A Gracious Exit Plan

Next weekend the Special Session of the General Conference will begin for the United Methodist Church. There has been a lot said about the One Church Plan, the Traditional Plan, and the Connectional Conference plan. But there has not been much discussion about what happens in the event of a church split.

Currently, the Book of Discipline, the lawbook for the denomination, has something called the Trust Clause. You may be wondering what that means exactly. Briefly, the trust clause says that even though the local church holds the deed to the property the church is on and the building itself, it is held in trust for the United Methodist Church Denomination. Now, what does that mean? Basically, if a church leaves the denomination, the denomination keeps the property. The local church loses everything.

I am sure that there were good intentions when this practice began, but today it seems that it could be used as a weapon against local churches. This is especially true in a time when the church is poised to make a decision that could say we no longer believe the Bible at all on human sexuality, marriage, and the qualifications of ordination. For that matter, it is a vote that says the church may no longer believe what the Bible says about sin in general.

There have been petitions added to either suspend or do away with, the trust clause during this time of uncertainty on the way forward. There are rumors that this type of plan will be the only thing to pass during the General Conference next week.

In my opinion, this needs to happen regardless of the voted plan. The United Methodist Church is increasingly abandoning the teachings of Scripture and I am sure there are probably many local churches that would pull out if they could without the legal implications of the trust clause.

Praying For the Special General Conference

It is no secret that I have been very outspoken regarding the General Conference that will take place in less than two weeks for the United Methodist Church. I firmly believe that there is only one biblical viewpoint on this issue. Currently, the United Methodist Church has it correct, homosexuality is not compatible with Christianity. It is sinful. This makes the General Conference of utmost importance.

Christians everywhere, not just United Methodists, should be in prayer during this time as one of the larger denominations in the United States goes through this battle. It is a battle. This is not a political disagreement, though that is part of it, it is a spiritual war.

Satan is trying to get a grip on the church. He would like nothing more. It is a crucial point. But it is not a moment to compromise. It is a moment to stand firm on the truth of Scripture and not give in to the desires of the culture. That is what we are called to do as Christians, stand on the Word of God.

Unity is the buzzword of the day, but real unity only comes when Scripture guides our every action. We must pray for the delegates. We must pray that the higher leadership of the United Methodist Church returns to a Scriptural viewpoint and standing. We must pray for those who are wrestling with what to do if the denomination leaves the biblical viewpoint.

It is a trying time. May we look to the Lord for guidance and an understanding of His Word, and the courage to follow it.

A Response To: “Be Careful Using The Bible”

An article titled “Be Careful Using The Bible” was published this week on the United Methodist news site. The article is troublesome as it shows a clear lack of exegetical and hermeneutical understanding that is so rampant in liberal circles. Moreover, it shows how an improper understanding of the Bible and improper Biblical interpretation can lead to justifying sinful actions.

The article was written by Rev. James R. McCormick who is a retired United Methodist pastor from Cumming, Georgia. His abuse of Scripture in the commentary is deplorable and this article is a response to the misuse and apparent misunderstanding of Scripture.

The premise of the article is this:


In studying the Bible, it is necessary to realize that often God is cited as supporting whatever values are normative at that time in history. Those are “timely” standards — standards valued for a time — but not necessarily “timeless” standards that are applicable for all time and all circumstances.

This, of course, is true for some things found in Scripture such as the civil laws given to Israel to govern Israel. That was for a specific time and specific people. However, this principle is not true for the moral standards that we find in Scripture. Moral standards are timeless.

We see the error of this thinking in the examples that are given. The first being Abraham and Hagar.


Remember that the Bible affirms Abraham having sexual relations with Hagar, Sarah’s maid, in order to produce his first son, Ishmael. Only later did Sarah produce Isaac, through whom Jews trace their ancestry.

I must ask Rev. McCormick, where in Scripture does it affirm Abraham having relations with Hagar? Where does it state that this is ok? It does not say anything of the sort. This was Sarah’s idea, not the Lord’s plan. In fact, we see in Scripture the opposite of affirmation for this act, we see the consequences of the sin as it tears the family apart and causes division. In no way was this a moral standard for that time to take multiple wives. In fact, this actually affirms the moral standard we see throughout Scripture that marriage is for one man and one woman.

Rev. McCormick tries the same tactic with the 1,000 wives of Solomon. Again I must ask, where is this affirmed in Scripture? Where is this sanctioned? It is not.

Continue reading

Unity For The Sake of Unity?

In the ongoing drama leading up to the United Methodist Church’s Special Session of the General Conference next month one argument that we have seen over and over is that the church needs to stay unified above all else. But is that biblical? I would argue that it is not.

The United Methodist Church has a major problem. That is that they have forsaken the authority of Scripture. They are trying a different way. They succumb to culture and the ideas of men rather than the ideas of God. If they were not, there would not be the issue that they currently find themselves in.

Nevertheless, we are told that the church needs to find a way to unify under what they agree upon. But Scripture disagrees. Scripture tells us in several places that when people come up with unbiblical doctrine we are to have no partnership with them (Ephesians 5:7). Paul says to Titus the following:

As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him.

Titus 3:10 English Standard Version

Have nothing more to do with him. Does this sound like unity above all else to you? No, it doesn’t. That’s because we are not to let false doctrine and unbiblical teaching infiltrate the church. That is why the Traditional Plan needs to pass for the United Methodist Church.

The cry here is that the progressives will leave the church if the Traditional Plan passes. To that, I say, “AMEN!” Let them leave! The church needs to undergo purification and these false teachers and proponents of sin need to be moved out of the church.

Now I want to be very clear, I am not saying we should not witness to the LGBTQ crowd. But they are not to have a place in the church. That is not even to say they cannot attend church. But under no circumstance should their sin be welcomed, celebrated, and advocated for, it should be dealt with as any other sin.

LGBTQ persons who are practicing and not trying to mortify that sin are not to be considered for the clergy according to Scripture. They are not to be married according to Scripture. Churches, Districts, Conferences, and Bishops that seek to do those things have no place in the church universal and need to be dealt with.

What Changed? Homosexuality No Longer A Sin?

As we look forward to next month’s Special General Conference of the United Methodist Church regarding human sexuality, I have one simple question, what changed? If the current doctrine of the church, which should be based on Scripture and Scripture alone, says that homosexuality is incompatible with Christianity, then what changed?

What in Scripture has changed to make this debate come to the floor? What Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic term changed its definition so that the interpretation of thousands of years is suddenly incorrect? What has changed that has made the church realize that all of a sudden LGBTQ is compatible with Christianity?

Of course, the answer is that nothing has changed. If the church allows LGBTQ pastors and marriages it is not because something has changed with God’s view on the matter. It is not because Scripture was wrongly interpreted. It is not because Scripture has changed. It is not because the Holy Spirit is leading that way.

If the United Methodist Church embraces the LGBTQ lifestyle it is because they have departed from God’s Word. It is as simple as that. The church would no longer be following God. The church would no longer be pointed toward Christ Jesus. Instead, it would be pointed and aligned toward Satan and the work of fallen mankind.

The only thing the church can do next month is to adopt the Traditional Plan. There is no other option that is compatible with God’s Word. Not the One Church Plan, not the Connectional Conference Plan. Only the Traditional Plan upholds the biblical view on the matter.

A Way Forward: The Traditional Plan

Out of the three possible plans for a way forward, there is one that the Council of Bishops do not want to see pass, The Traditional Plan. The Traditional plan would almost guarantee a split in the United Methodist Church. Namely, churches that want to support the sin of the LGBTQ lifestyle will leave.  Of course, some, myself included, would see this as a purification process for the church.

Simply put, the Traditional Plan (TP) would keep the current position of the United Methodist Church stating that homosexuality is not compatible with Christianity and that there is to be no LGBTQ clergy or weddings within the church. The TP would go further to add strict enforcement to the doctrine as well. Every annual conference will have to certify that they will uphold the doctrine or else they will be removed from the United Methodist Church. This includes clergy and bishops as well.

The TP upholds biblical standards with regard to homosexuality and LGBTQ positions. They are sinful and, as such, are not compatible with the Christian life or the Church. Romans 1 makes very clear how God views the LGBTQ lifestyle:


For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.


Romans 1:26-27 ESV

The passions of the LGBTQ movement are dishonorable. They are unnatural. They are against God’s created order and they are sin.

Because of this truth, the Traditional Plan is the only biblical plan that is on the table for the 2019 Special General Conference and is the plan that I endorse.

A Way Forward: The One (Unbiblical) Church Plan

The Council of Bishops of the United Methodist Church has decided to advocate for an option called The One Church Plan. They argue that the plan allows the best way forward with minimal impact to the United Methodist Church overall. The following is my take on the One Church Plan after careful study of the commission’s report.

First, the One Church Plan, and the entire crisis itself, is based on a false pretense that the church has somehow been responsible for harming the LGBT community. This simply is not so. Those who practice an LGBT lifestyle harm themselves by going against God’s Word and the created order. Paul makes clear in Romans that the LGBT lifestyle is not natural. It is debased and dishonoring to God. Moreover, it is sinful.

Second, the theological proofing and basis for the OCP is not biblical.

Continue reading

They Call It: A Way Forward

Next month the United Methodist Church General Conference will meet and make major decisions on the beliefs of the church regarding homosexuality and transgender issues.

In 2016 the regularly scheduled General Conference, which meets every four years, decided to punt the issue and form the Commission on a Way Forward.  They also set a date for a special General Conference to meet in St. Louis, Missouri on February 23-26, 2019. You can read the commission’s full report by download it at the United Methodist Website.

The Commission has put forth three options for the General Conference to vote on. The Traditionalist Plan, The One Church Plan, and The Connectional Conference Plan. All three plans have their issues and it is yet to be seen how this will impact the denomination as a whole.

Last week, I published an article that stated this is a debate that should never have happened. But it is happening. Over the next couple of weeks, I will look at all three plans and try to explain the ins and outs of each plan as we look to the General Conference next month.

Banning the Bible

In the State of California, a bill has passed the General Assembly banning the sale of any goods or service that would seek to correct the behaviors related to homosexuality or transgenderism. This is the latest attack from the LGBTQ lobby against anyone who would dare to stand in their way. Remember, “tolerance” is the word of the day as long as you hold to their worldview and their worldview alone. But as Bible-believing Christians we cannot hold to that worldview. It goes directly in the face of Scripture.

Continue reading