‘Andy Stanley, a pastor widely discredited by orthodox, Bible-believing Christians as a false teacher, has ignited a raging controversy with his latest remarks on homosexuality and faith. Stanley’s “seeker-sensitive” approach prioritizes attracting non-believers to church over upholding traditional doctrine, diluting the essence of Christianity to appease a wider audience. This has drawn fierce criticism from those who see Stanley’s views as a deviation from the true teachings of Christianity.
In a recent sermon, Stanley proclaimed that homosexuals who “loved Jesus” despite God’s rejection of them have more faith than most Christians and that Christians should learn from them. This asinine assertion, along with Stanley’s disregard for traditional teachings and the authority of the Bible, is a blatant display of his apostasy.
Stanley’s views and approach to ministry have rightfully faced heavy criticism as he is merely promoting his personal aberrant beliefs as gospel. Meanwhile, some homosexuals have praised Stanley for his innovative views on biblical interpretation, theology, and the role of the church, perceiving his approach as more “inclusive.”
However, beneath the surface of the controversy lies a more sinister issue at Stanley’s North Point Church. Not only does Stanley take a lenient, unscriptural approach to sin, but it has recently come to light that he employs an openly lesbian individual who leads the church’s LGBTQ ministry. You can read about that here.
But now, it has come to light that Stanley has been openly promoting open and active homosexual lifestyles within his church and he has been doing so through some very sinister people. Andy Stanley is repeatedly hosting an openly practicing homosexual who is openly living with his homosexual partner. His name is Brian Nietzel.
Brian Nietzel, according to his own biography found on his website, is living in Atlanta with his “partner Dan.” A look at photos on Nietzel’s Facebook page confirmed that he is still openly and actively in a homosexual relationship.
These homosexuals, as you can see from the image above, were “married” in 2021 with the wedding being performed by Amy Hayes, a former staff member for Charles Stanley’s In Touch Ministries.
Brian is the founder of Renovus—which we’ve written about in several previous articles—a ministry dedicated to advancing queer theology and homosexual affirmation within the Church. According to Brian’s website, he says he has known two things all of his life: “Jesus is my hero,” and “And I’m gay.” Brian says that for much of his life faith and sexuality were divided, but that “through a season of new conversations with God, I came out knowing my peace as a gay Christian man.”
We can all rest assured that whoever Brian was having “conversations” with, it certainly wasn’t God and what he teaches and believes certainly did not come from God’s word.’https://disntr.com/2023/02/03/andy-stanley-repeatedly-hosts-man-living-in-open-homosexual-relationship-for-lgbtq-kids-conferences/
‘I recently had an exchange with Jared Moore, a pastor and a graduate of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS), who has been exposing much of the bad theology within the Southern Baptist Convention over sexuality. Moore recently started a firestorm on Twitter through a series of tweets on several prominent Evangelical leaders denying that same-sex attraction is sin.
In Moore’s latest expose, he demonstrates that a long-time professor at SBTS, David Prince, is openly and unashamedly teaching that same-sex attraction is not sin and that those who believe that it is are “accusers” like Satan.
In an article on Prince’s website, after citing Romans 8:23, “And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies,” he argues:
I am arguing that same sex desires and same sex orientation are in that category of groaning — waiting for the redemption of our bodies. Which means they are in the same broad category with all kinds of disordered bodies and minds and emotions. If we tried to make a list of the kinds of emotional and mental and physical brokenness of the human family the list would be unending. And all of us are broken and disordered in different ways. All of you are bent to desire things in different degrees that you should not want. We are all disordered in our emotions, or minds, our bodies.
Of course, this argument is completely and totally absurd. Men desiring to have sexual intercourse with other men and women with women is not described anywhere in Scripture as an “emotion,” but rather “πάθη ἀτιμ,” which is translated as “dishonorable passions” in the ESV, “degrading passions” in the NASB, and “vile affections” in the KJV. Further, these degrading passions are described as a state of being demonstrative of a mind, body, and spirit that has been “given over” by God to the “lusts of the flesh.” Sexual attraction is not described as an emotion, but rather thoughts and desires that can either be natural or unnatural.
And since homosexual attraction is described in Romans 1 as a mind being “given over” to the “lusts of the flesh,” In the same chapter of Romans (chapter 8) that Prince cites to try to remove the stigma of homosexuality and redefine sexual sin as “brokenness,” he fails to acknowledge that just prior that in verse 7, that “the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God,” because it does not, and cannot, submit to God’s law.
Prince’s view is clearly out of line with biblical teaching and to suggest that those who hold a hardline biblical stance on human sexuality and sexual ethics are “accusers of the brethren” like Satan is foolish, at best. But we already know that the Southern Baptist Convention is sinking deeper into spiritual and theological apostasy and it’s merely a matter of time before the entire denomination is handed over.’https://disntr.com/2023/02/03/sbts-professor-says-same-sex-attraction-is-not-sin-and-those-who-believe-so-are-like-satan/
‘Izzy Montague was one of many parents who raised concern when her son’s primary school began promoting LGBT issues to children as young as five, not allowing parents to opt their children out. When she met with the school’s executive headteacher, another teacher attending the meeting wore a t-shirt with the provocative message: “Why be racist, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic when you could just be quiet?”
Parents also say that they were misled with incorrect statements of law when they challenged the school on the issue of the Pride event. Izzy has launched legal action against the school on the grounds of direct and indirect discrimination, victimisation and a failure by the school to uphold its statutory duty.
Izzy said, “It was like being bullied. They stopped treating me like any other parent but were antagonistic towards me. I believe that they retaliated against me by unreasonably excluding me from the premises, victimising my child and not taking my safeguarding concerns seriously.”‘https://christianconcern.com/cccases/izzy-montague/
‘The Church of England, also known as the Anglican Church, is a historic institution that has its roots in the 16th century when King Henry VIII sought to divorce his wife Catherine of Aragon but was denied annulment by the Pope. As a result, Henry broke away from the Roman Catholic Church and established the Church of England, with himself as its head, setting the stage for centuries of close ties between the Church and the British monarchy and state.
The Church of England’s evolution towards progressivism is a part of a larger historical trend in Western Christianity, where many Christian denominations have moved away from their conservative theological roots and towards a more progressive, liberal perspective. This shift has been influenced by a number of factors, including the Enlightenment, the rise of secularism, and the influence of progressive political movements.
In the 19th century, the Church of England was at the forefront of the social justice movement, advocating for the abolition of slavery (not that this in and of itself was a bad thing) and working to improve the lives of the poor. But along with this shift came a departure from its previous conservative roots. More importantly, this shift also marked a gradual distancing from the gospel, as the Church placed greater emphasis on social activism and political engagement, rather than the proclamation of the gospel and the spiritual transformation of individuals.
In the 20th century, this trend towards progressivism continued, as the Church adopted increasingly liberal attitudes towards issues such as women’s ordination and LGBTQ rights. Despite opposition from more conservative elements within the Church, the trend towards progressivism has continued to this day, with the Church of England now being seen as a generally liberal and progressive institution.
The Church of England’s shift away from the gospel and towards progressive activism is a trend that is not unique to the Anglican Church but is being seen in many other mainline Protestant denominations. This shift is often seen as a warning sign of impending apostasy, as it represents a departure from the core teachings and values of the Christian faith.’https://disntr.com/2023/01/31/from-the-gospel-to-gay-sex-tracing-the-evolution-of-the-church-of-englands-theology/
Romans 1:24-27 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
God will save all “whosoever” wills that will turn from their sins in repentance and come to Him by faith BUT He died for their sins and if they will not repent of their sins he will NOT save them. Luke 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
This is the testimony of Keith Becker as told on Pacific Garden Mission’s Unshackled. “Keith had his own plans for his life, but bankrupt and brokenhearted, he starts to wonder where he’s going wrong. From rebellion to bending the knee, to devastating tragedy, Keith saw God’s power turn his family’s story into a powerful ministry.” John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
There seems to be a considerable amount of people who have come forward publicly saying they have been abused by someone in a local independent Baptist church. This should never be the experience of someone attending a church that claims to be “the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” The following is a review of a book written by one who suffered such abuse!
‘Sheltered but Not Protected is the story of a young man that was raised in an independent Baptist church (probably listed in our database) and who did all the right things just like the preacher said, but nevertheless was the victim of a female predator in his church. The church culture around him not only permitted but protected this sort of behavior, and instead of reporting the abuser as a child molester, the pastor forced the victim to repent in front of the church. Sound familiar? As the author says, not every church is this way, but there are enough of them out there that it deserves serious attention.
Justin Woodbury is the author of the book Sheltered but not Protected (affiliate link throughout), his story of abuse in an independent Baptist church, both sexual abuse from a trusted adult, as well as the emotional and spiritual abuse that was standard behavior from the leadership. The book begins with a foreword from Justin’s wife Emily, describing the pain and struggles that she experienced as a new wife dealing with the emotional trauma that her husband had suffered. While there’s a “happy ending” of sorts to the book, the scars–spiritual, emotional, and even physical–created thanks to a system of abuse that came from or was at least enabled by good intentions nevertheless will remain with Justin and Emily, and innumerable other victims, for the rest of their lives.
Justin’s childhood is described as wonderful, with loving parents and a great sister. Even his church was a place full of (initially) love, people seeking to serve the LORD from a pure heart. Unfortunately, the way in which they went about trying to serve God became more about control and rigid compliance with rules than seeking God’s will. The writer of this review grew up in a church that shared some similarities with the church described in Sheltered, though I can’t remember things being quite so over-the-top with regards to pastoral control.
However, the whole idea of the pastor being “the Man of God” and that his opinions were actually the leading of the Holy Spirit (Justin’s job at the church was threatened continually if he disagreed with or disobeyed the pastor) is very familiar, and is unfortunately a very common aspect in many independent Baptist churches. I personally recall a significant emphasis on “she-bears” and calling down fire from heaven on disrespectful people being part of the birthright of the pastor. While my pastor didn’t go so far as telling people which color of car they should buy, he certainly interfered in family matters and felt that he had some sort of special line to God and knew better than everyone else how they should live.
What also resonated with me was the repeated detail that the pastor didn’t believe that there was ever a good reason to leave the church. I remember hearing that there were only two good reasons for leaving church: getting called out (to a ministry somewhere), or dragged out (a la Ananias and Saphira). This now seems like a parallel universe compared to my current pastor’s opinion on the matter: if you can’t serve God here, then please find a church where you can serve God; we’d hate to be the reason you can’t be faithful. Perhaps nine times out of ten, the reason they can’t serve God here (wherever that may be) is because they don’t really want to serve God anywhere, but there’s always the possibility that someone just isn’t a good fit and the LORD wants to use them somewhere else. That apparently wasn’t acceptable in the church where Justin grew up.
Ultimately, out of a desire to prevent the young people from experiencing the same disappointments and sins that the church’s founders had been through, they put in place draconian rules all with the intention of preventing impurity. As the rules evolved, becoming ever more restrictive, extreme, and ridiculous, most of the church members just followed along, since after all, “the Man of God” apparently knew something that they didn’t.
In his teen years, Justin’s mom became close friends with a woman in church, who was a predator and groomed him for about two years. I’ll let you read the details in his book (again, buy a copy and read it), but the abuse scarred him for life. Of course he felt pressured to keep it secret, since all of those people who had to “confess” in front of the church (whether perpetrator or victim) were publicly shamed and humiliated, and then once he finally opened up to the pastor, he was made to feel as if he were the responsible party. Moreover, the pastor, who is by law required to report sexual abuse, especially involving a minor, did not report, but instead forced Justin to apologize to his abuser’s husband.
So, not only was child sex abuse covered up, but the victim was shamed into admitting fault that was not his. Of course Justin was not the only minor affected by sexual abuse in that church; you’ll read about many other situations of leadership overlooking, dismissing, or mishandling situations to such a degree that it almost seems a caricature of reality. After several years of working in the same church, he faced another public humiliation for a private (and rather chaste) relationship with a girl in the church, and finally left to start a new life elsewhere.
Unfortunately, escaping the place doesn’t change the past, and Justin’s long road toward healing was hindered by the fact that “counseling” in his mind was a series of meetings with the pastor to make sure you were sorry and humiliated enough to be “restored.” He was never encouraged to seek professional assistance for his abuse, partly because the church had no real concept of what damage the abuse inflicted, but mostly because they didn’t see it as abuse, just some sort of adulterous affair–even though the aggressor was an adult woman close to twice the age of the minor that she molested.
In the last chapters of Sheltered but not Protected, Justin describes his journey from bitterness to forgiveness, along with the various ways that God stripped away the judgmental, spiteful tendencies that had been inculcated in him throughout his upbringing in a cultish Baptist church. Of course I personally wouldn’t move away from the King James Bible as Justin has, nor would I probably feel comfortable in the church where he believes the LORD brought them, but those are irrelevant points. He overcame the sexual abuse from a child predator, the emotional abuse from a system that was designed to create perfect clones, and spiritual abuse from the men that he should have been able to trust, and has come to a place where he can forgive even the unrepentant abuser in his past.
This brings me to the real point that King James Bible-believing, independent Baptists have to face: why is it that we can have the right Bible (and we do), and the right doctrine (at least for the most part), and yet the fruit of so many ministries is complete destruction of families and individuals that should have been helped? How is it that we, like the Pharisees of old, can have all the right forms and technicalities (even if I disagree with many of the traditions purported to be “Old Time Religion”) yet the end result is one train wreck after another? Where in the Bible does it indicate that every believer should look like, talk like, act like, and sound like “the pastor” or else they should be shunned and ostracized by the church? Where exactly does the Bible say that the “proper” male haircut is a crop-top or a high-and-tight comb-over? Or are we allowing the culture around us to dictate what we do and how we do it, even if it is simply to be opposite of said culture?
Sheltered but not Protected is a gut-wrenching story of abuse, while at the same time a gleam of hope in a world with a church that is “wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked” (Revelation 3:17) and where churches actively protect child abusers and rapists. There IS something that we can do, and maybe it starts with reading and understanding the truths that Justin Woodbury shares in this book.
Sheltered but not Protected: Learning to Love, Forgive, and Heal After Emotional and Sexual Abuse can be purchased on Amazon, and Justin Woodbury can be contacted through his website or his Facebook Page.’https://www.kjvchurches.com/review-sheltered-but-not-protected-learning-to-love-forgive-and-heal-after-emotional-and-sexual-abuse-by-justin-woodbury/
‘Brett McCracken is the senior editor and director of communications at The Gospel Coalition and an elder at Southlands Church. He released his ‘Best movies of 2022’ and unsurprisingly, at least one of the films is full of graphic sex and nudity.
Last year his top 10 movies featured many that were rated ‘R’ for language, violence, and frequently for scenes of sex and nudity. Then he released his top 20 TV shows, and they were also full of sex and nudity, including graphic scenes of homosexuality. He would later suggest that watching this sinful content makes him better at evangelizing. ‘https://protestia.substack.com/p/the-gospel-coalitions-2022-best-movies
‘The interaction of the angel with the shepherds was so engrained in the hearts and minds of the early church that Luke wrote that his record was “most surely believed,” that he had “perfect understanding,” from which Theophilus and subsequent readers might know “the certainty of those things.” If it was not God Himself who preserved the infallible, inspired word, how could the Church ever know with certainty that the events of Acts 2 ever historically transpired, and if the events did not transpire, then the written record of these non-events are spurious. So, let’s say for the moment, we discount the historic orthodox manner these verses have been rendered and consider what might be an empirical defeater to this paradigm for manuscript transmission?
There is no empirical evidence of this event except for the witness of the shepherds. Manuscripts at this point are meaningless. Luke, or someone calling herself “Luke” may have just recorded a happy story that became a wide-spread myth. This event cannot be supported scientifically. Indeed, this announcement can be easily erased simply by arguing that the author’s fabricated account was a local fable that found its way into the real Luke’s gospel. The whole Gospel is not spurious only the conflation that includes Luke 2:1-20. After all, what makes these verses any different that John 7:53-8:11? It’s all just words on parchment. Luke was not in the field with the shepherds, nor was anyone else to corroborate the event. Even if it did happen, how reliable are shepherds to accurately report something of this magnitude. The story sounds like something out of a bottle not of divine significance, kind of like “snake handling” in Mark 16, or maybe like an Aesop fable of wonder and amazement but not an actual inbreaking of heaven to earth.
Before you can argue transmission, you must agree or believe the event being recorded happened. Luke recorded an event of the angel’s announcement to the shepherds. Was there a moment in time when the Apostle John wrote 1 John 5:7? Was there a historic event when Christ interacted with the woman caught in adultery? Did Mark write the long ending? How many times did Mark’s heart beat before he completed the Gospel? Because special revelation is grammatical/historical, word and event, if there is no written record, there is no way of knowing whether the historic event happened; if the event is in the text, because it is God’s word, it did happen. The present critical reconstruction of the text reconstructs the past when the unchanging past has already limited the veracity of the record. The past did not manifest itself in two simultaneous, contradictory events. Text critics are not so much students of ancient literature as they are manipulators of time. Call the manipulation what you want, just not truth or the New Testament. Did redemptive history unfold in the Biblical record or did it not? Orwell was correct, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” By critically reshaping the past, the future has been the splintering of the Church with multiple modern bible versions, and it is the present information dominance of the evangelical text critic that continues to reshape the past.
The witness of the shepherds is confirmed by Anna and Simeon, and then by the Wise Men, and then by the Father, Holy Spirit, and John the Baptist at Christ’s baptism, then the ministry of Christ, his death, resurrection, ascension, Pentecost, the Apostolic message, and the founding of the Church based upon inspired writings. All of this either confirms the witness of the shepherds or we are witnessing a complete 1st century ruse. Indeed, much of the Church is about to reinforce this transgenerational ruse on Christmas Sunday if it is not believed that all the past events of Holy Scripture are forever, unchangeably settled. And the only means of exercising that kind of faith this Christmas is to believe that the Gospel record has been providentially preserved by God and based on the introduction to Luke’s Gospel to have “certainty” of those things through the Word and Spirit.
Merry Christmas!’https://standardsacredtext.com/2022/12/13/christmas-providential-preservation-and-certainty/
whatyareckon 