His basic position is that he was born gay, there’s little chance of him ever changing from that orientation and so he somehow deserves to be in the pulpits of Jesus Christ’s Church, and that we actually need to have more men like himself in pulpits. He says he needs to be authentic to the way he was born, and anyone who commends him to Christ to change his sexual orientation is being abusive and unloving toward him.

Prior to this I have not spoken publicly about the Presbyterian Church in America’s (PCA) internal debate over same-sex attraction and Pastor Greg Johnson’s efforts to see to it that more same sex-attracted men end up in the pulpits of the PCA. I have not spoken publicly because I did not believe it appropriate to publicly air this matter in front of the secular world.
Well, recently Greg Johnson published a book and has begun a series of interviews with secular TV networks and News/journalism Internet outlets promoting the idea that same-sex attraction is permissible in the church so long as the gay person does not act and consummate his / her desire with a sexual act.
As such now I can no longer stay silent, and I must publicly repudiate and refute Greg Johnson’s theological error and abominable sinful attitudes.
His basic position is that he was born gay, there’s little chance of him ever changing from that orientation, and so he somehow deserves to be in the pulpits of Jesus Christ’s Church, and that we actually need to have more men like himself in pulpits. He says he needs to be authentic to the way he was born, and anyone who commends him to Christ to change his sexual orientation is being abusive and unloving toward him.
However, Matthew 5:28 makes it clear that the mere desire for any sexual sin is itself sexual sin. The Bible teaches that looking and lusting, that desiring what God has forbidden, without acting or committing a sexual act satiating the desire is itself sin. This would necessarily include both lustfully looking at a woman by a man and any homosexual/lesbian sexual desire. Mr. Johnson is wrong. His teaching is theological error. He himself is showing himself to be a false prophet.
And in a most recent interview he has sinfully and publicly demeaned, insulted, belittled, and smeared other PCA ministers who we’re trying to have a private discussion internal to the PCA with him; instead, his desire was to go to the secular media to employ their sympathies to arm twist, shame, and silence the stand of these fellow elders for Scripture and godliness.
So permit me to publicly speak straightforwardly about this issue:
My every impulse to sin is just me wanting to be me… to be “authentic” … to NOT deny the way I was born—a sinner.
And every commandment of God regarding my sexuality and everything else is just God wanting me to be like Jesus and not be like me.
Regarding Greg Johnson let me say:
This is why I say Greg Johnson and the Revoice crowd don’t understand the most basic aspects of Christianity or the Gospel, and in no way are qualified to be anywhere near the pulpit…. other than kneeling in front of it and repenting.
Mark Kozak is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and is Pastor of Providence Reformed PCA in Lavalette, WV.

Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) pastors Dominic Aquila and Fred Greco sat down in early September 2021 to discuss overtures 23 & 37 which are related to the Revoice/SSA officer controversies. They explained the background to them, answered questions posed about them, and clarified why these amendments should be passed.
Watch the video here.

The Intent of the BCO Amendments

BCO 16-4 Deals with Standards for Ordination for Church Officers.
BCO 21-4 and 24-1 Deal with Standards for Examinations For Church Officers.
There amendments do not deal with communicant members, their views and their membership in the church.
The General Assembly approved the wording on Overture 23 (which is the wording for BCO 16-4) by a vote of 77%. The vote for Overture 37 (the wording for BCO 21-4 and 24-1) was approved by a vote of 62%.
These BCO amendments add specific wording because of current issues in the culture that require clearer definitions of qualities like “above approach,” “a good reputation,” and “respected.” It is the nature of the development of creeds, confessions and internal church orders, that clarifying wordings may be added to affirmations in light of current issues.

The Proposed Amendments to the PCA’s Book of Church Order as approved by the PCA General Assembly

BCO 16-4. Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either (1) by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction), or (2) by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or (3) by failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office.
BCO 21-4 e. In the examination of the candidate’s personal character, the presbytery shall give specific attention to potentially notorious concerns, such as but not limited to relational sins, sexual immorality (including homosexuality, child sexual abuse, fornication, and pornography), addictions, abusive behavior, racism, and financial mismanagement. Careful attention must be given to his practical struggle against sinful actions, as well as to persistent sinful desires. The candidate must give clear testimony of reliance upon his union with Christ and the benefits thereof by the Holy Spirit, depending on this work of grace to make progress over sin (Psalm 103:2-5, Romans 8:29) and to bear fruit (Psalm 1:3; Gal. 5:22-23). While imperfection will remain, he must not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulness, but rather by the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 6:9-11). In order to maintain discretion and protect the honor of the pastoral office, Presbyteries are encouraged to appoint a committee to conduct detailed examinations of these matters and to give prayerful support to candidates.
BCO 24-1. In the examination of each nominee’s personal character, the Session shall give specific attention to potentially notorious concerns, such as but not limited to relational sins, sexual immorality (including homosexuality, child sexual abuse, fornication, and pornography), addictions, abusive behavior, racism, and financial mismanagement. Careful attention must be given to his practical struggle against sinful actions, as well as to persistent sinful desires. Each nominee must give clear testimony of reliance upon his union with Christ and the benefits thereof by the Holy Spirit, depending upon this work of grace to make progress over sin (Psalm 103:2-5; Romans 8:29) and to bear fruit (Psalm 1:3; Gal. 5:22-23). While imperfection will remain, he must not be known by reputation or self-profession according to his remaining sinfulness, but rather by the work of the Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 6:9-11). In order to maintain discretion and protect the honor of church office, Sessions are encouraged to appoint a committee to conduct detailed examinations into these matters and to give prayerful support to nominees.

Reasons to Vote in Favor of Approving These Amendments
The focus is on church officers with an emphasis on their developing a Christlike character. The amendments recognize that it is possible for a man’s character to undermine or contradict the focus on Christlikeness in a number of ways, which may become hinderances to being qualified as a church officer, EITHER

By denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction); or
By denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification; or
By failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions

Why Are These Statements Important?
“By denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction).”

The Westminster Standards teach the all-encompassing reality of the Fall and its effects on all mankind (WCF 6). Sin affects our total being such that we are dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all parts and faculties of soul and body and inclined to all evil.
WCF 6.5 states, “This corruption of nature, during this life, does remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be, through Christ, pardoned, and mortified; yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.” No professing believer is perfect in this life and because it is possible for remaining sin to prevail in a professing believer’s life, church courts should examine men for church office carefully in life as well as in doctrine.

“By denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification.”

WCF 13.2 states, “This sanctification is throughout, in the whole man; yet imperfect in this life, there abiding still some remnants of corruption in every part; where arises a continual and irreconcilable war, the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.”
Since professing believers are not perfect, the Scripture teaches and the Standards affirm, that their growth in grace is progressive. Those being considered for church office should demonstrate a maturity of life by a regular pattern of growth in Christlikeness. Even the most mature church officer continues to progress regularly in his sanctification and maturity in his life and faith.

“By failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions.”

WCF 13.3 states, “In which war, although the remaining corruption, for a time, may much prevail, yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part does overcome; and so, the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.”
Professing believers are incapable by their own strength to overcome the effects of remaining sin; they must depend on the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit to put to death the works of the flesh and by the Spirit put on the character of Christ. Church courts are to examine candidates for church office to inquire into how they put off the old and put on the new by the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit.
Professing believers can say, “I was once a sinner struggling with—-, but Christ washed me. Some corruption remains, but the Spirit enables me to put it off the old and to put on its Christlike opposite.” If this is our true understanding for all professing believers, it is just as true for church officers.

The Amendments Will Guide Church Courts
These amendments are beneficial to guide church courts in their duty to examine church officers with respect to their Christian character. These amendments provide the following:

Amplify the Scriptural requirements for church office found in many passages, such as in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.
Encourage courts to be diligent in examining both theological views as well as character. “Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers” (I Tim 4:16). “Keep watch over yourselves and of all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers” (Acts 20:28).
Encourage courts to ask appropriate questions on a variety of areas: such as, marital issues, child abuse, racism, sexual purity, use of time, friendships, and financial management.
Use the language of “reputation,” which is in line with the Pauline language, and touches on qualifications such as to be “respected” (1 Tim 3:2), “well thought of by outsiders” (1 Tim 3:7), and “above reproach” (Titus 1:7).
Apply our biblical understanding of our theology and practice to church officers.
Define general moral thinking and behavior specifically to reflect and apply current realities facing the church.
Understand and apply the teachings of the Westminster Standards, especially as delineated in Larger Catechism questions 138 (What are the duties required in the seventh commandments?) and 139 (What are the sins forbidden in the seventh commandment?).

While the debate on questions about biblical sexual ethics gave rise to these amendments, the intent and content of the amendments cover the whole spectrum of character qualities for church officers.
As one outside observer noted: Seen in the context of the 2,000-year history of the church, the PCA’s deliberations were hardly revolutionary. But in 2021 cultural revolutionary America, the language commissioners proposed be added to the PCA’s Book of Church Order ring with Christian bravery before a hostile world:
Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same-sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires . . . or by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or by failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office. 
Watch the video here.

Sadly, Evangelical Christians are buying into the thinking of the world. We should know better. Not only do we have the same evidence available to everyone else in the world, but we also have God’s Word. He has made it clear that our bodies belong to Him alone. He has made it plain that life is conceived even before conception in the womb.

When Justice Alito’s draft was leaked, thousands of mostly Millennial and Gen Z women took to the streets chanting, “My body, my choice.” That mantra is not only the argument for wholesale abortion, but the logic behind so much of what’s driving the thinking of our next generation of kids. Yet is “my body, my choice” reasonable? Is it logical?
If you want to have a conversation with your Gen Z children or grandkids, you should understand how social media, cultural influencers and educational elites have reprogrammed their values. Examining the values of this generation will help us understand why more than 85% of them embrace the LGBTQ+ agenda, and why 59% support the legality of abortion in almost all cases.
Progressive: Gen Zs are progressive on issues like LGBTQ+ rights, abortion, racial justice and open borders. They believe government should play a greater role in solving problems and are more likely to attribute climate change to human activity rather than natural patterns.
Compassion: Feelings are more important than the dogmas of right or wrong. The emotional trauma of a woman being forced to carry a child supersedes the moral rightness or wrongness of her choice to abort. To cause others to feel bad about their decisions is hateful. To make a moral judgment is bigotry.
Diversity and Inclusion: Gen Z wants to work for companies that champion diversity and buy products from advertisers who use images portraying diversity. Everyone should be welcomed and included, regardless of race, gender, sexual preferences, religious views or moral beliefs. (Everyone, that is, except for those whose views are not inclusive: evangelical Christians or political conservatives.)
Authentic: As Frank Sinatra once sang, “I’ve gotta be me.” And “me” is whatever I decide I want to be, regardless of what the biology or scientific facts say. To be authentic is no longer to express verifiable reality, but to express what you imagine yourself to be, and then to demand that others see you the same way.
Is it really “our body, our choice?”
The LGBTQ+ lobby changed everything when they convinced cultural elites to divide sex and gender distinctions: your sex defined by empirical data like your genitalia and chromosome makeup at birth; your gender determined by what you feel it is or want it to be. If, as a woman, you insist that the preborn baby in your womb is not a viable person and subject to elimination, but others disagree, then those pro-life supporters are haters of women. In the value system of most Gen Zs, each person gets the right to decide what is real to them, and those who push back are denying their fundamental right to be who they want to be.
When it comes to who owns our bodies, there are only three choices:
You own your own body: This thinking is at the root of the pro-abortion movement when it comes to abortion and the sexual preference and gender identity lobby. This lawlessness is what’s destroying our society. In 2 Timothy 3:1, the Apostle predicts our dystopian future: “In the last days people will be lovers of self…” He goes on to describe the horrors that are unleashed on society when everyone does what they see fit.
Read More
Related Posts: