Thursday, June 11, 2015





"On June 8, 2015, Tony Campolo released a statement changing his position on the issue of gay relationships, and stating that he now supported full acceptance of Christian gay couples into the Church. He cited several reasons including the institution of marriage primarily being about spiritual growth instead of procreation, what he had learned through his friendships with gay Christian couples, and past examples of exclusionary church traditions."
    "As previously reported, Campolo serves as one of the leaders at Mount Carmel Baptist Church in West Philadelphia, which is part of the National Baptist Convention USA and American Baptist Churches USA. In the 1990’s, he served as a spiritual adviser to then-President Bill Clinton, including during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
    Campolo’s wife, Peggy, is a homosexual activist and believes that the Church should be accepting of same-sex “marriage.” He explained on Monday that his wife is one of the reasons why he has decided to endorse acceptance of homosexuals in Christianity.
    He asserted in his 2008 book “Partly Right” that the Bible is not without error, as “an evangelical has a very high view of Scripture though not necessarily inerrancy,” and has also commented to reporters that he believes non-Christians might go to Heaven."


SEE: below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

June 8, 2015; Tony releases a new statement urging the church to be more welcoming.

As a young man I surrendered my life to Jesus and trusted in Him for my salvation, and I have been a staunch evangelical ever since. I rely on the doctrines of the Apostles Creed. I believe the Bible to have been written by men inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit. I place my highest priority on the words of Jesus, emphasizing the 25th chapter of Matthew, where Jesus makes clear that on Judgment Day the defining question will be how each of us responded to those he calls “the least of these”.

From this foundation I have done my best to preach the Gospel, care for the poor and oppressed, and earnestly motivate others to do the same. Because of my open concern for social justice, in recent years I have been asked the same question over and over again: Are you ready to fully accept into the Church those gay Christian couples who have made a lifetime commitment to one another?

While I have always tried to communicate grace and understanding to people on both sides of the issue, my answer to that question has always been somewhat ambiguous. One reason for that ambiguity was that I felt I could do more good for my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters by serving as a bridge person, encouraging the rest of the Church to reach out in love and truly get to know them. The other reason was that, like so many other Christians, I was deeply uncertain about what was right.

It has taken countless hours of prayer, study, conversation and emotional turmoil to bring me to the place where I am finally ready to call for the full acceptance of Christian gay couples into the Church.

For me, the most important part of that process was answering a more fundamental question: What is the point of marriage in the first place? For some Christians, in a tradition that traces back to St. Augustine, the sole purpose of marriage is procreation, which obviously negates the legitimacy of same-sex unions. Others of us, however, recognize a more spiritual dimension of marriage, which is of supreme importance. We believe that God intends married partners to help actualize in each other the “fruits of the spirit,” which are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control, often citing the Apostle Paul’s comparison of marriage to Christ’s sanctifying relationship with the Church. This doesn’t mean that unmarried people cannot achieve the highest levels of spiritual actualization – our Savior himself was single, after all – but only that the institution of marriage should always be primarily about spiritual growth.
In my own life, my wife Peggy has been easily the greatest encourager of my relationship with Jesus. She has been my prayer partner and, more than anyone else, she has discerned my shortcomings and helped me try to overcome them. Her loving example, constant support, and wise counsel have enabled me to accomplish Kingdom work that I would have not even attempted without her, and I trust she would say the same about my role in her life. Each of us has been God’s gift to the other and our marriage has been a mutually edifying relationship.
One reason I am changing my position on this issue is that, through Peggy, I have come to know so many gay Christian couples whose relationships work in much the same way as our own. Our friendships with these couples have helped me understand how important it is for the exclusion and disapproval of their unions by the Christian community to end. We in the Church should actively support such families. Furthermore, we should be doing all we can to reach, comfort and include all those precious children of God who have been wrongly led to believe that they are mistakes or just not good enough for God, simply because they are not straight.
As a social scientist, I have concluded that sexual orientation is almost never a choice and I have seen how damaging it can be to try to “cure” someone from being gay. As a Christian, my responsibility is not to condemn or reject gay people, but rather to love and embrace them, and to endeavor to draw them into the fellowship of the Church. When we sing the old invitation hymn, “Just As I Am”, I want us to mean it, and I want my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to know it is true for them too.
Rest assured that I have already heard – and in some cases made – every kind of biblical argument against gay marriage, including those of Dr. Ronald Sider, my esteemed friend and colleague at Eastern University. Obviously, people of good will can and do read the scriptures very differently when it comes to controversial issues, and I am painfully aware that there are ways I could be wrong about this one.
However, I am old enough to remember when we in the Church made strong biblical cases for keeping women out of teaching roles in the Church, and when divorced and remarried people often were excluded from fellowship altogether on the basis of scripture. Not long before that, some Christians even made biblical cases supporting slavery. Many of those people were sincere believers, but most of us now agree that they were wrong. I am afraid we are making the same kind of mistake again, which is why I am speaking out.
I hope what I have written here will help my fellow Christians to lovingly welcome all of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters into the Church.

Tony Campolo Announces His Apostasy - Homosexual Agenda



Is It Time to Fully Accept Christian Gay Couples Into the Church? NO! "Be Ye Separate"

Open Letter To Dr. McGee, Other Nazarene College Presidents, and General Superintendents, Regarding Tony Campolo

Dear Dr. McGee,

A few years ago in 2010, my wife and I visited your campus where we met with you, the college chaplain (Corey McPherson) and college provost (Tim Wooster).  I have always appreciated your kindness in inviting us to express our concerns to you, and we were treated with respect by you, Tim, and Corey.  In spite of our total disagreement on the issues we raised, we recognize the fact that few Nazarenes leaders have even been willing to give us, and many other concerned Nazarenes, the opportunity to share our deep concerns.

Our main reason for coming to the campus was to warn you regarding the agenda and theology of Tony Campolo.  Our warnings were not heeded, and it was made clear to us at that meeting that the leadership of Eastern Nazarene College are perfectly fine with Tony Campolo speaking to the students in chapel.

Later in October, Dr. Campolo confirmed our fears, and went on to promote his false ideas of contemplative spirituality, promoting mantra prayers and mysticism to the students, while plugging shamelessly his “social justice” agenda to the students.  In one of his comments to the students, he stated that “I say the name of Jesus over and over again”, and suggested that we try it, that we should do it for 15 minutes, until this ritual “drives away the dark forces around us.”  He promoted centering prayer, an unbiblical practice that has no basis in Scripture.  Quote: “it takes only 15 minutes to be inwardly still.”  He asked“when was the last time you were still for 20 minutes- so that you can come alive in Christ?”  He continued on by promoting an occultic version of Christian called Celtic Spirituality, referring to “thin places”.

I remember looking around and wondering why any of these pastors are not standing up against this guy’s false ideology being pushed onto these young impressionable students?   I still recall when the wife of a pastor approached me and my brother outside after the service, gushing about how wonderful his message was.  How shocked she was when I told her that Tony Campolo is a false teacher, and should never be allowed to speak at a Christian college.  It is so sad to see the lack of discernment today in supposedly mature Christian adults, as well as pastors, who are charged with a heavier responsibility to protect the flock.

(His capitulation to political correctness and ecumenicalism is very evident in his writings, including his statement in the past implying that perhaps we worship the same God as do the Muslims).  He does not even know whether Jesus only abides in Christians!  Quote: “I am saying that there is no salvation apart from Jesus; that’s my evangelical mindset. However, I am not convinced that Jesus only lives in Christians  (National Liberty Journal, 8/99)

Quote: “…what can I say to an Islamic brother who has fed the hungry, and clothed the naked? You say, “But he hasn’t a personal relationship with Christ.” I would argue with that. And I would say from a Christian perspective, in as much as you did it to the least of these you did it unto Christ. You did have a personal relationship with Christ, you just didn’t know it.”

Is This The Last Straw?

Now Dr. Campolo has finally gone to the next level, and has been totally deceived by Satan.  He has capitulated to the gay and lesbian agenda.  Here is his latest pronouncement on the issue:

“It has taken countless hours of prayer, study, conversation and emotional turmoil to bring me to the place where I am finally ready to call for the full acceptance of Christian gay couples into the Church.”

You can read his entire statement from his website here:

My question to you, to all the college presidents, to president Sunberg of Nazarene Theological Seminary, to the District leaders, and to the General Superintendents of the church, who are also charged with defending biblical doctrines of the church:

Are you going to continue allowing Tony Campolo to bring his unbiblical doctrines onto our college campuses, to freely espouse the heresies that he promotes?  Has Tony Campolo now gone too far even for those of you who, up until now, have had no problem accepting him on campus?

And furthermore, will you go the extra mile and not just ban him from all college campuses, but you will do so publically at all Nazarene colleges and on the Nazarene website, and call for his repentance?

Or will you continue to stay silent as you have on so many critical issues in the past several years, and continue to allow the Church of the Nazarene to further degrade into its own version of the Laodicean church in Revelation.
 “And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.  ‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. (Rev. 3:14-16)
Sincerely asking on behalf of many Bible believing Christians and Nazarenes,

Manny Silva

Links for reference:

Manny Silva
Stand For Truth Ministries

"The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever." Psalm 119:160

Blogging at
Podcasting at:

FaceBook group: 
Concerned Nazarenes
FaceBook group: Concerned Christians


"We are hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not abandoned; struck down, but not destroyed."  2 Corinthians 4:8-9

[Stand For Truth Ministries is a self-supporting ministry dedicated to fighting emergent church ideology and other false teachings.  Your prayers are asked for more than anything else.]

To donate to our ministry, send a check to:
Stand For Truth
P.O. Box 532
Somerset, MA  02726
(Donations are not tax-deductible; we are NOT a non-profit)
“STAND FOR THE TRUTH MINISTRIES  é um ministério auto-sustentado dedicado a combater a ideologia da igreja emergente e outros falsos ensinos .
Acima de tudo agradecemos suas orações por este ministério”

    "Para contribuir para o nosso ministério, é favor enviar seu cheque para :" 

Stand For Truth
P.O. Box 532
Somerset, MA  02726
(As doações não são dedutíveis, nós não somos sem fins lucrativos)




Published on Jun 9, 2015
Direct Email for Public Comments: (Be sure to add “ITAR Amendment—Revisions to Definitions; Data Transmission and Storage” to your subject line)
Official website to submit a comment:
Federal Register Vol. 80 No. 106 Regarding Proposed Changes:
Truth About Guns Article:
Breitbart Article:

OK guys, this is some scary stuff. There are proposed changes to ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) on the table right now that could be bad for the way firearms related content is distributed on the internet and possibly magazine publications. Pretty much anything in the USML (United States Munitions List) considered a "defense article" is subject to these changes which includes all common firearms regardless of caliber. The wording is so ambiguous it may or may not pertain to subject matter which you see on our channel, other gun related YouTube channels, gun blogs, forums, other websites, even magazine or newspaper publications, etc. These proposed changes are an affront to our First Amendment Rights and our Second Amendment Rights, and we will not stand idly by and see an entire industry muzzled overnight by the stroke of a pen.

Provided above are links on how and where to comment, as well as relevant articles on the proposed ITAR Changes. The comment period end August 3, 2015. Please comment on this matter and make it known that you do not support these regulations and restrictions on your rights.


Shirts & other Apparel:

Like us on Facebook:

Follow us on Instagram:

Follow us on Twitter:

YouTube Hotline: (770) 692-9326
Moss Pawn and Gun
6382 Old Dixie Hwy
Jonesboro, GA, 30236

Free Speech & The 2nd Amendment Are Under Attack

Proposed Online Ammunition Sales Ban; Non Compliance Makes You a "Malicious Suspect":

NRA: Gun Blogs, Videos, Web Forums Threatened By New Obama Regulation
Published on Jun 7, 2015
Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department, amounting to a “gag order on firearm-related speech,” the National Rifle Association is warning.

Read more:

Gov't To Make Gun Owners Take Psychological Evaluations

Talking About Guns Online Could Soon Be A Crime

The Delusions Of King Barack
Published on Jun 10, 2015
He’s just wrong...flat wrong and delusional. Which appears to have become the norm for Presidents since Richard Nixon completely transformed the office into a den of iniquity. If he had seen the poll, his aides must have given him it to him upside down. In February of 2014, a Gallup poll revealed that, for the first time, the majority of Americans at 53% agreed that President Obama is NOT respected by other world leaders. Obama’s aides probably shredded the 2014 BBC poll showing that the US is 7th in mainly negative ratings under China, Russia,Israel,Pakistan,North Korea, and Iran.

Obama’s controversial “deal” with Iran has created a rift between the U.S. and its longstanding Saudi Arabian allies. Albeit, they are not well respected by the American people either as more call for the release of the 9/11 report’s redacted 28 pages which leakers have divulged points the blame squarely at the Saudi Arabian Royalty as the quarterback of the ruthless plot.

Obama made Brazilian and German leaders furious when it was revealed that they had been personally spied on.

If President Obama lifted the veil of fantasy between his ears, he would discover to his own horror, a Presidency paved with lies and fraught with cowardice in the face of his globalist masters.

Proposed Federal Rule Could “Censor” Online Gun Speech, Warns NRA

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The Obama administration is proposing regulations that could “censor online speech related to firearms” and subject violators to “severe” penalties, the National Rifle Association (NRA)warns. The new rule, says the NRA, “is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second.”
The proposed regulations, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, are part of a “large scale overhaul of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)” that the administration has been pursuing “for the past several years,” writes the NRA. The ITAR, which implement the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) of 1976, require anyone wishing to export certain “defense articles,” which include firearms and ammunition, and “defense services” to obtain a license from the State Department before doing so. They also demand that producers of such articles and services “register with the U.S. Government and pay a hefty fee for doing so,” according to the NRA.
In addition, writes the gun group, exporting “technical data” about defenseitems, such as “blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans, instructions or documentation,” is subject to ITAR — and that is where the real danger lies.
ITAR were, of course, originally written when home computers were still a novelty and the Internet wasn’t even a gleam in Al Gore’s eye. They do not regulate technical data in the “public domain” — data “which is published and which is generally accessible or available to the public,” including at public libraries. “Many have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access available to their patrons,” the NRA explains.
However, notes the organization, “Some State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a generally-accessible location has essentially been ‘exported,’ as it would be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.”
The proposed regulations bear out this contention. “A release of ‘technical data’ may occur by disseminating ‘technical data’ at a public conference or trade show, publishing ‘technical data’ in a book or journal article, orposting ‘technical data’ to the Internet,” reads the rule. (Emphasis added.) “Persons who intend to discuss ‘technical data’ at a conference or trade show, or to publish it, must ensure that they obtain the appropriate authorization.”
Although the State Department claims it is merely “clarifying” the rules about disseminating “technical data,” the NRA argues that “the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech,” subjecting “online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition … to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published.” Indeed, suggests the group, the new rules “would make online communications about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible.”
“Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities,” the NRA asserts. How many of them, after all, have the resources either to obtain approval to publish their data or to stand up to the federal government for violating the rules? The penalty for each violation includes up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $1 million, with the dissemination of such information to each individual foreign country or national considered a separate violation — and there could be civil penalties to boot. Better not to post such information than to risk the wrath of Uncle Sam, many will quite reasonably conclude.
Lest anyone think this is just alarmist rhetoric from the “gun lobby,” recall that the administration has already used ITAR to force Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson, creator of the first 3D-printed handgun, to remove the blueprints for the gun from his website, where he offered them for free to all interested parties. This hasn’t done anything to stop the spread of Wilson’s blueprints, which had already been downloaded over 100,000 times by the time he received and complied with the order from the State Department, or the advance of 3D firearms printing in general; but it has shown that the administration is eager to crack down on people who don’t play by its (unconstitutional) rules. Backed by the Second Amendment Foundation, Wilson is now suing the administrationwith a legal team headed by Alan Gura, who successfully argued two recent gun-rights cases, District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. Chicago (2010), before the Supreme Court.
The proposed regulations are open for public comment until August 3; those concerned about firearms and free-speech rights may wish to make their voices heard in the interim. Whether the Obama administration will listen, however, is another matter entirely. Considering the fact that it applied ITAR to Wilson’s blueprints two years ago, well before these latest regulations were proposed, it may not really care what the rules — whether codified in regulations or laws or the Constitution — say. As the NRA observes, “When did the U.S. Constitution ever deter Barack Obama from using whatever means are at his disposal to exert his will over the American people and suppress firearm ownership throughout the nation?”