Nazarene Youth Conference 2023 Bad News: Beware of These Speakers (Possibly Others)

Parents of Nazarene youth need to vet all speakers and music artists at every Nazarene youth event going forward, including NYC. They cannot afford not to do it anymore. The spiritual wellbeing of their children is at stake. To allow young people to be potentially indoctrinated with unbiblical ideas should outrage every Bible-believing parent and church leader.

Scripture talks about the contrast between light and darkness, and these two things, both literally and spiritually, cannot co-exist together.  It is impossible. Ephesians 5:11 is a classic admonishment from God’s word: “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.”

There is an attempt to mix light and darkness at Nazarene Youth Conference, 2023, at Tampa, FL in July. Unfortunately, there have been some unwise choices for guest speakers or music artists. I talk about three of them here today, but it’s possible there are more, and speakers should be vetted thoroughly. NYC organizers also should announce their entire speaker lineup before accepting any registration money, or at least be able to offer refunds within a reasonable time period after the final speaker is announced. That will allow parents to make the best decision possible for their teens.

Following are the speakers/music artist in question. Who organized this event, and who scheduled these bad choices? What do the General Superintendents think about these people? Please prayerfully consider this information, and decide if these are the kind of speakers you want your teens to be exposed to.

[Favorably quotes these false teachers on his Twitter page; all of them are pro-homosexual]

Richard Rohr: Pro-Homosexual, contemplative Mystic, New Age panentheist (God is in all things, and all is in God).  Does not believe homosexuals need to repent. Denies biblical doctrine of the blood atonement. Believes that people of all religions worship the same God. He is a champion for the idea of a global world religion. Rohr integrates pagan contemplative practices with that of ancient Catholic “saints.” He has adapted practices such as Buddhist koans and Hindu mantras. Many evangelicals, including Gloria Gaither, have been bewitched by this heretic. Does Braatz agree with Rohr’s false teachings?

Brian McLaren: Pro-homosexual. Considered the godfather of the emergent church movement. Performed a commitment ceremony at his son’s “marriage” to another man. Says that the Bible is not clear on homosexuality. (“Frankly, many of us don’t know what we should think about homosexuality. We’ve heard all sides but no position has yet won our confidence so that we can say “it seems good to the Holy Spirit and us.”). Does Braatz agree with McLaren that the Bible is not clear on homosexuality?

Juergen Moltmann: Pro-homosexual. Quoted by Braatz multiple times.  Moltmann is a German theologian who is a universalist and believes homosexuality is not a sin. Quote: “I will not say that a lesbian or a homosexual partnership is equal to a marriage, because a marriage is intended to father children, while these partnerships are not intentionally directed to adopt children. But I have no problems in blessing such a partnership. Why should I not bless a partnership between human beings? And homosexuality is neither a sin nor a crime.”

Tony Campolo: Pro-homosexual. A once popular speaker at Nazarene colleges. Campolo is in favor of same sex marriage and has no problem with homosexual “Christians.” Does Braatz agree with Campolo? If not, why does he favorably quote Mr. Campolo?

Rachel Held Evans: Pro-homosexual.  Rachel passed away in 2019, but her public support of homosexuality was evident. Her message was that you can be both homosexual and a Christian, and anyone who disagrees is wrong. She was a false teacher who deceived many. Why does Brady Braatz quote a woman who promoted sinful behavior as something good? Quote: “In short, I affirm LGBTQ people because they are human beings, created in the image of God. I affirm their sexual orientations and gender identities because they reflect the diversity of God’s good creation, where little fits into rigid binary categories. I affirm their (healthy) relationships. I affirm them because theology that refuses to accept their personhood is deadly.”

Rob Bell: Pro-homosexual. Bell is one of the foremost leaders to come out of the emergent church movement. He announced his support of same sex marriage several years ago. Does Braatz agree with him?

And Braatz quotes the Dalai Lama, who is a Buddhist Tibetan monk and a self-proclaimed Marxist.

As described on his website, Rich Villodas is the “lead pastor of New Life Fellowship, a large multiracial church in Queens, NY”. He is the author of several books, including one titled ‘The Deeply Formed Life.’
It is a book grounded on contemplative mysticism as well as racial and other cultural approaches. In the Amazon book description, it says that Villodas “offers an expansive and interconnected vision of  spiritual formation based on the five key paths of monastic, multiracial, emotional, sexual, and missional values.”

Villodas is a follower of contemplative mysticism proponents such as Peter Scazerro, who did the foreword for his book. Villodas also leads an online discipleship class using Scazerro’s “Emotionally Healthy Discipleship”, a book filled with contemplative mysticism ideas and false doctrine. Anyone who follows and works with Scazerro so closely is a danger to the spiritual health of Christian youth and adults.

On his website, it says that Villodas “enjoys reading, preaching and writing on contemplative spirituality.” Contemplative spirituality is an unbiblical spirituality system based on Eastern mysticism, which teaches practices such as “the silence”, which is a ritual of emptying the mind as to allow it to be “filled” by God.
No such idea is remotely taught in scripture, yet Villodas promotes this as well as other contemplative practices.

Villodas is listed as a resource on the website of Renovaré, an organization founded by Richard Foster, a Quaker theologian who many consider to be the modern day father of contemplative mysticism.  Foster promotes the same kind of Eastern mysticism that Villodas follows. Foster’s book, Celebration of Discipline, has been used by many Nazarene pastors over the years, and was featured at General Assembly in 2009. David Cloud gives a good synopsis of the false spirituality Foster promotes in this article.

Rich Villodas is also a racial and social justice ideologist. He is obsessed with Critical Race Theory, a racist ideology that blames white people for racism, teaches that all white people are inherently racist, and that America’s institutions are all deeply infused with racism and needs to be completely reformed. As part of this racially charged nonsense, evangelical “white churches” are also thrown under the proverbial bus, and are seen as being complicit in the racial ills of America. Ironically, such views are themselves racist. (See examples in his own words at the end of this post).

Villodas is an ecumenicalist who favors Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. He has praised heretics such as Thomas Merton and Karl Barth. Some of their heretical beliefs are summarized below.

Villodas’ Recent Praise Of Two False Teachers: Thomas Merton and Karl Barth

Quote: “Thomas Merton and Karl Barth. Both have shaped my understanding of God in profound ways.”
How exactly can these false teachers shape anyone’s “understanding of God in profound ways”?

Karl Barth was a neo-orthodox theologian. Mr. Barth was a very highly intellectual theologian, but he made complex the simplicity of scripture and rejected its complete inspiration by the Holy Spirit. Here is a good summary of neo-orthodoxy from gotquestions.org, which indicates how neo-orthodoxy is very dangerous: 

“Neo-orthodoxy defines the Word of God as Jesus (John 1:1), and says that the Bible is simply man’s interpretation of the Word’s actions. Thus, the Bible is not inspired by God, and, being a human document, various parts of it may not be literally true. God spoke through “redemptive history,” and He speaks now as people “encounter” Jesus, but the Bible itself is not objective truth.

Neo-orthodoxy teaches that the Bible is a medium of revelation, while orthodoxy believes it is revelation. That means that, to the neo-orthodox theologian, revelation depends on the experience (or personal interpretation) of each individual. The Bible only “becomes” the Word of God when God uses its words to point someone to Christ. The details of the Bible are not as important as having a life-changing encounter with Jesus. Truth thus becomes a mystical experience and is not definitively stated in the Bible.”

Thomas Merton was a Catholic monk who was a universalist (all will eventually be saved). Trevecca President Dan Boone has praised Merton, calling him a “spiritual giant”, and Merton seems to be a favorite of many Nazarene pastors. But Merton was not a spiritual giant- he was a monk who said that he was “deeply impregnated with Sufism” because he believed that Eastern mysticism was compatible with and could be incorporated into Christianity.  He placed Mary high on a level equal to Jesus, and he prayed to many Roman Catholic saints.  He was influenced by Aldous Huxley, who found enlightenment through hallucinogenic drugs.

Would Villodas agree with the following statements by Merton?

 “I see no contradiction between Buddhism and Christianity … I intend to become as good a Buddhist as I can.” (The Springs of Contemplation, p. 266)

“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.” (Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander (1989 edition, 157-158)

For five minutes in an interview, he could not answer a question with biblical clarity about homosexuality, and instead such words will lead to confusion, doubt, and lead youth away from a clear biblical view of homosexuality. Lecrae is a double-minded man.

The fact that Lecrae is appealing to the world and seeking greater acceptance from the world by using a worldly form of music should be very concerning. Did not our Lord Jesus Christ say in Matthew 16:15… “And He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.” Lecrae is trying to have it both ways; to make the world happy, and Christ happy. It’s not possible to do both. And yet, Lecrae is trying to impart the idea that you can be both a Christian, and also be worldly. That is not a biblical view.

There is a serious problem with Lecrae working directly with worldly artists whose views on faith as well as their lifestyles are contradictory to the teachings of Jesus Christ. His musical influences have included Lauryn Hill, Tupac, and Outkast. He has high praise for them and their supposed ability to insert spirituality onto “good music.” Others who he says are some of his greatest inspirations include Chance the Rapper and Kendrick Lamar. It remains to be seen if he will soon have any musical collaborations with them. At the very least, Lecrae has a serious lack of spiritual discernment, and is ignoring biblical instruction to avoid those who oppose the true doctrines of Jesus Christ.

Lecrae was a featured performer at Together 2016, a day-long ecumenical Christian event. It also featured Pope Francis as a speaker, and the event was a call to “unity.” Lecrae apparently forgot that true unity is only with those who believe in a biblical Gospel of salvation by faith alone.

When the movie The Shack came out, Lecrae not only worked on the soundtrack for this heretical depiction of God, but he gave rave reviews of the movie. The Shack presents a distorted view of God and compromises scriptural truth by presenting a view of “universal” salvation.

Lecrae also has directly spent time at political rallies for politicians who fully support abortion. He has denied that he has any political leanings at all, but the documentation is pretty damning. Lecrae has said on FaceBook: “I’m a Christ follower. I’m politically agnostic. I don’t endorse abortion.”

Right. And yet, on inauguration day for Joe Biden, the guy who claims to be “political agnostic” said this: “Feels good to be on the right side of history. “Which of course is the anti-racism, pro-life from womb to the tomb, care for the marginalized, anti-Christian nationalism, anti-abuse of power side.”

Apparently for Lecrae, the right side of history belongs to the Democrat liberal administration which is pro-abortion all the way. And in all his appearances with politicians, it has always been with Democrats only; liberal, leftist, abortion loving, race-obsessed Democrats. (Lecrae’ Progressive Politics and Double Minded Artistry)

Lecrae on Chic-Fil-A Owner Being Anti-Homosexuality

Lecrae is a double-minded man.

28 Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. 29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. 31 So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears. (Acts 20:28-31)

False Teachers That Rich Villodas Has Quoted or Associated With:

These are the ones I have found: Brian Zahnd, Thomas Merton, Peter Scazzero. These three are all proponents of contemplative mysticism. (Merton passed away in 1968).

Examples of Villodas’ Lack of Discernment:

Below is another example of his approval of contemplative mysticism. Going to a monastery and practicing the silence are not biblically grounded activities. These are centers for promoting Eastern style practices that are bot based in scripture. Practicing the silence essentially teaches you to empty your mind, in order to “hear from God.” Instead, it is a way of inviting demonic voices to fool you into thinking you are communing with God.

Thomas Merton was a false teacher and universalist who mixed Eastern religions with Christianity.

Below are examples of Villodas’ obsession with and support of racial division, by way of Critical Race Theory ideas, support of the Black Lives Matter organization, and generalizing a kind of institutional racism in evangelical churches.

Other Links:

Rob Bell on homosexuality: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevin-wax/rob-bell-and-andrew-wilson-discuss-homosexuality-some-thoughts/

Tony Campolo on homosexuality: (Why Gay Christians Should Be Fully Accepted Into The Church).

Juergen Moltmann on homosexuality: https://postbarthian.com/2014/07/17/jurgen-moltmann-homosexuality-vs-fundamentalists/

Richard Rohr on homosexuality: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=655

Advertisement

Are there Pro-LGBT Faculty Teaching Ministry Students at Northwest Nazarene University?

Earlier this year, I came across what is now a 34 page letter outlining some concerns about NNU by a recent graduate of the school, Sean Killackey (BA Religious Studies). This letter covers several topics, most notably LGBT issues. If what it says is accurate, there are several pro-LGBT professors within the College of Theology and Christian Ministries (CTCM).

Shortly after reading this letter and looking through the various pieces of evidence this student had accumulated, I wrote to several CTCM faculty whom he had mentioned. I asked them questions such as: “Do you believe that homosexual practices and gay marriage are sinful transgressions of God’s law?” While I did not receive any direct answers to these questions from the faculty whom I had contacted, I did have a brief email correspondence with one of the professors, Dr. Richard Thompson, Professor of New Testament and Chair of the Department of Philosophy and Religion.

Our conversation did not remove the concerns that I had as a result from reading this letter. While he described it as “filled with material taken out of context, misconstrued, misquoted . . . if not perhaps fabricated, and/or seriously misunderstood,” his characterization seemed to ring hollow. He and his faculty refused to answer what I believe to be very straightforward questions. If what this former student was saying about them (i.e., that several of them are pro-LGBT) was not correct, why not deny that directly? Moreover, if all of the things this student had said about current and former NNU professors, such as Dr. Bankard, Dr. Smerick, and Dr. Riley (see below) were false, why was Dr. Thompson unwilling to refute the particular pieces of evidence I had mentioned?

Professor Thompson was willing to deny at least one of the statements that Sean had ascribed to him, namely, that if there were enough loving homosexual couples then what the Bible means for us today would have to be reassessed. He says that he did not say this. However, if this is meant to be an indication that the letter as a whole is unreliable, it was not persuasive to me. At best it is a stand-off between two contrary recollections of what was or was not said in a certain conversation that neither you or I were present for. It is possible that this student misrecalled what Dr. Thompson had said (though, for a few reasons, I do not think this is that likely). Even if he had mis-recalled what was said, there are other claims that are directly confirmed by emails, recordings, screenshots of social media statements, etc., that appear to be accurate.

Recently, I discovered that about two months ago the former student had sent out a brief letter to Nazarene churches in the northwest United States that links to a one-and-a-half page summary document. I encourage anyone who is interested in this matter to read it. Below are a few quotations from it:

Dr. Bankard, Professor of Philosophy

He has preached several pro-LGBT sermons. In one of these, “Hide and Seek: Say No to Fear” (September 24, 2017), he relates a time when a student came out as gay to him. [Evidence] This may be the same student whom several persons refer to when they say that one of their female relatives came out as gay to Dr. Bankard and Dr. Oord, whose pro-LGBT views are well known.

Dr. Smerick, Professor of Philosophy

She has often tweeted, liked, or retweeted pro-LGBT and pro-abortion messages. Among these are several messages expressing support for students protesting against Seattle Pacific University, a private Christian college, to get them to revise their student handbook, remove its prohibition against homosexual practices, and hire LGBT faculty. [Evidence]

Dr. Kipp, Professor of Youth and Family Ministry

On several occasions, despite being asked Dr. Kipp has refrained from giving his opinion on the permissibility of homosexual practices. [Evidence] [Evidence] [Evidence] However, he was willing to say, “Wesleyans have a wide range of views of marriage (‘gay marriage’),” and, “I’m confident that our OT and NT scholars in CTCM [Dr. Riley, now at the University of Denver, and Dr. Thompson] will not agree, wholeheartedly, that St. Paul or the writer of Leviticus, is describing the same behaviors that a same-sex marriage would include.” [Evidence]

My Followup Questions To Dr. Akkerman, Dr. Peterson, and Dr. Thompson

In preparation for this post, I recently reached out again to three NNU faculty members: Dr. Jay Akkerman, Assistant to the President for Congregational Engagement; Dr. Brent Peterson, Dean of the College of Theology and Christian Ministries; and Dr. Richard Thompson. The only significant response I received (as of writing this) has been from Dr. Thompson. I will relate that in a future post. Suffice it for now to note that he continues to insist that what Sean has claimed is unreliable. He states that he and his faculty all continue to support and uphold the Manual’s statement on sexuality, even if they do not feel obligated to affirm every “jot and tittle” in it.

A Sample of Some of the Evidence

Below are just a few examples of the sort of evidence that Dr. Thompson alleges are ‘cherry-picked’. Judge for yourselves.

1) This is an excerpt from Sean’s longer letter about NNU’s College of Theology. It contains two verifiable quotations from Dr. Bankard, a philosophy professor at NNU.

2) This is a screenshot of one of the pro-LGBT tweets that Dr. Smerick, a philosophy professor at NNU, liked. Is it proper for a philosophy professor at a Nazarene university to celebrate LGBT activists bullying a Christian college?

3) This is a screenshot of just one of Dr. Riley’s many pro-LGBT and pro-abortion tweets, retweets, and liked tweets (“biology is not destiny” is a pro-transgenderism sound bite, “reproductive rights” is an euphemism for abortion, and “sexual . . . rights” is probably an assertion of a pro-gay marriage position).

Racist, Pro-Abortion, Pro-LGBT, Conservative-Hating “Pastor” Speaks At Nazarene Seminary

The Nazarene Theological Seminary is dying, if not already dead, and has been for a while, well before the recent event at the Preacher’s Conference.

Part One: Responsibility Of Nazarene Leaders

The responsibility has to be laid on President Jeren Rowell and other NTS leadership over the last 15 years or so for destroying a once biblical seminary. We must give some level of responsibility to the entire Board of General Superintendents during this period, who have failed to do anything of significance to stop a steady progression of post-modernism, mysticism, creation worship, and social justice; and now lately, it is woke ideology, LGBT and normalization of homosexuality, Critical Race Theory and blaming of white people for racism.

Regarding the General Board, the Nazarene Manual mentions in section 317.1 one of their duties: “Provide supervision, guidance, and motivation for the general church, with appropriate attention to leadership and theology for all districts, agencies, and ministries of the global Church of the Nazarene.” Section 306 also mentions their role to include: “propagating theological coherency.” I submit to you that they have failed to meet these specific duties and responsibilities. There is no theological coherency across the board in the denomination and the colleges and seminaries.

And the culpability does not stop there. There are district superintendents, college professors and chaplains, pastors, and local church leaders who are contributing to this mess. And sadly, there are many sitting in the pews who would rather stay silent and enjoy their monthly pot luck dinners rather than rock the boat. They know what’s going on is bad, but they put themselves in a state of denial and an unhealthy emotional allegiance to an organization. All this is contributing to the slow death of a holiness denomination.

Part Two: Commentary on the Seminary And Frank Thomas

My report concerns Dr. Frank A. Thomas, who spoke at Nazarene Theological Seminary on September 27. Mr. Thomas did not sneak into the seminary under false pretenses. He is not guilty of fooling the most learned leaders of the seminary by pretending to be aligned with stated Nazarene values.  He did not trick them into believing he was teaching a Gospel-based message. If only it were so, because being fooled might be considered a little less serious than being knowing partners to a crime. Dr. Jeren Rowell and all the others who are aware of this man’s unbiblical ideology and hateful rhetoric are either very gullible and ignorant, or complicit.  The evidence indicates that they are knowingly complicit in agreeing with and facilitating a false teacher’s agenda, and thus they allowed him to stand behind the sacred desk and preach his false ideas.

It would take a serious bit of work to save this seminary, requiring a wholesale replacement of leadership and heretical professors. This rarely happens. The only successful turnaround that I know of is that which was accomplished through the efforts of Dr. Al Mohler, who doggedly fought through every obstacle he encountered; fired dozens of professors who were teaching heretical ideas; and with little support except from God, was able to root out liberalism from the classrooms and chapel of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.  I know of no other effort that ever turned around a seminary from its march into the abyss of apostasy.

Dr. Thomas has earned the applause of men now, so he has his reward now. After warnings from various Nazarenes over the last several months, Dr. Rowell concluded that Frank A. Thomas is worthy of speaking at a seminary that purports to espouse holiness; purports to follow the Nazarene manual; and purports to follow biblical standards. Sorry, but “actions speak louder than stated loyalty to church polity.” What happened on September 27 was a travesty that should never have happened. Dr. Rowell and all who collaborated in arranging this travesty should be fired. They are active facilitators of a problem which keeps getting worse. But don’t forget to hold the General Superintendents accountable.

Frank A. Thomas is a false teacher. What is a false teacher? A false teacher is, in simple terms, someone who deceives by teaching things that should not be taught. What he teaches is contrary to God’s word, including the things that Jesus Christ taught, but also anything taught in the entire Bible. On that basis, Frank A. Thomas is a false teacher.  And the leaders at the seminary should know better; they should cease to be leaders; and they should be removed from their positions of power and influence.

Frank Thomas advocates for racial division, blames societies problems on all white people, and promotes Critical Race Theory; he praises Jeremiah Wright who is one of the most racist pastors in America, and who also teaches Black Liberation Theology; he is pro-abortion; he supports the LGBTQ agenda; he vilifies Christians who are conservative in their theological and political views.

Below is the link to of Thomas’ first speech at the Preacher’s Conference. I follow up with a commentary on selected quotes from this mostly political lecture. I do not consider it a sermon.

Part Three: Commentary on Frank Thomas’ Speech on Sept. 27

Title: The Word of God For The People of God: “What About The Children?”
Video Timeline: 0:00 to 29:30- Thomas’ message.  30:00 to 1:03:15- Interview session.
Scripture Passages used: Exodus 1:15-17, Luke 18:1

In Opening Comments, Thomas Omits Abortion from a long list of Violence Against Children

Thomas’ speech focused on “the children.”  This seems to be a “sermon” that he recycles often at different speaking engagements. Here are some highlights, with timelines:

02:30: Mr. Thomas asks… “What about the children?” (repeats this often)
He quotes Amy Lindeman Allen, a professor at Christian Theological Seminary, where he teaches. “Children are rarely the center of text and interpretation, and more often than not, are simply an appendage and an afterthought.” He quotes her also by saying that “while marginalized groups such as black people, women, minorities, LGBTQI, immigrants, Latinx, we don’t mention children.”

“What about the children in this post-truth era, lies, fake news, conspiratorial facts?”

04:35 “Chief challenges facing children all over the globe: violence through indoctrination, poverty, life as refugees, lack of access to education, child neglect, child labor, child sexual rape and molestation, child abuse, child prostitution, child trafficking and slavery, military use of children, disease, hunger and climate change, to name a few.”

Note: he fails to mention the evil of abortion, which is a violence of the most reprehensible kind.

In Less Than 10 Minutes, We Hear His Racist View of Society

5:35 Mr. Thomas addresses issues affecting our children, and here he regurgitates his racist approach to all of life’s problems. Quote: “… in the issues affecting our children…what we would probably find is fear in adults. The fearful reality for some is that America is changing, and by 2040 Euro-Americans will not be the dominant group in the nation. There is massive fear in living in this kind of diversity when Euro-American people don’t control the levers of wealth and power, of voting and institutions.”

This is straight out of Critical Race Theory, a philosophy which Mr. Thomas embraces, and he shares with close colleagues like the very racist Dr. Jeremiah Wright. CRT teaches the basic racist idea that ALL white people are guilty of racism, even if they deny it. It also teaches that every institution in America is loaded with racism and functions to keep people of color down and inhibit their success in life.

This comment reflects the post-modern thinking of the Emergent Church

6:30 “I hate to admit this, but… I don’t like change either. But nothing stays the same. Everything must change.”

This is reminiscent of another false teacher who has made a very negative impact on the Nazarene denomination.  “Everything Must Change” was a book written by Brian McLaren, whose post-modern philosophy included the idea that nothing remains the same. All ideas are in play (i.e. absolute truth, views on homosexuality, etc.).  Even the standard of scripture is subject to change. EVERYTHING is subject to change, which is also a foundation of liberalism. This is a philosophy which seeks to facilitate the ability to move the goal posts of theology, and change the direction on a whim, based on societies opinions.  It is totally opposite of the teaching of God’s word, which is steady and never-changing.

These comments exemplify the subtle attacks on conservative Christians

9:10 “In this fearful environment, all political leaders have to do is appeal to our fears…scapegoat minorities, women, LGBTQI persons, immigrants, blame other people…it’s the immigrants that are taking our jobs.”

10:06 “A God and a church to divinely sanction and offer cosmic validity to our fears.”

Using the Exodus 1 passage, Thomas betrays his hypocritical “care for the children”

10:55 “Allow me to bring the king of Egypt to the homiletical stage.”

It is ironic that Mr. Thomas uses a passage in scripture that describes a plan to kill babies en masse, but then he himself is a supporter of abortion. He describes the pharoah as responding “in fear…wielding massive levels of power and political machinery.”  He says later… “Maybe for Shiphrah and Puah, children were the center of the world, and not adults. When asked about the children, they had an answer.  Save the children at all costs…because if we cut off our children, we cut off our chance at redemption.” At 14:12 Talks about Fred Rogers and how he focused on children, “you are special just the way you are.” He continues on… “he loved and protected children.”

17:30  He builds up this monologue to what I knew he was going to do. His “sermon” again become a political attack, which he loves to do… “When I look at our public behavior… some of these politicians and these groups, I say are you going to act like this in front of the children? You gonna put these kids on buses as political pawns, ship them to sanctuary cities. Pawns as political games. You do that to children? What about the children? Adults dropping their fearful slime on children.”

19:36  Luke 18 text is now quoted, where the children come to see Jesus, and the disciples rebuke the people. He depicts the disciples complaining to Jesus this way…. “Can you get these kids out? Can you get these immigrant kids out of here?”  Once again twisting scripture to make a political point, not a theological truth. He continues… “can you get the black kids out? We trying to build the kingdom.”

22:20 “Would I be dangerous to say that if you aborted a child, a child is already in the kingdom? To such belong the kingdom.” Of course, he does not talk about abortion as an evil thing, because he supports abortion. It is as if he approves of abortion, because the child will go to heaven anyway. Later, in the question period, he affirms his support for “choice.”

He continues on with more political speechmaking. You will need to listen to it all, I could not stomach much more of it.

23:25 “When are we going to have our Shiphrah and Puah moment…and tell the king, no!…Are there any Shiphrah and Puahs here today?”

The last five minutes he talks about Fred Rogers again, with a nice story about Rogers when he received an award for his programming. And he politicizes it also. This was not a sermon, this was a crass political message that twisted God’s word, as he always does in his public speeches.

The question and answer session was 30 minutes.  Please watch it if you can.  I have no time to do an extended commentary on it.  It was all I could stomach to watch the “sermon.”

Conclusion: Frank A. Thomas, a confirmed racist, pro-abortion and pro-LGBTQI “pastor”, spoke at a seminary that supposedly aligns itself with the holiness principles of the Church of the Nazarene.  It was a complete sham, and if people of integrity cannot rise up to stop this foolishness, this poison will spread into the denomination more, and the Nazarenes will go the way of the liberal mainstream denominations.  The denomination will support woke ideology; it will support homosexuality; it will support blaming white people for the world’s troubles; it will worship creation instead of the created.  It will do everything but uphold the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, while sending many people to hell who are buying into their lies.

Past articles related to Frank A. Thomas:

Nazarene Theological Seminary Speaker Frank Thomas: An Enthusiastic Supporter of Abortion

Review: Frank A. Thomas “How To Write A Dangerous Sermon”- Part 1

A Racist, Pro-Abortion “Pastor” Is Still Scheduled To Speak At Nazarene Theological Cemetery

Dan Boone Praises A Racist, Pro-Abortion “Pastor” Who Will Speak At Nazarene Theological Seminary

General Superintendent’s Answer About Homosexuality Leaves More Questions – Once Again

When will the day come when a General Superintendent of the Church of the Nazarene will answer a question about homosexuality forthrightly, clearly, and unambiguously?

At the Southwest Indiana District Assembly this Summer, General Superintendent David Busic was asked the following question by Pastor Jared Henry, an ordained elder in the Church of the Nazarene:

“If an ordained elder in the Church of the Nazarene is advocating publicly for gay marriage or the practice of homosexuality, and the district fails to deal with that- in other words, they don’t take their credentials, what takes place after that…in other words, what recourse may be at that point?”

Dr. Busic begins answering at the :54 mark, in this video.

He finishes his answer some nine minutes later, and no one can reasonably conclude that he gave a straightforward, clear answer.  And yet, it appears to me that that the response he gave to a very specific question has resulted in continued confusion and uncertainty within the denomination, and perhaps will discourage or demoralize pastors who are working hard to uphold biblical standards regarding homosexuality. This should be very troubling to all Nazarenes who have been seeking answers about the direction the church is going regarding human sexuality, and its stance on homosexuality.

Dr. David Busic at SW Indiana District Assembly

A simple and clear answer to the question would have been something like “The Church of the Nazarene will not back one inch from its biblical stance on homosexuality. There is no excuse for any district to fail to uphold our biblical principles, and any pastor who continues advocating for anything that violates biblical principles ought to be required to surrender his credentials and is not fit to serve in the church in any leadership position.”

Instead, like a politician trying to walk a fine line and avoid offending anyone, Dr. Busic spent about nine minutes answering a very appropriate question from an ordained elder in the denomination who clearly is concerned about upholding biblical standards. It was a great opportunity to give clarity for members who are looking for the church leadership to step up in a time where clarity is needed so badly. The LGBT movement which is trying to normalize homosexuality within the denomination is a real danger, and General Superintendents need to be unambiguous when it comes to homosexuality.

Yet, it is not a surprise to me when I see this kind of response to serious questions.  In the past when I had communicated back and forth with several General Superintendents (the emails can be found on my blog), their responses had little substance, and they only spoke in general terms. They seem to not like giving direct answers to specific questions. One of them has promised several times since 12 years ago he would get back to me. I’m still waiting.

At around 1:20 in the video, Dr. Busic says that 2017 was one of the “most extraordinary moments in the Church of the Nazarene”… and that “97% voted on a clear position on human sexuality.”  He described the new Human Sexuality statement as “one of the most poetically and beautifully written statements.” He also stated that “this board [the current Board of General Superintendents] is 100% behind what that [2017] General Assembly did.”

And yet, that specific Human Sexuality document omitted the word “perversion” from the manual, in reference to homosexuality; and it was applauded by LGBT advocates such as Andy McGee and Love Wins LGBT, as well as the Holland Nazarene District, and the New England District also advocated for watering down the statement.

If you did not know, the Holland Nazarene District is basically in rebellion against the denomination, and is already blessing same sex unions. So for them to applaud the Human Sexuality statement is not an indicator of anything good.  And what makes it worse, the Board of General Superintendents knows of their rebellion, and even received additional evidence from me, with an email from a pastor admitting blessing same sex unions, and admitting that the Generals are aware. Read the article here.
What have the General Superintendents done about that? Absolutely nothing.  You may want to ask them the next time you run into them or speak with them. Why is the Holland District being allowed to pervert the word of God openly?

There were other concerns that came out of his response as well. When another question was asked about the Confucius Center at Northwest Nazarene University and why was it allowed to be there, Dr. Busic said:

 “I had not heard about it… but let me say this about all our universities in the USA. I believe 100%, every single one of our Presidents, including NBC and NTS, every one of them, are completely committed to our Nazarene identity.”

My question to Dr. Busic, who is a former President of the Nazarene Theological Seminary, would be: “Dr. Frank Thomas has been scheduled to speak at the seminary in September. Dr. Thomas is a pastor who advocates for Critical Race Theory ideas; it is documented that he is a racist; he is an open advocate of abortion, which goes against Nazarene doctrine; and he supports the LGBT movement. Dr. Busic, is it appropriate that NTS is allowing this man who is against so many biblical principles to speak, and would you do the same if you were still president?

Also, what does Dr. Busic think about a theologian (Dr. Willie James Jennings) who spoke at NTS this year? Would he have invited Jennings? Dr. Jennings is an open advocate for same sex marriage.  (https://reformednazarene.wordpress.com/2022/02/25/nazarene-theological-seminary-welcomes-gay-marriage-promoter/

So either Dr. Busic is unaware of the many problems at the Nazarene universities and seminaries, or he feels that there is absolutely nothing wrong with allowing such advocates of unbiblical principles to speak at Nazarene colleges.  In any case, he is incorrect by stating “every single one of our presidents… are all committed to our Nazarene identity.” There is too much evidence to contradict that statement. And I’m afraid every single General Superintendent would have answered in a similar way.

There are other statements he made that will cause some concern regarding the issue of clarity in how things are addressed. If there was ever a time for full clarity in such areas, now is the time for clarity from those who are charged by the Nazarene manual to be the guardians of biblical truth in the denomination.

My heart goes out to all Nazarenes who are still active in the denomination. My heart goes out to pastors who are sincerely seeking answers and support from the leaders. I was a lifelong Nazarene; my father and father-in-law were true holiness preachers. There are far fewer now, and many of the pastors coming out of Dr. Busic’s former seminary are the very ones who are destroying the church, and yet the people are waiting for someone to step up.

I feel for those who are fighting for biblical truth to be upheld, but to me it seems like a losing battle. But when you have leadership at the highest levels speaking as politicians, rather than giving clear and strong answers that would provide clarity, all you get is a mess that leads into further apostasy.

(This article will be sent to the General Superintendents)

–

Related articles:

A New General Superintendent: Cause For Celebration, Or Concern?

Nazarene Theological Seminary Welcomes Gay-Marriage Promoter

https://reformednazarene.wordpress.com/2017/05/30/sodom-and-gomorrah-and-the-church-of-the-nazarene-in-holland-is-there-any-difference/

Nazarene Theological Seminary Welcomes Gay-Marriage Promoter

How Dan Boone Hides His False Teaching In Plain Sight

Dan Boone, President of Trevecca Nazarene University, cannot be trusted with disseminating biblical truth. In a recent post on his blog, he suggests three basic areas in which, as he says, “ the church today needs a greater degree of trust.”  I believe he strikes out in all three areas, especially his final point.

I would point out that since I am well familiar with his writings in the past ten years or so, I note again a taste of arrogance, as well as a subtle disdain for those Christians who dare to stick to a biblical principle and not deviate from it.  He can’t help but look down on those kooky “fundamentalists”, and he always uses that term in a derogatory, less than “charitable” manner, as he expressed in his book, “A Charitable Discourse.”

Here are his three points:

“An older generation needs to trust the missional spirit of a younger generation as they seek to reach their changing world.”

“The church needs to trust the Christian college to do its thought-work in a complex world.”

In these first two points, the answer should be a resounding no! Trust must come conditionally, especially in these days.  The younger generation has been poisoned with so much nonsense and unbiblical ideas, especially from people like Dan Boone, that there is no way they should be trusted without scrutiny based on God’s word.  And the same goes even more for trusting a Christian college. All Christian colleges need to be held up to the light of scripture, and be held accountable for their actions and what they teach.  There is no such thing anymore as trusting Christian colleges without subjecting them to accountability.  And I’m sure Mr. Boone does not wish to have Trevecca held accountable, which it should always be.

Finally, point number three, which is the most concerning to me:

If we are to have “in essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberty; in all things, charity,” the million dollar question is—what is essential and what is nonessential?

I would suggest the essential things include a saving experience in which the Spirit of God bears witness with our spirit that we are the sons and daughters of God. I would also include the core of Christian faith as expressed in the Apostles’ Creed and the stated doctrines of the church. (For me this is my denomination’s sixteen Articles of Faith rooted in historic Methodist and Anglican belief.)

My nonessentials list is a lot longer—creation theory, political party, hawk or dove, role of government, method of befriending the homosexually oriented, church music preference, preferred eschatology, favorite authors, method of baptism, church architecture, budget priorities, whether there is one or three authors/chronologies of Isaiah, interpretation of Gen. 1, the death penalty, the right of a woman to preach (although this comes close to being an essential for me), social drinking, reading from the early church fathers, yoga, blessing pets in the church sanctuary, speaking in tongues, Catholic theology, real wine or Welch’s at Communion, casual or coat-and-tie on Sunday, Left Behind opinion, national health care, and so on.

The main mistake Dr. Boone makes in listing a bunch of items as “non-essential”, is that he does not realize that everything that God says in His word, or everything that Christ commands us to do, is essential! Note that he “suggests” some non-essentials, which is good, because he apparently does not know for sure what is essential or non-essential.

The only measuring stick as to what is essential or non-essential is Holy Scripture! And you certainly cannot suggest that something that is clearly taught in scripture cannot be an essential. And the fact that he cannot be specific about what he believes about each of these items makes his list irrelevant, and no one can reasonably agree or disagree with these points, unless he specifically says what he believes about them!

Hiding His False Beliefs Behind Words

What Dr. Boones does is hide his false teachings behind words.

He hides his belief in evolution: For example, his “non-essential” of creation theory.  He wants to shut off discussion of his false belief in evolution, and his rejection of the literal account of creation. This very idea alone makes him a false teacher, since belief in evolution rejects the creation account and the actual existence of Adam and Eve. He makes God a liar by rejecting God’s simple story of creation.

He hides his love of contemplative mysticism and works written by heretics: therefore, his non-essentials of “reading from the early church fathers”, and “yoga’.  This is a reflection of his affinity for contemplative mysticism and Eastern practices such as yoga, practicing the silence, and prayer labyrinths, which he finds nothing wrong with. There are many “early church fathers” who are outright heretics, so no Christian ought to agree that this is non-essential, unless Dr. Boone specifies which ones he is talking about.  And yoga is certainly not a non-essential, because it is based on Eastern mystical practices, and is actually a religious practice which Christians should avoid.  Mr. Boone is well known for his liking of Thomas Merton, and prayer labyrinths, and trips to Merton’s Abby of Gethsemani.  So certainly, he would want these subjects to be non-essentials.

He hides his ecumenicalism: his non-essential of Catholic theology is also disturbing. Dr. Boone is a good example of the many Nazarenes who have compromised biblical truth and who consider Roman Catholic teaching to be okay, and therefore we can get along with them. Catholic theology is so full of heresy, and yet Boone and other misguided Nazarene leaders today are leading people to accepting Catholic theology as no big deal. This is shameful, and this is part of what is destroying the Nazarene denomination-thanks to Dan Boone and many others.

In all these other items, it all is based on what the context is. Even a subject as “speaking in tongues” is all determined by what scripture teaches about it! The matter of “the right of a woman to preach” can also be answered by scripture. Dan Boone does not seem to realize the essential of “obey the word of God and all it teaches.”

The bottom line is, Dan Boone wants all Christians to agree on the things he suggested as being essential, which I agree are essential- but he wants to then leave open anything else as being non-essential. Including his own heretical neliefs.

You can read the entire article he wrote, and perhaps leave your thoughts with him. Since he has advocated a “charitable discourse” in the past, he ought to let everyone give their honest opinion of his writing.

http://www.danboone.me/trust/?fbclid=IwAR1FgLJATwYK7klKsuwbrb5OKt1Y2G6w9fvO4cBNdTKURDcGcFDKVFhzoJw