The SBC Welcomes the LGBTQ

Home Forums BLUE COLLAR SAINTS FORUM The SBC Welcomes the LGBTQ

This topic contains 10 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  revtom 8 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #391

    watch-pray
    Keymaster

    The following excerpt from Thomas Littleton’s “Open Letter to Russell Moore,” who is president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission, reveals what has been going on behind the scenes in that denomination. The average SBC member has no idea that this collaboration between the SBC leadership and the LGBTQ is taking place.

    Dr. Moore, for a time I gave you the benefit of the doubt in that you were new to DC and to the ERLC and were on a learning curve, albeit a costly one for your constituents in the SBC. I was still hopeful, and shared your desire to be more effective in our public engagement, but then you began your efforts toward public discourse in 2014. The ERLC appeared to be engaging the conversation not just “about” but “with” the LGBTQ on sexuality and marriage.

    I was asked, by a Christian brother in convention leadership, to meet with the activist who came to our city and state to organize communities and jump start the Human Rights Campaign’s state offices. It was an unofficial sit down so as not to validate the activist while trying to understand better their intentions and methods, for which they had $8.5 million in new funding to engage churches in three Southern states.

    Because of our candid approach to the meeting, we were told very openly that the goal was to silence opposition to gay marriage and to end the “traditional rhetoric that homosexuality is a sin and that we would go to hell if we engage in it.” The various groups who were partnering with HRC were sending gay couples and transgender or “gender bending” teens into our churches to “test reaction.” There were new training manuals and tool kits being developed to persuade “Conflicted Christians” out of long held Biblical views. (I have copies of these, Dr. Moore, if you care to become more informed.) But the next revelation is the most shocking.

    I also found out about the ongoing dialogue between you and your offices on the one side, and the HRC and other LGBTQ activists on the other. The upcoming ERLC 2014 conference on the issues had created an excited buzz among LGBTQ activists especially on their social media. One of your conference speakers who was a “same sex attracted” or “Gay Christian” tweeted out mid-conference that “the Southern Baptist and gay community break bread together in Nashville.”

    Some of your staff boasted to the LGBTQ representatives who had been welcomed to the conference that “Dr. Moore is rebranding the whole organization of the ERLC.” I watched the broad spectrum gay organizations hosted by the ERLC use their social media with the ERLC logo as a back drop to broadcast to their followers the excited news of their individual critiques of your conference, thus validating themselves no matter how radical or small or new to the public arena such organizations were. It dawned on me that, whether intentionally or not, Dr. Moore, you were allowing our ERLC to be used for the same type of platform we had fought to prevent our late SBC minister’s legacy from becoming—a platform to promote the radical LGBTQ faith agenda.

    This was one of the most heart-sinking feelings I have ever had as a Southern Baptist, and one that came on the heels of my own personal loss, being threatened, invaded and unable to gain even an honest hearing from you. You were allowing all of our voices to be drowned out by your new talking points and rebranding efforts.

    LGBTQ Furthers Agenda by Using ERLC

    I then went to a former ERLC board member and personal friend to ask what was really going on. Their response was “I don’t know what he is thinking and he has a home full of young boys himself.” This response pointed to the most direct question of all: “Are we really aware of what is at stake in the struggle of our culture?” It is not just for Christians and SBC churches but for anyone who cares what we are leaving for the next generation or allowing to happen, on our watch, under our parenting and leadership.

    So I ask you, Dr. Moore, what about your children and mine who are right now, not ten years from now, the aim of, not the lost cultural narrative, but organizations like Planned Parenthood, the major stealth partner in the LGBTQ movement? You are welcoming and dragging the SBC into these disingenuous and scripted conversations.

    Do you know why PP redefined the meaning of Q in the alphabet soup of the new sexual minority big tent approach? Q means Queer. Its inclusion promotes the more radical elements of the movement, as they “own” the slur. But Planned Parenthood has substituted Questioning for Q, teaching our children it is normal and healthy to question their sexual orientation and gender AT ANY AGE. From K5 (and even Pre-K3 and Pre-K4 in some places), the rabid and aggressive PP agenda is on the march to redefine sexual norms and gender to our children in every arena of life, from education to recreation to houses of worship and in every source from which they obtain information, including Christian media and curriculum.

    Do you understand this, Dr. Moore? Do you know with whom you have been associating? Do you at least understand their intentions, their history and their target generation? Personal efforts to follow up and raise these concerns with the ERLC and with you in late 2014 were met with this dismissive response: “We have a lot on our plate right now; we don’t have time for that.”

  • #393

    watch-pray
    Keymaster

    Thomas Littleton’s “Open Letter to Russell Moore,” President of the Ethics and Religious Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, caused quite a stir in that denomination. Now why would that happen?

    The Ethics and Religious Liberties Commission (ERLC) of the Southern Baptist Convention is “the moral and public policy agency of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination.” The ERLC is also an NGO in Special Consultative Status of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) .

    The International Planned Parenthood Federation and its partner, the LGBTQ, are the largest funders and exporters of the LGBTQ agenda globally. The IPPF and LGBTQ organizations are also NGOs in Special Consultative Status of the UNECOSOC.

    In their Special Consultative capacity, the ERLC, IPPF and LGBTQ orgs are required to be in conformity with the aims, purposes and work of the United Nations. This requirement is clearly stated on the UN/NGO Database:

    Principles to Be Applied in the Establishment of Consultative Relations

    ‘The following principles shall be applied in establishing consultative relations with non-governmental organizations: The organization shall be concerned with matters falling within the competence of the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies.

    1. The aims and purposes of the organization shall be in conformity with the spirit, purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

    2. The organization shall undertake to support the work of the United Nations and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities.”

    So, behind the scenes Russell Moore and the SBC’s Ethic and Religious Liberty Commission are bedfellows with the LGBTQ, International Planned Parenthood and the United Nations. How many Southern Baptists are aware of this?

    The aims and purposes of the United Nations regarding sexuality education of children – with which the ERLC is in agreement – have been established by the UN Organization for Education, Science and Culture (UNESCO).

    UNESCO Guidance on Sexuality Education assumes a mandate to overcome opposition by cultural and religious groups to sex education by “education and health sector decision-makers and professionals.” Opposition will be overcome through “consensus building” among religious, government, education LGBT and various secular organizations.

    International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education

    “Sexuality education attracts both opposition and support. Should opposition occur, it is by no means insurmountable. Ministries of education play a critical role in building consensus on the need for sexuality education through consultation and advocacy with key stakeholders, including, for example:

    • Young people represented by their diversity and organizations that work with them;
    • Parents and parent-teacher associations;
    • Policy-makers and politicians;
    • Government ministries, including health and others concerned with the needs of young people;
    • Educational professionals and institutions including teachers, head teachers and training institutions;
    • Religious leaders and faith-based organizations;
    • Teachers’ trade unions;
    • Training institutions for health professions;
    • Researchers;
    • Community and traditional leaders;
    • Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender groups;
    • NGOs, particularly those working on sexual and reproductive health with young people;
    • People living with HIV;
    • Media (local and national); and
    • Relevant donors or outside funders

    International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education II

    “A companion document (Volume II ) focuses on the topics and learning objectives to be covered at different ages in basic sexuality education for children and young people from 5 to 18+ years of age, together with a bibliography of useful resources.”

    “As a comprehensive package, all learning objectives address children’s and young people’s need for information and right to education. However, while only some of these learning objectives are specifically designed to reduce risky sexual behaviour, others will attempt to change social norms, facilitate communication of sexual issues, remove social and attitudinal barriers to sexuality education and increase knowledge.”

    The topics and learning objectives address four age groups and corresponding levels:

    1. ages 5 to 8 (Level I)
    2. ages 9 to 12 (Level II)
    3. ages 12 to 15 (Level III)
    4. ages 15 to 18+ (Level IV)

    “The sexual and reproductive health needs and concerns of children and young people, as well as the age of sexual debut, vary considerably within and across regions, as well as within and across countries and communities. This, in turn, is likely to affect the perceived appropriateness of particular learning objectives when developing curricula, materials and programmes. Learning objectives should therefore be adjusted to their context. However, this should be done in response to the available data and evidence rather than because of personal discomfort or perceived opposition.”

  • #394

    watch-pray
    Keymaster

    On June 30, 2015, the UN General Assembly adopted a Human Rights Council resolution which authorized the appointment of an International Expert to monitor LGBTQ rights among the member nations. In September, Thailand’s Vitit Muntarbhorn was appointed as the UN’s first independent investigator into violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Thailand is perhaps the most gender fluid nation in the world with a reputation for being one of the largest child sex trade operations in Southeast Asia. (Southeast Asia a Haven for Pedophiles)

    “UNICEF estimates the number of Thai children involved in prostitution to be between 60,000 and 200,000, though the organization says the exact number is difficult to track… Sowmia Nair, a Department of Justice agent, said the Thai government often “turns a blind eye” to child sex tourism because of the country’s economic reliance on the tourist trade in general. He also said police officers are often corrupt.”

    So is Vitit Muntarbhorn, a professor of law at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, going to protect children in member nations of the UN from child trafficking? No, Muntarbhorn’s duty is to enforce the UN Mandate protecting the rights of LGBTQ persons from being discriminated against using whatever public facilities they identify with, in the way of bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, or even dorms or hotel rooms designated for girls or boys on camping or school trips.

    Note in the UN Resolution that the “human right” that will be protected at the expense of children’s right to protection from predators is “violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

    Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council on 30 June 2016

    32/2. Protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity

    The Human Rights Council, Reaffirming the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Recalling Human Rights Council resolutions 5/1 and 5/2 of 18 June 2007,

    1. Reaffirms that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights,
    and that everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status;
    2. Strongly deplores acts of violence and discrimination, in all regions of the
    world, committed against individuals because of their sexual orientation or gender identity;
    3. Decides to appoint, for a period of three years, an Independent Expert on
    protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, with the following mandate:

    (a) To assess the implementation of existing international human rights instruments with regard to ways to overcome violence and discrimination against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity, while identifying both best practices and gaps;
    (b) To raise awareness of violence and discrimination against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and to identify and address the root causes of violence and discrimination;
    (c) To engage in dialogue and to consult with States and other relevant stakeholders, including United Nations agencies, programmes and funds, regional human rights mechanisms, national human rights institutions, civil society organizations and academic institutions;
    (d) To work in cooperation with States in order to foster the implementation of measures that contribute to the protection of all persons against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity;
    (e) To address the multiple, intersecting and aggravated forms of violence and discrimination faced by persons on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity;
    (f) To conduct, facilitate and support the provision of advisory services, technical assistance, capacity-building and international cooperation in support of national efforts to combat violence and discrimination against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity;

    4. Requests the Independent Expert to report annually to the Human Rights Council, starting from its thirty-fifth session, and to the General Assembly, starting from its seventy-second session;

    5. Calls upon all States to cooperate with the Independent Expert in the discharge of the mandate, including by providing all information requested, to give serious consideration to responding favourably to the requests of the Independent Expert to visit their countries and to consider implementing the recommendations made in the mandate holder’s reports;

    6. Encourages all relevant stakeholders, including United Nations agencies, programmes and funds, human rights mechanisms, national human rights institutions, national independent monitoring frameworks, civil society, the private sector, donors and development agencies to cooperate fully with the Independent Expert to enable the mandate holder to fulfil his or her mandate;

    7. Requests the Secretary-General and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide the Independent Expert with all the human, technical and financial resources necessary for the effective fulfilment of his or her mandate;

    8. Decides to remain seized of this issue.

    41st meeting
    30 June 2016

  • #408

    JV
    Participant

    What is the answer to this? It sounds like this (which is only one arm of the octopus) has infiltrated most denominations at some level. Are house churches the answer?

  • #410

    watch-pray
    Keymaster

    Consider these statements by Theosophist Alice Bailey concerning the takeover, exploitation and merger of the Christian denominations into a Universal Church:

    “Very definitely may the assurance be given here that, prior to the coming of the Christ, adjustments will be made so that at the head of all great organizations will be found either a Master, or an initiate who has taken the third initiation. At the head of certain of the great occult groups, of the Freemasons of the world, and of the various great divisions of the church, and resident in many of the great nations will be found initiates or Masters.” (Initiation: Human & Solar, 1922, pp. 61-62)

    “Secondly, the church movement, like all else, is but a temporary expedient and serves but as a transient resting place for the evolving life. Eventually, there will appear the Church Universal, and its definite outlines will appear towards the close of this century. In this connection, forget not the wise prophecy of H.P.B. as touching events at the close of this century. This Church will be nurtured into activity by the Christ and His disciples when the outpouring of the Christ principle, the true second Coming, has been accomplished. No date for the advent do I set, but the time will not be long.

    “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… Its work is intended to be the holding of a broad platform. The church must show a wide tolerance, and teach no revolutionary doctrines or cling to any reactionary ideas. The church as a teaching factor should take the great basic doctrines and (shattering the old forms in which they are expressed and held) show their true and inner spiritual significance. The prime work of the church is to teach, and teach ceaselessly, preserving the outer appearance in order to reach the many who are accustomed to church usages. Teachers must be trained; Bible knowledge must be spread; the sacraments must be mystically interpreted, and the power of the church to heal must be demonstrated.

    The three main channels through which the preparation for the new age is going on might be regarded as the Church, the Masonic Fraternity and the educational field. All of them are as yet in relatively static condition, and all are as yet failing to meet the need and to respond to the inner pressure. But in all of these three movements, disciples of the Great Ones are to be found and they are steadily gathering momentum and will before long enter upon their designated task.” (“Religious Organizations in the New Age,” Externalisation of the Hierarchy, 1957)

    I think that when governments overtly force churches to obey the LGBTQ non-discrimination requirement for the Faith-Based programs, many Christians will recognize and flee the Harlot Church. The problem now is that churches and denominations usually conceal from members their complicity with the requirement for LGBTQ inclusion.

    “And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” Rev. 18:4

  • #411

    watch-pray
    Keymaster

    Example of Harlot Church:

    SBC MegaChurch Says LGBT Community is the Chief Cornerstone

    “God help the SBC. This is the kinder, gentler, more politically correct SBC church that Russell Moore is building.”

  • #417

    revtom
    Keymaster

    JV
    Sad to say I see indications of this influence in almost all denominational groups. The efforts to recruit pastors have gone across denominational and non denominational and doctrinal lines . The reason for this is because the programs involved seek the lowest common denominator and doctrine “does not matter”. Seminaries are often focused on these new paradigms with their efforts to train the next generation of pastors for church growth and what “works” . The source of the advance of these entanglements and compromise is found far more from the leadership as few in the pews know it is happening or the dangers involved in the requisite compromise. House churches will be all that is untouched at some point as the trend continues .

  • #421

    JV
    Participant

    Watch-Pray,
    Thank you for sharing the blog link. I spent the last few hours reviewing the material, and am dismayed and heartbroken, but not entirely surprised. I see subtle warning signs in the church I attend. My pastor quoting from “Purpose Driven Life” (though it was only a one time thing), the “Freeway” series, using “Circle Maker” as a study book for mid-week service, the increasingly use of books for Bible studies in our small groups. I stated some of my concerns to my small group during Freeway, and though I attended, I did not use the book and mostly listened. When our members of our group were considering of doing a second round of “Freeway,” I objected on the grounds that it contained no Scripture and had an emphasis on “self.” I told them we needed something that was focused on Jesus and the Word and prepared us to fulfill the Great Commission. So, our group chose to have discussion and further study of the sermons our pastor preaches on Sundays. Fortunately, other than the Purpose Driven Life quote, our pastor, at least on Sundays, preaches the Word and sticks to Scripture. I have sat out the mid-week service due to the “Circle Maker.” Perhaps I should have gone and spoke out about it. I do regret that now.

    Tom,
    It is sad that it has gotten to all the denominations. But clearly that did not happen by accident. As I explored the blog link W-P posted, I noticed that in the Nazarene denomination, as you stated in general, it is primarily focused in the seminaries and universities and the leadership. At least for the moment, the denomination has not yet compromised on the LGBTQ matter. However, I realized from exploring the blog, that the Nazarene Church is somewhat divided on that issues as well as the emergent movement, etc. That is not apparent in the church I attend, with the exception of the books. But clearly, this will eventually trickle down to all the individual churches if it is the direction the leadership and seminaries are going.
    I am going to be more vigilant, and prayerfully speak up when I see and hear signs of these things. Also, this reminds me the necessity of spending more time in prayer and study of Scripture. We are coming to a point that we may have no other option but to study it alone. or in small groups independent of a church.

  • #577

    revtom
    Keymaster

    Gwen
    Thank you for the comment. Christians ARE gullible and an easy mark especially when our foes have studied us/ know how we believe / and have put millions into the think tanks that do this message shopping and talking points. The greater issue is that ANY trusted, Biblically conservative ( at least by reputation ) evangelical leaders ARE helping aid this deception is unthinkable and yet it is undeniable that some are. They are facilitating the dialog and hosting these people -themselves owning the title of change agent . God spoke plainly to Jeremiah that His peoples problem was not that they were not up to speed or on the wrong side of history with the rotting culture
    around them – but that the had strayed from /wandered off the ancient path Jer 6:6

  • #464

    watch-pray
    Keymaster

    A little more history which you may already know. Back in 2008, the liberal Christian Post reported a $1.2 million grant given to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Foundation’s “Institute for Welcoming Resources” and its partner LGBT orgs to promote the affirmation and inclusion of homosexuals in Christian churches that were not yet on board with the radical gay agenda.

    Grant Aims to Expand Pro-Gay Churches
    Aug 28, 2008

    A $1.2 million grant has been awarded to expand the efforts of gay and lesbian groups in increasing the number of churches that fully welcome and affirm homosexuals.

    The grant from the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund was given to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Foundation’s Institute for Welcoming Resources and five partner organizations for a joint collaboration on strengthening the capacity and voice of Christian organizations that support gays and lesbians…

    Currently, more than 3,100 congregations throughout the country have explicitly welcomed lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people to full inclusion, according to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which merged with the Institute for Welcoming Resources in 2006 in efforts to “increase the number of people of faith supporting equality for LGBT people.”

    “The more than 2.5 million individuals in the 3,100 congregations supported by the Institute for Welcoming Resources and these partner organizations are some of our movement’s most valuable advocates in promoting understanding, reclaiming what unfortunately has become a narrow view of ‘moral values’ espoused by those who seek to divide, and advancing LGBT equality,” Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said in a statement this week.

    More and more churches are moving away from judgmental attitudes toward homosexuality and making efforts to respond to gays and lesbians with compassion and redemptive love. But they are doing it while still affirming homosexuality as sin.

    Many churches are still ill-equipped in terms of ministry to homosexuals, but progress is being made, including within the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in the country. After establishing a task force in 2001 that would inform, educate and encourage Southern Baptists to be proactive and redemptive in reaching out to homosexuals, the denomination shifted their homosexual outreach into higher gear this past June.

    “Our biblically-based opposition to the normalization of homosexuality and the affirmation of homosexual behavior should not hinder us from ministering to homosexuals and offering them the love and healing environment they need to leave this destructive and unbiblical lifestyle,” said Richard Land, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, earlier.

    The Institute for Welcoming Resources currently works with the “welcoming church movement” in 30 Christian denominations including The Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the United Methodist Church, and the United Church of Christ.

    As of the publication of this article, the SBC had “shifted their homosexual outreach into higher gear…offering them the love and healing environment they need to leave this destructive and unbiblical lifestyle,” according to Richard Land, past president of the ERLC. But under the leadership of the current ERLC president, the SBC’s “love and healing environment they need to leave this destructive and unbiblical lifestyle” has morphed into a “secret ongoing dialogue” with HRC and LGBTQ organizations who are demanding the denomination “end the traditional rhetoric that homosexuality is a sin and that we would go to hell if we engage in it.”

  • #539

    Gwen
    Participant

    A little more history which you may already know. Back in 2008, the liberal Christian Post reported a $1.2 million grant given to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Foundation’s “Institute for Welcoming Resources” and its partner LGBT orgs to promote the affirmation and inclusion of homosexuals in Christian churches that were not yet on board with the radical gay agenda.

    AND

    The bigger issue would be with who is promoting her in my opinion. I think they are message shopping.

    Thank you for the information regarding the grant money. I really like the soft, fuzzy name, “Institute for Welcoming Resources” when their agenda and tactics are nothing of the sort.

    I agree, Rev Tom, regarding the “message shopping”. Forgive me, but I confess to being a bit of a cynic (not to mention a dyed in the wool conspiracy theorist). I, too, suspect ulterior motives on the part of whomever is promoting her. I can’t remember from whom it originated, but someone once said that Christians are the most gullible people. We need to take this seriously: “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” (Matthew 10:16 KJV)

    Thank you, watch-pray, for the response.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.