NAZARENES DRIFTING TOWARDS AFFIRMING HOMOSEXUALITY

The following report from Manny Silva in its entirety:

Compromise With the Radical Homosexual Agenda By Pastors

Pastors who cannot preach the simple message of the transforming power of the Gospel to free homosexuals from their sin, ought to resign from the pulpit before causing further damage.

Here is the truth:

“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Cor. 6:9-11

“There is NO love in being kind, and gentle, and welcoming, and “affirming”, or “standing with them”, (whatever that might mean), if you DO NOT preach the Gospel plain and simple. It is the opposite of love; it is cruel and wrong and unbiblical.”

Those were my words in response to “rumfordrev”, a pastor who left comments on my blog post Eastern Nazarene College Rejects The Bible, Moves Towards Affirmation of Homosexuality.  He responded in defense of chaplain Corey McPherson, who in April 2012 preached a message to the Eastern Nazarene College students titled “Homosexuality: What Does God Think?”  Listen to the entire message if you will and judge for yourself, especially those of you who have an investment in either your children, or youth from your church who are attending, or thinking of attending a Nazarene college.  I had characterized Dr. McPherson as one who “speaks more like a confused college student, rather than a spiritual leader who is supposed to give biblical guidance to the students.”  His unapologetic boasting of having shared communion and worship service with a homosexual pastor and his congregation is one of the many disturbing things I found in his message.

In his defense of Corey McPherson, (see comments at my blog) you will not find a clear defense of biblical teaching on this subject from rumfordrev, and that illustrates one of the problems in the Church of the Nazarene today.  Certainly, there are still pastors and chaplains who, without wavering and making excuses or condemning the church for its faults, will articulate what God clearly teaches about sin, whether it is homosexuality, or any other sin.  Yet today I find more and more examples of a kind of compromise, sometimes very subtle, that is trying to make some kind of distinction in defining homosexuality, and raising this sin to a special position that it does not warrant.

Many of us are seeing a trend in the Church of the Nazarene of a movement towards “affirmation” and acceptance of homosexuality as “okay” and normal.  I think it is just a matter of time, and perhaps some might be in for a shock after General Assembly.  Some of the previous examples of this trend were Point Loma Nazarene University and the gay student chaplain situation, in which he was allowed to continue in that position for a while; and the off campus gay support group hosted by the local Nazarene church in San Diego.  Then we have had compromise by Trevecca Nazarene University, allowing a radical homosexual group to come onto its campus for “dialogue.”  At Southern Nazarene University, the leadership’s bad judgment allowed a student newspaper to promote the “new view” of homosexuality; one quote said that “Christian circles are too quick to call homosexuality a sin, without ever having talked to someone who identifies as gay.”  Eastern Nazarene College leadership recently approved a new support group for GLBTQ (gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transgender, and questioning student), as reported at my blog post of April 9.

Rumfordrev pointed out a quote from Dr. McPherson as indicative of a Christ-like approach, but he failed to address the serious problems with much of what was said, including the issue of having communion with a homosexual pastor, or worshipping with a gay affirming congregation, and he did not affirm agreement with my biblical answer to his question. What does this mean?  I’m not sure, but for someone to suggest to me that I made personal attacks without being specific about it, and yet not agree clearly with me about the sinfulness of having communion with a homosexual “Christian”,  and who himself stated “I am not responding to whether one can or can not be homosexual and Christian at the same time”, that leaves me asking: why would you not respond?

Affirming The Gay Lifestyle: What Does That Mean?

As examples of what Dr. McPherson said in his message, which I am working on transcribing, here are some disturbing quotes:

“You can’t help but put on a whole new perspective when someone you love is gay.  I was gradually coming to the point where I was affirming the gay and lesbian lifestyle. By affirming I mean encouraging him and I mean believing that an active gay lifestyle in a committed monogamous relationship is acceptable by God.”

“Many of you already know the passages of Scripture that address or seem to address the issue of homosexuality.  They are used as weapons to attack and abuse others even if the passage is quoted in the right text, it is done so in a manner that is demeaning and abusive.  So I would not look to these texts, in fact I will not quote them at all.”

I would say to Dr. McPherson that first of all, if one of my children declared someday that they were gay, that the only perspective I would have is that of a grieving dad who was just told by their child that they were rejecting God and were living a life of what they wish to do, and not what God wants them to do.  That’s all.  Our perspective in any other way should never change.  God’s word is applicable to all, whether they are related to you or not.  What your responsibility would be is to lovingly tell that loved one that they are in sin, and are headed towards eternity in hell without God for rebelling against him.

Secondly, his failure to properly give the biblical teaching on homosexuality, without any ambiguity to those who were listening, was unfair to them, and wrong.  Too many pastors now are talking about sexual orientation as a separate issue from homosexual acts.  I was astounded when I heard this sermon by Rev. Rick Power of College Church in Olathe, KS, when he said the following (my emphasis in bold):

“as a community that is called to reflect the grace and forgiveness and hospitality of our Savior, we must thoughtfully and carefully respond to the questions of homosexuality, and sexual purity, and divorce.  To say that marriage is a lifelong covenant between one man and one woman …. doesn’t mean that we are slamming our doors or closing our hearts to gay and lesbian people. Not at all.   We have learned that for the vast majority of individuals sexual orientation is not a choice, and it cannot be changed.  If this is true then homosexual orientation in itself is not sinful.  It may be a sign of the brokenness and fallenness of our world, but if it does not involve personal choice, it is not in itself sinful, and we have to make this distinction between homosexual orientation and homosexual acts.”

Is this thinking coming out of the seminaries now?  Are these ideas being driven by the emergent church crowd, of which many like Rob Bell, Brian McLaren and others openly approve gay marriage, and believe now that you can be homosexual and remain Christian?  What is the fascination with a kind of coddling of those who identify with this particular sin, but not with those who are involved in other types of sin?  Where is the direct and clear, bold preaching that homosexuals can be freed from the bondage of their sin?  Instead, we see pastors stating that they “affirm” them, and “stand with them”, but to what end?  Is it to get more bodies into the church, and show everyone how “caring” you are?

I shudder to think that perhaps next month, the General Assembly might elect one, maybe even two, new General Superintendents who also believe in this unbiblical approach to dealing with homosexual sin.  If so, the spiraling downwards of the Church of the Nazarene will continue at an even faster pace than I thought would happen.  And the words of Rev. Power from his sermon makes me wonder: how many of his congregation that day were nodding their heads in approval, instead of standing up and objecting to his unbiblical view on homosexual sin?  That should be of concern as well.

Not All Are Compromising

I remind you of the pastors in Rhode Island who stood up against gay “marriage” and publicly signed a petition expressing the biblical view that condemns such things.  Not all evangelical pastors were on this list, and I wonder was it because they never saw the petition, or because they did not want to be identified as one who is against the radical political correctness of the day?  Sadly, gay “marriage” has been foisted upon Rhode Islanders, with much thanks to some legislators who caved in at the last minute.

And there is Pastor John Lindell of James River Assembly in Missouri, another example of those ministers of Christ who refuse to water down the Gospel, and who do it in a loving way, in spite of accusations by the radicals and the compromising “pastors” who objected to his biblical views.  Can you believe pastors objecting to a biblical assessment of homosexuality?  That’s exactly how he was treated, and I will report on this further.  In the meantime, his story can be read here, and the full context of his speech can be read here.

(On Wednesday, I will also post a response to the “sexual orientation” question, written by John Henderson, which addresses this fallacy being propagated by what seems to be a growing number of pastors).

 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 www.reformednazarene.wordpress.com
Podcasting at: http://standfortruthministries.podbean.com/

FaceBook group: Concerned Nazarenes
FaceBook group: Concerned Christians

Portuguese: http://nazarenoportugues.wordpress.com/
Spanish: http://nazarenoespanol.wordpress.com/

"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)

OPEN MICROPHONE: THE POLICE STATE OF NEW JERSEY WANTS TO CONFISCATE WEAPONS FROM CITIZENS

NJ Senator Weinberg:

NJ woman arrested for quoting constitution, permitted guns confiscated. Police in Clayton, New Jersey, confiscated two guns from a woman after she complained about county government moving to raise her property taxes and inspect her property without a search warrant. Eileen Hart of Franklin Township was arrested and charged with making terroristic threats, disorderly conduct and harassing officials from the Gloucester County Office of Assessment and Appraisal Systems, Inc.

NJ introduces 18 restrictive gun control bills:

ROB BELL'S HERETICAL NEW POSITION ON HOMOSEXUALITY & THE CHURCH, CHALLENGED AND EXPOSED

Rob Bell appeared on Justin Brierley's Unbelievable Radio Broadcast recently, with Andrew Wilson in the UK. The discussion turned to his new position on homosexuality, and Mr. Bell demonstrated that his position is one of cultural compromise, not biblical reflection. 
Bell: "Cultural consciousness has shifted"; and on doctrinal differences: "This is the bullshit that pushes people away"; and "This is why so many people don't want to be part of the church".
Wilson: Approving the gay lifestyle is "lowering the asking price" of Christianity:

James White, Reformed Baptist apologist and theologian analyzes the interview in which Bell plays the victim:

LIGHTHOUSE TRAILS REFUTES JODI DETRICK OF ASSEMBLY OF GOD INVITE TO RUTH HALEY BARTON AND SHOWS THAT CONTEMPLATIVE PRAYER IS OCCULTIC

Here is the refutation and analysis from Lighthouse Trails Research in full:


A Special Follow-Up Report by Ray Yungen and the Editors at Lighthouse Trails
Before we begin our report addressing the public response issued by the Assemblies of God Superintendent Dr. George O. Wood and Dr. Jodi Detrick, chairperson for the Network for Women in Ministry regarding the invitation of Ruth Haley Barton to the 2013 General Council Conference, we would like to clarify one thing: Lighthouse Trails carries no personal animosity toward Ruth Haley Barton. Our issue has to do with a spiritual practice that Ms. Barton is deeply involved with and that, as we will show, has roots in Eastern mysticism, which does not line up with the Gospel of Jesus Christ or the Word of God.
To begin, we want to clarify that the names we mention below are not people who are loosely and inadvertently associated with this mystical spirituality but rather are practitioners and dedicated advocates of it.
Dr. Detrick suggested in her response to our April 15th article that what we presented in that article was a “misunderstanding” in that there is a clear and distinctive difference between Eastern mysticism and Christian contemplative prayer. She stated:

Sadly, some are saying that seeking the Lord in such a way equates with the practices of meditation and contemplation in Eastern religions. This couldn’t be further from the truth, and is an unfortunate and inaccurate identification.(source)

What we hope to show in this report is that our conclusions are not the result of a misunderstanding by any means, and we will show that there is a direct correlation between the contemplative prayer movement and Eastern meditation.
While we bear no ill feelings toward Dr. Detrick or Dr. Wood, we are compelled to show that the premise of the following statement by Dr. Detrick can be disproven through solid evidence:

We want to assure those with concerns that there is not even the smallest part of us that embraces any form of eastern religion or the New Age movement’s teachings and practices.(source)

Now while it may be Dr. Detrick’s intent not to embrace any form of Eastern mysticism, we will demonstrate that contemplative prayer and Eastern meditation are essentially the same, and different in name only. At the onset of providing this evidence, please bear in mind that while we only give a relatively few examples (for the reader’s time’s sake) in this report, we could provide many many more similar examples as they are ample.
THE CONNECTION BETWEEN CONTEMPLATIVE PRAYER AND EASTERN MEDITATION
I. The very person who coined the term New Age, occultist Alice Bailey, saw a direct link between Christian mysticism (i.e., contemplative prayer) and Eastern mysticism. Bailey stated:

It is, of course, easy to find many passages which link the way of the Christian Knower [contemplative] with that of his brother in the East. They bear witness to the same efficacy of method.1

II. Tilden Edwards, the founder of Shalem Institute of whom Ms. Barton received her training in contemplative spirituality, also identified the connection between contemplative prayer and Eastern meditation. Edwards said:

This mystical stream [contemplative prayer] is the Western bridge to Far Eastern spirituality.2

III. In his book, Spiritual Friend, Tilden Edwards suggests those who practice contemplative prayer and have begun experiencing “spiritual unfolding” and other “unusual experiences,” should turn to a book titled Psychosynthesis in order to understand the “dynamics” at “certain stages.”3 The man who wrote Psychosynthesis, Roberto Assagioli, was a direct disciple of Alice Bailey! Edwards might as well have recommended people turn to Alice Bailey herself. This is not guilt by association. Edwards knows that there is a connection between contemplative  prayer and occultic (i.e., Eastern) mysticism.
IV. Thomas Keating, a major leader in the contemplative prayer movement, also acknowledges that Barton’s contemplative prayer is related to Eastern religious meditation. In a book Keating wrote the foreword to, Kundalini Energy and Christian Spirituality, Keating states:

In order to guide persons having this experience, Christian spiritual directors may need to dialogue with Eastern teachers in order to get a fuller understanding.4

Keating understands that within the DNA of Christian contemplative prayer is Eastern-  mysticism. Philip St. Romain, the author of the Kundalini book says: “This book is an important contribution to the renewal of the Christian contemplative tradition.”5 Contemplative mystics say these things because they know them to be true.  Also in the foreword of that book, Keating states that the Kundalini energy “is also at work today in numerous persons who are devoting themselves to contemplative prayer.” Kundalini energy is what is known as the serpent power of New Age mysticism.  This statement by Keating should cause any Christian who is even thinking of dabbling in contemplative prayer to run the other way. We encourage you to look up Kundalini on the Internet.
V. Ruth Haley Barton identifies with Keating. In her book, Invitation to Solitude and Silence, she admits that Thomas Keating helped her to understand the contemplative idea of “the true self” (man’s divinity):

The concept of the true self and the false self is a consistent theme not only in Scripture but also in the writings of the church fathers and mothers. Thomas Merton and Henri Nouwen (particularly Nouwen’s The Way of the Heart) and Father Thomas Keating are contemporary authors who have shaped my understanding of this aspect of the spiritual life.6

Merton, Nouwen, and Keating believe that man can attain to his “true self” (perfect self) through mystical practices. This is actually the crux of the Spiritual Formation  (i.e., contemplative prayer) movement, that man realizes his divinity through mystical experiences. Ruth Haley Barton’s Transforming Center has a mission of helping people find their “higher” true self through contemplative practices.
VI. Henri Nouwen, the late Catholic priest, who is touted highly by Barton as well as by virtually every contemplative proponent, knew very well that Eastern mysticism was at the underlying roots of contemplative prayer. In a book written by universalist Catholic priest, Thomas Ryan, Nouwen (in the foreword) wrote:

[T]he author shows a wonderful openness to the gifts of Buddhism, Hinduism and Moslem religion. He discovers their great wisdom for the spiritual life of the Christian . . . Ryan [the author] went to India to learn from spiritual traditions other than his own. He brought home many treasures and offers them to us in the book.7

VII. Regarding a book written by Philip Goldberg titled, American Veda, the book shows how “Hindu mysticism has profoundly affected the world view of millions of Americans and radically altered the religious landscape.”8  Goldberg saw fit to devote an entire chapter to contemplative prayer stating:

Perhaps the biggest shakeup by the eastern winds has been . . . the reawakening  -  of Western mysticism . . . the long sequestered vaults of contemplative Christianity and Jewish mysticism [Kabbalah] begin to be unlocked.9

If contemplative prayer has nothing to do with eastern mysticism, then why does Goldberg devote an entire chapter to it? He saw it as an adjunct to Hinduism. One final point to consider is this: Virtually every major New Age bookstore has a sizable section on Christian meditation (i.e., contemplative prayer). Call one up in your own town or city and ask if this is so. We believe you’ll see it is.
WHERE DID CONTEMPLATIVE PRACTICE COME FROM?
I. Carl McColman, in his book, The Big Book of Mysticism, The Essential Guide to Contemplative Spirituality, states:

It is important to note that, throughout the history of Christianity, Christian mystics have displayed an unusual openness to the wisdom of non-Christian philosophy and religion. . . . Ultimately, however, no absolutely clear distinction can be drawn between Christian and non-Christian mysticism…  It is precisely in this dimension of mystery that people of different faiths and different wisdom traditions can relate to each other.”10  

 II. Brian C. Taylor said:

These contemplatives also recognize their soul mates in other traditions, as did Thomas Merton in his pilgrimage to Buddhist Asia. This is because they have passed beyond the confines of religion as a closed system to an open awareness of God-in-life.”11   

III. The contemplative prayer movement that is rising rapidly within evangelical circles largely through the early work of figures like Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, and Ruth Haley Barton, and now many of their protégés, stems primarily from the Catholic church. Michael Leach, past president of the Catholic Book Publishers Association, explained this:

The irony is that the best of the New Age ideas—those flowing from a spiritual understanding of God, humankind and the universe—have been jewels in the Catholic treasury since the very beginning, but for too long have been neglected, forgotten or buried.12

IV. How did Eastern meditation enter the Catholic church in the first place? Did the early church fathers get it from the apostles, Jesus’ teachings, or Scripture? No, they did not. On the contrary, the Desert Fathers (monks such as St. Anthony who became hermits)  experimented:

It was a time of great experimentation with spiritual methods. Many different kinds of disciplines were tried … many different methods of prayer were created and explored by them.13

And in this experimentation, they “discovered” a prayer tool. According to one meditation scholar:

The meditation practices and rules for living of these earliest Christian monks bear strong similarity to those of their Hindu and Buddhist renunciate brethren several kingdoms to the East . . . the meditative techniques they adopted for finding their God suggest either a borrowing from the East or a spontaneous rediscovery.14

And thus:

The fourth-century Desert Fathers understood that a simple device was needed to keep the “monkey mind” from wandering. Thus, the mantra method of prayer, which had been introduced centuries before by Buddhists and Hindus, came to be a stable form of Christian prayer, not only for the Desert Fathers and Mothers but for Christians down through the ages.15

One of Christian contemplative’s own, Marcus Borg, reveals the role the mantra plays in contemplative prayer:

Contemplation typically involves the silent repetition of a mantra—-a single word, a short phrase or a series of short phrases. . . . Ultimately the purpose of contemplative prayer is to descend to the deepest level of the self, of the heart, where we open out into the sea of being that is God.16

 V. Christian contemplative teachers will often say that in contemplative prayer one is not using Buddhist or Hindu mantras, so therefore it cannot be called Eastern meditation. While it is true that different words or syllables are repeated in the contemplative mantra than those used by Eastern mystics, the method (mantra or focus) of entering an altered state of consciousness is the same. Furthermore, as we will demonstrate later, the fruit of contemplative prayer has been shown time and time again to be the same – that of a pantheistic (or panentheistic) mindset of divinity in all things. In short, one would have to conclude – after witnessing the teachings of countless contemplative prayer mystics – that contemplative prayer and Eastern mysticism alike connect the practitioner with spirit guides that will erode – and in time destroy – their belief in the fundamentals of the Christian faith. Once the practitioner establishes the belief, as contemplative prayer will bring him to, that he has divinity within, there is no longer the need for the Cross. Yes, and countless contemplative mystics have already come to this conclusion.
PROOF THAT CONTEMPLATIVE IS OCCULTIC
I. Perhaps the strongest evidence to prove that the realms entered during contemplative prayer are not God’s realm (i.e., the Holy Spirit) but rather demonic occultic realms is observing the “fruit” that contemplative prayer bears in a practitioner’s life. Probably the most profound example is that of the late Catholic monk and mystic, Thomas Merton, who said once that he was “impregnated with Sufism”17 (Islamic mysticism).
Merton’s mystical experiences ultimately made him a kindred spirit and co-mystic with those in other Eastern religions. At an interfaith conference in Thailand, he stated:

I believe that by openness to Buddhism, to Hinduism, and to these great Asian [mystical] traditions, we stand a wonderful chance of learning more about the potentiality of our own Christian traditions.18

Please understand that contemplative prayer alone was the catalyst for such theological views. One of Merton’s biographers made this very clear when he explained:

If one wants to understand Merton’s going to the East it is important to understand that it was his rootedness in his own faith tradition [Catholicism] that gave him the spiritual equipment [contemplative prayer] he needed to grasp the way of wisdom that is proper to the East.19

II. A second remarkable example of the “fruit” of contemplative prayer can be found in an author (often quoted by evangelical contemplative advocates, including Barton) named Sue Monk Kidd. Monk Kidd was once a conservative Southern Baptist Sunday School teacher. One day, she was handed a book by Thomas Merton. It changed her life dramatically (that’s an understatement). Monk Kidd explained:

I found a host of Christian thinkers and saints talking about a way of “being with” God—a way of needing Him and experiencing Him in the depths of one’s being—that opened the door to oneness with Him. They called it contemplation. I was amazed to realize that I had known practically nothing about this ancient and powerful tradition of Christian meditation…. I was ready.20

She wrote that quote in a book titled God’s Joyful Surprise: a spiritual biography. Just to illustrate how subtle this spirituality can be, listen to some of the endorsements she received for that book by traditional Christian organizations:

 “[A] joy to read from beginning to end.” Virtue Magazine  (back cover); A Virtue Magazine best book of the year
 “[T]he message and challenge of the book is profound.” Today’s Christian Woman (back cover)
 “[Kidd] suggests some disciplines for cultivating an interior ‘quietness’ and a richer, personal experience of God’s love.” Moody Monthly (back cover)

We don’t believe that the people who wrote these endorsements really understood what they were endorsing.
III. But back to our point here to show the “fruit” of contemplative prayer. Where is Sue Monk Kidd today, spiritually speaking? Listen to these quotes written by her a number of years after God’s Joyful Surprise to see where it took her:

We also need Goddess consciousness to reveal earth’s holiness… Matter becomes inspirited; it breathes divinity. Earth becomes alive and sacred… Goddess offers us the holiness of everything. . . . As I grounded myself in feminine spiritual experience, that fall, I was initiated into my body in a deeper way. I came to know myself as an embodiment of Goddess.21
Mystical awakening in all the great religious traditions, including Christianity, involves arriving at an experience of unity or nondualism. In Zen it’s known as samadhi . . . The day of my awakening was the day I saw, and knew I saw, all things in God, and God in all things. 22

Today, after going down the contemplative path, Sue Monk Kidd worships the goddess within and not the God of the Bible. That is what practicing contemplative prayer got her. And it is what it got Thomas Merton. He came to believe, as well, that God was inside every human being (panentheism):

It is a glorious destiny to be a member of the human race, ... now I realize what we all are .... If only they [people] could all see themselves as they really are ...I suppose the big problem would be that we would fall down and worship each other ... At the center of our being is a point of nothingness which is untouched by sin and by illusions, a point of pure truth ... This little point ...is the pure glory of God in us. It is in everybody. 23

And Henri Nouwen:

The God who dwells in our inner sanctuary is also the God who dwells in the inner sanctuary of each human being.24

What we are saying here is vital. God does not work in the contemplative silence—but rather demons do. Moreover, what makes it so dangerous is that they are very clever. One well-known New Ager revealed what his guiding (familiar) spirit candidly disclosed:

 We work with all who are vibrationally sympathetic; simple and sincere people who feel our spirit moving, but for the most part, only within the context of their current belief system.25

The term “vibrationally sympathetic” here means those who suspend thought through word repetition or breath focus—inward mental silence. That is what attracts them. That is their opening. That is why Tilden Edwards called this the “bridge to far Eastern spirituality,” and this is what is being injected into the evangelical church!
WHERE IS THIS ALL LEADING?
In Sue Monk Kidd’s book, The Dance of the Dissident Daughter, she makes a revealing comment:

Deity means that divinity will no longer be only heavenly … It will also be right here, right now, in me, in the earth, in this river, in excrement and roses alike.26

Monk Kidd has come to believe that God is in everything, literally. She rejects the belief that God is holy and man is a sinner needing a Savior and redemption.
We do not believe that Dr. George Wood or Dr. Detrick would deny the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the Cross, nor do we believe they would say that they agree with the words of Thomas Merton or Sue Monk Kidd. But by their willingness to embrace the teachings of Ruth Haley Barton (or any contemplative, for that matter) they are directly exposing themselves and potentially the two-and-a-half million in their denomination to the beliefs of Merton and Monk Kidd.
Alice Bailey predicted that there would be a global awakening where mankind would finally realize the divinity within. She called it the “regeneration of the churches.” Her rationale for this was obvious:

The Christian church in its many branches can serve as a St. John the Baptist, as a voice crying in the wilderness, and as a nucleus through which world illumination may be accomplished.27 (emphasis added)

Satan is very good at deceiving people, often in very subtle ways. The Bible talks about a day that is coming when Christians will fall into great deception. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils” (I Timothy 4:1). These seducing spirits are just that – seducing.
In Acts 16, there is a good example of this. The spirit in the woman endorsed Paul and Silas, but that spirit was not for them but rather against them. It was a demon. In Matthew 24, Jesus talks about great deception coming upon the earth prior to His return. False christs, false prophets, great signs and wonders, and many coming in His name. Could it be that this mystical spirituality, which leads man to say he is divine, is part of this great falling away? We believe it is.
Nothing is being twisted here. The aforementioned evidence is based on facts, not speculations. The leaders of the Assemblies of God (and every other denomination, actually) must decide if they really want to take their denomination in this direction. If they decide to go forward, they must explain away the evidence we have given.
In her books, Ruth Haley Barton quotes a number of people who could legitimately be called New Agers. Bear in mind that she quotes these figures in the context of the practices they share. In her book Sacred Rhythms, she quotes Basil Pennington from his book Finding Grace at the Center. This means she must have read that book, which is a primer in contemplative mysticism. Listen to what Pennington says:

We should not hesitate to take the fruit of the age-old wisdom of the East and “capture” it for Christ. Indeed, those of us who are in ministry should make the necessary effort to acquaint ourselves with as many of these Eastern techniques as possible.
 Many Christians who take their prayer life seriously have been greatly helped by Yoga, Zen, TM [Transcendental Meditation] and similar practices, especially where they have been initiated by reliable teachers and have a solidly developed Christian faith to find inner form and meaning to the resulting experiences.28 

Basil Pennington is one of the prominent figures of the contemplative prayer movement.
We stated in this report that contemplative prayer stands on the same ground as occultism. With that in mind, it is worth mentioning that both Thomas Keating (who, according to Barton, shaped her thinking) and Basil Pennington enthusiastically endorsed a book titled Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey in Christian Hermeticism. Fortune-telling Tarot cards are one of the major tools for divination in occultism. And Hermeticism is a set of ancient esoteric beliefs based on the writings of Hermes Trismegistus, the one who coined the term “as above, so below” (the maxim for the New Age movement). Keating said the book was “the greatest contribution to date toward the rediscovery and renewal of the Christian contemplative tradition,”29 and Pennington said, “It is without doubt the most extraordinary work I have ever read.”30 We’re talking about outright occultism here – there’s no room for doubt.
We are not asking anyone reading this to take our word for it. Look these authors up and see for yourself what they are saying. Compare this report we have written with our earlier article showing how Ruth Haley Barton is directly promoting the practice of contemplative prayer. We think, after true prayer and deliberation, you will come to the same conclusion we have—that contemplative prayer has no place in the biblical Christian faith.
Dr. Detrick claims that “[c]ountless AG people, and credentialed leaders, have testified to drawing much closer to the Lord as a result of Ruth’s books and teachings.” If it is true that “countless AG people” have been influenced by Ruth Haley Barton, then this report should motivate those in the Assemblies of God to get to the bottom of this controversy that is unfolding here.
Notes:
1. Alice Bailey, From Intellect to Intuition (New York, NY: Lucis Publishing Co., 1987, 13th printing), p. 193.
2.Tilden Edwards, Spiritual Friend (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press,1980), p. 18.
3. Ibid., pp. 162-163.
4. Philip St. Romain, Kundalini Energy and Christian Spirituality (New York, NY: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1995), foreword written by Thomas Keating.
5. Ibid, p. 7.
6. Ruth Haley Barton, Invitation to Solitude and Silence (Downer Grove, IL: Intervarsity, 2004),  p. 160.
7. Thomas Ryan, Disciplines for Christian Living (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press,1993), pp. 2-3, from Henri Nouwen in the foreword.
8. The publisher’s description of American Veda on both the publisher’s website and Amazon.com.
9. Philip Goldberg, American Veda (New York, NY: Random House, 2010), p. 310.
10. Carl McColman, The Big Book of Mysticism (Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing, 2010), pp. 63-64.
11. Brian C. Taylor, Setting the Gospel Free (New York, NY: Continuum Publishing , 1996), p. 62.
12. Michael Leach (America Magazine, May 2, 1992), p. 385.
13. Ken Kaisch, Finding God (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1994), p. 191.
14. Daniel Goleman, The Meditative Mind (Los Angeles, CA: Tarcher/Putnam Inc., 1988),  p. 53.
15. Frank X. Tuoti, The Dawn of the Mystical Age (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1997), p. 137.
16. Marcus Borg, The Heart of Christianity (San Francisco, CA: 2004), p. 198.
17. Rob Baker and Gray Henry, Editors, Merton and Sufism  (Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999), p. 69.
18. William Shannon, Silent Lamp (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1992), p. 276.
19. Ibid, p. 281.
20.  Sue Monk Kidd, God’s Joyful Surprise (San Francisco, CA: Harper, 1997), p. 187.
21. Sue Monk Kidd, The Dance of the Dissident Daughter (San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins, 1996), pp. 162-163, 161.
22. Ibid, p. 161.
23. Thomas Merton, Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1989 edition), pp. 157-158.
24. Henri Nouwen, Here and Now (New York, NY: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1997 edition), p. 22.
25. Ken Carey, The Starseed Transmissions (A Uni-Sun Book, 1985 4th printing), p. 33.
26. Sue Monk Kidd, The Dance of the Dissident Daughter, op. cit.,  p. 160.
27. Alice Bailey, The Externalization of the Hierarchy  (New York, NY: Lucis Publishing, 1976), p. 510.
28. M. Basil Pennington, Thomas Keating, Thomas E. Clarke, Finding Grace at the Center  (Petersham, MA: St. Bede’s Pub., 1978), pp. 5-6.
29. Endorsement on jacket of book.
30. Ibid.
Note: Ray Yungen has been researching the New Age and contemplative spirituality for over 20 years. He is the author ofA Time of Departing and For Many Shall Come in My Name. You may find more information, including contact information, about Ray Yungen and Lighthouse Trails Publishing & Research Project at www.lighthousetrails.com andwww.lighthousetrailsresearch.com.
Editors at Lighthouse Trails Publishing & Research
Note: Please make sure you put editors@lighthousetrails.com in your white or allowed list on your email program to help assure our newsletters do not end up in your spam folder.

BOB JONES UNIVERSITY RELEASES NEW MUSIC PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT

Music in the Mission of BJU

The mission of Bob Jones University is to grow Christlike character that is scripturally disciplined, others‐

serving, God‐loving, Christ‐proclaiming and focused above. We fulfill this mission using a variety of

methods, tools and resources, including public proclamation of the Word in chapel services and special

meetings, a biblically integrated curriculum, opportunities for Christian service, and a faculty and staff

who endeavor to model Christ to our students.

What role does the music that we perform and listen to play in our mission?How can we use music to

grow Christlike character in our students?How can music hinder or thwart our efforts? This document

is an attempt to answer those questions succinctly.

Although the answers will be based on biblical teaching that is valid for all believers at all times, we

recognize that these answers involve the application of those teachings to our specific context and

institutional mission.Other institutions, congregations and individuals may apply them differently based

upon their own earnest efforts to reflect scriptural principles within their respective contexts and in

keeping with their unique institutional, congregational or personal missions.

While biblical truth is non negotiable, application in specific cultural and institutional contexts may differ.

In particular, since music is such a dominant cultural force in the contemporary West—to a greater

degree, apparently,than it has been throughout most of history—application of biblical principles in this

area is likely to be controversial, touching strongly held opinions across a spectrum of choices.

Because we seek to apply biblical thinking and decision making to every issue, we must start with an

examination of what the Bible says—or does not say—about music.

Biblical Principles in Music

Music reflects the beauty and goodness of God and is a gift from the Creator intended for our

enjoyment and spiritual elevation. It is an important part of every believer’s life, both in his worship of

God—his primary mission—and in his interaction with his culture(s) as he carries out Christ’s Great

Commission. Because music resonates with the spirit of mankind in ways that make it a powerful

influence on our thinking and behavior, our decisions about music often have significant consequences

on our spiritual health—and consequently often have moral implications as well. The Bible has much to

say about the use of music in worship. It also speaks often about the motives that should govern the

believer’s broader lifestyle as he moves in the world.

• Music should make me more like Christ(2 Cor. 3:18).

Christ’s character is perhaps best reflected in what He identified as the two greatest

commandments:to love God completely and to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40).

The practical application of these broad principles appears in Paul’s summary of “the fruit of the

Spirit” (Gal. 5:22–23). Like everything else he welcomes into his life,the believer’s music should

promote truth, dignity, justice, purity and loveliness as well as be admirable to onlookers(Phil. 4:8).• Music should enrich my spirit in enjoyment of what God has created (1 Tim 6:17).

The believer’s experiences need not be clearly religious in order to be spiritually profitable; God has

indeed “given us richly all things to enjoy,” and there is a place for simple enjoyment of beauty and

for enrichment by expanding one’s knowledge and experience. It is appropriate for the believer

simply to listen to music for entertainment.

• Music should edify my fellow believers (Eph. 4:11–16).

The believer’s lifestyle choices are not made in a vacuum; he is a member of the larger body of

Christ. Thus, his choices can affect his fellow believers. Paul warns that the believer must not

encourage another believer to violate his conscience, even when that believer’s conscience is

misinformed, and that the believer willingly and gladly gives up genuine rights and liberties for the

sake of the health of other believers(1 Cor. 8:4–13). Similarly, even careless or thoughtless practices

that create or accentuate differences between believers (e.g., 1 Cor. 11:17–22) violate the essential

unity we all have in Christ(Gal. 3:28). Believers need to act with primary concern not for their own

liberties but for the well‐being of their fellow believers(Phil. 2:4). This is a legitimate test of our

devotion to Christ’s two great commandments(Gal. 5:14).

• Music should discourage in me the works of the flesh (Gal. 5:19–21).

By contrast,then,music that encourages contrary character qualities—sexual impurity, devotion to

competing gods, division, short‐temperedness, self‐centeredness, carousing “and the like” (Gal.

5:21)—the believer should reject and avoid. Even beyond this,though,the believer’s music should

positively empower him against these things.

• Music should aid my testimony before the lost(Matt. 28:19–20) by demonstrating to them my

devotion to God and distinctness from the elements of the world that are organized in opposition

to God (1 John 2:5–17).

There is much in the world system that signifies its rejection of God’s rightful sovereignty and will.

The believer cannot appear to endorse those elements, even with the intention of building bridges

for evangelism. Biblical examples of evangelism are empowered by the Spirit, not by psychological

manipulation or deception (1 Thess. 2:3–6).

• Sacred music should focus on the attributes and acts of God (Ps. 150:2; Isa. 12:2).

Worship is primarily addressed to God for praising His objectively revealed perfections rather

than to the worshiper for connecting with his subjectively perceived needs or interests. The focus of worship in the Bible is the recounting of truths about God—primarily His attributes and

His works—and the consequent response of the worshiper in praise.

Cause me to rejoice thankfully in God (Ps. 33:1; 105:2–3; 108:1, 4), fulfilling the command to

love Him with all my heart,soul, mind and strength (Deut. 6:4–5; Matt. 22:37–38).

As the worshiper meditates on God’s person and works—through prayer,song and the hearing

of the Word—his Spirit‐driven response will be gratitude and the consequent desire to trust,

obey and serve God. His direction will be toward surrender to and thoughts of God rather than

to his own needs and benefits. Love for God yields focus on His benefit, not our own.

Be doctrinally sound (Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:18–19), beautiful (Ps. 27:4, 29:2, 66:2, 96:6–9), reverent

(Ps. 29:2), and fresh and vital (“a new song,” Ps. 40:3, 96:1, 98:1), not merely routine.

Because God is holy—in a class by Himself,set apart—our worship of Him should not look like

activities that are not worship or that are false worship.God forbade practices in Israel that

merely resembled pagan worship practices (Lev. 19:27–28), and He expected worship to be

distinct from everyday activities (e.g., Exod. 20:8–10; Ps. 29:2; and much elsewhere). Paul tells

us that based on God’s great work in us, everything we do must not be “conformed to this

world” (Rom. 12:1–2)—that is,the Christian is to live with the intentional aim of resisting the

external pressure of the world to conform. Our sacred music, as well as all of our music and

actions, must resist the natural pressure to recalibrate standards according to the musical

trends of the unregenerate. Jesus frequently criticized the religious leaders of His day for their

mindless, unfeeling practice of religious ritual (Matt. 6:7). When believers respond to God in

worship,they will do so in ways that reflect the freshness and vitality of their experience. We

can expect that every generation of believers will devote its creative effort to this end. At the

same time,they will learn from God’s direction of those who have preceded them, honoring

what is timeless in the rich history of God’s gift of music to His people.

Involve the congregation as well as the platform leaders (Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:18–19).

While the New Testament provides for leadership positions in the church (Phil. 1:1; 1Tim. 3;

Titus 1), it calls for participation in worship from all the members of Christ’s body. Believers are

participants in, not observers of, worship.

Encourage the unity of the church (Eph. 4:1–6).

All believers have identical individual standing and responsibility before God when it comes to

debatable issues (Rom. 14:4, 10–12, 22). Our relationship to Christians who exercise their

stewardship of this through the consecrated approach taught and called for in Romans 12:1–2

should be respectful enough to allow for differences between us that are the result of our

respective earnest efforts to understand and consistently apply scriptural principles to this issue.

This posture promotes unity and mutual edification in the truth (Eph. 4:15–16).

Music Policies at BJU

In the application of these principles, BJU’s music policies essentially will remain unchanged. BJU will

delineate the application of these policies in the student and faculty/staff handbooks which will be

published in the summer.

Questions andAnswers

• Is music a matter of morality?

At one extreme,some view music as completely morally neutral; at the other extreme,some

see morality intrinsic in specific chords or other building blocks of music. The question is easily

oversimplified or misunderstood. Music, by God’s design, is a subjective experience; but its

various aspects—words,sounds, imagery and associations—greatly affect us. The elements of

music (pitch,rhythm,tone quality and dynamics) communicate broadly but only imprecisely.

Music—the combination of these elements—can be designed to elicit moral responses both

right and wrong. Therefore, we reject the idea that music is morally neutral; and we evaluate

music on several levels—the words and imagery themselves, the intent of the music maker, the

effects on the listeners, and even the context of the experience.

• How do associations affect our music choices?

It is possible to adapt recent songs by people with whom we would not fully agree and arrange

them in a style that is above reproach. Hymnals have historically contained pieces written by

authors with aberrant theology, yet the pieces we use from such authors have a strong biblical

text and are set to excellent music—and the writer’s theological aberrations are usually known

by only a few (e.g., “Lead On, O King Eternal”). With modern technology, however, associations

may more easily have negative influence. The original source of music is never remote. The

more recently a song has emerged and the more popular its source, the more influence it has.

So BJU exercises great restraint in the choices of music we adapt, and we issue cautions about

our concerns.

Of course,the mere use of any music has never implied endorsement of its original presentation

or source. And avoiding certain music is not a blanket criticism of another’s ministry or motives.

All of us are imperfect vessels, and Christ in His grace continues to work in and through us.

Thankfully, being careful in music choices does not mean that our worship need be musically

impoverished. We have an abundance of beautiful music,readily available today,that is

completely edifying,soul‐stirring and above reproach.

• How do we define rock music?

When compared with the characteristics of other musical genres (e.g.,folk music, patriotic

music, classical concert music and traditional sacred music),the rock genre is distinguished by

the combination of some or all of the following characteristics—sensual singing styles,

dominating beat, heavy percussion, overwhelming volume and an overall atmosphere that

counteracts self‐control, especially when coupled in performance with elements such as a

defiant demeanor, immodest attire, sexually suggestive dancing or crude gestures. Attempts to

couple worldly vehicles like rock music (and other pop styles) with sacred lyrics and settings

create a moral tension for the believer and contradict the Christian’s call to a consecrated

approach to life (Rom. 12:1–2).

ON MY HONOR'S RESPONSE TO BOY SCOUTS NEW GAY MEMBERSHIP STANDARDS

John Stemberger of OnMyHonor.net responds to Boy Scouts pro-homosexual membership standards:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHMSMX4nhkg. 50 minutes or more.

April 29, 2013 Livecast of Boy Scouts leadership on the National Executive Committee:

\

SENATE DEFEATS GUN CONTROL? NO PROBLEM FOR OBAMA-JUST ISSUE EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUION AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE

UPDATE: DELAWARE LEGALIZES GAY MARRIAGE, BECOMES ELEVENTH STATE TO APPROVE

    The gleeful Governor Markell of Delaware hurriedly signs gay marriage bill into law, saying: "I do not intend to make any of you wait one moment longer", unwittingly characterizing the burning "lust" that must be satisfied immediately in those forced to wait "decades".

    The "first state" becomes the "eleventh state" to join the infamous band of states rejecting God's law. 

    Romans 1:26-27-"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due". 

    God may not wait one moment longer either! Example: HO41 gonorrhea, a just recompense.

See the following videos:

Text accompanying above video, in part:

    A divided state Senate gave final legislative approval Tuesday to a bill authorizing same-sex marriage after hearing about three hours of debate. The vote sends the bill to Democratic Gov. Jack Markell, who has promised to sign it.

    The bill doesn't give same-sex couples any more rights or benefits under Delaware law than they currently have with civil unions. But supporters say same-sex couples deserve the dignity and respect of married couples. They also hope the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down a federal law barring married gay couples from receiving federal benefits.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXxDSKox1Qo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB428UQbPvs.

And:

DELAWARE HB75 BILL TO PERMIT SAME SEX MARRIAGE & 75 DE PASTORS IN DOVER AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE

A dependable Liberal Democrat typically goes with the flow, searchs own soul without searching the Bible, and betrays traditional marriage

TITLE OF DELAWARE HB75 BILL

FULL TEXT OF BILL:
http://legis.delaware.gov/LIS/lis147.nsf/vwLegislation/HB+75/$file/legis.html?open.

An Act To Amend Title 13 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Domestic Relations To Provide For Same-gender Civil Marriage And To Convert Existing Civil Unions To Civil Marriages.

DELAWARE HB75 Summary

This Act repeals the prohibition on same-gender marriage that was enacted in 1996. The effect of this Act is to allow two individuals, whether of the same or different genders, to marry if otherwise eligible. Upon the effectiveness of this Act, no new civil unions will be formed in Delaware. This Act allows both parties to a civil union that is not subject to a pending proceeding for dissolution, annulment or legal separation to convert their civil union to a marriage prior to July 1, 2014 by application for a marriage license to the clerk of the peace of the county in which their civil union license was issued, with or without further solemnization of such marriage. On July 1, 2014, all remaining civil unions not currently subject to a proceeding for dissolution, annulment or legal separation will automatically convert to marriages. This Act also provides that for legal unions other than marriages between two persons of the same gender established in another jurisdiction, both parties to such legal union will be afforded the same rights, benefits and protections, and will be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations and duties, as a marriage for purposes of Delaware law. In order for such recognition to apply, such union must be validly formed in such other jurisdiction, the parties thereto must meet the eligibility requirements to enter into a marriage in the State of Delaware, and such union must afford and impose on the parties thereto substantially the same rights, benefits, protections, responsibilities, obligations and duties of marriage. This Act provides for the equal application of all laws of the State of Delaware relating to marriage, married spouses or their children to same-gender or different-gender married spouses and their children. This Act protects religious freedoms of religious societies and other persons. The Act specifically protects the freedom of religion guaranteed under the United States Constitution and the Delaware Constitution. Further, the Act specifies that it shall not interfere with or regulate the religious practice of any religious society. Any religious society is free to choose which marriages it will solemnize, and religious societies, clergypersons and ministers of any religion will not be required to solemnize any marriage that does not conform to its religious beliefs. This Act becomes effective on July 1, 2013.

Sponsors

Rep M. Smith	Rep Schwartzkopf	Rep Longhurst	Sen Sokola
Sen Blevins	Rep Barbieri	Rep Baumbach	Rep Bolden
Rep Brady	Rep Heffernan	Rep Keeley	Rep Kowalko
Rep Mulrooney	Rep Osienski	Rep Ramone	Rep B. Short
Rep Viola	Rep D.E. Williams	Rep K. Williams	Sen Henry
Sen McDowell	Sen Peterson	Sen Poore	Sen Townsend

History

Date	Chamber	Action
2013-05-01	Senate	Reported Out of Committee (EXECUTIVE) in Senate with 4 Favorable
2013-04-24	Senate	Assigned to Executive Committee in Senate
2013-04-23	House	Passed by House of Representatives. Votes: Passed 23 YES 18 NO 0 NOT VOTING 0 ABSENT 0 VACANT
2013-04-17	House	Reported Out of Committee (HOUSE ADMINISTRATION) in House with 3 Favorable, 1 On Its Merits
2013-04-11	House	Introduced and Assigned to House Administration Committee in House

Please see the Vimeo video of the 75 pastors who met in Dover, Delaware to protest this bill:

https://vimeo.com/65422984.