Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach;no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money;one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;(but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil.Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. - 1Timothy 3: 1-7 (ASV)
I do not expect someone as false as Jennifer LeClaire to understand true Biblical Christianity. She is someone who makes a living off of pretending she is a prophet of the Lord. In 2007, she falsely prophesied that the Lord told her that He was renewing His covenant with America. That He was going to heal our land. How is that working out Jen? Despite the fact that the world continues to spiral deeper into the end times, LeClaire's entire premise was false because God would never have said what she claimed because America was never under covenant with God. I say this as the backdrop to the story this week that Juanita Bynum will be elevated by some outfit known as the Global United Fellowship (GUF) to the status of Bishop. The irony is not lost on me that we should add another "F" to that acronym since the word "guff" actually means foolish and empty talk. I do not expect more from GUFF either since they refer to their own leader as "His Grace, The Most Reverend Neil C. Ellis." The Bible understanding wing of Christianity understandably went a little apoplectic when the news of Bynum's imminent Bishopness became news. Because the false always defends the false however, Jennifer LeClaire abused her editorial position at Charisma to pen the following defense of Juanita:
LeClaire mixes metaphors and reality to try and throw as little against the wall as possible in the hopes that those being critical appear mean-spirited and unforgiving. I want us first to understand that man has not defined the office of Bishop - God has. We find the qualifications for this office in our key verses today. It has become acceptable in modern churchianity to look upon these verses and others where God spells out qualifications as being too hard to fulfill. As if God must not have known to what He was speaking about. Those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture must disagree. The first thing we see is that this office is to be held by men, not women. Wait a minute preacher! Are you saying a woman should not hold the office of Bishop? No, God is saying that. I am merely pointing out the Scriptures. A man who seeketh. A husband of one wife. These things are only ambiguous if we are looking to make them so.
Let's put that aside for today however because Juanita Bynum is disqualified on nearly every other front as well. She is not the wife of one husband but two. She is actually the divorced wife of two husbands. Now, some claim that her first marriage may have preceded her salvation and certainly we do not carry that forward if so. The same would go for her admitted foray into lesbianism. Her own testimony however seems to indicate that she was saved at a young age. She is on record as claiming God called her to be a prophet when she was still in high school. LeClaire however is able to minimize everything into one sentence she then tries her best to dismiss:
"Suffice it to say that a peppered history that includes homosexual encounters with women, speaking at an ordination service for a gay minister, alleged breaches of contract and divorce has some second-guessing Bynum's appointment as bishop." - Jennifer LeClaire
Yes Jennifer, these are very real and serious considerations, especially in light of Scripture. This is not merely a "peppered history." This is a lifetime of willful sin, while continuing to make money from the sheep of the Lord by pretending to be a prophet. Let us start here beloved. Someone claiming to be a prophet is claiming to hear directly from God. Bynum has frequently claimed such direct revelation. Yet she is divorced twice and both times claims to be the victim of domestic violence. Now, I am not condemning her for the divorce actions. God still hates divorce but it is not the unpardonable sin. I am merely pointing out the sheer lunacy of claiming to hear directly from God but marrying an abusive man, twice. Before you think that too harsh seriously consider it for a moment. So God would tell you that someone needs to sow their electric bill into your ministry but not let you in on the fact that the man you are considering marrying is going to abuse you? Twice. That would lead me to think you are probably not hearing from God after all. Not just because of the abusive marriages but because you use prophecy to rob people. One of the qualifications from the key verses is the person cannot be a lover of money.
"You've got to release something--no I'm talking to you. Come on! Hear me tonight--you've got to release something! You've got to release it now! What's a $1,000.00 in exchange for eternal victory? Let me tell you something--pick up the phone right now! You need to go to the phone! It's time for you to sow! Because in order for God to give it to you you've got to divinely release something. What is a divine release seed? It is a seed that I can't afford to give, One check away from your breakthrough! One check away from your deliverance! Pick up the phone! It's a divine release!" - Juanita Bynum on TBN in 2005
This is only one of many absurdly heretical comments made by Bynum. LeClaire correctly points out that she was one of many targets of a rap song that called out false prosperity preachers. LeClaire also points out that she was recently arrested for failing to adhere to a court order to pay $140,000 to a company she had contractually reneged on. If all of this is not unseemly enough, let us not forget that she spent 1 million dollars on her nationally televised wedding ceremony to Bishop Thomas Weeks. The same man she would later accuse of the domestic violence that led to her second divorce. How in the world can anyone look at this and say it is a good testimony, as is required in our key verses? She recently claimed she had taken a picture of Jesus at a service. This is who Jennifer LeClaire defends.
Bynum has lived a stormy life, with ups and downs and downs and ups. Many will not let her live it down, but the GUF has embraced her. How do we apply the truth in 1 Tim. 3:2-5 to situations like this? Is the blood of Jesus sufficient for a peppered past and all the scandals that went along with it? How do you judge true repentance? Is there a double standard for recovering from scandals for women in ministry? Should Christians really be throwing stones at Bynum?" - Jennifer LeClaire
Mixing metaphors and the truth as only Jennifer LeClaire can. How do we apply any Scripture? Completely devoid of personal experiences. The Word of God is not required to bow down to what our personal experiences are. If God says that this is the list of qualifications for a Bishop then we apply these verses by not assigning anyone this title without meeting these qualifications. Is the blood of Jesus sufficient for a "peppered past?" Absolutely, but the blood is in reference to the forgiveness of her sins, not her restoration to or elevation in ministry. This is the shell game false teacher sycophants love to play. No one is suggesting that a truly contrite and penitent Bynum is somehow beyond the unbelievable grace of Jesus Christ. We are simply saying she has lost any credibility to continue to pretend that she hears from Him about other people's lives. By the way, if there is a double standard for men recovering from scandals in ministry I would side with LeClaire in condemning that standard. It seems however that LeClaire's argument is that since men get an unbiblical pass regarding ministerial scandals that women should too. How absurd.
Should Christians really be throwing stones at Juanita Bynum? This question is posed of course to essentially accuse people of throwing the stones. It is a referent to the Biblical story of the woman caught in the act of adultery. As such, the obvious answer to Jennifer's question is "no." The religious leaders brought this woman to Jesus to test Him. They wanted to stone her to death as per the law of Moses. Let me be the first to say that we ought not be found testing Jesus in such a manner. Let me also say that anyone who is advocating the stoning of Juanita Bynum is clearly wrong and possibly mentally unbalanced. But somehow, I think Jennifer LeClaire knows full well that no one is actually advocating that. By mixing this metaphor she is abusing these Scriptures to defend the indefensible. Yes Jesus said let he who has no sin cast the first stone. But He also said to the woman - go and sin no more. More to this point however, He did not appoint this woman a prophet after this incident. He did not give her a television show, radio program, or any ministerial opportunity at all. Claiming Juanita Bynum is beyond the grace of God would be akin to throwing stones. Claiming she is not qualified to hold the Biblical office of Bishop is not only accurate but it is unbelievably obvious.
Rev. Anthony.
