Bishop Edir Macedo: Jesus Never Talked about Homosexuality

By Julio Severo

Protestant denominations are divided, especially in the United States, between the liberal stance, prevalent among mainline Protestant churches, supporting the gay agenda and the conservative stance, prevalent among evangelical, Pentecostal and charismatic churches, countering this predatory agenda.

The division is so intense that recently when Rev. Eugene Peterson, creator of “The Message” Bible, tried to support homosexual “marriage” (a liberal stance already common in his denomination, the Presbyterian Church USA), the conservative backlash was immediate, making Peterson backtrack. But the Presbyterian Church USA, which is the largest U.S. Presbyterian denomination, insists on the stance.

Other mainline Protestant denominations are also embracing a liberal stance regarding the homosexual sin.

In Brazil, the only neo-Pentecostal exception has been the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (UCKG), which does not criticize the liberal stance, but has attacked the conservative stance.

The official website of UCKG announced in 2015 that its founder, Bishop Edir Macedo, said,

“There are many evangelicals, ministers and churches raising a flag against the homosexual movement and against homosexual marriage. I ask: Would Jesus do it if He were living in our time? I do not believe that He would do it, because in His time there were homosexuals and Jesus did not speak anything. Jesus did not raise a flag, saying, ‘Look, you should speak up against homosexuality, that it is forbidden, that it should not be done.’”

After this comment, Macedo was awarded the Gay Oscar 2015, from the Gay Group of Bahia, founded by Luiz Mott, the most prominent homosexual activist in Brazil.

Macedo could also say, “How many times did Jesus talk about child abuse? How many times did Jesus talk about child sex abusers? Jesus did not raise a flag against child sex abuse, saying, ‘Look, you should speak up against child sex abuse.”

Actually, Jesus never talked against child sex abuse and child sex abusers.

Should you then remove the gay agenda and child sex abuse from Christian concerns just because Jesus never mentioned them directly?

Jesus just did not attack head-on the homosexual agenda because this was not the obsession in the Jewish society where he preached the Gospel. Each generation has its own challenges and special attention. Without the Holy Spirit to guide us in God’s Word, it is impossible to give an answer to these challenges and special attentions.

In this point, it is important to give attention to Luther’s words,

“If I declare openly, with the loudest voice and the clearest expression, each portion of God’s truth, except precisely the tiny portion that the world and the devil are, in this time, attacking, then I am not really confessing Christ, however much I may cry aloud that I am confessing Him.”

The necessary question is: Why does not Bishop Edir Macedo criticize the liberal stance, but has attacked the conservative stance against the gay agenda?

Apparently Macedo made his controversial comments for sheer provocation, to be not seen as imitating Assemblies of God minister Silas Malafaia and other Brazilian neo-Pentecostal leaders who are spearheading (“raising a flag”) the fight against gay “marriage” and other gay agenda’s demands, including homosexual indoctrination of children demanded by gay predators. He does not want to be seen as an imitator of conservative evangelicals.

But the UCKG founder is not a pioneer when “supporting homosexuals.” The Presbyterian Church (USA) has been doing much more than this for years. It marries homosexuals. It supports abortion — just as Macedo does.

Even if UCKG begins to marry homosexuals, there will not be anything new in this apostasy. The Presbyterian Church USA is in the forefront and vanguard.

Macedo is just a cheap imitator. He has a fancy apartment in the U.S. and he has lived several years in the U.S. It seems that in his stay in the U.S., he chose the influence of more liberal Protestants, even though the U.S. has many fine conservative evangelicals.

Macedo has also imitated cessationism, a heretical doctrine predominant in the Presbyterian Church USA. This extra-biblical doctrine teaches that God does not speak today through prophecies, revelations and dreams. Calvinist theologians as John MacArthur in the U.S. and Augustus Nicodemus in Brazil believe and promote this doctrine. Even not being a Calvinist, Edir Macedo also believes and promotes this doctrine.

In fact, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, where Nicodemus was a chancellor, has homosexualist professors and it is defended by gay activists.

So Macedo’s cessationist stance is mere imitation of radical Presbyterians’ and Calvinists’ cessationist stances.

What is left of “Pentecostalism” in UCKG is perhaps just demon-expelling. Its prosperity gospel is totally based on “determining” with Sola Scriptura (totally rejecting prophecies and revelations), highly reminding old Calvinism, which actually saw prosperity as a sign of election.

UCKG totally rejects the possibility of a Christian to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit today because it believes in Sola Scriptura.

UCKG totally rejects the gift of prophecy today because it believes in Sola Scriptura.

UCKG totally rejects the possibility of a Christian to receive revelations from the Holy Spirit today because it believes in Sola Scriptura.

UCKG totally believes that prophecies and revelations today are demonic because it believes in Sola Scriptura.

UCKG says that it believes “only in the Bible,” whose Latin translation is “Sola Scriptura” — the form preferred by Calvinists, because it seems intellectually more elegant. At the end, UCKG and the Presbyterian Church USA use Sola Scriptura to support what God has never supported and will never support: abortion and cessationism.

Abortion is to kill an innocent life in the mother’s womb. Cessationism is to kill spiritual life in the church. No Christian has authority, theological or otherwise, to kill what God gives.

Macedo’s pro-homosexuality and pro-abortion stance is mere imitation of the Presbyterian Church USA’s left-wing stances.

Even though imperfectly, the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God is, as far as cessationism, homosexuality and abortion are concerned, a cheap imitation of the Presbyterian Church USA.

Coincidentally, Marcelo Crivella, mayor of Rio de Janeiro and former UCKG bishop, chose to head a LGBT advocacy department Nélio Georgini, a Presbyterian homosexual activist, who has a male sexual partner. Crivella is a Macedo’s relative.

The Universal Church of the Kingdom of God is a syncretic chimera: It is the first and only pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality cessationist neo-Pentecostal church in Brazil.

Yet, if Macedo wants to be a perfect imitator, he will have to do much more than just “supporting homosexuals,” which for him means not to fight gay “marriage” and other gay agenda’s demands, including homosexual indoctrination of children demanded by gay predators. The Presbyterian Church USA has already been holding gay weddings and it has already been ordaining homosexual ministers.

When will UCKG begin to hold homosexual weddings and ordain homosexual ministers?

Portuguese version of this article: Bispo Macedo: Jesus nunca falou contra o homossexualismo

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Bishop Edir Macedo and Homosexuality

Justin Peters in Brazil: God Does Not Speak to You Today Through Prophecy and Revelation

A Charismatic Response to “The Growing Crisis Behind Brazil’s Evangelical Success Story”

Radical Gay Activist Defends Brazil’s Mackenzie Presbyterian University

Brazil’s Mackenzie Presbyterian University and Its Gender Ideology Professor

“Message” Bible Creator Eugene Peterson Says Homosexuality Is Not Wrong — and Then Backtracks

“Homosexuality is Unnatural”: The Last Great Message of Myles Munroe on the Gay Agenda

“Message” Bible Creator Eugene Peterson Says Homosexuality Is Not Wrong — and Then Backtracks

By Julio Severo

Eugene Peterson, who is best known as the creator of “The Message,” a reading Bible that uses contemporary language, has come out in support of homosexual “marriage,” saying that he would officiate a same-sex “wedding” if asked.

Eugene Peterson

Peterson has been widely admired across the theological spectrum, and his move was seen as an important shift. Now 84, Peterson spent decades as a pastor in the Presbyterian Church (USA), which allows same-sex “marriage” and openly gay clergy. Polls show a dramatic divide between younger evangelicals and older evangelicals on the question of gay “marriage.”

But after a firestorm, including possible boycotts from large bookstores and publishing houses, Peterson backtracked and said he would never perform a same-sex wedding.

HOW THE FIRESTORM BEGAN. In an interview with Jonathan Merritt at Religion News Service on July 12, 2017, the author of more than 30 books described how his views on homosexuality have changed over his pastoral career.

Merritt said of the interview:

It’s one of the hottest topics in the church today, and given Peterson’s vast influence among both pastors and laypeople, I knew his opinion would impact the conversation. Though he has had a long career, I couldn’t find his position on the matter either online or in print. I did discover that “The Message,” Peterson’s popular paraphrase of the Bible, doesn’t use the word “homosexual” and “homosexuality” in key texts. But this wasn’t definitive proof of anything. After all, those words never appear in any English translation of the Bible until 1946.

Then Merritt asked Peterson:

You are Presbyterian, and your denomination has really been grappling with some of the hot button issues that we face as a culture. I think particularly of homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Has your view on that changed over the years? What’s your position on the morality of same-sex relationships?

Peterson, who formerly pastored a PCUSA church, answered:

I have been in churches when I was an associate pastor where there were several [homosexuals]… They just assumed that they were as Christian as everybody else in the church.

One of the young people that had grown up under my pastorship, he was a high school teacher and a musician. When he found out about the opening, he showed up in church one day and stood up and said, “I’d like to apply for the job of music director here, and I’m gay.” We didn’t have any gay people in the whole congregation. Well, some of them weren’t openly gay. But I was so pleased with the congregation. Nobody made any questions about it. And he was a really good musician.

I wouldn’t have said this 20 years ago, but now I know a lot of people who are gay and lesbian and they seem to have as good a spiritual life as I do. I think that kind of debate about lesbians and gays might be over. People who disapprove of it, they’ll probably just go to another church. So we’re in a transition and I think it’s a transition for the best, for the good. I don’t think it’s something that you can parade, but it’s not a right or wrong thing as far as I’m concerned.

Peterson was a founding pastor of Christ Our King Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) in Bel Air, Maryland, where he served for 29 years before retiring in 1991.

Finally, Merritt asked Peterson:

A follow-up: If you were pastoring today and a gay couple in your church who were Christians of good faith asked you to perform their same-sex wedding ceremony, is that something you would do?

Peterson’s forceful answer was “Yes.”

His answer contradicted God’s Word. It contradicted even his own Bible version, “The Message,” which says,

“Don’t have sex with a man as one does with a woman. That is abhorrent.” (Leviticus 18:22 Message)

“They pretended to know it all, but were illiterate regarding life. They traded the glory of God who holds the whole world in his hands for cheap figurines you can buy at any roadside stand. So God said, in effect, ‘If that’s what you want, that’s what you get.’ It wasn’t long before they were living in a pigpen, smeared with filth, filthy inside and out. And all this because they traded the true God for a fake god, and worshiped the god they made instead of the God who made them—the God we bless, the God who blesses us. Oh, yes! Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn’t know how to be human either—women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.” (Romans 1:22-27 Message)

These two “Message” passages are clear: sex between men is abhorrent. And only sexually confused people abuse and defile one another, women with women, men with men — all for lust.

It is hard to understand how Peterson could betray these solid stances on the homosexual sin.

HOW PETERSON BACKTRACKED. After the firestorm, in a statement to The Washington Post on July 13, 2017, he said:

Recently a reporter asked me whether my personal opinions about homosexuality and same-sex marriage have changed over the years. I presume I was asked this question because of my former career as a pastor in the Presbyterian Church (USA), which recently affirmed homosexuality and began allowing its clergy to perform same-sex weddings. Having retired from the pastorate more than 25 years ago, I acknowledged to the reporter that I “haven’t had a lot of experience with it.”

To clarify, I affirm a biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman. I affirm a biblical view of everything.

He was clear in his retraction.

Yet, considering that the evangelical world is discussing his controversial interview and retraction, let us look at how The Message was vague in one classical Bible passage against the homosexual sin:

“Don’t you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don’t care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don’t qualify as citizens in God’s kingdom.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Message)

Perhaps because the English version of this passage in “The Message” is so ambiguous the producers of the Brazilian version made it longer:

“Don’t you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don’t care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don’t qualify as citizens in God’s kingdom. I’m talking about heterosexual debauchery, homosexual immorality, idolatry, greed and destructive vices.”  (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Message)

The English version does not have: “I’m talking about heterosexual debauchery, homosexual immorality, idolatry, greed and destructive vices.” Yet, even in this case, there are problems. Homosexual immorality (orgy of men with men) is sin as heterosexual debauchery (orgy of men with women) is sin. So if marriage between a man and a woman (without immorality and debauchery) is not a sin, why should (by following the logic of this longer ambiguous Brazilian passage) “marriage” between a man and another man (without immorality and debauchery) be a sin?

The English version condemns vague sex abuses, and the Brazilian version tries to correct the vague condemnation by adding a condemnation that hits immorality and debauchery, not homosexuality. While serious versions of the Bible directly condemn homosexuality — regardless if it is involved in immorality and debauchery — The Message, in English and Portuguese, leaves in some way the door open for homosexuality not involved in immorality and debauchery.

The English version left problems that the Brazilian version was unable to solve and clarify. Instead, it created larger ambiguities and problems. Sex between man and woman is sin only when involved in immorality and debauchery. Is homosexual sex similarly sin only when involved in immorality and debauchery? The American and Brazilian Message did not answer this question and this ambiguity is consistent with Peterson’s ill-fated interview.

Yet, other Bible versions are much clearer:

“Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NIV)

“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NKJV)

Peterson’s interview with the Religion News Service, just as the PCUSA is already doing, followed “demonic illusions,” as warned by his own “The Message”:

“The Spirit makes it clear that as time goes on, some are going to give up on the faith and chase after demonic illusions put forth by professional liars.” (1 Timothy 4:1 Message)

Other Bible versions say,

“The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.” (1 Timothy 4:1 NIV)

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons.” (1 Timothy 4:1 NKJV)

Only the Holy Spirit can prevail against “demonic illusions,” “deceiving spirits” and “doctrines of demons.”

The same Bible that warns that in the last days there would be an explosion of apostasy also informs about a powerful outpouring of the Holy Spirit — an “explosion” of the Holy Spirit and his supernatural gifts.

“‘In the Last Days,’ God says, ‘I will pour out my Spirit on every kind of people: Your sons will prophesy, also your daughters; Your young men will see visions, your old men dream dreams. When the time comes, I’ll pour out my Spirit On those who serve me, men and women both, and they’ll prophesy.’” (Acts 2:17-18 Message)

PCUSA is a so liberal environment that even a Pentecostal or charismatic Presbyterian could be ensnared by its liberal stances on homosexuality. Often the best advice for Christians in such environment is to leave Babylon or face spiritual decadence and apostasy. To remain is to run the risk of serious spiritual contamination.

Perhaps this is Peterson’s case.

A church guided by Christ is a place where Christians are empowered by the Holy Spirit to preach the Gospel to homosexual sinners, heal their wounds and diseases and expel their demons. But PCUSA is filled of “demonic illusions,” “deceiving spirits” and “doctrines of demons” regarding the homosexual sin and other sins. People open or filled with the Holy Spirit and his supernatural gifts should, for their own survival, leave this environment of apostasy as soon as possible.

It is just a pity that Peterson did not leave Babylon in time.

On Trump, Peterson said to Merritt, “I think we’re in a bad situation. I really do. Donald Trump is the enemy as far as I’m concerned.”

Not that Trump is an enemy of the homosexual agenda. His State Department has proved to be pro-sodomy and America under Trump continues making sodomy great. But apparently Peterson’s interview showed displeasure that the Trump administration is not as virulently pro-sodomy as the Obama administration was. Has Peterson become a “discreet” hard-core liberal?

Has PCUSA, the largest Presbyterian denomination in the United States, in its liberalism produced such feelings and ambiguities in Eugene Peterson?

Peterson explained his complaint about Trump, saying, “He has no morals. He has no integrity.” What did Peterson expect? Trump is a member of PCUSA. But at least he has been open to prayers from Spirit-filled Christians.

If no firestorm had happened, would Peterson have backtracked? What will happen when there are no conservative firestorms?

It is just a pity that Peterson did not leave Babylon in time.

With information from the Religion News Service, Charisma News and The Washington Post.

Portuguese version of this article: Eugene Peterson, criador da Bíblia “A Mensagem,” diz que a homossexualidade não é errada — e então volta atrás

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

What Will America Gain by Making Sodomy Great?

“Homosexuality is Unnatural”: The Last Great Message of Myles Munroe on the Gay Agenda

Pedophilia Advocacy Knocks Down Prominent “Conservative” Gay

After Pressure, World Vision Reverses Policy on Hiring Gays

Presbyterian Church and Palestinian Liberal Christians Rewriting the Bible to Remove References to Israel

By Julio Severo

Sabeel (Palestinian Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center) has partnered with the Presbyterian Church (USA) to produce a new Bible version that changes God’s Word.

U.S. Presbyterian delegations celebrating 25 years of the Palestinian Liberation Theology at Sabeel

The new version has no mention of Israel as Jewish and no mention of Jesus as a Jew. In fact, Jesus (Yeshua) is changed from being Jewish to being a Palestinian Arab, according to Geri Ungurean in NowTheEndBegins.

Sabeel (Arabic ‘the way’ and also ‘a channel’ or ‘spring’) is a Christian liberation theology organization based in Jerusalem. It was founded by Palestinian Anglican priest Rev. Naim Ateek, the former Canon of St. George’s Cathedral in Jerusalem.

According to Ungurean, Dr. Ateek “wants to rewrite the Bible in the same manner that Catholic, Anglican and Reformed theologies have claimed that the Christian Church is ‘The New Israel,’ also called ‘The Israel of God.’ Rewriting history and inventing theology is a popular vocation. Revisionist historians take liberties with facts until they cease to have meaning. Prime examples are the Holocaust denial polemics or current trends to rewrite American history texts.”

Ungurean says, “An official partner of the Presbyterian Church USA, Sabeel has Friends of Sabeel chapters in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Australia.”

Sabeel is involved with the “Christ at the CheckPoint” conference, which seeks to undermine the traditional evangelical support for Israel.

Why would the Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUSA), which is the largest Presbyterian denomination in the U.S., get involved with Sabeel and its Liberation Theology?

Liberation Theology is the most widespread theological liberalism in our days. And PCUSA is an evidence of its evils. Having firstly embraced the Social Gospel in the late 19th century, Presbyterians later formed PCUSA, which is now a full-blown liberal power-house, supporting homosexual “marriage,” abortion and anti-Israel stances.

Liberation Theology may be the Social Gospel’s most important offshoot.

A Presbyterian missionary from the Social Gospel movement came to Brazil in 1952 and spent one decade teaching theology in the most prominent Presbyterian theological institution in Brazil. His name was Rev. Richard Shaull, and he was involved in several Marxist and communist causes in Brazil. The birth of the Theology of Integral Mission (TIM) in Brazil is traced and credited to him.

Even though TIM is labeled as the Protestant version of Liberation Theology, TIM was born before Liberation Theology. For more information, download my free e-book here: http://bit.ly/15AJmMC

TIM is destroying the Evangelical Church in Brazil. And Liberation Theology is destroying the Catholic Church in Brazil.

Probably, TIM contributed for the birth of Liberation Theology in the 1960s. So you see how powerful the Social Gospel was!

TIM adherents are also opposed to Israel.

PCUSA is representative of the future of churches under the Liberation Theology and TIM spell: supporters of abortion, gay “marriage” and anti-Israel.

At the end, what does difference make if they change the Bible or not? They do not care about what God commands and teaches about Israel, the Church, the Kingdom of God, the value of unborn human life, the natural marriage and family.

Portuguese version of this article: Igreja presbiteriana e cristãos liberais palestinos estão rescrevendo a Bíblia para remover referências a Israel

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

“Palestinian Messengers”: How Christ and Christians Are Used for the Palestinian Cause

Lausanne, Theology of Integral Mission and Israel

Jewish Issues: A Clarification to Christians about Their Perception on the Jews

Liberation Theology and Neo-Pentecostalism: A Leading Challenge to the Evangelical Churches in Brazil

The Perfect Revival?

By Julio Severo

Brazil has experienced an explosive growth of Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal (neo-charismatic) churches. Large crowds of poor people have been attending these churches looking for answers for their physical, material and spiritual needs.

The Brazilian Catholic Church, plagued by the Liberation Theology, has been worried about this growth. And even mainline Brazilian Protestant churches, similarly plagued by Protestant versions of the Liberation Theology, have been worried.

International onlookers see such growth as a phenomenon or even evidence of “revival.” Yet, Brazilian Calvinist critics question that if it were genuine, Brazil would not have now a socialist government. But what if Brazil depended just on the Catholic Church and its Liberation Theology? It would be already a Catholic Cuba. What if Brazil depended just on mainline Protestant churches and their Protestant versions of the Liberation Theology? It would be already a Protestant Cuba.

The Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil is far from perfection. But virulent critics from mainline Protestant churches, which are very small in Brazil in comparison to large Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal churches, have used the imperfections to point that the “revival” in Brazil is counterfeit, misleading, and even demonic. Calvinist critics have consistently condemned the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil.

They ignore that revival does not equal perfection. They ignore the grave imperfections of the perfectly charismatic church of 1 Corinthians.

They point that the result of a perfect revival is change and transformation in Christians and their behavior. This change affects everyone: lawyers, farmers, and even politicians. If there is a large numbers of Christians in a government, it is expected that it will conform to the Christian values and justice by the testimony and presence of Christians.

They point that the perfect revival was the Great Awakening in America and the preaching of men like Jonathan Edwards.

Let us use their standard to analyze a “perfect revival.” First, came the Great Awakening, by Jonathan Edwards and others. Next, the birth of the United States by men simultaneously Protestant and Mason. This is, most of the Founding Founders were Protestant at the same time affected by the Great Awakening and Masonry!

If America is today plagued by Mason symbols and taints, the example was set by these Mason Protestants who lived under the influence of the strong spiritual culture left by the Great Awakening.

The largest Presbyterian denomination in Brazil, founded by U.S. Mason Presbyterian missionaries in the midst-1800s and cradle of the first Protestant version of the Liberation Theology in the 1950s, has a difficult time to discipline its countless Mason ministers and other leaders, who nevertheless have been busy criticizing the many “heresies” of the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth.

So by their logic, if the Great Awakening was a perfect revival, it follows that Masonry plaguing Protestant politicians is ok, because if it is not ok, it follows that the Great Awakening was an imperfect revival. And Calvinist critics in Brazil have just one answer to imperfect revivals: systematic criticism.

Never mind that what God’s Word says also applies to Masonry among Protestant ministers, politicians and other leaders:

“Stop forming inappropriate relationships with unbelievers. Can right and wrong be partners? Can light have anything in common with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14 GWV)

The Great Awakening was the greatest blessing for the birth of America. But Masonry was not a blessing, and it will be, with its schemes of New World Order, her fall.

The Great Awakening was not a perfect revival. Only God is perfect. The Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil is not perfect. Only God is perfect.

If Brazil is today more socialist, Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals are not to blame. In the 1990s, Rev. Caio Fábio, the greatest Presbyterian leader in the Brazilian history, led the Brazilian Church to support the Workers’ Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores), which is the ruling socialist party in Brazil, and today Rev. Fábio is a fallen man, because of his sexual and financial scandals. More information about his huge influence in the Brazilian Church can be found in my free e-book “Theology of Liberation Versus Theology of Prosperity” here: http://bit.ly/15AJmMC

The Workers’ Party and other socialist parties are determined to impose abortion and homosexuality in Brazil. The only hindrance to their project, by their own admission, is the daring testimony of neo-Pentecostal televangelists, who are under a heavy barrage of “theological” criticism from Calvinist critics comfortably in a religious environment plagued by Masonry and the Theology of Integral Mission, which is the Protestant version of the Liberation Theology.

Their inspiration is often John MacArthur, a Calvinist theologian who believes the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased. Calvinist churches increasingly embracing homosexuality, abortion and stances against Israel and MacArthur and his Brazilian followers worried about what the Holy Spirit can or cannot do today. Why do not he and other Calvinist critics use their judgmental “gift” toward PCUSA and many other cessationist, liberal Protestant churches?

Why do not they use their judgmental “gift” toward the Theology of Integral Mission and Masonry?

If they did it, many Calvinist critics in Brazil would begin to busy themselves with these colossal problems in their own midst, and understandably they would be left no time to attack Pentecostals and charismatics and much less to require their growth to conform to Calvinist expectations of the Great Awakening.

If they want to criticize “imperfect” revivals, what about Masonry among Founding Fathers who were affected by the Great Awakening? Why do they refuse to see Masonry as intricate witchcraft? If they want perfection in others, why is their midst plagued by the Theology of Integral Mission? Why does this liberal and leftist theology affect predominantly Calvinists in Brazil? Why do they have never criticized their former theological celebrity, Rev. Caio Fábio, for his instrumental role promoting the Theology of Integral Mission and evangelical involvement with the Workers’ Party?

Is there a perfect revival? Of course, not. But if Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals do not criticize the Great Awakening, why do Calvinist critics consistently criticize the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil?

As for me, I say: there is no reason to reject the Great Awakening and the Pentecostal and neo-Pentecostal growth in Brazil because of their imperfections. Mature Christians will appreciate both events and will know how to reject their imperfections without tossing away what God did and is doing.            

Portuguese version of this article: O reavivamento perfeito?

Source: BarbWire, via Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

A Charismatic Response to “The Growing Crisis Behind Brazil’s Evangelical Success Story”

Liberation Theology and Neo-Pentecostalism: A Leading Challenge to the Evangelical Churches in Brazil

Brazilian Pentecostals: Church Growth Endangered by Socialist Embrace

R.C. Sproul: There Is No True Prophecy Today

Julio Severo Interviews Brazilian Congressman Marco Feliciano: How Massive Homosexualist Opposition Has Skyrocketed His Name into Fame, Making Him the Most Prominent Evangelical Politician in Brazil