The president of Exodus International, Alan Chambers, has just announced in an extended apology to homosexuals, that he is closing Exodus International, the ministry for those who experience unwanted same-sex attraction, and from its ashes he is creating a new organization titled “Reduce Fear.” The “fear” to which the name refers emanates from theologically orthodox churches that teach the whole counsel of God, including the pesky parts about God’s condemnation of homosexual acts. Apparently, Chambers doesn’t want to scare those who affirm homosexuality with bothersome biblical truths about eternity.

This doesn’t come as a surprise to those who have been closely watching Chambers’ slow abandonment of orthodoxy and his concomitant embrace of the “gay Christian” movement, which promotes the heresy that Christians may affirm a homosexual identity and remain in homosexual relationships.

A year ago in  an interview with The Atlantic, Chambers articulated a tidbit of his exegetically questionable theology:

Atlantic: Does that mean a person living a gay lifestyle won’t go to hell, as long as he or she accepts Jesus Christ as personal savior?

Chambers: My personal belief is that everyone has the opportunity to know Christ, and that while behavior matters, those things don’t interrupt someone’s relationship with Christ. But that’s a touchy issue in the conservative group I run with. (emphasis added)

For those who remain uncertain about Chambers’ deviation from the path of theological soundness, please watch this video of his appearance at a Gay Christian Network event.

Chambers’ transition to heresy has been accompanied by dizzying changes to Exodus’ Board of Directors over the past two years. Here’s a glimpse into that protean board.

Feb. 2011 board included Dennis Jernigan, Ron Dennis, and Jeff Winter
By June 2011 board had added John Warren
By Oct. 2011 board had lost Ron Dennis and Jeff Winter and added Mike Goeke and Patrick Peyton
By Dec. 2011 board had added Kathy Koch
By June 2012 board had lost Dennis Jernigan
By August 2012 board had lost Mike Goeke and Patrick Payton
By March 2013 board had added Bob Ragan
By April 2013 board had lost Bob Ragan
By June 2013 board had added Tony Moore

The troubling constant on the board is board chairman Rev. Clark Whitten about whose theology Dr. Robert A. Gagnon has warned here  and here.

More recently Dr. Gagnon wrote this about Chambers’ transformation:

I’m not suggesting that the Exodus leadership wants believers to experience grace without discipleship, dying to one’s self, and letting Christ live in them. I am saying, though, that they assure self-professed believers (falsely) that the nature of grace is such that believers can have one without the other….

Alan Chambers now calls “evangelical” a “dirty word” that he no longer applies to Exodus or to himself (“Guests in an Ever Changing Culture—Letter from Alan Chambers March 2013”). He complains that Evangelicalism is too “black and white” and he assures us that God is not “black and white,” which presumably means that God’s aim is to shade the light into gray. The story of Christ is now the story of Gray breaking into the darkness.

Evangelicalism, Mr. Chambers complains, gives too much attention to “right and wrong” and requires one to “take a stand” on moral issues. Chambers cries: “Gone are the days of evangelizing through scare tactics, moral legislation, and church discipline.” So instead the Exodus leadership prefers to assure self-professed Christians who engage in unrepentant homosexual practice that they are going to heaven irrespective of whether they bring their life into line with a confession of Christ’s lordship. The Exodus leadership refuses to take a stand against “gay marriage” even as it takes public policy stances on issues that homosexual activists support. And the Exodus leadership categorically rejects church discipline despite the fact that it is commanded by Jesus and Paul.

Earlier this month Alan Chambers even went so far as to insert secretly the e-mail address of Jeremy Hooper, an abrasive homosexual activist, into the middle of a private group email thread containing a number of pro-family leaders (including moi). This led to a number of misrepresentations online by homosexual activist sites and even Salon.com. This deceitful alignment with a person who maligns those who believe in a male-female foundation for marriage is not exactly a model for Christian conduct, certainly not for someone leading what is supposed to be a Christian ministry.

…

In an Exodus post a couple of weeks ago Leslie Chambers affirmed her husband’s severance of the transformed life from genuine saving faith, saying that while obedience to God is preferred it is not “required”. Neither Leslie nor Alan appears to realize that a necessary byproduct of true faith is a life lived for God.

As Dr. Gagnon mentioned, Chambers’ dissolution of Exodus was accompanied by his serious ethical lapse regarding an email group. A couple of months ago, a well-known and well-respected conservative author sent an email to a group of conservatives. Chambers responded to the entire group, angry that a person or persons in this large group have allegedly used terms in some context that Chambers finds offensive. He never identified the person or persons who used the term/s, nor did he identify the context.

One of the email recipients noticed that Chambers had surreptitiously added homosexual activist Jeremy Hooper, who has a blog titled Good As You (G.A.Y.). When confronted about the stealth addition of Hooper, Alan defensively admitted that he had, indeed, done so in the hope that Hooper would report on the email exchange and that the “good and decent people” on the list would be shamed into publicly exposing and rebuking others whom they may not know for offenses Chambers would not reveal.

I asked Chambers the following questions, which he refused to answer:

• Who are the people who deserve public rebuking and what specifically did they do to deserve to be rebuked?
• If he thought there was something “unrighteous” and “evil” (Chambers’ terms) going on, why didn’t he expose it himself and publicly rebuke the person or persons whom he believed deserved public rebuking?
• How did he justify betraying a trust and trying to publicly shame “good and decent” people for what he perceived as their failure to rebuke unnamed people for using words he viewed as inappropriate in unidentified contexts—actions, by the way, that he had not done?

No ministry should ever tell those who experience same-sex attraction or any other sin inclination that there’s a human way to eradicate all sinful impulses. If Exodus staff conveyed that unbiblical idea to those to whom they ministered, they erred.

Conversely no Christian should be told that God will not free them from same-sex attraction or that they will never experience heterosexual attraction, for those too are erroneous ideas.

Scripture tells us that God will free us from bondage to sin, but that full sanctification does not come in this life. We are promised that in this life, God will give us the power to resist our sinful impulses, which for most of us persist at least in attenuating strength.

God does not, however, give us permission to affirm our sinful impulses or act upon them. We are to pursue lives of holiness—which will never include homosexual relationships.

Since Exodus has abandoned orthodoxy, it is a good thing that it is shuttering its doors.  Fortunately, a far better ministry exists to fill a desperate need: Restored Hope Network

When we read about prior heresies, they seem like distant historical curiosities, but right now we are eyewitnesses to the birth and growth of a heresy in our lifetime. Let’s hope and pray that it’s soon relegated to the dustbin of heresies.

Click HERE TO SUPPORT Illinois Family Institute.

Andrew Marin, the controversial founder and president of the Marin Foundation, is speaking next week at Park Community Church in Chicago. This is surprising in that from its website Park Community appears to be a theologically orthodox church.

Marin promotes himself as a bridge-builder between the Christian community and the homosexual community and has written a book on the subject titled Love is an Orientation. It is not Marin’s desire to reach the unsaved that is troubling. We should all seek to bring the good news of Christ’s redemptive work to those who identify as homosexual. Rather, it is his approach and his theology that generate controversy and trouble many Christians.

One of the serious problems with Marin is that when asked directly about his biblical beliefs regarding homosexuality, he is troublingly evasive. In addition, his book has received a devastating critique from Dr. Robert A. Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics. 

If Park Community Church is a theologically orthodox church rather than a church that embraces “emergent” theology, they will likely be troubled by both Marin’s theology and obfuscation. Many Christians, including orthodox theologians, have serious concerns about Marin’s theology on a number of issues, most particularly homosexuality. Dr. Gagnon, arguably the preeminent biblical scholar on this topic, has written a two-part critique of Marin’s poor exegesis and his heretical theological positions, which every church that is considering working with Marin should read thoroughly:

http://robgagnon.net/articles/homosexmarinloveisorientation.pdf

http://robgagnon.net/articles/homosexmarinsreaction.pdf

Several years ago, it appeared that Marin was either trying to conceal his orthodox positions from his friends who identify as homosexual or that he was trying to conceal his unorthodox theological views from those who hold orthodox biblical views. Increasingly it appears that he is moving toward open heresy in line with “emergent” thinkers like Brian McClaren. 

My intent is not to indict Marin personally but rather to warn theologically orthodox church leaders about his deceitful, dangerous, and heretical beliefs. Marin’s purported desire to build bridges relies on rejecting inconvenient Scripture and obfuscating such rejection when talking to orthodox Christians. 

There is only one true theology regarding homosexuality. Orthodox theologians throughout the history of the church and today hold one singular view on what Scripture teaches on homosexuality. It wasn’t until the late 20th Century that any theologians could be found who reject the historical interpretation of Scripture on this issue. 

Many Christians share a concern that false prophets are coming into our churches in sheep’s clothing. Christian leaders should substitute any other serious sexual sin for homosexuality and consider whether Mr. Marin’s theology and approach are biblically justified. We all come to Christ as sinners in need of God’s grace and mercy, but the church has no business affirming or even appearing to affirm believers in their embrace of sin as central to their identies. And no Christian has the right when directly asked what the Bible teaches about homosexuality to answer ambiguously or equivocally. 

Some chastise critics of Marin’s work, like Dr. Gagnon, spuriously claiming that criticizing Marin’s work is tantamount to unbiblical judging. They and Marin himself claim that such criticism hurts Marin’s feelings. In so claiming, they seem to be doing what the secular culture does, which is conflate two distinct meanings of judgment. Dr. Gagnon has critiqued Marin’s exegesis, which is not only legitimate but essential. Mr. Marin has written a book and promotes his ideas all over the country on radio programs and in churches. The church must judge, that is to say, evaluate, the soundness and truth of his propositions. Marin’s feelings are far less important than biblical truth. 

No one likes to be confronted with his or her error, but imagine if this strange definition of judgment were to be applied consistently. How would Christians be alerted to the false prophets or heresies in the church? Should Christian scholars be prohibited from critiquing the work of, for example, John Shelby Spong because doing so would constitute unbiblical judgment and hurt his feelings? Although Marin may find criticism of the ideas he publicly promotes to be unpleasant, such criticism cannot reasonably be called unloving. Determining what constitutes a loving act depends on first knowing what is true.

Marin should publicly answer these questions:

• Is homosexual practice a sin?
• Can followers of Christ embrace and affirm a homosexual identity and be involved in homosexual relationships?
• At what point after a self-identifying homosexual becomes a Christian should his or her church practice biblical church discipline regarding his or her homosexual practice?

A writer for the Moody Church Venue blog wrote this following Marin’s 2010 visit: “[Andy] said, ‘We have to earn the right to communicate the truth first.’” 

What other sins do Christians have to “earn the right” to identify as sins? Do we have to “earn the right” to identify porn use, adultery, fornication, incest, drunkenness, or gossip as sins?  And how do we earn the right to communicate biblical truth? 

Marin is fond of citing this quote from Billy Graham: “It is the Holy Spirit’s job to convict, God’s job to judge, and it’s my job to love.” It is, indeed, the Holy Spirit’s job to convict, but it is the job of Christians, particularly Christian leaders, to teach what God’s Word says in its entirety, which includes teaching about what constitutes sinful behavior. Articulating what the Bible teaches about homosexuality no more constitutes unscriptural judging than does articulating what the Bible teaches about idolatry, blasphemy, or adultery. And sharing what God’s Word says about morality is a loving act. 

When Marin spoke at the Venue, he referred to the fight for civil rights for blacks. I wonder, did Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. believe that Christians have to “earn the right” to communicate the truth about the sinfulness of racism? Did he ever say that before Christians condemn racism, racists must be converted? Why should the serious sin of homosexuality be treated so differently than other sins? 

Everyone should be welcome in our churches, but welcoming sinners—which all of us are—must never involve affirming sin. God loves us despite our sins, and through the work of the Holy Spirit, God mercifully grants believers freedom from bondage to sin. It is the task of the church to teach the entirety of Scripture, and it is the privilege and duty of Christians to come alongside one another as we daily strive to deny ourselves as we live for Christ.

“And calling the crowd to him with his disciples, he said to them, ‘If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it’” (Mark 8: 34-35).

“Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness.  For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace” (Rom. 6:12-14).

“And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (Gal. 5:24).

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (II Cor. 5:17).

For more on Marin, watch these two short videos: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOQQPC_SsEs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2L-B1mHIeI