Strenuous efforts are made by "liberated" homosexuals within the various religion bodies...to alter the teaching and practices of these organizations for the benefit of the movement...mainline Protestant denominations are notorious for their willingness to compromise with the homosexual movement...Most denomination have "gay caucuses" or similar organizations which advocate the homosexual cause within the denomination.

    Mel White is one example of the influence of homosexuality in the church. White was a committed homosexual at the time he was writing best-selling Christian books and producing award-winning evangelistic films. As recalled in his autobiography, Stranger at the Gate, his services as a ghost writer involved books for Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, W. A. Criswell, and Billy Graham. He also produced films with D. James Kennedy and the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer.
    It wasn't until June 1993, when White was appointed dean of the largest gay and lesbian church in the world, Cathedral of Hope in Dallas, Texas, that his commitment to homosexuality attracted national attention and most evangelicals learned of his sexual preference.
    Unfortunately, White's rejection of Bible passages and attack upon evangelicals who teach that homosexuality is a sin continue today. White's "ministry" has caused a turmoil in the lives of some Christians who are struggling with their own sexual identity. Personal agendas of this type, which attempt to justify the homosexual lifestyle for Christians and non-Christians alike, have only led to thousands of people dying of AIDS. Regardless, the influence of such "evangelicals" as White or Ralph Blair founder of Evangelicals Concerned, are proof that the church must effectively deal with this whole area-not only with compassion for those trapped in homosexuality, but with full commitment to biblical teaching.
    In recent years the Christian homosexual community has challenged the orthodox teaching of the church. In Europe this has been spearheaded by what has been known as the Gay Christian Movement; in America, by Evangelicals Concerned, the Metropolitan Community Churches, and related homosexual groups. Way back in November 1989, on "The John Ankerberg Show," Episcopal Bishop John Spong argued that:
 

    homosexuality {is} being debated in every major body of Christendom-in every one of them-a hundred years ago it was not debated. It was not debated because it was the general consensus that it was self-evidently evil...It is being debated even in the Southern Baptist Church. It's being debated today because we are not quite so certain. When you're not certain, brothers, and sisters, don't condemn."
 

    Wait a minute. What are the underlying reasons for such a debate? Is it because genuine Christians are really having second thoughts or, rather, it is because liberal elements within virtually all denominations are confused morally and have accepted the spurious arguments of the secular sciences the "Christian" gay community? We think an object evaluation of the situation leaves no room for doubt.
    Granted, even some evangelical Christians are confused on this issue, but this confusion is itself a result of their being misled by false arguments or their own sexual confusion.
    Among those false arguments are the following, to which we have appended brief responses: 1) that homosexuality is to common for society to condemn it (what about rape, adultery, and other common practices that are morally wrong?); 2) the homosexual has the right to do with their body as he or she pleasures (what about AIDS?); 3) homosexuality is a civil right (a moral wrong can never be a civil right); 4) critics of homosexuality are bigots or latent homosexuals suppressing their own fears (how convenient); 5) homosexuality is normal for homosexuals-therefore, it is right for homosexuals (the same can be argued for habitual criminals; 6) when society condemns homosexuality, it only damages itself because homosexuality, constitute productive members of society (to the contrary), 7) the Christian view of homosexuality is outdated by modern research (to the contrary); 8) love is the only real issue (Who defines love and its limits? Can sinful behavior be loving?); 9) Jesus Himself never condemned homosexuality (not so Jesus upheld the divine authority of the Old Testament in John 17:17; also cf. Matthew 19:4,5; 10) homosexual behavior among animals proves homosexuality is a natural biological/ evolutionary condition (not so-regardless, men and women aren't animals), and 11) Christians, at least, must distinguish between the promiscuous homosexual act (sinful) and the homosexual condition (not sinful)-therefore monogamous homosexuality is not sinful (not so; see below).
    Once confessed Christians are given the facts, they return to a biblical position. The few self-proclaimed evangelicals who remain confused on the issue do so not because of biblical teaching, but in spite of it. Their reasons for accepting homosexuality have nothing to do with Scripture but only their own preferences.
    Regardless, the mainline churches themselves bear a significant measure of responsibility for the current condition of homosexual acceptance, including the spread of AIDS. To the degree that church denominations, congresses, and/or studies have falsely interpreted the Scriptures and actively encouraged homosexuality, they have simultaneously encouraged both sin and God's judgment upon sin. It is a sad commentary indeed when the very church whose mission is to support life and godliness is at the fore front of promoting sin and death.
 

Taken from The Facts On Homosexuality, by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Published by Harvest House Publishers.

Are You Rapture Ready?

In The Homosexual Network, Enrique Rueda reveals:

Strenuous efforts are made by "liberated" homosexuals within the various religion bodies...to alter the teaching and practices of these organizations for the benefit of the movement...mainline Protestant denominations are notorious for their willingness to compromise with the homosexual movement...Most denomination have "gay caucuses" or similar organizations which advocate the homosexual cause within the denomination.

Mel White is one example of the influence of homosexuality in the church. White was a committed homosexual at the time he was writing best-selling Christian books and producing award-winning evangelistic films, As recalled in his autobiography, Stranger at the Gate, his services as a ghost writer involved books for Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, W.A. Criswell, and Billy Graham. He also produced films with D. James Kennedy and the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer.It wasn't until June 1993, when White was appointed dean of the largest gay and lesbian church in the world, Cathedral of Hope in Dallas, Texas, that his commitment to homosexuality attracted national attention and most evangelicals learned of his sexual preference.
Unfortunately, White's rejection of Bible passages and attack upon evangelicals who teach that homosexuality is a sin continue today. White's "ministry" has caused and turmoil in the lives of some Christians who are struggling with their own sexual identity. Personal agendas of this type, which attempt to justify the homosexual lifestyle for Christians and non-Christians alike, have only led to thousands of people dying of AIDS. Regardless, the influence of such "evangelicals" as White or Ralph Blair founder of Evangelicals Concerned, are proof that the church must effectively deal with this whole area-not only with compassion for those trapped in homosexuality, but with full commitment to biblical teaching.
In recent years the Christian homosexual community has challenged the orthodox teaching of the church. In Europe this has been spearheaded by what has been known as the Gay Christian Movement; in America, by Evangelicals Concerned, the Metropolitan Community Churches, and related homosexual groups.
Way back in November 1989, on "The John Ankerberg Show," Episcopal Bishop John Spong argued that:

homosexuality {is} being debated in every major body of Christendom- in every one of them-a hundred years ago it was not debated. It was not debated because it was the general consensus that it was self-evidently evil...It is being debated even in the Southern Baptist Church. It's being debated today because we are not quite so certain. When you're not certain, brothers, and sisters, don't condemn."

Wait a minute. What are the underlying reasons for such a debate? Is it because genuine Christians are really having second thoughts or, rather, it is because liberal elements within virtually all denominations are confused morally and have accepted the spurious arguments of the secular sciences the "Christian" gay community? We think an object evaluation of the situation leaves no room for doubt.
Granted, even some evangelical Christians are confused on this issue, but this confusion is itself a result of their being misled by false arguments or their own sexual confusion.
Among those false arguments are the following, to which we have appended brief responses: 1) that homosexuality is to common for society to condemn it (what about rape, adultery, and other common practices that are morally wrong?; 2) the homosexual has the right to do with body as he or she pleasures (what about AIDS?); 3) homosexuality is a civil right (a moral wrong can never be a civil right); 4) critics of homosexuality are bigots or latent homosexuals suppressing their own fears (how convenient); 5) homosexuality is normal for homosexuals-therefore, it is right for homosexuals (the same can be argued for habitual criminals; 6) when society condemns homosexuality, it only damages itself because homosexuality, It only damages itself because homosexuals constitute productive members of society (to the contrary), 7) the Christian view of homosexuality is outdated by modern research (to the contrary); 8) love is the only real issue (Who defines love and its limits? Can sinful behavior be loving?); 9) Jesus Himself never condemned homosexuality (not so Jesus upheld the divine authority of the Old Testament in John 17:17; also cf. Matthew 19:4,5; 10) homosexual behavior among animals proves homosexuality is a natural biological/ evolutionary condition (not so-regardless, men and women aren't animals), and 11) Christians, at least, must distinguish between the promiscuous homosexual act (sinful) and the homosexual condition (not sinful)-therefore monogamous homosexuality is not sinful (not so; see below).
Once confessed Christians are given the facts, they return to a biblical position. The few self-proclaimed evangelicals who remain confused on the issue do so not because of biblical teaching, but in spite of it. Their reasons for accepting homosexuality have nothing to do with Scripture but only their own preferences.
Regardless, the mainline churches themselves bear a significant measure of responsibility for the current condition of homosexual acceptance, including the spread of AIDS. To the degree that church denominations, congresses, and/or studies have falsely interpreted the Scriptures and actively encouraged homosexuality, they have simultaneously encouraged both sin and God's judgment upon sin. It is a sad commentary indeed when the very church whose mission is to support life and godliness is at the fore front of promoting sin and death.

Taken from The Facts On Homosexuality, by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Published by Harvest House Publishers.

Are You Rapture Ready?