A debate rages over marriage and ordination of homosexuals in
the Anglican Church of Canada. Several congregations or dioceses
are voting to break with the national mother church over the issues.
While the people are thankful the votes are a stand of the majority
against marriage rights accorded homosexuals as others, they are
sad that it has come to having to make such a decision.
But why bring God into the controversy? What does He have to do
with the Anglican Church? Are we talking about the Church of God
here? Are we speaking of Biblical saints, the Body of Christ? Certainly
not if the Bible is our guide.
With leaders dressing in ostentatious garments and glorying in
proud titles, unlike Christ and His disciples, do the people truly
think their shepherds will lead them in right worship of God? Are
they not aware that these are works of men altogether independent
of Him? Apparently not. Why should it surprise people that the
high officials of the Church of England would come up with absurdities
of every kind? (The Archbishop of Canterbury even muses on accommodating
mild elements of Muslim Sharia law in England, a law quite contrary
to the Bible and Christian faith.) Figs are never gathered of a
thornbush, no matter how many fig leaves are tied to it and no
matter that the thornbush is called a fig tree.
Let’s look at some of the elements involved. The Anglican
situation is a labyrinth of complications the true church would
not and could not have, even though spiritual and Biblical values
are debated.
Besides the evident moral and Biblical issues, the conflict gets
somewhat sticky in other respects - legally, socially, and financially.
For example, if a congregation splits, which segment holds title
to the common property, those who split from the Anglican Church
of Canada or those who remain with it? What if, of 200 members,
195 choose to leave and 5 remain? Do the 5 retain ownership because
they remain faithful to the national organization, or should the
majority have ownership rights? How great must a majority be? 51%?
Two thirds? Or must the decision be unanimous? If there is a unanimous
vote to part with the national organization, do the locals (who
paid for the property) receive or retain ownership or does the
national church?
It gets even stickier. What if the national church changed the
articles of faith midstream, after the congregants came on board
agreeing to former principles as formally, unequivocally stipulated
in their “Statement of Faith”? In this case, many congregants
say, “We did not leave the Anglican Church - it left us.
Church doctrine was originally based on the Bible but it has departed
from Biblical rule and direction. In faith and conscience, we cannot
agree with the change. We are forced to leave. It isn’t our
fault!”
More stickies: “Our departed loved ones are buried in the
Church graveyards…husbands, wives, children, parents…who
gets the graveyard sites? We put our money into the buildings.
Do we have to start all over when we are not the ones who changed
things?”
Be it known that the Anglican Church from its inception has been
Christian only nominally, not Biblically (read The
True Marks of a Cult). It does not occur to the members that there ought
to be no debate on these matters according to the Bible, which
is, presumably, foundational to their profession of faith in
Christ. This is assuming Anglicans believe the Bible and wish
to live by its precepts and dictates as from God. On homosexuality,
the Bible is unequivocal:
“They say they are wise, but they are fools; instead of
worshiping the immortal God, they worship images made to look like
mortals or birds or animals or reptiles. And so God has given those
people over to do the filthy things their hearts desire, and they
do shameful things with each other. They exchange the truth about
God for a lie; they worship and serve what God has created instead
of the Creator Himself, Who is to be praised forever! Amen.
Because they do this, God has given them over to shameful
passions. Even the women pervert the natural use of their sex
by unnatural
acts. In the same way the men give up natural sexual relations
with women and burn with passion for each other. Men do shameful
things with each other, and as a result they bring upon themselves
the punishment they deserve for their wrongdoing. Because those
people refuse to keep in mind the true knowledge about God, He
has given them over to corrupted minds, so that they do the things
that they should not do” (Romans 1:22-28 GNB).
And:
“You shall not lie with mankind as with womankind. It is
abomination to God” (Leviticus 18:22 MKJV).
How can there be any debate about what the Bible clearly has to
say about homosexuality? Is it not because some disagree with God?
If they disagree, a true church would not permit them to be there.
Lest homosexuals look for an opportunity to silence me by an ignorant
Human Rights Commissioner and ill-conceived effort, allegedly for
justice, consider that Victor is not saying these things – the
Bible is; Victor merely repeats what God says. You ought to try
hauling Jesus Christ up to the HRC. Victor’s sin is that
he believes God, agrees with Him, and desires to obey Him in all
things. If God wrote the Bible (and He did), then I certainly don’t
see how He might find fault with what I have written against homosexuality.
Do you?
However, those who do not believe the Bible to be of God will
do as they please and find a way to uphold the laws of Canada and
the Charter of Rights, which are often contrary, if not in letter,
at least in spirit, to the Bible. Do I no longer have the right
to believe and preach the Bible? According to militant homosexuals,
Muslims, feminists, abortionists, idolaters, adulterers, and other
groups, Christians do not have the right to believe, preach and
live by the Bible.
So now where are the freedoms of religion and speech for Christians,
presumably enshrined in the Charter of Rights of Canada? Down the
toilet, that’s where – flushed down the sewer by Pierre
and party, who thought it better to have rights without responsibilities,
and rights for those who saw things as they did, or rights not
defined as God wills and defines them. They see rights to
do evil,
according to God’s definition, but “to Hell,” they
say, “with rights to speak against evil. To Hell with the
right of living by one’s conscience if one believes the Bible,
speaking and acting on Its contents. To Hell with God and His wise
Laws and sayings! We know better! We are a ‘just society.’”
Freedom of religion? Yes, there is plenty, as long as religion
is not in agreement with the Scriptures, and very little of it
is. But freedom to agree with God, to believe the Bible and to
speak that agreement is trashed by our Charter of Rights, parliament,
foolish lawmakers, our Supreme Court and Canadian society in general,
which condones and believes all the bullshit (excuse me – uncastrated
adult male bovine doodoo) coming forth from godless, arrogant,
presumptuous mouths who frame laws contrary to God’s Law.
They do so for various reasons. Some do it because they don’t
know any better. Some do it for money. Some do it thinking to please
their constituents and parties. Some do it because their darkened
spiritual leaders advise them to do it. Some are coerced or intimidated
into it.
But some do it in order to salve their consciences and justify
their own lawlessness. “Let’s keep the punishment for
drunken driving minimal. I drink and drive. I wouldn’t want
to get caught with a stiff fine or a stint behind bars.” Or, “Let’s
lower the age of consent for sex to 14, or even 12! Hey! Who knows?
I may get caught hopping into bed with a 13-year old! If we have
a law to condone it, who can say it isn’t right to do it
then?” Or, “Let’s delay or outright oppose laws
against child porn. I want to be able to watch it without fear
of getting caught. Who am I harming anyway?” The Liberal
party of Canada has resisted, prevented, opposed, stonewalled,
and voted against laws to prevent child abuse, pornography, organized
crime…you name it. It has, with Canada’s consent, supported
the greatest of evils. Why is this? Because Canada is rotten in
its society. Its government has only represented its society’s
true nature and intent. Hopefully, Harper’s government remains
a breath of fresh air.
The reason it has come to this confusion with the Anglican Church,
as with the Catholic, United, Lutheran, and other nominal churches,
in terms of ungodly, useless debates, if not splits, is because
these formal, religious organizations are not the true Christian
Church. They have nothing to do with It or the Lord Jesus Christ.
They are representations of Babylon (confusion). Indeed, their
stance is altogether antiChrist. Anglicans need only read the Bible
they think to prefer and believe. If believing, why are they not
obeying the laws, precepts, and principles they say they believe?
How do the Bible’s teachings and requirements agree with
the Anglican Church? They don’t; there is no agreement, except
in word. If only in word, what does the Bible have to say about
that? Here is what James says:
“But be doers of the word, and not only hearers of it, blinding
yourselves with false ideas” (James 1:22 BBE).
“Do not misuse My Name. I am the LORD your God, and I will
punish anyone who misuses My Name” (Exodus 20:7 CEV).
Some time ago, we published The
True Marks of a Cult, wherein
we refuted and denounced the foolish guidelines others have laid
out to define and condemn groups as cults. We proved that those
guidelines, being partisan, ignorant, antiBiblical, and subjective,
often condemned the Lord Himself. To establish legitimate guidelines,
we identified and enumerated true, Christian, Biblical truths,
examples, laws, and principles, based on the lives and teachings
of Jesus Christ and His disciples. Thus far, we have had not one
person willing even to try to refute what we have had to say – not
one.
I direct the reader to The
True Marks of a Cult to point out that
the Anglican Church, in terms of Biblical definition, is corrupt
and straining out a gnat with this same sex union issue. This issue
is a symptom, manifesting the fact that people need to get out
of there altogether, turning to and repenting before the Lord,
whose Name they have been taking upon themselves in vain. The game
playing is over.
“And I heard another voice from Heaven, saying, Come out
of her, My people, that you may not be partakers of her sins, and
that you may not receive of her plagues. For her sins joined together,
even up to Heaven, and God has remembered her unjust deeds. Reward
her as she has rewarded you, and double to her double, according
to her works. In the cup, which she mixed, mix double to her. As
much as she has glorified herself and has lived in luxury, so much
torment and sorrow give her. For she says in her heart, I sit as
a queen, and I am not a widow; and I do not see mourning at all.
Therefore her plagues will come in one day, death and mourning
and famine. And she will be consumed with fire, for the Lord God
Who judges her is strong” (Revelation 18:4-8 MKJV).