Brad Chilcott leaves Christian Church Network over Homosexual Scriptures

Australia: Refugee activist leads his church out of Australian Christian Churches into apostasy.  Adelaide’s Activate church, led by well-known refugee advocate Brad Chilcott, has left the Pentecostal Australian Christian Churches (ACC) network, because he rejects the clear biblical prohibitions on homosexuality. Chilcott wants to place homosexuals into leadership responsibilities in the church.

“When we decided to keep our people who are in LGBT relationships in leadership we knew it would lead to this sort of conversation,” Chilcott said. 

“Leaving ACC was a mutually agreed decision.…it was about allowing those who identify as active homosexuals full participation in church the same as everyone else.”

The ACC responded to Activate leaving with a statement: “The Australian Christian Churches (ACC) is a movement of Pentecostal churches in voluntary cooperation and our congregations welcome anyone to attend any of our services in over 1,000 churches across Australia.

The foundation of what we believe is firmly based on the Bible, which clearly sets the standards for those in leadership positions. We find it sad that the same-sex marriage debate is polarising society, yet we respect the decision of a local church in Adelaide to leave the movement as a matter of their freedom of choice.

The ACC is the largest group of Pentecostal churches in Australia, and Chilcott does not know of any other church in that network who shares Activate church’s position. 

HOW TO BECOME APOSTATE

“There are many interpretations of Scripture. We used Scripture for a long time to exclude women, to argue in favour of apartheid, and to argue in favour of slavery.”

“I was brought up Christian Brethren and used to be fairly conservative. But I have gradually come to this position by prayer and study, over the last eight years. I don’t pretend to have all the answers or fully-formed responses to all the arguments that people may raise."

A RESPONSE TO CHILCOTT CONFUSION

ONE OF THE MOST FAR-REACHING CLAIMS made in the area of sexual ethics is that Jesus did not condemn homosexuality, so neither should we. Revisionist writers use this observation-exhortation to support a view of accommodating same-gender sexual behavior or orientation in society and the church.1 If accurate, this argument should quiet those who hold that homosexuality is sin. Even if the position of Jesus contradicts the Old Testament or teaching elsewhere in the New Testament, they see the position of Jesus as conclusive. The teaching of Christ is to have supreme authority.

In truth, Christ did not explicitly address the practice of same-gender behavior or orientation, which we call homosexuality. However, this alone does not allow us to conclude that He approved of homosexuality. 

As far as the Scripture record is concerned, Jesus never mentions circumcision. Yet the apostles rejected it as a requirement for salvation because Jesus had taught them about it. Either His instruction was not recorded in Scripture, or the principles Jesus taught made the way clear. Nor do we know that Jesus mentioned the practices of His day relating to abortion, euthanasia, birth control, spiritual gifts, or the death penalty. The church, however, has confidently applied ethical principles as compatible with the views of Jesus. No one claims that Jesus had no opinion on, or found unobjectionable, any practice on which He was silent. At best, the claim that Jesus did not condemn homosexuality is an argument from silence, and this is treacherous footing.

Jesus does mention Sodom. In fact, from His references to Sodom—in light of what He said about the Old Testament, marriage, sexuality, and purity—we can conclude something quite different about Jesus’ “silence.”