Another Carlton Pearson story

We’ve reported on gcm cohort Carlton Pearson several times, but found this commentary so informative, we wanted to bring it to your attention. Although its a year old, it still sheds light on the old/new fallacy of Pearson which has now strangely rooted itself within the gay christian movement.

Its written by  Matt Green, editor of Ministry Today. MT is a Christian leadership magazine under the Strang Communications umbrella.

Pentecostal universalist Carlton Pearson is convinced that his “new” take on hell will eventually be adopted by the rest of the church, as he claimed at the end of his appearance last Friday on Dateline.
The crazy thing about Pearson’s theology is not merely that he thinks he has come up with a revolutionary revelation: Pearson joins the ranks of various Christians who taught an “alternative” view of eternal punishment–from 2nd-century church father, Origen, to 20th-century religious philosopher, John Hick. No, the strange thing about Pearson is how he claims he came up with the belief system he calls inclusionism.” (Interestingly, he avoids–or is unaware of–the theological terms “inclusivism” and “universalism”.)

Since he carefully avoided the terms “universalism” and “inclusivism”, I’ve speculated before that he co-opted “inclusionism” i.e. “radical inclusion” from the gay christian movement via his previous associations with Yvette Flunder. The gcm uses the term “inclusion” like a doctrine and was using it before Pearson popularized it. Its no coincidence that the first place he fled to after being declared a heretic was not the Buddhist or Hindu temple, not the Muslim mosque and not closest atheist confab, but to the gay church. In a rather comical way, Green demonstrates how Pearson uses a “common sense” shuffle game in explaining his falsehood.

These “common-sense” objections to the traditional view of hell may resonate with the secular skeptic, but Pearson’s noticeable avoidance of a coherent biblical argument should strike any thoughtful Christian as bizarre. If you intend to dismantle a cardinal doctrine built on two millennia of church history and Scriptural interpretation, you need more than a handful of witty one-liners. It’s like trying to take down the Brooklyn Bridge with a butter knife.

In a broader sense the article shows just how flaky false doctrine really is. If you study your bible and use spiritual discernment, there’s little chance you will get sucked in by it.

17 thoughts on “Another Carlton Pearson story

  1. It seems you guys really do your homework. Would you please send a response as to your research practices that you do before you post information on this website? I also support how you carefully state the results of your findings. I wish you guys were able to be heard on the NRB network of had a radio broadcast nationwide or maybe I missed something.

  2. Humm, Another guy walks into “my” house and asks “me” to stop using Palmolive, and use Joy to clean my dishes properly. 🙂

  3. Hello Mincraige,
    Our research includes searching the scriptures and comparing what SCRIPTURE says to what the gcm says. We also look at any historical evidence that points to a spiritual pattern among those who are naming the name of Christ but engaged in unrepentant sexual immorality.

    Thanks for your comments and for checking GCMW out.

  4. I found it incredibly interesting in the Dateline report that the one person used to comment in the opposition to Carlton was Pastor Ted Haggard of New Life Church in Colorado Springs…..or shall i say the former pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs…He, of course, was found to have had some very interesting private beliefs contrary to the public persona he offered to his congregation. .And, it does seem to me that Carlton continues, to this day, to share a sense of purpose and meaning in Life…while Mr Haggard, now a former evangelical minister to had claimed his former classmate to be in error, is mired in the confusion of an a delusion. So, it is best to love thy neighbor as you would love yourself. Carlton has moved a direction to do so…..And, so should you. Even if it means on the other side of the world….There are plenty of people to be loved out there….Go love the world as you have the power to do so as God willed if from the very beginning.

  5. angllhug,
    If Im understanding your logic it goes something like this:

    1.Man A (Haggard) was wrong for telling Man B (Pearson) he was wrong.
    2. Consequently, Man A was then found to be wrong, which vindicates Man B as right.
    3. Conclusion: No one should tell anyone else that they are wrong.

    Correct me if Im wrong, but I just want to get clarification on your logic.

  6. angllhugnu2,

    Defending someone’s bad behavior and error with someone else’s bad behavior and error is not only illogical (as gcmwatch points out), but also un-biblical.

    When you tell people to “love they neighbor as you would love yourself” and equate that with Carlton’s error of moving away from the truth of the Scriptures, you are creating a red herring argument.

    What’s worse, you are denying the importance of what Jesus said in his prayer to God the Father regarding truth and sanctification:

    Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

    You should read the entire chapter of John 17.

    It can’t get any clearer than in the following verse where Jesus equates the truth of God’s Word with sanctification of his saints:

    Jhn 17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

    The “love” that you want to elevate doesn’t even come close to the love that Jesus would have us share.

    This verse describes his meaning of love quite accurately:

    Jhn 17:26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare [it]: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

  7. I agree with DL’s original point that, Carlton Pearson, has used his charisma to promote a political aganda under the guise of theology. His contention that he created thgis “Doctrine of Inclusion” is rediculous, and a cause for serious concern as per the mans motives. However I think that your post was misleading in that it implied a connection between the doctrine itself, and the GCM.

  8. The “Doctrine of Inclusion,” is a watered down version of Apokatastasis: a theology held by Origen and all of the major theological figures of the first few centuries of the Christian Church. In that time period there were seven teologists of note, four of which believed in the apokatastasis, two in a purgatoric afterlife, and only one: St. Augustine, ascribed to a belief in eternal damnation. It was not until the Beatification of St. Augustine, and the subsequent adoption of his writings as the official dogma of the Catholic church that Apokatastasis, was declared heresy. Indeed, when most of Origen’s writings were condemned by Constantinople in 553 AD, Apokatastasis was not among the anathemas spoken against him.

    For those who aware, apokatastasis, differs from Carlton Pearson’s Doctrine, in that, while Pearson, denies the existance of Hell, Apokatastasis, holds that, Hell is a temporary, transitionary state, by which one is brought to repentance before entering the Kingdom of Heaven. It also holds the view that all creation will be returned to Heaven, including Satan. All are ultimately to be forgiven by God’s infinite Mercy, and redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.

  9. Colby, check any of the gcm websites, particularly those of the Fellowship and you’ll see that Im right about the connection. When you look at the specifics of Pearson’s inclusion doctrine and the gcm doctrine, it is almost interchangeable at certain points.

    With the issue of hell, you would be hard pressed to find any gcm who subscribe to the biblical perspective of hell. This is one of Pearson’s major points as noted in the article. To agree with the Bible about hell would disavow the broader inclusion/radical inclusion beliefs about the same.

    Again I say that Bishop Pearson did not go to any of the other religious faiths he declares are worthy of heaven without repentance. He made a beeline to the gcm. That can be tracked. Additionally, he has been on the gcm church circuit every since Yvette Flunder was invited to speak at the diminished AZUSA conference.

    No connection?

  10. I am not denying the connection between CP and the GCM, such a link is obvious to any who pay attention. I am defending the belief system.
    Apokatastasis, from which CP derives his “doctrine,” in no way condones homosexuality, merely states that they will not eternally be denied communion with God. So it is a very attractive doctrine, to the GCM. The belief in itself states nothing about homosexuality, or any specific sin, for that matter, merely that they to will be granted the mercy of God.

    GCMW: Can you cite evidence showing Pearson derived his DOI from apokatastasis?

  11. “…while Pearson, denies the existance of Hell, Apokatastasis, holds that, Hell is a temporary, transitionary state, by which one is brought to repentance before entering the Kingdom of Heaven. It also holds the view that all creation will be returned to Heaven, including Satan. All are ultimately to be forgiven by God’s infinite Mercy, and redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.”

    You are aware that is completely false, at least compared to what the Bible teaches about hell, right?

  12. No, It is completely false given the standard Catholic Dogma established at the beatification of St. Augustine. The apostle Paul was an Apokatastasist, many verses of the Verses that confirm Apokatastasis, are in Romans, and the other texts of Paul. Read, for example, 1 Corinthians 15, particularly verses 25-28. This is one of Origen’s major proofs of concept.

  13. Neither Origen or Catholic Dogma is the Bible. There is a canaverous difference.

    Superimposing a predetermined ideology onto scripture only reveals that one is afraid of letting the Word speak for itself.

    Such is the case with your apopka theories and Paul.

  14. Thank you for your posts. I am being enlightened by them. For my own edification – what does “canaverous” mean? I can’t find it in the dictionary.

    GCMW: Eld Carl, thats actually a misspelling. It should be cavernous which means: “Resembling a cavern, as in depth, vastness, or effect.” Thanks for pointing that out and for reading.

  15. Carlton Pearson is not a Christian Universalist. Don’t ever confuse him with us because we believe that every sin and disobedience shall receive a just recompense of reward, that those who defile the Temple of the Holy Spirit shall incur destruction, and that the wages of sin is death. Although believing BOTH the promises of destruction AND restoration to be STRICTLY true, we do take Romans chapter 1 seriously, along with 1Timothy chapter 1 about the law being made for those who are such perverts. While believing in what the Concordant Translation translates as “the evangel of the glory of the happy God,” we do believe that the path of restoration through Christ’s Blood will be the hardest path for those who’ve sinned against such Covenant Blood, according to Hebrews chapter 10; that although those who’ve died in Adam will most assuredly be made alive in Christ, the Blood will still profit none who haven’t repented, and those who’ve sinned against the Blood willfully will have to answer for the Blood before the Blood will answer for them after the close of the ages of ages. Carlton Pearson, even among most Christian Universalists is thought to be in very grave errors for which he’ll answer the most severely for turning the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ into licentiousness and indicating to the wicked that while they remain in their wickedness that there’s any peace for them. The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord, but every single soul from first to last must repent according to Acts chapter 17 as the qualifier through the judgment of the Day of the Lord to receive life and that more abundantly after they’ve been beaten with many or fewer stripes, been judged for the thoughts and intents of their hearts, and have “remembered” and returned to the Lord according to the intent of the judgments of the Psalms, Isaiah, and Ezekiel through which judgment is sent forth to victory. The Lake of Fire preceding the dispensation of the final restoration shall be the death of all who are condemned for their works. Grace saves none whom the ministry of condemnation has not condemned. These are God’s two Covenants: Law and Grace. The one is as needful as the other to break us all from the serpent’s lie and to reveal to all of us that we are ruined creatures apart from Redeeming grace. But, in the dispensation of the fullness of times, God will draw together into One all things in Christ of those in the heavens where the warfare with Satan has been and of those in the earth where the warfare with the carnal nature and with one another has been. All of this will be effected in Him according to the power which He has to subdue all things to Himself, according to the counsel of His will, and to the praise of His glorious grace.

Comments are closed.