Posted by: shannynmoore | May 27, 2009

Wasilla Pastor Preaches Against the Gay Anti-Christ

The Independent Baptist Church of Wasilla has quite a preacher. Ron Hamman is quite a homophobe. His fascination with sodomy doesn’t come close to the pure pornographic press releases from Rev. Jerry Prevo, but he gets his point across. Hamman’s letter in The Frontiersman ran today. I’m trying to be tolerant of the intolerant! It’s not easy. How do we combat this kind of hate? Ideas?

Will the Antichrist be a homosexual?
By Ron Hamman
Religion Views
Published on Monday, May 25, 2009 9:15 PM AKDT
In answering this question, it is important to assert the question does not originate with me, lest someone out there think that I am bringing some new doctrine out to bolster the political climate. But as the study of Bible prophecy includes verbiage as to the behavior of the one called “that Wicked” by Paul in II Thessalonians, it is not only a legitimate question to ask, but also one to answer.

While the word “homosexual” is not in the Bible, the behavior of those who practice homosexuality, and God’s estimation of them, very definitely is. When the word came into existence I cannot tell you, but what we can say for sure is that when Noah Webster published his first dictionary in 1828, it was not included. This means that homosexuality is a modern word invented to replace the word Noah Webster did include, sodomy, defined as a crime against nature. This is historical revisionism in action.

Sodomy is defined in scripture by two things, the first being that of where it began: Sodom. In Genesis 13:13 we have the first mention of the men of Sodom, pronouncing that they “were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.” Their saga is continued in chapters 18 and 19 with their sin being so great that not only does God say that it “is very grievous,” but he himself comes down to destroy them with fire, the rubble of which still stands as a warning to us today.

*
While the Genesis account does not graphically describe their sin, leading some to deny it as being the same as homosexuality, their sin is obviously just that by how it is described: lying with mankind as with womankind. What other conclusion can be reached when they want to “know” the men who were in Lot’s house, the same word the Bible uses in Genesis 4 in relation to the conception of Cain? And that Lot himself understood their intentions is clear; not only did he call such behavior wicked, but he also offered his virgin daughters as substitutes, which the men of Sodom refused.

And one more thing: Sodomy is the only sin for which God came down from heaven to destroy. Though God dealt with many other sins in various ways, there is no other for which he came down from heaven to verify and destroy. In the New Testament, sodomy is declared to be “against nature.” And of the men, Paul in Romans 1 says they leave “the natural use of the woman….” In effect, there is no greater sin against God than to reject how he made you, and no greater sin against women than to reject how God made them.

But will the Antichrist be a homosexual? Having seen what the Bible says of sodomy, we have no further to look than the book of Daniel, chapter 11 to find our answer. It says, “Neither shall he [Antichrist] regard… the desire of women….” As I said at the onset, I am not the first to draw attention to this, but the verbiage is clear.

From a lost perspective, the reason sex sells, pornography is profitable, and prostitution is “the world’s oldest profession” is mankind’s desire of women. From Christianity’s position, it is part of the glue for the bond of marriage and the propagation of a godly heritage. But homosexuality does not regard this — in their unbridled lusts they burn for their own gender.

But consider this: The time is ripe for such a leader. Indeed, it should not be surprising that the one who is against everything Biblical and Christian should be a partaker of so great a sin; there is no greater way to reject the Creator than to reject your gender and his design for it. And at what other time have we seen such perversion come out of the closets onto our streets, threatening violence if we do not accept their ways?

Is it any wonder that Revelation 13 says that this same Antichrist will make war with the saints of the tribulation, and overcome them? Are they not now readying themselves to make it illegal to “offend” them in any way, calling it hatred to preach against their sin? Is it because they love us? The time is ripe for such a man.

But remember that sodomy is the one sin that God left heaven and came to earth to destroy. Could it be that this will be the predominate sin on earth when Christ descends from the clouds to fight against the armies of wickedness? And will it be just a coincidence that the Antichrist will be the very first occupant of the lake of fire, tasting eternal death 1,000 years before even the devil himself?

You be the judge.

Ron Hamman is pastor for Independent Baptist Church of Wasilla.


Responses

  1. The time is ripe for a lesson on the separation of church and state!

    I quoted this letter earlier today at http://www.bentalaska.com/

    Do the Palins attend Wasilla Baptist Church? Wow.

    **********NOTE FROM SHANNYN**********
    Palin’s church is the Wasilla Bible Church.

  2. “From a lost perspective, the reason sex sells, pornography is profitable, and prostitution is “the world’s oldest profession” is mankind’s desire of women.”

    So is this dude deliberately ignoring his many married colleagues who have notoriously engaged in sexual relations with young men, or is it an oversight?

  3. As a Scot, we’ve had a bit of this nonsense here when a gay minister was called to a new parish and our own tartan taliban started frothing at the mouth to stop the call. The case ended up at the General Assemby where he was confirmed.

    My point is however to ask the homophobes if sodomy is so wicked why isn’t there a Commandment against it? You know – No 11. Thou shalt not b****r thy neighbour? In the same way, you might ask that as the dietary laws are so clear, presumably eating a bacon roll or a prawn cocktail must automatically disqualify the culprit for office. One final point did you know that the Bible doesn’t actually say why Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed? Bacon rolls anyone?

    Finaly if going against biblical sins is so bad, why is Newt Gingrich so prominent?

    • Ezekiel 16:49 makes clear why S&G were destroyed: selfish, pride, arrogance, overfed, greedy, carelessness about neighbors… and so on.

      The ransom sacrifice freed so called christans from the Mosaic Code we know at the “Ten Commandments”. The Mosaic Code was actually 600+ laws governing the Jewish people to keep them clean, safe and free from harm.

      There is no explanation for Newt except he’s a great strategist and clever with the word.

      • Yeah, I hear about the sacrifice conveniently freeing people from the dietary laws (the Jews don’t agree thought) and it is a convenient excuse. But what about the mixing of cotton and polyester. That is still a stoning offense, I believe.

  4. His reasoning is flawed.
    1. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for being greedy, selfish, arrogant and overfed. The majority of the population was heterosexual.

    2. Other biblical cities had similar mob homosexual gang rape situations and those were not destroyed. Read of Judges ch.19 about the city of Gibeah.

    3. Civilizations exist outside the realm of Judiasm and Christianity, some have acceptance of homosexual relationships. Think Inupiat.

    4. The various passages “quoted” from the bible are twisted away from their true meaning of being shameful the same way long hair or too much makup is. Biblically speaking, homosexuality is generally viewed as shameful to some but more of a personal issue than anything else.

    5. Faiths that are interested in cleaning up society should look inwards first. Matthew ch.7 is a good place to start.

    • I meant to include the reference to Ezekiel’s understanding of why S&G were destroyed. Ezekiel 16:49

    • Excellent response. Furthermore, if he takes the Bible literally, he is completely wrong about this being the only time God “came down” to destroy mankind. What about the flood?

  5. I went to an evangelic meeting at Loussac a couple of years ago (they rented the theater). At that meeting the speakers painstakingly went through all the prophecies and traced them back to historical events to show that the anti-christ was the Catholic Church.

    I wish they’d get their stories straight. This is so confusing. Who will the next anti-christ be? Personally I think it was the Bush administration.

  6. 11 Cor. 11:13-15
    For such are also apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

    And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

    Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

    Rev. 13:13-14
    And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.

    And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

    Matt. 12:31,32
    Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

    And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

    Sorry…I can go overboard. Celibacy. Oh, and all sins are equal. Judge not lest ye be judged. You will know them by their fruits.

  7. So…..is this guy okay with Lot offering up his virgin daughters ?

    Just asking…..

  8. The story of Sodom includes one man offering his daughters to be gang-raped in exchange for not attacking the city or something like that.

    Biblical family values.]
    So, with the attitude towards women as chattel and slavery is dandy, I am not sure that anything the Bible says about homosexuality has any legitimacy.

  9. What a swell man of God that Lot, offering up his daughters for rape.

    Reading all the inconsistencies and paradoxes in the Bible, I came to the conclusion long ago that the Bible was written, translated, manipulated, censored, edited and revised by men.

    If there is a truly loving God, why would it let those filled with hate and obsessions for power change and rewrite his supposed words?

    Love that Jesus guy though…

  10. I read a psychology study one time in which researchers screened the straight male volunteers for very anti-gay (male) attitudes. They then hooked up electronic sensors that would monitor the volunteers for sexual stimulation and screened male on male porn videos. To a man, the more anti-gay bias they displayed, the more arousal they exhibited during the screenings. The men who expressed comfort with gay men and their sexuality generally showed little arousal. Homophobia, it turns out, is a case of one who ‘doth protest too much.’ The question about the preacher man above: who’s he buggering in the dark closet he inhabits?

  11. “there is no greater way to reject the Creator than to reject your gender and his design for it.”

    This Pastor doesn’t even understand terms. Replace ‘gender’ for ‘sex’ and okay, he can make his lame argument.
    But keep ‘gender’ and the implication means any deviance from the norm for a gender within a particular time frame of a culture – and I guess you go to hell.
    Examples: American Victorian woman wearing pants would be against her prescribed gender. American nuclear family man staying home to raise the kids while wife works – both acting against gender norms. Female migrant drives truck for construction of Alaska oil pipline, definitately a deviant. And today? A gay man wants to raise and nurture an orphaned child – oh the horror, men aren’t nurturing!

  12. Gee, if Alaskans want their fix of porn, all it takes is a bit of waiting around for another letter to the editor. Written by one of Alaskas pastors…

  13. The ‘ Pastor’ (in words only ) uses this line as a confirmation of sorts for his arguement it seems any as far as a justification for his thoughts.

    “It says, “Neither shall he [Antichrist] regard… the desire of women….” As I said at the ”

    He say’s the [ Antichrist] will NOT desire of women… BUT… I don’t ever remember a reference where Jesus ‘ desired of women’ either….?

    By his arguement (definition)…. Jesus was an ‘Antichrist ‘ as well. So much for proof of HIS point.

  14. I would consider it a greater sin against women to offer the virginity of a child to a group of “wicked” men at some house party in Sodom, than to “reject how God made” women. He says the antichrist will have no regard for “the desire of women”. What if the desire of women is gender equality?? Maybe the antichrist is a misogynist who thinks the “natural use of women” is to procreate. I also find it somewhat humorous that in his argument to prove heterosexuality is natural, he cites sex, pornography and prostitution (way to throw the millions of women and children slaves in the sex trade industry world wide under the bus – I might argue that the desire for women is also “wicked”).

    I think it’s also important to point out that nowhere in this letter does Hamman draw from the teachings of Jesus Christ, which are the cornerstone of many major denominations of modern Christianity.

    In answer to your question, how can we stop this kind of hate? Tolerate his intolerance, this is a free country and Hamman is welcome to his opinion and his beliefs. Standing behind our belief that the only way to keep this country free is to uphold the separation of church and state.

  15. It’s almost anything that can offend the bible bangers I belonged to an Eveangelical Church and the intolerance toward anything that didn’t fit in their narrow world was incredible.Having had an alcohol problem at one stage of my life.I had empathy for any one struggling with the same problem .I discovered that they were happy to help only when the alcholic fit into their concept of society.In other words don’t bring anyone into the sanctuary thats dirty,smells or God forbid still drinking.I had to wonder if it was because they couldn’t contribute financially.I had to leave of course.Their view on homosexuality was much the same narrow minded and intolerant.

  16. Shannyn, you may want to adjust the opening line of your piece to reflect that Hamann is pastor of the Independent Baptist Church of Wasilla as opposed to Wasilla Baptist Church, which is not only easily confused with the Wasilla Bible Church but also with the other Baptist churches in Wasilla and surrounding area. I know it’s at the bottom of the article you quoted, but it might be good to be clear from the start. Just a suggestion.
    **********NOTE FROM SHANNYN**********
    Thanks!

  17. It says, “Neither shall he [Antichrist] regard… the desire of women….”

    I guess the good pastor is unaware of the fact that some people are asexual in their desires; they have no libido. I suspect that the Bible is inferring that the Anti-Christ will have no interest in bonding with a woman (or anyone). No surprise that the pastor feels this way. Baptists are notoriously homophobic. My daughter went to a Baptist private school (limited options in my small town) and was told by the minister to convince her family to vote against allowing homosexuals to work in the food industry. He told her that they go into the kitchen and spit into the food. Then he said that everyone will get Aids. Dear god! People who believe that kind of crap definitely do not pray to the Christian God to whom I talk.

  18. The nitwit pastor appears to selectively ignore that many aspects of a normal heterosexual relationship includes acts which fit under the definition of “sodomy.”

    As for not desiring women, people forget about Mary Magdalene.

  19. Steve at 2:14am – Thank you. That was hilarious! I’m still LMAO.

  20. This pastor has no idea what he’s talking about. I have a friend who was born on June 6, 1966 and he would be very unhappy with all of this random speculation. He will not be usurped. Oh wait – he is actually gay… Well, you can’t be wrong about all things all the time I guess.

  21. I think this may be the hottest piece the Frontiersman has ever had at 559 comments and counting.

    I was pleasantly surprised by the number of comments by locals who were quite disturbed by this pastor’s interpretation of the Bible before bloggers like Shannyn brought it to the national audience. Contrary to what people may have seen nationally in the recent campaign, Wasilla really does have some good, intelligent people.

  22. If I don’t follow the teachings of christ, and in fact resist the attempts of zealot evangelical christians to convert me to christianity, doesn’t that by definition make me, and over 4 billion others like me, an “anti-christ”?

    And is it a mortal sin to use lower-case “c” to describe a religion I find irrelevant to my reality but somehow tolerable or even, on occasion, refreshing in certain aspects such as when those who practice it place compassion above self-interest and love above hate?

    The spellchecker has red-lined each instance above and I think it wants to send me to hell for my transgressions.

    I am sorry, I just don’t see awarding an upper-case “C” under these circumstances.

  23. Welp, everybody’s gotta be doing something. He’s convinced folks to pay him a salary to invent bilge, so at the very least that’s money they won’t be drinking away of a Friday. Or a Tuesday.

    So that’s good, at least.

  24. And I used to think Bush was the anti Christ!
    But I think the good pastor has not been watching Cheney running around trying to scare the bejesus out of all of us.
    If he did, the gays would not even be in the running!

  25. The Oxford English Dictionary dates the first use of the word “homosexual” to Krafft-Ebbing’s classic text _Psychopathia Sexualis_, published in 1886.

    Hardly “revisionism”, and while an English major may consider 1886 “modern”, most parishioners would think that 1828 and 1886 are about equally remote historical dates.

    That this nugget is easily researched, and the pastor chose not to do so, is a perfect example of the anti-intellectualism inherent in a rant such as this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: