‘A “Pastor” Who Hates Purity’ (2018)

See the source image

Where do they get these fly-by-night “pastors”? I can’t even imagine what they’re teaching in the seminaries these days.

A ‘Pastor’ Who Hates Purity

This one likes to melt down purity rings. She thinks purity is a bad thing. Someone handed her a certificate that says that she’s a pastor. Whoever did that ought to be whipped around the block.

I shoulda known, all those years ago now, when “Reverend Jill,” the new pastor of the church that I was raised in, warned me to beware of Bibliolatry–the error of taking the Bible seriously. She also thought it was nice when couples committing adultery together found time to go to church. “Welcoming and affirming”

 

6 comments on “‘A “Pastor” Who Hates Purity’ (2018)

  1. Talk about a false church and a false religion. Distance one’s self from the Holy Bible and you distance yourself from God. As Dante said in “The Divine Comedy,” the end of not believing in God is Hell.

  2. One problem is that ordination means whatever the ordaining body wants it to mean. There is a church which will ordain anyone that requests it; their point being that we would all be ministers (servants) of God.

    I come from the viewpoint of a nondenominational Christian. While there are some denominations I find much closer to the Bible than others, I believe that each Christian should endeavor to learn as much as possible about the Bible and then make application in their own lives. I take in what experienced Christians have to say, but ultimately, I use the Bible as the sole standard by which I measure their advice.

    The Bible is clear with regard to sexual morality. From the beginning, mankind was made to be monogamous and Jesus referred back to Genesis when answering a question about divorce. Sadly, in our fallen world, this can be a challenge to live out, but the standard is in place and we know God’s will on the matter.

    Even within the last 24 hours, a Christian friend and I were talking about how risky marriage has become in these days of no-fault divorce. If a man of means gets married in our day, there is significant risk that said man could end up in court and lose much, if not all of his wealth. For example, someone could run up substantial debt, file for divorce, and half of the debt would automatically fall upon the other party, who might not even know that said debt existed. I speak from experience.

    This person’s take on “sexual reformation” reduces to a personal opinion, and the opinion of the cleric in question is contrary to scripture. Throughout history, mankind has worshipped sex on a number of occasions. That is wrong, because our worship should not be directed to fleshly things. Sex worship does not ennoble its practitioners in any way. It’s important, vital, that we maintain control of our desires. This is for the good of society in general. People should feel safe from sexual predation, and especially our youth.

    Right now, a case against Prince Andrew is playing out in the news. Allegedly, he was sexually involved with a girl, 17 years of age. There is a photo showing Prince Andrew with that girl, and Ghislaine Maxwell is visible in the background. This lends credibility to the claim, considering that Maxwell has been convicted of sex trafficking, including one count involving a minor. So here is a man that apparently allowed himself to become involved in illegal sexual practices involving at least one minor. His association with Maxwell and Epstein doesn’t improve his credibility, one iota. What a terrible folly this is.

    God made us the way He made us, and the gift or reproduction is sacred. It is something to be revered and respected, not something to be exploited and used irresponsibly. Anyone purporting to be a spiritual leader, should promote the Creator’s view of these matters. In the case of this pastor, it seems to me that she is promoting sex worship, which does not honor the Creator, but instead worships the flesh.

    1. I can’t help thinking a lot of church members would be pretty upset if they knew what their denomination’s seminaries were teaching.

    2. From what I understand, the first thing they teach in some seminaries is that the Bible is not the word of God. I would leave, immediately thereafter, but obviously, many do not.

    3. When someone decides that they can choose what parts of the Bible to take seriously, essentially they are studying their own opinions, and not the Bible. If you give that even a moment’s thought, it becomes obvious that we either have to accept the Bible as the word of God in its entirety, or we might as well write our own “holy book” and fill it with our personal opinions.

      I believe that the Bible is Divinely inspired and, as such, I believe that the God who inspired the Bible is capable of protecting the integrity of the scriptures. There are many books which contain sound advice of human origin. And some of these are quite good, but they are still the product of human wisdom. Perhaps more importantly, books of human wisdom may include sound advice on some subjects, but may also dispense bad advice on other subjects. If we believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, we can depend upon the entire book to be filled with teachings that will be beneficial.

      Frankly, I don’t see the point in attending a seminary unless one believes that they are going there to study Divine wisdom. Anything less is a waste of time. Of all the lessons I’ve learned in life, what stands out is that my Creator’s will is always paramount and that deviation from His will always spells trouble. If a person purporting to be a spiritual leader chooses their own standards of right and wrong, they are merely dispensing human opinions and advice. I can get that anywhere.

Leave a Reply