Wednesday, March 27, 2019

This Man Needs Help

H/T Pulpit and Pen:Clayton Jennings

When Don Jennings was ousted from his last church for helping to cover up the sexual and spiritual predation of his son, his wife and Clayton’s mother – Lisa – demanded the church give her the rights to a longstanding passion play directed by herself each year entitled Behold the Lamb. Being a major theatrical production for a small Indiana town, seeing the ‘show biz’ continue was important for Lisa, who used it to help propel her son into the spotlight.

Pulpit & Pen has spoken to members of Jennings’ former church who refer to Clayton as being a product ‘made’ by his parents. They recalled for us how Clayton would come out of his dressing room to play “hot Jesus,” a term Clayton and his friends used to describe him. Although this was off-putting to many in the congregation, Clayton’s parents didn’t seem to mind that their son was capitalizing upon Christ’s death to take the center-stage of fame. More than a few people told the Jennings family that Clayton seemed to be using his role as ‘Jesus’ for the wrong reasons – or at least in the wrong spirit – but they were ignored and shrugged off as critical to their child who, in the Jennings’ words, was ‘destined to be a star.’
Soon, Jennings’ church – under the pastoral leadership of his father – began to support the man’s playboy lifestyle, which he characterized as being an ‘evangelist. In recent days, Jennings has made admissions that his sexual promiscuity persisted during the time when he was receiving a stipend from the church to travel and speak so that “he could get his career started.”
Clayton Jennings, playing Christ
The full weight and influence of Jennings’ father and mother were thrust into the service of making their boy a star. Their lust for his fame seems to have rivaled even his own.

When I called Don Jennings in 2016 to make a private allegation regarding Clayton’s sins in accord with the second step of Matthew 18, he immediately did what we have also seen consistently from Clayton; he chided us for being too critical and therefore, not worthy of being heard. The elder Jennings had argued that because we had written an article of polite theological disagreement with John Piper, we must be “hyper-critical.” He did not want to hear anything negative about his son, claiming that it had been “appropriately dealt with already.”

This father did not seem to grasp that we knew he already knew about Clayton’s ongoing victimization of women because some had already come forward to Don to talk about how she had felt sexually used by Clayton and recounted what can best be described as clerical sexual misconduct. Don, Clayton’s father, essentially let Clayton apologize and then encouraged them to “move on.” Along with Clayton, and Don, Clayton’s own mother, Lisa also knew of the behavior.
Both Don and Lisa had heard their evangelist son, who their church was financially supporting, admit to engaging in careless and promiscuous fornication while being a licensed minister of the church. Both Don and Lisa Jennings responded by sweeping their son’s sin under the rug.

It was this information that led Don and Clayton’s church to (eventually) remove both of them.
Pulpit & Pen has also talked to women who as a part of the process of seduction, met Clayton’s parents during the time of his engagement (or at least courtship) with the woman who is now his wife. We have every reason to believe that Don and Lisa Jennings knew beyond a doubt that Clayton’s sexual impurity was not a one-time incident but a pattern of unrepentant behavior.
Whatever becomes of Clayton Jennings, it is absolutely fair to say that it should reflect to some extent upon his parents, who while having the opportunity to at least attempt to stop his spiritual abuse of women dead in its tracks, have instead done little more than enable him and cover up his immoral behavior.

Perhaps the best way to understand the depth of the desire that Don and Lisa Jennings have for their sons’ fame, is the way they continued to promote his stardom even after knowing he had abused his position as clergy for lasciviousness and debauchery. Lisa Jennings, who had sat in the room that fateful day and heard Clayton admit to sexual impurity, went on afterward to continue having Clayton play the role of Jesus Christ in the Behold the Lamb production.

Jennings portrayed Jesus in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Don and Lisa Jennings certainly became aware of Clayton’s ongoing sexual immorality in 2015. Countless sources from Noblesville, Indiana, indicate that it would have been impossible for them not to have known about Clayton’s repeated pattern of behavior even far, far sooner. Everyone else, so it seemed, already knew it. It didn’t matter to Lisa Jennings…the show must go on. Jennings took to the stage as ‘hot Jesus’ even after she heard her son’s belated and inescapable confession.
These were the feet that played Jesus, nailed to the cross.
A screenshot of Clayton’s feet, as he played the role of Jesus in his mother’s passion play production.
These are the feet of a man with his underwear around his ankles, sending a photograph of his genitals to an underage fan.
A photo released by the girl’s pastor and counselor. More evidence in released elsewhere. This is all we felt comfortable sharing (see editor’s note below).
[Editor’s Note: We were going to show all the photos released tonight by Pastor Fredrickson. However, we made an editorial decision not to show the photos here because of their graphic nature in light of Ephesians 5:12. It is however readily available enough, elsewhere.]

These are the same feet, so says the pastor who released the information, the testimony of the victim, and finally, the visual and digital evidence presented to the world tonight in the webcast.
The second photo is the fault of Clayton Jennings and his alone. The first photo, however, is the fault of all those who knew he was unqualified to play the part of Jesus (whether on or off the stage), but who promoted him anyway. Don and Lisa Jennings are regrettably at the top of this list.
Like Clayton, when Don and Lisa Jennings left their church under a cloud of scandal, they attacked that poor congregation for doing what they – in their own pursuit of nepotistic fame and vicarious living – refused to do; to hold Clayton Jennings accountable for his sins.

Now, Clayton Jennings is facing some very real consequences in every conceivable way that consequences can come. He has sown the wind, and will reap the whirlwind. I’m afraid, however, that the younger Jennings did not sow that wind alone. He had enabling help and assistance along the way.

To parents who didn’t do their job of teaching and discipline…for local churches that winked at his behavior in the name of attracting a crowd…to wannabe tag-along friends like Blake Whitely and the clingers-on in his new Dockside podcast, on-and-on… to all of his Instagram and Facebook fans who regarded his persona above righteousness and more than his victims…shame on you.
Shame on all of you.

Stop. Repent. Learn. Repeat.

[Note: This article was written by JD Hall and originally published at The Pulpit & Pen. Title changed by Ponderings of a Puritan.]

Collection of Mr. Jennings

Link below the information

About 

The Clayton Jennings Files website is designed to protect young women against this evangelist figure and give them a place to report the activities they have personally experienced by Mr Jennings.

It is important to understand we stand both with the victims of Mr Jennings and we also encourage Clayton to seek mental heath and drug treatment for the betterment of his life and his family.  If Mr Jennings ever does this, this website will come down.  The Matthew 18 approach has been done with Mr Jennings so religious obligation has been met, with the Matthew 18 process the job is to restore a brother or sister to the body of Christ.  We want this to happen.  The only way this will happen is through him fulfilling the points below. 
  • Mr Jennings will have to apologize to his victims through a video and social media posts 
  • Unlike previous confessions he cannot blame others for his own actions he has to take full responsibility 
  • Mr Jennings will have to check into a drug rehabilitation center for more than a month to get off his dependency of drugs
  • Mr Jennings will have to take the steps to deal with his perversions he has engaged in before and during his marriage with other women.  In doing so he will have to seek both religious and secular counseling. 
  • Real change will have to be seen over a duration of time so Mr Jennings can be restored to the body of Christ.
It is important to know this website was not designed for the reason to disparage Mr Jennings, but rather to warn other impressionable individuals and to draw Mr Jennings to repentance.  Many organizations have counseled his victims and there are more than "only a few".  The testimonies of these women are devastating and it is sad to see. 

If you like to search the site for more regarding Clayton, please look at the link provided: http://www.theclaytonjenningsfiles.com/

Monday, June 17, 2013

Angels and Reproduction!




Is it possible that angels can reproduce?  It was a question asked during a spirited debate regarding a good understanding of Gen. 6:1-4.  It is an interesting question that was spawned out of when angels were created, how much do we really know, and can we know with any certainty.  I would like to look at this briefly in hopes of addressing the opening question.  Though it is not the intent of the article to clarify what Gen. 6 is communicating, I do hope that the answer to the first question will bring the reader to a better position of understanding.

First, when were angels created?  In all honesty, Scripture is unclear as to when they were created.  However, we do know that they were created during the six days of creation.  Reason: Genesis 1:1 speaks, “In the beginning, God created…”  There was nothing else but God before He created the heavens and the earth.  Notice that it did not say, “In the beginning, God and the angels were there and then God created heavens and the earth.”  The next time we see this language used is in John 1 where it is much clearer as to who was there and was not there prior to creation.  John 1:1-3 states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” (Joh 1:1-3 ESV)  Putting these two Scripture references together, one sees the picture that the only being in existence was God prior to the creation we see in the six days.  This leads to a follow-up question, “On what day did God create the angels?”  The Scriptures do not specifically address this issue.  However, there may be a few clues we can glean from the Scriptures.

As stated, all things were created by God, Col. 1:16 adds that all things were created by Him everything that is in heaven and on the earth including, “whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers…” (Col 1:16 NET)  The ESV is not as clear as to what Paul is talking about, but in the footnotes one does see agreement that Paul is talking about the angelical realm.  One more clue as to the timing of their creation rests in Job 38 where we find the “morning stars” rejoicing at the laying of the earth’s foundation.  This would infer that the angelical realm was created no later than day 3 of Creation.  At best, we can surmise that the angels are created sometime between day 1 and day 3 of Creation. 

Second, we need to understand that angels are spiritual beings that are not created in the image of God.  This is an important distinction that must not be forgotten.  The question comes into mind if spiritual beings can reproduce after their own kind.  Jesus clarifies this when asked by the Sadducees regarding a hypothetical question of the seven brothers each dying before producing a child with the woman of the first brother doing their Levitical duties.  They asked whose wife she would be at the resurrection.  Jesus’ response, “"You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.  For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.” (Mat 22:29-30 ESV) One of the main reasons for marriage is the sexual union that makes a husband and wife one physically and spiritually as well as pro-creation.  This is no longer needed at the resurrection and we will be similar to the angels that are not given in marriage.  Because angels do not marry, we can rightly conclude that they are asexual beings.  Meaning, they do not have reproduction capabilities that would warrant the need for marriage.

Let’s say that this understanding of angels is just out there and that most certainly they can reproduce.  When God created, He created everything to its kind and within its kind they can reproduce.  This is fundamental to our understanding of the created order.  For example, can a dog and a cat mate to reproduce?  No.  Why?  Because, they are not of the same ‘kind.’ There is no two kinds that can come together to produce a new “kind”.  Likewise, angels and humans (only humans bear the image of God) are of different kinds and therefore could not come together to produce a new “kind”. 

Finally, “sons of God” has more than one meaning.  The phrase is used seven times outside of the Gen. 6 passage.  Of those seven times, four times the phrase is best understood as being human followers of God.  The other three references are found in the book of Job that refers to the angelical beings.  With the contextual clues of the Genesis 6 passage, it is not out of bounds to think that the “sons of God” may in fact be men of the Seth line that did call on the name of the Lord.

Conclusion: Angels are created by God sometime in the first three days of creation, more than likely on day one.  They do not have reproduction capabilities since no marriage is found in Heaven and even if they could, they would only reproduce their own kind, which is different from Man who is made in the image of God.