Politicians or Preachers?

[Download MP3]

Dr. Brown interacts with Bishop T. D. Jakes’ recent appearance on CNN, gives his commentary on some important, recent news, and share his thoughts before leaving for Israel. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.

Hour 1:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Yes, there is much cultural deterioration; so now is not the time for compromise but for clarity. Let it be sounded from the pulpits around the world.

Hour 2:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: As I leave for Israel right after this show, I am reminded that the prophets were put to death not for pleasing the crowds but for speaking the truth.


This week, we’re offering two important resources from Dr. Brown, his brand new book, Can You Be Gay and Christian?, and his DVD debate with gay activist (and professing born-again Christian) Harry Knox. You can get both of these key resources for the super low price of just $25! Postage Paid! That’s a $15 savings!
Order Online!

Other Resources:

Pastor Joel Osteen’s Stance on Homosexuality

An Inauguration to Make Orwell Proud (and Other World News)

What Happens When You Tamper with the Family; and Evander Holyfield Meets Big Brother

  1. Where in the New Testament is the church commanded to set the moral agenda for the culture?

    And, please don’t say, “It’s in the general tone of the bible.” (or similar as Dr. Brown told me to justify participation in the so-called “Pro-Life” movement.)

    Considering the damage that the “culture wars” have done to the church, we need a clear and direct commandment before we mix politics and church.

  2. Greg,

    What damage has the culture war done to the Church? What do you think it means for us to be called to be salt and light? What does it mean to lose your savour?

  3. My concern about this program is that Bro. Mike identified Bishop Jake’s compromising statements (and rightfully so), yet he himself has been guilty of the same fault.

    I speak in terms of Mike’s refusal to call out the compromise of Jerry Faldwell’s Seminary and Billy Grahams’s Ministries for taking Mormonism off their roles as a cult, and even the greater evil of having a Mormon speak at their seminary.

    Mike intentionally did not address these issues because of his political motives. Righteousness bears no political offiliation; hence, the ability to see so clearly at one’s compromise while ignoring his own only helps to weaken the fabric of the message throughout.

    So, while we cry out against the sins of homosexuality and abortion, let’s not pretend that open racism doesn’t exist or is not as grevious in the eyes of G-d as well. This extends from the Rancher in Las Vegas, to the (Former) owner of the Clippers, to the N.E. police commissioner.

    Mike does no honest justice on this issue at all. Whenever the race issue comes up, all he does is open up the phone lines to for people to call in and offer their opinions. He has not had a program on racism in America from which he has called out the offenders while openly denouncing this American sin that is bred in the womb of humanism.

  4. Do I believe the culture war is over?

    If every state decides to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals, the war has only begun.

    Politicians use people. They like to be in control. They love power, position, authority, and the glory or praise of men. They love the spotlight. They love to be seen. The want to feel important.

    But people are not just something to be used. They are not to be someone’s puppet on strings.

    So what’s a preacher? I think of Noah who is called a preacher of righteousness.

    Politicians preach themselves or their agenda. They are interested in their own kingdom.

    We are to be active in furthering God’s kingdom.
    I suppose that means the politicians will hate us.

  5. Greg wrote:
    “Where in the New Testament is the church commanded to set the moral agenda for the culture?”

    Well let me see, is there any history that might tell us what happens when they don’t?

    Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Russia, Mao’s China. Greg you would be fine with the whole church embracing your liberal agenda. You just do not like conservatives. So if the Government decided that it was going to start killing people with a southern accent, would it be a moral agenda for the believers to try to influence the government to change the law against southern accents? Is it a moral agenda to stand for laws that prohibit shop lifting? Theft and murder are part of morality, in case you haven’t noticed.

    You are not being honest with yourself and others. You just do not want any sexual thing to be wrong or for there to be consequences for unprotected sex…thus you support abortion. The only morality that you do not want the “Church” take a stand on are sex related matters. You are just a product of the sexual revolution. How have you come to think of morality as only about sex.

    And why did you only ask for a “command” and only from the “New Testament”? And how come only a command about setting the moral agenda. You once again are showing that you think that culture is the final authority. You worship it. It is your god. You are also not accepting the whole Bible as true. You are also trying to relegate everything other than a direct specific command to irrelevancy.

    The culture wars have not damaged the church. The culture has infiltrated the church. The church has caved in to immorality. It is Babylon and is about to be judged. It is time to come out. It is time for you to wake up Greg.

    P.S. I answered your question on the other thread that you so conveniently bowed out from. I won’t tell anybody that you actually do go back and read the comments. You can just lay low until you take another pot shot and then disappear when someone wants to do real battle with you. Oh well it is the nature of liberals to not play fair. So here is the link:


  6. Where ever in history do you have a society that has gone from moral abandonment back to restraint? I see more wisdom accepting whats happened and abandon as much as possible being part of the dominant culture. You really think TV is ever gonna go back to The Waltons?

    Surely there is a time when exposure to the lost has negative effects on the body. I mean we arent talking about those that are struggling but rather a society that wants to make every impulse normal and to spread that message. Isnt now the time to “judge”?

  7. The Orlando Sentinel/JEFF KUNERTH/ 08/02/2013

    This was at the time of the Trayvon Incident in Florida:

    A:” when you only worship with people who look like you, vote like you and think like you affects your sensibilities on what that other person is experiencing. ”

    Q: Why do we have so few multiracial churches?

    A: It’s not just about racism when it comes to Sunday worship. It’s about cultural expressions, about dress styles, about your sensibility of hierarchy, structure and order. As long as we neutralize each other to the point we would negate the fact that we have these distinctions, then what passes for integration in churches will be one culture dominating another culture…Integration is at its best when you allow me to be me, and I allow you to be you and we choose of our own volition to walk together.”

    Now its rather obvious Mr TD Jakes wanders but look at his thoughts on race anf the church and now ask how his unwillingness to stand for anything on the homosexual topic is terribly consistent.

  8. Sadly I think Mr TD Jakes is at war with the church–liberation theology path– and fears losing the support of those that have pledged support for all things race and now want his support with all things homosexual. Consider his argument about abortion not being as important as racism in the church:

    “Go ahead and preach against abortion,…but when you get through preaching against abortion, give us some milk up in here, so that we can feed the babies you told us we ought to have.” TD Jakes The Cincinnati Post 6/13/03

  9. Sheila wrote:

    >>What damage has the culture war done to the Church?

    read this:

    >>Millennials Leave Their Churches Over Science, Lesbian & Gay Issues


    >>What do you think it means for us to be called to be salt and light?

    Salt makes food more delightful.
    Light makes things more colorful and less scary.

    Who thinks that conservative Christianity plays that role in society?

  10. Doug,

    >>So you are against leftist politicians like Obama trying to set the moral agenda too?

    Is Obama making it illegal for you to marry a woman?
    Is he denying your wife the right to carry the fetus to term?

    THAT would be the equivalent of what Christian conservatives are doing.

    But liberals believe in the American tradition value of freedom and liberta.

    So does Obama. You should too.

  11. Bo,

    You sure used-up a lot of words to say, “There is no verse.”

    By the way, both Germany and Russia were Christian countries before they went off the rails.

    Of course, you are going to say they “They were not the right kind of church”

    But, I have yet to learn, from you, what is the right kind of church!

  12. “He has not had a program on racism in America from which he has called out the offenders while openly denouncing this American sin that is bred in the womb of humanism.”

    Racism existed a long time before the rise of humanism. If it weren’t for the rise of secular humanism, skepticism and atheism Christians would still be the intolerant, bloodthirsty masses, still hunting heretics, burning books and witches and anyone who dared not believe in their absurd religion. We humanists are the ones who have given Christianity its modern morals and ethics and have taught the Christians how to behave. You’re welcome.

  13. “What do you think it means for us to be called to be salt and light?”

    > That’s just what you call yourselves. Most unbelievers just call you delusional.

  14. Ray,

    Thank you for actually trying to answer my question. I mean that sincerely. Mostly, here, people judge me, not honestly discuss with me.

    One wonders — if they can’t even discuss with a brother in the Lord, how well do they witness with non-Christians?

    You gave the verses: Matthew 5:9-16

    Those are some of my favorite verses in the whole bible.

    Matthew uses the term “Kingdom of Heaven” dozens of times and this theses verses are in the context of the Beatitudes.

    It seems pretty clear to me that this pasage is about personal and Kingdom of Heaven values — not Christians using the government to enforce its moral code on non-believers.

    And, that is what the “culture wars” are all about for Christian conservatives.

    They don’t just want to _model_ Godly, heterosexual marriage. They want to make it _illegal_ to be gay married.

    When I lived in Muslim countries, I saw how morally corrupting it was for a government to use the power of government to enforce one religions moral codes on a population. Or worse, one _wing_ of that religion.

    Yet, despite the obvious and stark moral failure of the Islamicists to enforce morality, American “Christianists” want to emulate their failed strategy.

  15. Van,

    >>> Most unbelievers just call you delusional.

    No. It’s mostly just the Atheist Supremacists who do that kind of sophomoric name calling.

    Most unbelievers use the term properly.

  16. Magnus,

    >>Where ever in history do you have a society that has gone from moral abandonment back to restraint?

    You mean, except western society?

    Rome was liberal-progressive.
    The Middle ages were conservative-retrained.
    Then came the Renaissance which was liberal-progressive.

    You learn that in just about every Western Civ class.

    And, there seems to be a rising agreement that we are moving back to a time of conservatism and restraint as witnessed by the rise of fundamentalism in all the major world world religions.

  17. Got it Greg. So you do believe the NT church should set the moral agenda and your original post was totally hypocritical. You just think we should be pro-death and anti-marriage.

  18. Greg,

    You wrote:
    “You sure used-up a lot of words to say, “There is no verse.””

    Actually I just didn’t take a lot of time to post Bible verses, because you do not accept the Bible on its own terms. So it would have been an exercise in futility as usual. Your premise that there must be a direct command somewhere saying the exact opposite of your view to prove you false is a false premise. There is no need to answer a false premise. We have shown you over and over what that the Bible condemns all homosex, but you just change the rules and say that it only is speaking of that ancient cultures version of homosex and not our current version. You would do the same with this topic, even if we produced verse after verse. You serve the god of culture and will come up with some stupid from of justification to remain loyal to it.

  19. Sheila wrote:
    “The thing is is that we’ve changed the Biblical definition of what sin is.”

    Kind of like how we changed the Biblical definition of what a marriage is, or the Biblical definition of adultery?

  20. Great Sheila,

    So we can agree then that Biblical marriage isn’t necessarily one man and one woman, just as Biblical adultery isn’t necessarily extramarital relations?

  21. Do you mean in having more than one wife? They were however male and female. Don’t know except that God doesn’t tell them to take the extra wife/wives. They did it of their own accord.

    Jesus reiterates the initial design of marriage and how “Moses” suffered them to get divorced but that at the beginning it was not so.

  22. Sheila,

    Yes, I mean having more than one wife. And yes it’s quite true they were male and female, but I’m not sure that statement says a whole lot anymore. It seems the damage to the supposedly static institution of marriage has already been done…and in the very Bible no less.

    And saying they did it of their own accord misrepresents the actual picture, if we are being honest and objective about what the Bible teaches. The Bible doesn’t just describe people who happened to engage in polygamy of their own. It regulates the practice. Indeed, God even regulates it in the very same section in which male same-sex relations is condemned in Leviticus (albeit of the incestuous variety).

  23. Also, with respect to Jesus reiterating the initial design of marriage, I’m not sure what you’re referring to. The only thing Jesus reiterates is what Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24 say already, and not as a basis against polygamy but a basis against divorce. Moreover, if Gen 1:27,2:24 weren’t seen as a basis against polygamy back in OT times then why exactly would this be the case with Jesus?

  24. Sheila,

    Yes, we do know. Herod had 9 wives, and some Jews still practiced it, despite it being largely frowned upon in the Greco-Roman world of Jesus’ time.

  25. You cant really be surprised at this since TD Jakes had Oprah at his Megafest last summer. He has also done those Lifeclasses with her where he agreed with her that there is more than one way to God. KEEP HIM AND OPRAH IN PRAYER. SMH

  26. Magnus said,
    “Consider his argument about abortion not being as important as racism in the church:”

    “Go ahead and preach against abortion,…but when you get through preaching against abortion, give us some milk up in here, so that we can feed the babies you told us we ought to have.” TD Jakes The Cincinnati Post 6/13/03

    Where in the world did you get that TD Jakes thinks abortion is not as important as racism from this statement? Also, the above statement makes sense, and I don’t see a problem with it at all. To fight for those in the womb and then ignore them once they are out is altogether unchristian. Second, what makes you think that racism is “less” important than abortion? Racism is hatred, and hatred is as murder in the eyes of G-d, of which He has placed them on the same level.

    Now, I am not a fan of Pastor Jakes because his only message focuses on social issues, wherein I never hear Christ exalted and/or centered in his sermons. While he has not said anything terribly wrong, I do believe that he has compromised his message. With this said, his so called compromising views on abortion and homosexuality are no different than Bro. Mike’s compromise on Mormonism, for the sake of politics.

    Mike slammed Senator Obama for his ties with Rev. Wright and his Black Liberation Theology, but failed address Senator Romney’s ties with cultic religion of Mormonism at all, stating that he didn’t think religion was an issue. Hypocrisy at its highest! What was the reason for Mike’s obvious double standard, was it race, or his political bias that has blinded him on righteousness and fair and honest judgment? Could it be that he failed to condemn Billy Graham Ministry’s blatant compromise only because he, just a few months later, fellowshipped with them on a missions trip?

    The point is, while he has played the arm chair quarterback with TD Jakes’ sound bites interview in declaring how much he would stand for the truth, he miserably failed when he was on trial to speak the truth and stand for righteousness concerning Mormon theology that is set forth to turn G-d’s people away from the truth, in seducing them to follow another Jesus, another spirit, and another gospel. Let’s not point a finger at one man’s compromise while we ignore the compromise of another’s.

  27. Van said,
    “Racism existed a long time before the rise of humanism.”

    Racism is rooted in humanism. The love of self is the god of humanism, self gratification, the happiness of man, doing what is right in your own eyes. It runs in complete opposition of Christianity, In loving your neighbor as yourself.

    “Thank you” for being so faithful in coming back to this forum time and time again. You are being drawn, so there is still hope for you.

  28. The apostle Paul wrote this to the Church:

    Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. (I Cor 7:2)

    I don’t see anything plural in that. To suggest anything plural from that, would be to be adding something to scripture which the scripture isn’t saying.

    Q. Is there anything plural Jesus spoke of when he spoke of a man being married?

  29. Doug,

    >Got it Greg. So you do believe the NT church should set the moral agenda and your original post was totally hypocritical. You just think we should be pro-death and anti-marriage.

    How is denying marriages to a gays “pro-marriage.”?

    That simply defies logic. I am so pro-marriage that I want it for gay people too.

    We had this same debate before — when the Christian conservative “pro-marriage” crowd demanded that interracial couples should not marry. It re-defines marriage! You were wrong then and you are wrong now.

  30. Bo,

    >> Actually I just didn’t take a lot of time to post Bible verses, because you do not accept the Bible on its own terms.

    Oh, please! You didn’t post a verse because there is no such verse.

    The “culture wars” are political, not biblical.

  31. James,

    >> It seems the damage to the supposedly static institution of marriage has already been done…and in the very Bible no less.

    Only low-information Christian cry, “Don’t re-define marriage!”

    Informed Christians know that marriage has been re-defined many times — even in the bible.

    One doesn’t even need to read history — it’s right there in the bible.

    People here condemn me to hell for saying this — but I came to my pro-gay position from reading the bible with a conservative hermeneutic.

  32. Brian, Please read Hypergrace I just started this book and find it does answer some of your views.

  33. jon,

    I’m sure there is something that could be called “hypergrace” but we Evangelicals suffer much more from “hypograce.”

  34. Greg,

    You wrote,
    “People here condemn me to hell for saying this — but I came to my pro-gay position from reading the bible with a conservative hermeneutic.”

    Sick…you are very sick…spiritually speaking. You are deluded…spiritually deluded. You wouldn’t know a conservative hermeneutic if it grabbed you by the eye lashes and forced your eyes open. It is time to wake up Greg…way past time.

    Romans 1
    24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
    25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
    26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
    27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
    29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
    30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
    31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
    32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

    You take pleasure in “them that do them.” You are asking for the judgment of YHWH. Ask and you will receive.

  35. jon,

    Thanks for the recommendation. I do have the book, but I havent read it yet, as my schedule will not permit me to do so at this time. However, please post those answers from the book if you are able.


  36. Ever notice how destructive the gay agenda is to human reason? This is why the apostle Paul wrote in the gospel about the moral road down as he did in the first part of Romans. The same effects are happening today. (more proof that God indeed exists and that his word is true, for those who wish to not believe him)

    If homosexuality is right in someone’s eyes, what in their view is wrong? The simple answer to that is so many things are wrong in their view, and many right things are wrong in their view, because they refused the truth from scripture and everything in their view became unclear.

    Their vision became that way because that’s what happens when men refuse the truth from scripture.

    Refusing the truth from scripture is rejecting the armor of God, and without the armor of God on, the adversary can move in on them with his agenda and begin using them for his destructive purposes.

    Then those who have yielded themselves over to the Devil, will be used by him against the Church of God, and this is what’s happening today.

    The cross is the answer. Coming to repentance because of the work of Christ on the cross, gives God legal authority to move against the darkness on their behalf, and give them the light from the light of his living Word.

    Yes, Jesus is the answer.

  37. Brian, Just read the first chapter and he does tell a great story about his father and forgiveness. The book is not written to condemn any particular preacher he mentions that he is not the Christian enforcer but with much love and grace examines positions for some of the preachers that I personally have some questions about. I think you will find it done not only tastefully, but with the love of a man of faith.

    God bless, do not work too hard!

  38. Greg, When Christians put into law an ordinance which prohibits giving marriage licenses to homosexual “unions”, they are not forcing morality on anyone by using the government.

    Such an idea is hypocrisy.

    Where in the law does it say that a man must get married to one woman?

    We have no such law. If there was such a law, then marriage would be forced upon people using the government. But we don’t have that.

    Can you see that far?

  39. True or False?

    When the gay agenda uses the government to make homosexual unions equal to marriage in every legal and licensable way, they force immorality on others.

    I say this is true because the man who works for the state and knows it’s wrong to bless an evil thing such as gay “marriage” by giving them a certificate, or a paper that says in effect that it’s the same as marriage as God has ordained, is going contrary to the will of God, because he knows he should not be used for evil. Yet, the law requires him to not discriminate or “discern” the difference. He no longer has legal authority to say, “No I will not issue you a marriage license to do that sort of thing with it, because it is wrong. By it’s very nature, homosexuality is sin, and I wish to not be used to condone it, or give it license as a matter of conscience, which God has ordained to help guide me in righteousness. I wish to not be corrupted and used for your evil intent and purposes.”

    Also, what will be baker do when he is asked to put two grooms on a cake? “Sorry, I don’t do that sort of work for anybody, no matter of their sexual preference, religion, race, or creed.”?

    Will the law back him up and do so without hypocrisy?

    The Devil is behind promoting all this leaven, and it is destructive. It’s just as Jesus taught. It has a tendency to go throughout the whole thing, and it is damaging to the whole.

    It isn’t as if “I’m not hurting anybody.”, which has been often heard.

  40. Greg you crack me up. You totally avoided the point of my previous response. You were calling out conservative Christians for being too political but you are just as political or maybe more. That is hypocrisy. I see this all the time with left wing Christians. Complain the conservative church is political but be twice as political as the people you criticize.

    Banning interracial marriage is unbiblical from my perspective but I fail to see how you could argue against it if marriage is changeable. Why couldn’t they keep a definition of marriage that worked for their society?

    Changing the definition of marriage is anti-marriage. It will lead us on the path confusion until marriage is totally irrelevant. This has happened in some European countries.

    I also think we have had this conversation before and you gave no answers then. Also Greg the Bible never redefined marriage quit making things up.

Comments are closed.