This Message is Banned by the State Religion of the United States

It's time for another edition of Fighting for the Faith, Friday, January 11th, 2013. The Louie Giglio Obama inaugural controversy has hit a fevered pitch and it will pretty much dominate all of our number one on Fighting for the Faith.

Thank you for tuning in. You're listening to Fighting for the Faith. My name is Chris Rosebro. I am your servant in Jesus Christ, and this is the program that dishes up a daily dose of biblical discernment, the goal of which, help you to think biblically, help you to think critically, help you compare what people are saying in the name of God to the Word of God.

There is no shortage of crazy things being said out there, and what is needed are Christians who are discipled and know what the Scriptures say. We live in very treacherous times, and one of the reasons why we live in treacherous times is due to the fact that people base or determine what truth is based upon their subjective feelings and experiences.

Now I understand that very recently, just a few days ago, I did an entire opening monologue pointing out the fact that your subjective experiences do not equal the truth. Now this is what we are dealing with when we are dealing with the issue of homosexuality in the broader culture as well as in the church.

And what I mean by that is this, is that in the broader culture, when you use the word homosexual, what the culture believes that means, down on some fundamental level, despite what the word means in the dictionary, what they think that means is somebody who is born a particular way, that at that person's essence and being, they are a particular thing.

For instance, when we talk about leopards, okay, leopards, we all know what a leopard is. A leopard has spots, and the reason why leopards have spots is because that's what a leopard is. At its core being, it's a spotted large cat, right?

So that's the idea, is that when you say the term homosexual, people think that that means that somebody is born a particular way, to give you another equivalent. It would be the equivalent of being born black or white or Asian or pick whatever color combination it is.

So the idea is, is that therefore, since they are born that way, and that's what they are down in their being, it is wrong for anybody to say what somebody is in their being is wrong. So that's the idea, that's the thinking, that's the premise that you're dealing with.

But the Bible reveals something very different, okay? And that is that nobody is, in their core being, a homosexual. We're going to talk about that on today's edition of Fighting for the Faith, and help equip you to be able to talk about this biblically and understand when you're talking with people at the water cooler or in the neighborhood or in your small group study, if somebody is basically being sympathetic and saying, who are we to judge or something like that, or are being antagonistic or attacking you for putting out the biblical position, you need to understand what their thinking is and know how to confront it properly.

So that's what we're going to be doing part of today at Fighting for the Faith. So you're going to need your Bible and a piece of paper and stuff like that, but we're going to talk about the Louie Giglio thing a little bit more, and in the course of this hour we're going to unpack the rest of the stuff.

Now if you've been following the Louie Giglio Obama inaugural controversy, then you are probably aware of the fact that some pretty important people like Denny Burke, Albert Mueller, Russell Moore, and others have weighed in regarding Louie Giglio's being disinvited.

But see, that's the thing, was he disinvited? Because according to his blog post, he bowed out. And so there's two issues going on, and it's really easy to squish the two issues together and you've got to do that.

Now I'm on record and I stand by what I said, Louie Giglio is not a martyr. He's not a Christian martyr. He hasn't stood up for what the Bible says on this matter. In fact, I made it very clear that he was behaving in a very cowardly fashion, and I stand by what I said.

And I will continue to stand by what I said because he has an obligation as a pastor to be preaching and teaching the truth on this matter, and hasn't done so by his own admission for more than 15 years.

Now as a teacher in the church, I teach weekly in my congregation. And as a result of being a teacher in the church, I find it just absolutely impossible for anybody who is teaching God's Word to not on a regular basis have to deal with this.

Seriously, rarely a month or two goes by before I have to address the topic, and usually it's the biblical text that forced me to do so. It's not that they're forcing me, it's just you understand what I'm saying.

So for him to go 15 years without actually preaching or teaching on this topic, yeah, there's something seriously wrong there. So what we're going to do is we're going to take a look at some of the coverage out there.

I want to take a look at Albert Muller's piece, maybe Russell Moore's piece, but I'm also going to give ear to Aaron Benziger's piece about Louis Giglio because I think she nails it spot on and points out the fact that Louis Giglio is not a martyr.

Now all of that being said, there is a second aspect to this, and the two need to be separated in your mind as two completely different issues. Number one, Giglio is not a martyr. But second, what has happened and transpired is, well, it should cause everybody to wake up.

If you've been asleep at the switch or haven't weighed in on this, let me put it this way, the bugle is being blown and the soldiers are being called to muster. Reveille has been sounding forth, and it's real simple.

If you don't muster on this one, you're AWOL, and if you're AWOL, well, the only way to interpret your AWOL-ness or your silence on this matter is that you don't agree with what God has said. Instead, you have chosen to side with the enemy.

I know that sounds harsh. I know that sounds ridiculous. That's exactly what the case is. It's time to stand up and be counted. That's all there is to it. Flat-out open persecution of Christianity pretty much has been declared.

This is a very, very clear warning shot across the bow of Christianity, and make no mistake about it, something has changed in the broader culture. It's a different day today than it was a couple of days ago, and as a result of it, it's time to weigh in, time for people to muster and to show their support even if it costs them their job, their marriage, popularity, celebrity, or whatever, or even their life.

They must stand and be counted and stand with Christ in what He has said on this matter. Plain and simple. All right, so looking at how I want to do this, whose piece do I want to start with? All right, I think I got it figured out here.

Louie Giglio and the New State Church

From the Russell Moore website entitled Moore to the Point, he's a professor of Southern Seminary in Louisville and a good friend of Al Morley. The name of the headline is Louis Giglio and the New State Church.

Louis Giglio and the New State Church. Now, Russell Moore's angle on this is that this is a clear shot as to what's coming down the pike, and so he's not dealing with Louis Giglio's statements per se.

He's dealing with the story itself. So here's what Russell Moore writes. He says, President Obama kicked up some controversy by announcing that evangelical pastor Louis Giglio would be praying at the inauguration.

Sexual liberationist group quickly identified Giglio as they did Rick Warren under similar circumstances in 2009 as, quote, anti-gay. After a couple of days of firestorm from the left, Giglio announced this morning that he would withdraw.

Now, that's the important part. After a couple of days of firestorm, Giglio announced he would withdraw. Now, I am absolutely of the firm opinion that Giglio should have stood his ground and made Obama kick him out.

Okay? That way it would have been a clear, unambiguous stand taken by Giglio regarding what the scripture says, and had Obama had to kick him out and disinvite him, then Obama would clearly have been the bad guy and doing wrong, and Giglio would have been the Christian standing up for the truth.

That's not what happened. Giglio announced that he would withdraw. More continues. He says, here's why this matters. The statement Giglio made that was so controversial is essentially a near direct quotation from the Christian scriptures.

Now, this is talking about the sermon that was dug up from nearly 15, 20 years ago. Here's what he said. Unrepentant homosexuals, Giglio said, as with unrepentant sinners of all kinds, will not inherit the kingdom of God.

That's 1 Corinthians 6, 9 -10. Giglio said, it's not easy to change, but it is possible to change. The Bible says God commands all people everywhere to repent, Acts 17 -30, verse 30, and the same gospel Giglio said, that I say to you, and that you would say to me.

Okay? Back 15 -20 years ago, Giglio clearly, unambiguously, unapologetically proclaimed what the Bible says regarding same sex sins. Nobody is challenging that. This is what he did 15 -20 years ago. Now, those of us who teach regularly in the church, we have to do this a little bit more often than every 15 -20 years.

Like I said, hardly a month or two goes by where it doesn't come up in the text that I teach. Okay? It comes up. You dress it, because if you're teaching the full counsel of the Word of God, God's Word dictates the message and it dictates the agenda.

It's just that clear. We continue though. Moore says, the Christian faith in every expression has held for 2 ,000 years that sexual immorality is sinful. Yep. This same Christian faith has maintained again in every branch that sexual expression outside of conjugal marriage is sin.

Yep. And the Christian faith has maintained universally that all persons are sinners and that no sinner can enter the kingdom without repentance. This is hardly new, to which I would say, yep, Russell's right on it.

So, here's what he continues. Says, the, quote, shock with which the so-called anti-gay stance is articulated by the left is akin to the Pork Producers Association denouncing a Muslim in-mom's invitation because he's anti-agriculture due to Quranic dietary restrictions.

Yeah, I think that's a fair way of putting it. In fact, by the standards of this controversy, no Muslim in-mom or Orthodox Jewish rabbi alive can pray at a presidential inauguration. Yep. When it is now impossible for one who holds to the Catholic Christian view of marriage and the gospel to pray at a public event, we now have a de facto established state church.

Yep. Moore is absolutely right. We have a de facto state church now. Okay. The United States of America has created a state religion. If you do not agree with their state religion, well, there's, well, a cost and prices to pay.

I think Moore is right onto it here. He says, just as the pre-Constitution Anglican and Congregational churches required a license to preach in order to exclude Baptists, the new state church requires a license of embracing sexual liberation in all of its forms.

Note, this now doesn't simply exclude harsh and intemperate statements or even activism. Simply holding the view held by every Roman pontiff and by every congregation and synagogue in the world until very recent days is enough to make one radioactive in public.

Yeah, radioactive in quotes, meaning, yeah, we can't have you there. As citizens, we ought to insist that the president stand up to his base and articulate a vision of a healthy pluralism in the public square.

Notice that the problem is not that the evangelical wants to impose his religion on the rest of society. The problem is not that he wants to exclude homosexuals or others from the public square or their civil rights.

The problem is that he won't say that they can go to heaven without repentance. That's not a civil issue, but a religious test of orthodoxy. As Christians, we ought to recognize that the old majoritarian understanding of church-state relations is outmoded.

Our situation today is not to hold on to some form of American civil religion. Our situation today is more akin to the minority religions of America's past, colonial Baptists, 19th century Baptists, early 20th century Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses who are appealing simply for the right to exist at all in the face of an established religion armed with popular support and, in the fullness of time, state power.

It turns out we're circling around to where we should have been all along with the understanding that religious liberty isn't toleration and separation of church and state isn't secularism. We don't have a natural right to pray at anyone's inauguration.

But when one is pressured out from a previous invitation because he's too toxic for simply mentioning once something universal in the Christian faith, we ought to see what we're looking at, a state church.

And as one old revolutionary era Baptist said as he went in and out of prison for preaching, there is nothing so offensive to an established church than the gospel of Jesus Christ. Yep, I think Russell Moore has a very, very important point that he's made there, and that's absolutely what we're dealing with here.

We're dealing with now, in the public square, the United States of America has a state church, and that state church will not tolerate anybody who even once in Christianity has said what scripture says regarding same-sex sin.

Great point. All right, the next one that we're going to be looking at is Albert Muller's piece, and the name of his is entitled, The Giglio Imbroglio, the Public Inauguration of a New Moral McCarthyism.

Albert Muller writes, he says, a new chapter in America's moral revolution came to us as Atlanta pastor Louis Giglio withdrew from giving the benediction at President Obama's second inaugural ceremony.

In a statement released to the White House and the Presidential Inaugural Committee, Giglio said that he withdrew because of the furor that emerged yesterday after a liberal watchdog group revealed that almost 20 years ago he had preached a sermon in which he had stated that homosexuality is a sin, and that the only way out of a homosexual lifestyle is through the healing power of Jesus.

In other words, a Christian pastor has been effectively disinvited from delivering an inaugural prayer because he believes and teaches Christian truth. Well, at least he did 20 years ago. I'm not, I see, I'm not so sure Giglio does today.

We continue though. The fact that Giglio was actually disinvited made clear in a statement from Addie Wisenot of the Presidential Inaugural Committee, quote, We were not aware of Pastor Giglio's past comments at the time of his selection, and they don't reflect our desire to celebrate the strength and diversity of our country at this inaugural.

Pastor Giglio was asked to deliver the benediction in part because of his leadership in combating human trafficking around the world. As we now work to select someone to deliver the benediction, we will ensure their beliefs reflect this administration's vision of inclusion and acceptance for all Americans.

Well, that statement is in effect an embarrassed apology for having invited Louis Giglio in the first place. Wisenot's statement apologizes for the Presidential Inaugural Committee's failure to make certain that their selection had never at any time for any reason believed that homosexuality is less than a perfectly acceptable lifestyle.

The committee then promised to repent and learn from their failure, committing to select a replacement who would, quote, reflect this administration's vision of inclusion and acceptance. The imbroglio over Louis Giglio is the clearest evidence of the new moral McCarthyism of our sexually, quote, tolerant age.

During the infamous McCarthy hearings, witnesses would be asked, quote, Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party? Well, in the version that is now being employed by the Presidential Inaugural Committee, the question will be, quote, Are you now or have you ever been one who believes that homosexuality or bisexuality or transsexualism, et cetera, is anything less than morally acceptable and worthy of celebration?

Louis Giglio, pastor of Atlanta's Passion City Church, is also founder of the Passion Movement that brings tens of thousands of Christian young people together to hear Giglio along with speakers such as John Piper.

They urge a rising generation of young Christians to make a passionate commitment to Christ. In recent years, the movement has also sought to raise awareness and activism among young Christians on the issue of sex trafficking.

It was that activism that caught the attention of both President Obama and the Presidential Inaugural Committee. Note, carefully, that both the White House and the committee were ready to celebrate Giglio's activism on sex trafficking, but all that was swept away by the moral McCarthyism on the question of homosexuality.

Two other dimensions of this story also demand attention. First, we should note that Louis Giglio has not been known lately for taking any stand on the issue of homosexuality. To the contrary, Giglio's own statement withdrawing from the invitation made this clear, Quote, Due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15 to 20 years ago, it is likely that my participation and the prayer I would offer will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration.

Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past 15 years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ. Mueller then states,.

A fair-minded reading of that statement indicates that Pastor Giglio has strategically avoided any confrontation with the issue of homosexuality for at least 15 years. The issue, quote, has not been in the range of my priorities, unquote, he said.

Given the Bible's insistence that sexual morality is inseparable from our ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ, this must have been a difficult strategy. It is also a strategy that is very attractive to those who want to avoid being castigated as intolerant or homophobic.

As this controversy makes abundantly clear, it is a failed strategy. Louis Giglio was cast out of the circle of the acceptable simply because a liberal watchdog group found one sermon he preached almost 20 years ago.

If a preacher has ever taken a stand on biblical conviction, he risks being exposed decades after the fact. Anyone who teaches at any time to any degree that homosexual behavior is a sin is now to be cast out.

Second, we should note that Pastor Giglio's sermon was, as we would expect and hope, filled with grace and the promise of the gospel. Giglio did not just state that homosexuals are sinners. He made clear that every single human being is a sinner in need of the redemption that is found only in Jesus Christ.

Quote, we've got to say to the homosexuals the same things that I would say that you would say to me. It's not easy to change, but it's possible to change, he preached. He pointed his congregation gay and straight to the healing power of Jesus.

He called his entire congregation to repent and to come to Christ by faith. That is the quintessential Christian gospel. That is undiluted biblical truth. Those words are the consensus of the Church for over 2 ,000 years and the firm belief held by the vast majority of Christians around the world today.

The Presidential Inaugural Committee and the White House have now declared historic biblical Christianity to be out of bounds, casting it off the inaugural program as an embarrassment. By its newly articulated standard, any preacher who holds to the faith of the Church for the last 2 ,000 years is persona non grata.

By this standard, no Roman Catholic prelate or priest can participate in the ceremony. No evangelical who holds to biblical orthodoxy is welcomed. The vast majority of Christians around the world have been disinvited.

Mormons and the rabbis of orthodox Judaism are out. Any Muslim imam who could walk freely in Cairo would be denied a place on the inaugural program. Billy Graham, who participated in at least 10 presidential inaugurations, is welcome no more.

Rick Warren, who incited a similar controversy when he prayed at President Obama's first inauguration, is out of bounds. In the span of just four years, the rules are fully changed. The gauntlet was thrown down yesterday, and the axe fell today.

Wayne Besson, founder of the activist group Truth Wins Out, told the New York Times yesterday, it is imperative that Giglio clarify his remarks and explain whether he has evolved on gay rights like so many other faith and political leaders.

It would be a shame to select a preacher with a backwards view on LGBT people at a moment when the nation is rapidly moving forward on our issues. Anyone who has ever believed that homosexuality is morally problematic in any way must now offer public repentance and evidence of having evolved on the question.

This is the language that President Obama used of his own evolving position on same sex marriage. This is what is now openly demanded of Christians today. If you want to avoid being thrown off the program, you had better learn to evolve fast and repent in public.

This is precisely what biblical Christians cannot do. While seeking to be gentle in spirit and ruthlessly gospel-centered in speaking of any sin, we cannot cease to speak of sin as sin. To do so is not only to deny the authority of Scripture, not only to reject the moral consensus of the saints, but it undermines the gospel itself.

The gospel makes no sense and is robbed of its saving power if sin is denied as sin. An imbroglio is a painful and embarrassing conflict. The imbroglio surrounding Louis Giglio is not only painful, it is revealing.

We now see the new moral McCarthyism in its undisguised and unvarnished reality. If you are a Christian, get ready for the question you will now undoubtedly face. Do you now or have you ever believed that homosexuality is a sin?

There is now nowhere to hide. The government of the United States of America has set up a state church and their state church demands that you repent publicly of ever saying that homosexuality is a sin or you are on the outs.

Plain and simple. Now, I want to cover the topic of Louis Giglio just a little bit again because I want to make very clear that Albert Moeller pointed it out very clearly that Louis Giglio hasn't preached on this for at least 15 years.

What did that get him? Nothing. When you think about this strategy of trying to appease the culture by giving the culture what they want and trying to be relevant and hip to the things that they believe, you're basically becoming the equivalent of a Christianized version of Neville Chamberlain trying to appease Hitler.

It doesn't work, does it? No, of course it doesn't. But the other thing that is also very clear here is that I'm not the only one out there who is demanding that Louis Giglio clarify his remarks. Remember the New York Times, Wayne Besson of the New York Times wrote, quote, it is imperative that Giglio clarify his remarks and explain whether he has evolved on gay rights like so many other faith and political leaders.

Well, Louis Giglio hasn't clarified his remarks. In fact, his bowing out the way he did leaves all kinds of questions as to whether or not his theology has evolved. And so keep the two issues separated because you got to do it, even though they're all together in one big mess at the moment.

And that is this, is that Louis Giglio is not a living martyr. He's not. He has not made a principled stand. He has not clarified his position. And so I turn now to the DoNotBeSurprised .com website and Erin Benziger's commentary regarding this, and her headline is entitled, Louis Giglio, living martyr, question mark?

Erin writes, she says, it was announced on 8 January, the 8th of January, that Louis Giglio, pastor of Passion City Church in Atlanta and founder of the Passion Conferences, had accepted an invitation to deliver the benediction at President Obama's inaugural on the 21st of January.

Immediately following that announcement, someone dug up a 15 to 20 year old sermon of Giglio's wherein he made comments about homosexuality that didn't sit so well with the loudest voices in this country.

By the morning of the 10th of January, Giglio had withdrawn his acceptance of the invitation. With this news, Louis Giglio immediately became a living martyr among evangelicals. Indeed, the backlash in response to the contents of the sermon was unfortunate.

There is little arguing that fact. At the same time, it really should not surprise the Christian who does not have his head stuck in the sand. America is, after all, a Roman's one nation. We love our sin.

We love our sexual sin. We revel in it. We celebrate it. So what do you expect? But is Giglio's withdrawal from the inauguration ceremony worthy of the praise and commendation of Christians? Has he taken a strong stance that so many evangelical leaders would have us believe?

Is he a victim taken to the figurative stake and burned for his adherence to God's word? Now, the argument is swirling based upon a New York Times article that Giglio was asked to step aside, that he in essence was ousted.

This was the scenario painted at Denny Burke's blog. However, the quote in question has since been removed from the original New York Times article. If one looks at the pastor's own words, though Giglio says, I respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the president's invitation.

So if Louis Giglio was asked to step aside, then that needs to be said by Louis Giglio. Otherwise, we should take him at his word. He is, after all, a Christian pastor, and thus his word should be able to be trusted, should it not?

With that, and because Louis Giglio wears the title of Christian pastor, it behooves the Christian to examine the statement he has made regarding this decision to withdraw. The remainder of this post will look at that statement in its entirety as it was shared with Louis Giglio's own church at the blog of Passion City Church.

We read, Dear PCC family, though I was invited by the president of the United States to pray at his upcoming inauguration, after conversations between our team and the White House, I am no longer serving in that role.

I sent the following statement to the White House today. I am honored to be invited by the president to get the benediction at the upcoming inaugural on January 21st. Though the president and I do not agree on every issue, we have fashioned a friendship around common goals and ideals, most notably ending slavery in all of its forms.

Due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15 to 20 years ago, it is likely that my participation and the prayer I would offer will be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration.

Clearly, speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities for the past 15 years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance as we make much of Jesus Christ. Neither I nor our team feel it best serves the core message and goals we are seeking to accomplish to be in a fight on an issue not of our choosing.

Thus, I respectfully withdraw my acceptance. Of the president's invitation, I will continue to pray regularly for the president and urge the nation to do so. I will most certainly pray for him on inauguration day.

Our nation is deeply divided and hurting, and more than ever, we need God's grace and mercy in our time of need. The issue of homosexuality, which a particular message of mine some 20 years ago addressed, is one of the most difficult our nation will navigate.

However, individual rights of freedom and the collective right to hold differing views on any subject is a critical balance we as a people must recover and preserve. As a pastor, my mission is to love people and lead them well.

While lifting up the name of Jesus above anything else, I am confident that anyone who knows me or has listened to the multitude of my messages I have given in the last decade would most likely conclude that I am not easily characterized as being opposed to people, any people.

Rather, I am constantly seeking to understand where all people are coming from and how to best serve them as I point them to Jesus. In all things, the most helpful thing I can do is to invite each of us to wrestle with Scripture and its implications for our lives.

God's words trump all opinions, including mine, and in the end, I believe God's words lead to life. My greatest desire is that we not be distracted from the things that we are focused on, seeing people in our city come to know Jesus and speaking up for the last and least of these throughout the world.

Honored to be your pastor, Louis.". Aaron then writes, let's break this down. First part of it reads, I am honored to be invited by the president to give the benediction at the upcoming inaugural. On January 21st, though the president and I do not agree on every issue, we have fashioned a friendship around common goals and ideals, most notably ending slavery in all of its form.

Uniting around common goals is fine, Aaron writes, so long as the gospel is not compromised in the process. Any pastor agreeing to offer the benediction at an event such as this should do so with a gospel in mind, not a social agenda.

If one truly desires to end slavery in all its forms, then start with the great eternal slavery of sin and seek to end that by preaching repentance and the forgiveness of sin through Jesus Christ. Romans chapter 6 verses 6 through 7 reads, we know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin for one who has died has been set free from sin.

Romans chapter 6 verses 16 through 18 read, do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey, either of sin which leads to death or of obedience which leads to righteousness.

But thanks be to God that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the to the standard of teaching to which you were committed and having been set free from sin have become slaves of righteousness.

Giglio then continues, due to a message of mine that has surfaced from 15 to 20 years ago, it is likely that my participation and the prayer I would offer would be dwarfed by those seeking to make their agenda the focal point of the inauguration.

One might ask Mr. Giglio, do you still believe the words you preached 15 to 20 years ago? Do you believe what the scripture says about the sin of homosexuality? If so, then stand firm on that scripture.

It is the only worthwhile support you have. If the media labels you as anti-gay in the process, does it really matter? The gospel of John chapter 15 verses 18 through 23 read, if the world hates you, this is Jesus speaking, if the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.

If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own. But because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember, the word that I said to you, a servant is not greater than his master.

If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name because they do not know him who sent me.

If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin. But now they have no excuse for their sin. Whoever hates me hates my father also. Aaron then continues, may we be counted worthy to be persecuted for the name of Christ.

May we never back down on what we know to be true because it has been spoken in his word. May we never be ashamed of our master seeking to step aside from conflict that arises simply because the world hates him as he told us it would.

Next, Giglio offers a most curious statement, clearly speaking on this issue has not been in the range of my priorities in the past 15 years. Look closely at the sentence above and then answer this question.

If a man has not seen fit to preach on the topic of sin in the past 15 years, then can he legitimately wear the title of Christian pastor? Homosexuality is a sin. It is in the Bible. Preaching about sin, not just homosexual sin, but all sin must be a weekly priority for every pastor.

Why? Because without teaching your flock about the sinful nature of man, without sharing with them their depravity and wickedness, they cannot see their need for a savior, nor can they see and understand the great, glorious, saving gospel of grace.

The good news is not good news if there is not bad news delivered first. A pastor who has not placed sin as a priority within his sermons for one and a half decades is, it could be argued, a pastor in name only.

The Apostle Paul tells us in 1 Timothy 1 verses 15 -16 the saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost, but I receive mercy for this reason that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display His perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in Him for eternal life.

Giglio then shares what the purpose of his ministry has been over the past 15 years. Instead, my aim has been to call people to ultimate significance, as we make much of Jesus Christ. This sentence does not even make sense.

Is he calling people to be significant? One would hope not, since Jesus must always increase as we decrease. John 3 verse 30. Further, one cannot make much of Jesus if one diminishes sin. With a diminished view of sin, Jesus is unnecessary.

The good news of the gospel, as Paul taught in 1 Timothy, quoted above, is that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners, and that through His life, death, and resurrection He has saved sinners.

But if we choose to ignore the concept of sin in any form, then that good news fails to maintain any concept of goodness. Christians are to call people to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. Any other mission is doomed to fail.

What Giglio has stated here is not the gospel, and if Louis Giglio's aim has not been to proclaim the gospel and the whole counsel of God, then he has been gravely off target. If one truly desires to make much of Jesus Christ, then one may consider calling people to repent of their sins and to turn to Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

Nothing gives God more glory. Giglio then continues, Neither I nor our team feel it best serves the core message and goals we are seeking to accomplish to be in a fight on an issue not of our choosing.

Thus I respectfully withdraw my acceptance of the President's invitation. I will continue to pray regularly for the President and urge the nation to do so. I will most certainly pray for him on Inauguration Day.

Mr. Giglio has been called out and attacked for teaching the truth about the sin of homosexuality as found in God's Word, yet this is not a battle that he thinks is worthy to fight. Oh, what a travesty to think that there is a man posing as an under-shepherd of the Lord Jesus Christ who will not stand and defend his shepherd's word.