Dispensational Bible Institute

Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.
Our recent trip to Cooperstown New York

was great fun

and while we enjoyed the museums and the history

most fun of all...

was not simply seeing the 1557 pound pumpkin
(you are going to need a bigger crust)

or pumpkins on steroids... but meeting the people who grow such gourds... engage in the weigh off competition, and then cut the tops off their prized pumpkins, scoop out the seeds, climb inside and have a boat race.

What a wonderful country.... two pumpkin boats sank but the pumpkin paddlers survived.

© Discerning the Times Publishing Inc.
All rights reserved.
No part of this web site may be
reproduced or transmitted
by any means, electronic, mechanical,
digital, analog or photo copy and is not
authorized to be placed in any retrieval
system, multi-media or internet.

FAQ - (answers to your) Frequently Asked Questions.......

If you have questions for which you would like dispensational Bible-believing answers, please email Pastor Terry McLean

To get the answer, click on the question.

What about John MacArthur and his study Bible?

While the Bible continues to be the world's best selling book each year, and while Bibles sell in big numbers throughout the year, we are told that more Bibles are sold the last two months of the year than the previous ten months combined.
Bible sales are measured all year long, but the sales results for December are the most interesting because of the tremendous volume they represent and because many Bibles sold in December are given as gifts.

For all of those reasons it is fascinating to note that the best selling study Bible in America for last December was the John MacArthur Study Bible, available only in the New King James Version. (Christian Booksellers Association, Evangelical Christian Publisher's Association Best Sellers List)
The New King James (NKJ) is to the actual King James what Kool-Aid made with too much water is to freshly squeezed grape juice.

Examples of the diluted NKJ would be that the word 'Lord' has been omitted 66 times, 'God' 51 times, 'hell' 22 times and the word 'damnation' disappears entirely.
Since the NKJ is a derivative of the old King James, copyright law demands it "Must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a 'new work' or must contain a substantial amount to new material."

And since Christian celebrities are known to chose their Bible version based on the same reasoning that led the Williams sister of tennis fame to wear Addidas sneakers, we are off to a questionable start.

MacArthur himself is one of the more controversial Bible teachers of our time, but like Jimmy Swaggart, MacArthur's followers are extremely zealous in his defence.

Meanwhile, the notes in MacArthur's Bible are downright dangerous, as witness the following:
"Salvation is by grace alone, but it is not easy" (pg 1404) setting up a conundrum with no solution.

"there is a sacrificial price to pay" (pg 1416) meaning the price that Jesus Christ paid on the cross was insufficient: we join Christ in paying the price.

"When the church says the unrepentant person is bound in sin, the church is saying what God says about that person." (pg 1423) investing in men God's ability to judge and forgive.

"Repentance involves a turning from sin to God" (pg 1456) which demands that a person present himself sinless before he asks for salvation, rich means salvation is not by grace.

"he completely negates and forfeits any possibility of present or future forgiveness of sins" (pg 1465) which is a teaching that makes the cross of Christ of no benefit.MacArthur says Christ's teaching on hell was only a parable. (pg 1548)

And Christians are wrong to refer to being ‘saved by the blood' of Christ "as if the blood had saving properties" (pg 1833)
MacArthur is probably one of the best known of the modern media evangelists and he claims he has studied thirty hours each week for thirty years.

The man must not sleep much.
In addition to his Bible study time, he has a wife, four children, a considerable home, a church in California to pastor, a daily 30-minute radio program to produce, and a seminary to preside over. He has written over six dozen books as well.

And he has travelled with controversy every step of the way.
Almost 15 years ago the highly regarded Bob Jones University, Greenville S. C., began a full-scale assault on some of MacArthur's aberrant teachings with respect to the blood of Jesus Christ. "Nothing in His human blood saves," MacArthur says, and he makes it worse by writing nonsense such as "The shedding of (Christ's) blood has nothing to do with bleeding."

Almost ten years ago the Sword of the Lord Foundation invested gallons of ink in demonstrating that MacArthur is a dangerous teacher and Sword Editor Curtis Hutson said that "John MacArthur's gospel makes salvation totally unattainable, even for MacArthur himself."

No fewer than four books have been written to refute MacArthur's teachings that a believer is sinless as a product of 'lordship salvation'. Additionally, there have been literally dozens of pamphlets and articles warning of MacArthur's warmed over hyper-Calvinism, making everything that happens God's problem, absolving man from any responsibility. But for all of the problems, the MacArthur Study Bible was the nation's best selling Bible item during the most important selling season of the year. There is nothing we can say about the MacArthur Study Bible's popularity that the Lord hasn't already said better: "That which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." (Luke 16:15)

------------------------------------------------------------------

What about Santa and Christmas?

"He knows if you are sleeping,
He knows if you're awake,
He knows if you've been bad or good,
So be good for goodness sake..."
The song Santa Claus is Coming To Town ascribes to Santa the godly attribute which theology refers to as 'omniscience,' the ability to know all things. And Santa's ability to get to every home on planet Earth in one evening is very close to God's attribute of 'omnipresence." Undoubtedly, Santa Claus is an unseen presence, much like the Lord Himself. Superman may have been "faster than a speeding bullet" but Santa puts the caped crusader to shame. Santa is capable of visiting an infinite number of children during one finite night: very godlike, wouldn't you say?
Santa also breaks God-given natural law and the rules of physics when he slides his opulent form down a chimney, past the flue, coming out of the fire without even scorching the white fur on his outfit.

Other similarities between Santa and the Lord abound:
Santa lives in the North. God's throne is in the sides of the North. (Isaiah 14:13, Psalms 48:2)

Santa is old. God is the ancient of days. (Daniel 7:9)
Santa is coming soon. Jesus is coming soon. (Revelation 22:20)
Santa says "Ho, ho ho." God says "Ho Ho. (Zechariah 2:6)
Santa has white hair. Christ, at his return, has white hair. (Revelation 1:14)
Santa flies and gives gifts. Jesus ascends on high and gives gifts unto men. (Ephesians 4:7-8)
Question:
Is it merely coincidence that educator-philosopher John Dewey, who hated fundamentalist Christianity with visceral passion, believed that children must be shielded from God and the Lord Jesus Christ during their formative early years? Not to do so, in the opinion of thefounder of modern public educational thought, ruined the child before the state education system could get its hands on the children and turn them into evolution-worshiping atheists.
Clearly, the celebration of jolly old St. Nick is a diversion and a distraction from the real story about "God manifest in the flesh" (II Timothy 3:16) the Lord Jesus Christ and His church.
Instead of teaching positive Bible truth when the child is young and receptive, millions of parents wink and tell a myriad of 'little white lies.'
And if a person with many of the attributes of God turns out to be a lie, and if parents and the church are collaborators in such deception, would it not them be logical to conclude that the church and parents are also lying about Jesus Christ?
What happens when a child learns Jesus was not born in December but rather September and that He said to remember His death and not His birth? (Luke 22:19) That the wise men did not show up until almost two years later and that there was no little drummer boy? Or that the Bible does not even say there were ‘three' wise men?
Which would a child prefer: Santa miraculously putting a toy under the pretty tree or Jesus offering salvation and inheritance in heavenly places?
One of the underlying problems damaging modern society is that people choose instant gratification over the wisdom involved in taking the long view.
'Just do it,' 'Surge,' 'Go for the gusto,' and 'Have it your way," have long been preferred over waiting for spiritual reward; and no one teaches the lesson of selfish hedonism any better than Santa.
When this great nation was founded, Christmas celebrations were banned because of their pagan tradition and anti-biblical sentiment. Penalties and fines were in place for celebrating Christmas or for staying home on Christmas day, and Christmas did not become a sanctioned holiday until 1856.
Druid witchcraft priests, the same people who brought you Halloween, worshipped the evergreen tree as a god because it did not turn brown and die. In Scandinavian folklore, the evergreen god-tree
gave gifts when a person knelt at its feet. It is not a long leap from the tree of witchcraft to the traditions of the tree today.
"Learn not the way of the heathen...For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not." (Jeremiah 10:2-6)
The biggest problem, however, is that Jesus birth means very little and when God says "This day have I begotten thee" He is talking about the cross. (Psalms 2:7, Acts 13:33)
Yes, when Christ came, it was for peace on Earth (Luke 2:14) but by Luke 12:51 the chance for peace was gone as Jesus Christ said "Suppose ye that I an come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division."
As if ignorance of the Bible were not bad enough, along comes Santa Claus and Rudolph and Frosty.
As for me, my personal favorite would be the Grinch if he would just steal Christmas and replace it with God's truth.

----------------------------------------------------------------

What about the so called "Purpose Driven" mega church?

One of the many things that irritates most of us about modern government is that political activity seems no longer driven by what is right but rather by ever-changing opinion polls.
And while this current Administration has elevated poll-watching to a new level of sophistication, both parties are guilty of taking this spineless approach toward leadership. "Right' and "Wrong" matter little: what did the 'Focus Group' say? What are the poll results?
Forget that there are laws in this land and forget that there is a duly constituted purpose for our government: "Will it play in Peoria?" "What do they think in 'fly-over' country?"
We used to be a fairly well-ordered republic but we are degenerating into a chaotic democracy.
That said, one might reasonably expect church to operate differently from the world political system, but such is not the case.
You might expect that since the church centers on an unchanging book and represents theocracy rather than democracy, that autocracy would be the norm. But you'd be wrong.
The best example of obnoxious political tactics utilized in church growth is that detailed in the nearly 400 page book entitled "The Purpose Driven Church" written by Rick Warren.
Just like the the politicians Focus Group, the purpose driven churches now employ 'Seeker Sensitive Services."
In place of polls, purpose driven churches employ demographic studies and target surveys.
Rick Warren pastors a mega-church in Saddleback California and he has gone so far as to invent a target not unlike Peoria or fly-over country with his imaginary Saddleback Sam and Samantha.
It turns out Sorry Self-involved Sam and Smug Slovenly Samantha are more apt descriptions. These folks would be welcome at any church I know of, but Rick Warren would have their lifestyle and scriptural ignorance become the basis of how the church services are presented.
While Warren does not say "Shoot the organist and hang the pianist" he believes that "Most TV commercials use the contemporary-rock style ...This is the primary musical style we've chosen to use at Saddleback." (Pg 285)
Madison Avenue all the way, forgetting Colossians 3:16 and "teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs."
"Invest in the best sound system you can afford. If you are trying to cut costs, do it in some other area--don't skimp here." (Page 266) Indoor plumbing is secondary to well-modulated decibels. Instead of "on this rock" it is now "Rock On."
"This week, secretly replace all the light bulbs in your worship center with twice the watts. Then study the change in the mood in next Sunday's service.:" (Page 266) Mechanical mood manipulation, forgetting the "light of the glorious gospel of Christ." (II Corinthians 4:4)
Communicate with a vocabulary of less than 2000 words, (Page 234) and since 'godly' and 'edification' are not in Sam or Samantha's vocabulary, forget "godly edifying." (I Timothy 1:4)
Keep it simple. Dumb it down. "Run, Jesus, Run. See Peter fish."
Which leads to Warren's promotion of new and dumbed down Bible versions such as the NIV (Not-Inspired-Version). He says on page 297 that "Clarity is more important than poetry." as if those were the only two considerations. What of purity and accuracy? What of the fact that a lesbian edited the NIV, hence the omission of the word sodomy?
The tragedy of all this is that over 22,000 pastors from 42 countries, from sixty plus denominations, have gone to Saddleback to learn how to do things the simpleton slovenly Saddleback way to make spiritually dead Sam and Samantha sing and swing and sway.
It all went into the porta potty at square one, when 'don't call me Doctor, don't call me Pastor' Rick Warren put in his church bylaws that "This church exists to benefit the resident of the Saddleback Valley by providing for their spiritual, physical, emotional, intellectual, and social needs."
The church is for the preaching of Christ according to the revelation of the mystery (Romans 16:25) not bright lights, sensual music and Madison Avenue.
The church is where you learn to study to show yourself approved unto God (II Timothy 2:15) so people are lifted up, rather than God dragged and dumbed down.
"Whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." not for the satisfaction of entertainment-satiated self-absorbed Saddleback Sam and Samanatha.
And if The Purpose Driven Church is the example of what it takes to be big and successful, supposing that gain is godliness...(I Timothy 6:5)
Then thank the Lord for all the little churches pastored by anonymous men who adhere to the Bible rather than modern Madison Avenue merchandising methods.
Thank God for the men who know that real ministry is not about bright lights and rock music, and that the value of a pastor is not counted in nickels, noses, numbers and notoriety.
Just as certainly as cowardly men make a mockery of our nation by governing according to public opinion polls, so men like Rick Warren and his clones make a mockery of ministry by mundanely merchandising that which used to be meaningful, even sacred.
But, the wrong way works.
Men who should know better, driven by envy, will drop Bible principles like hot rocks if their church would double in size.
And when God writes "Ichabod...the glory of the Lord is departed," (I Samuel 4:21) no one will notice because the band keeps playing and the lights keep flashing and the hands keep clapping the the performers keep shouting .....

------------------------------------------------------------

If Baptism saves...then why oh why...

Why do these preachers, who preach water baptism saves, use Christ's baptism (Matthew 3:13-17) as proof that this is true? Did the Lord Jesus Christ need to be baptized -to be saved?!!!
Matthew 3:13-17 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. 16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Why is I Peter 3:20,21(context: Noah's Flood) used as a proof test since the ones who went into the water drowned and went to hell?
1 Peter 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. 21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Why- did the Apostle Paul in Galatians 1:6-9 say that if any man preached any other gospel than the one he preached (see I Corinthians 15:1-4)--which excluded water baptism (see I Corinthians 1:17)-let him be accursed?!!!
Galatians 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
1 Corinthians 15:1-4Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.   3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
1 Corinthians 1:17For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Why are these preachers who tell one to believe and be baptized (Mark 16:16) unable to perform the miracles mentioned in Mark 16:17,18 WHICH IS IN THE SAME CONTEXT?!!!
Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

Why does John the Baptist tell his hearers that the baptism with the Holy Ghost is truly the baptism that one needs, not water baptism see Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Why does John the Baptist tell the Lord Jesus Christ that he needs not to baptize Christ, but Jesus needs to baptize him (see Matthew 3:13,14) and this baptism is the baptism with the Holy Ghost, not water baptism, mentioned two verses earlier (Matthew 3:11)
Matthew 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

Why is "born of water" (John 3:5) supposedly water baptism when the word baptism occurs no where in the context (see John 3:1-21) and the true meaning is given to be a physical, flesh birth                  John 3:3    Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Why do these preachers who tell me that being born again (John 3:3) is getting baptized in water when Jesus Christ clearly tells you that being born again is by believing in Him (John 3:14- 18)--NOT GETTING BAPTIZED?!!
John 3:14      And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Why, if Acts 2:38 is plan of salvation, Peter change his in Acts 15:9-11 preach salvation grace through faith NOT "be baptized the remission of sins?
Acts 15:9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Why does Paul tell the Philippian jailer to "Believe on the lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved" instead of preaching baptism to them?

How does baptism save? Some folks got the Holy Ghost simultaneously upon baptism in water (Acts 2:38) while others got the Holy Ghost after baptism in water
Acts 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Acts 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
and still others got the Holy Ghost before baptism in water
Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
[Note: And if you say they all work, how do you KNOW you got the right formula?].

Why, if Paul supposedly was baptized in water to be saved (Acts 22:16), does Ananias call him "Brother Saul" (Acts 22:13)a titled used for a saved believer
Acts 22:13,16 Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him. 16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Why, if Paul was supposedly saved by water baptism, does he say he was born again on the road to Damascus (I Corinthians 15:8), not three days later when Ananias baptized him in water?!!!
1 Corinthians 15:8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
Why, if Paul was supposedly saved by water baptism, does he preach salvation by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ
Acts 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: 39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
Acts 20:21Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 26:18To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
Romans 5:1Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ

Ga 2.16, 3.11-14, 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
II Ti 3.15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
Ephesians 1:12-13That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
and NOT Acts 2.38, Mk 16.16 or anything that even sounds like that. Why would Paul preach a plan of salvation whereby he was not saved, assuming the he has saved by water baptism?
Why is Colossians 2:11,12 used as a proof text since the baptism here is plainly spirit baptism, for the context states that this baptism was an operation of God made WITHOUT HANDS?!
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

BUT WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY?

The Bible plainly lays out the order of salvation in Ephesians 1:13:
"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise."
The order is (1) hearing the word of truth--the gospel; (2) belief or trust; (3) receiving of the Holy Spirit. And notice no water water baptism is mentioned.

-----------------------------------------------------

What about the Prayer of Jabez?

And Jabez called
on the God of Israel, saying,
Oh that thou wouldest
bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast
and that thine hand might be with me,
and that thou wouldest keep me from evil,
that it may not grieve me!
And God granted him
that which he requested.
I Chronicles 4.10


    That Christians often follow after fads is best demonstrated by the fact that sightings of the Antichrist outnumber Elvis sightings and that thousands are still eating their Y2K dried foods.
    The latest fad is a prayer by Jabez now popularized in a book published by Multnomah (Liberal Evangelical Publishing House) written by   Dr. Bruce H. Wilkerson, (evangelical Baptist author), nearly five million copies already in circulation.
    Wilkerson claims his wealth and success come not from the selling of millions of books but rather from the daily recitation of an obscure prayer ensconced in a genealogical account in First Chronicles.   He is, of course, mistaken.

And Jabez called on the God of Israel,
    Whenever the Bible speaks of the "God of Israel" it means just that. No gentile has access to Jehovah and no gentile is a recipient of the Jewish promises, and this we know on the authority of Ephesians 2:12

saying, Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed,
    Since every Christian alive today is Colossians 2:10 complete in Christ, since Christians Romans 8:26 do not know what to pray for as they ought, and since God Ephesians 3:20 does better for the Christian than the person praying could even imagine, there is no sense in which a Christian in this dispensation requires additional blessings.
    Christians tend to want to pray to alter circumstances, but in this dispensation the Christian has no covenant lever with which to ‘move God.' and enlarge my coast
    Dominion on the earth and possession of land are distinctly Jewish prerogatives and the Christ is to Colossians 3:2 set affections on things above and no on the earth for it is in Ephesians 1:3 heavenly places that the Christian has his inheritance.
    Wilkerson takes this phrase to mean "expand my opportunities and my impact that I touch more lives for your glory" (pg. 32) but that is not what the words in the Bible say. The entire point of the genealogical account in 1
Chronicles is to demonstrate the growth of the Jewish nation as it spreads out on the earth.

and that thine hand might be with me,
    To pray that ‘thy hand may be with me' suggests that it also may not. This suggests that the Christian is incomplete and unequipped, directly contrary to II Corinthians 9:8. Words that do not fit in the dispensation of God's grace include ‘if,' and ‘may be,' but are always associated with ‘deal-making' prayers which are always covenant prayers. No Christian alive today has any covenant that can be claimed: they are all Jewish and they are all for different dispensations.

and that thou wouldest keep me from evil,
    It is our job to keep ourselves from evil as explained to us in the sixth chapter of Romans. We are in Christ, it is no longer us but Christ, Galatians 2:20, and so this sort of prayer is about as efficacious as a rabbit's foot.
   While this phrase sounds noble, for the Christian is represents an abdication of our persona l moral responsibility in the face of I Corinthians 10:13.

that it may not grieve me!
    Being free from evil's presence is a kingdom prayer hardly appropriate for anyone in this dispensation where evil is present with us (Romans 7:21), the world is evil (Galatians 1:4) and the very days are evil, (Ephesians5:16).

It should also be instructive to note how closely Jabez ‘kingdom' prayer corresponds to t Jesus' kingdom prayer:

And Jabez called
Our father which art in heaven
on the God of Israel, saying,
Blessed by thy name
Oh that thou wouldest bless me indeed,
Give us this day...
and enlarge my coast
Thy kingdom come...
and that thine hand might be with me,
Thy will be done
and that thou wouldest keep me from evil,
Deliver us from evil
that it may not grieve me!
For thine is the power...

    And just as millions of Christians have ignorantly prayed the so-called Lord's prayer even though Christ refers to such activity as vain repetition (Matthew 6:7), millions more are not praying an inappropriate beggarly prayer, as if ignorant of the fact that God gives the Christian Ephesians 3:20, exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think.

--------------------------------------------

What about racism, Shem, Ham and Japheth?

Racism seems to be an issue that just won't go away, and there is reason to fear racism could destroy our great country.

One of the reasons why this issue is so intractable is that racism has been erroneously taught from the Bible for centuries. The Ku Klux Klan member waves his Bible as he claims his destiny is to rule over blacks, and he claims that authority from the Bible. The black Muslim throws the Bible to the ground and claims that it is a white man's book with a white Jesus. They are both wrong, but racism has in fact been taught from the Bible, and in some quarters, it still is.

Using a book called "Segregation or Integration, What Saith the Scripture" (written by a Florida pastor with an earned Doctorate), we will demonstrate how racism is taught from the Bible and why it is wrong to do so.

Firstly, the idea is put forth that God is a segregationist. The point is made that God segregated the animals (Gen. 6) but the fact is that God put all the animals on the same ark. God segregated the Hebrew nation from others (Ne.13:20-28), but the fact is anyone from any nation could accept the Hebrew faith.

Secondly, the "Mark of Cain" always fits into the racist's view, and the idea here is that when God cursed Cain it was with black skin. "And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him," is what the Bible actually says, so the mark was a good thing, and there is no mention of black skin. Even if you assume Cain was black, it really does not matter much since his seedline was not on Noah's ark and drowned in the flood, but this is a fact
the racist seems to miss.

Regardless of Bible truth, the racist teaches that the three men who got off the Ark were prototypes of the three races: Shem was Asiatic, Japheth was Europeans, and Ham was African (and by that they mean black). How did Cain pass the mark that God gave to him, and him alone, to Ham alone does not enter the racist's illogical pattern of thought.

Meanwhile, the black racist looks at the famous paintings of Christ, perhaps those done by Warner Salman in the forties, and he sees a light skinned white man with long reddish hair and blue eyes. From that the black racist thinks Christianity is a white man's religion, but Salman's paintings are one man's faulty imagination and not Bible truth.

We know from the Bible that Christ was Jewish, which would make red hair and blue eyes most unlikely. Further, the Bible reveals that Jesus had relatively short black hair and a dark beard, that his eyes were as a doves, and that his skin was ruddy: He was neither white nor black.

In the book 'Segregation or Integration, What Saith the Scripture?' we read "Mizram is said to be Egypt (Ge. 50:11) by definition. It is said to be the land of Ham (Ps. 105:23-4). Ham is characterized by dark skin, thick lips and kinky hair." The amazing thing to consider is that Egypt, the land of Ham, is not the home of the black African at all, and it should go without saying that all black people do not look alike.

The racist teaches that the allegedly white son of Noah, Japheth, went to Europe and that the sons of Shem, the Asiatics, became the Japanese, Chinese and American Indians.

Again, from the book "Segregation or Integration": "of Japheth, the European, Noah says, 'God shall enlarge Japheth;' that is, "spread him out and widen his occupation of the earth. We are running smack into racial prophecy..."

Or so says the racist Bible teacher as he postulates the theory that the white European is called by God to take over the planet and to run things.

Teaching this in 1997 is obviously racist dogma that is not acceptable, but before we become intolerant ourselves, we would do well to remember that our entire nation once operated according to a policy called Manifest Destiny. Of that doctrine, the Encyclopedia Britannica says, "Americans were a chosen people ordained by God to create a model society," and the backdrop to Manifest Destiny was racist Bible teaching.

The Asiatic son of Noah, Shem, is said to be the religious of the three because of the verse referring to the "Lord God of Shem." Our Florida racist author says in his book, "All religions have their origin in the region of the east of Greece and west of India (Ge. 4:15-18). Every religion in the world can be traced to SHEMITE roots." (Emphasis his).

The fact that many, many religions were started in other locations by people who are not Asiatic is patently obvious. Several sects began in New York, and while New York is in fact west of India, New York would hardly satisfy the text in Genesis.

The other shoe drops when we see how the racist Bible teacher deals with Ham. From page 29 of "Segregation or Integration," we read the teaching that is commonly held among our racist brethren: "Of Ham, the African, Noah says, 'A servant of servants shall he be to his brethren.'" (Ge. 9:25).

First of all, the curse quoted from Noah is not directed at Ham, but at this son, Canaan. And we have already seen that Ham was the Egyptian, not the black African. And if that isn't enough, Noah was drunk when he pronounced the curse that is so central to racist theology.

One of the reasons the Civil War was fought was racism, and there seem to be folks willing to fight it again.

Well, if fight they must, then fight they will, but leave the Bible out of it.

In this dispensation, God is not a respecter of persons, and in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female: Christianity does not come in colors, it comes in faith and charity.

When the racist Bible teacher is finished teaching that the mark of Cain was black skin and that the black race is supposed to serve the white race,the racist then takes another leap of convoluted logic that expunges his conscience and blames all the problems on the black people.

Here is how he does it, quoting from the book "Segregation or
Integration."

"All of Ham's boys are Negroid...Ham's entire offspring, not one boy out of four ...as a servant of servants the descendants of Ham excel."

And further, race problems are the black man's fault because God established the bounds of their habitation, and the black descendants of Ham were supposed to stay in Africa.

Then ,the racist says that the reason the name Canaan appears instead of Ham's is that "Since Ham's sin was sodomy, it would be a curse on his seed." The Bible verses cited by the racist to prove this are Ge.9:24, which mentions Ham but does not mention sodomy and Gen 19:5, which may allude to sodomy but has nothing to do with Ham.

From this, the racist Bible teacher concludes that Ham is to be a slave since he was cursed to be a servant of servants. Forget that the verse also says he should serve his brethren, not white Americans 4000 years later.

Slave-holders taught the Bible in this manner and justified slavery in so doing. Some even went so far as to teach that black people are only happy as slaves, and our Florida racist author believes all black people have a sex problem to this day, as a result of Genesis chapter nine.

There are 773,692 words in the King James Bible (about 60,000 fewer in the NIV), and even our racist friend has to admit on page 34 that "The statement to Ham's coloring is not clearly given," but when you want to find it so you can teach your superiority over other people as being God-given, it can be read into the text.

There are seemingly no limits to the flights of fancy the racist will take. The man who wrote the book used here as an example also says that when you go soul winning, you should "start with n------ and then work your way up to white people who live in trailers." He also said that the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 was the first person saved by grace, and he was a n-----, which proves God has a sense of humor. What a consummate Bible-thumping jerk.

Bible racists are certainly consistent in that none of these teachings can be demonstrated from any version of scripture and have to be read into the text. The verse about establishing the bounds of habitation, for example, is Acts 17:26 and deals with man on the face of the earth, not blacks in Africa or white bible professors in Florida.

Clearly, the white man who comes to the Bible to justify his fears and prejudices can do so with little trouble and have lots of company. Similarly, the black man who wants to hate the Bible and see the "fountain of living water" with a sign saying 'White Only' can do so as well.

Both would be wrong, of course.

The prejudices and problems and predilections of racism come from our hearts and not from the Bible. A closer look at the Bible will demonstrate that to us and help us with our heart problem because one of the functions of the Bible is to "discern the thoughts and intents of the heart."

In point of fact, the word 'race' in the Bible is something we are supposed to run, a$ brothers and sisters, not as Bible-perverting enemies.

God help us before we tear each other toy shreds and destroy our nation with hatred, misquoting the Bible and the Koran as we go.


Back to top

------------------------------------------------

Just how many kinds of baptisms are there in the Bible?

There are twelve baptisms in Scripture

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 = Israel's national baptism
Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Hebrews 9:10 = Israel's ceremonial cleansing
10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Mark 7:1-7 = little flock ceremonial cleansing
Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. 2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables. 5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Luke 3:3 = John's baptism of repentence
3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

Matthew 3:13-15 = Jesus baptism
13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

Luke 12:50 = Jesus baptism into death
50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!

1 Peter 3:20-21 = Noah's flood baptizes the planet
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. 21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Luke 24:49 = Spirit baptism
49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
1 Corinthians 15:29 = martyrs baptism of death
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Matthew 3:11= Fire baptism into hell
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Acts 2:38 = Pentecostal baptism
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

1 Corinthians 12:13 = Baptism by the Holy Spirit into Christ
13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

------------------------------------------------

What about Public Schools?

The answer to this question is an Amy award winning WITH A BIBLE IN MY HAND newspaper column written by Terence D. McLean.

AMERICA'S BEST KEPT SECRET

When the Sputnik satellite was launched by the Soviet Union in 1957, cold war America awoke to a new reality. Perhaps for the first time there was hard and frightening evidence that our public school system was not delivering the goods, and our very national security seemed threatened as a result.

Congress responded immediately and in 1958 the National Defense Education Act was passed to provide financial aid to states with the goal being that of advancing our technology in competition with the Soviets. Unfortunately, government attention to the school systems did not stop with funding for improved curriculum. The schools became a social planning playground and a center of much turmoil.

It was in 1963 that three Supreme Court cases led to the removal of prayer and religious principles from the public school system. Although there was widespread opposition at the time, educators soon fell into line and there has really been very little fuss over the removal of Christian principles from the halls of education. Compare, for example, the riots and deaths brought about with court ordered desegregation in 1954 or Vietnam war protests in 1968. By comparison, Murray v. Curlett and the removal of prayer from school was a yawner.

In 1963, when the last school prayer was offered, there were fewer than 900 Christian Schools.

Christian moms and dads did not take to the streets, they did not bum flags, and while secular history sees the court decision as a yawner, in fact a revolution began. A revolution that is not over yet.

By 1970, less than a decade after the constitution was misinterpreted to call for separation of church and state, the number of Christian schools had increased 320%. Parents who pulled their kids out of the prayerless schools were seen as radial zealots back in those days. With today's drug problems, lack of discipline and plummeting test scores pervasive in the public schools, few reasonable people view Christian parents as foolish radicals anymore.

And the courts just would not leave the thing alone. Consider these cases: In Abington v. Schempp in 1963 it was determined that reading portions of the New Testament without secular explanation was psychologically harmful. With Stien v. Oshinsky in 1965 our highest court determined that free speech did not extend to religious topics. Prayer out loud over lunch in the cafeteria was found unconstitutional in the Reed v. Van Hoven case, also in 1965.

Back of the bread is the water, Back of the water is the mill,
Back of the mill is the wind and rain, And the Father's will.
This nursery rhyme was declared unconstitutional in 1967 when the court ruled on Despain v. Dekalb Community School. Amazingly, children were not allowed to listen to the prayers of the Chaplain of the United States House or Senate while they were on field trips, according to the 1970 State Board of Education v. State Board of Education decision.

By 1970 there were approximately 2600 Christian Schools.

In Ohio v Whisner it became unconstitutional for a Board of Education to refer to or use the word "God" in any of its official writings. That happened in 1976 and by then there were over 5000 Christian Schools. Four different cases lambasted the Ten commandments in 1980-81 with the result being that the posting or reading of the decalogue in any manner that induced reverence was unconstitutional.

By 1980 there were over 7500 Christian Schools.

Invocations and benedictions and prayers were outlawed at graduation ceremonies in 1985 with the Graham v Central decision.

By 1985 there were over 20,000 Christian Schools and according to the listing published by the Library of Congress, there are more than 32,000 Christian Schools operating in America today. And there are hundreds of thousands of home schoolers on top of that.
It is a silent revolution. Not a shot has been fired. There has been no looting. No graffiti has been painted on any public school buildings. There are no screaming people waving signs and harassing the police or the school authorities.

There was a big fuss over "white flight" to the suburbs because of court ordered bussing in 1971 and there were riots in the streets over Brown V. Board of Education in 1954. The Christian School revolution has had nothing like that. Mommys and Daddys very simply are seeing to it that their children are raised in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord." (Ep 6:4) The Bible in my hand tells parents to "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it," (Fr. 22:6) and that is what they are doing.

The parents and teachers and churches involved are not radical reactionary religious nut-cakes, as many in the secular system seem to think. These parents are quality people who care about their kids. These are people with values and standards. These are parents who would rather pay tuition now than pay the price of drugs and undisciplined behaviour later. Their revolution, the Christian School movement, is the second best kept secret in America.

The best kept secret is that they are winning.

---------------------------------------------------

Why Johnny Can't Feel

The answer to this question is an Amy award winning WITH A BIBLE IN MY HAND newspaper column written by Terence D. McLean

WHY JOHNNY CAN'T FEEL
When S. A. T. scores began to fall a couple of decades ago and some schools
began graduating functional illiterates, the discussion centered on 'Why
Johnny can't read" People blamed the schools, forgetting that since the
invention of television, parents all over America had stopped reading.
When the Soviets launched Sputnik and the Japanese began to produce better
products than we were, the discussion moved to 'Why Johnny can't do math"
People blamed the schools, forgetting that since the invention of the
calculator and home computer, parents all over America had ceased to do math.
Now we are told that the greatest problem teachers are having involves
discipline. People blame the schools, forgetting that since Dr. Spock and
child psychiatry that parents all over America have ceased to discipline
their little darlings.
The lack of discipline is a serious problem, but something worse needs to be
brought to the attention of the national consciousness.
ITEM Four young men in a car see a man walking down the street. "Hit him, hit
him, hit him," the driver his taunted. The teenaged driver allegedly
responded to the chiding of his buddies by driving up on the sidewalk and
killing the innocent pedestrian.
ITEM A young lady rides the bus carrying a tiny coat. She had allegedly
drowned the owner of the coat, her two year old son, and now was busy about a
carefully calculated plot to cover her tracks. She looked into the TV cameras
and asked for help in finding her son when in fact she had disposed of him
like trash from the waste basket.
ITEM Several teens for a gang and involve themselves in booze, sex and cheap
thrills. Their activities allegedly escalate until six are dead, one victim
having been shot seven times for her sneakers.
The issue that needs to be wrestled with now is not "Why Johnny can't read,"
or 'Why Johnny can't do math.' but 'Why Johnny can't feel"
People are already poised to blame the schools again, when the problem is
again something much larger.
The Bible in my hand warns of those who "Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having
their consciences seared with a hot iron" (I Ti. 4:2). fall victim to
doctrines of devils.
The uncaring unfeeling acts we are hearing about with increasing frequency
are frightening to us all, but should they be a surprise and should we blame
our favorite scapegoat the schools?
For years now, parents have allowed their children to witness hundreds,
perhaps even thousands of incidents of violence on the television set.
Children pack theaters when the most violent of the slasher and chain-saw
movies are presented.
Nintendo games often portray violent scenes one after another at a
purposefully dizzying pace. Millions of quarters drop into thousands of slots
to activate game machines that portray killing and mayhem.
Rock and rap are not about "Blue Suede Shoes" or "Let's go to the Hop" as
they once were but now often speak of drugs, sex and killing cops.
Could it be that the cumulative effect of bathing our nation in violent
entertainment is that we have now effectively desensitized a significant
segment of the population?
Alfred Hitchcocks "Psycho" traumatized viewers at the time with the ax murder
in the shower. The blood and gore in many films currently popular demonstrate
how far we have come.
The kids who went out behind the barn to sneak a peek at a 'French postcard"
are now adults who allow graphic sex scenes into their living rooms. And the
scenes which were once only on cable are moving to the public screen.
Bible values have been deserted and replaced with moral relativism. Home and
hearth have been shattered and replaced with the family entertainment center.
The idea of a family gathering together around the kitchen table and the
Bible for family devotions is so foreign to American thinking as to be almost
laughable today, yet it was common at one time.
My contention has long been that the reason prayer was outlawed in the public
schools was because mommys and daddys and boys and girls had ceased to pray
at home. No one would have listened to Madilyn Murray O'Hare if we had fifty
million praying families.
The schools merely reflected the lack of prayer and Bible Christianity in the
homes.
Today, our nation worries little about prayer or reading or math, having
institutionalized their absence.
Today the issues of booze and drugs have even been strangely accommodated
with programs that make us feel good while they fail to fix the problem.
Today the sexual revolution is so firmly entrenched that thousands are
dropping dead as a direct result of irresponsible and aberrant sex and soome
pass out condoms while others make quilts.
So very much has happened and so very much has been accepted that there seem
to be no limits to behavior anymore.
And some folks just don't care.
The pictures of the cold calculating teenaged murderers are chilling to those
remaining who still value life. The very idea of killing a person for their
shoes is devastating, but as America remembers Roe V. Wade this month can we
forget that millions of little lives have been ended because of monetary
concerns?
The Bible anticipated all this, of course, as Paul wrote about people "Having
the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the
ignorance that is in them."
Removing the Bible from the schools and Christianity from our national
purpose has brought forth are ignorance of the Bible which is unparalleled.
Further, Paul went on in Ephesians by warning of those who "Being past
feeling have given themselves over unto laciviousness to work all uncleanness
with greediness."

Current events present a frightening prospect to us all, and we must not
shift the blame to the schools again. First we must take a long and hard look
at
the home and the church. -

-----------------------------------------------------

What about unanswered Prayer?

At one end of the field, the visiting football team huddles in the end zone
and prays. Just then the home team does the same beneath the opposite goal
post.
What does the Lord hear?
In unison, the opposing teams might pray "Lord, we pray that you will give us
the victory and let us knock the snot out of those other guys."
Christian Broadcasting Network President Pat Robertson prays that a hurricane
would veer away from the CBN's offices in South Carolina and it does, only to
hit and kill people in New Jersey.
Even Adolph Hitler said that God was on his side.
In his book OUTRAGE: FIVE REASONS WHY O.J. SIMPSON GOT AWAY WITH MURDER
agnostic lawyer Vincent Bugliosi writes "Saying that 'God answered my
prayers' necessarily means two things: that God has the power to answer
prayers, and more important, for the 99 percent of the other humans who pray
and beg for God's merciful intervention in time of desperate need, God told
them to take a walk, get lost, He couldn't care less."
With the critical and logical mind of a cynical lawyer, Bugliosi continues by
asking "Don't you think the Jew at Auschwitz prayed to God to be spared.
Maybe we have been praying to the wrong entity all along. People who believe
in prayers could hardly do worse praying to the devil." (pgs 250-251)
Should you listen to the so-called Christian radio or television broadcasts,
you will undoubtedly hear several people "bind Satan, in the name of Jesus,"
during the course of the broadcast day. The obvious questions are "Why must
you bind Satan more than once: how does that rascal keep getting loose?"
There is a bumper sticker out there which asks "If Jesus saves, why can't He
cure acne?" That would be a good question for today's crop of 'faith healers'
to answer.
When the tornadoes tore through many cities this spring, people were killed
and property damage was considerable. One pastor standing in the rubble that
had been his church told the CNN reporter that "God is trying to tell us
something."
Attorney Bugliosi would look at the disaster area with its dead bodies and
sarcastically ask, "why would anyone feel he (God) is all-good or want to
spend eternity with this type of being?" (Ibid. pg 251)
The answers to the questions people have about prayer are actually quite
easily found and understood, but learning the answers requires knowledge of
the Bible.
And while we would reasonably expect that agnostic authors would not have
read the material, it is the sad truth that most Christians are equally
unlearned.
Fact is, Adam and Eve didn't need to pray: God walked and talked with them in
the garden.
After God kicked the First Family out of the garden and Cain killed his
brother, mankind learned it was estranged from its maker and "then began men
to call upon the name of the Lord." (Genesis 4:26)
When God gave His covenant to the nation Israel over 2500 years later, prayer
became much more sophisticated. Under that covenant "If my people (Israel)
which are called by my name (Lord God of Israel), shall humble themselves (by
keeping all the laws and statutes) and pray, and seek my face (which God had
hid from them since the sin in the garden) and turn from their wicked ways
(by performing the Mosaic law); then will I hear from heaven." (II Chronicles
7:14)
But without keeping all the laws, statutes and their end of the covenant, God
promised to "pluck them up by the roots." (lI Chronicles 7:20)
When Jesus Christ, who said "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house
of Israel' (Matthew 15:25) and declared that "salvation is of the Jews" (John
4:22) instructed how to pray, He broke some new ground.
Matthew 21:22 is plain that "All things, whatsoever ye (Israel) shall ask in
prayer,
believing, ye shall receive."
If that weren't only for Israel, I wouldn't be bald.
Fact is, God set his dealings with Israel aside (Romans 1 i), and with the
change, prayer was again altered.
Paul tells the church in which there is neither Jew nor Gentile but a new
creature, "We KNOW NOT what we should pray for as we ought ...we KNOW that
all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the
called according to his purpose." (Romans 8:26, 28)
One verse tells us what we know, the other tells us what we don't know. And
from those passages we see that God has again intervened to change the
mechanics of prayer.
No longer walking in the garden with man, no more with His face turned away,
no more operating under the Jewish covenant, no longer the ministry of the
Messiah, God tells us today that He is not up in heaven waiting for our
prayers to tell Him how to run things.
And because we are on a sin-cursed planet with Satan as the "god of this
world" (II Corinthians 4:4), we should be relieved that the ultimate
responsibility is God's, not ours.
God has now told us what he wants us to know through His Bible, not through
tornadoes.
When Christians under grace, (not Jews under the law), are instructed about
prayer they are told to "Let your requests be make known unto God"
(Philippians 4:6)
And...
And what, exactly?
And you will get whatever you ask for, as the faith healers say?
And you will get one out of a million, as the agnostic suggests?
And God may say 'No,' as weak-spined theologians postulate?
The answer is 'None of the above."
"And the peace of God, which passeth ail understanding, shall keep your
hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." (Philippians 4:7)
Keeping track of everything "passeth our understanding" and since we are
"strangers from the covenants of promise" (Ephesians 2: i2) we are much ahead
to accept God's peace rather than to require authority over Him in prayer.
God says to tell Him everything, learn to be thankful for everything, and be
anxious about nothing, for God will work whatever happens for the good of
them that love Him.
Amen.

-----------------------------------------------

What about the Koran vs. the Bible?

THE BIBLE AND THE KORAN:
BOOKS AT WAR WITH EACH OTHER

There seems to be a great deal of confusion and consternation about the
militancy of some Muslims, but putting people and personalities aside, even a
cursory reading of the Koran is quite revealing.
The Koran is the holy book of the Muslims and is taken to be the infallible
word of the one true God, Allah. It is said to be the earthly manifestation
of the heavenly tablet, revealed by the angel Gabriel to Muhammad in the
sixth century.
Opinions and attitudes need not be added to the Koran to find incendiary
language and the indication as to why we may be looking at unreconcilable
situations.
The Koran, for example, teaches that while God greatly blessed the Jewish
people through Abraham, all but a few Jews subsequently broke all of God's
covenants with them. It is said that the Jews were supposed to preach the
scriptures to all mankind but instead they cast the scriptures behind their
backs and sold them for a cheap price.
The unbelieving Jews rejected the signs that God gave them to verify the true
faith, including the rejection of the Christ of the Christian faith.
Because of this rebellion against God's revelation, God declared that He
would raise up oppressors to attack Israel until the Day of Resurrection. God
then sent the Romans to destroy the temple in 70AD and scattered the Jews
worldwide.
Muslims are then forbidden to make friends with Jews because Jews accept what
devils say as truth.
The Koran then teaches that God sent Muhammad and the Koran to reveal to Jews
those parts of the Scripture that the Jews had misunderstood or rejected, and
the idea was to forgive and reconcile the Jews to the one true God of the
Muslim.
If Jews would accept Muhammad and the Koran, the teaching goes, God would
forgive them and grant them entrance to the gardens of delight.
Those who do not accept the true light of the Koran are to be fought and
subdued. Christians, to whom scripture was also given, are to be fought and
subdued also because they do not accept the one true faith.
God sent Muhammad with the one true faith and it is to triumph over all
others, whether the others like it or not.
The Koran teaches that God gave the Torah to Moses, the Psalms to David, the
Gospels to Jesus and the last words of interpretation to Muhammad. Jesus,
however, was not God incarnate but no more than an apostle.
The Koran teaches that God could not have a son since He has no female
companion and is Himself, self-sufficient. The very idea that God would beget
a son is considered blasphemy Persistence in making such claims, basic to the
Christian faith, results in severe punishment in hell according to the Koran.
What we have, then, is a very different book from the Bible. The Koran
commands Muslims to fight Jews and Christians until they pay tribute and are
completely subservient to Islam. Any reader of the Koran can know this, while
the information seems to have escaped mention in the popular press, no doubt
for reasons of political correctness.
An early dispute about the lines of succession in leadership has created some
splits in the Muslim camps. The Iranians, some Iraqis, and the Lebanese are
Shiite while most all others are Sunnis. These are merely matters of politics
between factions, however, with the beliefs in the Koran unaffected. This
explains while it is not uncommon to see Arabs fight among themselves but quite remarkably unite to fight a common enemy.
These are not matters easily reconciled in a peaceful manner.
The Koran denies that Christ was deity, that he was a substitutionarysacrifice for man's sin and the only way to God so doctrinal reconciliation between the Koran and the Bible is not possible.
. For the Jews, the Koran requires that they accept Christ as their MessiahSaviour and then submit to the rule by Muslims. Here we have another unreconcilable situation.
Cooler heads will need to prevail because the books involved, the Bible and the Koran, are at war with each other.

--------------------------------------------------

What about Angels?

Do you remember the hula hoop?
Now there was a way to throw your back out!
Millions of them were sold and millionaires were made in the space of just
months as the fad became a rage that identified a time in our lives.
Kids could twirl their fannies just right, causing the plastic hoop to
operate correctly, but adults usually did not do as well.
It was quite a fad for a while, but happily, fads pass.
Do you remember the crawl track?
It was a toy made of reinforced cardboard that was like a cardboard box with
the ends open. The outside was decorated to look like the tread on a tank and
a kid would get inside. When the child crawled, it look as if the tank tread
was moving all by itself.
Since tanks often go down roads, some children played with their crawl tracks
in the streets, and since the tank tread decorations were grey, motorists did
not always spot them.
After a few kids were injured and even killed, the crawl track fad came to a
sudden end, warehouses and store shelves loaded with a toy no one wanted,
very much the opposite of the hula hoop experience.
It was quite a fad for a while, but happily, fads pass.
You wouldn't think there would be fads in Christianity, but there are.
For a time, the fad was over the mark of the beast and one genius even wrote
a book about how Gorbachev's birth mark identified him as Satan. Back in the
sixties there was tremendous interest in the Antichrist and one dear lady
preacher sold 4 million books naming Anwar Sadat as that demon of Bible
prophecy. .
More recently, a refugee from a mental hospital put many Christians tilting
at Don Quizote's windmill over the second coming of Christ and the removal of
Christians from the earth in September of 1988. No doubt we Christians who
remain missed the bus.
Today, angels are all the rage, but this fad will also pass.
While the Bible in my hand does clearly speak about angels, their existence
and their ministry, it is clear that the beings involved in the fad of this
hour have no relationship to Bible angels.
Firstly, no angel in any Bible in any language has wings. There are beings in
the word of God that do have wings and they are called cherubim or seraphim
but these creatures are not angels.
Secondly, every angel in every Bible is a man. There are no female angels but
there is a creature found in only one passage that is female and has wings
like a stork.. While this may sound like an angel, the passage in Zechariah
5:8-9 defines these beings as "wickedness."
To say it more clearly, the beings being represented today as angels are in
fact something the Bible calls wicked and an actual picture of an angel would
look like an ordinary man.
Another way you can know that angels are ordinary looking is that Hebrews
13:1 says "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have
entertained angels unawares."
It would be very difficult to be unaware of a person with a halo, stork
wings, long blond hair and the ability to fly, don't you think?
And by the way, no one in the Bible has a halo.
And the Bible does not say there were three wise men.
And whatever the number of wise men, they did not go to the manger, they
showed up at a house over a year later.
And the animals did not get on the ark two-by-two.
You see, a mythical brand of confused religion that uses Christian
terminology often supplants real Bible Christianity in the minds of those
unfamiliar with what the Bible really says.
Jeremiah spoke to such a manifestation when he said that "the prophets
prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means: and my people
love to have it so," (Je. 6:31)
Since the confusion is not based on the Bible it is often rampant with error,
just like the current fad over angels.
When the truth comes out the 'Christian fad' quickly moves from the 'hula
hoop' phase and goes into the 'crawl track' phase Soon enough we will be
finished hearing about these critters masquerading as angels and go on to
something else, equally as silly.
As in Acts 17:21, the faddists move on for "they spend their time in nothing
else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing."
The Bible in my hand will still be here when all the floppy winged
imaginations of the sensationalistic faddists fly off.
And is it not better to know what the Bible really says, than to have the
very best of imaginations?

------------------------------------------------

What the gospel ain't.

WHAT THE GOSPEL AIN'T
'Vance Hanver was well into his eighties when I met him. By then, he had been
an evangelist for over 70 years and had held meetings in thousands of
churches, in every state, and in several other countries.
Havner had written ten books after he had reached 65 years of age and was
respectfully called "God's Will Rogers" because of his wit and wisdom.
After a meeting in Dayton, Havner said to my wife and me that "Probably two
thirds of the members of the average church are not really Christians and
will end up in hell"
B. R Lakin was called the "Prince of Preachers" and he was Jerry Falwell's
mentor. His pulpit ministry was world wide for over five decades. Presidents,
prime ministers, kings and sheiks were among the millions who heard Lakin's
deep raspy voice preach.
After a meeting in Dayton, Lakin said to my wife and me that "Three quarters
of America's church membership will never see heaven" but would instead burn
in hell.
Two ,great men, then, with over 100 years of preaching experience between
them, testified to me personally that between 66 and 75% of church members
were not really converted Christians on their way to heaven.
The very thought gives pause: what is the problem?
After all, these notable preachers were not talking about the atheists,
agnostics or the ambivalent, but church members.
Now, I have held meetings in a relatively small number of churches, maybe 200
or so. No books bear my name and I don't even have a dog named Prince, but I
have kept in mind what those great men said to me so many years ago, and I
have put some things together which may shed some light on the question.
First, it must be noted that the Bible in my hand says "The gospel of Christ
is the power of God unto salvation" (Ro. 1:16), not our good works (Ep. 2:8-9) or our righteous lifestyle (Ti. 3:5) or our baptism (1 Co.1:17).
Second, the Bible also states that the gospel, "by which also ye are
saved..." is that "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and
that he was buried and that he rose again on the third day." (1 Co. 15:1a4)
That is all pretty straight forward and simple.
But nobody likes to be told that he is a sinner and must trust what someone
else did to make amends.
Observation tells me that if those two great evangelists were right, that
most church members are not really saved, there might just be a pretty
straight forward and simple reason.
Instead of being told to trust the finished work of Jesus Christ, people are
instead being instructed to come forward and make a commitment, or to sign a
card, but that is not the same thing.
Others are told to pray through and I was at one meeting where a potential
convert had come forward and one altar worker was telling them to 'let go'
while another altar worker on person's other side was telling them to 'hang
on."
Popular today is to "Open your heart's door and let Jesus into your heart;"
but that is not the gospel either: hearts do not have doors, and no verse in
any Bible says that Jesus wants into the heart.
Many have the idea that Christianity is joining a church or giving money, but
none of those things are included in the gospel of salvation.
It should be obvious that if a man can do things to earn his trip to heaven,
Jesus Christ wasted His time on Calvary's cross. In fact, His death was for
our sins, His burial was payment for the wages of sin, and His resurrection
demonstrated victory of death and hell. Those items are the elements of the
gospel. Faith in what Jesus did, then, is what saves.
It could not be much simpler, but maybe that is the problem. Mankind tends to
reject simple solutions, especially when such solutions declare man's best
efforts worthless in the face of what Cod, in Christ, has already
accomplished.

--------------------------------------------

C.S. LEWIS: FOR HIM THE BIBLE WAS A SHADOWY LAND

Fundamental Bible-based Christianity requires belief in the Bible as the word
of God, meant to be taken literally wherever possible. Because of those
requirements, Bible fundamentalism has never been very mainstream or popular.
More liberal Christianity nods toward the Bible and believes those passages
of scripture which advance its agenda, and uses the scriptures as a source of
moral support. Because of those attributes, Bible liberalism has always been
very mainstream and popular.
From that premise, it would follow logically then, that the most popular
"Christian" author of this century would be a person who writes well, refers
to the Bible, and then goes on to believe whatever he wants to, advancing his
own spiritual, political or theological agenda.
That turns out to be exactly the case with the most influential and best
selling author of this century, C. S. (Clives Staples) Lewis, the subject of
the recent film Shadowlands.
His most famous books include Screwtape Letters, Chronicles of Narnia, Mere
Christianity and The Space Trilogy. Lewis, (1898-1963) has sold more books
than there are people in America and his influence goes far beyond mere
numbers due to the manner in which he is revered and quoted by others.
Meanwhile, C.S. Lewis is anything but a Bible-based Christian.
Lewis believes in evolution: "For long centuries God perfected the animal
form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself"
(The Problem of Pain, pg. 177)
Lewis believes the Bible is a myth: "I have therefore no difficulty
accepting, say the view of those scholars who tell us that the account of
Creation in Genesis is derived from earlier Semitic stories which were pagan
and mythical.: (Reflections on the Psalms pg. 110)
Lewis believes the Bible has mistakes in it: "The Bible contains the word of
God and human material" (Ibid. ppg. 110,112) "It (the Bible) contains good
literature and bad literature." (Selected Essays, pg. 144 para. 42)
Lewis does not believe in Hell but does embrace Purgatory: "Our souls demand
purgatory, don't they? I'd rather be cleaned by fire first." (Letters to
Malcolm: Chiefly on prayer ppg. 108-109)
Lewis prayed to and for dead people: "Of course I pray for the dead" (Ibid.
pg. -107)
Lewis did not believe in the resurrection of Christ (C.S. Lewis: A Biography
pg. 234) that the Bible was in any way inspired (Inklings pg. 175) and denied
salvation by grace through faith in the body of his works and most notably in
the last of the Chronicles of Namia.
Still, the writings of this pipe-smoking, beer and martini drinker are quoted
by everyone from SBC leader Charles Stanley who says "Lewis wrote masterfully
on the Christian life" to Sesame Street which has purchased percentages of
film rights for Chronicles of Namia. Once conservative Moody Monthly magazine
calls Lewis
"this century's most important convert," which is rather like calling the fox
the most important visitor to the hen house.
Jerry Fallwell said (Journal Champion 1 / 11 / 80) that he wanted his
students to read more of Lewis.
Amazingly, some of the writings of Lewis are not just anti-Biblical, and even
heretical. Actual witchcraft incantations are contained in White Witch of
Perlandra and Lewis claims to have converted from a "black" witch to a
"white" witch.
It should come as no surprise that the New Age mystical book Chicken Soup for
the Soul is wrongly considered Christian and Mormom-based heresy Embraced by
the Light continues on the best-seller list. The occult book God Calling also
continues as a best seller, masquerading as inspirational Christianity.
C.S. Lewis paved the way for such new books with his confused combination of
pop psychobabble and loose use of Holy Writ. His was an unbeatable
combination for cashing in on those who are ignorant of what the Bible says,
who do not want to learn, and who's spiritual interests involve affirmation
of what they have already decided to believe and do.

---------------------------------------------

s there a HELL?

'H-E- Double Hockey Sticks,
You say?'
The air conditioning system has been installed, and hell is not such a bad
place anymore.
Something over 90% of Americans surveyed believe in heaven but fewer than 20%
believe in a literal burning hell.
'Hellfire and brimstone' peaching was long ago replaced by the 'sharing of
praise,' with content filled messages now supplanted by 'sermonettes for
Christi anettes.'
You often hear people say that they plan on going to hell because that is
where all their friends will be.
And they may be on to something.
Gary Larson's Far Side cartoon presented many insightful views of hell. He
drew 'Nerds in hell' going around asking "Is it hot enough for ya?" In
another cartoon, Satan is forcing a man to make a decision between two doors:
one is labeled 'Damned if you do; and the other is labeled 'Damned if you
don't'
My personal favorite depicts a man in hell spitting out his coffee and the
caption reads " Oh man! The coffee's cold! They thought of everything!"
In July, people say that it is hotter than hell.
When they hear something that surprises them, they respond with "The hell,
you say?"
In a fit of anger, "Go to hell," is a common statement.
Some would even say "Hells bells."
Cdr, "Helluva deal"
People will tell you their job or their marriage is like "Hell on earth."
And who has not heard of the 'Repairman from hell; or the 'In-law from hell?'
John Lennon wrote a song called "Imagine" which suggested you should imagine
"no hell beneath us, above us only sky.."
And aren't modernist theologians quick to say that a loving God would never
send a sinner to hell.
Nationally known evangelist Luis Palau promised his listeners at revival
meetings in Chicago that he would not even mention "H-E Double Hockey
Sticks."
The New King James Bible, which is now neither new nor King James, claims to
be a great translation of the Bible into modern day English. Meanwhile, it
leaves 'hell' untranslated as 'hades'
But whether untranslated or unbelieved or merely trivialized, hell has
clearly been air-conditioned, and someone will be hanging curtains any day
now.
The fact remains that when you consider either mining or core sampling, the
human race has barely scratched the surface of this planet and we have only
educated guesses as to what lies near the center of the earth.
The Lord Jesus Christ made more mention of hell than He ever did heaven; and
it is curious that He would waste so much time talking about a place that did
not exist.
Do the reverse of John Lennon and imagine, just for a moment, that there is
such a place as hell.
When you die, your body starts to degenerate almost immediately.
Your eternal soul slips from its mortal carcass and the force of gravity
pulls it inexorably toward the center of the earth.
Mile by mile you steadily grow hotter; but since you left your body in a
pretty metal box, there is nothing of you to be consumed by the fire. Instead
of being annihilated, your soul is merely tormented in horrific flames that
cannot consume you.
"The hell, you say?"
Jesus told of a man who "in hell, he lift up his eyes, being in torments."
(Luke 16:23)
Ironically, many modernists who want to preach "All is well, there ain't no
hell," say the Lord's account is a parable not meant to be taken literally.
What makes that irony is that the Lord predicted the Bible's hell would be
misinterpreted as being a mere parable.
Way back in Ezekiel 20:48-49 He warned that "the flaming fire shall not be
quenched...all flesh shall see that I the Lord have kindled it: it shall not
be quenched. Then said I, 'Ah Lord God, they say of me, Doth he not speak
parables?"'
Just as God does not believe in atheists ("The fool hath said in his heart,
there is no God." Psalms 14:1), God does not lose any sleep over the
hell-deniers who reject the Bible doctrine of eternal punishment.
The old bumper-sticker stated that "God Said It, I Believe It, and That
Settles It," but the old bumper-sticker was wrong.
It really doesn't matter if you believe it or not. If God said it, that
settles it, whether you believe or doubt or deny.
"Let God be true but every man a liar." (Romans 3:4)
The good news is that even though hell is real and God's judgement of our
sins is severe, Jesus Christ was "set forth to be a propitiation through
faith in his blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins
that are past" (Romans 3:25) and so we are "Justified by faith, we have peace
with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:1)
Everlasting fire was prepared for the devil and his angels, (Matthew 25:41),
so let them have it.
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." (Acts 16:31)
Why, the H-E Double Hockey Sticks would you not?

-----------------------------------------------

Will we find life in outer space?

As both this century and this millennium come to a close, many attempts will be made at listing the most significant events of both. One event, Neil Armstrong's walk on the moon, will undoubtedly be on all the lists, whether for the last one hundred years or the last one thousand. Let us flip the coin over, and ask ourselves what we might suppose would be the most significant event of the twenty-first century or the third millennium. A cure for cancer? World peace? The Cincinnati Bengals having a winning season?? Amazing and wonderful as those items would be, our fascination with outer space would make it very likely that the discovery of life in some other galaxy would be seen as the most important likelihood for the next century or even the next millennium. Our thinking has been primed by science fiction and the likes of Carl Sagan to believe that there must be life out there somewhere. Little Green Men, X-Files, UFO's, ET, Rosswell, and Area 51 are all items which probably don't even exist, but which have all passed into our outer space folklore. While we say we care about poverty and the homeless, we plow billions into our unrequited love affair with the Twilight Zone. And just what is the likelihood that we will find something alive out there? The fact that so much effort has already been expended, to no avail, leans toward concluding that life will not be found. We may remember that in 1995 a meteorite, supposedly from Mars, supposedly contained signs of life. You had to search the back pages of newspapers to locate the statement of geochemist Jim Papike, director of the Institute of Meteoritics at the University of New Mexico that "There was no evidence that it was in a ratio for life forms." If you don't keep up, you might ignorantly believe that meteorite contained signs of life, or that black holes have actually been discovered, or that millions of planets have been discovered. But not only has well-funded science come up dry, there is every indication from the Bible in my hand that we are wasting needed billions of dollars to keep up this fruitless search. We can know from I Corinthians 15:47 that Adam was the first man. Not ET. And we can know that Adam did not evolve from pond scum if we believe the Genesis account The invention of the evolution theory, while widely accepted by the public-educated humanist, has yet to show us the compelling evidence of either the missing links or the emergence of a new species. Actress Jodie Foster's movie Contact was a tribute to scientific apologist Carl Sagan and the film offered the idea that if there is no life out there, it seems like a tremendous waste of space. Perhaps from our Earth-bound perspective that is so. But from God's perspective, "The heavens declare the glory of God." (Psalms 19:1) The sun, moon and stars were given "to divide the day from the night" and "for signs,and for seasons, and for days, and years" (Genesis 1:14-19) Meanwhile, the Bible tells us that there is life out there, but it ain't green and it ain't ET. There is an "innumerable company of angels" (Hebrews 12:22) which are both evil and elect beings, (I Timothy 5:21, Ephesians 6:12) engaged in activities in heavenly places. (Colossians 1:16) The space exploring evolutionist thinks I am simply silly to believe my Bible while I get a good laugh at their belief in embryonic recapitulation, or the Peiking Man, both now totally debunked. Some of us remember that it was the scientist that thought the Earth was flat and the Bible-believer that knew it was round. (Isaiah 40:22) When all is said and done, the fact is that the underlying purpose of the search for ET is actually to do away with the Bible, once and for all. Finding life elsewhere would be perceived as a death blow to the singularity of Creation here. Finding a different form of life in space would endorse evolution and nail the covers of the Bible shut. Most people have already taken the anti-biblical stance without the benefit of compelling evidence. They are merely waiting for our tax dollars to validate the teachings of both science and our public education system by locating a little green man. That discovery simply won't happen, but we will waste billions and billions looking. And those educated open-minded politically correct, wonderfully tolerant people who believe in ET and evolution will always rise up in angst and ire and uniform opposition against the Bible-believer who refuses to be intimidated by "science, falsely so called." (I Timothy 6:20) ET or no ET, "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement." (Hebrews 9:27) "The fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone.: (Revelation 21:8) Small wonder sinful man wants to get rid of the God of the Bible so that he can replace judgement with happenstance..

--------------------------------------------------

How do I teach dispensationalism to the hard-headed?

TELL THEM ABOUT.......
THE BIBLE'S MOST BEAUTIFUL 'BUTS'
Pound for pound, Billy Goats have got to be about the most powerful creatures on the face of God's earth. And hard-headed, too. The last Billy we owned we cleverly named Billy-The-Kid; and when we put him on a lead line to go for a walk, we could only go where Billy wanted. And if you did not keep pace, he would yank your arm out of its socket until you got the idea. To stop him, the best tactic was to circle a good sized tree with the lead line: after a few minutes of constant tugging and choking, Billy generally got the idea. And heaven help you if you did not circle a big enough tree with the lead line, for you'd be going down the street: goat tree, roots and all. Now, a Billy goat's horns and head are solid as rock, but I have discovered a creature with a head even harder, and that would be a person resisting the Lord. You say any of the 'magic words: "Jesus, grace, faith, God, sin, reconciled," and the hard-headed will say "but, but, but, but but," just like a Billy goat. But for every "But" the hard-headed would offer, the Bible has a beautiful "But" in reply. The hard-headed Billy-the-Person says "But nobody can keep all those laws in the Bible and all those commandments;" to which the Bible replies "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested" (Romans 3:21) "But I can't live it," hard-headed Billy fires back. And the Bible calmly responds "But now being made free from sin, and become the servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life." (Romans 6:22)Hard-headed as any goat ever was Billy-the-persistent-person says "But I thought to be a Christian you had to act the way all those hypocrites in the Church act and do what the pastor tells you." Romans 7:6 answers "But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." (And why is it the hypocrites at the Walmart and the hypocrites at the bowling alley don't bother anybody, only the hypocrites at the church? And isn't it well said that "If there is a hypocrite between you and God, the hypocrite is closer to God that you are?") Some of the hardest heads I have ever encountered personally sat on the muscular shoulders of men I taught Bible to in a maximum security prison. Their favorite rejoinder was "But I've done too many bad things so God can't forgive me." "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8) "But I'm not smart enough to understand God." "But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty." ((I Corinthians 1:27) Back and forth it goes. But God has a rock that will crack any nut "and that Rock was Christ." (I Corinthians 10:4) "But what if I sin again?" asks Billy-the-hard-headed. "But God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it" (I Corinthians 10:13) "But I have wandered far away from God." "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." (Ephesians 2:13) "But, but-but ....but" There are no buts for which the Bible lacks a beautiful response, thanks to the grace and wisdom of almighty God. One nice thing about a hard-headed Billy goat is that when you get something into his cranium, it is there forever. For example, when our younger twin goats learned that the best way to get our attention was to jump onto the hood of the car, they never forgot it. (Which goes a long way to explain why we no longer own any goats.) And hard-headed people are enough to keep a person busy. "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world though him might be saved" So don't be so hard-headed you miss heaven and don't be so hard-headed that you think it is your sins that will take you to hell. "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sin, hath quickened us together with Christ-for by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:4-8) I know. You are saying "But, but, but..." But "being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (,quit being so hard-headed and thank God for those beautiful 'buts.')

---------------------------------------------------

What about homosexuality?

The answer to this question is an Amy award winning WITH A BIBLE IN MY HAND newspaper column written by Terence D. McLean

Ellen: what will they think of next?
Just a few short decades ago, black Americans took to the streets to oppose racially based discrimination and segregation. There were excesses on both sides of the issue, but cooler heads prevailed. Riots occurred in cities all over America, but it was logic that carried the day.
Dr. Martin Luther King said all people, including blacks, should be "judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." In other words, black Americans wanted to be judged by what they did in the work place, how they performed in the neighborhoods, not by the color of skin. No rational person could disagree. It was logical, it made good sense, and. slow progress is being made along those lines. Now along comes another group which says "Don't judge us by what we do, disregard our behavior, accept us because we are a minority." Black activists took to the streets with a promise to perform as great Americans. Homosexual groups take the streets with promises of dangerously unhealthy behavior and ask to be accepted because they are different. It is not prejudice to notice this distinction, particularly since one of the results of homosexual behavior has the potential of decimating our health and insurance systems. Former Chairman of the joints Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell well said "Skin color is a benign, nonbehavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument." Nine year olds in New York City are being taught that "Heather has two Mommies" and "Daddy has a Room mate" and those same books are no doubt in your library. Our federal government through the National Institutes for Health, spends two million dollars annually to provide an 800 number for homosexuals. It is not a line for counseling or referral but rather a place to call to talk dirty and hear dirty talk. The idea is that it promotes 'outercourse' and combats AIDS. Project director Roger Ruffman says that the line is a good idea because "We are a gay affirmative, sex positive group." To stifle blacks because of skin color was a civil wrong recognized. To stifle homosexuality because of behavioral ramifications is clearly a different thing. The rule of law that no lawyer uses these days, but which is the rule in place in the minds of all Americans is that "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." By this rule again, there is no comparison between the issues of civil rights as they pertained to the black race or as they now relate to the homosexual. Preachers who stand with the apostle Paul on the issue of homosexuality are lumped in with Skin Heads and the KKK. The difference is that the Skin Heads and KKK hate because of the benign characteristics that Powell spoke of while the preachers don't hate anybody but concern them selves with self-destructive behavior. Paul tells the pastor to be "Patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to acknowledging of the truth." (II Ti. 2:25) This is not a matter of hate but of desire for Godly behavior and success. CNN estimated that as much as 15% of Clinton's vote came from the homosexual camp and so our new president is rewarding that constituency by taking an illogical position that endorses a behavior, not a true minority. To follow President Clinton's error to it's logical conclusion, we must next deal with transvestites. It is not unfair to make them wear the uniform of the services as it denies them their rights. Corporal Klinger of the old MASH television show must be allowed in the service. And pity the poor Drill Sergeant who surveys his crop of green recruits and shouts "March like soldiers, you bunch of sissies." My, won't the lawsuits fly. Our nation has a great many people who believe clothing is wrong and so nudists have always been discriminated against. We must, in order to be fair, have a militia of the naked, no doubt in a warm climate. The logic defending the rights of the homosexual, the naked and the transvestite is clearly different from the logic behind the issues relating to blacks or other races, and the difference is that of behavior versus a nonbehavioral characteristic. Ellen is cute and funny. But if we were allowed to detail in public those things she claims a right to do in private, I am confident the smiles would be wiped off every face. It is not a matter of homophobia, it is a matter of how the plumbing works. It is not a victimless activity done in privacy, it is a flaunted perversion that has killed thousands and cost millions. Then Vice-President Dan Quale lamented Murphey Brown when she was on the cutting edge of televised promiscuity a few years ago. Now Ellen has pushed the envelope just that much further, and we are not a better people for her efforts. It makes one afraid to ask "What will they think of next?"

--------------------------------------------

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO GODLY MUSIC?

What is wrong with "Amazing Grace," I ask you?
Is there a problem with "How Great Thou Art?"
Are the words and melody of "How Firm a Foundation" now longer true and beautiful? Must we set aside the great hymns of the faith and replace them with "Who put the bop in the Bible shee-bop shee bop?" And "Ram-a-lam-a-ding-dung for Jesus." Now that we have "Christian" rock, rap, reggae, and jazz, can "Christian" Budweiser be far behind? Must "What a Friend We have in Jesus" be replaced with "The Dude upstairs is so cool, doo whoppa, doo whoppa doo?" And now that we have "Christian" heavy metal, acid and (get this) Christian New Age, can "Christian" Marlboro's wrapped in New Testament parchment be far behind.? And what of the people who write these new songs? Once upon a time, hymns were written only by the greatest of composers and the most devout of Christians. Compare that with Michael W. Smith, who, "at the same time he was penning gospel songs, he was also using marijuana, LSD and Cocaine." (Wall Street journal, 9-11-91, page A-11) "I'm a singer, not a preacher...I'm not looking to convert anybody" says Christian rock diva Amy Grant. (Los Angeles Times, 5-4-84, pg 2-c) Grant goes on to demonstrate her spirituality by saying "I'm not going to say too often that I like a cold beer while watching a football game. That might bother some of my fans." (Greenville News, 5-4-94) One Christian rock star gets caught fornicating and he converts to singing secular songs, including one in which he ridicules Christians. Then be packs an auditorium in Dayton as he does his 'comeback tour.' Another Christian rock star gets caught fornicating and all her albums are recalled by the publisher, only to have them re-released after her divorce and subsequent remarriage to the object of her three-year affair. And of Amy Grant's lyrics, Billboard magazine and Face The Music both report that "The only difference between Amy Grant's love songs and those of Olivia Newton John, is that often Grant's pronouns come with capital letters." To which Amy has been quoted saying "I want to play hardball in this business. I want to be at the same level as...Billy Joel, the Doobie Brothers..." (Time Magazine, New Lyrics for the Devil's Music, 3-11-85, pg. 60) Well, glory to God in the highest. And what of the presentation of this new "Christian" music.
Michael W. Smith was seen as a hot number by the Wall Street journal when they learned his sexy steamy sensuous video was produced by the same company that produces the rocker formerly known as Prince. "I know if I am too blatant about my Christianity and talk about Jesus I won't succeed. But hey, I'm not an evangelist. I'm a singer." (Ibid) On "Christian" metal group Bloodgood's video, one of the rockers enters with purple hair and sunglasses, carrying a giant Bible. Then he says "I'm not here to tell you about how Jesus loves you ....I"m here to talk about ME!" (Metal Mardi Gras)And now we have "Christian" Rave and "Christian" Thrash music. Amen, brother. Split somebody's head for Jesus.
You say, "Splitting heads for Jesus would never be included on a "Christian" album, not even Thrash trash. Wrong-o my naive friend. 'Persecution' is a "Christian" thrash group and the chorus of one of that group's songs repeats over and over: "Praise the Lord - Beat My Head In." And try these for lyrics giving honor to God on recent "Christian" albums: "Drown the devil in the urinal." Or better still: "I love my dog, and he loves me. He uses my leg when he has to pee." (New York Times, 7-26-96) Was there such a problem with "What a Friend we Have in Jesus" or "Nothing But the Blood Of Jesus" that we must replace them with a dog doing his duty on some dimwit's leg? "But you have to go with that stuff to keep the kids", you say. To keep them what exactly? To keep them laughing at you because they see through your hypocritical compromise? To keep them coming to church because they know they won't hear any more about Jesus and right-living there than they will at the amusement park? To keep them convinced that you have absolutely no clue?
The Bible in my hand says that real Christian music has three purposes. Colossians 3:16 says "Let the word of Christ dwell in your richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."
Clearly, then, Christian music is to teach Bible doctrine, to encourage godly behavior and to give testimony to the grace of God that resides in us by faith in Christ Jesus. Why did "Moshing for the Master" replace "Wonderful Grace of Jesus?" Was there something wrong with "The Haven of Rest" or "Trust and Obey?" No doubt when all you have ever listened to is sex-driven junk, really spiritual music feels like a bucket of cold water to a cavorting canine. Meanwhile, "How sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me."

-------------------------------------------------

IS THAT IN THE BIBLE?

There is a story, often told, of a young preacher who was delivering one of his first sermons with great verve and enthusiasm. He was preaching from the Bible's creation account in Genesis and he said "a deep sleep fell upon Adam...And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made He a woman..." (Genesis 2:22) And the somewhat inexperienced preacher had come to the bottom of the page, but when he turned the page he had actually turned several; so when he continued he said of the woman God had given Adam: "and the breadth of it fifty cubits and the height of it thirty cubits." (Genesis 6:15) Eve was apparently a very large lady. But if you take Bible verses from their context and combine them with unrelated verses, it is possible to teach just about anything from God's Holy Word. It would be wrong but it is possible. For example: "Judas went and hanged himself." (Matthew 27:4-5) "And do thou likewise." (Luke 10:37) "That thou doest, do quickly." (John 13:7) This method of verse twisting is well known to the charlatans and phoney 'fake healers' making millions from their mindless minions. One fellow got all tangled up as he was preaching from the parable of the good Samaritan, or so the story goes, and he said: "Once upon a time long ago, a young man went to Jerusalem and he fell among thieves. Thorns sprung up around him and choked him."
"But he went on and met the queen of Sheba and she gave him thirty pieces of silver that she got out of the mouth of a fish. With that the young man bought ten changes of raiment and a foal that he rode into the city as the people put palm branches in his path."
"As he was riding he caught his long hair in a tree and he hanged there fortydays and forty nights. Ravens brought him food and he got water from a rock until one night Delilah showed up and cut off his hair."
"He fell on stoney ground and when he got up he went into the highways and the hedges looking for the fields which were white unto harvest." "When he got back to Jerusalem he saw Jezebel sitting in the top of a sycamore tree and the young man told her to come down. She refused saying that she had just bought five yoke of oxen and must go to prove them." "The young man took his sling and five smooth stones and knocked Jezebel out of the tree, and he knocked her down seventy times seven times so that great was the fall of her." "And of the fragments of her they took up twelve baskets full." Then, the confused young preacher ended his sermon with the profound question: "Now whose wife will she be in the day of judgement?" While everything in the story is Bible-based, clearly the telling of it is entirely wrong. So, it is not enough to be 'scriptural' because verses must be left in their context. Further, verses must applied to their intended audience and not just anybody. There is a verse which says to take your plowshare and make a sword (Joel 3:10) and another verse which tells the reader to take his sword and make a plowshare (Micah 4:3). Since you cannot do both because the verses are mutually exclusive, the concept of identifying the context and the intended audience are clearly critical. It turns out that neither verse applies to us today. One part of the Bible is said to be that which "all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days." (Acts 3:24) That stands in contrast to "the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began," (Romans 16:25) "which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God." (Ephesians 3:9) Is it any wonder there are so many denominations with so many doctrines in conflict? One says tithe. (Malachi 3:10) Another says you should not give according to the law because you are under grace. (Romans 6:14) One says "repent and be baptized" (Acts 2:38) while another says "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us." (Titus 3:5) One says "He that shall endure until the end, the same shall be saved." (Matthew 24:13) while another says "To him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." (Romans 4:5) One person says "My Bible teaches thus and so" and the other person says "Yeah but, my Bible says this and that."
And they are both quoting the same book while coming to opposite conclusions. Clearly, there must be something more to Bible study than merely stringing verses together and arguing about them.
Meanwhile, did I ever tell you the story of the Prodigal Son. Seems God told him to build an ark because it was going to rain fire and brimstone, so he built Him an ark and put the tables of the covenant and Aaron's rod that budded in the ark. Then he set the ark loose in the bullrushes where it was found by a pool woman who had not a cake nor oil in her cruse ....

-------------------------------------------------

What would Jesus do?

"What would Jesus do?" is not merely a question. It is the latest 'fad" to hit Christian marketing paydirt. Over ten million bracelets with the initials WWJD have been sold, and no doubt the fax machines between here and China have been going wild with orders for more and more items with the slogan's imprint. Already there are pins and pens, shirts and shoe laces, books and bookmarks. The idea is to have things with the WWJD message, so that when temptation comes, there will be a reminder to ask "What would Jesus do?' Sounds great, until you think about it.
We know what Jesus Christ would do because His activities are recorded in the Bible. Hundreds of details were prophesied in the Old Testament and thousands recorded in the New Testament, so we know the answer to the question. Jesus "was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." (Hebrews 4:15)
We know for a certainty that Jesus would do the right thing.
And of course, the point of the WWJD fad is to get kids to look at their bracelet, hat, shirt, shoelaces, pin and pen so that they are reminded to do the right thing. That is fine and we are for that. But here is the rub. Jesus Christ was God in the flesh (I Timothy 3:16) and we are not. Speaking accurately, none of us is capable of doing what Jesus would do "for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23)
The Christian Booksellers Journal ....
No, that's not right: they don't want to be called 'Christian' anymore so they shortened their name to Booksellers Journal ....
No, that's not right either: they want to sell more than books so they changed their name to CBA Marketplace...
That's it: Marketplace with a teeny-tiny CBA for Christian Booksellers Association printed sideways to make it difficult to read and see they have something to do with Christianity. (No doubt they are concerned about offending the marketers who advertise in their magazine with too much of that nasty old blatant variety of Christianity.)
Well...
Whatever they are called, in their latest issue they opined that WWJD is a real cash cow but their headline asked "Trinket wares or truth bearers?" The article, written by Editor Sue Grise asks about the WWJD fad and its many products: "Are they mere fluff, or do they have real impact on lives?" (She concludes that only good is happening.) And obviously we are all in favor of every bit of good that comes out of something like this, but her question remains a good one. Has anyone noticed that we seem to need a new fad every year or so? No mention is made in the CBA Marketplace magazine that one had best make his WWJD buck quickly, because this too shall pass. Then,WWJD merchandise will be warehoused right next to President Ford's WIN buttons, the 'Just Say No' bumper stickers and the "True Love Waits" sweat shirts. The point needs to be made somewhere along the line that the central tenet of the gospel of Jesus Christ is that we are sinners and that none of us can do what Jesus did. It is because we are inherently unable to walk 'in His steps' that He died on the cross for us. It is because we are sinners by nature and choice "that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8)A better question would be "What should I do to glorify God?" How might I live to make the Lord happy? When temptation or trouble rear their ugly heads, how do we respond so that "whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." (I Corinthians 10:31)
Setting the standard unrealistically high ministers failure, frustration and hypocrisy. And if you know that, you change the question "What should I do to glorify God"
When all is said and done, you can take the bracelet off, remove the hat, pull off the T-shirt, untie the shoe laces, turn off the tape, and replace the pen.
What is your heart's desire when the trinkets are gone?
Is it to tip-toe along the edge of temptation and hope to be reminded at the last moment?
Or is it to do all that you do for the glory of God all the time?
The old saying is that "Beauty is skin deep", but does your 'Christianity' go any deeper than your sweatshirt?
If your love of the Lord is what motivates you, that truth will shine through whatever you are wearing and will get you though when trinkets made in China will not.

------------------------------------------------

What happens when faith healing goes sour?

WHEN FAITH HEALING GOES SOUR
A child is dead.
And bad religion killed her.
The little girl's mother and grandmother forced her to drink a deadly combination of chemicals because the child was supposedly possessed by demons. The objective was to exorcise the demons from the tiny tot, but the result was the dead child was toted away and tossed into a dumpster. This incident just happened, but it is hardly unique and it has not been a long time since similar disasters have ocurred. Just a month ago a 12 year old diabetic perished because his parents refused medical care. They said that going to a doctor would exhibit a lack of faith on their part, which would prevent God's healing.
There are enough anecdotes of this nature to fill a very large, tear stained book. Some of us remember a local lady, now dead, who perished when she refused a blood transfusion. The Bible forbids the eating of blood and her church says that a transfusion would be the same thing as ingesting blood. There are many so-called healers who love to strut around in front of television cameras pronouncing "Be healed, in the name of Jesus," but the result is "Be dead, to the shame of Jesus." If the response to these horrific happenings is that "those are just ignorant people" I would absolutely agree.
Meanwhile, do they deserve to be dead? And where does the buck stop?
Do we blame the mother and grandmother who thought they were doing a good thing for their apparently unmanageable child? Do we blame the parents of the diabetic when their intent was to demonstrate faithfulness to God?
Do we blame the adult woman whole slipped into eternity, holding fast to that which she had been taught? Yes, on one level, those sad people are most definitely at fault. But on another level, complicity in these atrocities must be ascribed to the irresponsible purveyors of Bible baloney, the faith healers who take complete credit for their success and claim no responsibility for their innumerable failures.
Consider one of the leaders of the faith healing movement, Dr. D. Peter Wagner, a man who has authored over twenty books on the subject. He says he had headaches for which no pain reliever proved effective.
In Wagner's book Confronting the Powers he writes:
"Then in 1983, (faith healer and founder of a faith healing school) John Wimber received a rhema word from God that the root cause of my headaches had been a demon and that I was to drive it out myself rather than ask someone else to do it for me. I obeyed. I cast out the demon in the name of Jesus,and I have not suffered any headaches since that day." So what have we got here: a demon of headaches? Does that mean the professing Christian author was demon possessed? Now that is an interesting concept. But most troubling of all is this business of getting a rhema word from the

By this the faith healer means that the Bible is the logos, the written word of God, but the hearing of the voice of God today in individual communication is the rhema word of God and is as valid as the Bible itself.
Wagner says he is one who believes "that a valid source of divine knowledge comes through what some would call 'extrabiblical revelation."' (Ibid, 55) He goes on to say that people who adhere only to the Bible are an endangered species about to become extinct. Being endangered would seem to be the condition of those who make up Rhema as they go along, rather than those who believe the written scriptures in context.
Now, if McDonalds is responsible because the coffee is hot and if the cigarette manufacturers are responsible for the people who use their product, it would seem to follow that some culpability for senseless tragedy must be ascribed to these extrabiblical fellows who "by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple." (Romans 16:18) Jesus Himself said "They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick" (Mark 2:17) So pray first, but if the condition persists, call a doctor.
The apostle Paul called Luke his beloved physician and Luke was with that sickly apostle right up to his death. (Colossians 4:14, II Timothy 4:11) So pray first, but if the condition persists, call a doctor.
Some years ago a lady called me and said "Pastor McLean, I listen to you on the radio and you seem to be an honest man." And then the 42 year old woman broke into tears.
"Is it my fault that I can't get out of this bed?" she sobbed. "Does God hate me? Am I demon possessed?" She had Multiple Sclerosis, had been bed ridden for almost 20 years, and a faith healer had visited her home and told her that the reason she could not be healed was because she did not have enough faith. Her 60 year old mother and caregiver was devastated. It was my privilege to sit at her bedside for hours, consoling the two of them from the Bible, and if that faith healer had been at her house when I got there, he would have been the endangered species. Suffice it to say, the Bible in my hand declares "we know not what we should pray for as we ought" but we can "know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them that are called according to his purpose." (Romans 8:2 6,28 ) "Be healed, in the name of Jesus," indeed. I'll believe those faith healers when I see them at the nursing homes, at Children's Medical Center, and over at Hospice. Perhaps the reason I don't see them there is that they are attending funerals, raising their followers from the dead.

--------------------------------------------------------------

What do you think about the message "When Did Christ Learn the Mystery?

There is a controversy swirling around a message entitled "When Did Christ Learn The Mystery" This message came to my attention when people from Grace Bible Fellowship of Xenia returned home from bible conferences and wanted everyone to know that Jesus not only did not know the mystery in the four gospels, Christ didn't even have the attributes of God in the four gospels. Since that time, literally dozens of people have inquired about this controversial teaching.

(If you do not have the tape of the specific message under review, you can obtain one free by e-mailing me your address or by writing me at Box 87, Alpha OH 45301-0087) What follows are my notes on this particular message. My opinion (having become fully persuaded in my own mind) is that this teaching borders on heresy and is dangerous in that it lessens the person of Christ and it feeds into the heresy of Open View Theology which is a current fad among many believers. My notes follow along with the taped message, so perhaps you will find it helpful to follow my notes as you listen to the tape, making your own notes and coming to your own conclusions.

Pastor Terence D. McLean

The subject is identified by the speaker as "almost a dangerous subject" in the very first minute, indicating the speaker knew it would be controversial and could be (almost) dangerous. It should come as no surprise then, that some might conclude that the subject is dangerous, particularly to young believers and especially to those leaning toward Open View Theology.

The question posed is "When did Jesus Christ learn the secret? When did He learn about the mystery?" My answer would be that He learned it before the foundation of the world, and while the speaker agrees with that the speaker teaches Christ chose to forget what He knew and did not find out about the mystery until Acts 7.

If Christ did not know the mystery, is the speaker saying the ‘son' is different from the ‘Christ?' Note that the speaker never says ‘Christ' was back there....he says the Son was back there.

Proverbs 8.10,22, 3.19 ‘God's wise plan was before the foundation', and I would agree. I would say Christ was back there and He learned the mystery then. Christ was at the council table when the plan was initiated and His part in it set forth.

‘Frankly, and I know it is considered heresy in some places' is another quote which makes it clear the speaker understands he is in controversial territory and that disagreement can be expected.

Then, the speaker says "When you think about ‘Did the Lord Jesus Christ know about the mystery?' Absolutely, He was at the council table, He was at the table when the plan was originated." With this statement I am in total agreement and I would simply leave it at that. But our speaker continues: "Did He know about it? Absolutely He knew about it. He had it as God, as a member of the Godhead, Jesus Christ knew and agreed to the execution of the plan and His part in the plan. Are you with me?" Yes, I am in total agreement, but this is not the conclusion which this message ultimately reaches.

The speaker then says "Here's when it gets thick" (I would say, here is where we run amuck).
Philippians 2.5-8 The speaker says "There is no question about the deity of Christ, here this morning." and that is good news, because some of the things about to be said are troublesome when it comes to the deity of Christ...."Jesus Christ, voluntarily, and of His own free will, laid aside the free and independent exercise of all of His attributes as God. He is God, you cannot change his attributes as God, you cannot change His essence and His being. But He made Himself, He took upon Himself, He made a choice to lay aside the independent exercise of all of His deity attributes." With these statements, I cannot agree. It was not a mere man who died for my sins, it was not a mere man performing miracles for Israel and it was not a mere man who was the Lamb slain. It was the attributes of God by which He knew men's thoughts, by which he performed signs and wonders and by which He could die for my sins. Without the attributes of God, you have a Christ unworthy of the cross.

Then the speaker sounds like a seminary professor when he talks about the doctrine of the gnosis (and why are we using this liberal terminology?).
Then the speaker says "and you will see translations that say ‘He emptied Himself,'" which in this presentation are apparently translations preferred by the speaker over the King James Bible so as to improve upon what the King James Bible states. Listen to this section again as the speaker clearly prefers a translation other than the KJ.

Next we are taught that He cannot give up His deity, but he willingly lays it aside....the independent exercise of His deity. Please, then, do not say that this message does not deal with the deity of Christ when it clearly does. We have, from this speaker, Christ without any attributes of deity in the four gospels. This I refer to as ‘near-heresy' choosing to give the speaker the benefit of the doubt.
Next the speaker deals with the status of being a servant and again it is said "When the Lord Jesus Christ laid aside the free and independent exercise of His deity attributes in order to be made into the fashion as a man and be found as a servant," we have ourselves a Christ without the attributes of deity. Respectfully, I must strongly disagree. And if you take the speaker's position, don't you dare ever teach the deity of Christ from any of the four gospels ever again.

Mark 13.31John 15.15 While the speaker uses these verses to conclude that Christ is ignorant and knoweth not, would we then similarly conclude that God did not know where Adam was when God said ‘Adam, where art thou?" Rather than teaching that Christ chose not to be God, I would say this is anthrophormistic in nature.
"He made the choice not to live on what He knew...laid that aside." but Christ, when asked in Mark 14.61 "Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" finds a Christ who knew who he was in verse 62 And Jesus said, I am." The Lord seems to disagree with the speaker.
Luke 22.70-71 bears the same witness and when Christ said in John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I am." does not Christ there declare that he is operating with the attributes and knowledge of God? And please tell me, what profit is there in lessening the personage of the Lord Jesus Christ? How does the message of an ignorant Christ encourage people to trust Christ?
And if he put aside all the attributes of God, as our speaker suggests, are we not intellectually dishonest to demonstrate the deity of Christ in the four gospels? And if we cannot demonstrate the deity of Christ in the four gospels, where would we then go to demonstrate his deity?

Then, the speaker says "In church history, there have been all kinds of heresies, the Nestorians....etc.etc" again suggesting that the speaker understands he is in tenuous territory, near heresy.
"Fleshing himself in your limitations..."
"He didn't quit being God, he just wasn't gonna exercise those deity attributes on his own, He was gonna put Himself in complete total dependence on the other members of the Godhead."

John 5.19 the son can do nothing of Himself, but what he seeth the father do
"He didn't live in His identity as the one with all the creative attributes of the universe. He lived in perfect humanity." Are we to conclude from this that we are saved by a man? And would it not also follow that if we are good little boys and girls we can be just as much a Christ as He was, since both of us lack all the attributes of deity?

John 5 .30 I can of mine own self do nothing
7.16 my doctrine is not mine but his that sent me
8.26 I speak those things which I have heard of him
5.20 the father shows him all things
(If the father showed Christ all things excluding the mystery then ‘all' does not mean ‘all' and further.....when did this showing happen? After the cross or before the foundation? The speaker is going to say Acts 7).
While all these verses deal with the position Christ took in His earthly ministry, my belief is that He still had all the attributes of God and beside that there is nothing here demonstrating ignorance of the mystery. All this message will ultimately do is lessen Christ and elevate humanity to being equal with Him, and if I am correct about this, then we have moved from ‘near-heresy' to the real thing.
And did not Christ reveal through many of His parables that there would be a delay before the kingdom would come? Did not Christ teach the mysteries of the kingdom? And where in the old testament did He read that information? And how did an ignorant Christ know to close the book in the middle of a sentence in Luke 4.20.

Matthew 11.25 all things delivered unto me of my father....(Again, does ‘all' mean ‘all' or not?)
Then the speaker says "Jesus Christ was educated by His father" and refers to the speaker's Luke study....
Our speaker then says "Come over to Chapter 3 of Luke, verse 21......and a voice came from heaven which said Thou art my beloved son, in thee I am well pleased. You can read over that and miss that....in Luke, looking at Him and who He is, in Luke the Father isn't addressing the crowds, He's addressing His son and He says ‘Thou Art'......God the Father is educating the Lord Jesus Christ....."
But in Luke two at twelve years old Christ already knew that He was going about His Father's business and so the idea that Christ found out He was the son in Luke three is just plain wrong, almost silly. Perhaps the speaker thinks that when Christ said He was going about his father's business in Luke Chapter two, Christ meant Joseph and that Christ was taking carpentry lessons.
"Total dependence upon what the father teaches him" is another statement then made by our teacher which sets a foundation for a question the speaker is about to pose, and please do not miss THE SPEAKER'S QUESTION..........:
"Can you grasp some of that in your mind without becoming a heretic?"
If that is a legitimate question, and I believe it is, then this is a teaching inappropriate at best and dangerous at worst.
And after all this, all that the speaker has established is an ignorant Christ lacking deity....we have yet to be told when Christ learned the mystery....the title of the message. You will learn it happened in Acts 7, flippantly, almost as an ‘oooops'....almost as an afterthought.

John 14.9-11 I speak not of myself but of the father
"Jesus knew the mystery in eternity past and he chose not to know it in order to become a man.....He (Christ) had a time of limited understanding and limited knowledge because the Father had only revealed certain things to Him and He walks in dependence upon what the Father's revealed." So Hebrews 13.8 does not apply to the earthly ministry of Christ; Christ is not the Author and Finisher and we should relax and accept this teaching? When we relax, intellectually, we become lazy and easily led, dear friend.

Romans 1.3 "the servant at a point in time becomes the son...by the resurrection." but you are going to learn that Christ remains ignorant of the mystery, even after the resurrection. The speaker is not even consistent as he teacher his error.

This thing of becoming a son is the doctrine of adoption per Gal 4.1-4
Until the time appointed of the father when he is declared a full grown adult
He 1.1-3 appointed heir of all things at the resurrection, the time of the appointment....(but the speaker will subsequently deny what he says here by saying that Christ gets told the mystery in Acts 7)
Christ taking the position is taught as being the same thing as Christ finally being educated.
Then the speaker takes Hebrews 5 and makes it that an ignorant Christ had to learn obedience rather than that God manifest in the flesh took the position of having to experience obedience to the shame of the cross
"He's declared to be His son, My Son, because he has all the information now."....(Not only does the speaker put words in God's mouth here, the speaker then denies what God supposedly said by teaching that Christ stays ignorant to this very day, and did not learn about the mystery until Acts 7)

"If I was getting that across to you, you couldn't be looking at me that blank." is not what you want to say at the conclusion of a message, I can assure you. Listen to this again....apparently the speaker's audience was dumbfounded by this message. Perhaps if you turn up your tape player you can hear chins hitting the floor.

Because He has depended upon the education that the Father gave him......The speaker draws to a conclusion with this statement...."He is living in total dependence today, even now, in what God the Father communicated to Him." This statement, in my opinion, makes Christ into a lesser God. And if Christ is now in the same dependent condition as described by the speaker relating to Christ's earthly ministry when Christ lacked the attributes of God, is the speaker now presenting a Christ who still lacks the attributes of God? At this point, this message has become even more dangerous.

No wonder the speaker uses forms of the word ‘heresy' three times in this message and no one should be surprised that this message would be unacceptable to some who hear it. If I am understanding what is being said here, and I hope I am not, Christ still does not know all there is to know, even now.

And since Christ is living in total dependence, does this leave room for more surprises? Remember, the speaker said....He (Christ) had a time of limited understanding and limited knowledge because the Father had only revealed certain things to Him and He walks in dependence upon what the Father's revealed." and here the speaker has apparently extended the time of ignorance and dependency through this present hour. If this is not an open door to Open View, whatever would be? This is a message worthy of total rejection. This teaching has the potential of tarring the Grace Movement with a label of heresy that could well stick.

Ep 1.17 knowledge of him, his calling etc. v20 which he wrought in Christ when he raised him

Near the conclusion of this message the speaker makes this amazing statement: "You know when He learned about the mystery. He learned about it when he was set at the Father's right hand in the third heaven, far above all heavens, right there. He ascended up into the heavens and sat at the Father's right hand, educated in the prophetic program, there came a time when the fall of Israel took place and the wrath of God is ready to be poured out and the Father says "Wait Son, there is something else for you to know about....and He took Him up far above all heavens and revealed to Him the wonderful finality of the revelation of all that God accomplished through Calvary."

"Wait son, there is something else for you to know about...." You heard it with your own ears. Christ is still ignorant in Acts 7 and still lacks the attributes of God nearly a year after the resurrection.

There you have the speaker's answer to the question that only the speaker raised: "When Did Christ Learn the Mystery?'....... Christ learned the revelation of the mystery in Acts 7, according to the speaker, and apparently Christ is still dumb as a brick about anything the Father has not told Him.

And no doubt God didn't know where Adam was because the GPS satellite was not yet launched.

The speaker is a dear brother and a valuable asset to the Body of Christ. This message is regrettable and should not be accepted simply because the speaker is a faithful friend or notable leader. Many have asked me what I thought about this teaching and several came back to Ohio from Bible Conferences elsewhere exporting the doctrines they had picked up in the message, the assumption being that no one would ever openly disagree with the speaker.

When I could no longer avoid the issue raised by the speaker I considered the matter, ordered the tape and listened to it several times, and then I searched the scriptures. When I concluded the material on the taped message "When Did Christ Learn The Mystery" was terribly wrong I provided that answer to those who had asked me.

Now I find myself being attacked by the ‘Grace Gestapo' because I have come to a different conclusion than the speaker and the Grace Gestapo found out that I disagree with one of the Mid-Acts ‘popes'. There is no ring that I care to kiss and no personality cult I care to join, and so these attacks seem to me to be more malevolent than meaningful. You have not heard one word of personal attack or name-calling from me and I have endeavored to only deal with the doctrine, not personalities.

If we as Grace Believers are not allowed to search the scriptures and become fully persuaded in our own minds without being subsequently attacked by a Grace Gestapo of Thought Police, then we have come to a very sorry place. When you send people off to a bible conference they should come home encouraged, not confused....edified, not damaged.

Please remember, the genesis of this controversy is the speaker and his thought police....
the rest of us were doing just fine without the speaker raising issues that the speaker himself identifies as things that you may not be able to grasp without becoming heretics.

And one last thought: as you witness the attack on me, remember you could be next if you dare to disagree with these high-and-lifted-up leaders of the Mid-Acts movement.

Yours for making all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery.
Pastor Terence D. McLean
© Discerning the Times Publishing Inc

Romans
16:25-26

Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: