Bishop Yvette Flunder, the lesbian pastor, has a problem. Apparently, the bishop is not aware that as she travels around the country preaching a gospel of lies, she is racking up a record of contradictions. View this video [realplayer required for viewing] of Bishop Flunder’s fancy homoletical revisioning of God’s Word. We have already shown you how she has made statements in direct opposition to what the scripture says. Then, we discovered this video in an earlier Washington, DC speech (Nov 2, 2005) where she contradicts her words in Phoenix (June 4, 2007).
Flunder (and those in the gay christian movement) liberally employ a form of allegorical perspective which gives an individual the unrestricted freedom to remove real or apparent contradictions between Scriptures and current beliefs. This is how they neuter parts of the Bible that stand in the way of their cleverly crafted, but false premise. Practictioners of this roguish form of interpretation, replace clear scriptural truth and revelation with whatever cultural context fitting their presupposed ideology. This is a potent weapon of manipulative misinformation in the hands of false prophets, pulpit pimps and the gay christian movement.
As you will see in the video, Bishop Flunder has a phd in this type of revisioning. From Numbers 10:28, she hijacks the story of Moses and Hobab, allegorizing it to fit the ideology of the gay christian movement. To those listening, it is “revelation”, most likely because they are (1) minimal students of scripture or (2)already possess a predisposition (the itching ear syndrome) to believe what is being said so that it “affirms” their ideas about themselves.
But this 26 minute video from her speech at the Human Rights Campaign, a liberal-white-gay political lobby, Flunder unquestionably demonstrates that she herself is lost in a wilderness of her own fallacy.
We feel it necessary to give you some history on the HRC’s “religious conversion.” Although a political operation, the HRC for years courted the black church with “gospel concerts.” The purpose of the concerts was to infiltrate the stiff wall of resistance to homosexuality characteristic of most black Christians. These concerts, of course featured homosexual religious stage acts. In Atlanta, the 2002 “Gospel and Soul” was met with icy silence and some confusing responses. When that failed, the HRC began searching for gay christians who would take their political message and translate it into more palatable religious terminology. Thus, Flunder’s Pentecostal background made her a perfect candidate to carry the bastardized version of the gospel. The result was the “faith and fairness” conferences now bankrolled by HRC. HRC (with Flunder’s help?) attacked her former denomination here.
From Bishop Flunder’s “wilderness” speech, we have compiled a list of her astonishing attempts at legitimizing sin–with wanton disregard for the souls of vunerable people.
(1) “Same thing with the transgender community in San Francisco. They taught me. They said, ‘let’s remove the men and women signs off the bathrooms.’ I thought that was pretty good. Essentially why do we need male and female bathrooms, they said. You don’t have them at home. I said, that’s the truth. They said to me…’when we have baptisms, don’t put women on one side and men on the other side. Let people determine where they want to be or not be gender identified at all.”
If God created genders, separated them uniquely with different anatomy and even emotional makeup, why should anyone negate that? God pronounced his work “good”, however Bishop Flunder prefers to listen to those who despise God’s good creation and intent. Logically, one would have to demean their own gender in order to accomodate any gender. Flunder’s advisors are blind. The mechanics of home privacy are vastly different than those of a public place, especially in the house of God.
Flunder repeats her signature falsehoods about homosexuals, talents or giftings.
(2) “I ask this question everywhere I go. How is it that so many gifts are disproportionately in the same gender loving people? Who in the world would do our hair, decorate our rooms, write and sing our gospel music? Where would we get beauty and color, dance, poetry, preaching and teaching? In fact, if it had not been for the God-given gifts [in homosexuals] the whole world would be blue.”
We have already cited that gifts and callings are given by God without repentance. This carries a duality of purpose. God does not take back his gifts to people, and neither does he require a person to be in relationship with him to receive gifts. We can easily make that point with Adolph Hitler. As evil as he was, he yet possesed a masterful gift of charisma which he used for evil purposes. The tragedy of such gifting is that unsubmitted to God, it becomes a curse to the bearer. Bishop Flunder’s prideful arrogance becomes more apparent each time she asks her question. Are homosexuals the only ones with an ability in cosmetology, oratory, culinary arts, interior design, music and fashion? How can less than 2% of the population claim such asthetical dominance? Our response is this.
After telling the story of a woman who baked a bad cake for 25 years, Flunder made this statement:
(3) “Time didn’t sanctify [the bad cake] it. It was just 25 years of bad cake.”
Perhaps Bishop Flunder has changed her mind about the affect of time on sin. In Phoenix, less than two years later, she said the only difference between a heretic and a prophet is time. If time doesn’t sanctify 25 years of bad cake making, then certainly it cannot sanctify 25 years of false prophecy.