me, I will kill myself.”

10. Has mandatory celibacy produced good fruit in the lives of most gay Christians you know? Again, I object to the term “mandatory celibacy,” and I believe the term “gay Christian” is misleading and unhelpful, but yes, the single Christians I know who are still same-sex attracted are enjoying the Lord, enjoying healthy friendships, and are really quite vibrant. Others have seen a shift (or complete change) in their attractions, and they are happily married to their heterosexual partner. I’ve been quite close with some of them over the years.

Read the rest of this article »

Ex-‘Gay’ Group – Restored Hope Network – Rejects ‘Gay Christian’ Formulation and Celibate Homosexual ‘Spiritual Friendships’

Wednesday, August 5th, 2015
Assault on Biblical Truth: Due to the success of the homosexual movement, Christianity is under an unprecedented assault to make an accommodation with out-and-proud homosexualism. Above, young "evangelical" Matthew Vines uses recycled "gay theology" arguments to push for the acceptance of homosexual unions and even same-sex "marriage" in Christian churches. Vines refuses to debate orthodox

Assault on Biblical Truth: Due to the success of the “gay” activist revolution, Christianity is under an unprecedented pressure to make an accommodation with homosexualism. Above, young “evangelical” Matthew Vines uses recycled “gay theology” arguments to push for the acceptance of homosexual unions and even same-sex “marriage” in Christian churches. Vines now refuses to debate orthodox Christian scholars like Dr. Michael Brown and Prof. Rob Gagnon. See Brown’s answers to Vines’ “4o Questions’ HERE.

The following official statement was approved in June by Restored Hope Network, the leading U.S. network for ex-homosexual ministries. RHN is a Christian ministry that was formed during the implosion of Exodus International, which collapsed under the failed and unbiblical leadership of Alan Chambers [see this video]. Here is a link to a PDF of the RHN document.

I know some of the leaders of RHN—godly men like Stephen Black and women like Anne Paulk—and have attended two of their annual conferences, most recently in Lancaster, Pennsylvania–which began on June 26, the day that five Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court imposed homosexual “marriage” on the land. I urge AFTAH followers to pray for and donate to Restored Hope. May the Lord bless and protect this Christ-centered ministry!– Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera; AFTAH Facebook Page

_________________________

‘Gay Christian’ and ‘Spiritual Friendship?’ RHN Official Position

Restored Hope Network (RHN) respectfully disagrees with anyone who continues to identify as both ‘homosexual’ and Christian. Identification with Christ can and must displace an identity based on disordered desires. The New Testament repeatedly calls believers to repent of old identifications and to cleave to the new, true source of one’s identity—Christ Jesus Himself (Rom. 6: 11, 12; 8:6-14; Gal. 2:20). Paul in particular reminds ‘homosexuals’ to forego their ‘gay’ selves when he declares to believers: ‘such were some of you’ in light of having been ‘washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God’ (1Cor 6:9-11).

Yet many Christians today claim to be faithful to both God and their ‘homosexual natures.’ ‘Gay’ Christians tend to fall into two categories: first are persons who are open to homosexual erotic unions, behaviors clearly prohibited by scripture (see RHN doctrinal statement). The second group is comprised of ‘gay’ persons who claim to be celibate. These celibates appear to be faithful to scripture and church tradition but actually foster the ‘gay’ self by encouraging same-sex attracted persons to ‘come out’ to their faith communities and to form ‘spiritual friendships’ with others, even covenanting in exclusive homo-emotional unions.

RHN advocates for healthy same-sex friendship as a key to transformation. However, RHN believes that claiming to repent of sinful behavior while cultivating homosexual selves and desires in exclusive homo-emotional ‘spiritual friendships’ is unscriptural and unwise. Such an approach reinforces a ‘gay’ identity and orientation, which undercut God’s purposes for our sexuality. Identification with Christ cannot be separated from these purposes. Jesus’ command to love our neighbors applies to our self-definitions and relational choices. That requires a realignment of our fallen natures to Christlikeness.

The Bible defines humanity as created in God’s image as male and female (Gen. 1:26, 27; 2:18-25). Faithfulness to God involves faithfulness to one’s gendered self and the command to live interdependently with the opposite gender (Matt. 19: 1- 6; 1Cor. 11: 11, 12). Any Christian who advocates for ‘gay’ selves and friendships frustrates the prospect of growing in that gender duality; in truth, ‘gay Christians’ encourage gender dis-complementarity, which endangers God’s will for our humanity (Rom. 1: 18-25).

RHN believes that God calls all persons to gender complementarity: married, single and celibate, whatever their sexual inclinations may be. RHN upholds God’s call upon certain persons to live celibate lives, and understands celibacy as God’s call on persons He asks to serve His Kingdom without domestic burdens (1Cor 7: 7, 35-37). We disagree with the implication of ‘gay’ Christian celibates that persons with same-sex attraction automatically receive God’s call to celibacy, much less a ‘gay’ celibate call. God calls all to gender complementarity.

Many Christians base their ‘gay’ identification upon the depth of their same-sex inclinations. Yet such identification prevents the renewing of the mind that can open one to new ways of thinking, feeling, and relating. While RHN realizes that one may experience same-sex desires to varying degrees over a lifetime, we contend that one can also discover new desires by reordering one’s thinking and acting (2Cor. 10:3-5).

After all, we are turning toward the Author and Redeemer of our lives; His transforming love is deeper than our desires. He asks us to forego any identification or behavior that stands in the way of the transformation He desires for us. ‘Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—His good, pleasing and perfect will’ (Romans 12: 2).

Read the rest of this article »

Baylor OKs Homosexual Behavior – Barber Asks: Will Christian Universities Obey God or Man?

Monday, July 20th, 2015

Baylor University removes ban on ‘homosexual acts’ from its sexual conduct code

Baylor_logo

Sodomy-Friendly Baylor–More ‘Caring’ than God? The “Christian” university dropped its ban on “homosexual acts” from its sexual conduct code.–because Baylor officials didn’t believe the Bible-based sodomy proscription “reflected Baylor’s caring community.”

By Matt Barber

First published by WND.com; also see Barbwire.com,

It’s by design. As I, and others, have repeatedly warned, the establishment of so-called “gay marriage” as a newfangled federal “right,” and the free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment simply cannot coexist in harmony. Things diametrically at odds cannot possibly occupy, with any coherence, the same time and space.

The secular left is tripping over itself right now to prove my point. In the wake of last month’s Obergefell v. Hodges opinion – an opinion that somehow divined a top secret “constitutional right” for Patrick Henry to “marry” Henry Patrick – liberals are now demanding, as both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito predicted, that Christian universities immediately abandon recognition of, and obedience to, God’s unequivocal natural sexual order, and adopt, instead, the new pagan orthodoxy.

In a July 14 article in The Atlantic headlined, “Gay Marriage and the Future of Evangelical Colleges,” University of Tampa professor David R. Wheeler asks, “Now that same-sex couples have the right to wed, will higher-ed institutions that condemn LGBT students still be eligible for federal funding?”

Wheeler is not alone in asking. “As cultural evolution on the issue of LGBT rights continues to accelerate, it’s inevitable that some Americans will start asking hard questions about whether it makes sense to allocate scarce public resources to institutions that are not only anti-gay, but proud of it,” opines anti-Christian bigot Barry Lynn, of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “For starters, can federally supported educational institutions bar married same-sex couples from living together in student housing? I doubt it,” he adds.

In other words, Christian universities must together embrace and facilitate homosexual sin, or lose, at once, both tax-exempt status and access to all students who choose to fund their education via federal loans and grants (which is most of them).

Read the rest of this article »

AFTAH’s Core Principles and Beliefs

Thursday, June 25th, 2015
Kinsey-Table-34-2

The Deviant Roots of a Sin Movement: Dr. Alfred Kinsey’s Table 34 showing timed “orgasms” for babies and young children–apparently supplied to him by a child molester. This table appears in Kinsey’s celebrated 1948 book, “Sexual Behavior and the Human Male,” which also greatly exaggerated the number of people practicing homosexual behavior in American society. Homosexual activists seized on Kinsey’s book to argue that homosexuality was widespread and normal. See AFTAH Point 12 below. Click on graphic to enlarge.

There will be revisions and additions to this list, but here is AFTAH’s first draft of core principles and beliefs.–Peter LaBarbera, President, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

______________________________

1) Homosexual behavior and trans-gender rebellion are morally wrong as they defy Nature and Nature’s God.

2) Homosexuality is not the basis for a healthy self-identity; embracing homosexual or transgender lifestyles/behaviors is a very bad and destructive choice.

3) Homosexuality is about What You Do, not Who You Are. Everyone is responsible before God for his or her sexual conduct. “Sexual Orientation” and “Gender Identity”–the notion of an innate or inherent nature centered around proclivity toward sex- and gender-confusion–are the misguided foundations of self-serving “gay” ideology. These concepts seek to justify immorality by essentially removing one’s moral responsibility for his or her actions.

4) Homosexualism and gender confusion are not the basis for civil rights. Equating  the campaign for homosexual “rights”and same-sex “marriage” to the Black civil rights movement insults Black Americans and their noble struggle against slavery and institutional racism (e.g., Jim Crow). Christians in past days were wrong to misuse the Bible to ban interracial unions. Interracial marriages produce beautiful children and families; homosexuality cannot produce life. Creating “rights” based on moral wrongs and sexual/gender perversions naturally undermines other people’s rights, especially the freedoms of religion and conscience enshrined in the United States Constitution. As John Adams, the second president of the United States and a signer of the Declaration of Independence, wrote: “[W]e have not government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…Our constitution was made only for a moral and spiritual people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

5) All people as human beings created in the image of God deserve respect; all behaviors and ideologies do not.

6) Unlike race and ethnicity, homosexuality is not immutable: people can pursue virtuous change and leave aberrant sex- and transgender lifestyles behind. Oddly, the same LGBTQ activists who champion men and women who abandon their marital spouse and children to live a homosexual life–or the DNA-defying notion that people can change sexes–often excoriate and dehumanize EX-“gays.” Nevertheless, thousands of people have successfully left homosexuality behind, and their wholesome transformation should be celebrated. Legal and legislative efforts to ban pro-heterosexual change therapy for minors are cruel, antithetical to liberty and parental rights, and demonstrate the totalitarian mindset of homosexual advocates and their allies. [AFTAH highly recommends Restored Hope Network, an umbrella group of Christian ex-“gay” ministries.]

Read the rest of this article »

Janet Mefferd on Matthew Vines and the Homosexual-Christian ‘Dialogue’

Thursday, June 18th, 2015
Matthew Vines is working hard to win Christians to the idea that homosexual relationships can be blessed before a holy God. For espousing that heresy, he cannot and must not be seen as a "brother in Christ."

Sin Advocate: Young and winsome Matthew Vines is working hard to win Christians to the idea that committed homosexual relationships should be blessed before a holy God. Despite his apostasy, Vines was recently welcomed as a “brother in Christ” by Rev. Caleb Kaltenbach, lead pastor of Discovery Church in Simi Valley, CA. See Vines’ curiously named “Reformation Project.

“We are to have no fellowship with darkness. We can’t ‘dialogue’ with any professing Christian who’s in open rebellion against the Word of God. We can’t ‘dialogue’ with anybody who is deceiving and misleading the Body of Christ on any sin while claiming to be a Christian!”–Janet Mefferd

______________________

I welcome my friend Janet Mefferd to the pages of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality. Janet is a former longtime radio talk show host with the Salem Radio Network–and, I must say, as someone who cumulatively chatted a few hours in on-air interviews with Mefferd over the years–she was one of the best in the business (Christian and secular). We look forward to seeing what’s next in Janet’s career, but until then we are delighted to publish her work.

Regarding this issue of “dialogue” or “bridging” with homosexuality advocates, I recall an article by the late Alan Medinger–a man who walked away from homosexuality with the help of the Savior he loved, Jesus Christ. Medinger, who founded Regeneration Ministries in Baltimore, wisely cautioned against an internal Church debate over homosexuality because there is nothing compelling it except outside, anti-biblical agitation. The sinfulness of same-sex behavior is a settled matter in both the Bible and thousands of years of Church/Old Testament tradition, argued Medinger, and we need not debate it now within Christendom any more than we should debate, say, adultery.

Read this beautiful tribute to Medinger by Regeneration’s Josh Glaser–then decide if the same Spirit of Christ that impelled Alan lies with Matthew Vines, who–by trying to redefine Christianity to accommodate homosexual relationships and “gay marriage”–propels the very same debate that Medinger rejected on principle. Below Mefferd ably applies what I call the “Sexual Sin Substitution Test.” — Peter LaBarbera, AFTAH; Twitter: @PeterLaBarbera

_____________________________________

Enough with the “Dialogue,” Already

By Janet Mefferd; first posted June 17, 2015 on Mefferd’s blog; Twitter: @JanetMefferd

Evangelicals Open Door to Debate on Gay Rights.” Just the kind of headline I never enjoy, but it ran June 8 in The New York Times over a story about “influential evangelicals” meeting with homosexual activist Matthew Vines at Biola University last month, complete with a Times reporter and photographer on hand.

Vines, you may recall, is author of 2014’s controversial “God and the Gay Christian: The Biblical Case in Support of Same-Sex Relationships,” which manipulates biblical terminology in an unconvincing attempt to argue against the sinfulness of homosexuality.

Worse, the book was published by Crown Publishing Group’s Convergent imprint, which shared staff and operations with and was a sister imprint of evangelical Christian publisher WaterBrook Multnomah. Among other repercussions for printing such unbiblical garbage, WaterBrook Multnomah resigned its membership from the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB). (Crown later separated the two imprints.)

Vines also runs an apostate group called The Reformation Project, which claims to exist “to train Christians to support and affirm lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Through building a deep grassroots movement, we strive to create an environment in which Christian leaders will have the freedom to take the next steps toward affirming and including LGBT people in all aspects of church life.”

Read the rest of this article »


Support Americans for Truth about Homosexuality

Americans for Truth
P.O. Box 5522
Naperville, IL 60567-5522


Americans for Truth Radio Hour

Americans for Truth Academy

Want to See Every New AFTAH Article?

If you don't want to miss anything posted on the Americans For Truth website, sign up for our "Feedblitz" service that gives you a daily email of every new article that we post. (This service DOES NOT replace the regular email list.) To sign up for the Feedblitz service, click here.