Monday, November 5, 2018


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
[Thirty Pieces of Silver] At the beginning of 2013 the Christian community in America began to be flooded with new terms and players using new words for human sexuality, gender and sexual norms. These new speakers like Sam Allberry, Rosaria Butterfield, and a small herd of others, began making the rounds at conferences and working to ever so gently to move the church toward a new “understanding” of sexual minorities (LGBTQ ) whose “civil rights” were on a fast track into the mainstream.  Although in conservative circles the assertion was that conventional Biblical perspectives were being retained and defended, the talking points were being changed and the language and terms were nuanced just in time for the massive redefining of sexual norms and marriage.  This new language came from respected heavy hitters in conservative evangelical circles like Albert Mohler and Timothy Keller whose influence on next-gen pastors is immeasurable.  As their endeavor surfaces several glaring realities come into focus.
  • The church is being asked to rethink (a favorite progressive term for overhauling the past position) its rhetoric if not its stand on homosexuality and marriage.
  • The church leadership has constructed a unified approach to accomplish a task, for whom and to what ultimate end is not YET in focus.
  • The effort has brought to the “Conversation” some interesting players including a gay priest from the UK / Church of England whose ministry Living Out is pushing the “same-sex attracted”/ SSA language, inclusion and understanding, seasoned with a good dose of guilt and shame for the churches’ past failures to understand and distinguish SSA from homosexuality.
  • Another major player in the conversation is a former lesbian and (as yet) quiet liberal academic whose professional specialty and activist training was in Marxist/Freudian / Darwinian flavored Critical Theory specializing in “Queer Theory” – Rosaria Butterfield, who has no theological background to address the issue with the conservative church.
  • The church is suddenly being told that the “ick factor” recoil to same-sex desires is “sin” and is being asked to abandon 2,000 plus years of Biblically-based language and understanding of homosexuality, sexual temptation and desires.


The earliest use of the term “SSA Christian” and “victim of the church” internal talking points for evangelicals appears to be from the preparations of statements for the 2010 third Lausanne Congress of World Evangelism in Cape Town South Africa. This would place the insertion of SSA language and the emotion-packed narrative in the 2009 documents for the lead up to Cape Town 2010.  The ministry to homosexuals is based on Lausanne’s partnership with Exodus Global Alliance (a distinct organization, according to its website, from Exodus International which famously abandoned the mission of rehabilitating homosexuals and apologized for hurting homosexuals in 2013). Exodus Global worked directly with the Lausanne committee to draft 4 essays on how the church is to minister to homosexuals.
Downloads are available here.
Essay 1 Sexuality, Truth and Grace
Essay 2 Homosexuality and the Church
Essay 3 God’s Work to Redeem People Involved in Homosexuality
Essay 4 Equipping the Church to Respond
Examples of The New Talking Points and Approach
According to the Lausanne Global Conversation, homosexuals number 155 million worldwide and represent an “unreached people group.” Here is some of the narrative on “Homosexuality and the Church”:
“Some of the souls who are impacted by same sex attraction are Christians, and some are not. People dealing with same-sex attraction wander the streets of communities all over the world, and many of them are perishing because no one has seen them as worthy of evangelism and ministry.”
“Each of these persons represents people marginalized in the church.”
“The church can learn something from the fact that so many prominent gay activists and personalities share a common upbringing in the church. Their struggles began, in some way, in the church.”
“As these people share their stories, it is clear that condemnation, warning and fear can work to restrain someone dealing with same sex attraction for a time. At some point, however, these tools no longer work. Christian rules, Christian regiment, and Christian tradition will only go so far.”
Time and space do not permit going into greater detail and quoting more sources but the contents above show the tone of the essays. Gays are victims – not of homosexuality but mostly of an unaffirming culture and church and an old-school approach to the Gospel.  REPENTANCE and saving FAITH are not discussed as the remedy as millions of us have historically left sins behind us in the traditional Christian faith. The CORE message of the new talking points?  The church is at fault and MUST change.


Mike Goeke, pastor of Stonegate Fellowship since 2010 is now associate pastor of First Baptist San Francisco.  Goeke authored several of the Exodus essays including the quotes above. In his testimony “Homosexual and Married,“ Goeke recounts his homosexual desires and online indulgence until finally departing from his marriage to pursue life as a gay man. Eventually, Goeke abandoned gay theology and homosexuality and returned to his wife and family. Though parts of his testimony reflect a clear repentance yet his family and Christian community’s support and loving outreach hardly confirm his espoused view that the church is mishandling ministry to homosexuals. And the Exodus/ Lausanne collaborations plainly call the CHURCH to change by asserting its failure in compassion toward homosexuals.
Goeke cannot be making these assumptions and assertions in the Lausanne essays from personal experience since his wife and family prayed and waited and believed.  Somewhere in what should be an otherwise wonderful testimony is a confused narrative of mistreatment that did not come from the Christians in Goeke’s personal experience. Yet to date, as of 2017, he asserts that Christians retain homosexual or SSA desires well after conversion. These retained desires now in the broader narrative are not temptations but taken as proof of “orientation”. One of the primary contributors to this determination is psychologist Mark Yarhouse. He was commissioned by DA Carson of The Gospel Coalition to develop this ideology for TGC and  TEDS “Christin on Campus Initiative ” and it was applied as the gold standard on sexuality and to the general topic of the church and homosexuality in 2010 (same time as the Lausanne Movement South Africa meetings launched the works it had commissioned developing the SSA narrative and elevating Tim Keller – Carson’s co-founder at TGC). Yarhouse assertions that Sexual Orientation is proven and a reality then concludes a person with homosexual temptation has a homosexual of LGBTQ+ “Sexual Identity ” . If that individual holds to a faith then they also have a “Faith Identity”. If that faith does not affirm LGBTQ+ identity or practices then they resulting “conflict” must be resolved. The Yarhouse resolution is to merge the Sexual Identity with Faith Identity in an acceptance of a “Gay Christian Identity “. If that individual’s faith tradition does not affirm homosexual behavior then the critical piece of the process for resolution is to advocate celibacy or mixed orientation marriages where one opposite-sex partner identifies as homosexual the other as heterosexual. THIS is the answer that Lausanne, TGC , and others who follow in their wake have decided to develop and promote to the church and from the church to a lost world. The question for the reader? “Is this the Gospel and the Power of Christ sacrifice to save sinners and make us saints? A simple study of scripture and the testimony of millions of redeemed souls no longer in bondage to past sins or the temptations to engage in them  – and no longer defined by nuanced language to coddle and preserve them – stand in total opposition to this sad and false set of unbiblical beliefs.
The approach to SSA Christianity mirrors the “once an alcoholic always an alcoholic” of Alcoholics Anonymous and does not reflect Biblical salvation. SSA begs acceptance by the church of a sexual orientation to homosexuality. Therefore, if orientation exists as an inborn trait, then homosexual attraction is something that cannot change and the church “must begin its journey toward acceptance” of the new science, understanding, language, and an era of inclusion. The only verdict yet to be determined is whether we in the church will continue to REQUIRE celibacy by the newly labeled victims of SSA as the determinate for inclusion in the faith and in the church and in leadership roles within it.


You can see from articles linked below where this 2010 development of and 2013 full launch of the Lausanne Movements SSA branding and language have taken the church thus far. Sam  Allberry /Living Out ministry has introduced a “Church Audit on LGBTQ+ Inclusion ” which will be coming to the States in November 2018 through TGC affiliated 9MARKS churches of Southern Baptist Mark Dever. Tim Keller was the keynote speaker at the June 2018 meetings of Living Out where the Church Inclusion Audit was launched.
In the lead up to the June meetings with Keller in London, Living Out endorsed the radical Revoice Conference” for out U S audience ” which is “promoting “LGBTQ+ flourishing ( a favorite word of Keller and Lausanne and their associated think tanks ) in historic Christian traditions”.  Both the Revoice group and Living Out want the Church to Rethink and Revoice the conversation of homosexuality in the church . The word salad and nuancing that was drafted  in 2010 and launched in earnest in 2013 by Lausanne, The Gospel Coalition, Christian media , and a host of others- continues to mute the voices of opposition and distort and twist the scriptures , muddle clarity , and promote the normalization of a Gay Christianity to an unsuspecting evangelical church on a global scale. Key research articles tracking this decline into full compliance -acceptance- welcome and eventually affirmation of the global LGBTQ+ agenda by the global church can be found at this link. Here are a few key articles related to the advance of the SSA narrative and the decline of Biblical perspective on the issue of the Gospel and LGBTQ+.
The following are a video and article that may help the reader decide if these talking points are Biblical or more driven by emotions and the changing times. A great deal is riding on the present considerations as no denomination has historically ever continued to grow as a result of affirming, including, welcoming LGBTQ and none have recovered from the onset of steep decline once the bridge is crossed.
Practical Steps For Church Based Same Sex Attraction Ministry

Biography of Mike Goeke, Executive Vice President, Exodus International  

[Editor’s Note: This article was written by Thomas Littleton and first published at Thirty Pieces of Silver]




Off Point: CRTV Partners with Disgraced Pastor 

Greg Locke


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
One of the newer players in the conservative media marketplace is CRTV.  The online subscription service (it’s basically Fox News for millennials) has made a name for itself by providing no-nonsense, right-leaning news commentary and features popular figures such as Steve Deace, Allie Beth Stuckey, Mark Levin, and Phil Robertson. CRTV now also features disgraced pastor Greg Locke.
Locke is well-known for his politically incorrect social media rants about politics and religion.  Readers of Pulpit & Pen will recognize Locke as the foul-mouthed, spouse-abusing small-time Tennessee pastor who notoriously divorced his wife of two decades and quickly married his secretary.  Despite his biblical infidelity, Locke retained his position as pastor of Global Vision Bible Church, which he founded himself.
He now finds himself with a bigger platform on CRTV, where he is featured on a show entitled “On Point”.  One must now wonder if the management of CRTV, in partnering with such a scoundrel, has any true concern for biblical family values.  Christians should think twice before subscribing to and sharing CRTV resources, lest they participate in publicizing and providing this platform for an unqualified t-shirt-hawking “pastor” in desperate need of repentance, more accountability, and less visibility.
**Please note that the preceding is my personal opinion. It is not necessarily the opinion of any entity by which I am employed, any church at which I am a member, any church which I attend, or the educational institution at which I am enrolled. Any copyrighted material displayed or referenced is done under the doctrine of fair use.


Rev. Susan Rothenberg Shouts Down President Trump in Squirrel Hill

Ranting Lady Pastor Protests Trump’s Visit 
 in Pittsburgh
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
This lunatic and ranting crazy woman is a “Pastor” of the “Presbyterian” church (scare quotes are buy-one-get-one on Halloween). Apparently, she’s upset that President Donald J. Trump is showing up to grieve as the President of the United States with those at the Tree of Life Synagogue, where a crazed gunman took 11 lives. The Synagogue lies in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood, and the female impastor lives a few houses down. In spite of news reports that progressives in the Jewish community (in reality it was an alt-left propaganda group funded by outside interests) asked Trump not to come unless he (further) denounces alt-right racism and anti-Semitism in a perverse and morbid political stunt, the Rabbi of the Tree of Life Synagogue, Jeffry Meyers, offered an invitation to the President and warmly embraced him upon his arrival.
Trump, whose son-in-law and daughter are Jewish, has been the greatest friend to the State of Israel in American history, repeatedly defending the Israeli people and moving the American embassy to Jerusalem – a promise that other presidents made but none kept. It’s safe to say that among many Jews, particularly Orthodox Jews, Trump remains popular for being a defender of the Jewish people around the world.
This did not stop “Pastor” Susan Rothenberg from standing nearby the funeral services in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood and disrupting their religious services by shouting how unwelcome Trump was, regardless of the invitation of the Jewish people actually inside the Synagogue. Rothenberg pastors at the liberal Presbyterian Church USA (not to be confused with the more conservative Presbyterian Church of America). She also blogs at Presbyterians Today, a website for the denomination’s faithful, under the column, “Unglued Church.” Although she goes by the title “pastor,” she is only a “member-at-large” in the Presbytery of Pittsburgh, but was pastor of a small church at one time. Today, she heads up the Commission on Ministry and serves on the Anti-Racism Transformation Team for the denomination.
According to the Presbyterian website, she has two cats. Of course, she does.

The impastor says:
This is our neighborhood. You are not welcome here. We don’t want him here. We don’t want him on our streets…You don’t belong here. This is our neighborhood. We welcome everybody here. You are not welcome on my street…You are not welcome in Squirrel Hill.
Apparently, everyone is welcome at Squirrel Hill. Except the president. You know, he’s not welcome. But he’s not welcome because everyone is welcome…except him?
How would you like to listen to this lady’s take on the Bible in her screeching sermons? Oofta.
Rothenberg claimed that the President’s presence was disturbing Shiva, the Jewish prayer of mourning, while she stayed out on the street screaming. Makes sense. Totally.


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

That's the message of Doris Wise, the founder and leader of Jews Can Shoot.
Jews Can Shoot is a Jewish 2nd Amendment civil rights group. And after the Pittsburgh shooting, and the rising anti-Semitism on the alt-left and the alt-right, its message is more relevant than ever.
"With all due respect, singing songs, lighting candles and posting the phrase “Never Again”, regardless of the number of exclamation points, is not going to stop anyone from killing Jews," Wise writes in the latest JCS newsletter.
"Fear of being shot by armed Jews. That’s what will stop them."
:We have a duty and an obligation to do everything we can and must to protect ourselves. The absurd belief that we can eliminate bad people with bad intentions is beyond stupid. Learn to protect yourself. Self-defense is a God-given right. Here in America – all of America – we have the very good fortune to have the Second Amendment. Honor it, yourselves and all good people by making use of it," Wise posted on Facebook.
In this interview on NRA TV, Doris Wise discusses the Jewish approach to armed self-defense.


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
[Thirty Pieces of Silver] Midterm elections demonstrate that the classic battle lines are being redrawn among Evangelical voters. Ongoing and concerted efforts through American conservative Christian seminaries, churches and secular mainstream media are intensifying to reshape the foundations and convictions which drive the Evangelical vote. Leadership continues to come from trusted ministers like Tim Keller of The Gospel Coalition and The Southern Baptist / ERLC’s Russell Moore. Formerly the efforts were to detract from conservatives but now the push is to openly abandon pro-life/pro-family Republicans and endorse Democrat candidates.
Tim Keller’s recent opinion piece in the New York Times provides a look at some of the rhetoric being engaged in. Keller asks, “What role should Christians play in politics?” and asserts that “more people than ever are asking this question.” He goes onto say, “While believers can register under a party affiliation and can be active in politics (thanks for the permission Dr. Keller) they should not identify the Christian church or faith with a political party as the only Christian one.” Keller then quotes British ethicist James Mumford who warns against “package -deal ethics “ that come with party affiliation. Keller omits that Mumford works at The Centre for Social Justice in London and stateside with Keller’s friends at The Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture. Mumford’s work touts Critical Theory and the Marxist Frankfurt School inspiration from which Keller and Mumford (as well as the IASC) draw their rhetoric of false social justice while attacking individualism, conservative “Culture Wars” and capitalism.
Another New York Times piece by Faith and Values Correspondent Elizabeth Dias featured recent interviews with five Texas Evangelical moms troubled by Christians’ past voting loyalties. Dias says, “All are longtime Republican voters, solely because they oppose abortion rights. Only one of them broke ranks to vote for Hillary in 2016. But this November, they have all decided to vote for Mr. O’Rourke.” While written as a random sampling of evangelical Texas Women reflecting a “trend,“ the NYT piece proves less than honest.
Radio host Janet Mefferd researched and found that at least three of the “Beto Moms” are tied to Village Church in Flower Mound, Texas where pastor Matt Chandler preaches for social justice / against white privilege and is a leader in both Keller’s TGC and Moore’s ERLC. Also revealed by Mefferd’s research is that these women play activist roles in refugee resettlement “ministries”- one even received $20,000 in one year from Village Church.
The progressive Christian left has been awash in George Soros funding as revealed years ago by American Association of Evangelicals – “Rent an Evangelical.”
Today we see the same funding agenda spilling over and trickling down through the Conservative Christian community through ministries like World Relief, Evangelical Immigration Table (of which Moore is a member) as well as denominational mission objectives. Is this funding inspiring these Evangelicals’ progressive politics? Dias points to the obvious hopeful payoff. “To democrats nationwide who have largely written off white evangelical voters, it also sends a signal -not just for midterms but also for the 2020 presidential campaign …”
Former Obama administration Faith Based and reelection campaign Faith Outreach Coordinator Michael Wear is now working with Keller’s TGC. Wear’s book sports endorsements from Keller and Evangelical leaders Russell Moore, Andy Stanley, Ann Voskamp and fellow Obama spiritual advisor Joel Hunter. Wear is also writing for TGC on topics like “Holding the Christian Ethic Together.” 
The young lobbyist of Russell Moore for ERLCs DC offices recently hosted Nashville ERLC employee Brent Leatherwood for a midterm roundtable discussion. Leatherwood was hired by Moore after Tennessee GOP officials tired of his team’s subversive work which almost bankrupted the TN Republican Party. In the Roundtable video the ERLC crew discuss the likelihood of the Democrat Party retaking the House in 2018.They then focus on the Senate seats up for grabs by Democrats. The ERLC team recommends voter resources like CNN where Moore frequently appears alongside prime time anchors including CNN Marxist /Obama pal Vann Jones. ERLC also recommends NBC, and The Cook Political Report by Charles Cook -a favorite of left leaning outlets ABC/ NBC/ NY Times /Washington Post.
The face of conservative Christian political engagement is changing rapidly by covert and overt forces from within. The steady creep of diluted doctrine and progressive social justice has weakened a generation of Christians’ resolve and conviction. Liberal mainstream media now have partners deep within the Evangelical leadership moving the church to embrace leftist policy and political candidates. The loss of the evangelical base, once complete, will prove catastrophic to the Conservative movement in America as well as to personal and religious freedom. A rapid and sustained movement must be organized to counter this subversive revolution against Christian Conservatism.
[Editor’s Note: This was first written at Thirty Pieces of Silver by Thomas Littleton, title changed by Pulpit & Pen]
 Trevor Loudon Interview - Are Churches in America being Infiltrated?



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
“In order to be true to my own principle, I won’t bother you with information about the different views of the flood. Let me just lay out my own assumptions. I believe Noah’s flood happened, but that it was a regional flood, not a world-wide flood…those who insist on it being a world-wide flood seem to ignore too much the scientific evidence that there was no such thing.” 
–(Tim Keller, Genesis: What Were We Put in the World to Do? [New York: Redeemer Presbyterian Church, 2006],81

My own principle? My own assumptions? Scientific evidence there was never a global flood???
Take note of the dire warning to the Lord’s church by the Apostle Peter from his second epistle, whereby he clearly illustrates how to recognize the “scoffers” in this warning:
“This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:  That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior: Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, for this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:  Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.”   2 Peter: 3: 1-3, 5-6

Question: What does Peter say will be the mark of the coming ungodly scoffers?

Answer: Denial of the worldwide flood.

Keller is a Darwinian evolutionist and you will find him regularly partnering with the BioLogos Foundation, which was organized for the sole purpose of replacing the biblical account of creation with Darwin’s theory of evolution inside the church. This heresy is being cleverly propagated onto the church as “theistic” evolution, and again we see the manipulation of language used to promote heinous error in the church.
belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

“Animals, whom we have made our slaves, we do not like to consider are our equal.”  Charles Darwin
There is not a word of scripture that suggests any type of evolutionary process in the Genesis account of creation, as scripture makes clear that God created in six literal days and rested on the seventh. How do we know the six days are literal? Because a day is defined in the creation account:
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.” Genesis 1:5

Can it possibly be any clearer than this? No.

To prefix the theory of evolution with the term “theistic” makes it a much easier “sell” to the churches. A clear, concise creation account of what God did in the span of six days comes from the word of God. Darwin’s profane and dastardly theory, developed for the sole purpose of eliminating God, comes from the pit of hell. There is nothing “theistic” about Darwin’s godless theory, as we review the full title of (and concept behind) Darwin’s thesis:

“On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle For Life.”

By means of natural selection?

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Genesis 1:27,2:21-23

Preservation of favored races?

“Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.”
Acts 10:34
Evolution, from the idea of natural selection to the perversion of preserving only favored races, cannot be “Christianized.” But that will not stop the false teacher, as they never allow truth to get in their way. Dr. Timothy J. Keller says the Genesis account of creation is just poetry, insisting that “science falsely so-called” should have the last word in the church.
“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.”   1 Timothy 6: 20-21

In an essay he wrote for BioLogos titled Creation, Evolution and Laypeople, Dr. Keller revealed something that is both troubling and very telling about himself and his mission:

“If as a pastor I want to help both believers and inquirers to relate science and faith coherently, I must read the works of scientists, exegetes, philosophers, and theologians and then interpret them for my people. Someone might counter that this is too great a burden to put on pastors, that instead they should simply refer their laypeople to the works of scholars. But if pastors are not ‘up to the job’ of distilling and understanding the writings of scholars in various disciplines, how will our laypeople do it? This is one of the things that parishioners want from their pastors. We are to be a bridge between the world of scholarship and the world of the street and the pew. I’m aware of what a burden this is. I don’t know that there has ever been a culture in which the job of the pastor has been more challenging. Nevertheless, I believe this is our calling.”
Tim Keller says the pastor must build bridges of unity between the world and the church; he says it is their “calling.” He says it is what believers want from their pastors…?
God’s word is void of any such concept but rather completely condemns this idea, as Paul warns us:
“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord.” 2 Corinthians 6:14-17
 The Apostle John couldn’t agree more:
And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.” 1 John 5:19
 Peter concurs that the church and the world are incompatible:
“Dear friends, I warn you as temporary residents and foreigners to keep away from worldly desires that wage war against your very souls.” 1 Peter 2:11
Peter identified believers as “temporary residents” and “foreigners” in this corrupt world; this doesn’t help much to promote Keller’s idea of uniting and building bridges. Jesus is completely at odds with the idea of his church uniting with the world:
“If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me first.  If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.”   John 15:18-20

  The Apostle Paul details the role of the men who teach the church in undeniably clear language and it is the polar opposite of Keller’s definition of pastoral ministry:

“I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.”  2 Timothy 4:1-2
 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” Acts 20:28
 “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ” Ephesians 4:11-13
Below is a link to the list of pro-evolution essays Keller has produced for The BioLogos Foundation:
Pastor John M. Otis has written a great book exposing the sinful error of any form of evolutionary thought in the church, as it robs God of his glory in creation, undermines all confidence in the word of God and collapses the very foundation of the Cross regarding the fall of Adam, sin and death.

Dr. Otis’ warnings to the church regarding evolution and its compromisers, including Tim Keller, can be found in the three links below.

Interview with John Otis about his book on the sinfulness of evolutionary compromise, with warnings about Tim Keller.  (159.24 minutes)
Audio link to Otis’ lecture warning believers about Keller’s teaching and influence (51.27 minutes)
PDF file of John Otis’ book (to read Chapter 8 “The Compromisers: Dr. Tim Keller” click on the link and scroll down to page 121, which is the beginning of chapter 8 on Keller)

You can add Darwinian evolution to the long list of heresies Tim Keller is promoting in the Lord’s church. We will continue to expose the extensive error of Keller’s false theology in the next post.

Written by Toni Brown – Read more BTWN articles by her – HERE
Read another article on Tim Kellers view of creation & evolution – HERE
Check her website out – HERE 
Read more about Tim Keller HERE and HERE

Check Out Everything Bible Thumping Wingnut – HERE

Support BTWN – HERE

Follow BTWN on Twitter – HERE

Like Our Facebook Page – HERE


 Trevor Loudon Interview - Are Churches in America being Infiltrated?




republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
[Daily Wire] As the midterm elections loom several days away, Pope Francis has expressed his support for the 14,000 people in the migrant caravan headed for the United States southern border.
According to Vatican documents, Pope Francis expressed his support for the caravan on Monday while addressing the participants of the XV General Chapter of the Congregation of the Missionaries of San Carlo.
Much of the [Pope’s] speech focused on the virtue of welcoming the stranger and how nations need to foster this virtue or risk their own demise.
“It’s easier to welcome a stranger than to be welcomed, and you have to do both,” said Pope Francis. “You must teach, help welcome the stranger, and give all the possibilities to the nations that have everything or enough to use these four words that you have said. How to welcome a foreigner.”
Pope Francis noted how he was such a stranger with his family in Argentina, which he held up as an example. “Argentina has this experience of welcoming because there was work and it was also needed. And Argentina — for my experience — is a cocktail of migratory waves,” he said.
Such a policy, Pope Francis says, is a social good because migrants “build a country.”
“Migrants build a country; how they built Europe,” Pope Francis said. “Because Europe was not born this way, Europe has been made by many waves of migration over the centuries.”
Should a nation reject migrants out of its own “well-being,” Pope Francis said that would be “suicidal,” noting Europe’s demographic winter which is the result of a secularized continent that largely rejects Church teaching on sexuality.
He later held up the “caravan traveling from Honduras to the United States’ as an example of migrants moving together in a “community.” He does not acknowledge that such a migratory wave reduces individuals into a crowd, making it difficult for government agencies to properly vet the people flowing into the country. It’s as if the sight of a person moving as just another member in a faceless crowd rather than a divine individual is something beautiful to behold.
Another phenomenon of migrants – let’s think of the caravan that goes from Honduras to the United States – is to pile up . The migrant usually tries to go in groups. Sometimes it has to go alone, but it is normal to pile up, because we feel stronger in migration. And there is the community. In football there is the possibility of a ‘free agent,’ that can move according to the opportunities, but from you there is no possibility, the ‘free agent’ from you fail. Always the community. Always in the community, because your vocation is precisely for migrants who pile up. Feel migrants. Feel, yes, migrants facing needs, migrants before the Lord, migrants among you. And for this the need to pile up.
Continue reading at the Daily Wire

[Editor’s Note: This was written by Paul Bois and first posted at Daily Wire. The title was changed by Pupit & Pen]
 The Biblical Answer to Migrant Caravan 
is Bombs and Bullets
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The Biblical solution to the migrant caravan preparing to invade the United States includes bombs and bullets.
As a pastor and theologian, the answer is clear to me. A nation has a right to sovereign borders. The invasion of sovereign borders by those who are not permitted therein should be met with judicial force. To use violent force upon foreign invaders is Biblical, ethical, and godly. This thesis shall be laid out in detail.


Preemptively, let me say that American evangelicals have lost their way. The discussion on immigration among evangelicals has been just one part of an overarching internal conflict that has flared up in recent years thanks to the propagation and popularization of secular philosophies which have invaded our academies ever as much as the impending migrant horde threatens to overtake our southern border. Led by mainstream denominational liberals in rainbow-colored clerical garb and New Calvinist social justice warriors on the theoretical right, both groups have coalesced to teach young seminarians and religious activists the tenets of Critical Race Theory, Cultural Marxism, Multiculturalism, Intersectionality, and Victimology. In this bizarre union between the religious left and those ostensibly on the religious right, a potpourri of Arminians, Pelagians, practical agnostics and Calvinists are all seemingly in agreement that the Bible condones lawlessness done in the name of kindness to the sojourner.
[Editor’s Note: This article is longer than that which normally appears at Pulpit & Pen, so as to be informative and most substantive. Please have the patience to read with care]
On this subject, mainstream religious leftists like Rachel Held Evans and Jim Wallis are in perfect union with historically conservative Southern Baptists, Albert Mohler and Russell Moore. The latter have been greatly influenced by the personality of Tim Keller, a popular thought leader among the New Calvinists who use traditional Confessions of Faith like toilet paper. Keller, a Cultural Marxist (by any standard definition and by his own admission) from New York City, has had a powerful footprint among The Gospel Coalition, whose leaders have commandeered the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), that in an ideal world would be providing Biblical answers to such serious ethical questions as illegal immigration. Instead, that organization – the ERLC – directs the Evangelical Immigration Table, a front organization belonging to George Soros and his National Immigration Forum. In fact, in no place is the union between the left and right more noticeable, as the director for the ERLC, Russell Moore, serves as on the board of directors for the Evangelical Immigration Table along with Jim Wallis (who is famously progressive, denies the inerrancy of Scripture, and is a liberal on virtually every issue of ethical importance). Along with Soros’ funding of this Southern Baptist entity, Clinton globalist billionaire financier, James Riady, has funded New Calvinist institutions – like Westminster Philadelphia and Ligon Duncan’s Reformed Theological Seminary. Riady, who was expelled from the United States for trying to corrupt the American political system with obscene amounts of corrupt foreign cash, is now the financial sugar daddy of the seminaries pushing out Reformed graduates, most of whom are a part of the new Social Justice movement.


Those on the supposed right who are fully “woke” and fully committed to acts of “social justice” that diminish the rule of law and protection of the nation-state include the aforementioned Albert Mohler, Tim Keller, Russell Moore, Mark Dever, Thabiti Anyabwile, Ed Stetzer, Beth Moore, D.A. Carson, Matt Chandler, and David Platt. While Russell Moore and Chandler both serve the ERLC (Moore as its director and Chandler as a research fellow), neither seem aware that the nation-state is the world’s strongest bulwark for religious liberty. Likewise, Platt, now retiring from the International Mission Board as its president, signed an amicus brief on behalf of the IMB to get a mosque built in New Jersey under the guise of religious liberty (he’s since apologized), but seems blissfully unaware that it is the nation-state that protects individual liberty. Acting in tandem as a gaggle of useful idiots pushing the agenda of globalists like Soros and Riady, these evangelical leaders are subversively undermining the very governmental system that protects the religious liberties they hold so dear.
Simply put, Soros and Riady – along with other globalist elites – seek to dismantle the nation-state as a form of governance. A nation consists of three primary building blocks. These include sovereign borders, a common language, and a shared culture. All three of these have been under attack in America from the political left for decades. It is only recently that those claiming religious conservatism have become allies in the subversion. Without the nation-state, there is no government by the People and for the People, which is tasked to defend the rights of individuals (including religious liberty) in the face of claims for the common good. Many of these subversive leaders, like Russell Moore, are proud communitarians, championing utilitarianism over individual liberty. It is difficult to maintain that these evangelical leaders are ignorant or somehow not culpable for their participation in the eradication of liberty when they are knowingly taking cash from men like Soros and Riady.
This leads to the question as to why these evangelical leaders are on the wrong side of these important Biblical and ethical issues, ranging from immigration to racialism (other than the cash they receive). The partial answer to this question – in their own words – is what they perceive demographically to be the “browning” of America. They suggest and perhaps are right, that the WASP (white Anglo-Saxon Protestant) will soon be the minority in the United States. If the evangelical church should survive, and by some chance even grow in coming years, its melanin count must rise. For that reason, the SBC has employed Affirmative Action in various of its institutions – like the Kingdom Diversity Department at Southeastern Seminary – and in its appointment of denominational leaders. Doctrinal fidelity has suffered greatly in the attempt to diversify the SBC, as heretics like Tony Evans and Sammy Rodriguez have been scraped off the very bottom of the theological barrel to fill speaking spots at denominational events. Their insistence that the church must change demographically in order to survive is not conspiratorial; it is overt and explicit.
The point in all the above is this; the rhetoric on immigration coming out of the Evangelical Intelligentsia is not shaped by a Biblical ethic or sound hermeneutical principles as it relates to immigration. The rhetoric on immigration coming out of the Evangelical Intelligentsia is singularly focused on future survival, and not doctrinal commitment or the work of Biblical ethics.


Jeff Sessions cited Romans 13 earlier this year in his defense of sovereign borders and was skewered by the Social Justice warriors on the right, many of whom were previously mentioned (above). However, Sessions was right in his citation of Romans 13, and he used the verse properly in context. He would have been equally as justified should he have cited 1 Peter 2. Both passages clearly explain our role in relation to the Civil Magistrate. The government exists to punish the wicked and reward the good. It carries the sword (of punishment) for a reason. We are to submit to those governing authorities so long as it does not require us to rebel against God.
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. (Romans 13:1-2).
13 Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. 16 Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. 17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor (1 Peter 2:13-17).
God invented the nation-state and Citizenship. That’s right, it was God that invented the “nation-state” as the children of Israel came out of Egypt with a concept of social construct not tied exclusively to kinship or geography. While it is true that the three building blocks of a nation are (A) borders (B) culture and (C) language, the development of Hebrew identity as a nation came about in an interesting vacuum in which they did not have a border or a geographical anchor. Historical anthropologists recognize that the Old Testament Israelite nation may very well be the first people group in the world to form a “nation” not tied directly or exclusively to kinship and geography, but instead was a social Covenant between Yahweh and his people. The idea of nation via compact was born. Israel was Israel even outside the Promised Land, because Israel had a Covenant with Yahweh. Those obeying that Covenant were seen as Israelites and those disobeying it were seen as Gentiles, and the concept of “Citizenship” was born. This proto-Citizenship in the historical record is demonstrated in the clear delineation of how Israelites were to be treated under Sinaitic civil codes given by God through Moses and how non-Israelites were to be treated. While aliens and sojourners were to be treated well, Old Testament laws make it very clear that Citizens of Israel were unique and were to be treated with different privileges than those not of Israel. This is seen even in the “Courtyard of the Gentiles” constructed outside of the Temple. It took more to become an Israelite than to simply sojourn in the land. Citizenship requires adherence to the Covenant, and formal admission into the body politic by a special rite.
God invented national sovereign borders. God himself gave the boundaries for the nation of Israel in Genesis 15:18 and in Genesis 17:8. In this, God ensured that the nation-state of Israel had applied to it the first and most important aspect of its existence; borders. Encroachments upon these boundaries were to be met with hostility. God commanded the Israelites to protect their borders and boundaries, and they were given total and unilateral control of those boundaries. Rather than causing conflict with neighboring nations, the borders clearly delineated property lines, defusing potential conflicts and better enabling the Israelites to govern their affairs in accordance with their Covenant with Yahweh.
God invented the border wall. There is an entire book of the Bible devoted to the building of a border wall. Nehemiah 1:1-7:3 explains God commanding the construction of a wall around Jerusalem to protect its strategic interests and prevent foreign invasion. There is nothing unethical, unbiblical, or sinful, about protecting national sovereign borders. And by the way, that border wall was well-armed.
When the United States lets in more than one million immigrants a year to attain Citizenship and nearly that many more to work and attend our educational institutions, it clearly does not exhibit institutionalized bigotry toward the foreigner. A nation that lets in two million foreigners a year does not suffer from xenophobia. That is not systemic racism; it is a systemic kindness. That the United States has border crossings where anyone can seek legal asylum through an open and forthright and generous asylum policy, it makes it all the more criminal to instead choose to sneak across the border criminally. That parents aren’t separated from their children by death as America protects its sovereign borders by force (which is its right) is a testimony of America’s shining generosity. Any other nation in virtually any other part of the world would fire upon those invading their sovereign borders. Instead, America applies the rule of law while feeding them, clothing them, providing them due process, and putting them in a detained “time-out” until they can be returned to their home of origin.


No, I’m not suggesting the Bible mentions either bombs or bullets. The Bible mentions swords and spears. The General Equity of those moral principles found in the Old Testament “positive commands” (meaning specific commands given to specific people), however, undergird and support the appropriate use of violence to dispel invading forces from sovereign nations. And the appropriate use of violence for invading forces into sovereign nations is, biblically, the application of deadly weapons. In today’s terms, these include bombs and bullets.
Just as Jerusalem’s border wall was being built in Nehemiah’s day by laborers working with one hand and carrying a spear in another, it is appropriate to prepare and utilize weapons for national defense. Although some would argue that Jerusalem was not a nation-state and therefore the comparison does not apply, it was – for all intents and purposes – a city-state, which is a fair equivalent. It was the state. It had a boundary. The boundary needed a wall. And, the wall needed to be protected by the use of deadly force. God did not only allow for this provision, but it was commanded by the prophet of God.
From that day on, half of my servants worked on construction, and half held the spears, shields, bows, and coats of mail. And the leaders stood behind the whole house of Judah, who were building on the wall. Those who carried burdens were loaded in such a way that each labored on the work with one hand and held his weapon with the other. – Nehemiah 4:16-17
Some might take exception with the parallel between the invading hordes of Nehemiah’s day and those traveling to our southern border on the grounds that the former was an army and the latter includes suckling babes and women. I take exception with their naivety. Artaxerxes, King of Persia, released the Jewish exiles to rebuild Jerusalem not because it was being invaded by armies (Jerusalem had already been conquered by the Persians), but because it was being settled by foreigners who had no rightful claim to the homes, orchards, vineyards, and infrastructure built by the Jews. Nehemiah’s invading hordes included the Samaritans, Ammonites, and Philistines, all of which were neighboring nations to Jerusalem who felt entitled to the greener grass on the other side of where Jerusalem’s border fence once stood. Surely a comparison is fitting to those coming from Central America and Mexico across our borders, many of whom are (as our Social Justice Warrior friends remind us)  just “looking  for better opportunities.” Families surely would have been in tow among these people-groups as well. Furthermore, it should be pointed out as a matter of fact that the so-called “migrant caravan” approaching our border consists of more than three-quarters of adult men. There is zero doubt that the invading nations upon Nehemiah’s Jerusalem contained considerably more women and infants than the mob approaching Texas.
The story of Old Testament Israel and Judah after the settling of the Hebrews in Canaan is little more than a history of its constant invasion by foreigners (redemptively, it’s about Christ, of course). The Book of Judges, in particular, focuses on the motif of foreign invasion. In each of these cases, even when the invasion of their sovereign borders was punishment dispensed by God, the Israelites were commanded and commended for picking up arms to annihilate their enemies. Gideon fought back the Midianites. Deborah fought Sisera of Canaan. Samson fought the Philistines. At no point was Israel commanded to stand-down and surrender their land or property in the name of misplaced kindness.
The United States of America is a Republic and union of 50 states that collectively and federally have a sovereign border. Our nation is autonomous and autocratic, under no binding international law. There is no ruler, power or authority over the United States other than the Lordship of Jesus Christ, which he enjoys over all the Earth. Our nation has a right to sovereignly declare our boundaries and borders and to protect them. Our nation-state must protect these boundaries and borders in order to protect the people therein and, even more importantly, the liberty of said people. To argue that the United States doesn’t have the right to defend our borders or that it’s somehow not right (in other words, immoral) to defend our borders, have taken away very little from the divinely orchestrated and infallibly preserved history of Israel.


Here, Social Justice Warriors with a semester or two of seminary may cry out with an obnoxious and ill-disguised arrogance, “But the United States is not Israel!” No kidding, Sherlock. I’m a Reformed Christian, which means (in part) that I believe Israel to have been a typology of the Christian Church, and not typological of a future geopolitical nation-state. Dispensationalists would likewise acknowledge that the United States, very clearly, is not Israel. The principle at play here, however, is a term from the Westminster Confession known as General Equity. As the divines explained it, which they did in particular as it functions regarding the Civil Code of Israel, the General Equity is that which is “moral and universal” found within those positive commands. In other words, although details change (like exchanging swords and spears for bombs and bullets), the moral principles undergirding those details do not change.
Others might insist that the coming of the New Covenant somehow changes the General Equity principle of protecting a nation’s borders. This logic does not follow. The installation of the New Covenant – as spoken of in Jeremiah 31 – brought a Covenant of Grace into time and space to redeem believing mankind by grace through faith in Christ. The New Covenant does not change moral principles. Reformed believers in particular, who should already believe that the Moral Law is immutable, must grasp this basic concept. It has always been wrong to steal. And while everything you currently own may in some way be the consequence of “hook and crook” by someone from whom you received it, it does not justify taking what belongs to another man currently. Those who seek to invade a nation for the purpose of consuming its resources, contrary to their national law, are thieves. Biblical principles have always upheld the use of force to protect property.
What the New Covenant did not change is Biblical ethics. We (that is, Reformed believers) would strongly resist the notion that Jesus gave new law in the Sermon on the Mount and his various discourses. We would argue that the newness of his commands are found in the motivation for our following them, chiefly resting in his divine example. Loving your neighbor, for example, is a citation of Old Testament law (Leviticus 19:9-18) and was not unique to the Sermon on the Mount. The defense of Israel’s sovereign border was not antithetical to loving neighbor, and neither is protecting America’s sovereign border. In relationship to this debate, it should best be understood that proper love between neighbors (which is a command given to individuals and not nation-states) is best preserved by the maintenance of good fences. As the old adage among the ranch communities here in Montana goes, “Good fences make good neighbors.”


Of course, the various Scriptural admonitions of kindness to the alien are brought out frequently by opponents of the rule of law, often by those with little to no understanding of Biblical law. Nonetheless, the frequency with which these commands are repeated and the level of ignorance among those who often repeat them do not negate their surety and soundness in our modern age. What are these commands, exactly?
We are commanded not to exploit the sojourner traveling through our territories (Exodus 22:21, Leviticus 19:33; by the way, this would apply to using illegal aliens as a cheap labor force, as many proponents of illegal immigration do). We should provide a level of charity for the sojourner and destitute (Leviticus 19:10). Even those who are not Citizens, if they are residents, should be treated with a degree of legal rights (Ezekiel 47:22). Various admonitions of this variety appear throughout the Old Testament. Simply put, God does not want anyone abused or mistreated.
Does this then mean that invading caravans of illegal immigrants must be treated as the “alien and sojourner”? Absolutely not. Invading forces are not lawful aliens and sojourners, and should be treated as enemies rather than as neighbors.
Ezekiel 47:22 informs us of this common sense division.
You shall allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the sojourners who reside among you and have had children among you. They shall be to you as native-born children of Israel. With you they shall be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel.
Non-Citizen permanent residents in Israel (Gentiles who lived within its sovereign borders) were not allowed to purchase land except through a temporary lease that would be ended or renewed at the Year of Jubilee every seven years (Leviticus 19:34). This would ensure that Israelite Citizens maintained control over their land. However, apparently a large number of non-Citizens had accrued by Ezekiel’s day, and they had proven their faithfulness and obedience to Israel, despite not belonging to the Covenant with Yahweh. While foreigners could not have land-rights, their children born within Israel’s sovereign borders could have land-rights.
In Old Testament Israel, distinctions were made between foreign invaders, temporary residents (sojourners), and permanent non-Citizen residents (“foreigners” or “aliens”). Foreign invaders were to be killed, travelers were to be treated hospitably, and resident non-Citizens were to be given property rights. While leftist religious leaders may make a case from Ezekiel 47:22 that the 14th Amendment, which according to the Supreme Court (their judicial opinion and legal precedent is often rightly challenged on this point) gives Citizenship to the children of immigrants and such is Biblical and ethical, it cannot be done without making special note that Biblical law differentiates between kinds and types of aliens. The distinction between an illegal alien (an invader), a temporary resident, and a legal permanent resident is unnecessarily blurred by the religious left, who have proven to have very little regard for a thoughtful analysis of Biblical ethics.


Seven-thousand active-duty troops are heading to the Mexican border to protect American lives and property from approximately seven-thousand foreign invaders (mostly adult men) who are intent on disobeying our laws and disrespecting our national sovereignty. A careful analysis of Christian ethics indicates that it is the full prerogative of our military to use deadly force after giving them every possible warning that a step across our border will be their first step into the world to come.
[Contributed by JD Hall]