Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on Sep 23, 2016 in Articles, Blog | 0 comments



Our mail is sometimes discouraging. People who follow TXC often tell us with sadness, that their children have walked away from the faith. This is not unusual.  Studies show that a large percentage of Christian Millennials, after the first year in college, abandon the faith of their youth. There are many reasons: the radical thinking of college professors; the cultural marginalizing of orthodox faith making belief “uncool”; mere experientialism typical of modern Evangelicalism no longer has appeal since they can find “religious experiences” in all kinds of alternative spiritual options available today.

Our culture is careening out of control. We in our lawless “good intentions” – ever seeking our godless utopian world – have left out of the social equation the notion of a God-fearing father and mother, personal responsibility, accountability, morality, the Laws of Nature and the fear and reverence of Almighty God the Creator of Heaven and earth. To put it simply and to visualize our current state, we, in our reprobate lawless bent and narcissistic mindset, have sought to put out the culture’s ravishing social fires with ideological gasoline, as the prophet Isaiah said: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isa. 5:20). Is that not simple enough for all to understand? Yet to convey such common sense reality  today is to be called insensitive, bigoted, extreme, radical and a host of other slanderous names in an attempt to silence truth and hold onto subjective, godless and lawless delusions (Rom. 1:18-32).

Our rising generation desperately needs to be trained in cultural apologetics, that is, the theological analysis of contemporary culture using terminology that speaks to this new, de-christianized situation. For most of us, the “Christian experience” of our parents is not enough. We need to see how Scripture addresses the whole of reality when faced with a radically pagan culture, like our own has become.

In cultural apologetics, Christianity’s teaching about the nature of the world and the being of God is not merely a sentimental or spiritual preference. Christianity is inextricably tied to a cosmology that fits the deep nature of existence. The apostle Paul takes us to ground-zero with his statement that there only two ways to exist, either worshiping creation or worshiping the Creator (Rom 1:25).

I called the worship of creation Oneism because worshiping creation implies that everything is divine. If that is true, then essentially everything is the same and, ultimately, there are no distinctions. This is the essence of paganism and polytheism, but also of atheism. You could call this worldview a homocosmology.  (All Is One)

If, on the other hand, you worship the Creator, you have understood that there are two essential realities in existence—the reality of God the Creator and the reality of everything else, which is fundamentally different from God because it is created. You could call this worldview a heterocosmology. (All Is Two)

I came to cultural apologetics through culture shock. I needed to understand what had happened to the culture. For 18 years I taught theology in secular “godless” France. When I returned, I wrote my first book in English: The Gnostic Empire Strikes Back: An Old Heresy for the New Age (1992), arguing that the New Age Movement was not a weird sect but a major apostasy that would change the very soul of the culture. This once Western “Christian” culture has returned to ancient but new-look “religious paganism,” going from a form of Twoism towards radical Oneism.

In biblical terminology, the equivalent of Twoism is “holiness,” not to be confused with “wholeness.”  Behind these two English words are two unrelated Greek words—hagios and holos. In the Bible, the Greek term hagios translates the Hebrew term, qodesh from the verb, qod, “to divide.”[1] Things that are holy, like “holy ground” (Ex 3:5) or the Sabbath day, are separate, set apart. God “blessed the seventh day and made it holy” (Gen 2:3). To “sanctify” something is to dedicate that thing to God’s possession “as something exclusively belonging to him.”[2] This term is supremely applied to God as separate from his creation.

On the other hand, in Greek, holos is translated as “whole” or [w]holistic, from which we get “catholic.” “Kat’ holos” means “according to the whole, or “universal.” Holos thus means “whole,” “complete,” “full.” Nothing is set apart, as in “holiness.” Everything is included.

In this sense they are opposite in meaning. Behind these two words, wholly and holy, so close in sound, is a world of difference, indeed, two antithetical worldviews, Oneism and Twoism. They just sound similar but the etymology that ties them together is false.

By holistic, modern spirituality means what Jung taught about the joining of the opposites. An ex-Jungian academic correctly shows that Jungian “holism” constitutes a rejection of the moral order. He states: “For Jung good and evil evolved into two equal, balanced, cosmic principles that belong together in one overarching synthesis.” The pagan joining of the opposites is what progressive spiritualists mean by “wholeness,” the holistic joining of the dark and the light side.

How interesting that via these different terms of “holy” and “holism” we come back to our starting point, the fact of only two religions, Oneism or Twoism. Oneism is a form of spiritual holism where everything is included—including God. Twoism is the very essence of holiness, where things are not confused but have their special, God-ordained distinct places. The two terms could not be more different.

As we look for a meaningful response to our contemporary world that explains everything from a Oneist perspective, we have a compelling cosmology of holiness, that is, the biblical vision of an ordered, God-created cosmos. As I suggested, this is the biblical way of speaking about cultural apologetics. We will examine three related topics:

1. a holy God;

2. A holy universe;

3. a holy people

To be Continued…

[1] Stauffer, Hagios, 89.

[2] Stauffer,  Hagios, 91.

Read More

Posted by on Sep 7, 2016 in Articles, Blog | 14 comments

Utopia is Burning: Burning Man Festival 2016

Utopia is Burning: Burning Man Festival 2016

When his ship, The Beagle, docked in Southern Australia in 1831 on the way to the Galapagos Islands, Charles Darwin, one of the leading intellectual skeptics of his day, witnessed naked Aboriginal natives dancing themselves into delirium all night long. In his diary, Darwin wrote that he found this animistic display “a most rude, barbarous scene.”

Times have changed. This year 70,000 people have thronged to the annual countercultural Burning Man Festival in the Nevada desert. Leading hi-tech worthies like Google founders Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and chairman Eric Schmidt, and Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, along with celebrity visitors like Katy Perry (31), socialite Paris Hilton (35), and British actress and model Cara Delevingne (24) now find such “rude, barbarous scene[s]” totally normal and perfectly cool. These contemporary definers of popular culture have thrown off even the outward standards of public decency dear to Charles Darwin. Burning Man sets the agenda for popular culture. In acts of shameless self-expression, they abandon all inhibition and wander around naked in the desert doing ecstasy and acid, visiting the anonymous-sex-orgy dome (open 24/7), joining in fire dancing, yoga, and meditation. No one is allowed a hint of judgmentalism.

Indeed, the right to define one’s self-identity has become the ultimate moral touchstone. A sophisticated and clean version of the Burning Man philosophy came from Supreme Court Justice Kennedy: each person has “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” Such a definition gives every individual the right to declare: “I am whatever I say I am and you must accept my assertion and behave accordingly, otherwise you are a bigot who is oppressing me.” Past ethical norms are obsolete. The new norms are on display at Burning Man in vivid Technicolor.

This temporary city in the desert is equipped with an airport, radio stations, daily newspapers, a postal service, an overnight courier service, taxicabs, a drive-in movie theater, bars, clubs, yoga classes, hair salons, pancake houses, and – no government. It claims to be an “annual utopian experiment in temporary community, dedicated to radical self-expression and radical self-reliance.”

It is founded on a decidedly Oneist ideology. The founder of Burning Man, Larry Harvey, a self-described atheist, says: “I do not believe in a supreme being but I believe that being is supreme.” It is like the title of a progressive spiritual book, by Gabrielle Bernstein, Nature Has Your Back. Burning Man seeks to create its own mythology since, as one spokesman says: “All mythologies were created by humans…no god rushed down from wherever to ‘give’ a human some special message. Therefore, what really matters at Burning Man is imagination.” The meaning of Burning Man seems to be impermanence (as the 70 foot “Man” being burned at the end of the week seems to suggest), a principle deeply entwined with Buddhism. Impermanence becomes for burners an annual reminder of the transience of life, the eternal return of Osiris. Jewish/Buddhist “gay” rabbi, Jay Michaelson, an avid burner, gives meaning to the burning of the “Man” when he states: “if religion creates boundaries, mysticism and spirituality efface them.” All boundaries, all binaries must be burned up.

Is such a utopian life possible except for one week in the desert? Alas, it is not even possible there. This year in “Black Rock City” a sad event happened. A band of burners attacked “White Ocean,” an upscale camp for the very rich who fly in on private jets, stay in luxurious air-conditioned RVs and are served elegant cuisine by full-time employees. In this utopia, the unthinkable happened. In the words of one luxury camper, “A band of hooligans raided our camp, stole from us, pulled and sliced all of our electrical lines leaving us with no refrigeration and wasting our food and glued our trailer doors shut, vandalized most of our camping infrastructure….This is evil. This should not happen at Burning Man…This is supposed to be about love, happiness, sharing, giving and appreciating.”

As the burners celebrate liberating impermanence, real sinful humans need help to sustain life. What can a Oneist world do with evil except live with it? If Nature is “supreme” or “has your back,” how trustworthy is it? Perhaps, after all, we need “a god rushing down” to “give us a special message”; a God who tells us that only Jesus can overcome evil by bearing the consequences of our evil on his back. That unique, perfectly just, loving man, is the real “burning man,” who was consumed by the fiery judgment against our sin, but was raised by the justifying, life-giving power of God the loving Creator of Nature. In him, we overcome evil and gain eternal life.

Read More

Posted by on Aug 30, 2016 in Articles, Blog | 0 comments

Why I Am Not a Gay Christian

Why I Am Not a Gay Christian

We hear so much about the importance of love these days, and we providentially called our conference “The Two Loves” which we now understand to mean the Love of God and love of humanity, in that order. This really is the guiding thesis of this conference. The most loving response to same-sex attracted people is not to undertake actions based upon sentimental feelings of concern (itself important), which is the guiding principle of “Gay Christianity,” but to seek to show to them the person of God and thus who we are as human beings. Jesus had already, in a way, claimed this title we are using. In his response to the Pharisees he spoke of two loves: You shall love the Lord your God, the… first commandment… the second: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. (Matt. 22:37-39).

In other words, the ultimate issue facing us as creatures in God’s universe, is first and foremost, how we love God and second, in this order, how we love our fellow human beings. These two commandments have much to say about the subject of our conference, “Gay Christianity.” If we wish to respect Scripture as God’s revelation of himself, both the distinct human and divine identities must be preserved because they are integrally related, but also must be preserved the correct order of priority. God must be first because we human beings depend entirely on the being of God. Only then can we truly understand ourselves. I only have two points: the Being of God and the Being of humanity.

New Flyer OD Print July

The Two Loves: A Biblical Response to “Gay Christianity”

Friday, October 7, 2016

8:15 AM – 9:00 AM Hamilton/Jones Introductions, Conference Set-up
9:00 AM – 10:00 AM Michael Brown A Defense of “Gay Christianity” and its Ramifications
10:00 AM – 11:00 AM Peter Jones Theological Devastation of “Gay “Christianity
11:00 AM – 11:15 AM Break
11:15 AM – 12:00 AM Brown and Jones Q&A
12:00 PM – 2:00 PM Lunch
2:00 PM – 3:00 PM Rosaria Butterfield Our Identity
3:00 PM – 3:30 PM Staff Speakers Ministry Presentation
3:30 PM – 5:00 PM Panel Open Discussion and Q&A
5:00 PM – 7:00 PM Dinner
7:00 PM – 8:00 PM Gabe Fluhrer Gay Christianity and the Doctrine of Scripture

Saturday, October 8, 2016

9:00 AM – 10:00 AM Stephen Black Testimonies of Hope and Change in the Gospel
10:00 AM – 11:00 AM Michael Brown Biblical Answers to “Gay Christian” Theology
11:00 AM – 11:15 AM Break
11:15 AM – 12:00 PM Panel Q&A
12:00 PM – 2:00 PM Lunch
2:00 PM – 3:00 PM Panel Jim Weidenaar and Allan Edwards
3:00 PM – 4:00 PM Gabe Fluhrer Ministering to those within the LGBTQ Community
4:00 PM – 5:00 PM Panel Open Discussion and Q&A
5:00 PM – 7:00 PM Dinner
7:00 PM – 7:20PM Peter Jones Twoist Sexuality
8:20 PM – 9:00 PM Panel Final Comments, Prayer and Closing


Sunday, October 9, 2016: Worship Service at New Life Presbyterian Church

Read More

Posted by on Aug 24, 2016 in Articles, Blog | 2 comments

JAHWEH Your Average Pagan Divinity?

JAHWEH Your Average Pagan Divinity?

Those in the newspaper business do what it takes to sell papers, even if that means claiming that the God of the Bible is “transgender,” like the pagan gods of old. Such is the theory of a New York Times article by Rabbi Mark Sameth, “Is God Transgender?” (Aug 12, 2016).

Sameth claims that the Hebrew Bible, “when read in its original language, offers a highly elastic view of gender….In Genesis 3:12, Eve is referred to as ‘he.’ In Genesis 9:21, after the flood, Noah repairs to ‘her’ tent. Genesis 1:27 refers to Adam as ‘them.’”

These minor textual oddities are easily explained by Hebrew experts like Robert Gagnon and Michael Brown. In addition, many languages do not employ gender signifiers in a sexual manner. In French, for instance, a car and a bottle are feminine, yet no one accuses the French of gender fluidity, a culture known for its expression—vive la différence.

Sameth’s thesis becomes even more speculative concerning the name of God. He employs a deeply imaginative argument, speculating that the name YHWH, “Yahweh,” could have been read backwards, spelling “He/She.” Gagnon shows that biblical scholars are generally in agreement that YHWH is derived from the third-person singular of the verb “to be” (hayah), meaning either “he is” or “he will be.” Michael Brown, a Hebrew scholar, argues that “there is not a stitch of evidence to support this.” He adds: “…of the more than 6,000 times that the name YHWH occurs, it never occurs with a feminine adjective or verbal form.”

According to Gagnon, there is “No historical evidence that supports Sameth’s reading—only his own sex ideology.” Sameth’s “sex ideology” is his attempt to justify the actions of a male cousin, among the first in America to undergo sex-reassignment surgery.

But his motivation is more than sentimental: It is theological. While he is “saddened whenever religious arguments are brought in to defend social prejudices,” he does not hesitate to use the “social” example of his cousin to justify his own religious arguments. He maintains that in the ancient world, well-expressed gender fluidity was the mark of a civilized person. Such a person was considered more “godlike.” In Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, the gods were thought of as gender-fluid, and human beings were considered reflections of the gods.

He then speculates that “the Israelites took the transgender trope from their surrounding cultures and wove it into their own sacred scripture.” Here Sameth defends his theological commitment to polytheistic interfaith and to his “god-within” theology rather than to his own Scriptures, the Old Testament, which are full of warnings against imitating the sexual practices of the nations. Leviticus 18:22 states: “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.”  In Deuteronomy 22:5 God commands that: “A woman must not put on man’s apparel, nor shall a man wear woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is abhorrent to the LORD your God.” These are sexual abominations, about which the Leviticus text states: “Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled…And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you” (Lev. 18:23–28).

Rabbi Sameth’s theology is definitely open to “these ways.” In his synagogue he leads Jewish meditation and is open to other spiritual teachings, “Jews, non-Jews, Buddhists, non-Buddhists, Juddhists, non-Juddhists!” His openness to various genders reflects his openness to various pagan religions. Poly-sexualism is an embodiment of polytheism.

Who would have thought that this ancient idolatry would mark a civilized 21st century citizenry and religion of the modern West?  As Michael Brown rightly says: “[Sameth’s] attempt to use the Hebrew Scriptures to support transgender activism is utterly misguided, fatally flawed, and unworthy of serious consideration.”

The Bible nowhere presents God as a sexual being. Sexuality is a human characteristic, designed by God for procreation but also as an embodiment of the differences knit into the created order (land/sea; human/animal; light/dark; male/female, etc.). Just as God is a transcendent Creator, distinct from creation, so creation also reflects distinction—supremely seen in the male/female distinction.

We are again faced with only two options: worship of creation or worship of the Creator, who is blessed forever. The former is the Oneist Lie, the latter is the Twoist Truth (Romans 1:25). I doubt you could sell newspapers today with that line from the Apostle Paul, but at the end of history, God’s salvation picture of male and female will find its fulfillment as the Bride of Christ forever delights in the inexhaustible love of her heavenly husband. Vive la différence!




Read More

Posted by on Aug 19, 2016 in Articles, Blog | 0 comments

Human Identity in Crisis

Human Identity in Crisis

A few weeks ago Rush Limbaugh announced that the fastest growing crime in the West is identity theft. It is true that we hear a lot about illegal hacking in the news cycle, as individuals, businesses and even nations have their deepest secrets exposed. But the real crime is the theft of the source of human dignity, namely, the Creator. The removal of God from cultural consciousness, eliminates the true source of human identity. According to a recent study, 91% of adults agree that “the best way to find yourself is by looking within yourself” and 86% say that “to be fulfilled in life, you should pursue the things you desire the most.””[1]  The radicals smell imminent victory. Progressive professor Mark Tushnet, of Harvard Law School declares: “The culture wars are over; they lost, we won….taking a hard line (“You lost, live with it”) is better than trying to accommodate the losers.”[2] There will be no accommodations or exceptions.

In once “Christian” Scotland an evangelical youth group from Texas offered a free concert in a shopping center. National newspapers compared this to Nazi or ISIS indoctrination.[3] In these conditions, we are losing the Christian identity of our Western culture but we are also losing our individual identity.

In these new conditions, liberated from God, people believe they can create their own identity—males who think they are female and females who believe they are males, or a 58-year old husband and father who now is sure he is a six-year-old girl. True human identity now depends on how we individually define ourselves sexually.[4] And just recently Hugh Hefner, creator of Playboy, confirms this, declaring the victory of the sexual revolution that he helped begin in the 1960s.[5]

At truthxchange we have often focused on the rise of homosexuality and the presumed right of same-sex attracted people, some within the church, to self-identify as “gay” and to practice homosexual sex legally, thereby denying the image of God as male and female. (See our conference, October 7-9, 2016). However, this is not the only problem. One of the major causes of identity loss is the massive fixation on pornography—even in the Church!

The statistics for Christian men between 18 and 30 years old are particularly striking: 77 percent look at pornography at least monthly; 36 percent view pornography on a daily basis; 32 percent admit being addicted to pornography (and another 12 percent think they may be).[6] In 2016, the Barna Research Group discovered that nearly 40% of “practicing Christians who actively seek out porn”  feel comfortable with how much porn they use. Only “1/3 of practicing Christian porn users” say they “feel a sense of guilt when they use porn.” In the culture at large the results on teenage sexting are equally disconcerting for the rising generation. “Teens and young adults [are] coming of age in a culture…that encourages and rewards the pornographic impulse.” The rising new identity is pornographic.

A sensitive article evaluating the Barna report makes some valid points:

  1. Pornography isn’t going away anytime soon;
  2. Our moral trajectory is convoluted. “Teens and young adults surveyed said it was worse to not recycle (56%) than to look at pornography (32%)”;
  3. Porn destroys sex and marriage. “[P]eople’s perspective on the purpose of sex is moving away from “an expression of intimacy between two people who love each other” and toward “self-expression and personal fulfillment…”;
  4. Deception is deadly. Barna found that “if you use porn often, you’re more likely to feel okay about it.”

If porn destroys marriages, what will happen to the general moral tenor of our society? The young people of today will become the public officials of tomorrow, brainwashed into serving their desires and fantasies and unable to make sound judgments.

The Bride of Christ must be above reproach. She must offer wise and serious marital counseling for those caught up in this perversion, and intentionally teach her children from their earliest age to avoid this satanic trap.

Things have changed. The “Four Spiritual Laws” or “Evangelism Explosion” no longer work for many. People are losing their identity. They long for human rights and personal dignity, but these things only come from God the Creator, whom they reject. The Gospel is still the answer, which they unknowingly long to hear. The God who created us in His image restores our fallen identity by the death of His Son, who stood in our place to bear our sin and has become, by grace, our new identity.


[1] The Barna Research Group’s 2016 survey, The Porn Phenomenon.

[2] Laurie Higgins, “Harvard Law Professor to Conservatives: You’re Losers, Live With It,” BarbWire, (June 30, 2016).


[4] See a very useful article on this report by Gareth Kell:


[6] A 2014 survey, Proven Men Ministries.

Read More

Posted by on Aug 4, 2016 in Articles, Blog | 2 comments

Drag Queen in the Nave

Drag Queen in the Nave

Why would anyone except a professional organist take the magazine The American Organist? A friend gave me a recent issue of this highly specialized publication. The stunning picture on the front cover got my attention. The foreground features a glorious pipe organ with five key boards, endless foot pedals and a hundred stops. In the background is the grandiose nave and the vaulted ceiling of the historic Fourth Presbyterian Church of Chicago.

To me, the church organ is a symbol of high Western Christian culture, made famous by the soaring oratorios of Johann Sebastian Bach and the stirring grandeur of George Frederic Handel’s Messiah. Incidentally, on the portal over the St. George’s Church in Eisenach, Germany, where Bach was baptized, is the inscription of the hymn of the Reformation: “Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott”—“A Mighty Fortress Is Our God”—one of Luther’s striking contributions to Western Christian music, and wonderfully sung accompanied by an organ. Indeed, in the same issue, a long article on “Luther’s Theology of Music” declares with conviction that Luther believed music was a gift from God, the ultimate Artist and Musician. This full front-page color picture of a massive church organ, in its own way, places us in touch with the heart of Western Christianity.

Strangely juxtaposed on the previous page, before the article on Luther, is an interview with a “gay” church organist and director of church music at a Presbyterian church in Portland, one Marshall Cuffe, who is photographed in a sexually-provocative picture as a performing “gay drag queen.” He is pleased that “a lot of church members attend my shows,” and he helpfully adds that he was inspired by another drag-queen organist’s “high-heeled organ shoes.”

What does the juxtaposition of these two articles in The American Organist tell us? No judgment is given because, apparently, no judgment is appropriate. Moral pushback would be immoral bigotry and hate. Once again, shocked readers are intimidated into silence, as the LGBTQ movement continues to establish its “ethical” system as normative for once-Christian Western culture. There is nothing in Western history that explains this deviance. The magazine speaks of “God’s view of music” but can no longer speak of God’s view of sexuality. Today the all-important notion of self-defining personal liberty has become the ultimate moral value, silencing all other opinions, on pain of punishment. This is the contemporary inviolable “right,” as Justice Kennedy, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey said—“the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” This is the new meaning of the Constitution, the new declaration of independence—independence from our Creator, the true source of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Opposing that pure source is fraught with peril.

Indeed it seems like nothing will stop this movement, if the four-day conference Equality Forum for LGBTQ issues is any indication. Held in conjunction with the Democratic National Convention in late July 2016, the pan-sexual Equality Forum enthusiastically developed a plan for the total integration and normalization of perverse sexual practice in American. It traced a fourfold goal:

  1. passing the draconian Equality Act that will punish all forms of “discrimination”;
  2.  engaging in a program of litigation to deny religious freedom and to promote unlimited sexual indulgence;
  3. defeating state and local laws that have sought to defend marriage;
  4. partnering with Black Lives Matter to create an unstoppable pseudo social justice movement.

As German president Merkel just said about Islamic terrorism, “taboos of civilization are being broken.”

The attempt by rebellious creatures to create their own reality will ultimately fail, of course. For fallible, limited, ignorant creatures to define their own identity is an act of unthinkable foolishness and hubris that can only end in utter failure. Alas, our surviving gothic cathedrals and organs now utter pagan heresies and cannot revive the hearts of men. We need a mighty fortress back in our lives—the presence and knowledge of Almighty God, whose pre-existing Being gave us all life, meaning and dignity. This spiritual fortress may still be evoked by the stirring sounds of a cathedral pipe organ, but is truly built only on the foundation found in the pages of Holy Scripture and in the truth of the Gospel. As Luther said so well at the time of the Reformation:

Did we in our own strength confide, our striving would be losing;
Were not the right Man on our side, the Man of God’s own choosing.
Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is He;
Lord Sabaoth, His Name, from age to age the same,
And He must win the battle!

Read More