Vatican Says Gays Have ‘Gifts and Qualities to Offer’ – So What?

LGBT-CatholicsRoman Catholic gay rights groups hail the paper titled Relatio as a breakthrough, because it says:

50.        Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community: are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a Church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony? source

While point 50 is being cited as a revolutionary step forward for Rome, it amounts to babbling incoherent nonsense. Here is the implied argument: 1) Gays have talents and gifts to offer the church; 2) Gays wish the church to welcome them; 3) Therefore, we should guarantee them space in our communities.

Reasoning carefully is important and this line of reason fails. Formally, it is called a non-sequitur (does not follow). Why? It is easy to demonstrated.

All groups of people have gifts but not all groups are consistent with Christianity. Extreme examples make this obvious. For example, predatory pedophile priests like  Fr. Robert Brennan have gifts too but the nature of such sin requires the church to break fellowship, correct? I only use an extreme example to prove that gifting alone is not the basis for acceptance. Even satan worshippers have talents but we do not want to worship with them.  It does not follow that the giftedness of homosexuals (or anyone) demands the church to “make space” for them (whatever that means).  Thus, the logic fails.

The New Testament teaches:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Co 6:9-10)

A Christian cannot “accept and value their sexual orientation” because it is sinful (1 Cor 6:9). This documents reveals that Rome does not understand the Gospel. One joins the true church by acknowledging ones sinfulness and need of the Savior’s redeeming blood. If a homosexual believes the Gospel (1 Cor 15:3-5) acknowledges that such activity is sinful, struggles and resists the proclivity then they are Christian. If they refuse to acknowledge that it is a sin, freely indulge it and ask the church to compromise, then they are in open rebellion no matter what gifts and talents they might offer.

The Great Ghost Debate Mark Hunneman vs Cris Putnam


ghost debate
 
Be prepared to be disappointed by my debate opponent’s unprofessional behavior, I certainly was… Here is an embedded player to listen:


 

or you can download it here: http://extraordinaryintelligence.com/beyond-extraordinary-ep-27-are-human-ghosts-consistent-within-a-biblical-worldview/

The Great Ghost Debate Are Human Spirits Consistent With a Biblical Worldview?

ghost debate

Many have objected to my arguments that a biblical worldview must leave room for human ghosts by insisting that they are all demons in disguise. While it is impossible for an author to address each readers concerns one on one, a serious author will seek the opponent with the strongest counter arguments and address them in print. That is why I addressed Mark Hunneman’s work in The Supernatural Worldview. Now in the interest of seeking truth, we are taking it live. I will be debating Presbyterian Pastor Mark Hunneman author of Seeing Ghosts Through God’s Eyes on whether or not “all ghosts are demons” (Mark’s position) or if a biblical worldview allows for the appearance of human apparitions (my stance). This will be recorded and publicly podcast free to all on Beyond Extraordinary with Natalina, the first weekend in October.

Movie Review The Remaining

remaining_xlg The Remaining is a refreshingly realistic portrayal of the rapture and tribulation events described in biblical prophecy. It seems to follow the Pre-Wrath perspective on the rapture timing. Overall, it is one of the better Christian films I have seen. The film begins with a wedding (as in the days of Noah)  and focuses on a group of contemporary twenty somethings:

 “For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark,”(Mt 24:38)

[SPOILER ALERT]

The acting is quite good for a Christian film and the personalities and attitudes of the characters resemble those of today’s young adults. The swanky wedding party quickly goes south as many folks drop dead and the building is bombarded with basketball size hail. I suspect many Christians might take exception with this interpretation because the dead folks are actually the Christian believers. Rather than piles of clothes on the floor like in the Left Behind film, the believers bodies remain while their souls are taken up. Of course, this readily dismisses the proverbial question, “How will they explain the missing Christians?” It  makes a lot of practical sense but I wonder if it is biblical. The principle rapture passage is from 1 Thessalonians:

 “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.(1 Th 4:16–17)

Paul does not specify that those who are left are bodily “caught up” up but the preceding verse speaks to the awakening of the dead whose souls are already in heaven so it must be their bodies in focus. The best description of this event is in 1 Corinthians 15:

“Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.”(1 Co 15:51–52)

Because Paul compares this to Jesus’ bodily resurrection (1 Co 15:20-23), it is problematic to spiritualize the raising of the dead and consequently the rapture of living believers. Thus, the apparent death of believers provides a satisfying rationale for the rapture but it doesn’t accurately match Paul’s descriptions.

Overall the film gets a lot of things right and corrects many of the common errors in worldly thinking. Some of the film’s characters believe “the good people were taken and the bad people were left.” This is corrected by Pastor Shay (played by John Pyper-Ferguson) who clarifies “the believers were taken and the unbelievers were left.” The message of scripture is that there are no “good people” (Rom 3:10) and the saved are forgiven because they believe Jesus died for their sins and was raised from the dead (1 Cor 15:3) This important point is emphasized as demons strategically destroy Bibles and kill the characters who come to saving faith. However, this also brings my main criticism into focus.

The biggest problem with The Remaining is that the Gospel is never clearly articulated. The bride in the opening wedding scene, Skylar (played by Alexa PenaVegais a nominal Christian whose parents dropped dead at the wedding. She is the first in the film to realize that the rapture has taken place and she finds a Bible to prove it to her friends. She prays to God and repents of her luke warm faith. Soon after, she is attacked by a demon and slienced. As mentioned above, the apostate pastor also realizes he never really believed and repents. He is also quickly taken out by demonic assault.

What’s missing is what they came to believe. The name Jesus is hardly mentioned much less the fact that he died for our sins and rose from the dead. I suspect the producers wanted the film to provoke unbelievers to ask, “What is it they believed?” rather than hit them over the head with it.  Even so, it seems to me that at least one of the characters could have said “I believe Jesus died for my sins!” It is still a great film to start the conversation and I recommend it.

Pope–Petrus Romanus–Francis Has Only a Few Years to Live?

The Arutz Sheva Israel National News is reporting that Pope Francis has only a few years to live and may retire like his predecessor Benedict.  If he steps down, then I will be the first to say the Prophecy of the Popes was wrong. People who read Petrus Romanus carefully are aware I have always been tentative, for it to be fulfilled Rome should be destroyed. If Pope Frank steps down and Rome is fine, the prophecy of the popes is undone. I have always maintained a wait and see position, my argument has been that past fulfillment compelled me to not dismiss it. I will dismiss it if this pope retires uneventfully. However, it could also mean that 2016 will mark its culmination, the jury is still out.

 

Pope Francis: I Only Have 2-3 More Years to Live

Pope Francis believes that he still has a maximum of three years left to live, he told reporters Monday, and indicated that he is considering early retirement.

“Another two or three years, and God will take me,” Francis said, speaking to reporters on his way back to the Vatican from South Korea. According to reporters on the plane, the pope was generally in high spirits despite the grim prediction.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/184187#.U_Nce2P5M-d

 

Last PopeWatch the The Last Pope? for details on the Prophecy of the Popes.