The Christian life begins with the sacrifice Christ made for our sins on Calvary. The Christian walk begins with our presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice unto God. This sacrifice is explained in Romans 12:1-2. The Liberty Bible Commentary offers the following exposition of this passage:

"Paul is speaking to Christians, whether Jews or Gentiles. The mercies of God are all those good things we have because we are in Christ Jesus. Most especially he is referring to those mercies enumerated in [Romans] 8:35-39.

. . . That ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. This request is eminently linked to his [Paul's] discussion of sanctification in chapters 6 and 7. In fact, the word rendered present here (Greek partisemi) is the same as translated yield in [Romans] 6:13, 19. Paul now deals in greater detail with what it means to present ourselves to God.

The Lord God wants the sacrifice of our life, not our death. Consequently the sacrifice we are to make of our bodies (representing our whole person) is a living sacrifice. . . . Not only is the presentation of our bodies a living sacrifice but it is also a holy and acceptable sacrifice. . . . When the sacrifice of ourselves to God is holy it is inerrantly acceptable to God and well pleasing to Him. More than this, says the apostle, the sacrifice of ourselves to God is our reasonable service. The word service (Greek latreia) is a term used for the function of priests in the tabernacle. The adjective (Greek logikos) which precedes it may be translated either reasonable (i.e., rational) or spiritual. But our worshipful service can only be spiritual in the biblical sense when it is characterized by our conscious, intelligent, rational service to the Lord God. In Paul's theology, spirituality is not some mindless fluttering of the heart but is the presentation of an entire life to the Lord.

Not only is the presentation of our bodies the subject of Paul's request, it is the pattern of our behavior as well. And be not conformed to this world. Paul cautions the believer not to be fashioned after this world or age (Greek aion). The world system of this age is an evil one (Galatians 1:4), and is dominated by "the god of this world" (II Corinthians 4:4). The new creation in Christ is to live with the understanding that old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new (II Corinthians 5:17). We are therefore not to have our lives governed by the thought patterns and dictates of this evil world system.

But how can we prevent that? Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind. The only possible way for the believer not to be fashioned (Greek syschematizo) after this world is to be transformed in mind. The word transformed (Greek metamorphoo) reaches far deeper than conformity to the world. This implies a fundamental change in the Christian's inward nature and a following pattern of character, which corresponds, to that new nature. Thus the mind (Greek nous, the center of logical reasoning, ethical judgement, and moral awareness) must be completely changed if we are to live a life that is holy and acceptable unto God."

We believe that abortion is the number one national sin against God in America today. We believe the Bible teaches that abortion is murder. We believe God will require each mother, doctor and nurse who has participated in an abortion to answer for that baby's shed blood and the destruction of its life.

Jeremiah 1:5 tells us this: "Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." This verse clearly teaches us that even in the womb we are complete individuals, with body, soul and spirit, and that God intimately knows us and has a plan for our lives.

Psalm 22:9,10; Psalm 119:73; Job 31:15 and Job 10:8 teaches that God is the author of life and that, with His own hands, He forms each individual person in the other's womb. Scripture even indicates that we are known by God during the pre-embryonic stage of development:

"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works: and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect: and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them" (Psalm 139:13-16).

We are all "fearfully and wonderfully made." It is God who made us and not we ourselves. We, as parents, are only instruments in God's plan of procreation. Therefore, to terminate a baby's life within the mother's womb, is the same, in God's sight, as terminating the baby's life after it is born. It is on the basis of the above scripture verses that we believe the Bible teaches that abortion is murder.

The Bible specifically details the life of Abraham beginning in Genesis 12 through Genesis 24. It should be noted that Abraham's name originally was Abram ("father of elevation" or "exalted father"). His name signified the honor of his being the progenitor of God's chosen people. Later, in Genesis 17:5, his name was changed to Abraham (meaning "father of a great number").

Very little is known about the early childhood of Abraham. Historians speculate that Abraham was born approximately 2165 BC Abraham's father was Terah, and according to Joshua 24:2, Terah worshipped heathen gods. Abraham was born and raised in the city of Ur of the Chaldees.

The God of glory appeared unto Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia (Acts 7:2). God told Abraham to leave his father's house and proceed to the land of Canaan. And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed (Genesis 12:2-3).

Abraham was known as the father of the Jews. He is identified as a Hebrew in Genesis 14:13. Abraham is described as the "friend" of God (see II Chronicles 20:7), and a man of great faith and prayer (see Genesis 15:6; 18:23-33; Hebrews 11:8). Perhaps the greatest attribute of Abraham was his determination to be obedient to the Lord, and this obedience brought God's blessings upon him: (1) He became the patriarch of the nations, (2) he entered the Promised Land, and (3) he became the bestower of blessings upon all nations (CRISWELL STUDY BIBLE, p. 22)

Regional accreditation for Christian colleges is a controversial subject. Some parents will not permit their children to attend a college unless it is accredited. Their reasoning is, "since parents are not trained to evaluate colleges, we will not send our children to a college unless it has met some standards." On the other hand we hear the complaint, "accreditation kills a college and makes it become liberal." We face this question because Liberty University is accredited with the Southern Association of Schools and Colleges. Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary is accredited with the same agency not only because the state of Virginia required it by law, but primarily because Liberty University is committed to the highest standards of excellence in every area of endeavor. We believe accreditation enhances its excellence, not dilutes the process. We do not see a "cause and effect" relationship between accreditation and spiritual decay. First, let us look at history. The missionary school on the island of Iona in the fourth and fifth century was as aggressive as any modern soul-winning church, yet it lost its fervency. Accreditation had nothing to do with its demise. The same could be said for other soulwinning institutions throughout history. Many of the great Wesleyan colleges were built on revivalism and holy living, yet they have become liberal. Harvard, Yale and Princeton were each established with a strong commitment to the fundamentals of the faith, yet each was lost to the faith. Accreditation had nothing to do with the problems of these colleges. Therefore, we feel there are other contributing factors, which corrupt a Christian college. Those who determine accreditation do not set aims, rules or arbitrary requirements for the college or university. The purpose of accreditation is simple. They seek to determine the integrity of the objectives of a college via self-study and examination. It thus establishes the credibility of the educational institution, which lives up to its self-determined goals and aims. When an institution uses the name "college," a higher education than high school is implied: English, that the student can communicate properly; History, that the student has a grasp of the past; Literature, that the student can read and interpret the writings of other men; Mathematics, that the student can use numbers at the college level; Biology, that the student understands the world of science and physics; Psychology, that the student understands personality and basic human adjustment; Philosophy and Logic, that the student can think properly and analyze the thoughts of others. A university is a collection of many colleges. Higher education at a college or university implies that a student has mastered an area of specialty. The last subject is called the student's major. We think a college student should show competency in the above areas. Accreditation only guarantees that the majority of the students graduating from a given college have reached a standard of maturity in those areas. Accreditation helps the student transfer credits to like-quality institutions. The accreditation of a student's credits is like trading money. U.S. money can be spent in Canada because the money in both nations is both worth something. This is like one college accepting another's credits. However, Indian beads cannot be spent at McDonalds because the beads have no value in the American economy. This is like a non-accredited college attempting to transfer credit to an accredited college. When a young person invests four years of his time listening to lectures and doing homework, he should receive an education. When he invests thousands of dollars in college fees, his degree should be worth something. Accreditation adds worth to a college degree. ACCREDITATION PROBLEMS All is not "peaches and cream" with the process of accreditation. The process of accreditation has hurt some Christian colleges; however, it was the process that damaged the college, not accreditation itself. Many educators with liberal tendencies have used accreditation as a club; "If we don't reduce the number of Bible courses, we will not get accreditation." The college board of directors is usually made up of noneducational people, and they listen to those whom they have hired. They reduce the Bible course and the school begins to drift. Another cause of the spiritual degeneration of Christian colleges has been the tendency of leaders to compromise their convictions and commitment to a spiritually dynamic institution. We engage in age-old arguments concerning which is more important-a quality education or a spiritually dynamic institution. A strong argument at Liberty is the loyalty of the University to the local church. As long as the church remains fundamental and the leadership remains committed to spiritual goals and excellence in education, there is no reason to believe accreditation would diminish our resolve. On the contrary, it should strengthen the University. Accreditation will force us as an institution to continually evaluate our program against our goals. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states generally, "Everything is in a state of deterioration." A university or a church will deteriorate if not closely watched. Sin, like leaven, works in individuals, and the enemy will try everything possible to dilute a Christian college/university. A college committed to Christian fundamentals swims against the stream of educational practices. Some students do not want to study so a college must help them learn discipline. Many find a way to excuse their laziness. It is those who tear down standards. Many students will complain that the rules are too strict and the classes too hard. They put pressure on the faculty to ease up, and when they do, the university drifts. Some students feel their idea of what a university ought to be is more important than the administration and if they could, they would make the university a little easier. If in fact some students had the opportunity, they would bring the college down to their lower levels of expectation because of their spiritual immaturity and inexperience. Accreditation does not corrupt a Christian university-people corrupt a Christian university. We feel that the greatest foes of a Christian university are not always those without. We who are members of the Liberty University family feel a responsibility to God to be as pure as the goals of its founders. And, Liberty University will remain as pure as we keep it. We would like to go a step further. We would like LU to do more for God than any other college in history. We would like to grow in size, realizing that size only guarantees numbers, not success. We would like to grow in spiritual power so that we may capture towns for Christ. We would like to grow in our commitment to the fundamentals of the faith so that we are closer to truth than we have ever been. We want quality, which is what accreditation is all about.

In the fourth chapter of the book of Hebrews, it mentions a "rest" for the people of God: For we which have believed do enter into rest...(Hebrews 4:3). From this we conclude that God provides a rest to all who have placed their trust in Jesus Christ as their personal Savior. We know there yet remaineth a rest for us in Heaven. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God (Hebrews 4:9). This rest, as referred to in Hebrews chapter 4, could represent the believer who has experienced spiritual rest, either in salvation or by consecration. The believer who experiences this rest has ceased from his own works. 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 2:8,9).

The passage in Hebrews 4 could be better understood as describing the Christian at death. At that point, he ceases from his good works and enters into Heaven's rest (Revelation 14:13). Although we look forward to that heavenly rest, we are admonished in Scriptures to be laborers in the vineyard here upon the earth: Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief (Hebrews 4:11). Heaven and the millennial rest is the reward of the believer's labors for the Lord (Revelation 14:13).

Some people believe that Heaven will be a place of eternal sleep. However, the answer from Scripture is clearly stated to be -- No! We will not sleep in Heaven. In the book of Revelation we are privileged to look into Heaven and see the activity around the throne of God. Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple . . . (Revelation 7:15). . . . And they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty . . . (Revelation 4:8). And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season . . . (Revelation 6:11).

We know from the descriptions given in the book of Revelation that there will be no night in Heaven, thus no need for sleep for those who inhabit Heaven. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there (Revelation 21:25, 22:5).

Truly, Heaven will be a wonderful place for the believer to look forward to spending all eternity. Heaven is a prepared place for a prepared people. Are you prepared and looking forward to going to Heaven? Does Christ live in your heart? If you have not already done so, I invite you to receive the Lord Jesus Christ into your life. Let Him be your Savior and cleanse you of all sin. Give Him control of your life.

You can do so by simply praying the following prayer and meaning it with all your heart: "Dear Lord, I now realize that I am a sinner. I accept the fact that Christ died upon the cross to save me. I now open my heart's door and receive Him as my personal Savior. Please forgive me of all my sin. I also receive Jesus Christ as my Lord. I will willingly give my life to His complete control. Now help me be the kind of person, God, you want me to be. Guide and direct me from this day forth and I will serve you faithfully in everything I do."

If you have prayed this prayer in all sincerity and faith, you are now a child of God for all eternity. You can look forward to Heaven as your eternal home.

Many Bible students ponder the theological questions as to why Adam and Eve were forbidden to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and what the fruit of this tree was. He (Adam) was commanded to abstain from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, lest he die [Genesis 2:171. The Hebrew language indicates here that if Adam sinned he would die twice! . . . There are two kinds of death . . . physical and spiritual. In the Bible, the theological meaning of the word "death" is "separate." The death of the body is the separation of soul and spirit from the body. The death of soul and spirit is their separation from God. This is the death that Adam died, and in Adam we died also. It is in consequence of this death that we are born separated from God, estranged, aliens, Godless, hopeless, Christless [Ephesians 2:12] (GENESIS, Donald Grey Barnhouse, p. 16).

The complete freedom of man in the garden was restricted only by this one prohibition (eat not of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil). Since man as yet in a state of unconfirmed holiness, God chose to test the obedience of His creation by placing him in a perfect environment with but one restriction. As God had created him, man was able not to sin. If he had not sinned, he would have been confirmed in righteousness and would subsequently not have been able to sin. Instead, he disobeyed God, died spiritually, and fell into a state that made him not able not to sin (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. I, p. 17).

What about the fact that Adam was made in God's image? The following comments concern Adam being made in the "image of God." The Bible uses the terms "image of God" and "likeness of God" as indication of man's mental and moral nature, his powers of reason and intelligence, his free will and self-consciousness, and his capacity for communion with God (THE BOOK OF GENESIS, Charles R. Eerdman, p. 19). Although Adam was created in the "image of God," neither Adam nor Eve were capable of knowing good and evil as perfectly and completely as God knew good and evil. The truth was that Adam and Eve could never attain God's knowledge of good and evil because, in part, to know evil they had to sin, something which God had never done and something which would be fatal to their [Adam and Eve's] experiential knowledge of good (PARADISE TO PRISON, John Davis, p. 89).

It should be pointed out that the knowledge of the distinction between good and evil is the property of all oral intelligence, and man [Adam] possessed it from the first. The mere presence of the Tree, apart from the eating of it, gave knowledge, to what extent, of good and evil. Man thus knew the nature of good and the possibility of evil. He sought to know more, to know evil, not as a possibility merely, but as a reality; not negatively, but positively; not by symbol, but in fact, by personal acquaintance and experience, by free and voluntary choice (STUDIES IN GENESIS, Robert S. Candlish, p. 64).

Thus we understand, both [Adam and Eve] acted freely; both knew that they were breaking the law of God-both were guilty of sin; for in the gift of freedom had been involved oral responsibility. They might have chosen to obey God. They chose, however, to disobey; and what is sin but transgression of law? (THE BOOK OF GENESIS, Charles R. Eerdman, p. 19). A further question to the issue of Adam and Eve and their disobedience to God's command not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is "Why did God permit a temptation which ultimately leads to death and all our woe?" The answer must always be that God will have only that to count as oral behavior which is worthy of a being made in God's image, freely given and maintained even where the possibility of doing otherwise offers itself. To do what God desires merely because one cannot do otherwise has no moral worth. It would be a morality like unto that of beams which uphold the house because they have been put in place and cannot but bear their load. To do right where there has never been an opportunity of doing wrong is not moral behavior. The opportunity to do otherwise must present itself. This is temptation. A being who could not even suffer to be tempted would be a poor specimen of God's handiwork. But the true wisdom of God appears in this, that, though His creature falls, God is still able to achieve His original purpose through the redemption. which is in Christ Jesus, a redemption for which provisions were noted in Genesis 3 (EXPOSITION OF GENESIS, Vol. 1, H. C. Leupold, pp. 145, 146).

To answer the question, "what was the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?" it may be simply stated that the fruit was "forbidden fruit." With the eating of the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve's eyes were opened. They saw themselves as sinners, devoid of their original beauty. They now saw good and evil only from the standpoint of sinners. They now experienced the dilemma described by the Apostle Paul which says, For the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do (Romans 7:9). In other words, they knew good but were unable to do it. They also knew evil, but were unable to resist it. Truly it may be stated that the forbidden fruit was a bitter/sad fruit. As a result of eating the fruit, a keen sense of guilt immediately followed the act of Adam and Eve sinning, and their intimate fellowship with God was broken.

Another question often asked by Bible students is: "Why did God choose the shedding of blood as the only acceptable sin offering? What is unique about the shedding of blood?" The Scripture explains that after Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons (Genesis 3:7). In a pitiful attempt to replace the radiant garments of their innocence, they sewed fig leaves together. Man has ever since attempted to cover his guilt and assuage his conscience. His efforts, just as Adam and Eve's efforts, fall way short of God's divine demands. Although man's covering for his nakedness was inadequate, God provided a suitable covering by sacrificial blood-that is, substitutional death of the innocent for the guilty. For Adam and Eve, the sacrifice of innocent animals was the high cost of their guilt and covering of their nakedness. Later it would be the death of the sacrificial Lab of God, Jesus Christ, as He died on the cross of Calvary for man's sins.

It should be pointed out that the Lord God made the coats of skins, and clothed Adam and Eve in them (Genesis 3:21). In this, God appointed innocent animals to be slain in sacrifice--representing the way in which sin is covered, by the imputed worthiness of the great sacrifice--the righteousness of the lambs slain for sin's remission. The Lord God Himself "made," or ordained, this as the method acceptable for covering. . . . The skins have spiritual meaning arising out of the sacrificial se of the beasts to which they belonged. . . . The practice of animal sacrifices is manifestly taken for granted as having the sanction of God . . . (STUDIES IN GENESIS, Robert S. Candlish, pp. 81, 82).

We who claim Christ as our personal Lord and Savior may stand assured that God has provided for the covering of our sins, nakedness, and shame, and for the sinner's acceptance in His sight: clothing him with a perfect righteousness, the righteousness of a full and finished work of vicarious obedience and expiatory blood. And we may claim as the apostle John wrote: . . . Thou art arrayed in white robes, washed and made white in the blood of the Lamb (Revelation 8:13-14) .

In summary, Adam and Eve sinned by eating of the forbidden fruit, thus penalizing man to both physical death (the separation of body and soul) and spiritual death (the separation of soul and God). However, God acted in mercy to provide a way of salvation and demonstrated His grace to cover the shame (sin) of man. Man was separated from God by sin. God determined to prevent his partaking of the "Tree of Life." To partake of the Tree of Life is to share in the eternal life which is experienced to the fullest in the New Jerusalem (Revelation 22:2). The only way for sinners to partake of that life is through faith in Jesus Christ, whose coming was prophesied even in Genesis 3:15.

BIBLICAL KEYS TO OVERCOMING ADDICTIONS: Addiction to sin is as old as the human race. As soon as Adam and Eve fell into sin, they plunged all of humanity into an addictive pattern. Today, addiction is so widespread that over 30% of all Americans are being treated for some form of addiction - drug and alcohol abuse, tobacco dependence, gambling compulsions, pornography obsession, sexual addictions, etc. The list is almost endless. Every level of society is affected - married and single, young and old alike.

USA Today recently noted that unless we can quickly stem the tide of increased cigarette use in adolescents, all the recent reductions in lung and heart disease will be reversed in this decade. In a compulsive culture, these trends can only increase. Now is the time to confront these issues and call America to repentance.

ALARMING FACTS * Today, 15 million children now use the Internet regularly and many are being hooked by Internet pornography;

* This year, adult entertainment on the Internet is expected to generate revenues of $51.5 million, the third largest sector of sales, surpassed only by computer products and travel; There are computer bulletin boards set up specifically for the seduction of children. They lure kids in with games and establish relationships with them on-line. Then they arrange to meet face-to-face;

* Child molesters are using the electronic superhighway to look for victims. They are going to the places where the kids of the '90s play; Illegal, hard-core pornography includes bestiality (sex with animals), incest, rape, sado-masochism, torture, mutilation, necrophilia (sex with the dead!) and "eroticized" urination and defecation. Most of the victims of such degrading themes are women and children and are depicted on the Internet;

* The Playboy Web site averages 4 million hits per day;

* One-in-three American girls and one-in-seven boys will be sexually molested by age 18.

* An amazing 87% of convicted molesters of girls and 77% of the convicted molesters of boys admit to use of pornography in the commission of their crimes;

* A primary "consumer group" of pornography is adolescent boys, aged 12-17;

* There are now many more hard-core pornography outlets in America than there are McDonald's restaurants;

* A staggering 86% of convicted rapists admit regular pornography use - 57% admit actually imitating pornography scenes in the commission of their crimes;

* It is estimated that hard-core pornography is available in 80% of the 26,000 neighborhood video stores in America;

* The pornography industry grosses $10-$12 billion per year and is primarily controlled by organized crime;

WHAT CAUSES ADDICTION? Addicts seek to avoid painful emotions through addictive substances and addictive behaviors. They seek to create an artificial high, calm their stress, or create illusions that symbolize love and nurture. Addicts want instant relief from their pain. They want pleasure without responsibility and consequences. This is the problem of our sinful nature. Ever since Adam and Eve sinned against God, people have been dealing with the consequences of sin - sickness, pain and death.

1. Addictions are diseases of unhealthy survival. Addicts think that they are in control and that their addictions help them survive painful experiences. Whatever the substance or behavior, it seems to addicts like a friend that brings temporary relief from loneliness, anger, and fear. Counselors and Ministers need to realize that giving up these survival strategies may seem life threatening to addicts. Attempts to get them to change may be met with great anger. This is like trying to take food away from a hungry animal.

Family, friends and counselors will hear denial, lies, excuses, and see many short-lived attempts to give up the addiction. They will be blamed, criticized, and even sued by angry addicts who feel threatened. Be prepared not to take this personally. This anger and denial is not about you. It is about the addict's shame and desperation. Focus on these feelings as a way of helping addicts give up control and reach out for help.

Addicts need to learn that they can exchange short-term unhealthy survival strategies - the high of their addictions - for long-term healing strategies. They must replace short-term gratification with long-term peace. They need the fellowship of others who struggle with similar addictions. They will also need to learn healthy emotional, physical, and spiritual discipline. This is a life-long process.

2. Addictions are choices of the will. At some point in life, the addict makes a conscious choice to sin by taking a chance on addictive substances or behaviors. Chances are that nobody made you start smoking, drinking, or taking drugs. You made that choice and you must decide to do something about it. You may need help and most addicts do - that is why we established Elim Home for Alcohol and Drug-Addicted Men 42 years ago here in Lynchburg, Virginia - to provide a spiritual environment in which to minister to addicts and help them find God's power to change.

My experience in working with addicts has taught me that we must help them find sobriety quickly. They must be taught how to change behaviors that lead to addiction. Support and accountability groups are essential. Eventually, however, we must also search for and treat underlying causes. Often addicts will be depressed, anxious, and obsessive-compulsive. Actually "dry drunks" - alcoholics who have found sobriety but who still suffer from deep inner conflicts. Many addicts may even be suicidal. Various forms of in-patient hospitalization may be necessary. But ultimately, the addict has to want to quit. He or she must decide: "I've had enough! I want out!"

3. Addictions are spiritual substitutes. In their addiction, addicts are looking for love, nurture, and relationship (even if only with a bottle, pill, food, work or sex). Some counselors see addicts as searching for a relationship with God. Yet many Christian counselors will be frustrated talking to them about God. Addicts have sought religious solutions for years. Since addicts seek to control, their religious quest is usually in the form of searching for black-and-white answers that will manipulate God to forgive them and totally remove their unmanageable desires. Even though they may be believers, many really haven't surrendered to God at all. They have merely replaced their addictions with an addictive form of a religion of good works and self-effort.

THE NEED FOR CHANGE As Christians, we are in the business of helping people change by introducing them to the grace of God and the power of the gospel. Dr. Tim Clinton, adjunct professor at Liberty University and president of the American Association of Christian Counselors, recently shared with me some of the barriers to change that may every addict faces:

Lack of motivation: "I want to change, but I'm too busy to get help."

Resistance: "I can't" usually means "I won't."

Learned Helplessness: "That's just the way it is in our family."

Labels and Excuses: "We're all, in some way, addicts."

Self-sufficiency: "I have the power within me to beat this. I don't need God."

It's all in my genes: "I have a genetic predisposition to alcohol ... homosexuality ... pornography, etc."

COMMON EXCUSES Addicts typically must work to deal in new ways with their fear, pain, guilt, and shame of resorting to addictions. Common erroneous beliefs contribute to the difficulty addicted people experience with change. They may tell themselves:

* I can't control this habit. This is the false belief that circumstances are responsible for one's behavior, so people can't help what they do;

* Life without my habit is too terrifying. Few addicts really believe they can get through their days unaided by drugs, alcohol, or other self-gratifying behavior;

* I shouldn't have to do anything hard or experience anything unpleasant to give up my addiction. This is the erroneous belief that self-control and habit-change are too hard, and that it really is easier to avoid responsibilities and hard work;

* I can't help my passion for my addiction. This is a victim mentality - the misbelief - that bad habits are solely a result of past mistreatment;

* If I want something I should have it. This is the belief that one has a God-given right to be happy all the time, that no strong wish should go unfulfilled, and that one should not have to suffer loss or deprivation. It is the false assumption that all desires are psychological "needs" which must be fulfilled;

* I'm so worthless I really don't matter, so I might as well go ahead and indulge in my addiction. This is the belief that one is so lost in their addiction that things can't get any worse.

* My habit enables me to tolerate myself. Guilt over the addictive behavior is handled by performing the addictive habits - an awful cycle based on misbelief and leading to further addiction;

* Maybe I can cut down. Then I won't have to quit. This is an effort to do anything to hang on to the addiction!

GROUND RULES FOR CHANGE Ground Rule #1 Never believe what an addict says. All addicts are liars. They lie the most to themselves and to those they love the best. The lies are effective because both the addict and those closest to him or her want to believe the lies.

Ground Rule #2 Sobriety and Abstinence are the Primary Objectives. Addiction is a mood-altering experience. Only when he or she is "clean" does an addict have the ability to think clearly, to make appropriate choices, and to follow through on decisions.

Ground Rule #3 Getting Sobriety Requires Help. Getting help is mandatory. Going sober solo generates new compulsions. While they might be less deadly or more socially acceptable, they are compulsive behaviors, nonetheless.

Ground Rule #4 Addicts Manage Their Addictions. Addicts always discount the severity of their addictions and hold back from doing everything necessary to develop and maintain sobriety.

Ground Rule #5 Addiction and Sobriety Are Processes. Relapse is possible and the addict needs a safe place to be and safe people to be with (Elim Home).

Ground Rule #6 Sobriety Requires Leverage. Addicts are better at maintaining their addiction than we are at solving them. They will beat us every time. Therefore, law and grace are both a part of recovery. One individual cannot develop sobriety for another.

Ground Rule #7 Addictions Are Forms of Self-Medication. Addictions sedate emotional pain, quiet anxiety, and provide a false sense of well being. Abstinence allows the underlying issues, with all their pent-up emotions, to surface and be processed in counseling.

Ground Rule #8 The Addiction Affects All One's Contacts. Spouses, families, and co-workers become tied into the maintenance of addictions and must be involved in the treatment process as well. Their lack of involvement places the sobriety process at risk of sabotage.

Ground Rule #9 Sobriety Is Not a "Fix." Addicts can develop a history of treatment programs, counseling, or broken relationships. We cannot work harder at sobriety than the addict does. They must come to grips with their own addiction and deny it.

Ground Rule #10 Only God Can Set You Free. In Romans 7, Paul admitted that the power of sin is so great that sometimes we give into the very things we are determined to resist.

VICTORY THROUGH CHRIST Speaking on behalf of all of us, in verse 24, he said: "O, wretched man that I am! Who should deliver me from the body of this death?" Then he added, in verse 25, "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord." Christ alone is the answer to our addictions. He took all our since upon Himself on the cross and died for each one of them. That is why Romans 8:1 says: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus." In Galatians 2:20, Paul said: "I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless, I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." If you are suffering from addiction, stop denying your addiction. Stop excusing. Face it and deal with it. Then confess it to God; repent of it. I encourage you to turn away from it and turn your life over to Christ today.

I believe that the day we should worship is Sunday. Please note the following: The Bible says two or three things about Sunday worship. First, from illustration, the church worshiped on Sunday. Second, since the Sabbath was the sign of the law, and the law was put aside, therefore we believe the sign of the law which is that the Sabbath was put aside. Third, the three most important feast days in the Old Testament to the Jews were celebrated on Sunday. Study carefully Leviticus 23, and you will see the Passover was seven days plus one, i.e., the Feast of Firstfruits was celebrated on Sunday. Second, Pentecost was 50 days after Passover, that means Pentecost was celebrated on Sunday. The third was the Feast of Tabernacles which was seven days plus one. The last day of the Feast of Tabernacles was its greatest day, it was Sunday. Because the Seventh Day Adventist calls us the "Babylon" and repudiates all that we stand for, means that I cannot accept them into the Christian camp. In a day when people are saying Seventh Day Adventists are one of us; they make a clear distinction saying they are different from us, and we are wrong. As a result, if they know Jesus Christ personally as their Savior, but then they reject all that we stand for; they place themselves outside of our camp.

Dr. Falwell suggests five basic emphases for the pastor of any church:

1. Make a total committal of your heart and life to Christ after salvation; for dedicated Christ-like living; for earnest, fruitful soul-winning service determined to please Him above all others, as your supreme desire for the rest of your life.

2. Make the heart of your life and your church prayer, Bible study, and soul winning at home and on mission fields around the world.

3. See that you have a scriptural, happy, Christ-honoring family, in husband-wife relationships and in parent-child relationships.

4. Work, work, work--happily work, but work long hours. Strive to reach for Christ all the people you can by all the means you can at every possible time you can.

5. Be local New Testament church oriented. Build a super-aggressive, Bible-believing, soul winning, happy, local New Testament church which takes the separatist's stand firmly, yet in love.

Fourteen Reasons Why Bad Things Happen to Good People:

1. God's way of getting our attention (Matthew 13:18-23).

2. God's assurance of His love (Paternal) (Hebrews 12:6-13).

3. God's call for our self-examination (I Corinthians 11:28-32).

4. God's way of conquering our pride (Proverbs 13:10, 16, 18).

5. God's reminder to us of our weaknesses (I Corinthians 1:26-29).

6. God's way of motivating us to depend on Him (Psalm 34:17).

7. God's reminder to us that we are in a spiritual warfare (I Peter 5:8).

8. God's way of strengthening and purifying our faith (Hebrews 11:6).

9. God's way of testing our works (Psalm 127:1).

10. God's way of sifting our friendships (Proverbs 17:17).

11. God's call for us to conform unto Christ (Romans 6:5).

12. God's reminder to us of our accountability to Him. (Proverbs 16:6).

13. God's purging us through suffering for His grace (II Corinthians 12:5).

14. God's way of preparing us to comfort others (II Corinthians 1:3-5).

Dr. Falwell has admitted he grew up in an environment of prejudice tendencies. He further admits that it was a number of years after he was in the ministry of the gospel before this provincialism began to disappear from his life and ministry. His testimony is that God began to deal with him about his "Waspish" attitude and that there came a day when he suddenly realized that this prejudice was no longer an issue with Jerry Falwell.

Dr. Falwell has devoted much time, energy and money towards the evangelistic ministry of the inner cities of America. There are several other key cities around this nation that groups of Liberty University students are ministering through the evangelistic inner-city ministry--especially the black community.

In Dr. Falwell's hometown of Lynchburg, Virginia, the church that he pastors, Thomas Road Baptist Church, sponsors the Good Samaritan ministry, an on-going evangelistic youth ministry directed towards the African American community of Lynchburg, Virginia. Within the church itself there are several African American members who enjoy all the privileges afforded any member of Thomas Road Baptist Church.

Dr. Falwell frequently invites outstanding black pastors such as E. V. Hill of Los Angeles, California, and Joseph "Preacher" Brown from Baltimore, Maryland, to share the pulpit at Thomas Road Baptist Church. There are many other examples that I could give to you to express Dr. Falwell's definite concern for the African American community.

Dr. Falwell has admitted he grew up in an environment of prejudice tendencies. He further admits that it was a number of years after he was in the ministry of the gospel before this provincialism began to disappear from his life and ministry. His testimony is that God began to deal with him about his "Waspish" attitude and that there came a day when he suddenly realized that this prejudice was no longer an issue with Jerry Falwell.

Dr. Falwell has devoted much time, energy and money towards the evangelistic ministry of the inner cities of America. There are several other key cities around this nation that groups of Liberty University students are ministering through the evangelistic inner-city ministry--especially the black community.

In Dr. Falwell's hometown of Lynchburg, Virginia, the church that he pastors, Thomas Road Baptist Church, sponsors the Good Samaritan ministry, an on-going evangelistic youth ministry directed towards the African American community of Lynchburg, Virginia. Within the church itself there are several African American members who enjoy all the privileges afforded any member of Thomas Road Baptist Church.

Dr. Falwell frequently invites outstanding black pastors such as E. V. Hill of Los Angeles, California, and Joseph "Preacher" Brown from Baltimore, Maryland, to share the pulpit at Thomas Road Baptist Church. There are many other examples that I could give to you to express Dr. Falwell's definite concern for the African American community.

Dr. Falwell has admitted he grew up in an environment of prejudice tendencies. He further admits that it was a number of years after he was in the ministry of the gospel before this provincialism began to disappear from his life and ministry. His testimony is that God began to deal with him about his "Waspish" attitude and that there came a day when he suddenly realized that this prejudice was no longer an issue with Jerry Falwell.

Dr. Falwell has devoted much time, energy and money towards the evangelistic ministry of the inner cities of America. There are several other key cities around this nation that groups of Liberty University students are ministering through the evangelistic inner-city ministry--especially the black community.

In Dr. Falwell's hometown of Lynchburg, Virginia, the church that he pastors, Thomas Road Baptist Church, sponsors the Good Samaritan ministry, an on-going evangelistic youth ministry directed towards the African American community of Lynchburg, Virginia. Within the church itself there are several African American members who enjoy all the privileges afforded any member of Thomas Road Baptist Church.

Dr. Falwell frequently invites outstanding black pastors such as E. V. Hill of Los Angeles, California, and Joseph "Preacher" Brown from Baltimore, Maryland, to share the pulpit at Thomas Road Baptist Church. There are many other examples that I could give to you to express Dr. Falwell's definite concern for the African American community.

At what age does a child become accountable to God? The Word of God says nothing about an "age of accountability," only the traditions of man.

Jesus used a child as an object lesson in Matthew 18:1-6 to demonstrate the necessity of childlike faith to receive eternal life, and the results of offending a child by withholding the truth of salvation. In Matthew 19:14, Jesus said, . . . Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of Heaven.

Some children arrive at a point of mental and spiritual development, and can understand what sin is and how to be saved earlier than others. This is usually true of children who are brought up in a home where Christ is exalted, where the family attends church and prayer and Bible reading are preeminent in the home. Many children are saved at an early age (5-6). God is no respecter of persons. It takes the same Gospel, the same Christ, the same blood to save a five-year-old as it does a fifty-year-old, though children are usually more receptive.

Reading and explaining sin and salvation to a child should be done at an early age. There is nothing more thrilling than a parent sharing John 3:16, Romans 3:23, 6:23, 10:9-10 with his child and leading Him to Christ.

Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel (II Kings 8:26).

Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Athaliah the daughter of Omri (II Chronicles 22:2).

Bible scholars have found considerable difficulty in harmonizing the numbers given in the books of Kings and Chronicles for the reigns of the various rulers of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms. In the case of the Jewish kings particularly, when all the regal years were added, they came to a total considerably greater than that which could have elapsed between the death of Solomon and the fall of Jerusalem. Later research, however, demonstrated the fact that in many instances the crown prince or the immediate successor to the throne was formally crowned, added the years he officially reigned even in the lifetime of his father. One such example is found in II Chronicles 22:2 which gives the age of King Ahaziah Ben Jehoram as forty-two when he began to reign, whereas II Kings 8:26 gives it as twenty-two (A SURVEY OF OLD TESTAMENT INTRODUCTION by Gleason L. Archer, Jr., pp. 297-298).

The following explanation provides the age difficulty of King Ahaziah: Jehoram's youngest son, Ahaziah, was made king because the older sons had been killed by the raiding band of men (II Chronicles 21:16-17). His age of forty and two years is impossible in light of II Chronicles 21:20. It is probably a scribal mistake for twenty-two years (see 11 Kings 8:26). (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. I, p. 830). The scribal inadvertence reflects the difficulties of manuscript transmission but has no bearing on the inspiration or authority of the Scripture (CRISWELL STUDY BIBLE, p. 542).

In Matthew Henry's Commentary on II Chronicles 22, another possible explanation for the age controversy associated with King Ahaziah is explained as: Some make this forty-two (II Chronicles 22:2) to be the age of his mother Athaliah, for in the original [Hebrew] it is, he was the son of forty-two years, that is, the son of a mother that was of that age; and justly is her age put for his, in reproach to him, because she managed him, and did what she would -- she, in effect, reigned, and he had little more than the title of king (see II Chronicles 21:4-6; 22:10).

"How old was Jesus when he returned from Egypt?" The Gospel of Matthew, chapter 2, gives a biblical summary of Christ's early infancy and childhood. This passage identifies the place of Christ's birth as being Bethlehem of Judea and the time of His birth was in the days of Herod the King. Herod the King was known as "Herod the Great," and was made King by the Romans in the year 43 BC Historians tell us that his death occurred approximately 4 BC According to Matthew Henry's commentary on the book of Matthew, page 10, Christ was born in the 35th year of Herod the Great's reign. According to Albert Barnes' commentary on the book of Matthew, King Herod the Great died in his 37th year of reign. The best chronologers have supposed that Herod died somewhere between two and four years after the birth of Christ, but the particular time cannot now be determined; nor can it be ascertained at what age Jesus was taken into Egypt. It seems probable that He was between one and two years old--based upon the account of Herod's order to kill all the children two years and under.

Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men (Matthew 2:16).

The Bible describes how an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph giving him instructions to take Mary and the young child into Egypt (Matthew 2:13). The flight to Egypt by Jesus' family is related by Matthew to the statement in Hosea 11:1 which refers historically to the deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt. Since the Old Testament statement is not a direct reference to Christ, it is apparent that the writer, Matthew, saw this prophecy as a type of Christ (Liberty Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p.8).

Alfred Plummer, in his exegetical commentary on the Gospel according to Matthew, notes that, "We know neither how old the child Christ was when He was taken into Egypt nor how long he remained there. Herod died 4 BC, five days after he had put his son, Antipeter, to death and a little before the Passover. The flight into Egypt probably took place two or three years before that-the stay in Egypt must have lasted some years." We do know that following the death of King Herod the Great, the angel of the Lord appeared once again to Joseph instructing him to go into the land of Israel, for they are dead which sought the young child's life (Matthew 2:20b). Scripture tells of Joseph returning to Nazareth, avoiding any further residence in Judea. And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene (Matthew 2:23).

In the Gospel according to Luke, chapter 2, verses 39 and 40, it is recorded that Jesus grew up in the area known as Galilee, in the city of Nazareth, and that Christ had a normal childhood growth, however, he waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him (Luke 2:40).

Many people have been confused concerning the age of Abraham's father, Terah. In order to clarify the confusion associated with the age of Terah at the birth of Abram, one should examine the passage of Genesis 11:26: And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran. From this listing of Terah's children, it would appear that Terah was 70 years old when Abram was born, since Abram's name is listed first in the genealogy. However, it is reasonable to assume that Genesis 11:26 follows the same pattern as Genesis 5:32, which places the most important son from the Messianic viewpoint first, rather than placing the oldest first.

In Genesis 5:32, Shem is named first, although Japheth was the oldest son of Noah, because it was through Shem that God's Messiah would come. Therefore, it may be concluded that in Genesis 11:26 Abram was named first because of his being the progenitor of God's chosen people. The name "Abram" means "father of elevation," or "exalted father." This signified the honor of his being the progenitor of God's chosen people (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 1, p. 42).

In studying the life of Terah, one finds that history closes with the statement of his age being 205 years. His death occurred in Haran. A difficulty resulting in possible confusion lies with the reference by Stephen in Acts 7:4 in which he states that Abram left Haran, when his father was dead. Yet, it appears that Terah lived 60 years after Abram's departure from Haran. Terah's total age was 205 years, and to the casual reader of Genesis 11:26, Abram was born when Terah was 70 years of age. In Genesis 12:4 Abram's age is recorded as being 75 years when he departed out of Haran. By applying simple mathematics to this problem, one may readily find that Abram was born during Terah's 130th year (205-75=130 years). This calculation would make Abram 75 years old when his father, Terah died in Haran (v. 32); and accordingly, one may find in Genesis 12:4 that he was exactly of that age when he left Haran-the first stage of his pilgrimage to which he had removed with his father Terah (STUDIES IN GENESIS, Robert S. Candlish, p. 182).

The Lord will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed (Deuteronomy 28:27).

Does this passage describe the diseases of AIDS and Herpes? To answer this question, we need to look at chapter 28 in its total context. Deuteronomy 28 is one of the most solemn chapters in the Bible. The entire nation of Israel was given the opportunity to serve the Lord and to enjoy the blessings of one of the most prosperous lands available. At the same time, the nation was warned that if it disobeyed God it would be completely decimated as a national entity by the judgment of God.

Concerning verses 27 and 35, the "botch of Egypt" is ulcers, a particular form of leprosy. "Emerods" are hemorrhoids, boils, or tumors. The "scab" and the "itch" were medical words for several forms of skin disease found in Syria and Egypt. These diseases were signs of sin.

Although God pronounced many judgments in verses 27 and 35 he continued to compound them in verses 60-62 by adding the phrases, "all diseases of Egypt" and "every sickness, and every plague." These are direct references to the plagues of Egypt. The purpose of the judgments upon Israel was to show the certainty of God's promises. Just as God judged Egypt by ten plagues because they rejected His commandments, so God would judge Israel with the same plagues for the same reason.

It is a commonly accepted fact that AIDS and HERPES are social diseases; also that AIDS is more prevalent among homosexuals. While we do not feel that these are the diseases described in Deuteronomy 28, certainly the application could be the same. It could well be that these diseases are a consequence of sexual relations, and probably sin. We know that God will use natural means to bring about judgement and we know that He hates sin.

Public policy today includes homosexual "rights," abortion, an established humanism and much, much more that is contrary to the teachings of the Word of God. The tendency is to remain silent while the use of drugs becomes more and more prevalent. America's views toward marriage and the sanctity of the home continue to deteriorate. Our founding fathers would be shocked by today's standards. Our nation, which was founded on the principles of the Bible and which has enjoyed the blessings of God as no other nation in history, has certainly drifted further and further away from God.

It is our earnest prayer that, through the prayers and witness of faithful Christians who are willing to stand up and be counted, our nation will turn back to God before it is too late. Today we should read Deuteronomy 28, realizing that "... if God spared not the natural branches [the Jews] take heed lest He also spare not thee [the Gentiles]" (Romans 11:21). If we do not turn our nation back to God, we could find ourselves experiencing the sad and sorrowful fate described in Deuteronomy instead of the great blessings of God which we have hitherto enjoyed.

Animals do not have souls such as we have. They do not go to Heaven or Hell when they die --- and the spirit of the beast...goeth downward to the earth (Ecclesiastes 3:21).

Because animals have a consciousness which makes them different from plants, and because the Hebrew word nephesh in the Old Testament is used sometimes in reference to this characteristic of animals, some people would say that animals have souls. This would lead to the belief that killing an animal for meat would be murder. However, this is not so. They have a consciousness which makes them different from plants, but they do not have souls like human beings, which go to Heaven or Hell when they die.

When animals are buried, that is the end of their life. When man is buried, this is not the case.

The Bible teaches the three parts of man--body, spirit and soul-in I Thessalonians 5:28. Man is the only creature or creation of God which has the ability to be saved if he will turn to the Lord Jesus. Animals do not have the moral conscience which tells them they are sinners in need of forgiveness.

The Bible on occasion pictures animals as possessing souls. Dr. H. L. Willmington explains this in his book entitled, THE DOCTRINE OF MAN. The Hebrew word nephesh is translated by the word "soul" 428 times in the Bible; but on two occasions it is rendered "beast" (Leviticus 24:28 and Genesis 2:19). For this reason, we need to define the nature of man and the nature of animals.

Man was created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 2:26, 27). Therefore, you see, man is triune in nature--he possesses spirit, soul and body. He is a trichotomous being. On the other hand, animals possess body and soul, but not spirit. This would make them dichotomous beings.

Being dichotomous in nature, an animal would have no sense of right or wrong--no conscience. Therefore, even though he loves his master, and is loved by his master, and even though he may learn to "obey" his master, he would not be held accountable by God for his actions. The Lord gave man "dominion" over all animal life (Genesis 1:26-28).

The Lord made provision for the care of animals (Genesis 9:9,10; Psalm 36:6-1 Deuteronomy 25:4- Psalm 104; Psalm 247:9).

The best reference I know relating to the final destiny of animals would be the passage found in Ecclesiastes 3. Notice the reference to "beasts" (Animals--all forms of animals) found in verses 18-22, and particularly verse 21. There has been much debate through the years over this verse. The most natural understanding of this verse is as a statement concerning how man and animals differ--in soul or spirit, as discussed above.

The word translated "spirit" is the same Hebrew word ruach that is translated "breath" in verse 29. Solomon, in these verses, rightly identifies the essential difference between the human soul and the soul of an animal. He is saying in these verses that the soul of man returns to God when the breath of life (spirit of life) ceases. However, the animal was made to derive its happiness and fulfillment from the world. This goes back to what Solomon says in verse 1--To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the Heaven.

In summary, considering the above, an animal would simply perish when it dies--and the spirit of the beast ... goeth downward to the earth (Ecclesiastes 3:21).

Man has that third element of a trichotomous being discussed above--spirit. At his death, his spirit returns to God (Ecclesiastes 12:7).

For man, it is either Heaven or Hell, depending on his own free choice to accept or reject the Lord. For animals, it is simply a case of them returning to dust (12:7).

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, but ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him" (I John 2:27).

The term "anointing" (Greek christos) is used only twice with regard to Christians. In both places the reference is to regeneration. The anointing which is on the child of God is that which was received at regeneration. Every believer on the Lord Jesus Christ, having vital relationship with Him, became a Christian when baptized with the Holy Spirit. Next, the filling of the Spirit is indeed an experience far beyond anything, which the majority of Christians knows anything about. It is the purpose of God that every child of His should be filled at the moment of his or her conversion, and perpetually filled until the consummation of his sojourn upon the earth. (The Spirit of God, G. Campbell Morgan, Baker Book House, pp. 184-186.)

The usage of the word anointing, as found in I John 2:27, is a noun usage which is only to be found in I John 2:20, 27. In I John 2:20, the word "unction" is a translation of the Greek (chrisma) occurring three times in the Greek New Testament (verses 20, 27a, 27b), is more precisely rendered "anointing" which usually has reference to the anointing of the Holy Spirit. This anointing, with the power and presence of the Holy Spirit, is a part of the believer's equipment for effective service. This "anointing," or indwelling, of the Holy Spirit is sufficient to make lucid all truth in matters of faith and practice. No additional experience of knowledge or enlightenment is needed. The apostle John is giving assurance to all believers of the intent of establishing the sufficiency of the Holy Spirit in His teaching ministry. In I John 2:27, the passage recognizes the adequacy of the Holy Spirit in teaching and in testing the truth of what is taught by human teachers. (The Criswell Study Bible, p. 1465.)

To properly understand the intent of the apostle John's usage of the word anointing, one should examine the reason for John's writing of this first epistle. The first epistle of John is a vigorous polemic against certain heretical teachers whom John calls "'antichrists." These "antichrists" are recognized as one or more of the many ramifications of Gnosticism. This heresy has three possibilities: 1) The denial that Jesus Christ came in the flesh; 2) That Jesus is the Son of God; 3) That Jesus came "by water only" and not "by blood also." Gnosticism was divided into two schools of thought: 1) Dicetism described Jesus as the Christ in the sense of a phantom figure; 2) Ceninthus taught that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but was the physical son of Joseph and Mary. Whereupon His baptism by John the Baptist, the Spirit of "Christ" anointed Him for His earthly teaching ministry then left Him at His crucifixion.

In the passages found in I John 2:18-20, John represents to the believers the work of the Holy Spirit and this anointing for security against apostasy of the antichrists. John reminds all true believers of the living Witness they have in themselves-- the Holy Spirit of God; who both set the seal of immediate conviction upon the Truth itself and enabled the believers unfailingly to distinguish it from all of its counterfeits. According to verse 20, the result of this "anointing" is that ye know all things. The specific office of the Spirit is to guide into all truth, to receive of mine (Christ's) and show it unto you (John 16:13-14).

The distinctive feature of I John 2:27 is that the testimony of the Spirit is regarded as a "teaching." The believers would recognize this teaching as the subjective, enlightening action of the Holy Spirit of truth upon the minds of all true believers in Christ. This does not assert infallibility or omniscience on the part of the Christian or indeed negate the need for Christian instruction. The general purport of the passage therefore is to remind the readers that they already possess in their fellowship a resource that is all sufficient for discerning the real character of the antichristian doctrine.

The "anointing" of the believers enables all to know the truth concerning the object of their Christian faith--Christ the incarnate Son of God. This indwelling of God is recognized by its appropriate sign, the gift of the Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh (I John 4:2). The Spirit's anointing is not to be recognized as a source of independent revelation, but makes the revelation of Christ (the Word) effectual. This is done by a process that may be considered as two-fold, teaching and testimony. The Spirit is the living Divine Teacher who works in all believers a progressive understanding of the contents of the Truth embodied in Christ. He shall testify of me (John 15-26). (The Tests of Life, 3rd Edition, Reprint, Robert Law, Baker Book House, pp. 91-92, 112-115, 297-298.)

The verb form "anoint" (Greek chrio) is also used several times in the New Testament to allude to the anointing of Christ, but once it is used of Christians, who are also in a sense annointed (II Corinthians 1:21). The anointing, is the same as that with which Christ was anointed, namely Holy Spirit (II Corinthians 1:22). This, in fact, is the meaning behind the name "Christians," for believers are "little Christs," "little anointed ones." When John, therefore, uses this word unction, or anointed, he simply means to say that all believers have the Holy Spirit. Since believers have the Holy Spirit, they have an "edge" on unbelievers and can "know" certain things that unbelievers cannot. So, John says in the passage of I John 2:20, Ye know all things. Do the Gnostic false teachers claim to "know?" Here is truth they cannot know, which even the simplest believer "knows" because he has the Spirit. The truth, which makes it possible to tell Christians from antichrists, is the truth that Jesus is the Christ. This is the message, which the believers have had from the beginning and note the emphasis on hearing and receiving the Word of God from the apostles.

In I John 2:25-27, the case is that any believer can apply a test to be used on false teachers: These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. It is clear that from verse 27 that they do not need to listen to these false teachers; they have been taught the Word of God by the apostles, and they have the indwelling Holy Spirit who will give them assurance and teach them to live by that Word. (Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, p. 768.)

ANSWERING THE ARGUMENTS OF POST-TRIBULATION RAPTURE POSITION By Elmer L. Towns

Post-tribulationism is that view which anticipates the church will endure the Great Tribulation and be raptured at its conclusion. The Rapture and Second Coming of Christ are viewed as one and the same. According to Reese, The Church of Christ will not be removed from the earth until the Advent of Christ at the very end of the present Age: The Rapture and the Appearing take place at the same crisis; hence Christians of that generation will be exposed to the final affliction under Antichrist.

Post-tribulation writers suggest several "proofs" for their theory. It should be noted that not every writer holding this view would necessarily hold all the arguments listed below, but the following list identifies the major arguments by leading spokesmen in this theological camp. 1. The Historical Argument. One argument advanced by post-tribulation writers is that the early church held their view. For this reason they sometimes refer to themselves as historic premillennialists. This argument has both a positive and negative emphasis. The positive argument is stated by Gundry. Until Augustine in the fourth century, the early Church generally held to the premillennarian understanding of Bible eschatology. The chiliasm entailed a futuristic interpretation of Daniel's seventieth week, the abomination of desolation, and the personal Antichrist. And it was post-tribulational. Neither mentioned nor considered, the possibility of a pre-tribulational Rapture seems never to have occurred to anyone in the early church.

The above quotation implies that pre-tribulationism was conceived at a late date and was the idea of some individual, rather than that which the apostles handed the early church. MacPherson, an advocate of this position, attributes the pre-tribulation position to a young girl in Scotland. What I'm about to say may come as a shock, but I have to say it. The common doctrine in certain church circles of a Pre-Trib Rapture is something that was never heard of or held by any group of Christians before the year 1830. In my earlier book The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin, I presented a lot of new evidence I found, while researching in Scotland and England in 1972, that Pre-Trib Rapture teaching began in a personal revelation of a young Scottish lassie in the spring of 1830.

There are three points that need to be observed in relation to the above criticisms of the pre-tribulational position. First, it is questionable if anyone can demonstrate that there was a finely developed eschatological position taught by the early church. This means the early church was not clearly pre-tribulational nor post-tribulational. Addressing this subject, Ryrie suggests, The early church believed in tribulation, the imminent coming of Christ, and a Millennium to follow. The early church was clearly premillennial but not clearly pre-tribulational, nor was it clearly post-tribulational when measured against today's developed pre- or post-tribulation teachings.

Second, the time of the Rapture was not an issue with early church fathers. They knew Christ was coming imminently. It was not until a hundred years ago that the Rapture became an issue. Someone has said that each generation fights its own theological battles. By this they mean that the church does not deal extensively with an issue until a need arises that demands their attention. Then the issue is debated until it becomes systematically formulated. It seems that at different periods in church history different doctrines have been the central issue. In the two centuries following Christ's appearance on earth, the issue was Christology; during the Dark Ages the doctrine of justification was emphasized by Martin Luther; during the eighteenth century sanctification was emphasized by John Wesley. This past century the doctrine of eschatology has been the focal point of theological discussion, hence it is only natural that the timing of the events has been closely analyzed. Pentecost supports this conclusion, It should be observed that each era of church history has been occupied with a particular doctrinal controversy, which has become the object of discussion, revision, and formulation, until there was general acceptance of what Scripture taught. The entire field of theology was thus formulated through the age. It was not until the last century that the field of eschatology became a matter to which the mind of the church was turned.

In the third place, the statement that "the common doctrine of a Pre-Trib Rapture began in a personal revelation of a young Scottish lassie" cannot stand unchallenged. If MacPherson was half the historian he claims to be, he would have known better than to make what he apparently knew was an inaccurate statement. In his earlier book he devoted 123 pages (including appendix, notes and bibliography) that maintained that Darby was converted to pre-tribulationalism from post-tribulationalism through a Miss Margaret MacDonald of Port Glasgow, Scotland. He attempts to prove she first discovered "the common doctrine of a Pre-Trib Rapture" through a pentecostal-like trance in 1830 in which "the truth" concerning the Rapture was revealed to her. He concludes his argument, In light of the evidence I have prayerfully and carefully given in this book relative to the Pre-Trib origin (which origin has been hidden for a long time), I hereby ask all Bible teachers to declare a moratorium on such teaching--at least until they can check this out for themselves. If I am wrong, I ask your forgiveness. And if you are wrong, I have already forgiven you. This then is the story of the unbelievable--yet true--Pre-trib origin.

One does not have to go far to "check this out for themselves." MacPherson includes the record of Miss MacDonald's own testimony of the vision. She speaks of "the fiery trial" of the Christian under "THE WICKED" (i.e., Antichrist) and of "the awful sight of a false Christ" which she apparently later identified as an early Communist leader living at the time. Then MacPherson is forced to admit in the final footnote of his book, "Margaret was actually a Partial Rapturist; she saw a select group caught up before the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians 2 is revealed, with the rest of the believers passing through and being purified in the Great Tribulation." It is sad that many who oppose the pre-tribulational Rapture use this argument. Commenting on Miss MacDonald's statements concerning her vision, Ryrie suggests, As for the very young and chronically ill Margaret MacDonald, we can only truthfully label her as a "confused rapturist," with elements of partial rapturism, post-tribulationism, perhaps mid-tribulationism, but never pre-tribulationism. By Darby's own testimony, he claimed his ideas came from the Bible, particularly his understanding of the distinctiveness of the church (in 1826-28), that he believed the Rapture would be a considerable time before the second coming (in 1830), and that there would be a parenthesis between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel (no later than 1833). He seemed to be unsettled about the secret aspect of the Rapture as late as the 1840's.

2. The Argument Against Imminency. One cannot read the New Testament and conclude the writers believed in other than an imminent return of Christ. Christ can return at any moment. Christians are exhorted to keep watching for His return (1 Thes. 5:1-8; 2 Pet. 3:8-10) and wait for it (1 Cor. 1:7; 1 Thes. 1:9,10; Tit. 2:13). These commands were as meaningful and applicable to the first century as they are today. Even if there are "implied" signs concerning the end time, that does not preclude the belief in the imminent return of Christ. Signs are not absolute measurements of time concerning Christ's return, but relate to general conditions on earth when Christ returns. Imminency means He can come at any time. Post-tribulation writers argue that the early church did not believe in, nor do the Scriptures teach the doctrine of imminency. They claim the biblical injunctions to watch for the return of Christ do not necessarily mean it should be anticipated immediately. Stating this conclusion, Gundry writes,

The full force of the exhortations to watch for Jesus' return, then does not require imminence of the Parousia. tribulational interval no more destroys expectancy than did necessary delays during the apostolic age. A number of exhortations to watch, including the fullest, appears in the immediate context of the post-tribulational advent and includes the observation of precursive signs during the tribulation. Such signs do not alleviate expectancy, they stimulate it. Self-purification in the light of the second coming rests, not on the fear of sudden exposure, but on the certainty of the event and on the knowledge that the conduct of our whole Christian life will be revealed in the light of the divine presence. Concerning NT exhortations to watch, we are led to the conclusion: until tribulational events have taken place, New Testament expectancy does not mean to look for the return of the Lord as a present possibility, but to look forward to His return after the events of the tribulation.

The argument against the imminent return of Christ is normally based on a number of signs which had to be accomplished before Christ could return. It is also argued that certain events such as the fall of Jerusalem, or the death of Peter had to happen before Jesus could return; therefore, He could not have returned before these things happened and was not expected by the church prior to these events. Also, the need to accomplish the Great Commission is presented as an argument against imminency. MacPherson lists the following twelve: 1. The Great Commission fulfillment implies a long period of time. 2. Seed growth in Matthew 13, a time-consuming process. 3. Paul expected death, not Rapture, in 2 Timothy 4:6-8. 4. Jesus predicted Peter's martyrdom in John 21:18-19. 5. Matthew 24 signs must come first. 6. Big interval between Christ's ascension and return: Jewish dispersion into "all nations" (Lk. 21); "man travelling into a far country," "after a long time the lord of those servants cometh" (Mt. 25). 7. Apostasy of last days takes time to develop. 8. Bridegroom tarried in parable of virgins. 9. Pastoral epistles teach Church's continuing ministry, which involves time. 10. Paul says Christ's coming is not imminent (2 Thes. 2:1-3), for apostasy and Antichrist must come first. 11. View of seven phases of church history (seven churches of Revelation) involves big lapse of time and imminence difficulties for Pre-Tribs; could Christ have come before the last phase? 12. Exhortations to watch and be ready tied so-called second stage in Matthew 24 and 25, 1 Corinthians 1:7, Colossians 3:4, 1 Thessalonians 3:13, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 1 Peter 1:13, 1 Peter 4:13, and 1 John 2:28. At first glance, the arguments appear conclusive, but in light of the biblical teaching on imminence, they require closer evaluation. When this is done, the above list reveals at least seven fundamental errors in interpretation. First, MacPherson fails to interpret the Scriptures in the context of revelation. Conservative scholars are generally agreed the prophecy concerning Peter's martyrdom was recorded by John perhaps as much as thirty years after Peter was killed. How this could discourage the early Christians who first read this Gospel from believing in the imminent return of Christ is difficult to comprehend. The context in which this prophecy exists suggests some readers may have believed Christ would return even before the death of the aging apostle John (Jn. 21:23). A second hermeneutical problem apparent in the above list is evident in the failure to interpret a verse within its biblical context. This is particularly evident in the claim that Paul anticipated death, not Rapture. It was Paul who most fully developed the doctrine of an imminent Rapture of the church (1 Cor. 15; 1 Thes. 4). If toward the end of his life, he spoke of death as a very real possibility, it does not necessarily mean he was denying the doctrine of imminency. Perhaps he was merely recognizing the reality of the situation he faced at that time. Commenting on the statement in question, Stott notes, The apostle uses two figures of speech to portray his coming death, one taken from the language of sacrifice and the other (probably) of boats. First, "I am already on the point of being sacrificed." Of "Already my life is being poured out on the altar" (NEB), he likens his life to a libation or drink offering. So imminent does he believe his martyrdom to be that he speaks of the sacrifice as having already begun. He goes on: "The time of my departure has come." "Departure" (analysis) seems to have become a regular word for death, but we need not necessarily conclude from this that its metaphorical origin had been entirely forgotten. It means "loosing" and could be used either of striking a tent (which Lock favours, because of the soldier's "I have fought a good fight" in the following verse) or of "release from shackles" (which Simpson mentions), or of untying a boat from its moorings. The last is certainly the most picturesque of the three possibilities. The two images then to some extent correspond, for the end of this life (out poured as a libation) is the beginning of another (putting out to sea). Already the anchor is weighed, the ropes are slipped, and the boat is about to set sail for another shore.

Thirdly, MacPherson assumes certain conclusions, that the early church would not have assumed. The fulfillment of the Great Commission does not necessarily imply a long time. Within their generation the early Christians were accused of having turned the world upside down (Acts 17:8). Paul himself claimed the gospel had been preached "in all the world" during his lifetime (Col. 1:5,6). While MacPherson might believe apostasy takes time to develop, that was neither the experience or conviction of the early church. Even before the gospel was preached outside the city limits of Jerusalem, the church had to deal with the problem of deterioration (Acts 5:1-11). The whole emphasis of the biblical teaching concerning apostasy is that its growth is rapid (cf. 2 Jn. 8; Jude; 1 Cor. 15:33f.; Gal. 3:1-5). A fourth problem with the above list is its dependence upon parables. MacPherson makes-- parables teach more than what they may have been intended to teach. Jesus did not teach the parables of the ten virgins to convince His listeners that the bridegroom intends to be late arriving, but to watch because he might come at any moment. Also, Jesus did not teach the parable of the sower to discuss the time it takes for germination, but to teach the certainty of the harvest or judgment. Commenting on the interpretation of parables, Ramm suggests, Determine the one central truth the parable is attempting to teach. This might be called the golden rule of parabolic interpretation, for practically all writers on the subject mention it with stress. "The typical parable presents one single point of comparison," writes Dodd. "The details are not intended to have independent significance." Others have put the rule this way: Don't make a parable walk on all fours.

Post-tribulationalists tend to ignore the distinction between the Rapture and Second Coming. This is evident in arguments 5, 10 and 12 in the above list. As the biblical distinction between the Rapture and revelation of Christ is a major argument for the pre-tribulational view, this distinction will be examined more closely at that point. A sixth evident error in MacPherson's list is his misunderstanding of the doctrine of imminency and its application to the Christian life. There can be no question that imminency was taught in Scripture and believed by the early church. But no one who properly understood that Christ could return at any moment ever went to the mountains in white sheets to wait for the Rapture. Rather, Christians were urged to work hard that they might be found working when he returned. As Pentecost rightly observes, The doctrine of imminency is taught in Scripture in such passages as John 14:2-3; 1 Corinthians 1-7; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; 4:16-17; 5:5-9; Titus 2:13; James 5:8-9; Revelation 3:10; 22:17-22. . . . the early church held to the doctrine of imminency.

When properly understood, none of the objections listed by MacPherson are effective, except his eleventh argument involving the typical interpretation of the seven churches. However, this is not an argument, but an illustration and a weak foundation upon which to erect a denial of a clearly taught biblical doctrine. This typical interpretation has become popular only within this century and not many theologians would dream of building a theology or any part of it upon an illustration. 3. The Argument that the Church is Promised Tribulation. Another argument of the post-tribulationalist is that the church will endure the Great Tribulation. Verses are cited such as Job 15:17-19; John 16:1-2,33; Acts 8:1-4; Romans 12:12 noting that tribulation is promised to the Christian, not escape from tribulation. Those holding this position argue that this tribulation is simply the trials experienced over the years by Christians, so they equate suffering with "the Great Tribulation." Others agree there is a coming tribulation and that Christians will suffer during this period, but they are not subject to the wrath of God. This appears to be the majority belief of contemporary post-tribulational teachers. Gundry states, It is not a point of disagreement whether the Church will ever suffer God's retributive wrath. She will not (Jn. -3:36; 5:24: Rom. 5:9; 8:1; Eph. 2:3; 5:6; 1 Thes. 1:10; 5:9). And there are clear indications in the book of Revelation that the bowls of divine wrath will not touch saints, indications in addition to the theological necessity that God's wrath not touch a saved person. . . . As now, the Church will suffer persecution during the tribulation, but no saint can suffer divine wrath.

Similarly, Harold Ockenga argues the church will endure the Tribu-lation. Further, he recognizes the nature of this argument must deny the identification of the Tribulation with the wrath of God, noting, The church will endure the wrath of men, but will not suffer the wrath of God. This distinction which has been of great help to me is generally overlooked by pre-tribulationalists. . . . Pre-tribulation rapturists identify the tribulation with the wrath of God. If this cannot be disproven, we must believe that the church will be taken out of the world before the tribulation, for there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus. This line of argumentation fails to recognize at least three distinctions between the use and interpretation of the word "tribulation" and "the Great Tribulation" as described in Scripture. First is the argument of intention and fulfillment. When the Great Tribulation and the suffering of saints are confused, it logically demands that every generation experience its own great tribulation. Commenting on John 16:33, Mauro notes, "If the Lord meant that the Great Tribulation was the portion of His saints, then there would needs be about three 'great tribulations' every century--upwards of fifty to the present time--in order to meet the requirements of the case." The second argument deals with the use of the word "tribulation" in Scripture. Pentecost explains, Further, it must be noticed that the term tribulation is used in several different ways in Scripture. It is used in a non-technical, non-eschatological sense in reference to any time of suffering or testing into which one goes. It is so used in Matthew 13:23; Mark 4:17; John 16:33; Romans 5:3; 12:12; 2 Corinthians 1:4: 2 Thessalonians 1:4; Revelation 1:9. It is used in its technical or eschatological sense in reference to the whole period of the seven years of tribulation, as in Revelation 2:22 or Matthew 24:29. It is also used in reference to the last half of this seven-year period, as in Matthew 24:21. When the word tribulation is used in reference to the church, as in John 16:33, it is used in a non-technical sense, in which the church is promised an age-long opposition from the god of this age, but it is not teaching that the church will be brought into the period technically known as the tribulation. Otherwise one would have to teach that the tribulation has already existed for over nineteen hundred years.

The third argument notes that the Great Tribulation is everywhere in Scripture discussed as largely Jewish in character and characterized not by the wrath of men so much as by the wrath of God. According to Ironside, It will help a great deal if we see at the very beginning that the Great Tribulation is the time of Jacob's trouble, not the time of the Church's trouble. It cannot begin until after that parenthetic period that comes in between Daniel's sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks, for during all this age God makes no distinction between the Jew and the Gentile. It will be after the Church is taken out of this scene that He will recognize Israel again as a nation in special covenant relationship with Himself. Then their time of final trial will begin.

Further summarizing the character of the Great Tribulation, Thiessen notes, We know, of course, that believers must through "much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22, A.V.); but there is besides this common experience of Christians a future period of tribulation. In Dan. 12:1 it is spoken of as a "great tribulation"; Luke 21:34-36 refers to it as "that day," depicted in the preceding part of the chapter; Rev. 3:20 speaks of it as "the hour of trial, that hour which is come upon the whole world, to try them that dwell upon the earth"; and in Rev. 7:14 we read of a great multitude who had come "out of great tribulation." In the Old Testament it is referred to as the "day of Jacob's trouble" (Jer. 30:4-7) and is the time of God's indignation with the inhabitants of the earth (Isa. 24:17-21; 26:20, 21; 31:1-3; Zech. 14:1-3). That the Tribulation period will come between the two phases of Christ's coming appears from a study of the whole program of the future. Note particularly that Mt. 24:29 declares that it will close with Christ's return in glory, i.e., with His Revelation.

4. The Argument of the Historic Fulfillment of Daniel. 9:24-27. Some post-tribulationalists hold to an historic fulfillment of Daniel 9:24-27 including the seventieth week of that prophecy. They believe the seventy weeks are a continuous, successive, unbroken period of years that ends with the death of Stephen or the destruction of Jerusalem. Typical of this interpretation, Rose writes, If there were "gaps" and "intermissions" the prophecy would be vague, misleading and deceptive. . . . The "62 weeks" joined immediately unto the "7 weeks," and their combined "69 weeks" reached "UNTO MESSIAH." Beyond HIS birth, but not to his "triumphal entry"; only "UNTO" His public anointing. There was no "gap" between the "69th, and the 70" weeks . . . . The "one week" of prophetic "70 weeks" began with John the Baptist; from his first public preaching the kingdom of God, the gospel dispensation commenced. These seven years, added to the 483 years, complete the 490 years . . . so that the whole of the prophecy from the times and corresponding events, has been fulfilled to the very letter. . . . All the evidence of the New Testament and of Christian experience agrees with the greatest teachers of the Christian church that the seventieth week of Daniel's prophecy has all been fulfilled more than 1900 years ago. This leaves no future seventieth seek yet to be fulfilled in "the great tribulation after the Rapture."

It should be here noted that not all post-tribulationalists hold to an historic fulfillment of Daniel's seventieth week. In a rebuttal of post-tribulationism of J. Barton Payne, Gundry emphasizes the futurity of the seventieth week, noting in part, We cannot spiritualize the phrase "your people" (v. 24) into a spiritual Israel inclusive of the Gentiles without doing violence to the plain sense of the passage. For example, the destruction of Jerusalem, spoken of prominently in the prophecy, deals with Israel the nation. And yet, since in the seventy weeks the goals listed in verse 24 were to be accomplished, the seventy weeks cannot have entirely elapsed, for the finishing of Israel's transgression, the purging of her iniquity, and the bringing in of her everlasting righteousness have not reached completion. Paul writes of these as still in the future for Israel (Rom. 11:25-27).

There are five major schools of interpretation surrounding the issue of Daniel's seventieth week. Pre-tribulationalists are futurists in interpreting this passage. Walvoord summarizes the other views, In opposition to the futurist interpretation, at least four other views have been advanced: (1) the liberal view that the seventieth seven is fulfilled in the events following the Maccabean persecution just as the preceding sixty-nine sevens were; (2) the view of Jewish scholars that the seventieth week is fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70; (3) the view that the seventieth week of Daniel is an indefinite period beginning with Christ but extending to the end, often held by amillennarians such as Young and Leupold; (4) that the seventieth seven are seven literal years beginning with the public ministry of Christ and ending about three and a half years after His death.

The futurist interpretation views a gap of some time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week. It is during the gap that this present dispensation exists. At some future point, that seventieth week will begin. Most futurists hold that the nature of the Tribulation (focused on regathered Israel) demands that the seventieth week not begin prior to the Rapture of the church. Gundry summarizes the view of the futurists, Although the lack of certainty regarding the exact dates of our Lord's ministry demands some reserve, the futuristic view rests on a more exact chronology, best and fully set forth in Sir Robert Anderson's The Coming Prince. Very briefly, it is common ground that the seventy sevens are weeks of years. Anderson reckons a year at 360 days from the equation of 1,260 days with forty-two months (Rev. 12:6,7,13,14; 13:4-7), from the equation of five months with 150 days (Gen. 7:11; 8:4; 7:24; 8:3), and from other evidence of unequal value. By calculating the only known decree to rebuild the city of Jerusalem (Neh. 1:1-11; 2:1-8) sixty-nine weeks of seven 360-day years, we are brought to Palm Sunday, the only time Jesus was publicly acclaimed King, Prince, and Messiah and shortly after which He was cut off . . . . The accuracy is so remarkable that the objections seem paltry by comparison. The best answer to the objections is the failure of the historical view to provide an exact and accurate chronology and the resultant substitution of chronologies dealing in wide approxi-mations, with the result that the seventy weeks of years become half-literal and half-symbolic. The futuristic view can be established apart from Anderson's calculations, but they endow the futurist view with a chronology far superior to chronologies under the historical view.

5. The Argument that the Resurrection Occurs After the Tribulation. Probably the strongest argument presented by post-tribulationalists is the doctrine of resurrection. According to this argument, the Rapture must be post-tribulational because the resurrection occurs after the Tribulation. The importance of this argument is seen in various statements made by post-tribulation writers. According to MacPherson, Clearly the resurrection of the holy dead takes place at the Rapture of the Church (1 Thes. 4:16). Therefore, "wheresoever the resurrection is, there will be the Rapture also." Upon examination of passages that speak of the resurrection of the holy dead, which is the first resurrection (Rev. 20:5-6), we find that this first resurrection is associated with the coming of the Lord (Isa. 26:19), the conversion of Israel (Rom. 11:15), the inauguration of the Kingdom (Luke 14:14-15; Rev. 20:4-6), the giving of rewards (Rev. 11:15-16), the Great Tribulation coming before it (Dan. 12:1-3).

Ladd views this argument as the only one based upon an explicit statement of Scripture, explaining, With the exception of one passage, the author will grant that the Scripture nowhere explicitly states that the Church will go through the Great Tribulation. God's people are seen in the Tribulation, but they are not called the Church but the elect or the saints. Nor does the Word explicitly place the Rapture at the end of the Tribulation. Most of the references to these final events lack chronological indications. . . . However, in one passage, Revelation 20, the Resurrection is placed at the return of Christ in Glory. This is more than an inference.

Similarly, Gundry also stresses the importance of this argument. The resurrection of the dead in Christ will immediately precede the Rapture (1 Thes. 4:16-18). Therefore, if Scripture places the resurrection of saints in general after the tribulation and does not specifically put the resurrection of deceased members of the Church before the tribulation, it is natural to understand that the deceased of the Church will be raised after the tribulation. Such a resurrection would of course draw the translation of living members of the Church and the Rapture of the whole church into a post-tribulational orbit.

This argument is based on the conclusion that the resurrection of Revelation 20:5-6, which is there called "the first resurrection," is the same resurrection referred to in 1 Thessalonians 4:16. Probably the most systematic of the presentations of this argument is that of Reese. Summarizing this position, Stanton writes, Reese's argument takes on the form of a syllogism, the major premises being (1) the Old Testament Scriptures prove that the resurrection of the Old Testament saints is at the revelation of Christ, just prior to the millennial kingdom; the minor premise being (2) all Darbyists agree that the resurrection of the church synchronizes with the resurrection of Israel; hence, the conclusion is drawn (3) therefore the resurrection of the church sets the time of the Rapture as post-tribulational.

The major weakness of this argument is the equating of "the first resurrection" (Rev. 20:5-6) or the resurrection of the Old Testament saints with that resurrection occurring at the Rapture. The Scriptures identify at least four distinct resurrections, the first chronologically being the resurrection of Christ (Mt. 28:1-7). The expression "first resurrection" can therefore be understood only within the immediate context of the passage since Christ's resurrection was first. The resurrection there mentioned is "first" in that it comes one thousand years prior to the fourth and final resurrection, but it is also "third" in that it follows the resurrection of Christ and the resurrection of saints that accompany the Rapture. Questioning Darby's wisdom in making such a statement, Walvoord, for instance, suggests, The Old Testament saints are never described by the phrase "in Christ." The fact that the "voice of the archangel"-Israel's defender-is heard at the Rapture is not conclusive proof that Israel is raised at that time. The tendency of followers of Darby to spiritualize the resurrection of Daniel 12:1-2 as merely the restoration of Israel, thereby refuting its post-tribulationism, is to forsake literal interpretation to gain a point, a rather costly concession for premillennarians who build upon literal interpretation of prophecy. The best answer to Reese and Ladd is to concede the point that the resurrection of Old Testament saints is after the Tribulation, but to divorce it completely from the translation and resurrection of the church. Reese's carefully built argument then proves only that Darby was hasty in claiming the resurrection of the Old Testament saints at the time of the translation of the church. If the translation of the church is a different event entirely, Reese proves nothing by his argument.

Finally, perhaps the word "first" did not mean "first in time" but "first in kind," i.e., the resurrection was of God's people (whether before or after the Tribulation). The "second of a different kind," involved the unsaved. 6. The Argument of the Parable of the Wheat and Tares. An additional argument based upon the parable of the wheat and he tares is sometimes used to defend the post-tribulational cause. They suggest that Christ spoke of the wheat and the tares growing together "until the harvest" (Mt. 13:30) and suggest a general judgment at the end of the age. Commenting on this text, Brown writes, The harvest is the end of the world, the period of Christ's second coming, and of the judicial separation of the righteous and the wicked. Till then, no attempt is to be made to effect such separation. But to stretch this so far as to justify allowing openly scandalous persons to remain in the communion of the Church, is to wrest the teaching of this parable to other than its proper design, and to go in the teeth of apostolic injunctions (1 Cor. v).

It must be remembered, however, that the purpose of the kingdom parables in Matthew 13 is not to record the history of the church, but rather the history of the kingdom in mystery form, i.e., Christendom. Wiersbe emphasizes this point, In this series of parables, Jesus explained the course of the gospel in the world. If Israel had received Him as King, the blessings would have flowed out from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. But the nation rejected Him, and God had to institute a new program on earth. During this present age, "the kingdom of heaven" is a mixture of true and false, good and bad, as pictured in these parables. It is "Christendom," professing allegiance to the King, and yet containing much that is contrary to the principles of the King.

7. The Argument of Fruit. Perhaps the weakest argument for any theological position is that based upon fruit, i.e., the apparent results of a doctrinal teaching. MacPherson makes extensive use of this argument suggesting those holding a pre-tribulational view of the Rapture were at least in part responsible for the deaths of "tens of thousands, maybe millions, of Chinese Christians," the persecution of other Christians, church splits, raising funds under false pretenses, etc. One has a great deal of difficulty recognizing a direct relationship between eschatology and some of the above-mentioned results. Further, in cases where a relationship might exist, it is difficult to believe that only those holding to a pre-tribulation Rapture are capable of criticizing (or, as MacPherson suggests, "persecuting") other Christians, splitting churches or raising money under false pretenses. The real weakness of this argument is seen in W. R. Riley's observations concerning pre-tribulational Christian workers. There is one thing that will be denied, even our opponents themselves being witnesses, namely, that the men that held this hope, have so far discharged their obligations to God as to have promoted the interests of His church by personal service, by money sacrificed, by missionary zeal, by intelligent counsel, by tireless work, so as not to have been surpassed by any people that have ever named His name, or joined their fortunes to His cause.

OTHER FACTORS TO CONSIDER The above seven arguments are those generally used by post-tribulationists. While not all holding this position see all these arguments, and some of them use these arguments with various spins, these seem to be the ammunition they use to prove their point. I believe these arguments have been sufficiently answered, probably not to their satisfaction; but if honest, they must recognize that I have demonstrated some proof on the other side, i.e., the pre-tribulationist Rapture. There's one basic weakness I did not address. It is their lack of a consistent theological system that would naturally demand a post-tribulation Rapture. They do not have a comprehensive approach to Scriptures; if anything, their "glue" that holds them together is their vehement denial of a pre-tribulation Rapture. If this is true, their's is not an affirmation of truth, but a negation of truth. The pre-millenialist view is based on a dispensational interpretation of Scriptures with a clear distinction between the church and Israel. Amillennialism is based on a covenant or reformed interpretation of Scriptures that assume a covenant ratified in the Old Testament continues unto the New. Also, a post-millennial view is based on certain interpretations of sin; Christ triumphed over sin in His death and purpose of His Second Coming. The post-tribulation Rapture might gain some scholarly support if it has the support of a theological system and those who hold this position-if they are serious-should attempt to interpret all Scriptures within their theological view of interpretation. But of course I don't believe they have one; however, I still hold a classical dispensational interpretation of Scriptures and logically the pre-tribulation Rapture. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The other answer to the seven arguments of the post-tribulationist is obviously the affirmative reasons for believing the pre-tribulation Rapture. These are (1) the contrast of the Rapture and the Revelation, (2) the necessity of an interval of time to accomplish on earth and Heaven, (3) the things mentioned between the Rapture and the Revelation, (4) the necessity for the removal of the restrainer and the revelation of the man of sin, i.e., Antichrist, (5) the uniqueness of the church as the Body of Christ, (6) the promises to the church to be removed from the Great Tribulation, (7) the absence of the church between Revelation 4:1 and 19:11, and (8) the pre-tribulation Rapture is based on a historical-grammatical interpretation of Scripture. "Even so come Lord Jesus" (Rev. 22:20).

ENDNOTES

1 Alexander Reese, The Approaching Advent of Christ (London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, n.d.), 18. 2 Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1973), 173. 3 Dave MacPherson, The Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture (Kansas City, Missouri: Heart of America Bible Society, 1974), 12. 4 Charles C. Ryrie, What You Should Know About the Rapture (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), 68. 5 J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974), 166. 6 Dave McPherson, op. cit., 104. 7 Ibid., 118. 8 Ryrie, op. cit., 72. 9 Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, 43. 10 MacPherson, The Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture, 23. 11 John R. W. Stott, Guard the Gospel: The Message of 2 Timothy (London: InterVarsity Press, 1973), 113. 12 Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation: A Textbook in Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1974), 283. 13 Pentecost, Things to Come, 168. 14 Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, 46, 62. 15 Harold J. Ockenga, "Will the Church Go Through the Tribulation? Yes" Christian Life, February 19, 55, 22. 16 Philip Mauro, Looking for the Savior (London: Samuel E. Roberts, Publishers, n.d.), 37. 17 Pentecost, Things to Come, 170. 18 Harry A. Ironside, "Why the Church Will Not Go Through the Great Tribulation" The Sure Word of Prophecy, ed. John W. Bradbury (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1943), 127. 19 Henry Clarence Thiessen, Lectures in Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1951), 464. 20 George L. Rose, Tribulation Till Translation (Glendale, California: Rose Publishing Company, 1943), 46-47, 62. 21 Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, 189. 22 John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), 232. 23 Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, 192-193. 24 Norman S. MacPherson, Triumph Through Tribulation (Otego, New York: Published by the Author, 1944), 41. 25 George E. Ladd, The Blessed Hope (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1956), 165. 26 Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, 146. 27 Gerald B. Stanton, Kept from the Hour (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1956), 320. 28 John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), 154. 29 David Brown, The Four Gospels (London: Banner of Truth Trust, 1969), 79. 30 Warren W. Wiersbe, Meet Your King (Wheaton, Illinois: Victor Books, 1980), 82-83. 31 MacPherson, The Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture, 16-17, 67-80, and The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin, 15. 32 W. B. Riley, The Evolution of the Kingdom (New York: Chas. C. Cook, 1910), 167.

The first step in being sure you can get prayers answered is to be sure Jesus Christ is your Savior. Sometimes people put their trust in their church or in works instead of in Jesus for the forgiveness of sins and for the salvation of their souls.

The Bible teaches in John 1:12: But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name.

We can see from this verse that God tells us if we want our sins forgiven and our souls saved, all we have to do is receive or accept Jesus into our heart as our Savior. If we accept Him, God will accept us into His family. If we turn from our sins and set out to live for Jesus a life trying to please him, then the first step we should take in trying to live a life to please Jesus is to make the decision definitely and personally to accept Jesus into our heart as our Savior. If you have never been saved, would you, right now, ask the Lord Jesus to come into your heart and save you?

The second step in being sure you can get your prayers answered is to be certain you are trying to live a life to please Jesus. It is good to start a time of personal devotion by daily Bible reading and daily prayer. It is important that you ask God to help you with those sins that have crept into your life and are displeasing unto God.

It is important to get into a good, strong, Bible-believing, soul-winning New Testament church. Such a church will teach salvation through Christ alone and not through works or church membership. Church membership is important, but the church cannot save and the preacher cannot save. Some churches teach baptism has a part in salvation, but this is not true. Salvation is between an individual and Jesus alone. And, if we get into the right kind of church, our hearts will be warmed, our minds will be instructed, our lives will be uplifted by the example of others with whom we are having fellowship, and we will begin to grow remarkably in spiritual strength and likeness to Christ.

Another thing to be sure to do in trying to get our prayers answered is to seek the help of God's Holy Spirit, who is given to all saved people as our prayer partner (Romans 8:26). He will help us know what the will of God is, what we should pray for and what we should not pray for. Then let us find some promises in God's Word and claim those promises for the things for which the Holy Spirit lets us know are right to pray.

There are two instances in which God will not answer prayers:

If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me (Psalm 66:18).

And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive (Matthew 21:22).

God will always hear and answer our prayers--if we do not have unconfessed sin in our hearts and if we pray with faith. But we must not forget His answer may not be the same answer we desire because He knows more about us than we know ourselves. The following books may be of great help and blessing to you, and should be affordable in or through your local bookstore:

PRAYER, ASKING AND RECEIVING by John R. Rice

HOW TO PRAY by R. A. Torrey

QUIET TALKS ON PRAYER by S. D. Gordon

The term antichrist has a twofold meaning in Scripture:

1. Antichrist [Greek antichristos, against or instead of Christ]. (DAVIS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE, p. 39).

The-word antichrist may mean, as the etymology shows, an enemy of Christ or a usurper of Christ's name and rights -- this meaning has the broad application to include all that is opposite to Christ is thus antichrist; i.e., see I John 2:18 ... Even now are there many antichrists. I John 4:3 -- includes the spirit of antichrist -- alluding to any who in spirit or in person is opposed to Christ, to teach antichristian doctrine, and deny the fact of the incarnation [of Jesus Christ as God the Son] i.e., false teachers and false disciples. (SYSTEMAT1C THEOLOGY, Vol. VII, L. S. Chafer, pp. 16-17).

2. The Antichrist as a future person identified as:

"The Man of Sin" (II Thessalonians 2:3). It is not certain exactly who this person will be; but the identification of the "Man of Sin" with the coming Antichrist of Revelation is the most logical conclusion. He is the "beast out of the sea" (Revelation 13:1), the "little horn" of Daniel 7:8. He is the Antichrist; i.e., the false Christ who will force himself and his kingdom upon the world one day hence (see Revelation 13:15-17). (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 620).

"The Son of Perdition," "The wicked one" (II Thessalonians 2:3,8) refers to the personification of evil and sin in one who resists the power and person of Christ. He is to be identified with the first beast of Revelation 13, the little horn of Daniel 7:8, and the abomination of Matthew 24:15. Antichrist is apparently a historical person who makes his debut in history at a crucial moment and thus achieves incredible power and influence. His true character emerges at the midpoint of the Tribulation (see Daniel 9:24-27). Ultimately, he is destroyed at the coming of Christ (see II Thessalonians 2:8). (CRISWELL STUDY BIBLE, p. 1409).

Several theories as to the identity of the Antichrist-:

1. Some believe the Antichrist will be a Gentile, since he comes from the sea(Revelation 13:1), which is often a symbol for Gentile and heathen nations.

2. Some believe the Antichrist will be a resurrected individual, on the basis of Revelation 13:3 and 17:8.

3. Some believe the Antichrist will be Judas Iscariot, on the basis of the following verses: John 6:70-71; Luke 22:3, John 13:27; 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3; Acts 1:25.

4. Others interpret the second beast of Revelation 13:11, i.e., the False Prophet as the Antichrist. His origin is from the earth (or land) or the Land of Promise, thus he is an apostate Jew. The Jews would not accept a non-Jew as their Messiah, and history witnesses that they have received some scores of false Messiahs already (see John 5:43; Acts 5:36-37). But the portrayal of the Antichrist in Daniel 11:36-45- Zechariah 11:15-17, Matthew 24:15-28; John 5:45; II Thessalonians 2:1-12; Revelation 13:1-10, is such that the one called "the man of sin" is not likely to be compelled by truth as to his national origin, any more than he adheres to the facts in claiming to be God Himself (see II Thessalonians 2:4). Falsehood is one of the staples of his stock in trade. Thus, he will arise from the Land of Promise and will falsely claim to be of the nation of promise and the promised Messiah ... He seeks to imitate the kingly and prophetic ministries of Christ. "Spake as a dragon (Revelation 13:11). But his speech betrays him as a tool of Satan; he pretends meekness and humility as a lamb, but in actuality is a masterpiece of the devil. He is stationed in Jerusalem (see II Thessalonians 2:4); but owes his position and power to the first beast, who resides in Rome (see Daniel 11:38-39), especially the words "god of forces" and "strange god." With the military help of his superior, he can command universal compliance with his demands. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 11, pp. 823-825).

The Antichrist's personal characteristics:

1. He will be an intellectual genius (Daniel 8:23).

2. He will be an oratorical genius (Daniel 11:36).

3. He will be a political genius (Revelation 17:11-12).

4. He will be a commercial genius (Revelation 13:16-17; Daniel 11:43).

5. He will be a military genius (Revelation 6:2; 13:4).

6. He will be a religious genius (Revelation 13:8; II Thessalonians-2: 4).

The activities of the Antichrist:

1. He begins by controlling the western power block [Federation of nations i.e., Revised Roman Empire] (Revelation 17:12).

2. He makes a seven-year covenant with Israel but breaks it after 3 1/2 years (Daniel 9:27).

3. He gains absolute control over the Middle East after the Russian invasion (Ezekiel 38-39).

4. He attempts to destroy all of Israel (Revelation 12).

5. He destroys the false religious system, so that he may rule unhindered (Revelation 17:16-17).

6. He thereupon sets himself up as God (Daniel 11:36-37; II Thess-alonians 2:4,11; Revelation 13:5).

7. He briefly rules over all nations (Psalms 2; Daniel 11:36; Revelation 13:16).

8. He is utterly crushed by the Lord Jesus Christ at the Battle of Armageddon (Revelation 19).

9. He is the first creature to be thrown into the Lake of Fire (Revelation 19:20).

(Exerpts from THE KING IS COMING, by H. L. Willmington, pp. 78,79,82):

It should be pointed out that the Antichrist will be identified with a number 666) (see Revelation 13:16,17,16). The mark of the Beast (666) is a mark which the Antichrist will require people to have on them if they are to buy or sell. It is to indicate they accept him. It's such a deep committal to him and such a deep turning away from the true Christ that all who receive the mark of the Beast will go to Hell (Revelation 14:9-11). Therefore, it is obvious no saved person will accept the mark of the Beast even if it costs him his life to reject it.

CONCLUSION

There is one simple but profound act, a destiny determining and life-transforming act, which will guarantee one will never have the mark of the Beast. That act is to repent of one's sins and accept the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior for the forgiveness of sins and for the gift of everlasting life. One then has become a member of the family of God (John 1:12-13) and shall never perish (John 10:28). If one accepts Jesus Christ as his Savior now, he will not have to go through the terrible reign of the Antichrist, but will be taken out of this world (I Thessalonians 4:16-17).

The Bible teaches the identity of the Antichrist will not be known until after Christ takes out of the world all Christians (I Thessalonians 4:16-17; II Thessalonians 2:3-9) and until the Antichrist makes a seven year covenant or agreement with Israel (Daniel 9:27). The one who will become the Antichrist may be alive and may be an adult ready for action today. However, God has not revealed him, and it would be wrong to try to point him out before those two events occur (Rapture of saints and seven-year covenant).

I believe the Antichrist is alive and well on Earth today. I also said that I believe, as do most evangelical leaders, that he will be a male and a Jew. This got me in some hot water with the Anti-Defamation League. That group's director, Abraham Foxman, accused me of extolling anti-Semitic comments "rooted in Christian theological extremism." However, this is far from the truth. My statements were, in fact, rooted in prophetic orthodox Christian doctrine that most theologians have embraced for two millennia. Since the Antichrist will be the utter antithesis of Christ, he must certainly embody many elements of Christ in his own evil ministry. I want to make it perfectly clear to all my friends that I am wholeheartedly pro-Israel and am committed to ensuring that the State of Israel remain free. The Jews are God's chosen people and we are, as Christians, miraculously connected to them as adopted brethren. I have had a wonderful relationship with Israel President Benjamin Netanyahu and many other Jewish leaders and I am a frequent visitor to the Holy Land. I sincerely love the Jewish people. I honestly believe that, as a Christian, it is my responsibility to honor and revere the people God chose as His own. However, my love and respect of the Jewish people cannot alter the prophetic truths of the Bible. Keep looking to the skies, my friends. He is returning soon!

There are two eschatological facts which are unknown to all mortals: (1) the date of the Lord's return; and (2) the identity of the Antichrist.

When I recently delivered my sermon on the second coming of Jesus Christ to a Real Evangelism conference at Higher Ground Baptist Church in Kingsport, Tenn., I conveyed biblically-based truths that I have believed and preached for more than 40 years.

In addition to asserting that I personally believe that Christ could return soon, I stated that, if the Lord's return is imminent, the Antichrist may possibly be alive on the earth today and, in my opinion, could be Jewish.

The national media went ballistic and many Jewish leaders felt the statement could be construed as anti-semitic. I did not change my opinion, nor did I apologize for what I believed. I apologized for the misunderstanding surrounding my statements, specifically; I did not mean to offend the Jewish people, but to express my beliefs.

I Am Pre-Trib and Pre-Mil I am one of many evangelicals who believes in the imminent, premillennial, pretribulational coming of Jesus Christ for all of His Church. Since Jesus came to the earth the first time 2,000 years ago as a Jewish male, many evangelicals believe the Antichrist, a counterfeit Christ who will pretend to be the Jewish Messiah, will, by necessity, be a Jewish male.

This belief is 2,000 years old and has no anti-semitic roots. This is simply historic and prophetic orthodox Christian doctrine that many theologians, Christian and non-Christian, have understood for two millennia.

Honest Disagreement At the outset, it should be noted that there is honest disagreement among evangelical Christians regarding the background of the Antichrist. In essence, there are three views:

(1) The Antichrist is not a person at all, but an evil system. (2) The Antichrist is a real person and will be a Gentile. (3) The Antichrist is a real person and will be Jewish.

Of course, no one can be absolutely dogmatic in this matter, but I personally feel (and have publicly stated) that the third view has more scriptural support than the previous two.

Whenever I speak on this subject, I usually state that there are (at least) three scriptural passages that lead many to believe the Antichrist maybe Jewish:

A. Ezekiel 21:25: "And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come when iniquity shall have an end." B. Daniel 11:37: "Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers ...." C. John 5:43: "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive."

The church fathers generally believed in a personal Antichrist. One of the most famous, John Chrysostom, (347-407 A.D.) held that the Antichrist would be a Jewish dictator from the tribe of Dan, based on the following:

(1) Jacob's prophecy upon his son Dan: "Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward." (Gen. 49:17) (2) Jeremiah's prophecy concerning the tribulation: "The snorting of his horses was heard from Dan: the whole land trembled at the sound. . for they are come, and have devoured the land, and all that is in it; the city, and those that dwell therein. For, behold I will send serpents, cockatrices, among you, which will not be charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the Lord." (Jer. 8:16, 17). (3) The tribe of Dan is omitted from the list in Revelation 7. This chapter records the tribal identity of the 144,000 Hebrew evangelists who will be saved and called to special service during the tribulation.

View Is Not Anti-Semitic Let me briefly summarize: This view is not novel or new. It is not without biblical support. It is not anti-semitic.

Since I delivered this Kingsport message, some felt that my comments expressing my opinion that the Anti-Christ will be Jewish could possibly be construed as anti-semitic and could inflict pain upon the Jewish people. I did not intend for my sincere belief on this issue to cause any pain to anyone, Jewish or otherwise. I am unapologetically pro-Jewish and pro-Israel.

My statement was obviously not dogmatic since no one can be certain of the identity of the Antichrist. If I had known the expression of my opinion about the ethnic background of the Antichrist would be publicized and misconstrued, I would never have made it. For me to express my opinion on this subject in a public forum serves no real purpose and, in my opinion, is not essential to declaring "the whole counsel of God."

I Cannot Apologize For My Beliefs

Recently, at the International Prayer Breakfast of Jewish and Christian leaders at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention in Nashville, I sincerely apologized to those persons who were offended thereby, and I restate that apology now. Clearly, I could never apologize for what I believe and preach. Nor have I changed any of my eschatological convictions and views. I tell this story in this article only for the purpose of informing my friends about what really happened.

I want always to be sensitive to the nervousness and tensions that prevail today as we approach the new millennium. I especially want to contribute to the generally warm relationship that exists between evangelical Christians and Jewish people everywhere.

I Am Strongly Pro-Israel

I have traveled to Israel more than 30 times and have met often with every Israeli prime minister from Menachem Begin to Benjamin Netanyahu. I am known everywhere for my continued and outspoken support of Israel. In 1980, I was presented with the Jabotinsky Centennial Medal by Prime Minister Begin for my friendship to Israel. Additionally, prominent Jewish author Merrill Simon wrote and published the book Jerry Falwell and the Jews in 1984, outlining my unwavering support of Israel through the years. Recently Liberty University, where I serve as founder and chancellor, sponsored a tour of Israel for approximately 1,500 of the University's students. We have sponsored many Liberty University study tours. For further information on the second coming of Christ, my sermons on this subject are available on my website at: www.falwell.com. My sermons on the Book of the Revelation and the Book of Daniel may also be accessed at my website.

(from Dr. H. L. Willmington's book: THAT MANUSCRIPT FROM OUTER SPACE, p. 68)

Reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha

1. The Apocrypha was never included in the Old Testament canon by recognized authorities.

2. It was never quoted by either Jews or any other New Testament writers.

3. The great Jewish historian, Josephus, excluded it.

4. The well-known Jewish philosopher, Philo, did not recognize it.

5. The early church fathers excluded it.

6. The Bible translator, Jerome, did not accept them as inspired, although he was forced by the Pope to include them into the Latin Vulgate Bible.

7. None of the fourteen books claim divine inspiration; in fact, some actually disclaim it!

8. Some books contain historical and geographical errors.

9. Some books teach false doctrine, such as praying for the dead.

10. No Apocrypha book can be found in any catalogue list of canonical books composed during the first four centuries AD In fact, it was not until 1596 at the Council of Trent that the Roman Catholic Church officially recognized these books, basically in an attempt to strengthen their position, which had been grievously weakened by the great reformer Martin Luther.

The Bible does not tell us a great deal about the individual lives of the apostles. It is the fashion of biographers in our present day to enter into more minute particulars of outward event regarding the person about whom they are writing than was the case in the evangelistic histories. The writers of the Gospels, even though they gave an account of the ministry of the apostles, were no primarily concerned with the personal details of their lives. God revealed to the hearts of these writers what He wanted them to say. Their message was "God-breathed," because through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit they were able to carry from heart to paper what God had given them to write. The theme of their writings was the Lord Jesus Christ.

However, we do find an account in the Liberty Commentary as to how the apostle James (the son of Zebedee and brother of John) died. King Herod Agrippa I "killed him with a sword" (Acts 12:2). This is found on page 292 of Volume II. James was the first of the apostles to fall victim to martyrdom and the only one recorded in the Bible. His death fulfils the promise of Jesus that he would drink of His cup and be baptized with His baptism (Mark 10:39). Although this promise was made to both James and John, John outlived all the other apostles. However, he suffered for the sake of Christ (see Revelation 1:9). The actual account of the death by martyrdom of the other disciples is not found in the Bible. The following information concerning these courageous first-century apostles, and what apostleship really meant in the time of Christ is taken from New Testament accounts of their ministry, and from the most respected traditions handed down from early church history. While we do not intend to infer that traditions necessarily constitute historical fact, we do feel that they are accurate and have much value in the study of the lives of these great men.

The last Scripture account of Andrew is found in Acts 1:13 when he was with ten other disciples in the Upper Room, prior to Pentecost. According to tradition it was in Achala, Greece, in the town of Patra that Andrew died a martyr. When Governor Aepeas' wife was healed and converted to the Christian faith, and shortly after that the Governor's brother became a Christian, Aepeas was enraged and arrested Andrew. He condemned him to die on the cross. Andrew, feeling unworthy to be crucified on the same-shaped cross as his Lord, begged that his be different. So, he was crucified on a cross shaped like the letter "X" which is called Saint Andrew's cross.

Tradition also has it that Peter was crucified--that when he was taken out to be led to a cross, he requested to be hung upside-down because he felt unworthy to die as his Lord had died. John 21:18,19 alludes to the fact that Peter would die a martyr's death when our Lord prophesied that one day Peter's freedom would cease. In these verses, "Old" indicates that Peter would have a long, useful life of service. "Thou shall stretch forth thy hands" could refer to crucifixion. "Glorify God"--what confidence the Lord gave to one who had denied Him!

Peter would be faithful to the end, and would bring glory to God through his death. "Follow me" is a reference to the Lord calling Peter to a life of total commitment to Him.

John was banished to the Isle of Patmos in the reign of Nero (or perhaps Domitian). While at Patos he received the vision of Revelation. He was later liberated and died a natural death while pastoring at Ephesus.

A fifth-century church historian relates that Matthew was martyred in Ethiopia where he had gone as a missionary.

Thomas (Didymus) was in the Upper Room with the disciples, after which tradition says he labored in Parthia, Persia, and India and he suffered martyrdom near Madras, at Mount St. Thomas. He was killed with a spear.

James (the son of Alphaeus), known as James the Less, preached in Palestine and Egypt, in which latter country early church history says he died as a martyr and his body was sawed in pieces.

Thaddaeus (the brother of James the Less), also known as Jude, is believed to have died for Christ after preaching in Persia and Assyria. He was killed with arrows at Ararat.

Simon the Zealot was a "right-wing" member of a political party called the Zealots. Tradition says he was crucified.

Tradition tells us that following the last Passover Supper (John 14:8,9) Philip went as a missionary to Phrygia and was martyred and buried at Hierapolis. It is said he died by hanging. While he was hanging he requested that his body be wrapped not in linen, but in papyrus, for he was not worthy that even his dead body be treated as the body of Jesus was treated.

The last Scriptural account we have of Bartholomew is found in John 21:2 when he was present at the lake breakfast prepared by the Savior on the Galilean shore. Tradition has it that he preached in India and Armenia and was flayed alive with knives.

Judas Iscariot, of course, betrayed Christ and subsequently committed suicide (Matthew 27:3-10).

Are The Jews Lost?

Many people ask Dr. Falwell the question, "Do you condemn all those Jews who have died to date, who did not worship Christ?" And also a parallel question, "Are you condemning all those Jews living today who do not worship Christ?" The answer to those questions is that Dr. Falwell does not condemn any, however, Dr. Falwell does make the following statement in the book, JERRY FALWELL AND THE JEWS, written by Merrill Simon, concerning the Jews and their religion being "incomplete:"

The Jew, therefore, is practicing an "incomplete" religion. To this Dr. Falwell replied "Yes. Even according to his [Jews] old standards - the Old Testament - the blood sacrifices are wholly missing. The temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD. and the sacrificial offerings ceased. Yom Kippur is no longer practiced as commanded by God through Moses (Leviticus 16). The New Testament claims that Christ, in fulfillment of the Old Testament types (prefigurations) and predictions (Isaiah 53) has once and for all offered up Himself as the sacrifice for all our sins. Whereas the Old Testament sacrifices were incomplete and that they had to be repeated yearly, Christ has 'once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God'" (I Peter 3:18). (JERRY FALWELL AND THE JEWS, pp. 18, 19.)

Dr. Falwell has made it clear that he believes that the Jews or anyone else without Christ have a missing dimension in their lives. They are missing the joy and peace of having their sins freely forgiven and of knowing they are fully accepted by God. In the Words of our Savior Jesus Christ, with regard to whether or not a Jew would want Heaven or Hell, He makes the statement "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). This statement was made to a Jewish Pharisee named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. Thus Jesus Christ Himself utters the statement of utmost eternal importance for all men to consider-"What will you do with Christ?"

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not be see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36).

I would encourage you to purchase a copy of the book, JERRY FALWELL AND THE JEWS, by Merrill Simon. This book gives a clear exposition of Dr. Falwell's views regarding various subjects pertaining to the Jews of today. This book may be purchased at most bookstores or may be ordered directly from the publisher:

Jonathan David Publishers, Inc. 68-22 Eliot Avenue Middle Village, NY 11379

ARE THE MEN IN GENESIS 6 ANGELS?

Several Bible teachers believe that the "sons of God" (Gen. 6:2) which were angels, cohabited with the "daughters of men" (Gen. 6:2), who were human women and produced giants (v. 4). God saw the wicked results, as well as potential ruin and destroyed the earth with a flood. The angels who were responsible were placed in Tartarus to wait for judgment at the Great White Throne judgment. Lawlor gives support for this view.

1. The title "sons of God" in Genesis 6:2,4 is used in Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 to designate angels. Moreover, in the Septuagint the word "sons" in these passages is the Greek for "angels," and where the Authorized Version reads "sons of God" in Geneses 6:2,4 the Septuagint reads "angels of God." Nowhere in the Old Testament are God's people called "sons of God," with one notable exception in Hosea 1:10, and the meaning there is obvious.

2. The term "sons of God" denotes beings brought into existence by the creative act of God. Such were the angels, and in the Old Testament the title refers to angels. Men are not "sons" until they are redeemed (Gal. 4:4,5), born again in the New Testament sense (Jn. 1:12,13; 3:3-7).

3. There was a strong Jewish stream of tradition with regard to Genesis 6:1-4 as being the description of a terrible sin committed by angels attracted by the beauty of mortal women, and who forsook their proper habitation in order to live on earth with the daughters of men.

4. The early church held that Jude's statement in verse 6 refers to Genesis 6:1-4. It was not until the latter part of the fourth century that any other view was suggested.

5. The language of the text is foreign to the view that the "sons of God" are the sons of Seth, while the "daughters of men" are the offspring of Cain. If the "sons of God" are the sons of Seth, and the "daughters of men" are the offspring of Cain, then at the time of the amalgamation God's true people were limited to the male sex, for the "sons of God" were the ones who married the "daughters of men." And if the "sons of God" were believers, they perished in the Flood, yet Peter states that it was the ungodly who received that judgment (2 Pet. 2:5).

6. The "daughters of men" can surely be held to include the daughters of Seth as well as the daughters of Cain, and this being so, then the "sons of God" must refer to something entirely different from the human race.

7. The progeny of the union between the "sons of God" and the daughters of men" was of such a character as to indicate a super-human union. The word rendered "giants" in Genesis 6:4 is the same word as that found in Numbers 13:33, where it is used to describe the sons of Anak, seen by the spies, and who were gigantic in stature. The Hebrew words designate these giants as "fallen ones." The result of this union was wickedness of such fearful character as to demand a new beginning of the human race (Gen. 6:5-7).

8. This corruption of the human race by the "sons of God" was in harmony with Satan's continued policy of trying to frustrate the plan and purpose of God, and thus answers the question of why these angels sinned. Herein is to be found the cause of their evil act. By influencing these angels to rebel, become insubordinate to God, abandon their first estate, leave their own habitation, and come down into the realm of the daughters of men and seek them out for themselves, Satan aimed at the monstrous destruction of the human race (the channel through which the seed of the woman, Genesis 3:15, should come), and at its immediate perversion, by producing a race of frightful monstrosities. He almost succeeded. Genesis 6:12 says, "All flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." Only one family remained by the grace of God: Noah's. Genesis 6:2,4 shows that monstrosities were produced.

9. The Scriptures reveal that angels fell, came down, and went after strange flesh (Jude 6,7 with 2 Pet. 2:4), and the testimony strongly suggests that their sin was that of Genesis 6. The passage in Jude 6,7 shows the awful sin of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah in comparison with the sin of the angels who fell.

10. Matthew 22:30 is used in refutation of the "angels" view. But in this passage, the words "in heaven" make a great difference with the meaning. The angels in heaven do not marry, nor are given in marriage. But the "sons of God" in Geneses 6:1-4 were no longer in heaven. They left their own place, forsook their habitation, and came seeking after strange flesh, hunting after unlawful alliance with the daughters of men.

(George Lawrence Lawlor, The Epistle of Jude (United States: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co., 1972), pp. 66-68.)

There are a number of passages in the Bible that relate to the battle of Armageddon involving the nations of the world converging on the Middle East and surrounding the city of Jerusalem (see Ezekiel 12:2; 14:2,3,12; Revelation 19:11-21).

In Dr. H. L. Willmington's book entitled THE KING IS COMING, he presents a chronology of the battle of Armageddon:

(1) The nations, led by the Antichrist, will be gathered together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon (Revelation 16:16).

(2) The Antichrist and the armies will be gathered together to destroy Jerusalem and the Jews.

(3) Christ will return and touch His feet on the Mount of Olives (Zech. 14:4; Acts 1:9-2).

(4) Christ will destroy the Antichrist and the armies gathered at Armageddon (Revelation 19:11; Isaiah 34:6 and 63:1).

(5) The beast and the False Prophet will then be cast alive into the lake of fire forever (Revelation 19:20).

In order for the armies of China, India, and other Asian powers to march into Jerusalem, it will be necessary for the Euphrates River to dry up (Revelation 16:12). Dr. Donald Barnhouse references the drying up of the Euphrates in his quote from Dr. Seis:

. . . The Euphrates with its tributaries has been a great and formidable boundary between the peoples east of it and those west of it ... History frequently refers to the great hindrance the Euphrates has been to military movements; and it has always been a line of separation between the peoples living east of it and those living west of it.

Thus, when this watery barrier is removed, tens of millions of soldiers from China, India, and other Asian powers will march straight for Armageddon and their destruction! (REVELATION, Dr. Donald Barnhouse, p. 301; excerpts from THE KING IS COMING, H. L. Willmington, p. 177).

Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them (Jeremiah 10:2). According to God's Word, the worship of the stars, the seeking of "direction" from the stars is a heathen practice, another false god. Jesus said, But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness... (Matthew 6:33). James said, under direction of the Holy Spirit, if any of you lack wisdom let him ask of God... (James 1:5). Godly wisdom comes from His Word (Psalm 1:1-3; Psalm 119; II Timothy 2:15, 3:16-17).

In Genesis 11, God records man's first effort at ecumenicism - "building the tower of Babel," not to get to Heaven, but to worship the stars and signs of the Heavens. This resulted in God confusing their language and scattering them over the earth.

Bob Larson, in his book, LARSON'S BOOK OF CULTS, page 259, has this to say:

The underlying philosophy of astrology declares that one's destiny can be found in the stars. In contrast, Christianity teaches that the events of life are determined by the combination of God's sovereign will and man's personal moral choices. Astrology, on the other hand, attempts to destroy man's accountability to God. Horoscope devotees may think they can fall back on blaming the stars for their action, but the Bible teaches that someday all mankind will stand before God to be judged.

Christians are to trust the Holy Spirit, who was sent to guide their lives (John 14:16-17, 26). The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord (Psalm 37:23). The guess work, the so-called "predictions of astrology," should have no interest for believers who follow a more "sure word of prophecy" (II Peter 1:19).

We believe that the salvation of sinners is wholly of grace; through the mediatorial offices of the Son of God who, by the appointment of the Father, freely took upon Him our nature, yet without sin, honored the divine law by His perfect obedience and by His death made a full and vicarious atonement for our sins; that His atonement consisted not in setting us an example by His death as a martyr but in the voluntary substitution of Himself in the sinners place, the just dying for the unjust, Christ the Lord, bearing our sins in His own body on the tree; that, having risen from the dead, He is now enthroned in heaven and uniting in His wonderful person the tenderest sympathies with divine perfection. He is every way qualified to be a suitable, a compassionate and an all-sufficient savior.

Without a doubt, there is a right way to pray and there is a wrong way to pray.

Prayer is the simplest act of the Christian life. It is basic communication with God, requiring neither wisdom nor experience. The weakest believer, like a simple child, can call upon his heavenly Father. The poorest sinner, like an impoverished beggar, can reach out to God in prayer. The ability to call on God is one of the attributes that distinguishes men from animals. We are not merely biological beings. We are spirit beings, created in the image of God.

Many elements of prayer enhance our communication with God. These must occur spontaneously, not artificially. Each element teaches us to pray more effectively.

Reverence. While praying is natural for the believer, we must remind ourselves about the seriousness of praying to a holy God. The writer of Ecclesiastes reminds us, Let not thy heart be hasty to utter any thing before God (Ecclesiastes 5:2). When Abraham spoke to God, he acknowledged that he was dust and ashes (Genesis 18:27). Job said, I abhor myself (Job 42:6). Moses recognized that he was on holy ground when he stood before God (Exodus 3:5).

Reverent prayer recognizes the holiness and majesty of God. It avoids formality and vain repetition, and addresses the heart of God with an appeal from the heart of man. Prayer is reverent conversation with almighty God.

Perseverance. The daily habit of genuine prayer enables us to persevere in our pursuit of God. The apostle Paul admonished, Pray without ceasing (I Thessalonians 5:17). By this he meant that we are to keep on praying as the regular habit of our lives.

Jesus and His disciples often prayed all night in order to persevere. In fact, the night before He went to the Cross, our Lord urged His disciples to watch and pray (Matthew 26.41). They would have done well to heed that admonition.

Intensity. The strength of prayer is more important than the length of prayer. We don't need to shout to get God's attention, but we must pray earnestly and fervently. That is why prayer is often described in Scripture as crying, knocking, wrestling, laboring, or striving. The Bible says our Lord Himself offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears (Hebrews 5:7).

Intensity of prayer is an expression of our faith in God. It is the realization that prayer is no casual conversation. J.C. Ryle wrote in A Call to Prayer, "Faith is to prayer what the feather is to the arrow." Earnest prayer involves pleading the promises of God by faith. Psalm 119 is filled with things asked according to thy word. When we pray according to the promises of God, we have every reason to expect answers from Him.

Boldness. When we pray with holy boldness we express our confidence in God, addressing Him with hope and assurance, as our loving Father. The writer of Hebrews urges, Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16). He predicates this appeal upon the fact that in Jesus Christ we have a great high priest who can be touched with the feelings of our infirmities (Hebrews 4:14-15).

As our High Priest, Christ makes intercession for us to the Father. Through His shed blood we have access to the throne of grace. So it is then that the poorest sinner may call on God for salvation, and the humblest saint may bring his petitions before God's throne.

Thankfulness. Asking God for help is one thing. Thanking Him for His help is another. Asking and praising are separate aspects of prayer. The apostle Paul said, By prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God (Philippians 4:6). The expression of thanksgiving in our prayers is itself an expression of our faith in God.

As you commune with God in prayer, thank Him in advance for answering your prayers. Let Him know that you are confident that He will answer you according to His will. Praise Him for who He is, for what He has done for you, and for what He is going to do in the future.

"Where in the Bible does it predict automobiles will be used?" In answer to this question, I would direct your attention to the following passages that some Bible students have interpreted as possible references to the modern day automobile:

The chariots shall rage in the streets, they shall jostle one against another in the broad ways: they shall seem like torches, they shall run like the lightnings (Nah. 2:4).

But thou, 0 Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased (Daniel 12:4).

It should be understood that there are varying views and interpretations of particular Scriptures. A Bible student, therefore, should study the Word of God very carefully and ask God for wisdom and insight in forming the proper interpretation of Scripture. It is a solemn responsibility to know what God has said with reference to each area of Scripture study. This can be done only by carefully, thoroughly, and systematically utilizing the system of Biblical interpretation which will yield most readily the native meaning of the Bible.

Interpreting that the above mentioned Scriptures (Nahum 2:4; Daniel 12:4) refer to automobiles would be considered an allegorical interpretation. This method of interpretation treats biblical narratives in a non-literal manner. The interpreter looks beyond the literal meaning of the words and constructs new and "more spiritual" meanings. Therefore, many Bible teachers and preachers have interpreted these Scriptures in an allegorical manner and see that automobiles are indeed referenced in the Bible.

THE LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, in commenting on the passage Nahum 2:4, gives the following literal interpretation:

To interpret this verse as being a prediction of the modern automobile, as has sometimes been done in the past, does violence both to the nature and purpose of prophecy. The verse properly indicates the ease and access that the invading hordes and their armament have to the city. They have taken the city by surprise, and none of the defenders can restrain them at all. They have unlimited freedom and move throughout the city with such speed that they come into contact with one another, instead of the defenders; and as the sunlight reflects off of them, they seem like torches and move with such speed that to the mind of the prophet they are comparable to lightning. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 1, page 1757).

Dr. H. A. Ironside in commenting on Nahum 2:4 gives the following:

. . .What is there here to suggest the strange and forced interpretation often put upon so plain a passage? Were it not so common a view, who could believe that sober men would attempt to see in words like these references to railroads, electric cars, and automobiles! Yet, sermons have been preached and books written in which such mechanical devices are declared to be the fulfillment of this portion of Nahum's prophecy. It is an instance of the careless way in which men read Scripture; for, clearly, the day of his preparation was the day of Nineveh's destruction- and the chariots with flaming torches, running like the lightnings, were the war-carriages of the victorious Babylonians. (NOTES ON NAHUM, H. A. Ironside, pp. 264, 265).

In a book written by Dr. H. L. Willmington entitled SIGNS OF THE TIMES the following comments are made concerning Daniel 12:4:

After reading this passage many years ago, the great scientist and Christian, Sir Isaac Newton, is reported to have said: Personally, I cannot help but believe that these words refer to the end of the times. Men will travel from country to country in an unprecedented manner. There may be some inventions which will enable people to travel much more quickly than they do now. This was written around 1680 AD. Newton went on to speculate that this speed might actually exceed 50 miles per hour ... (SIGNS OF THE TIMES, H. L. Willmington, pp. 27, 28).

What is the status of babies at death?

The Bible teaches us plainly that little babies are covered by the blood of Christ and they go to Heaven when they die. No baby goes to Hell. II Samuel 12 tells us that David's baby, conceived in his adulterous sin with Bathsheba, died. The servants were afraid to tell David, who had fasted and prayed so earnestly while the baby was still alive, that God would forgive him and spare the baby's life. When David saw them whispering, he asked them plainly if the baby had died. They told him it was true. Then David washed himself, changed clothes, anointed his head with oil, and called for something to eat. The servants were puzzled by his behavior and asked why he prayed and fasted while the baby was still alive, but now does the opposite.

David replied that while the baby was alive, he thought perhaps God would hear his prayer and spare the baby's life, but since the baby had died, he said, "...Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me (II Samuel 12:23).

We know, according to the Bible, that David is in Heaven. When he said that he was going to his baby, he knew that his baby was in Heaven. This is a clear teaching of the Bible that little babies, helpless and unable to choose for themselves, are covered by the blood of Christ and will go to Heaven at death, not to some intervening place. David spoke of his child as having already gone on to be with the Lord.

I Corinthians 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." This verse teaches that Adam's sin caused all men, even those not yet born to become sinners. This verse also teaches that Christ purchased life for all, even those not yet born, if only they will choose Him. Whatever mankind lost in Adam, Christ regained for us. If we repent of our sins and accept Him as Savior, we certainly will go to Heaven. However, little babies, who are unaccountable, never knew right from wrong, never were developed enough to be able to accept or to reject Christ, are thus kept safe by the blood of Christ until they come to know and to choose right or wrong and thus become deliberate, conscious sinners.

It is a happy teaching in God's blessed word that no baby goes to Hell. If poor lost sinners love babies and little children, they ought to accept Christ and go to Heaven, because if they go to Hell, they will find that there are no little ones there. If an unsaved mother whose baby died ever wants to see her baby again, she must repent of her sins and take Jesus as her Savior. Thus, she can be sure she is going to Heaven, because that is where her baby is.

The identity to Babylon of the book of Revelation has caused many commentators to question whether or not Babylon was Rome or if Babylon would be literally a restoration of the Babylon of the ancient days. No commentary that we are aware of ever aligns the United States of America as being identified with Babylon. The Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, does an in-depth study of the subject of the identity of Babylon. This study begins with Revelation chapter 14, verse 8: "And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication." Interpreters differ on the identity of this Babylon. There is a general consensus that the Babylon introduced here proleptically is that of chapters 17-18 (of the book of Revelation). R. H. Charles maintains that the fall of Rome is announced. Scott holds: "But what is before us now is the mystic Babylon, that huge system of spiritual adultery and corruption which holds sway over the whole prophetic scene. It is scarcely possible to conceive of a huge system of wickedness eagerly embraced by the nations once called Christian. It will nevertheless be so. Babylon (in the book of Revelation) is the full development of the state of things under the Thyatiran condition of the Church (chapter 2:18-23) ." R. C. H. Lenski (The Interpretation of Saint John's Revelation, page 432), "Babylon, the antichristian world city or empire, which is named 'Babylon The Great' after the Old Testament Babylon ... the great enemy of Israel, Jerusalem, Zion. The Preterists regard Babylon as a reference to pagan Rome alone; the historical interpreters as a reference to papal Rome; the futurists as a reference to the capital of the antichristian who is yet to come, either Rome or Jerusalem. Babylon... is the entire antichristian empire throughout the whole New Testament Era. Both pagan and also papal Rome would then be included." (Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, page 827.) "And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and the great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath" (Revelation 16:19). The identity of the city of Babylon causes commentators to be divided. One group of commentators equate the great city and Babylon with Jerusalem, others with Rome (whether political, religious, or papal). When reliable expositors differ so widely, it is presumptuous to be dogmatic. In his excellent commentary on the Book of Revelation, Dr. J. Vernon McGee writes, "In chapters 17 and 18 two Babylons are brought before us. The Babylon of chapter 17 is ecclesiastical. The Babylon of chapter 18 is economic. The first is religious - the apostate church. The second is political and commercial." (The King is Coming, Dr. H. L. Willmington, page 104.)

Admitting that you have gotten away from the Lord is a great first step. Many people spend the majority of their lives afraid to admit they're far from the Lord. They want to believe they have it all together, and that even though God isn't at the forefront of their lives, He is still there. If God isn't first place in your life, then He isn't where He should be.

If you are truly ready to recommit your life to the Lord, begin today to make the necessary changes. The longer you wait and the more you hold back, the harder it is going to be to totally "let go and let God."

First and foremost, you need to spend some time in prayer. Ask God to forgive you for the ways you have turned from Him. Ask for freedom and release from your sins. And remember God's great promise that each time we "confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (I John 1:9). Repent and begin to make a conscious effort to change your sinful life into holy living.

I would also advise you to get back in church. God's Word says: "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matthew 18:20). Surround yourself as much as possible with men and women of faith who can encourage and uplift you.

If you have a close friend or relative who is a believer, share with them your decision to get back into the Word and ask them to be your accountability partner. If you don't have a close friend or family member to turn to, get involved in a Sunday School class and seek out an accountability partner that way.

Most importantly, spend much time in prayer and Bible reading. Allow God to filter back into your life through these special resources He has given you. Remember the joy of the personal relationship with Jesus Christ you once had, and build on it for your future. We read in Psalm 119:105 that God's Word is a "lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path," and that the prayers "of a righteous man availeth much" (James 5:16).

Soon, as you begin to grow and rekindle your personal relationship with Jesus Christ, you will want to begin sharing your joy and witnessing to others.

Finally, never let your guard down. Always keep in mind how easy it was to slip into old patterns of sin and immorality. Remember that a relationship with Jesus Christ takes daily commitment on your part, but that the joys of a life lived for Jesus Christ will far outweigh any sacrifice you make in the day and weeks to come.

The scriptural mode of baptism is to immerse (put under) in water. The word baptism is a transliteration of the Greek word baptizo, from the root bapto (to dip). The early church knew nothing of sprinkling and pouring. The words rhantizo (sprinkling), and ballo (pouring) are never used in the New Testament concerning baptism.

The purpose of baptism is that of identification. Baptism does not save, does not wash away sins, and has no mystical results. John preached baptism of repentance (Luke 3:3-8), and warned those coming for baptism, "Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance," or make sure what you are publicly professing by the outward sign of baptism has already occurred inwardly. The New Testament Christians baptized by Jesus and His disciples were claiming identification with Christ in their baptism. See Acts 8:26-38; 9:17-18, 10:34-48, 18:5-8 and 19:1-5.

Baptism is a beautiful illustration of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Baptism is an outward sign, saying, "I have received Christ as my Savior." As a believer goes under the water, this pictures the death of his old life; and as he comes up, he is raised to a new life in Christ (II Corinthians 5:17).

The subject of baptism is anyone who has received Christ as his Savior (John 1:12 and Acts 16:31). The only prerequisite is being born again (believing in Christ as Lord and Savior). The eunuch's question to Philip in Acts 8:36, after having the scriptures explained, asked, "...What doth hinder me to be baptized?" Philip's answer in vs. 37 was, "...If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest...." Notice, Philip said believe (see Romans 10:9-10), not, join a religion, or denomination, or church, or do some good work.

Baptism is based on belief, receiving Christ. This refutes the "authority for infant baptism" or entrance into a particular denomination -- both are unscriptural, traditions of man. The scriptures quoted teach baptism should be followed by a new believer as soon as possible after conversion (Matthew 10:37).

We believe that Christian baptism is the immersion in water of a believer; in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, with the authority of the local church, to show forth in a solemn and beautiful emblem. Our faith in the crucified, buried and risen Saviour, with its effect in our death to sin and resurrection to a new life; is prerequisite to the privileges of a church relation to the Lord's Supper; in which the members of the church by the sacred use of bread and the fruit of the vine are to commemorate together the dying love of Christ, preceded always by solemn self-examination.

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? (I Corinthians 15:29)

The practice of vicarious baptism such as that which is practiced by Mormons today, appeared as early as the second century. It should be noted a Biblical doctrine should not be built on any verse as obscure as this one in I Corinthians 15:29. Since the Bible clearly teaches that baptism does not save an individual, therefore being baptized in the place of those who are already dead cannot be of benefit to anyone. The interpretation of this difficult verse yields to an understanding of the Greek preposition hyper. Usually, the word means "over" or "instead of." But there are times when the only translation possible is "concerning." In John.1:30, John says, "This is he concerning [hyper] whom I spoke." The same applies here; the translation should be "concerning the dead." The idea that Christian baptism concerning death and the promise of resurrection is a meaningless ordinance unless the resurrection is a reality. This interpretation certainly fits well with the contexts of I Corinthians 15. (The Criswell Study Bible, Page 1362)

In the Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, pertaining to I Corinthians 15:29, the following is given: "The expression may refer to young converts who took the place of the older brethren in the church who had died so that it would be properly rendered "baptized in the place of" (Greek hyper) which has the same sense (See II Corinthians 5:15; Philemon 13).

Since the context centers on the reality of the resurrection, it seems that Paul would be questioning why they are continuing to baptize new converts "over" or "in place of" the dead ones, if there is no resurrection, since baptism symbolizes our death and resurrection. This verse means, "to continue to baptize new converts, then, in place of the dead ones, would be meaningless if there were to be no real resurrection of the dead."

A second interpretation of the passage is that the expression is to be taken synonymously with the meaning found in verse 30, thus being rendered "baptized with reference to the dead." This would be a nonsacerdotal use of the term "baptism." That is, the people of whom Paul was speaking were being literally immersed in such severe persecution that they were dying for their faith. (Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, Page 462).

There are many sincere Christians confused by the teaching of the Charismatic Movement concerning the baptism of the Holy Spirit. There are also many individuals involved in the Charismatic movement who are depending on some emotional experience for their salvation. For this reason, one must prayerfully and carefully study God's Word concerning the teaching of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible teaches that the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs at the very instant a person accepts Jesus as their Savior. I Corinthians 12:13 explains that all believers are baptized by the Holy Spirit, and placed into the body of Christ. "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews of Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (I Corinthians 12:13)

There is much confusion among believers today concerning being baptized by the Holy Spirit. Most of this confusion stems from the error of using the terms "baptism" and "filling" interchangeably.

The word used to refer to the Holy Spirit's ministry in a believer's life at the time of spiritual rebirth is the same word that is used to refer to the believer being immersed in water, and that word is "baptize."

"He shall baptize ... with the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 3:11) refers to the spiritual rebirth of the unsaved who shall receive the baptism of the Spirit (see I Corinthians 12:13) at salvation.

Being immersed in water is the believer's outward identification with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection.

Just as it is scripturally wrong to refer to "sprinkling" or "pouring" as baptism, so is it wrong to refer to the filling ministry of the Holy Spirit as baptism. The "filling of the Holy Spirit" is that special empowerment for service given as we yield to Him. There are many fillings (see Acts 4:8, 31; 6:3; 7:55; 11:24; 13:9, 52), but only one baptism -- one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Ephesians 4:5).

Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit:

"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever" (John 14:16).

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8).

John the Baptist said Christ would be the Baptizer:

"I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than 1, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire" (Matthew 3:11). (See also Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33)

These prophecies were fulfilled in Acts 2:2-3, when the disciples were baptized with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost.

The following verses clearly define the baptizing ministry of the Holy Spirit in every believer's life.

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:3-4).

"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" (I Corinthians 12:13).

"For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Galatians 3:27).

"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Ephesians 4:4-5).

"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" (Colossians 2:12).

These scriptures tell us that all Christians are baptized by the Holy Spirit. There is no phrase "baptism of the Holy Spirit" in the Word of God.

Paul reminds the believer that we are indwelled with the Holy Spirit, and that those who have not received the Holy Spirit are not saved:

"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" (I Corinthians 3:16)

"What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?" (I Corinthians 6:19)

"But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his" (Romans 8:9).

Just as we receive the Holy Spirit at salvation, He baptizes every believer into the body of Christ when we are born again. "There is only one Holy Spirit -- only one baptism" (Ephesians 4:4-5).

What is the origin of the Baptist church? In answer to this question, one should examine the words of our Savior concerning His church: And I say unto thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). In this passage the word translated church (Greek ekklesia) means literally, a chosen or called-out assembly. Thus, the use of the word as a technical term for an assembly or group of believers in Christ was quite natural. ... The New Testament Church, therefore, is a local, autonomous congregation or assembly of believers which is a church in and of itself. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 2, pp. 60, 61)

From the words of Christ we understand that His church (type of church) has been promised since the days of Jesus, and will continue to stand until the end of the world. We believe that the Baptist churches, or churches like Baptist but called by some other name than Baptist, have been in existence all the way from the days of Jesus until this present time.

It is impossible to detect Baptists historically, simply by their name. They most often called themselves "brethren." The name "Baptists," ... was a nickname (or criticism) given by their opponents, who noticed that their baptism was unlike the practice of other denominations. They were first called "Anabaptists" (again-baptizers), because their converts were baptized again as adult believers, even though they had been sprinkled as infants.

Where did Baptists come from? There are many views concerning the historical origin of Baptists. Baptists claim no one founder as does Lutheranism (Martin Luther), Anglicanism (Henry VIII), or Presbyterianism (John Calvin), but have always been a movement of lay people. Historians have noticed a recurring phenomenon: Baptist distinctives appeared repeatedly throughout religious history whenever some group sought to follow the New Testament pattern. Although historians cannot always demonstrate continuity between these groups, it is not necessary to do so. Baptists are a people whose authority does not rest upon their relationship to an apostolic or church succession, but upon their commitment to New Testament practice.

Baptists can best be identified historically by their distinctives. These include:

The authority of the Scriptures "sola Scriptura"

The deity of Christ

The efficacy of the atonement

Salvation by faith "sola fida" (faith alone -Ephesians 2:8-3)

The priesthood of the believer (refute priestism--I Timothy 2:5) Rejection of a church hierarchy system

No spiritual differentiation between clergy and laity)

Believers' baptism (rejection of infant baptism)

Only a saved person may be baptized

Baptism by immersion only

Separation -- "Christ-like" lifestyle (II Corinthians 6:17)

Congregational form of church government

Authority resides in the laity membership (Acts 6:2,5)

Autonomy of the local church

Separation of church and state (Roger Williams' religious liberty)

Worldwide missions and evangelism (fulfilling the Great Commission -- Matthew 28:19-20)

Informality in worship services (reject formal creeds)

Non-sacramentalism (Reject idea of grace bestowed by "sacraments")

Two ordinances

Baptism

Lord's Supper

Church officers: Pastors and Deacons

(From "Baptist History" by Dr. Carl J. Diemer, as published in PROGRAM FOR THE FUNDAMENTALISM 184, pp. 15-18)

For further study of the origins of the Baptists I suggest that you secure a copy of the book entitled THE ORIGIN OF THE BAPTISTS by S. H. Ford. Another book that may be of interest to you on this subject is entitled A CONCISE HISTORY OF BAPTISTS by G. H. Orchard.

The teachings of Christ in the Sermon on the Mount delineates the outward manifestations of the character and conduct of a true believer and genuine disciple. It should be noted that the quality of life Jesus describes in the Beatitudes is a necessary product of grace alone. As Jesus teaches the true spirit and intent of the law, He describes a lifestyle which no human being could live in his own power. Thus, the life of the believer, described by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, is a life of grace and glory which comes from God alone. Jesus made it clear that the spirit of Christ goes beyond the outward demand of the law. A Christian, though not under the law, is to live above the law.

In a book entitled, STUDIES IN THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT, by Martyn Lloyd-Jones, he notes that the Sermon on the Mount and the message of the kingdom do have definite application to the Christian today. It was preached to people who were meant to practice it, not only at that time, but ever afterwards as well (pp. 12-15). Thus, the Sermon on the Mount cannot be restricted to life in the future millennial kingdom, since it includes tax collectors, thieves, unjust officials, hypocrites, and false prophets. Although the message in the Sermon on the Mount does not tell one how to be saved, it does tell one what it is like to be saved. It explains the quality of the life changed by the saving grace of God. Its basic truths are reiterated everywhere throughout the New Testament epistles.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus states the spiritual character and quality of the kingdom which He wished to establish. The basic qualities of this kingdom are fulfilled in the church which He would establish. Virtually, every section of this passage is repeated in substance elsewhere throughout the New Testament. There is nothing in the recorded Sermon on the Mount to indicate that this message was to be limited in its application only to the people of Israel. (Excerpts from LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 17-18)

The arguments for "abortion-on-demand" sound deceptively simple. Those who argue for "abortion-on-demand" contend it should be allowed because: (1) criminal abortion would be eliminated; (2) unwanted babies would not be brought into the world; (3) females who have been raped would not be forced to carry the product of someone else's crime; (4) overpopulation would be controlled; (5) the poor would not be discriminated against since the rich can purchase their solution but the poor are left without resources for their problems; (6) a potentially handicapped child would not be forced to live in his condition; and (7) mothers with suicidal tendencies would not be driven to self annihilation. However, these surface reasons are deceptive.

"Abortion-on-demand" is one of the most destructive techniques ever fostered on a Christian nation. For hundreds of years our western culture has specifically protected the right of every individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is an inalienable make-up of our laws and an unequivocal right of all. Consider the following:

WHEN DOES LIFE BEGIN? ? At conception human life begins. The fetus is a new being entirely separate From its father and mother because it has a different chromosomal make-up. ? At conception the fetus is alive because it has the capacity to replace its own dying cells. ? At conception the fetus is alive needing food and time to grow into an adult human. ? The fetus is just as much alive and human "before birth" as it is "after birth"; it is not a different life. ? The human heart begins to beat at 18 days. ? At six weeks activity or electrical impulses begin in the human brain. Activity can be recorded on the electroencephalogram. ? Children have been born prematurely at 19 weeks and six days after the mother's menstrual period and have become perfectly normal children. Therefore, if some children can survive at this pre-mature age, why can we not attempt to save all fetuses/children at this age, rather than terminate their life? ? The body of the child belongs to the child, just as the body of the mother belongs to the mother. The mother is not aborting a part of her anatomy; she is aborting that which two people placed in her. ? Since we have not given the right of a mother to terminate the child's life after birth, why should she have the right to terminate the child's life before birth?

METHODS OF ABORTION

The D&C abortion utilizes a sharply curved knife. The fetus is cut into pieces, and the placenta is scraped from the inside walls of the uterus. Someone usually reassembles the parts of the body after the abortion to make sure the uterus is empty; otherwise the mother will bleed and become infected.

? Suction abortion utilizes a powerful suction to tear apart the developing baby and suck it into a jar. Sometimes the smaller parts are recognizable. This is one of the most common methods of abortion used today. ? Salt poisoning is performed after 16 weeks when enough liquid has accumulated in the sac around the baby. A large needle is injected through the mother's abdomen into the baby's sac, and a concentrated solution of salt is injected into it. The fetus breathes and swallows the salt and is killed. It takes about an hour to terminate the baby by this method. The mother goes into labor and delivers the dead baby.

ANSWER TO OBJECTIONS

? Abortion is not birth control. Hence, it has nothing to do with overpopulation. Birth control prevents new life; abortion kills the new life. Programs to teach couples how to regulate the number of children are acceptable. It is never acceptable to kill human life. ? An unwanted pregnancy does not mean an unwanted baby. There are thousands of people looking for a baby to love and rear. Some of the most productive people in the world have grown up in adoptive homes. ? Rape and abortion are smoke-screen issues. In a Minneapolis-St. Paul study, there were zero cases of pregnancy for 3,500 cases of rape treated in hospitals. Even when there is pregnancy as a result of rape, love and help is the answer, not murder of an unwanted child. ? The question of aborting potentially handicapped persons (illustration-a mother who has measles during pregnancy) is not an issue. There is no difference in malformed and normal persons in their degree of life satisfaction. Every one of them has a soul. ? The after-effects of abortion on a pregnant woman are a determining consequence. There are potential increases in sterility, miscarriage, tubal pregnancies, premature babies, and psychiatric problems. ? Abortion is not safer than childbirth. Twice as many mothers die from legal abortions as from childbirth. ? The question of abortion concerns the entire civilized world. It is not a Baptist issue, nor is it Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish. Abortion is a human rights issue.

ANTI-ABORTION IS PRO-LIFE

The greatest gift God has given is life-first physical life and then spiritual life. The terminated fetus has no opportunity for either.

The human baby is an amazing organism. Because man is created in the image of God, he has a greater potential than a computer, greater psychological drive than any animal, and greater creative ability than any machine. Every baby is made in God's image and likeness (Genesis 1:27).

We have his life (physical) because we are made in God's image. Then when we are born again, we are transformed into the image of Christ (II Corinthians 3:18); then we have spiritual life.

Some think murder is a sin because of self-preservation. That is, if someone murders and is allowed to repeat the act, "I" may be next. Hence, the whole race could be wiped out. Self-preservation should be basis enough to outlaw murder, but God's Word goes further.

The answer is found in the first prohibition against murder, "whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man" (Genesis 9:6). It is a sin to murder because we are created in the image of God. When a doctor terminates a fetus/child, he is destroying the person who is made in the image of God. Abortion is a rejection of God and His commandments.

We recommend and use the King James Version of the Bible because we feel it is the most reliable and faithful of all translations. It is truer to the grammatical and syntactical elements of the original languages in which God first gave His Word.

We know there are numerous manuscripts which have been used to prepare various Old Testament Hebrew Bibles and New Testament Greek Bibles, and that English translations may then be made from these. We also know the King James translation is not perfect. Only God's Word as He gave it in the original manuscripts is 100% perfect and infallible, without error whatsoever. However, the King James Version represents the most faithful version in respect to the original languages. It is not, as some teach, the only English Bible which God honors.

The Holy Spirit helps those who are earnest soul-winners to have a very united stand on this matter. Of course there are some soul-winners and some excellent servants of God who do not use the King James translation, but use some other versions. But the vast majority of dedicated Christian leaders who are aggressive in evangelism and who are highly successful and highly fruitful in soul-winning, prefer, by far, the King James Version even though they may use other translations to which they refer from time to time.

By Dr. H. L. Willmington The term "inspiration" is found but once in the New Testament. This occurs in II Timothy 3:16. Here Paul says All Scripture is given by inspiration of God...The Greek word is theopneustos, and literally means, "God-breathed." Dr. Falwell and this ministry hold to the plenary-verbal position of biblical inspiration. The plenary-verbal view states that all (plenary) the words (verbal) of the Bible are inspired by God. This view is correct according to Scripture itself. (See Matthew 4:4; II Timothy 3:16-17; 1 Corinthians 2:13; John 6:63, and 17:8.)

Seven conclusions from Scripture regarding inspiration:

1. That no Old Testament Scripture was thought up by the prophet himself (II Peter 1:20).

2. That all Old Testament Scriptures were given by the Holy Spirit as He moved upon men (II Peter 1:21).

3. That this Spirit-breathed inspiration was given in many ways (Hebrews 1: 1).

4. That once it was given, this inspired writing:

a. Could not be broken or shaken down (John 10:35).

b. Is exact in all details, down to the smallest stroke and letter (Matthew 5:18).

c. Would abide forever (Matthew 5:18; I Peter 1:25).

5. That the Old Testament writers did not always understand the nature of everything they wrote about (I Peter 1:10-12; Luke 10:23-24).

6. That the four Gospels were given by inspiration of God (Hebrews 1:1; 11 Peter 3:2).

7. That Paul believed his writings were inspired by God (I Corinthians 2:4, 15:3; 1 Thessalonians 2:13, 4:15).

It should be noted that plenary-verbal inspiration does not guarantee the inspiration of any modern or ancient translation of the Bible, but deals only with the original Hebrew and Greek languages. We believe the Bible alone is the illuminated inspired Revelation of God and is therefore the sole ground of authority for believers ... Whenever there is a clear contradiction between the Bible and any assumed "fact" of history or science, it is those subjects which must give way to the Bible, and not the opposite! The view of Jesus Christ concerning biblical inspiration:

I. Our Lord began His ministry by quoting from the Old Testament. Compare Matthew 4:4, 7, 10 with Deuteronomy 8:3; 6:16; 13.

2. Our Lord ended his ministry by quoting from the Old Testament. Five of His last seven statements on the cross were lifted from the pages of the Old Testament. Compare:

Luke 23:34 with Isaiah 53:12 Luke 23:43 with Isaiah 53:10, 11 Matthew 27:46 with Psalm 22:1 John 19:28 with Psalm 69:21 Luke 23:46 with Psalm 31:5

3. Our Lord preached one of His first public messages from an Old Testament text. Compare Luke 4:16-19 with Isaiah 61:1-2.

4. Our Lord informed the Pharisees they erred, not knowing the scriptures ... (Matthew 22:29).

5. Our Lord justified His own actions by referring to the Old Testament. (See Matthew 12:1-8; 12:10-21; 21:13; and 21:16.) 6. Our Lord believed in the history of the Old Testament. He referred to:

a. Creation - Mark 10:6 b. Noah's Ark - Matthew 24:38 C. Lot's wife - Luke 17:32 d. Destruction of Sodom - Luke 17:29 e. Jonah and the fish - Matthew 12:40 f. The Queen of Sheba and Solomon - Matthew 12:42 g. The repentance of Nineveh - Matthew 12:41 h. Naaman the leper - Luke 4:27 i.. Elijah and the widow- Luke 4:25, 26 j. Moses and the serpent- John 3:14 k. The first marriage- Matthew 19:5-7 1. The blood of Abel- Luke 11:51 m. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - Matthew 22:31, 32 n. The burning bush - Luke 20:37 0. The wilderness manna - John 6:31 p. The murder of Zacharias - Matthew 23:35

7. Our Lord said the law would be fulfilled (Matthew 5:18) and the Scriptures would not be broken (John 10:35).

It has been estimated that over one-tenth of Jesus' recorded New Testament words were taken from the Old Testament. In the four Gospels, 180 of the 1800 verses, which report His discourses, are either Old Testament quotes or Old Testament allusions.

(Source reference for this commentary is the book THAT MANUSCRIPT FROM OUTER SPACE, by Dr. H. L. Willmington.)

What is the "fundamentalist stand" on the issue of separation?

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you (II Corinthians 6:17).

Dr. Falwell, as a spokesman for the fundamentalist movement of America, believes that all Christians, and especially fundamentalists, are to be moderate, or temperate, and under control at all times. Each believer is to walk blameless before the Lord. This does not mean that each is to have the same personality or preferences, nor does fundamentalism demand a particular methodology.

Dr. Falwell has stated many times that he believes in biblical separation. He believes it would be wrong for a saved person to marry an unsaved person; that a Christian should not go into a business partnership with an unsaved person; and that the Bible clearly teaches to separate from unbelievers and Christ-deniers in matters of faith and fellowship. Dr. Falwell encourages every Christian to examine the Scriptures for himself in order to establish his own biblical convictions. Too many Christians get their conviction, from whoever preaches the loudest. They, therefore, cannot back up their convictions from the Bible.

Dr. Falwell states, "God has made us all as different as two snowflakes, and therefore, we should not confine ourselves to little self-righteous, self-made rules and regulations." The Bible says truly we should examine ourselves. We should examine our standards and rules and regulations in light of the Scriptures -- do the Scriptures really speak to the issue of the rules or regulations? We must let the Word of God speak to us by the Holy Spirit and learn directly from God what we should or should not do.

Beyond our preferences and personal convictions are the doctrinal absolutes of Scripture -- the fundamentals of the faith. The Bible sets forth the moral absolutes of God: Thou shalt not lie, steal, murder, commit adultery, and so forth. There can be no compromise of these absolutes. Without them, Christianity ceases to be Christian. These are the issues over which we must separate, for . . What part hath he that believeth with an infidel? (II Corinthians 6:15).

True Christian fellowship rests upon the person of Christ. We are to separate from those who deny Him, or from professing Christians who are living in immorality and thereby denying Him [Christ] by their lifestyle.

Dr. Falwell encourages all churches to take their stand for the absolutes of God as found in His Word while at the same time standing against the Devil. Let our churches be known, not for how many believers we have rejected or how many extraneous issues we have added to our constitutions, but let us be known for what we are, that is, calling men everywhere to faith in Christ. (Excerpts from Dr. Falwell's article in FUNDAMENTALIST JOURNAL, April 1983, "Moderation: A Biblical Command").

The blood of humans and animals is a high complex fluid which contains cells, various forms of nourishment for tissues, oxygen, disease antibodies, hormones and other substances which, when in balance, maintain health and well being. Thus, the life of the flesh (i.e., the whole body) is indeed "in the blood." (THE OLD TESTAMENT COMMENTARIES -- LEVITICUS, p. 181).

Blood is known to be a vital principle of the physical body. The discovery of the circulation of the blood was revolutionary in the study of anatomy. In more recent years it has been demonstrated that the health of the body depends on the rapidity of the blood flow; and blood transfusions are an accepted means of prolonging life. (THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS, C. R. Erdman, p. 81).

The Bible does say for the life of the flesh is in the blood (Leviticus 17:11); for it is the life of all flesh (Leviticus 17:14) ; . . . for the blood is the life (Deuteronomy 12:23). Thus we understand that the blood represents the life. Although blood represents life it should be pointed out that the Bible also references the "breath" (oxygen) as being necessary for life (see -Psalm 104:29,30 . . . Thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth). In addition to oxygen to sustain life, we must also recognize the need for water and food nourishment as essential for the maintaining of physical life. So blood is not the sole element of physical life.

The blood represents life, and so sacred is life before God that the blood of animals was used in all offerings for sin as man's vicarious substitute (atonement) under the Mosaic (Old Testament) law.

And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood there is no remission (Hebrews 9:22).

Only as atonement is linked with death, the shedding of blood, and not life set free, would it appear to become efficacious in the covering of human sin.

The regulations concerning the sacredness of blood are full of spiritual meaning for the Christian. In addition to justification and forgiveness through the blood of Christ (see Romans 5:9; Ephesians 1:7), the Christian gains access to God in faith (Hebrews 10:22), experiences victory over evil (Revelation 12:11), and obtains eternal glory (Revelation 7:19). The death of Christ has brought new life into being for mankind by atoning for us in a manner completely beyond our own human abilities to perform. (TYNDALE OLD TESTAMENT COMMENTARIES-- LEVITICUS, pp. 182,183).

While we do not defend Bob Jones, we do not believe that they are against Catholics or Mormons, it's just that Bob Jones has taken a certain Protestant commitment to the Bible. The problem is groups like Catholics and Mormons have historically had a totalitarian attitude. As you study the Catholic Church, they have condemned to Hell anyone who disagrees with them. The same with the Mormon Church. What they believe is that they are the only ones going to Heaven, we do not agree. The only authority we have concerning salvation is the Word of God, not the Catholic church, not the Mormon church, not the Protestant church, not Bob Jones University, and surely not Liberty University. Therefore I would point you to Acts 4:12, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved."

Remember, a cult believes that they are the only ones who have the way salvation. Bob Jones does not believe this, technically, they would fall in the category of a "sect" which is a narrow group.

Many times lives are saved by a donor who will give some portion of his or her body. In some cases, such as for vision, the individual's life is not at stake, but his well being is involved. Skin banks render a great service to those with extensive burns, and banks for other parts of the body render equally valuable service.

There may be some proper reasons for offering a part of one's body to someone in dire need; there may be worthwhile consideration even in death, if a genuinely needed service can be rendered and if surviving loved ones are not hurt.

A person considering donating his or her body to science should also consider whether or not this will hurt deeply some loved ones that remain. The same consideration would arise with cremation. According to I Corinthians 6:19-20 the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit for each child of God.

What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: Therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's (I Corinthians 6:19-20).

With this in mind, one can readily understand that, while living, the body should not be defiled with tobacco, alcohol, immoral activities and improper eating habits. This passage of Scripture would also lead us to want our body, even in death, handled with loving care, respect, and dignity.

The main thing for a person to remember is this: the body of a Christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit--in life and in death it should be dealt with in dignity, respect, and loving care.

CALVINISM:

Calvinism is a belief system developed by the followers of John Calvin to explain their view of salvation. It is also called Reformed Theology. The system is reflected in five point's which involve the following teachings: (1) Total depravity of man - man can do nothing to save himself

(2) Unconditional election - God has elected some people to salvation without any condition at all

(3) Limited atonement - Christ died only for the chosen ones

(4) Irresistible grace - man has no choice - Since God has chosen him to be saved, he will be saved regardless of his own desires

(5) Perseverance of the saints - once saved, the believer will continue following the Lord till death.

We certainly hold that we are justified by grace on God's part, and by faith on our part (Ephesians 2:8-9), not by any goodness, nor good works, on our part.

We also hold that when we repent of our sins and accept Jesus as our Savior we are given "everlasting life," not "temporary life" (John 3:16). We hold that God's Word clearly teaches this everlasting life begins the moment we accept Jesus as our Savior.

Additionally, we hold the initiative is taken by God in the redemption of man (John 6:44). We also hold that God enables all, not simply the elect, to respond to the cross (John 12:32).

We definitely do not accept the unscriptural theory of "limited atonement" which is held by some. The Bible tells us Jesus did "taste death for every man" (Hebrews 2:9)--"He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (I John 2:2).

We do not accept the view which is called "Irresistible grace." We hold some lost sinners have indeed resisted the efforts of the Holy Spirit to get them to repent of their sins and accept Jesus Christ as Savior.

We do not accept the view, which is called "unconditional election." We believe God's Word teaches that predestination and election, with respect to salvation, are based on God's foreknowledge of whether or not we will accept Christ as our Savior (Romans 8:29-30).

This is borne out in God's many commandments to us to choose (Deuteronomy 30:19), and in Jesus' emphasis - it is not that sinners cannot come to Him, but that they will not come to Him (John 5:40).

PREDESTINATION:

The word predestinate occurs in the King James Authorized Version only in the passage of Romans 8:29-30. In addition the word predestinated occurs only in Ephesians 1:5 and 1:11. The American Standard Version translated all four of these entries by the word "foreordained." The Authorized Version uses the terms "foreordained" and "predestinated" to mean the same thing.

Scofield's definition of predestination is, therefore, also the definition of foreordination. He defines the former as "that effective exercise of the will of God by which things before determined by Him are brought to pass." As applied to redemption this would mean that in election God has decided to save those who accept His Son and in foreordination, He has determined effectively to accomplish that purpose.

Jesus Christ died for all people in the world: I Timothy 2:6; II Peter 2:1; Hebrews 2:9 1 John 2:2. In harmony with this is His expressed desire that none should perish, but that all should come to repentance (II Peter 3:9). In Ezekiel 18:32 we read: "For I have no pleasure in death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God; wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye." Acts 17:30 tells us that God "... now commandeth all men everywhere to repent."

One of the attributes of God is that he is just. That is, God is under no obligation to provide salvation for anyone since all are responsible for their present lost condition. But it is very difficult to see how God can choose some from the mass of guilty and condemned men, and provide salvation for them and efficiently secure their salvation, and do nothing about all the others; if, as we read, righteousness is the foundation of his throne. God would not be partial if He permitted all men to go to their deserved dooms-but how can He be other than partial if He selects some from this multitude of men and does things for them and in them that He refuses to do for others?

It is our position that common grace is extended to all and that everyone has an opportunity and the ability to accept Jesus Christ as their personal Savior. It seems to us that only if God makes the same provisions for all and makes the same offers to all, is He truly just.

THE WEAKNESSES OF CALVINISM

The following section examines the weaknesses or inconsistencies of Calvinism. Careful attention should be given to the definition of terms. The way a person defines the terms will determine if he is a Calvinist or not. It will also determine whether or not the system is inconsistent.

A. Total depravity. Most Calvinists interpret total depravity to mean that any man in his natural state is incapable or unable to do anything to please or gain merit before God. He is totally depraved of any urging to seek after God. Total depravity means that man is in complete rebellion against God, and by his "free will" he cannot and will never make a decision for Christ. When man is totally depraved, he cannot discern the truth of the gospel or understand it when it is presented to him. The Calvinist qualifies the meaning of "free will," indicating that man is not totally free, but is able to respond to God because of election and irresistible grace.

However, the Bible teaches that man is made in the image and likeness of God. Since God is Person (personality), man reflects the personhood of God through his human personality, made up of intellect, emotion, will, and moral awareness. Because man's will is reflective of God's will, man has the duty and ability to make moral choices based on his understanding and motivations. Man is given an opportunity to make a moral choice for God--as reflected in repenting, turning, believing, and receiving salvation--and is condemned if he rejects. God, in the integrity of His nature, could not ask man to do what he was incapable of doing nor could He hold man responsible for all choices, whether good or evil, if the choices were not indigenous to man. Since man will be judged by God for his decision, it would be immoral for God to punish man for his lack of response to that which he could not do.

There are illustrations of men in Scripture who have made decisions against the purpose of God (Pharaoh, Esau, Lot, Balaam, etc.). Also, there are men who have made difficult decisions, and God honored them (Abraham, Elijah, and those mentioned in Hebrews 11). Accountability follows responsibility.

B. Unconditional election. The second principle held by the Calvinist is based on the doctrine of predestination. Calvinists believe a man obtains salvation because God began the process by choosing him without any outside influence.

Those of mankind who are predestinated unto Life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable Purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ to everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving Him thereunto.

The Calvinist bases election upon the divine plan (according to God's purpose), so that the grounds of election is in God himself, which is to say salvation begins in God's will and purpose and not in an act of faith or some other condition in the responder. As a result, man has no part in it. Calvinists teach that God never elects anyone to salvation because of his goodness or potential merit. The choice is from Himself; hence, election is unconditional.

Conservative theologians appear to have some degree of disagreement among themselves as to the nature of this election. Some, like Strong, define "election" exclusively in terms of an independent decision of God. He claims,

Election is that eternal act of God, by which in his sovereign pleasure and on account of no foreseen merit in them, he chooses certain out of the number of sinful men to be the recipients of the special grace of His Spirit and so to be made voluntary partakers of Christ's salvation.

Others, like Thiessen, tend to modify the severity of this election by introducing such things as the foreknowledge of God. His attempt at defining election suggests, "By election we mean that sovereign act of God in grace whereby He chose in Christ Jesus for salvation all those whom He foreknew would accept Him." Both of the above noted theologians would probably define themselves to some degree as Calvinists.

The Bible uses such phrases as "chosen in Him," and "predestinated unto adoption of children," and "elect according to the foreknowledge of God." But because these phrases are used by the Calvinist does not mean the terms reinforce the Calvinists position to the exclusion of another position. These are Bible terms that must be interpreted properly.

First, election in the Bible is applied broadly. Election must always be interpreted within its context. The term "elect" is related to the church or to all believers, or those who have already accepted Christ. It is not applied to an unsaved, even if he is a candidate for salvation. As such, it relates to God's plan of salvation, because He has elected salvation and those in salvation are identified as elect. When taken in light of the nature of salvation, we understand that Jesus Christ made atonement for all. Those who respond to His plan of salvation are characterized as elect.

Second, to say that God has chosen some and passed over others is to breach the nature of God. God is One, which means He is Unity and acts in perfect harmony with His nature. Every part of God influences every other attribute of God. One attribute can never act in isolation from the others, hence God cannot be guilty of acting ignorantly or with a double mind. The nature of God expresses His love, as well as His justice. The Bible teaches that God so loves the world, hence this emotion is constant to all creatures at all times. Unconditional election implies that God chooses some out of His nature, but since others are not chosen, then the unity of God is breached. Also the love of God is breached because He is not able to love all equally. If God chooses (elects) some, it must proceed out of pure motives from His total Person. But the election of some and passing over of others divides the unity of God, implying duplicity, ignorance, or partiality in God.

C. Limited atonement. Calvinists indicate that this aspect of their system is the most difficult of their five points to communicate. They teach that if man is totally depraved so that he cannot respond, and God is sovereign in His unconditional choice, then when Jesus died, He died for those that were chosen by God. To keep their system intact, they must deny that Christ died for anyone else, for if He had, then they must also be saved. Since they are not, atonement is limited.

Atonement is for the Elect only, since Christ died only for those whom the Father gave Him to be His Bride. Only the saints or elect ones are ever said to be "beloved of God" for they alone are the objects of His saving grace. The Calvinist reasons that if Christ died for all, then all will be saved. If only the elect are to be saved, then Christ died for them, and them alone. Although it is true that the blood of Christ is surely sufficient in value to atone for all, still it is obviously efficient only for those who are saved by His unmerited favor.

In contrast to Limited atonement, the Bible teaches that the death of Jesus Christ was for all people of all time. This does not mean that all the world will be saved. The New Testament teaches that only those who receive Jesus Christ will enter into eternal life. There are at least five arguments against limited atonement. These are argued from the accomplishments of Christ on Calvary.

The first argument against limited atonement is the doctrine of substitution. The Bible teaches that Christ has given Himself for the sins of the world (Jn. 1:20; 1 Tim. 2:6; Tit. 2:11), that Christ was the Substitute for the church (Eph. 5:25), and that He gave Himself for individual Christians (Gal. 2:20). The Calvinist only uses the last group of verses to prove limited atonement, but overlooks the verses that teach Christ was the Substitute for every man (Heb. 2:9).

The second argument against limited atonement is that redemption is adequate, for Christ gave His blood a ransom for sin, hence redeemed the lost (1 Pet. 1:18-20). The price of redemption is blood. The Greek words for redeemed are applied to purchasing servants in the ancient slave market. The illustration reveals the extent of redemption to all men. First, the Bible teaches that He purchased the sinner in the marketplace--agorazo--that those who were "sold under sin" are redeemed (Gal. 3:10). But agorazo also applies to false teachers (2 Pet. 2:1); he died for these who obviously were not saved. Second, Christ paid the price with His blood and bought the slave out of the market place--ekagorazo; this person was never again exposed to sale (Gal. 3:13). This refers to those who were saved. In the third place, lutroo means to pay the price for the slave and release him (Gal. 4:5). This probably refers to the Christian who has learned to walk in grace and was not living by the law.

The third argument against limited atonement is that propitiation, which means "satisfaction," was made for the sin penalty of the world. The justice of God had been offended by the sin of mankind. The sin penalty of death could not be retracted and the nature of God could not forgive the sinner without satisfaction. The price of satisfaction was the blood of Jesus Christ, and the act of satisfaction is propitiation. The Bible teaches that Jesus is the propitiation for the world. "He is the propitiation for our sin, and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 Jn. 2:2). Since Christ is the propitiation for the world, the atonement cannot be limited.

The fourth argument against limited atonement is the fact that Jesus has satisfied all the demands of the law by nailing it to His cross (Col. 2:14). God's moral nature was offended when man broke the law and partook of the fruit of the garden. Everyone sinned in Adam, the head of the human race, and was guilty before God. The law not only condemned Adam, but every man who sinned, and would continue condemning them because of the demands of the law. The law could not be abrogated because it was an extension of the nature of God. The law was a unit, and to break one law was to break all the law (Jas. 2:10). Like sin, which is the sin-principle, the law is the law-unit. God did not deal with sins or the law on a "commercial" basis, meaning if there were more individual sins, Christ would have had to suffer more. Rather Christ dealt with the sin-principle and satisfied the law-unit. He satisfied the law-unit for the saved and unsaved. Jesus nailed the demands of the law to the cross and made an end of the law (Col. 2:14,15; Eph. 2:15,16; Mt. 5:17). The end of the law does not mean Christ put the law out of existence just for the elect, but that the law is no longer in effect as a moral judge to condemn mankind. Christ satisfied the law-principle, for both saved and unsaved, hence denying limited atonement.

The fifth argument against limited atonement is the fact that Jesus Christ reconciled the world unto Himself by His death. Reconciliation is God making man savable by placing him in a favorable light of God's mercy. The Bible teaches, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them;" (2 Cor. 5:19; Eph. 2:16). This does not mean the world is saved, but man is now in a place where he can be saved when he meets God's plan of salvation. Since the world is reconciled, surely the atonement is not limited to the elect.

The arguments against limited atonement are also powerful arguments for evangelism. Since Christ was the Substitute for the lost, and since Christ has paid the redemption for them, and since Christ fulfilled the demands of the law against them, and since Christ is their satisfaction (propitiation), and since Christ has reconciled them to God, the lost have an obligation to accept salvation, and Christians have an obligation to tell them the "good news."

One of the chief problems with this teaching of a limited atonement is rooted in one's understanding of some basic theological terms. Calvinists argue the atonement is somehow deficient if any of those for whom Christ died are not finally saved. This basic presupposition results in the belief that those who deny a particular aspect of limited atonement must necessarily teach the salvation of all men. This attitude is evident in Murray's discussion of the extent of the atonement.

The very nature of Christ's mission and accomplishment is involved in this question . . . Did he come to make men redeemable? Or did he come effectually and infallibly to redeem? The doctrine of the atonement must be radically revised if, as atonement, it applies to those who finally perish as well as to those who are the heirs of eternal life. If we universalize the extent we limit the efficacy. If some of those for whom atonement was made and redemption wrought perish eternally, then the atonement is not itself efficacious.

A closer look at the biblical concepts of redemption, reconciliation, propitiation and substitution, however, demonstrate a wider view of the atoning death of Christ (see above). As Chafer notes,

The question at issue between the limited redemptionists and unlimited redemptionists is as much a question of limited or unlimited reconciliation, as of limited or unlimited redemption. Having made a careful study of these three words and the group of words which must be included with each, one can hardly deny that there is a twofold application of the truth represented by each.

The Calvinist has misunderstood the separation between the historic accomplishments of salvation and how an individual obtains salvation. First, to be a universalist does not mean all will be saved, nor does it mean God has failed if some are lost. This does not question the sovereignty of God (obviously none can be lost if they are saved), but it shows a misunderstanding of the purposes of God by the non-universalist. Since God's desire is that none be lost (2 Pet. 3:9), He created a plan that provided for all, offered it to all, and wants all to participate in it. To say that God did not provide a universal salvation is to question His attribute of love. To say God saved all apart from their appropriate discharge of human responsibility is to question His integrity. To say God elected some to salvation, but not all is to question His justice. The necessity of human response fulfills our understanding of God's relationship to His creatures.

D. Irresistible grace. Calvinists teach that the grace of God is as immutable as the power of God so that man cannot resist it. They teach that since God of His own free will has chosen (elected) man and Christ has died for him, then man cannot resist the power of God that brings him to salvation. Accordingly, the Westminster Larger Catechism asks and answers,

What is effectual calling? Effectual calling is the work of God's almighty power and grace, whereby (out of his free and especial love to his elect, and from nothing in them moving Him thereunto) He doth in his accepted time invite and draw them to Jesus Christ by his Word and Spirit; savingly enlightening their minds, renewing and powerfully determining their wills, so as they (although in themselves dead in sin) are hereby made willing and able, freely to answer his call and to accept and embrace the grace offered and conveyed therein.

Since the Calvinists teach that salvation is the gift of God and man can do nothing to get it, he also can do nothing to resist it. However, the Calvinists claim it is not a passive human agent who involuntarily receives Christ. They teach that humans find Christ irresistible, i.e., they want to receive Him. But if the human is unable to resist, then human responsibility is taken away and man is but a passive agent. They claim,

Since it is the will of God that those whom He gave to His dear Son in eternity past should be saved, He will surely act in sovereign grace in such a way that the elect will find Christ irresistible. God does not force the elect to trust in His Son but rather, gives them life. The dead human spirit finds the dead spirit of Satan irresistible, and all living human spirits find the God of the living irresistible. Regeneration (the work of God) must precede true repentance and faith.

The Calvinistic doctrine of irresistible grace is built on a misunderstanding of the doctrine of man. First, irresistible grace takes away initiative from man. The doctrine of conversion stands against irresistible grace. Salvation provided by Christ is obtained by both regeneration and conversion. To deny any human role in salvation is to formulate a doctrine which denies a substantial part of the biblical teaching on this matter. As Hodge notes,

The question whether man is active or passive in regeneration and whether regeneration is effected by the mediate or immediate influence of the Spirit must be answered in one way if regeneration includes conversion, and in another way if it be taken in its restrictive sense. In the Bible, the distinction is generally preserved; repentance, change of mind, turning to God," i.e., conversion, is what man is called upon to do; "regeneration is the act of God." God regenerates; the soul is regenerated. The second argument against irresistible grace is a correct understanding of the means of obtaining salvation. The Bible is the instrument of Salvation and the Holy Spirit is the Agent of Salvation. Before a person comes to Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit is the Agent who works in his heart first by "common grace." This means the Holy Spirit works in the heart of all men to give them an awareness of God. The Holy Spirit works through the conscience (Rom. 2:1) and through the revelation of God in nature (Rom. 1:18ff). When the sinner comes under the influence of the Word of God, the Holy Spirit is the Agent of "special grace." The Bible is the instrument that God uses to give salvation to individuals. The Word of God is pictured as seed which is planted in the human heart. As the Word of God germinates, it enlightens him, and convicts him of his sin, righteousness, and judgment (Jn. 16:8).

The work of the Holy Spirit upon the Word of God in the human heart produces faith. Faith is not a gift through unconditional election. It comes in response to, and is produced by, the Word of God as a soul-winner implants the Scriptures into the human heart. This instrument becomes the basis of conviction and the impartation of a new nature (2 Pet. 1:4). As faith grows, the person is able to reach out in the act of belief and receive Jesus Christ as his Saviour; hence, the whole process is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8,9).

The third argument against irresistible grace is that it is inconsistent with the nature of a man as reflected from the image and likeness of God. God cannot deny Himself by going contrary to the human nature in man which He created. A consistent God will not force salvation on a man against his will.

The fact that some individuals in Scripture turned their back on Christ is the fourth argument against irresistible grace. Israel resisted and Paul wept for them (Rom. 9:1; 10:1). The rich young ruler turned his back on Jesus Christ, and the book of Acts is filled with illustrations of those who rejected. Perhaps the most heartbreaking scene is Festus, who said, "Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian" (Acts 26:28). The Calvinist would say he was not among the elect. Yet the child of God would examine his heart to find out how he could get such an one saved.

This does not mean that God does not call certain people to salvation, only that man may, for whatever reason, choose to resist the invitation of the Holy Spirit. A more accurate definition of the call of God as it relates to salvation is that of Mullins. He suggests,

Calling is the invitation of God to men to accept by faith the salvation in Christ. It is sent forth through the Bible, the preaching of the Gospel, and in many other ways. Nothing can be clearer from the teaching of Scripture than the fact that the call and invitation are universal and that there is a free offer of salvation to all who hear and repent and believe.

E. Perseverance of the saints. Calvinists teach that the saints will persevere because their salvation is dependent upon God's irresistible grace which was granted to them because Christ died in atonement limited to the elect. They teach that since man has absolutely nothing to do with his salvation, he will "persevere" because the Saviour has declared that he has eternal life. As Spencer notes,

The logical conclusion of Calvinism is that since "salvation is of the LORD," and absolutely no part of it is dependent upon any condition found in the elect, but is wholly dependent upon the God who has willed to save those whom He gave to His dear Son, salvation can never be lost. The saints of God will surely persevere because He has given them His promise that no creature can take away from Him (including themselves). We shall persevere because He wills to persevere!

Most men who reject Calvinism claim to hold the fifth point which is the perseverance of the saints. They claim perseverance is eternal security. However, the doctrine of eternal security is not the same as the perseverance of the saints. Calvin implies in his doctrine that if one is saved, he will persevere because of the election of God. It is rooted in the nature of God.

The occasions of believers in Scripture who died outside of the fellowship of God questions the perseverance of the saints, i.e., they persevered until death. Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) died in a state of rebellion. Other Christians who came to the Lord's table in Corinth with sin are described as, "they slept" (1 Cor. 11:30). Also, there was a "sin unto death" (1 Jn. 5:17,18), where certain sins led to the premature death of saints. The death of these believers outside of fellowship with Christ certainly does not take away eternal security, but it does question perseverance.

The Bible teaches that when believers are given eternal life, they have it forever. Rather than calling the doctrine the "perseverance of the saints," it should be called the doctrine of "preservation" or eternal security." THE WEAKNESSES OF ARMINIANISM

The study of the history of doctrinal controversies seems to indicate that heretical movements usually begin as the result of the overstatement of a case in opposition to another system. The biblical theologian would do well to learn this lesson and be careful not to go beyond biblical revelation in the affirmation of doctrinal truth. Also, he should recognize the tendency of many to think only in extremes of dialectics. Therefore, when one states opposition of Calvinism, he tends to be labeled "Arminian" or "Pelagian" or sometimes "Semi-Pelagian." In the minds of those who so label, these words all refer to the same doctrinal system known popularly as Arminianism. It is difficult for some to realize that one can seek a consistent biblical balance in his theology and in so doing oppose the extremes of both Calvinism and Arminianism. As Mullins notes,

The sense of proportion in the emphasis upon truth may be easily lost in our admiration for the harmony and beauty of a systematic arrangement. A simple doctrine or conception, such as the sovereignty of God, or election, or human freedom may be given a dominating position and all other truths modified to make them conform. Theological controversy may lead to one-sided systems. Thus Calvinism and Arminianism have sometimes taken on extreme forms and have led to unfortunate results.

Arminianism is that theological system originated by Jacob Arminius (1560-1609), while he taught at the University of Leyden in South Holland. Arminius was later condemned by the Council of Dort for his perceived teaching of a modified form of Pelagianism. While Arminianism and Calvinism today stand as two opposing theological systems, it has been suggested this is due primarily to the extremes of their respective followers more than the essential teachings of their founding teachers. Actually, there is a substantial agreement in the basics or fundamentals of the faith in the teachings of Arminius and Calvin. Perhaps the best-known American teachers in England were John Wesley and John Fletcher. In America this doctrinal system was popularized by such men as Francis Asbury and Charles Grandison Finney. Most holiness and Pentecostal denominations tend to be Arminian in theology; however, only a few Baptist groups are so identified.

Perhaps no man has had a greater influence for God during his life and in the ensuing years than John Wesley. Also, God has used many holiness evangelists to do a great work in winning souls, establishing churches and schools, and sending out missionaries. While the author praises God for what has been accomplished by these men, he also recognizes that orthodoxy is not always determined by one's ministerial successes. Also, God has greatly used many Calvinists who have opposed many of the fundamental tenets of Arminianism. In the determination of the theological orthodoxy of any Bible teacher, it is best to follow the Berean example and evaluate their teaching in the light of Scripture (Acts 17:11). When this is done, there are several reasons why I must also decline the label "Arminian."

A. Denial of original sin. One of the major problems with Arminianism is its view of sin. Since they differ in their definition of sin, it is only natural they would view differently the work of Christ on Calvary, the sanctification of the believer (how to live above sin) and the security of the believer (the consequence of those who fall into sin). There is a tendency among Arminians to deny or so define original sin as to practically deny its existence. According to Hodge, Arminians "usually deny the imputation of the guilt of Adam's first sin." Summarizing the teaching of Arminius on this doctrine, Strong notes,

According to this theory, all men, as a divinely appointed sequence of Adam's transgression, are naturally destitute of original righteousness, and are exposed to misery and death. By virtue of the infirmity propagated from Adam to all his descendants, mankind are wholly unable without divine help perfectly to obey God or to attain eternal life. This inability, however, is physical and intellectual, but not voluntary. As a matter of justice, therefore, God bestows upon each individual from the first dawn of consciousness a special influence of the Holy Spirit, which is sufficient to counteract the effect of the inherited depravity and to make obedience possible, provided the human will cooperate, which it still has power to do. The evil tendency and state may be called sin; but they do not in themselves involve guilt or punishment; still less are mankind accounted guilty of Adam's sin. God imputes to each man his inborn tendencies to evil, only when he consciously and voluntarily appropriates and ratifies these in spite of the power to the contrary which, in justice to man, God has specially communicated.

While Arminians usually employ the correct vocabulary and speak of original sin, they have in practice so redefined original sin as to deny the biblical teaching concerning the imputation of Adam's sin upon the race which he heads (Rom. 5:12). While the Bible teaches sin is imputed to all men and all men are born with a sin nature (experiential), according to Arminius, a man becomes a sinner only when he consciously and voluntarily sins, thus appropriating the sin nature of Adam. Thus sin tends to be volitional only, not omission, nor a center for lust within the person. As a result, there is some divergence of opinion concerning the motive in God's bestowal of ability to cooperate with the Holy Spirit. As Hodge observes,

We may add that Wesley made the bestowal upon our depraved nature of ability to cooperate with God to be a matter of grace, while Arminius regarded it as a matter of Justice, man without it not being accountable.

B. Limited definition of sin. A second problem with Arminianism is the tendency to redefine sin in such narrow limits as to deny all sin except "voluntary transgression." As noted elsewhere in this book, several Hebrew and Greek terms are used to identify sin or particular sins or classes of sins. To use any of these terms as an exclusive definition of all sin is to ignore or repudiate the wider biblical teaching. Yet this appears to be the practice of some Arminians. John Wesley once wrote in a letter,

Nothing is sin, strictly speaking, but a voluntary transgression of a known law of God. Therefore every voluntary breach in the law of love is sin; and nothing else, if we speak properly. To strain the matter farther is only to make way for Calvinism. There may be ten thousand wandering thoughts and forgetful intervals without any breach of love, though not without transgressing the Adamic law. But Calvinists would fain confound these together.

Apparently, in his opposition to extreme Calvinism, Wesley made the mistake of overstating an opposing case. While the voluntary transgression of the known law of God is sin, a biblical definition of sin includes far more. Perhaps his view of sin was a necessary part of his apologetic for his view of perfectionism. For if a person believed that sin was "every voluntary breach in the law of love," then it would be possible to attain perfection. On the other hand, if a person believed he had a sinful nature and he could never fulfill the perfect standard of Jesus Christ (he omitted divine perfection in his life), he could never believe in or gain perfection in this life.

C. View of the completed work of Christ. The meaning of the sixth cry from the cross, "It is finished" (Jn. 19:30), is practically questioned by Arminian theologians. Paul defines the work of Christ on the cross in terms of a reconciliation of God and man (2 Cor. 5:19) and concludes that nothing can separate the reconciled from the love of God which makes that reconciliation possible (Rom. 8:38-39). In contrast, toward the end of his life, Wesley concluded, "Two things are certain: the one, that it is possible to lose even the pure love of God; the other, that it is not necessary."

One of the implications of the denial of the security of the believer is a redefinition of the completed work of Christ. The giving of eternal life was in the teaching of Christ a guarantee against condemnation or perishing (Jn. 3:16; 5:24; 10:28). In His high priestly prayer, Jesus identified the giving of eternal life as a part of His work which was completed (Jn. 17:12). Since God has completed His work and since the believer has life that is eternal, how could God abdicate a completed agreement and take away salvation? Christ used the anthropomorphism of "the Father's hand" to emphasize the secure position of each and every believer, emphasizing they could not be removed from that place (Jn. 10:29). It is clear that the provision of salvation by Christ on the cross implied--at least in the mind of Christ--the security of the believer.

The idea that Christ would save and then allow a convert to lose what he did not merit nor achieve in repentance, causes one to question not only His work, but also His character. This is particularly so in light of such things as the sin unto death, which was apparently committed by some in the New Testament Church (cf. 1 Cor. 11:30). As one Calvinist has observed,

Let our opponents inform us why it is that in regard to those who become true Christians, but who as they allege, fall away, God does not take them out of the world while they are in the saved state. Surely they will not have the perversity to say that it was because He could not or because He did not foresee their future apostasy . . . There is scarcely an error more absurd than that which supposes that a sovereign God would permit His children to defeat His love and fall away.

D. Method of retaining salvation. Again Arminians appear to conflict with the clear teaching of Scripture when they make some work on their part necessary to retain their salvation. Paul questioned the Galatians, "Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" (Gal. 3:3). While in the context of his epistle, Paul assumes a negative answer, the Arminian answer is apparently yes. If it is possible for an individual to somehow fall away from grace, it therefore stands that the same individual--if he does not fall away--must be somehow at least in part responsible for the retention of his salvation. By definition, therefore, salvation ceases to be the free gift (Eph. 2:8). While the author knows of no Arminian so bold as to teach a salvation-by-works doctrine, this is implied by the idea that apostasy is possible for the believer.

It should be noted that there is a divergence of opinion as to what causes one to lose his salvation. E. B. Pusey, one of the Oxford Tractarians, suggested,

The six sins which are accounted of old to be forerunners of the sin against the Holy Ghost are: "presumption of God's mercy, obstinacy in sin, impenitence, despair of salvation impugning known truth, and envy at another's grace."

In his testimony concerning his various experiences of attaining perfection, John Fletcher seems to suggest an unwillingness to confess publicly that a particular blessing of God could result in some degree of apostasy. On August 24, 1781, Fletcher gave the following testimony in a Methodist Society in Leeds.

I received this blessing four or five times before; but lost it, by not observing the order of God . . . When I first received this grace, Satan bade me wait awhile, till I saw more of the fruits: I resolved to do so; but I soon began to doubt the witness, which, before, I had felt in my heart; and, in a little time, I was sensible I had lost both. A second time, after receiving this salvation, I was kept from being a witness for my Lord, by the suggestion, "Thou art a public character - the eyes of all are upon thee - and if, as before, by any means thou lose the blessing, it will be a dishonor to the doctrine of heart -- holiness." I held my peace, and again forfeited the gift of God. At another time, I was prevailed upon to hide it, by reasoning, "How few, even of the children of God, will receive this testimony."

The doctrine of the security of the believer is sometimes opposed by those who use hypothetical cases involving horrendous crimes such as murder, rape, child molesting, etc. Fletcher, who was fifty-one when giving the above testimony would never have been suspected of any such acts. His reputation was, in fact, widely known as a man of piety and holiness. The implication of his testimony and Pusey's argument suggest a view where salvation can be lost for what most Christians might consider hardly worthy to be called sin at all.

E. Confusion of salvation and sanctification. The idea of perfection and the corresponding view of sanctification as a post-conversion experience, characteristic of Arminianism, tends to confuse the biblical teaching of salvation and sanctification. This experience is known under various terms, including the second-blessing, the second work of grace, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, fullness of the Holy Spirit, eradication, perfection, or salvation from sin and sanctification. As these various terms are used by holiness writers to describe the same experience, it is difficult to identify a single writer who represents the variations. In an attempt to summarize this tenet of Arminianism, Hodge observes,

It is possible for an obligation upon all men in this life to attain to evangelical perfection - which is explained as being perfectly sincere - as being animated by perfect love and as doing all that is required of us under the gospel dispensation.

The doctrine of sanctification is discussed elsewhere in this study, and the holiness doctrine of perfection is more closely examined there. The point of interest here is the use of expressions of salvation to identify this apparently post-conversion experience. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is one of several things happening to the believer at the moment of conversion, and is nonexperimental. This is more a question of semantics. Holiness writers speak of experiencing the love of God in this second blessing, yet Paul suggests that it is the result of justification (Rom. 5:5). Contemporary charismatic and Pentecostal writers speak of "receiving the Holy Spirit," yet again, this is a part of the Pauline doctrine of the conversion experience (Ron. 8:9,14).

F. View of regeneration. In the history of doctrine, various theological concepts have been redefined in different ages. Beyond a doubt, the great contribution of John Wesley to the field of systematic theology was his refinement of the doctrine of regeneration. In one sense, every evangelical and fundamentalist Christian is indebted to Wesley in this area. Hodge observes that the Arminian denial of eternal security challenges the biblical doctrine of regeneration.

It is an inseparable part of the Arminian system, following necessarily from their views of election, of the design and effect of Christ's death, and of sufficient grace and free will, that those who were once justified and regenerated may, by neglecting grace and grieving the Holy Spirit, fall into such sins as are inconsistent with true justifying faith, and continuing and dying in the same, may consequently finally fall into perdition.

The very nature of regeneration denies this possibility. Regeneration is a work of God, therefore no man has the ability to change his nature, nor its fundamental existence. Creating new life was the prerogative of God. Since God created the new nature and gave it eternal life, only God can eradicate its existence. Man's actions cannot erase it. As Boettner says,

The nature of the change which occurs in regeneration is a sufficient guarantee that the life imparted shall be permanent. Regeneration is a radical and supernatural change of the inner nature, through which the soul is made spiritually alive, and the new life which is implanted is immortal. And since it is a change in the inner nature, it is in a sphere in which man does not have control. No creature is at liberty to change the fundamental principles of its nature, for that is the prerogative of God as Creator. Hence, nothing short of another act of God could reverse this change and cause the new life to be lost. The born-again Christian can no more lose his sonship to the Heavenly Father than an earthly son can lose his sonship to an earthly father.

G. Union with Christ. The security of the believer is to a large extent due to the unique action of the believer with Christ. Arminians tend to define this union as "A merely moral union, or union of love and sympathy, like that between teacher and scholar, friend and friend." Rather, the Bible seems to teach an organic union where believers are "in Christ" and "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pet. 1:4). Because of the indissoluble nature of this bond between the believer and his Lord, this union implies eternal security as Strong observes.

Once formed, the union is indissoluble. Many of the ties of earth are rudely broken; not so with our union with Christ, that endures forever. Since there is now an unchangeable and divine element in us, our salvation depends no longer upon our unstable wills, but upon Christ's purpose and power.

H. The Nature of grace. The word "grace" as used in Scripture is unlike any other theme. It includes the limitless goodness and kindness that God shows to sinners. Sinners did not deserve God's benefits. As a matter of fact, they deserved the opposite, damnation and eternal punishment. In grace, (1) God dispelled every charge against a sinner, and (2) God dismissed every human responsibility to Himself. Grace is more than love for the sinner. It is absolutely free merit bestowed on the sinner. God has dealt with all sin. Grace means all the sinner has to do is to receive it.

Not only is the sinner saved by grace (Eph. 2:8,9), but also, "We have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand" (Rom. 5:2). To stand in grace is to recognize that the sinner stands perfect (his position or standing before God) while he is still a sinner on earth (his state or place on earth). Since human ability did not gain a standing before God, human ability cannot maintain such a standing.

The continued exercise of divine grace toward a Christian is the only basis for his salvation and eternal security. Grace recognizes he did nothing to get it and can do nothing to continue it. The Arminian believes the sinner is saved by grace, but his continued salvation is dependent on his endurance in that salvation, which is conditioned on human merit or works. However, many Arminians who have been saved, have been kept from the hour of their salvation, not because they remained good, but because unmerited grace is given to everyone who is saved by grace. The grace of God anticipated the sin of Christians (1 Jn. 1:7), and took care of their sin, but God was never willing to encourage or condemn their sin. He demanded confession (1 Jn. 1:9), taught a perfect standard (1 Jn. 1:8,10), and rebuked those who broke the standard (1 Jn. 2:3-12).

I. Conclusion. As noted before, God has seen fit to use many who hold to an Arminian system of theology. He has also used many Calvinists in the same way. According to the doctrine of blessability, God will bless a man's faith and faithfulness even if he may be off on minor doctrinal points. If we would be biblical in our view of soteriology, we will necessarily oppose the extremes of both Calvinism and Arminianism. The biblical teaching on this doctrine lies outside these two systems. As Mullins correctly notes,

Now the New Testament avoids the pantheistic tendency of extreme Calvinism and the deistic tendency of extreme Arminianism. The New Testament teaching and Christian experience are completely one in keeping the divine and human aspects properly related to each other. In both, there is a clear recognition of God's initiative. The shepherd seeks the lost sheep. This is Jesus' declaration. The saved man knows he is found, laid hold of, apprehended by Christ . . . Again, the lost is not merely found; he is more than a sheep. He is prodigal in a far country who must repent. So the New Testament teaches.

You asked Dr. Falwell if he is that concerned about campaign finance reform. He is not involved in the issues that come through congress that do not have a moral implication. As a minister of the Gospel, he can only speak to moral issues. As you know the Bible says, "Rend unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's."

When John McCain attacked Jerry Falwell, he turned the other cheek saying, "John McCain is a great hero and I hope he makes his peace with George W Bush." I think if all of us took the high road, we might all be better for it.

What does the Bible teach about capital punishment?

Many people have misunderstood and misapplied the verse, "Thou shalt not kill." They have taught this particular command means there should be no capital punishment and no soldiers under orders to fight in defense of their wives, children, and country. This is not at all the meaning of the Sixth Commandment. When God says, "Thou shalt not kill," it reads in the Hebrew language, "Thou shalt not murder."

God's Word clearly teaches capital punishment--that deliberate, willful murderers should be put to death. In Romans 13:1-7, God clearly commands us to be subject to the civil and governmental authority. He commands us to pay taxes and to obey the other laws of the land. You will notice in verse 4 He refers to armed officers who bear the sword. This is a weapon used to put people to death when the need arises. This clearly indicates the death penalty must be applied for some crimes such as cold-blooded murder. Note also in this passage that government, law, and order are ordained of God.

Jesus Himself indicates in Luke 13:1-5 that capital punishment was justly and properly applied in His day and time. He even used this to indicate that His listeners, though not guilty of criminal offenses against the law of the land, would perish if they did not repent of their sins against God. The Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, teaches capital punishment.

"And surely your blood of your lives will I require; ... at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man" (Genesis 9:5-6).

"He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death" (Exodus 21:12).

"And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death" (Exodus 21:16).

Numbers 35:16-18 tells us, "...The murderer shall surely be put to death." Also verses 19-21 enforce this.

Numbers 35:31 and 33 say: "Moreoever ye shall take not satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death."

"So ye shall not pollute the land, herein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it."

Yes, Jesus commands us to love our enemies. Rather than hurt others, He allowed others to hurt Him and crucify Him. Nevertheless, Revelation 19:11-16 teaches us when Jesus comes back to the earth the second time He will come to judge and make war. This same passage teaches us He will come with "the armies, which were in Heaven." In verse 15, it tells us He will "smite the nations" and He will come to tread "the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God."

These passages show clearly that God will send to Hell any person who neglects or rejects Jesus Christ, who tramples underfoot the blood of Christ, and who spurns the pardon, which God offers through Christ. They teach that God intends for human society to put to death paid killers, cold-blood killers, and murderers who kill in a fit of temper. They also teach we should have armed policemen to protect our homes against those that would kill in hatred or rob, if the robber took an innocent person's life in order to get his property. The same Scriptures teach God intends for us to have armed soldiers and military personnel to protect all the homes in our nations.

Thus, we can see from these verses that God intends that those who murder should be punished according to His Word and that would be by losing their own lives.

I still support capital punishment as a deterrent. I believe the Bible approves it. While Christ was on the central cross, between two-crucified criminals, He had the platform of the ages from which to condemn capital puishment. He did not.

It should be understood that the term "carnal" (Gk sarkikos) pertains to flesh, bodily, temporal, animal, unregenerate -- fleshly (STRONG'S EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCE OF THE BIBLE).

There is a two-fold designation for the term "carnal" (1) Unregenerate man--the unsaved, natural man; (2) Fleshly believer -- the carnal Christian, (I Corinthians 2:14 - 3:4). The unregenerate, unsaved individual cannot please God (Romans 8:8; I Corinthians 2:14). In contrast to the unsaved carnal man, let us examine the saved carnal Christian. His carnality is caused not by the unscriptural things he may do, but fundamentally by a lack of his yieldedness to the mind and will of God. The carnal Christian does unspiritual things because he is carnal or fleshly (see I Corinthians 3:14).

A Christian's daily walk may be energized either by the flesh (carnal) or by the Spirit. A Christian may be dominated by the flesh and thus respond to the flesh (carnal desires); in contrast, a Christian who is dominated by the Spirit (a spirit-filled life) responds to the Spirit (see Romans 8:5). The flesh (carnal) is ever opposed to the Spirit of God (Galatians 5:17) and is never removed in this life. The flesh, however, may be held under subjection by the Spirit, when and as, the believer becomes dependent and yielded unto the Spirit (Romans 7:18).

The Christian's responsibility is to "walk after the Spirit," that is in subjection to the control, guidance, and purpose of the Spirit who indwells every believer (see Romans 8:9). Thus, when a Christian is yielded to the Spirit, it becomes the Spirit's task to "work in" the believer's life "both to will and to do" God's good pleasure (Philippians 2:13) (SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY by L. S. Chafer, Vol. VII, pp. 69-70).

The Apostle Paul referred to himself as being carnal (Romans 7:14). Paul recognized that even the believer is beset by the tugs and pulls of a self-seeking and self-centered ego (carnal desires). Paul designated this ego as "the flesh." Paul was aware that in the Christian there are two wills, that of the fleshly, sinful nature which causes him to sin, and that which is born of God which does not commit sin (see I Corinthians 3:9). Paul came to the conclusion that as long as the believer is alive there will be a constant warfare between the old sinful nature and his delight in the law of God (the spiritual things).

In Romans 7, Paul presents an actual picture of the internal strife caused by the law of sin against the law of the Spirit. Paul, furthermore, recognizes that the believer's attempts to win the battle in his on strength will always lead to defeat. Paul concludes that only Jesus Christ can enable a Christian to live a sanctified life. To live the sanctified life a Christian must know what Christ has accomplished for him in justification, righteousness and his eventual glorification (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 370-372).

The relationship of the Christian to sin and to Christ is described in a three-fold designation:

(1) In the past, Christ has saved us from the penalty of sin through justification!

(2) In the present, Christ saves us from the power of sin through sanctification!

(3) In the future, Christ shall save us from the very presence of sin through glorification! (WILLMINGTON'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE, p. 740)

Dr. Falwell encourages all Christians to commit their lives to Christ, to yield their lives wholly to the Spirit's control. In the New Testament, the term "commitment" (Greek paratithemi) means to place along side; to present; to deposit (as a trust or for protection): allege, commend, commit (the keeping of), put forth, set before (STRONG'S EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCE).

Dr. Falwell has outlined three areas in which he encourages Christians to commit themselves to:

(1) Bible study -- the Bible itself admonishes us to study the Scriptures, to keep them ever before us as our standard, our guide, and the source of our wisdom. Or commitment to God involves Bible study. Only through a study of the Scriptures can we learn God's will -- the duty we must perform.

(2) Prayer -- our commitment to God means a commitment to prayer. God desires to hear our prayer of confession reconfirming our commitment to Him. Thanksgiving acknowledges God's commitment to us; petition confesses, "I know I can trust you as the Maker and Sustainer of all things to do what is best."

(3) Obedience -- A Christian's duty remains the same -- faithfulness to God's will and God's Word. Our obligation is to do His will -- "as unto the Lord, and not unto men."

Would you please explain the difference between Baptists and Catholics?

We do not like to criticize other religions, or denominations, but you have asked an honest question, and it deserves an honest answer.

First of all, Peter was not the first pope, as many claim. Matthew 16:17-19, is as follows:

"And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Some people think Peter was the rock about which Jesus was talking in verse 18. However, this cannot be so. Jesus Himself is the rock upon which He has built His church. Proof of this can be found in I Peter 2:3-8, which is as follows:

"If so be ye have tested that the Lord is gracious.

To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on Him shall not be confounded.

Unto you therefore which believe He is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,

And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed."

It is very clear in this passage that Jesus Himself is the "chief corner stone," "a rock of offence," "the stone which the builders disallowed," "a stone of stumbling . . . even to them who stumble at the Word . . . ." It is Jesus, not Peter, who is the precious rock upon which God builds his church.

Again, the Bible tells us in I Corinthians 3:11 these words:

"For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."

We can see from these passages of Scripture, Jesus, not Peter, is the foundation, the rock upon which the church is built and upon which our salvation rests. Neither the church, preachers, nor priests can save anybody. All we can do is be the delivery boy, deliver the message of Christ to those who are willing to hear, and point them to Jesus. The decision has to be between the individual and Jesus Himself. Jesus is the only One who can save. Jesus is the only One who has the right to let us into Heaven or keep us out of Heaven, and it is our choice as to whether we will accept Jesus as our Savior and Lord or whether we reject Him. This is what determines whether we go to Heaven or go to Hell.

Matthew 16:19, referring to the keys of the kingdom of Heaven, speaks of the privilege not only Peter but all Christians are given of being a witness for Jesus, the privilege of telling others about Him and trying to persuade them to accept Jesus as their Savior.

Catholics hold the Pope as the viceregent of Christ on earth, and they hold he can make no mistake at all when he speaks in his official capacity as Pope. However, Scripture clearly teaches only Christ lived and spoke at all times without sin (Romans 3:10, 23 and Hebrews 4:15).

Catholics also give an unscriptural place to Mary. The whole question of having so many statues is disturbing. However, it is even more disturbing to go into some Catholic chapels and see a statue of Mary which is larger and which is above that of Jesus. This is a good illustration of the unscriptural position they give to Mary.

Some Catholics teach "Mary was a virgin all her life." This is a statement for which we find no Scriptural support. Please check these references to see the Scriptural support we find for our position.

Matthew 1:25 reads as follows:

"As [Joseph] knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus."

The word "till" tells us Mary and Joseph did not have physical relations until after the birth of Jesus. It does not mean they never came together in the normal way of husbands and wives, and it implies they did have normal marital relations afterwards.

The Bible teaches Jesus did have other brothers. Matthew 12:46-47 and Mark 3:31-35 tells of a time when Jesus was teaching the people and Mary and His brothers stood outside the crowd, desiring to talk with Him.

The Jews had a difficult time accepting Jesus in Nazareth because He was one of them; He had grown up in their midst. In Matthew 13:55 they say:

"Is not this the carpenter's son? is not His mother called Mary? and His brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon and Judas? and His sisters, . . ."

They were partly correct - He was Mary's son and He was the brother of the four men listed but He was not the son of the carpenter. This event is also recorded in Mark 6:3.

The Bible tells us in John 7:5 even Jesus' brothers rejected Him at the beginning of His ministry:

"For neither did this brethren believe him."

The word "brethren" here must refer to His physical brothers. It could not refer to His spiritual brothers because they did believe in Him.

However, God's Word later tells us His brothers did finally accept Him as the Savior. Acts 1:14 states, as the disciples waited in the upper room in Jerusalem, they were joined by Mary and Jesus' brothers:

"These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren."

One of Jesus' brothers even became an apostle:

"But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother" (Galatians 1:19).

We believe the Bible does teach Mary as a virgin before the birth of Christ. She was undoubtedly a very virtuous woman and devoted to God. Her immediate submission to the news brought by the angel and her praises to God show her to be a believer in God and in His promises. However, the Bible does not say she remained a virgin all her life. I encourage you to look up the above mentioned references in your own Bible.

May I also say, the word firstborn does not mean first and only child, as Genesis 27:19, 29:26; and other references substantiate.

In their Bible, Catholics have, between Malachi and Matthew, books which they accept as divinely inspired and as belonging in God's Word. However, Christendom as a whole does not accept these books as belonging in God's Holy Word. Unscriptural teachings, such as Purgatory, come out of those noncanonical books which the Catholics accept in their Bible.

While we believe Mary was definitely a pure woman chosen by God for a very special purpose, we believe it is dangerous to put her on a pedestal or make her someone to be worshipped. Many people have attempted to say Mary was sinless and she herself can help redeem sinful men. This is not in God's Word. We must be careful to believe only what God's Word says about Jesus:

"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

As you know, I am not a "Charismatic." I believe that the baptism and empowerment of the Holy Spirit is essential to effective Christian service and that these experiences take place at the time of one's conversion. Subsequent "fillings" of the Spirit may occur many times in a believer's life (Ephesians 5:18), but these are different than the singular baptism of the Holy Spirit by which He places all believers into the body of Christ (see I Corinthians 12:13, For by one Spirit are all baptized into one body). I believe that the charismatic movement is not a true representation of biblical teaching. Even though many good, sincere Christians are involved in this movement, or are sympathetic to it, I do not personally believe that it is scripturally justifiable. Ninety percent of the activity of most "Charismatics" is clearly restricted in I Corinthians 14, where women are definitely forbidden to speak in tongues or claim direct revelation from God. I also believe that Paul's statement was fulfilled at the close of the Apostolic Era with the completion of the New Testament revelation. Church history verifies that tongues did cease after that (with the exception of extreme heretical groups such as the Montanists, Shakers, and Mormons) and the attempt to bring back tongues in the twentieth century is a claim to new "revelation" from God and opens the door to new prophecies, visions, interpretations, and, ultimately, to the possibility of New "Scripture." This will only lead to a great deal of confusion and disillusionment.

WHERE DO THEY FALL SHORT?: The charismatic movement falls short in the area of placing experience above doctrine. Whenever one places emotion ahead of revealed truth, he will eventually reinterpret the truth to fit his "experience." Jesus said of the Holy Spirit that: when he is come, he will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment (John 16:8). Wherever the Spirit is manifested in His greatest power, people will take seriously the issues of sin and righteousness. Godly living is the result of the Spirit's power. Therefore, pure and obedient lives demonstrate His power more than anything else.

GOOD POINTS?: The Charismatic emphasis is a constant reminder that we dare not serve our Lord in the arm of the flesh. We must depend on the genuine power of the Holy Spirit to advance the cause of Christ. This is His real ministry: to glorify the Saviour, not Himself. It also reminds us that cold, dead "churchism" is no substitute for the real power of a real God. Many of the followers of this movement have come from the spiritually dead mainline denominations and are tired of the lack of spiritual life.

BIBLE BASE FOR MOVEMENT TODAY?: No. I do not believe that the old "holiness" concept of a "second blessing" of sinless perfection (or entire sanctification) as it was associated with the "baptism" was necessarily accompanied by the sign of tongues. This was based on a misapplication of a few transitional passages in the book of Acts. It should be remembered that Paul wrote I Corinthians to settle a misunderstanding in that church about tongues and spiritual gifts. While this letter was one of Paul's earliest epistles, there are no more references chronologically to tongues in the New Testament after this. It is obvious that Paul's letter settled the issue for his day and the over-promotion of tongues ceased as he said it would (I Corinthians 13:8). While many sincere and well-meaning people are involved in the current movement, I believe that it re-opens the claim to new revelation from God, which claim is denied by the New Testament Scripture.

In modern child rearing textbooks there sees to be a concept of equating the disciplining of children with child abuse and an abnormal "hatred" of children by those parents who exercise discipline upon their children. This concept is certainly not supported by the Bible.

As in the words of Jesus: Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? (Mark 12:24). The Bible clearly teaches that disciplining of children brings about profit of that child and not rebellion:

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou are rebuked of him: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? . . .Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby (Hebrews 12:5-11).

As the passage in Hebrews refers, whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, thus God's principle of disciplining His own people is completely congruous with human parenting practices. God's practices in disciplining Christians correspond to the commands God gave in Proverbs to fathers. He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (promptly) (Proverbs 13:24; cf. 22:15; 23:13). Love and corporal punishment are not incongruous; they are two complementary and necessary aspects of child training. Every human father who loves his son disciplines him; and, likewise, it is true that the father does not discipline the boys of the neighborhood, for they are not his sons. If ye be without chastisement, wherefore all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons (Hebrews 8).

The Bible gives instructions to the fathers (parents) not to use excessive or abusive forms of discipline:

And, ye father, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4).

A close examination of this passage reveals that the word "provoke" means to irritate, exasperate, rub the wrong way, incite. This provoking is done by a wrong spirit and by wrong methods of discipline, i.e., severity, unreasonableness, oversternness, harshness, cruel demands, needless restrictions, and selfish insistence upon authority. Such provocation would produce adverse reactions, deaden his affection, check his desire for holiness, and make him feel that he can't possibly please his parents.

A wise parent, therefore, seeks to make obedience desirable and obtainable by love and firm discipline. Parents must not be godless tyrants. Martin Luther said, "Keep an apple beside the rod to give the child when he does well." The passage exhorts parents to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Discipline, general education and culture must be exercised with watchful care and constant training. Chastening, disciplining, and counsel by the Word of God, giving both reproof and encouragement whenever needed, is the proper balance for child rearing. True Christian discipline is needed to prevent children from growing up without a true reverence for God, a respect for parental authority, a knowledge of Christian standards, and habits of self control. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 2, pp. 559, 560.)

Where in the Bible does it say that children will be born in the millennium and these children will have to be won to Christ?

First, let us look at an area that is often misunderstood and will shed some light on your question. There will be two types of people in the millennium, those that have received their glorified bodies, the raptured and resurrected, and those that lived through the tribulation and go into the millennium with physical, mortal bodies just as you and I have.

Matthew 24 and 25 give a chronology concerning those surviving the tribulation period: "(1) the tribulation period (24:4-26), (2) the second advent of Messiah to the earth (24:27-30), (3) the regathering of Israel (24:31), (4) the judgment on Israel (25:1-30), (5) the judgment on Gentiles (25:31-46), (6) the kingdom to follow. In this carefully developed chronology of events, the judgment on Israel follows the second advent of Christ to the earth and the consequent regathering of Israel as a nation." (Pentecost, Things to Come, p. 413).

Likewise, "in the chronology of Matthew 24 and 25 the judgment of the Gentiles (Matthew 25:31-46) is seen to follow the judgment upon Israel. This judgment takes place following the second advent of Christ to the earth. Joel says:

For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem, I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with then, there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land (Joel 3:12).

The prophet reveals that this judgment on the Gentiles will take place at the safe time that the Lord restores the nation Israel to their land, which is at the second advent. Therefore this judgment must fall at the time of the second advent after the regathering and judgment on Israel. It must precede the institution of the millennium, for those accepted in this judgment are taken into that kingdom (Matthew 25:34)." (Pentecost, Things to Come, p. 415).

"There is a twofold result of this judgment. (1) First of all, the unsaved are cut off from the land. ". . . they shall not enter into the land of Israel" (Ezekiel 20:37); "And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 25:30). Thus, the unsaved are destroyed before the millennial age begins. (2) In the second place, the saved are taken into millennial blessing.

You asked Dr. Falwell a question about children of mixed ethnic background. No matter who the person is, God loves them; and Jesus died for them. God loves all people regardless of their color, or their mixture of color.

While I do not have the final answer on the problem with the race, you probably know that young people at Liberty University are allowed to date whomever they choose. We do not prohibit those from one race dating another race. This would be against the law and we feel it would not be in keeping with God's standard.

I do not think there is a verse that teaches that a white person should not mix with those of another race, or they should not marry; however, I do recognize there are social consequences to some children because of pressures from cultures.

What do you mean when you say, Christ is a Person?

Christ indeed is a person. He appeared in the flesh to men many years ago, served God, and ministered to mankind, in the flesh, for 33 1/2 years. Then He went to the cross and suffered and died physically. He arose literally, physically and bodily, and allowed His disciples to touch Him and feel Him, to see that He was indeed the same Christ, physically, He was before His crucifixion and resurrection. He is God, but He is also man.

Romans Chapter 1 tells us Jesus is the Son of God according to the Spirit, but the son of David according to the flesh. Many passages in both the Old and New Testaments indicate that Jesus is a descendant of David and has the right to His father David's throne. Thus, Jesus Christ, the God-man who came to earth to be our Savior, is a person just as much as David was a person; just as much as His mother, Mary was a person; and just as much as his half-brothers and sisters were persons.

Jesus, though God in the flesh, made Himself susceptible to the pull and tug of temptations. Hebrews 4:15 tells us that He was tempted in all points "like as we are, yet without sin." Jesus is a person.

All of this does not mean that God is not a Spirit. It simply means that the Almighty, all-wise, most High God came down as a human being, a person in the flesh, to identify Himself with the human race, and to suffer and die for our sins.

Christ was not merely like God, he is God. (I John 1:1; Colossians 2:9). In His humanity, Christ did not cling to His prerogatives of His Divine majesty, and did not ambiguously display His equality with God. Christ waived His rights to:

1. Express His Deity 2. Display His Divine attributes 3. Demonstrate His equality with God

Christ laid aside His Divine glory, but He did not and could not lay aside His Divine nature. He did lay aside the expression of Deity, but He did not and could not lay aside His possession of Deity. He did lay aside His rights as the Son and took His place as a servant. He put aside the insignia of Deity and put on the robes of His humanity. He divested himself of His prerogatives. He did not and could not cease to be God when He was made flesh (John 1:14). His Deity remained throughout the whole course of His self-imposed humiliation. He gave up something that was HIS. He restricted the outward manifestation of His Deity. He was like a king temporarily clothing Himself in the garb of a peasant while still remaining king, even though it was not apparent. He was the sinless Son of God, the God-Man, (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 2, pp. 572, 573.) SCRIPTURES ON RECEIVING JESUS CHRIST'S DEITY

Jesus taught:

"...Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3).

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36).

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day" (John 12:48).

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).

The name "Christian" designates those who are saved. The term "Christian" appears in the Bible three times: ...And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch (Acts 11:26) . Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian (Acts 26:28). ...If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed... (I Peter 4:16). The term "Christian" is evidently a Gentile designation for believers, since the word "Christ" upon which this title was constructed suggest recognition of the annointed Messiah and no unbelieving Jew was prepared to acknowledge the Messianic claims of Christ. Messianism was ever the theme of those who preached to the Jews that Jesus is the Christ (SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY by L. S. Chafer, Vol. VII, p. 73).

Dr. Falwell has defined the term-"Christian" as "one who has asked Christ to save him from his sins and has experienced the New Birth." Jesus stated that the New Birth was not optional -- Ye must be born again (John 3:3). When one becomes a newborn Christian by accepting the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as the atonement for his sins, he is "born-again." The Holy Spirit takes up residency in his body. His sins are forgiven. He receives the promise of eternal life (Heaven). (JERRY FALWELL AND THE JEWS, Merrill Simon, p. 11)

In Philippians 3:21 we read: Who [Jesus] shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." Additionally, in I John 3:2 we read: "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is."

These verses tell us that those of us who die, having trusted Christ as our personal Savior, will be given bodies like that of the Lord Jesus Christ. It will be a body that is not subject to disease and death any longer. It will be in all points perfect as the Lord Jesus Christ's body is also perfect. We further know from II Corinthians 5:8 that a Christian, immediately upon his death, goes into the presence of the Lord.

It should be noted that the Christian will not receive his body until the time of the rapture. Those Christians who die before the rapture must wait until the Lord comes in the clouds to call His church. At that point, those who have died in Christ will have their bodies resurrected and they will be changed and united with their souls once again. It is at this point that we will receive our glorified bodies.

Though we cannot be dogmatic concerning our memory of the affairs of this life when we get to Heaven, it is our belief that once we enter into eternity with the Lord, which is at the conclusion of the millennial reign, the things of this life, with all the tragedies and sorrows and sufferings, will be permanently erased from our minds. Therefore, we simply will not have any remembrance of the affairs, the struggles, the sufferings, and heartaches of this life.

Christian humility is the proper attitude a Christian is to have concerning government leaders -- Christian humility.

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God (Romans 13:1).

Put then in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work (Titus 3:1).

Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by Him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them, that do well (I Peter 2:13-14).

Of course, there may be times when government leaders violate the power and authority given them by God and issue laws or acts contrary to Scripture. In these situations the Christian must not submit. An example of this principle is found in Acts 5:29, where the apostles boldly refused to submit to authority on the grounds that it as contrary to the will of God (Acts 4:19).

A Christian should support his government leaders by earnest prayer for them to be saved and for them to be filled with Divine wisdom to guide them in the affairs of governing the people. However, if the leaders are wicked and are doing contrary to God's Word, then as a Christian you should pray for their removal from office and exercise your right as a citizen and vote them out of office.

An often quoted statement attributed to Edmund Burke is: "For evil to triumph, the only thing necessary is for good men to do nothing." With this thought in mind, we can surely recognize that our citizenship in a free country is a blessing from God. Our great system of self-government assures every Christian a voice in the affairs of the nation, but we must claim that right. God wants us to do His will in government, just as in the church and in the home. We, as citizens of America, must not fail to pray for our government leaders, and as good citizens we must be regularly participating voters. For too long, Christians have ceased to participate in governmental affairs and as a result the moral fiber of America is rotting away. Our priceless freedom is in grave jeopardy. America is faced with the greatest crisis in history. We are in danger of losing our nation by default, and with it, our individual freedoms and possibly our very lives! If that should happen, our opportunity to help fulfill the Great Commission through-out the United States and the world will be lost, and hundreds of millions will never have an opportunity to receive our Savior. (Sept. 84, "You Only Choose But Can You Vote?" Colonel V. Doner, pp. 34, 35).

All Christians must exercise their citizen's rights and attempt to influence this nation for Christ through the voting process. In America, decisions are not made by a majority of the people. Decisions are made by a majority of those who vote. Dr. Falwell, therefore, encourages you to do your part and vote for the individuals you believe God would have to serve this nation.

Dr. Falwell has a genuine love for the Jewish people because God loves them. All Christians should love Jews and take a definite interest in the affairs of the Jewish state.

The Jews are very special to God - they always have been. They have a unique place in His program for this world. The Bible says that the Jews are the apple of His eye (Deuteronomy 32:10). The Christians should love Jews because it was through the line of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that Christ was born. Yes, Jesus was a Jew. Christians should love Jews because unto them were committed the oracles of God. Through the Jews, God revealed Himself in the Holy Scriptures and gave us the message of redemption. And finally, Christians should love Jews because of their respect for God's promises to them. In this I refer to the Abrahamic Covenant, in which the Lord told Abraham: I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee (Genesis 12:3). (Israel: The Apple Of God's Eye, by Richard W. DeHaan, page 31).

So we see then, the nation of Israel is still God's chosen people. His covenant with Israel is an everlasting covenant. Even though a majority of the nation rejects Jesus Christ as Saviour and as Messiah, many of the members of the nation of Israel have accepted Jesus as Saviour and Messiah and preach Him as such. One day the nation as a whole will turn to Christ and will know He is indeed the only begotten Son of God, the true Messiah of Israel, the only Saviour and hope for a lost and dying world.

Dr. Falwell has made it clear that he believes that the Jews or any other persons without Christ have a missing dimension in their lives. They are missing the joy and peace of having their sins freely forgiven and of knowing they are fully accepted by God. In the words of our Saviour Jesus Christ, with regard to whether or not a Jew would go to Heaven or Hell, He makes the statement Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3). This statement was made to a Jewish Pharisee named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. Thus, Jesus Christ Himself utters the statement of utmost eternal importance for all men to consider:

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him (John 3:36).

Can a person truly be saved and continue in willful and deliberate worldliness, and never have the desire to study God's Word or witness to lost souls?

Of course we cannot look inside one's heart and know for certain what their relationship is with the Lord. We all tend to judge a person by the way he lives. Certainly a person living in this manner is not living for the Lord. The Bible tells us to "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." When we see a person continue to live in deliberate worldliness and not read the Bible, witness or serve the Lord in any obvious way, then it is hard to believe that person has really had a heart experience with our Savior. However, we cannot, as Christians, make that judgment. This person could be saved, but living out of the will of God.

When we accept Christ as our Savior, the Holy Spirit comes into our heart to abide--to guide us and teach us. However, we are babes in Christ. We need nurturing in the ways of the Lord. We need the fellowship of other believers. We need to study and meditate on the Word of God. We need to pray and seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit in all things. Our Heavenly Father wants us to proclaim Him in all walks of life. However, we must grow into a heart knowledge of how to accomplish this. Sometimes, even though a person is saved, it is very hard to overcome the old sin nature with the new nature we take on as born-again believers.

As a child, we may proclaim with vigor that we bear the family name of our earthly father, but fellowship between us and that father is contingent upon our behavior. The same is true in the family of God. Our fellowship with our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, is based on our behavior. We may be saved, but if we live in sin, we live in a broken fellowship with our Heavenly Father because God hates sin. Our fellowship with Him rests upon God's very nature.

We live in a weak and vacillating age. God is often pictured as a benevolent one who winks at our sins and tolerates the spirit of our time as expressed in the phrase, "anything goes." But God is light and God is love. Both are aspects of His nature and character. We can't emphasize one without the other because then we have a very wrong concept of Deity. Absolute holiness--no darkness--that is God. In Him is no flaw, no mistake or weakness, no easygoing way regarding evil; no overlooking of the least thing that defiles.

James told us in his epistle that God is "the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning" (James 1:17). The nature of God, absolute holiness and complete freedom from evil, was manifested in the life of the Lord Jesus. To have fellowship with the Father and with the Son necessarily means to have fellowship with light. We cannot do this by wading around in the sea of darkness where Satan always lurks.

Because God is light, the new life He gave us when we accepted Him as our Savior can only have the nature and character of light. "Ye are the sons of light, and sons of the day; we are not of the night, nor of darkness" (I Thessalonians 5:5). A drastic change has been worked in our lives by the Holy Spirit in the New Birth. Therefore, much is expected of us. Paul wrote, "For ye were once darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord; walk as children of light" (Ephesians 5:8). So if we have been brought up to fellowship with Him who is the light, but then walk in darkness (in sin, worldliness), "we lie, and do not the truth" (I John 1:6). One precludes the other. "For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness?" (II Corinthians 6:14). Walking in the light and presence of God means fellowship; walking outside of it means we're stumbling around in Satan's darkness.

Is it possible for one who has been saved to walk in sin and worldliness (darkness)? Some immediately answer, "no!" However, when John said, "If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (I John 1:6), the word translated "fellowship" is not a synonym for salvation. John is speaking to those who are Christians, referring to them as "my little children" (I John 2:1). He goes on in this same verse to say, "These things I write unto you, that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous." Then verse 2 says, "And He Himself (Jesus Christ) is the propitiation for our sins..." John knew the possibility of sin (whether it be gambling, watching too much TV, or whatever) always exists for the Christian. Satan is always just around the corner waiting to pounce on the Christian who is weak in faith. A true believer will never lose his salvation, but when he sins, his fellowship with God is broken. The child of light (of God) becomes a Christian "out of character" when he continually and deliberately sins.

A person claiming to be saved and yet continuing in worldliness and sin does two things. First, according to John, this person lies. This person may not intend to be untruthful, but for the Christian to walk in darkness is in itself a practical lie. Secondly, this person, in professing fellowship with God while walking in the darkness, is acting an untruth. John said we "do not the truth." Life becomes a practical falsehood, and fellowship with the One who is light (Jesus Christ our Lord) is broken.

If we, as children of God, are to have abiding fellowship with God and be cleansed by Him, we must meet the conditions of walking in the light. While we are in the circle of that light, the blood of Jesus Christ keeps on cleansing us from all sin. We all sin every day. God knows we have a sin nature. Being saved does not destroy this sin nature. However, if we truly try to "walk in the light," if we rely on the Holy Spirit of God to direct us, we will not go about deliberately and willfully sinning day after day. We will pray and seek forgiveness for our sins.

The Christian who is ignorant of the presence of the old nature and blind to its power to assert itself will soon be victimized by his own self-delusion. He is headed for a fall. The truth of God must be allowed to operate within us so that we are not deceived. This can be accomplished through total reliance on the Holy Spirit of God in our lives--through prayerfully studying God's Word and meditating on it day and night; and through earnest prayer. In this way we are communicating with God and allowing Him to communicate with us.

We all have the opposing forces of light and darkness locked in conflict within us. It is exactly as Paul said in Galatians 5:17: "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other, so that ye cannot do the things that ye would."

No Christian sins cheaply. Knowing that we have an Advocate, and that God is faithful and just to forgive us and cleanse us from our unrighteousness gives us to cause to play fast and loose with God's oral laws. Instead, the true believer's heart should be stirred with a holy hatred for sin and with a consuming desire to please the Father.

Does a Christian lose his salvation, his chance of Heaven for eternity, when he sins? Is there a difference between our relationship with God and our fellowship with Him? If sin breaks that fellowship (and it does), then how can we be restored and forgiven? These are very important questions for every believer. Too many professed Christians are "on again, off again, gone again" practitioners of their faith. We should all heed Christ's solemn warning found in Matthew 7:21: "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father, who is in heaven."

If a person has no conviction of the Holy Spirit over deliberate sin, has no desire to read his Bible, to pray, to witness for the Lord, again the question arises as to whether or not that person is really saved. Even though a Christian will sin, his lifestyle is not characterized by sinning. We may disobey, fail and sin, but this is not the manner of our life in Christ. One who is abiding in Christ does not habitually practice evil. No one who has truly looked upon Christ as Savior and Lord will make light of sin. Our attitude toward sin will reveal whether we are abiding in Christ or are alienated from Him.

When a child of God recognizes that he has a dual nature--one of sin and the other of God--he will be able to face life realistically. He will not want to dishonor God by allowing willful, deliberate sins to remain in his life. And when, on occasion, the old sin nature asserts itself and the believer allows an act of sin by thought, word, or deed, he immediately does as I John 1:9 instructs--"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse unrighteousness."

We do not believe that it is wrong to decorate Christmas trees, have other decorations in the home, and give presents at Christmas time. We do not worship the trees as some people did long ago. Sometimes they worshipped idols under the trees. Sometimes they worshipped idols made from the wood of trees. This is the practice which is referred to in Jeremiah 10:3-4. We do not worship the trees, the decorations, or anything we put under the tree. It is just a simple and happy custom which we observe, not idolatry or paganism.

Some Christians in almost all denominations hesitate to celebrate Christmas as so many celebrate it today. They feel that Santa Claus may take the place of Christ in the interest and affections of little children. (In our family, we have never taught our children to believe in Santa Claus, but in Christ. We have had surprise gifts for them and Christmas caroling on which we went in groups to homes of needy people or shut-ins to sing carols and bring food and needed clothing. We have had Christmas parties on which we sang carols, read Scripture, and played games which emphasize a happy, wholesome celebration of the birth of Christ. We have taught our children to give more in the offering for foreign missions as a birthday gift to Jesus than they pay for any single gift to one they love most, apart from Christ. We have had happy, exciting times.)

We decorate our home with lights and use a decorated Christmas tree with gifts under the tree which may not be opened until Christmas morning. We send Christmas cards to loved ones and to unsaved people and prospects for church membership. With all this emphasis on Christ, the Scriptures, and the stories in the Gospels about the birth of Jesus, we have not forbade them to laugh and enjoy the stories about Santa Claus or to see Santa Claus down town. We have simply let them know he is a make-believe man, not real, and he has no miraculous ability to fly through the air in a sleigh driven by reindeer.

Many Christians hesitate to have a decorated Christmas tree in their home at Christmas time because of passages in Isaiah which tell us the people had gone into the sin of worshipping idols of trees and idols made from the wood of trees. However, we do not worship the tree; we only use it as a matter of traditional decoration. We have Christmas scenes around the tree which depict the birth of Jesus and His being laid in the manger, the coming of the shepherds to worship Him, and the coming of the Wise Men to offer gifts. We also have a star on the Christmas tree and sometimes the figure of a little angel. We make all of it Christ-centered. We see no wrong in having lights and decorations and scenes in the home, as long as idol worship is not engaged in and as long as Christ is worshipped and made central in all our Christmas activities.

You may be sure we do not serve alcoholic beverages. We do not even use wine or alcoholic beverages on or to yellow our fruitcakes. We may place within the fruitcake box some slices of fresh apple or put a little grape juice over the cheesecloth around the fruitcake, but we do not find it necessary to have or use alcoholic beverages in our home for any occasion.

Most Christians feel the main emphasis of Christmas should be on Christ while recognizing that it is all right to have a decorated tree and to tell the children about Santa Claus and his reindeer, as long as they do not believe they are real.

The Bible does not tell us the time of year when Jesus was born. We do not know the day or even the month. It is only a matter of tradition that we celebrate His birth on December 25. While this day is not the exact date of Christ's birth, it is good that we do have one day a year in which we do celebrate the birth of the Savior.

Many individuals wonder about the deity of Jesus Christ during the 33 1/2 years of His humanity.

Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:6-7).

It should be noted that Christ was not merely like God, he is God. (I John 1:1; Colossians 2:9). In His humanity, Christ did not cling to His prerogatives of His Divine majesty, and did not ambiguously display His equality with God. Christ waived His rights to:

1. Express His Deity 2. Display His Divine attributes 3. Demonstrate His equality with God

Christ laid aside His Divine glory, but He did not and could not lay aside His Divine nature. He did lay aside the expression of Deity, but He did not and could not lay aside His possession of Deity. He did lay aside His rights as the Son and took His place as a servant. He put aside the insignia of Deity and put on the robes of His humanity. He divested himself of His prerogatives. He did not and could not cease to be God when He was made flesh (John 1:14). His Deity remained throughout the whole course of His self-imposed humiliation. He gave up something that was HIS. He restricted the outward manifestation of His Deity. He was like a king temporarily clothing Himself in the garb of a peasant while still remaining king, even though it was not apparent. He was the sinless Son of God, the God-Man, (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 2, pp. 572, 573.)

SCRIPTURES ON RECEIVING JESUS CHRIST'S DEITY

Jesus taught:

"...Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3).

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36).

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day" (John 12:48).

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).

What the Bible says about those who deny Jesus as God:

"Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father; [.but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" (I John 2:22-23).

"Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God" (I John 4:15).

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him" (I John 5:1).

"He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life" (I John 5:12).

"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son" (II John 1:9).

I ask you to study the above Scripture passages and recognize the difference between your spending eternity in heaven or in Hell depends upon your personal relationship with Jesus Christ. My prayer is that you will receive Him as your Savior today.

To whom also he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them, forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God (Acts 1:3).

The word translated "passion" comes from the Greek word pascho, verb meaning "to experience a sensation or impression (usually painful), to feel, to suffer, to be vexed." (GREEK DICTIONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, STRONG'S EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCF OF THE BIBLE).

The term "passion" is used in Acts 1:3 to illustrate the crucifixion of Christ. This is a correct usage for the term "passion" as related to Christ's vicarious, substitutionary atonement for our sins. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed (Isaiah 53:5). Who his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness; by whose stripes we are healed (I Peter 2:24).

Christ willingly took our place when He died on Calvary's cross. And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world (I John 2:2). The word, "propitiation" (Greek hilasmos) means "satisfaction" in the sense that Christ's death satisfied the just demands of God's holy judgement for our sins. (CRISWELL STUDY BIBLE, p. 1464).

The fact is, Jesus Christ is the only remedy for sin and the only way for man to be in a "right" relationship to God. For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God... (I Peter 3:18). Jesus Himself said, . . . I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me (John 14:6). God the Father saw fit to use Jesus Christ in His dying on Calvary's cross ("passion") to be the means whereby the great gulf between sinful man and the Holy God can be bridged-God's plan of salvation. There is no other way: Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12).

"Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:14-15).

The Liberty Bible Commentary gives the following interpretation to Hebrews 4:15b, which says, ...tempted like as we are, yet without sin: Christ is able to understand our weaknesses and miseries, for He Himself has experienced these very things. To imagine that since Jesus could not sin, he could not suffer is to miss the point of the passage. First, this passage explicitly states that He did not sin, not that He could not. Second, temptation can be, and is, a reality apart from sin. God cannot be tempted (Greek apeirastos) with evil (James 1:13), yet God is tempted (Greek peirazo) by men (3:9; Acts 15:10); Christ was tempted; He did not sin; He can understand and intercede. Yet, beyond the explicit statements of this passage, He who is God was made like sinful man (Romans 8:3). But He could not sin (impeccable); and, indeed, He need not sin to be human.

Before he sinned, Adam was human, and probably more human than after his fall; for that was not how God had created him. One need not sin to be human, nor does one even need to possess the potential to sin. The glorified saint will never again be able to sin, yet he remains human. Christ's temptation was real [Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-131, for temptation exists apart from yielding to it through sin. Indeed, the temptation is greater in duration and intensity when one does not take the easy way out by sinning. If man's temptation is greater when he endures it, surely Christ's was great since He had no alternative but to endure it. He has suffered, or endured, the temptation (Hebrews 2:18). (Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume 11, p. 679).

Dr. H. L. Willmington states:

Christ could not sin. There is no question concerning the fact that Jesus did not sin while on this earth, but could He have done so?

Author W. E. Best writes:

"The point of view that Christ could sin is designated by the idea of peccability, and the fact that He could not sin is expressed by the term impeccability. To suggest the capability or possibility of sinning would disqualify Christ as Savior, for a peccable Christ would mean a peccable God [see Hebrews 13:8]. Holiness is far more than the absence of sin; it is positive virtue. The advocates of peccability say, 'Christ could have sinned, but He did not.' To say that he could have sinned is to deny positive holiness. To deny positive holiness, therefore, is to deny the holy character of God. Holiness is positive virtue which has neither room for nor interest in sin. The Lord Jesus could not sin because the days of His flesh meant only addition of experience, not variation of character. Holy humanity was united to Deity in one indivisible person, the impeccable Christ. Jesus Christ cannot have more holiness because he is perfectly holy; He cannot have less holiness because He is unchangingly holy" (STUDIES IN THE PERSON AND WORK OF JESUS CHRIST, p. 3).

The question is asked, however: If Christ could not have sinned, then what was the purpose of the temptations in the wilderness? Here it should be observed that these trials were not to see if Christ would sin, but to prove He would not (WILLMINGTON'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE, pp. 618-619).

In Philippians 2:5-7 we see that Jesus, as God, took upon Himself "the likeness of man." Thus, Jesus became the one and only "God-man." He was totally God and totally man at the same time. This is called the Hypostatic Union and is difficult to understand. But Jesus Christ, as the God-man died on the cross for our sins. So, God the Son did die for sinners. It had to be this way because Jesus has always been God and always will be God and He had to die as God, being perfect, to be a satisfactory sacrifice in the eyes of God the Father.

Jesus Christ also died as a man. This identified Him with all of us in the human race. He was "made in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:7) and therefore He could be tempted in all things as we are and remain sinless (Hebrews 4:15). We praise God for this wonderful truth. Jesus Christ is now our high priest who can sympathize with our weaknesses, because he knows exactly what we are suffering.

God the Son is a person and as a person He died as God and as man. He bore our punishment. Isaiah 53:5 says, "He was wounded for our iniquities: the chastisement for our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed."

In this chastisement Christ experienced what no other man has ever experienced. He became sin, taking on Himself our sins. And when He took on Himself this sin, God the Father had to turn His back on God the Son, because of our sin which He had taken upon Himself. Thus, Christ suffered the awful punishment of separation from God the Father for us. But we praise the Triune God that Christ rose from the dead, victorious over sin and death, now to live forever as the God--man who accomplished our eternal redemption. Hallelujah! What a great Savior we have! How can we do less than to give Him our best and trust Him as our all in all!

There are even those who claim Jesus was a fine fellow, but He was not really the Son of God, God in the flesh, and he was not really resurrected physically and bodily from the grave. Some people say they love Jesus, but will not agree He is the virgin-born, divine Son of God, the literally resurrected Savior, the only hope of a lost and dying world. They just think of Him as a fine fellow. This is not the Bible Jesus, and God wants us to believe in the Jesus of the Bible, the One the Bible tells us about.

We must test the messenger and the message by the Word of God, and by how that messenger and message hold up Jesus Christ. I John 4:1-3 says:

"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."

The message and the messenger must be tested by this one test: He and the message must hold up Jesus Christ as God in the flesh, God who has come down to earth as a human being, the God-man, Jesus Christ.

If anyone rejects Jesus as God in the flesh, Deity Incarnate, then He must be rejected as one of the spirit of antichrist. You will notice that many so-called "Christian" groups do this. For instance, Jehovah's Witnesses reject Jesus as God in the flesh and teach that He should not be worshipped as God. Yet Jesus Himself said in John 10:30, "I and my Father are One."

We believe that a church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers associated by a covenant of faith and fellowship of the Gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ; governed by His laws; and exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word; that its officers of ordination are pastors or elders and deacons, whose qualifications, claims and duties are clearly defined in the Scriptures; we believe the true mission of the church is found in the Great Commission: First, to make individual disciples; Second, to build up the church; Third, to teach and instruct as He commanded. We do not believe in the reversal of this order; we hold that the local church has the absolute right of self-government free from the interference of any hierarchy of individuals or organizations; and that the Great Commission is the one and only Scriptural basis for true churches to cooperate with each other in contending for the faith and for the furtherance of the Gospel; that every church is the sole and only judge of the measure and method of its cooperation; on all matters of membership, of policy, of government, of discipline, or benevolence, the will of the local church is final.

Is it wrong to stay home from my church in order to hear Dr. Falwell on the Old Time Gospel Hour television program?

Dr. Falwell tries his best to have his telecast at a time in a given area that will not interfere with Sunday School or preaching services, whether morning or evening. Sometimes this is impossible at first; then later, a better time is available.

In the meantime, Dr. Falwell encourages those who love the Lord to support their local New Testament church with their presence, prayers, offerings and service. We appreciate the prayers and support so many dedicated Christians give to the mighty work of Christ which reaches from this one local New Testament church all over this nation and into foreign countries. This is a wonderful ministry for Christ. However, we never want the work of Christ here, even with its mighty, far-reaching blessings, to interfere with local work of Christ in other areas.

The Bible exhorts us to attend a church locally where we can be blessed and serve the Lord. Hebrews 10:25 says,

"Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is..."

Church creeds, such as the Apostle's Creed, are simply statements (confessions) of basic Christian beliefs. Christian creeds include the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. These creeds are summaries of the most fundamental beliefs held by the Christian church which made the Christian faith different from Judaism, from pagan religions, and from the religion of the Roman state (emperor-worship).

The creeds were generally developed from confessions of belief used wherever a person had declared his faith publicly and was baptized. In fact, the word "creed" comes from the Latin word credo, meaning "I believe."

The Apostle's Creed is the earliest and best known of all the Christian creeds, not because it was written by the apostles, but because the early church believed it summed up the apostle's teaching. The earliest creeds were known to have been used at the end of the second century (Eerdman's Handbook To Christian Belief, pages 19-21).

It should be noted that no formal creed, such as the Apostle's Creed, is to be found in the New Testament. The creeds were formalized by the early church fathers and were integral ingredients in church liturgy, known as creedal authority. The Apostle's Creed was recognized as a basic statement of faith by Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and by the Anglican (English) Reformers (ENCYCLOPEDIA AMERICANA, Volume VIII, page 169).

It should be pointed out that Thomas Road Baptist Church does not utilize the Apostle's Creed as a formal source of doctrinal teachings, nor is it utilized in the worship services. We believe that for the Christian, Scripture alone is to be our final authority on all matters of faith and practice (biblical authority).

How can I develop a local church into a strong, happy, fruitful New Testament church?

Several important steps should be taken:

(1) Be sure you, your leaders, and your people take the right doctrinal position according to God's Word. It is important to understand the truth of the verbal inspiration of God's Word, the deity and sinless perfection of Jesus Christ; the substitutionary death of Christ; His literal and physical resurrection and ascension; the pre-tribulation, pre-millennial return of Christ to earth; the reality of a Hell where all who die without Christ spend eternity in conscious, incomprehensible torment; direct creation by God rather than the evolutionary process- and the "whosoever will" emphasis in God's Word for salvation toward a lost and dying world.

(2) Take the right position regarding a separated, dedicated, Christ-like life. This includes a stand against things like dancing, drinking, drugs, tobacco, rock music, and other forms of worldliness. God is a holy God, and His Holy Spirit's power is simply not going to be given in large measure to God's children when they are not dedicated, Christ-like Christians, but are fence-straddling and compromising. It is important also for a church to take a separated position as a church not affiliating with groups into which theological liberalism and/or worldliness have infiltrated.

Always remember, however, that an unsaved person does not have the convicting of, or the power of, God's indwelling Holy Spirit. Therefore, he cannot live a truly separated Christ-like life. Thus while we as separated, dedicated Christians take a firm stand on sin, we must let the unsaved see the love of Christ in us and trust the Holy Spirit to bring conviction and to transform their lives after they receive Christ. We must "love the sinner, while hating the sin."

(3) Take the right position with respect to fruitfulness for Christ. The minister, his leaders, and his church members must have a warm, compassionate, driving thrust for souls. Everything the church does should be directed toward winning people to Christ and then training them to become good Christians and good "soul-winners." The pastor should be the greatest example possible in this. Witnessing should be done every week.

It is very important to visit the sick, comfort the aged and the sorrowing, cultivate those who have already been dealt with about Christ, do administrative and organizational work, stay and prepare for delivering sermons and teaching Sunday school, and to do other duties. However, soul-winning must be paramount.

(4) Work hard. As God leads you, use such means as the bus ministry, the printed-page, radio and television, and/or other scriptural means to get people into the house of God where they can hear the Word of God taught and preached. There they should feel the moving of the Spirit leading them to make decisions for Christ, transforming their lives, and enabling them to establish good, scriptural homes.

(5) Feed your sheep. Remember, as the pastor, God has called you to shepherd His beloved sheep. Three times in John 21:15-17 Jesus commanded Peter to feed His flock--His lambs and His sheep. You must feed the newborn babes and the spiritually immature with the milk of the Word, and you must feed the mature Christian with the meat of the Word. This is the way you develop your people into more mature, stronger, fruit-bearing Christians. If you do not feed your people they will look elsewhere for nourishment--somewhere else where they will be taught the Word.

Dr. Falwell has often stated that a church is like a family. Thus, a church may have ties of great difficulties and problems, even "family feuds," but there should be a prevailing spirit of love and concern for each member within a church. Whenever individuals (members of a church) cause offenses or divisions within their church, then it is the responsibility of that church to exercise church discipline.

The purpose of church discipline is to rebuke a brother of sister for causing an offense or trespass in hope of causing them to seek repentance and to right the wrong they caused by their actions. The church has an obligation to show Christ-like love and assist the individual toward cleansing, forgiveness, and restoration.

I. DISCIPLINE

The correct procedure in church discipline is included in the following five steps:

1. First step: Note and mark those who are in need of discipline (11 Thessalonians 3:14; Romans 16:17).

2. Second step: Arrange a private meeting with the offender (Matthew 18:15).

3. Third step: If this fails, set up a second meeting, this time with several other members of the church present (Matthew 18:16). During these preliminary private and semiprivate meetings, the individual should be repeatedly admonished (Titus 3:10), rebuked (II Timothy 4:2), and warned (I Thessalonians 5:14).

4. Fourth step: As a final resort, the unrepentant one is to be brought before the entire church (Matthew 18:17; 1 Timothy 5:20).

5. Fifth step -- Upon refusal to submit to church discipline, the guilty party is to be spiritually excommunicated. This constitutes two fearful things, a denial and a deliverance.

a. He is to be denied of Christian fellowship!

(1) "Avoid them" (Romans 16:17). (2) "Withdraw yourselves from" (11 Thessalonians 3:6). (3) "From such withdraw thyself" (I Timothy 6:3, 5). (4) "Reject" (Titus 3:10). (5) "Have no company with him" (I Thessalonians 3:14; I Corinthians 5:9, 11).

b. He is to be delivered over to Satan! (I Corinthians 5:5; I Timothy 1:20).

Within the process of church discipline, all individuals are to maintain a proper heart attitude towards the individuals being disciplined. They are to avoid both vengeance and arrogance. Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted (Galatians 6:1). In addition, all individuals are required to view the individual being disciplined as an erring brother and not a bitter enemy. Yet, count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother (11 Thessalonians 3:15). Those responsible for administering the discipline should approach the erring brother with sorrow and not sarcasm (I Corinthians 5:2; II Corinthians 2:4). They should be ready to forgive the brother when repentance occurs (II Corinthians 2:7; 7:10, 11).

There are four reasons as to the purpose of church discipline:

1. It is to maintain the standards of the church (Acts 5:11-16; Matthew 5:13-16; Romans 2:24).

2. It is to keep sin from spreading throughout the church (I Corinthian 5:6, 7; Joshua 7:3).

3. It is to help the guilty person find his way back to God (II Corinthians 2:6-8).

4. It is to escape God's two-fold judgment upon habitual sinning Christians.

a. Sickness (I Corinthians 11:30). b. Physical death (I Corinthians 11:30).

It should be noted that the church is responsible for disciplining all its members. It has no authority to judge or discipline unbelievers or non-members of their particular church.

The individual who receives church discipline may react in three different ways:

1. He can despise it, that is, treat it too lightly (Hebrews 12:5).

2. He can faint under it, that is, treated too seriously (Hebrews 12:5 11 Corinthians 2:7).

3. He can be exercised by it (Hebrews 12:10, 11). (THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH, by Dr. H. L. Willmington, pp. 69-73).

II. RESTORATION

It should be noted, with regard to the proper attitude for those who have experienced the misfortune of being involved in church discipline (either party), it is the Christian's responsibility to extend loving sensitivity to their needs. We would do well in our churches to remind ourselves that Christ bears with us in all weaknesses. We who are in Christ and walk in His steps should be careful to maintain the same attitude toward the brother or sister who has gone through the traumatic experience of church discipline. This should include a genuine sensitivity to their needs and a loving desire to assist them towards cleansing, forgiveness, and restoration within the church.

Is it right for a church to serve meals?

The subject of eating and serving dinners in a church is dealt with in I Corinthians 11. In the early church, the Lord's Supper was commonly preceded by a fellowship meal, later known as the Agape Feast. Eventually, so many problems accompanied these feasts that at the Council of Carthage (AD 397), they were strictly forbidden. And such was the case at Corinth. The Apostle Paul noted that in their coming together, they were not eating together; hence it could not be called a communion, as their behavior was so dishonoring to the Lord, it could hardly be called the Lord's Supper. Some were actually getting drunk in the church.

The Apostle Paul's indictment to the Corinthian believers was actually twofold. They disgraced the Lord's house, and they embarrassed the poor in their midst who were not invited to participate in the fellowship dinner. The Apostle Paul was writing to the Corinthian church in order to correct these abuses. His statement, however, should not be taken as a prohibition against eating any food at all in the church (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, pp. 448-449).

It should be understood that church fellowship dinners may be allowed within the church sanctuary (a fellowship hall, cafeteria, or any place other than the sanctuary itself). The intent of the fellowship dinner served within a church should be to promote the Christian love and fellowship for each other. Thus, the fellowship dinner may indeed be to the glory and honor of Christ. In this sense, a fellowship dinner is advisable for churches.

It should be recognized that the real mission of the New Testament church is to not only provide edification and fellowship for the believers, but is to be used in reaching the world with the Gospel of Christ. God has entrusted the church with the story of His love (the Gospel) for mankind and his desire to save mankind. The mission of every local church is to share the good news of salvation and to set the example of righteous living within their community. A church fellowship dinner serves to reinforce the testimony of a church that displays harmony among its members. The commandment to the local New Testament church is to be a living testimony and an influential power of the Christian faith proclaimed through the local community as well as around the world.

We need to understand what the Bible says about the church. The word "church" is used in the Scriptures in two senses: one, in a universal sense; and two, in a local sense.

In the universal sense the church consists of all those who, in this dispensation, have been born of the Spirit of God and have by that same Spirit been baptized into the body of Christ (I Corinthians 12:13).

The gospel of Jesus Christ is simply His death, burial, and resurrection for the forgiveness of our sins and our justification before God (I Corinthians 15:3, 4). The blood of Jesus Christ actually cleanses an individual from his sins (Ephesians 1:7- Colossians 1:14, 20-22; Romans 3:25; Hebrews 9:12-14; I John 1:7). When an individual believes the gospel of Jesus Christ and invites Jesus into his heart as his personal Savior by faith, that person automatically becomes a part of the universal church.

The second sense in which the word "church" is used in the Bible is in the local sense. That is, a local church is a group of professed believers in any locality. Dr. Falwell uses the definition that a local church is a group of born again believers who have been baptized and have banded together to carry out the Great Commission. Thus, we read in the Bible of the church at Ephesus, the church at Corinth, the church at Galatia, the church of the Thessalonians, the church in Jerusalem, and so forth.

In other words, once an individual accepts Jesus Christ into his heart as his personal Savior, it is God's plan that that individual join a gospel preaching, soul-winning, local church in his own area. This teaches us that Christians all around the world are a part of the universal church which the Bible describes as being the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, or (as is sometimes used) the "building of God." Yet, at the same time, the Lord wants us to unite with a good local church in our area.

The rite of circumcision was instituted by God for Abraham and his descendents through Isaac as the token of the Abrahamic Covenant (see Genesis 17:1-10, 21). All Jewish males, eight days old, were required to be circumcised, although Abraham was 89 years old when he was circumcised. Any non-Jews who wished to become members of the commonwealth of Israel were required to submit to the rite of circumcision, whatever their age might be (see Genesis 34:14-17, 22; Exodus 11:48).

Often the term circumcision is used in reference to people of the Jewish community, just as the term uncircumcision is used for Gentile people (see Galatians 2:7-8); Colossians 3:11). Circumcision also means, in the New Testament, the significance of putting away all carnal lusts of the flesh (see Colossians 2:11).

The Apostle Paul addressed the issue of circumcision in Romans chapter 2,3,4, and in several of the other letters he wrote in the New Testament. Paul concluded that circumcision was not necessary for someone in order to be saved, but faith was necessary in order to be saved and go to heaven.

"Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision (Jews) by faith, and uncircumcision (Non-Jews) through faith" (Romans 3:30).

"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping of the commandments of God" (I Corinthians 7:19).

Paul notes the rite of circumcision in relationship to Jewish believers and non-Jewish (Gentile) believers is not the central issue with regard to salvation. There is no need to for a Gentile convert to be circumcised. On the other hand, there is no obligation incumbent upon a Jewish convert to be uncircumcised. In the New Testament, this rite had no direct reference on the life of faith (see Romans 2:25, 29; Galatians 5:6; Acts 15). (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 433)

"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing" (Galatians 5:2).

"For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love" (Galatians 5:6).

To accept the rite of circumcision as a condition of salvation is to abandon the liberty for which Christ liberated us and to bind one's self to the slavery of legalism. Depending on circumcision, or any other work, means renouncing justification by grace through faith (in Christ) and takes one out of the spirit of grace ("fallen from grace") and puts him under the dominion of the law. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, pp. 530-531.)

"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature" (Galatians 6:15).

Circumcision affects only the outward physical body, not the soul. A surgical operation can have absolutely no effect on the old nature. But a new creature, the only thing that is important is to be a new creature in Christ (see II Corinthians 5:17). In the new man, there is an obligation of outward distinctions. National privilege has been obliterated; ceremonial standings have been obliterated; cultural and social castes all have been obliterated, and "Christ is all, and in all" (Colossians 3:11). (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II pp. 536, 598).

We believe that civil government is of divine appointment, for the interests and good order of human society; that magistrates are to be prayed for; conscientiously honored and obeyed; except only in things opposed to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ; who is the only Lord of the conscience, and the coming Prince of the kings of earth.

There are several instances given in the Bible referring to clay. In Job 33:6 it states: I also am formed out of the clay. In Psalm 40:2, there is a reference to the "miry clay" symbolizing our lives before we were saved. In one of the miracles of Christ we find a reference to clay being made and put upon the eyes of the blind man (see John 9:6,11, 14,15).

Another passage that refers to clay is found in Isaiah 64:8: But now, 0 Lord, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand. This passage gives the relationship described in the work of a potter (one who molds and models clay vessels) with the natural clay. The word potter could be translated as "the one who formed us"; the clay represents that which is pliable and submissive, and the potter represents the one who has absolute authority over the clay. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. 1, p. 1419).

There are many other Scripture references to the work of God likened unto a potter's molding of clay. All of these Scriptures give an analogy which describe the way God remolds our lives in order for us to be fit vessels of honor unto Christ. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified, and met for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work (II Timothy 2:21).

(1) We believe God's Word teaches only those who are saved should partake of the Lord's Supper.

(2) We believe God's Word teaches partaking of the Lord's Supper does not save anyone, but is only in obedience to the instructions of the Lord Jesus Christ to do this in memory of His death until He comes again.

(3) We believe God's Word teaches the Lord's Supper is to point backward to His suffering aid death and shed blood on Calvary's cross, and forward to his promised return to earth.

(4) We believe God's Word teaches the elements to be used in the Lord's Supper are unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine (we use grape juice, not alcoholic beverage). We believe the bread symbolizes His body and the grape juice symbolizes His shed blood. The juice does not turn into the blood of Christ, nor the bread to the body of Christ. They only represent the body and blood of Christ in a symbolic and figurative sense.

(5) We believe those who are saved should partake of the Lord's Supper with a desire and determination to reconsecrate themselves to Christ on each of these occasionally if they do not strive to bring themselves into the center of God's will on these occasions, God may lay His hand upon them in chastisement.

(6) We believe God's Word teaches this is in honor of the Lord's death and shed blood; it reminds us that our relationship to Christ and communion with Christ are through what He has done on Calvary's cross and in our hearts, and is a fellowship of believers in Christ.

(7) We believe the Lord's Supper should be used as an occasion to call sinners to Christ, even though they do not participate in its observance.

(8) The Bible does not tell us how often to partake of the Lord's Supper. The Lord Jesus simply asked us, as often as we do partake, to remember His death on the cross for us and His promise to return to earth for us.

(9) The Lord's Supper took the place of the Old Testament Passover. The Passover was instituted as an ordinance to commemorate the deliverance of the children of Israel from slavery in Egypt. They had to kill the Passover Lamb and sprinkle the blood on either side of their door and above the entrance. They then had to eat the lamb, which had been roasted whole. When they did this, the death angel would pass over their home. If they did not do this, the death angel would stop in their home and slay the oldest child.

This Passover Feast, or supper, was a type of the coming Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, Whose shed blood would pay for the sins of the whole world and make it possible for "whosoever will" to be saved through repentance of sins and faith in Him for the forgiveness of those sins.

We can tell from the Gospels the Lord's Supper replaced the Passover Feast which was observed annually in the first month of the Jewish year, equivalent to the latter part of March and the first half of April. Although the Passover was observed only once a year, and the New Testament Lord's Supper took its place, the New Testament does not tell us explicitly how often to observe the Lord's Supper.

(10) Many churches observe it weekly; any others observe it once every three months. Once a week is so often we are likely not to take seriously the call to a definite reconsecration to a crucified way of life and renewed appreciation for Christ's death on the cross. Nevertheless, the Bible does not explicitly state how often we should observe the Lord's Supper.

(11) The Lord's Supper is a time when we should rededicate our lives to Christ. We should never partake without being completely surrendered to Him. If we do so with unconfessed sins, Paul tells us we may become sick. If our offense is serious enough, we may even die. Therefore, it is important we come to the Lord's Supper with a complete reconsecration of our heart to Him.

Abusive practices associated with communion:

What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame then, that have not? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not (I Corinthians 11:22).

The Corinthian church members were commended by Paul for their keeping of the ordinances (I Corinthians 11:2) -- but they were sharply criticized for the manner in which they observed the Lord's Supper. They had been guilty of carnality (see verses 17-22). They needed to be corrected (verses 23-26) as to the proper procedure and attitude of observing the Lord's Supper before they received chastisement from the Lord (verses 27-34).

When ye come together... this is not to eat the Lord's supper (verse 20). It was a supper, but not the Lord's. It was a disorderly gathering of people going through the motions. For in eating ... one is hungry, and another is drunken (verse 21). In the early church, the Lord's Supper was commonly preceded by a fellowship meal, later known as the "Agape Feast". Eventually, so any problems accompanied these feasts that at the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397), they were strictly forbidden --and such was the case at Corinth. In their coming together, they were not eating together, hence, it could not be called communion, and their behavior was so dishonoring to the Lord, it could hardly be called the Lord's Supper. Some were actually getting drunk.

Paul's indictment is twofold. They disgraced the Lord's house, and they embarrassed the poor in their midst who were not invited to participate in the fellowship dinner. This being the case, they could just as well do this at home. The apostle was writing to correct these abuses in the church. His statement should not be taken as a prohibition against eating any food at all in the church, i.e., fellowship dinners in the church (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 448).

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (I John 1:9).

The message of I John 1:9 is a practical application of a very critical subject in a Christian's life-the subject of sin. This verse tells all Christians that the confession of personal sins is an activity pleasing unto God for all Christians. The activity of confession is not simply in enumeration of various sins but a genuine sorrow over sin in a Christian's life. The word translated "confess" is a combination of two Greek word, homo meaning "saying" and lego meaning "to say." Thus, the idea of confession is to view sin as God views it and to identify with His judgment against sin. This passage gives a message of assurance to all Christians who are faithful in confessing their sins as to the faithfulness and the justice of God in forgiving them their sins. "Faithfulness" stresses the certainty of His response to man's confession. God is also just in forgiving sin because the penalty for all sin has already been met in Christ's death. (The Criswell Study Bible, p. 1463.)

The LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY interprets this passage as follows:

Sin must be dealt with; it is a fact. The proper way of dealing with sin is not to deny it, but to acknowledge it and allow God to cleanse it. If we confess (Greek homologeo, meaning "acknowledge" or "agree with") our sins, He is faithful and just (He can be faithful to us and fulfill His promise, as well as just in accordance with His own righteousness and require the punishment of sin in Christ) so that (non-final clauses with Greek hina are possible in John). He forgives our sins, and cleanses us from all unrighteousness. (Liberty Bible Commentary Vol. II, page 765).

You ask whether a church should register as a 501(c) 3 corporation? Usually, a church does not need to do this. The government has recognized the church's authority to issue charitable receipts for income tax purposes. However, there may be some local issues that we are not aware of. And we can not speak to those

The Hebrew word for "covenant" is berit, meaning, "to cut or divide"...having reference to blood. In Genesis 15:10-21 Abraham cut/divided several sacrificial animals in token of God's covenant with him. The New Testament Greek word for "covenant" is diatheke (testament or will) i.e., a treaty that is between two parties, but binding only on one, according to terms fixed by the other. (WILLMINGTON'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE, p. 520)

The Old Covenant pertained to the Old Testament economy: ... God first made the promise [old Covenant] with Abraham. During the interval, before the promise was fulfilled, the Law was added until Christ should come. He has now come, [New Covenant] and the Mosaic law has passed away (fulfilled) ... (Jeremiah 31:31-34- Hebrews 8:6-13). (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, VOL. 11, p. 691)

The Old Covenant was to prepare the children of Israel (Jews) for the mediator of a better covenant (Jesus Christ, Galatians 3:24), which was established upon better promises (Hebrews 8:6; Jeremiah 31:31). The Apostle Paul noted that the law "engraved in stones was to be done away" (II Corinthians 3:7). The New Covenant was new because it was not inaugurated until Christ (see Matthew 26:28; Luke 22:7-23; I Corinthians 11:25- Hebrews 8:8- 9:15). The Old Covenant law was holy, just, and good (Romans 7:21); but the best it could do was condemn the sinner "the latter killeth," but the "spirit giveth life" (11 Corinthians 3:6-7).

The New Covenant is based upon an inner, spiritual change within people (salvation). This covenant is not written upon stone, but in their heart (Ezekiel 36:26-27; II Corinthians 3:6-18). The next two principles of the New Covenant involve its spiritual superiority over the Old Covenant. All who are involved in the New Covenant will personally know the Lord. It is unlike the old, Mosaic Covenant which included all according to a physical, national qualification [given only to Israel]. Further, this covenant involves a complete forgiveness for its people [all saved] (Hebrews 8:12). The once-for-all sacrifice of its High Priest [Christ] will remove the remembrance of sins. The daily sacrifices made it difficult for the Old Testament saint to forget his sins. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, VOL II, p. 691).

Because of His [Christ's] blood, His death, Christ has accomplished what the Old Covenant could not. Therefore, He has been set as the Mediator for a New Covenant His sacrifice has achieved what the many sacrifices of the Old Testament could not, for He effectuated "the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first" (Hebrews 9:15). The Old Testament sacrifices could not take away sin (Hebrews 10:4); they merely made an atonement, a covering for sin. Christ's sacrifice expediated all those past sins that had received atonement. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, VOL. II, p. 695).

WILLMINGTON'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE, presents the following comparison/contrasts of the Old/New Covenants on page 520:

1. The Old Covenant a. It was mediated by Moses (Exodus 19- John 1:17; Galatians 3:19). b. It was conditional (See Deuteronomy 28). c. It could not produce the necessary righteousness (Hebrews 8:8). d. It was written on dead stones (Exodus 32:15).

2. The New Covenant a. It is mediated by Christ (Hebrews 9:15; John 1:17). b. It is unconditional (Hebrews 8:9) c. It can produce the necessary righteousness (Hebrews 8:11). d. It is written on living hearts (Hebrews 8:10).

Legalism

People who desire to hold to the Old Covenant of worship are rightly called legalizers. They rigorously prefer to worship in a legalistic form rather than in the liberty of the Spirit of Christ (II Corinthians 4:7; John 8:32; 14:17 "But if ye be led of the spirit, ye are not under the law" (Galatians 5:18; also see Galatians 5: 1)

One Special Day!

There is one day that a Christian can recognize above any other, day--"the day of salvation" (II Corinthians 6:2). "Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, today if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts..." (Hebrews 3:7,8a). Thus, any particular day of the week, calendar, or year may be special to the born again Christian. The Apostle Paul warned believers against judging a man for "esteeming one day above another" (Romans 14:5), because one day certainly is special to the Christian--the day of salvation!

We believe in the Genesis account of creation, and that it is to be accepted literally and not allegorically or figuratively; that man was created directly in God's own image and after His own likeness; that man's creation was not a matter of evolution, or evolutionary change of species, or developments through interminable periods of time from lower to higher forms; that all animals and vegetable life were made directly and God's established law was that they should bring forth only "after their kind." We believe that Genesis 1:1 is the record of the heavens and the earth being brought into existence in a basic form on the first day of the Creation Week; that each of the six days, plus the seventh day of rest, in Creation Week was not an age but a day such as each day in the command of God to work six days.

What do you believe about cremation?

Dr. Falwell definitely believes since the Christian's body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, he should plan a burial which will not involve cremation.

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: Therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's (I Corinthians 6:19-20).

According to I Corinthians 6:19-20, the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit for each child of God. With this in mind, one can readily understand that, while living, the body should not be defiled with tobacco, alcohol, immoral activities and improper eating habits. This passage of Scripture would also lead us to want our body, even in death, handled with loving care, respect, and dignity.

All of us understand that in large cities where the population is dense and plots for regular burial are at a premium, it would be easy for the practice of cremation to develop. However, in crowded cities, buildings are being erected where funeral services are held and the body is deposited for keeping in that same building. These buildings accommodate a large number of bodies. Thus, it seems an alternative to cremation is possible, even in crowded cities.

All of us also understand bodies have to be buried at sea when a vessel on which the person has died will be at sea for quite some time and there are no accommodations for preserving the body until the ship gets to shore. Nevertheless, the burial at sea is usually very sacred and dignified.

Cremation is wrong for you if you are contemplating cremation as part of a religious ceremony for a non-Christian religion or you think cremation will help you escape judgment by God in the future. However, if you live in a society that mandates cremation by law (because of limited burial space) or you have another valid reason (burial too costly), then it is not wrong to cremate. However, most believers will want to follow the example of Jesus and be buried in the earth to wait for Resurrection Day.

Also, if a person is contemplating their own body or a loved one's body being disposed of by the method of cremation, they should consider whether or not other members of their immediate family or close friends would be emotionally hurt by such a method. It would be wise to prayerfully seek God's peace regarding the decision of body disposal.

God certainly has the power to make our resurrection bodies from the dust or ashes to which our bodies decompose after death. The main thing to remember is this: the body of a Christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit -in life and in death it should be dealt with in dignity, respect, and loving care.

In Philippians 2:5-7 we see that Jesus, as God, took upon Himself "the likeness of men." Thus, Jesus became the one and only "God-man." He was totally God and totally man at the same time. This is called the Hypostatic Union and is difficult to understand. But Jesus Christ, as the God-man died on the cross for our sins. So, to answer your question, "yes," God the Son did die for sinners. It had to be this way because Jesus has always been God and always will be God. He could not have put away His deity to die on the cross even if He wanted to, because He is God. And He had to die as God, being perfect, to be a satisfactory sacrifice in the eyes of God the Father.

Jesus Christ also died as a man. This identified Him with all of us in the human race. He was "made in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:7) and therefore, He could be tempted in all things as we are and remain sinless (Hebrews 4:15). We praise God for this wonderful truth. Jesus Christ is now our High Priest who can sympathize with our weaknesses, because He knows exactly what we are going through.

God the Son is a person and as a person He died as God and as man. He bore our punishment. Isaiah 53:3 says, "He was wounded for our iniquities: the chastisement for our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed."

In this chastisement Christ experienced what no other man has ever experienced. He became sin, taking on Himself our sins; and when He took Himself this sin God the Father had taken upon Himself. Thus Christ suffered the awful punishment of separation from God the Father at that time. But we praise the Triune God that Christ rose from the dead, victorious over sin and death, now to live forever more as the God-man who accomplished our eternal redemption. Hallelujah! What a great Savior we have! How can we do less than to give Him our best and trust Him as our all in all!

The Bible speaks of the rewards of faithful Christians as their crowns, as may be seen in the following passages: And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible (I Corinthians 9:25). For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming? (I Thessalonians 2:19)

There are at least five crowns mentioned in the Scriptures that may be won by Christians:

1. The Incorruptible Crown -- faithfulness in self-control

And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight 1, not as one that beateth the air: But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway (I Corinthians 9:25-27).

2. The Crown of Rejoicing -- faithfulness in service

For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming (I Thessalonians 2:19).

. . . my joy and crown . . . (Philippians 4:1).

The only reward that approaches success.

3. The Crown of Righteousness -- faithfulness in testimony

I have fought a good fight. I have finished my course. I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing (II Timothy 4:7,8).

Not fruit, but faithfulness.

4. The Crown of Glory -- faithfulness in tending those entrusted to you

Feed the flock of God which is among you . . . Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away (I Peter 5:2-4).

Glory is an attribute of God.

5. The Crown of Life -- faithfulness in temptation

Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him (James 1: 12).

The believer's crowns will be given at Christ's judgement seat (Bema). For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad (II Corinthians 5:10).

The purpose of the Bema judgement is not to determine whether a particular individual enters Heaven or not, for every man's eternal destiny is already determined before he leaves this life. In addition, the purpose of the Bema judgement is not to punish believers for sins committed either before or after their salvation. The Scriptures are very clear that no child of God will have to answer for his sins after this life (see Psalm 103:10-12; Isaiah 38:17; Isaiah 44:22; Micah 7:19; Hebrews 8:12; 1 John 1:7).

The purpose of the Bema judgement is to determine whether or not a believer has been a faithful steward. Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful (I Corinthians 4:2). With the subject of stewardship in mind, all stewards (believers) will stand before their Lord and Master and be required to give an account of the way they have used their privileges and responsibilities (talents and abilities) from the moment of their conversion (THE KING IS COMING, H. L. Willmington, pp. 23-25).

The apostle Paul explains in his first epistle to the Corinthian church (I Corinthians 3:10-15) the glorious fact that at the moment of salvation a repenting sinner is firmly placed on the foundation of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ Himself! Paul gives clear warning when he says:

. . . But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

From this passage in I Corinthians, it is apparent that God classifies the works of believers into one of the following six areas: gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble. There's been much speculation about the kinds of work down here that will constitute gold and silver rewards up there. But is seems more appropriate to note that the six objects can be readily placed into two categories:

1. Eternal - those indestructible and worthy objects which will survive and thrive in the judgement fires. These are the gold, silver, and precious stones.

2. Temporal - those destructible and worthless objects which will be totally consumed in the judgement fires. These are the wood, hay, and stubble (THE KING IS COMING, H. L. Willmington, pp. 26, 27).

A great deal of what is called Christian work may be only the energy of the flesh. The objects listed in I Corinthians 3 speak of the quality/motive of one's service for Christ in this life. Those things not done for the glory of God will be burned up and thus not subject to rewards. Only that which is done for Christ will be rewarded at the judgement seat of Christ. God will test everything in the light of His own truth -- "the consuming fire."

If a man's works remain undamaged by the judgement fire, he receives rewards (wages). Rewards are spoken of as crowns given in direct relationship to the quality/motive of our service unto Christ. Rewards are not salvation, but are those things which may be earned. If a man's works are consumed in fire, he shall "suffer loss" but he himself shall be saved. It is important to notice that the man will not suffer loss of salvation, but the loss of rewards. The stress of the passage in I Corinthians 3:15 is upon service, not salvation (RYRIE STUDY BIBLE, p. 1730).

The crucifixion of Jesus Christ was good for us in that God in His great love and mercy offers through Jesus and His death for our sins the forgiveness of sins and the gift of everlasting life.

The crucifixion of Jesus was evil on the part of all of us whose sins caused Jesus to be crucified. Your sins and mine drove those nails through His hands and feet, put that crown of thorns upon His brow, drove that spear into His side, and all of the other awful things done to Jesus at Calvary.

So, the crucifixion of Jesus is good for us, but was bad because we were the ones who caused Him to go to the cross. Thank God His great love overcomes all the bad for every person who repents of his sins and turns to Jesus.

In Philippians 2:5-7 we see that Jesus, as God, took upon Himself "the likeness of men." Thus, Jesus became the one and only "God-man," He was totally God and totally man at the same time. This is called the Hypostatic Union and is difficult to understand. But Jesus Christ, as the God-man died on the cross for our sins. So, God the Son did die for sinners. It had to be this way because Jesus has always been God and always will be God. He could not have put away His deity to die on the cross even if He wanted to, because He is God. And He had to die as God, being perfect, to be a satisfactory sacrifice for us in the eyes of God the Father.

Jesus Christ also died as a man. This identified Him with all of us in the human race. He was "made in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:7) and therefore, He could be tempted in all things as we are and remain sinless (Hebrews 4:15). We praise God for this wonderful truth. Jesus Christ is now our high priest who can sympathize with our weaknesses, because He knows exactly what we are going through.

God the Son is a person and as a person He died as God and as man He bore our punishment. Isaiah 53:5 says, "He was wounded for our transgressions: he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed."

In this chastisement Christ experienced what no other man has ever experienced. He became sin, taking on Himself our sins. And when He took upon Himself our sin on the cross, God the Father had to turn His back on God the Son, because of our sin which He had taken upon Himself. Thus Christ suffered the awful punishment of separation from God the Father at that time. But we praise the Triune God that Christ rose from the dead, victorious over sin and death, now to live forever as the God-man who accomplished our eternal redemption. Hallelujah! What a Savior we have! How can we do less than to give Him our best and trust Him as our all in all!

The crucifixion of Jesus Christ was good for us in that God in His great love and mercy offers through Jesus and His death for our sins the forgiveness of sins and the gift of everlasting life.

The crucifixion of Jesus was evil on the part of all of us whose sins caused Jesus to be crucified. Your sins and mine drove those nails through His hands and feet, put that crown of thorns upon His brow, drove that spear into His side, and all of the other awful things done to Jesus at Calvary.

So, the crucifixion of Jesus is good for us, but was bad because we were the ones who caused Him to go to the cross. Thank God His great love overcomes all the bad for every person who repents of his sins and turns to Jesus.

In Philippians 2:5-7 we see that Jesus, as God, took upon Himself "the likeness of men." Thus, Jesus became the one and only "God-man," He was totally God and totally man at the same time. This is called the Hypostatic Union and is difficult to understand. But Jesus Christ, as the God-man died on the cross for our sins. So, God the Son did die for sinners. It had to be this way because Jesus has always been God and always will be God. He could not have put away His deity to die on the cross even if He wanted to, because He is God. And He had to die as God, being perfect, to be a satisfactory sacrifice for us in the eyes of God the Father.

Jesus Christ also died as a man. This identified Him with all of us in the human race. He was "made in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:7) and therefore, He could be tempted in all things as we are and remain sinless (Hebrews 4:15). We praise God for this wonderful truth. Jesus Christ is now our high priest who can sympathize with our weaknesses, because He knows exactly what we are going through.

God the Son is a person and as a person He died as God and as man He bore our punishment. Isaiah 53:5 says, "He was wounded for our transgressions: he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed."

In this chastisement Christ experienced what no other man has ever experienced. He became sin, taking on Himself our sins. And when He took upon Himself our sin on the cross, God the Father had to turn His back on God the Son, because of our sin which He had taken upon Himself. Thus Christ suffered the awful punishment of separation from God the Father at that time. But we praise the Triune God that Christ rose from the dead, victorious over sin and death, now to live forever as the God-man who accomplished our eternal redemption. Hallelujah! What a Savior we have! How can we do less than to give Him our best and trust Him as our all in all!

Let us examine what the Bible says with regard to the subject of cursing:

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you (Matthew 5:44).

In this passage, Jesus specifically instructs the believer to bless them that curse you and do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that ... persecute you. Another passage that gives clarity to the fact that a Christian should not curse another individual is found in Romans 12:14: Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. In addition to these passages, there is another passage that relates directly to the fact that it would be very wrong and unchristian-like for a believer to curse another individual:

Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be (James 3:9, 10).

Thus, we see that a Christian whose mouth is used to curse and condemn others while praising God certainly lacks credibility and a Godly spirit. Therefore, any Christian who would curse another individual, whether they be saved or unsaved, certainly would display a shallow Christian witness and a definite unchristian-like attitude.

Who was the person God placed on your heart today as you were driving in your car? Reading your devotions? Preparing for your day? Perhaps it was a family member or a dear friend. Maybe it was someone you haven't thought of or seen in many years.

The most important question, though, is not who it was you thought of but what you did with that thought. You see, at that very moment you have the opportunity to unleash a great "cycle of blessings."

How does that happen? First, any time God places someone on your heart, it is a call from the Holy Spirit to be sensitive and pray for that person. You do not have to know what he/she is going through in order to pray-just know that God is using you to accomplish His will in the life of another. Through your prayers, that individual will be blessed, even if he or she never knows you were praying. But the blessing is not for that person alone; the second blessing in the cycle is for you.

Prayer reveals new dimensions of God's great love. It keeps our mind on Him and off of ourselves. When you open yourself up to the working of the Holy Spirit, you will be blessed by His stirring in your life. By taking your eyes off of yourself and praying for the needs of another (even when you don't know what the needs are), you are able to see another side of God: His great love and compassion. And you will be greatly blessed.

Finally, in the same way that we are blessed by the moving of the Holy Spirit in our lives, God is blessed by our petition to Him on behalf of another. It must warm the heart of God to see His children reaching out in care and concern for one another. There is rejoicing in Heaven when such an occasion occurs. God then takes our prayers and uses them to unlock doors of great blessings in the lives of others.

So when that name comes to mind, don't disregard it. Stop what you are doing long enough to start the "Cycle of Blessings" that Holy Spirit-inspired prayer unleashes.

The Bible does not tell us the time of year when Jesus was born. We do not know the day or even the month. It is only a matter of tradition that we celebrate His birth on December 25. While this day is not the exact date of Christ's birth, it is good that we do have one day a year in which we do celebrate the birth of the Savior.

DEALING WITH DEPRESSION

Has there ever been a time in your life when you just did not want to get out of bed in the morning?

A time when you felt so low you could not even see a trace of the "light at the end of the tunnel?" Have you ever felt so burdened by the troubles and cares of life that it was difficult to spend time with your closest friends and family-and impossible to be in the company of just casual acquaintances?

If your answer is "yes" to any of the questions above, chances are you have battled depression in the past or you might be dealing with an overwhelming bout of depression now. It may even feel like it will never leave you. If this describes you right now, or reminds you of depression you have experienced in the past, this special message is for you today: There is hope for you, and I want to help you find your way out of the despair which engulfs you from time to time-even the despair that might be hanging over you right now.

First, let me tell you that you are not alone. Depression is a common experience to many people at some point in their lives. Physical illness, loss of a loved one and the sense that one has "failed in life" are feelings common to all people and can lead to depression.

But here is where the "rubber meets the road." What you do with your feelings of depression is what separates you from the world. Some people, even born-again believers, allow depression to become the stronghold of their lives. They become victims of depression instead of victors over depression. They allow depression to ruin their families, their jobs and their lives. Sadly, many of these people run out of hope completely and take their own lives.

However, there are also those who have experienced seasons of depression in life and lived to tell about it. In fact, several men in the Bible battled depression. Job, Moses, Elijah and David are just a few men who had a "death wish" due to depression at some point in their lives. But these men used their experience to enrich their ministry and their walk with the Lord. In the end, their bouts with depression did not conquer them: They made them stronger.

And that is what it can do for you.

II Corinthians 1:3 says, "Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort."

God can comfort you. He can change your mindset and lead you to a life filled with purpose and joy. Here are several suggestions to help you deal with depression:

Believe That God Is Greater Than Your Problems

There is a children's song that goes: "My God is so BIG, so STRONG and so MIGHTY, there's nothing my God cannot do!" What a wonderful truth about our Lord-and so simple. Why is that in the face of life's troubles we often forget this basic foundation of our faith?

Remember: God was bigger that the Red Sea. He was bigger than the giant Goliath. He was bigger than the whale that swallowed Jonah. And He was bigger than the cross at Calvary. What is it that God cannot overcome in your life? Absolutely nothing!

Turn Your Problems Over To Him In Prayer

That's easy to say, but difficult to do. I can think of many times when a situation presented itself and I immediately set out to "fix it" on my own. When I failed, I felt down and discouraged. How much better would it have been to take that problem to Jesus to start with?

The Bible says to "Cast all your cares upon Him; for he careth for you" (I Peter 5:7). God wants to take your burdens from you, and He wants you to lay them at the foot of the cross and let Him bear the weight.

Remember, too, that you do not have to "go it alone." Remember to PRAY and seek God's face. Pray specifically for the things you want and need. And pray that He will give you an understanding of the problem from His perspective and spiritual victory.

Believe That God Has A Purpose For Your Life

In Jeremiah 29:11, we are promised that God knows the plans He has for you, ". . . to give you a hope and a future." God wants you to be happy, fulfilled and full of peace.

It is not His desire that you feel depressed and hopeless. Seek wisdom from the Lord. Gather strength in the knowledge that His ways are higher than ours, and His plan for your life is filled with hope and joy.

Recognize That Depression Feeds On Self-Pity

If you feel overwhelmed by feeling of despair, the worst thing you can do is dwell on those feelings. Sitting in a dark room all alone will not help you. I have often said that YOU are in charge of your attitude and outlook on life. If you choose to "wallow in your self-pity"-in a dark room, with sad music playing in the background-you have chosen to stay depressed.

But if you choose to rise above your circumstances by getting out, getting involved and facing the world again, you will begin to see your darkness disappear!

If you find yourself struggling with self-pity in the midst of depression, squarely face your self-centered attitude and confess it as sin. Then, get out of your house, leave the darkness behind and do your best to start living again.

Depression does not have to defeat or destroy you. It can actually become God's tool to help you. Remember God's promise in Romans 8:28: ". . . all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose." Even depression can ultimately produce good results in your life, if you will allow God to use it properly. God made us with the capacity for depression, but He did not intend it to defeat us; instead He wants it to mature us.

What is meant by the term "death angel?" Does the Bible actually teach that there is a "death angel?"

The actual term "death angel" is not found in the Scriptures. In reference to the meaning of the term "death angel," the Bible uses the term "destroyer," as in the passage of Exodus 12:23: For the Lord will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the Lord will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you. Please note the reference to the "destroyer" as the agent used in killing the firstborn of the Egyptians. In the Moffatt version of the Scriptures, the term "destroying angel" is used in Exodus 12:23. In I Corinthians 10:10 we find a reference to the term "the destroyer": Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.

On page 92 of the book ANGELS: ELECT AND EVIL, by C. Fred Dickason, under the subject of the "Ministry of Angels," it is noted that angels are considered executors of God's judgment. The book gives the following examples of angels being executors: "Angels were involved in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:1, 12-13). God used angels in bringing the plagues on Egypt (Psalm 78:43, 49) and sent the destroying angel to execute the firstborn in Egypt at the Passover" (Exodus 12:13, 23).

In studying the passages referred to in Exodus 12, it seems to indicate that the direct act of execution of the firstborn was supervised directly by God Himself. On page 34 of BARNES' NOTES on this passage, it states the following: "This plague [death of the firstborn] is distinctly attributed here to the personal intervention of the Lord; but it is to be observed that although the Lord Himself passed through to smite the Egyptians, He employed the agency of the 'destroyer.' In accordance with Hebrews 11:28, all the ancient versions, and most critics, recognize the destroyer as an angel (see II Kings 19:35; II Samuel 24:16)."

There are those commentators who hold an interpretation of the "destroyer" as being none other than Jesus Christ in a preincarnate form --the angel of the Lord. On page 321 of MATTHEW HENRY'S COMMENTARY on Exodus 12:29, he states the following: "God's Son, even His firstborn, released this judgment and conquered Pharaoh..." The angel of the Lord's designation has been interpreted as being none other than Jehovah Himself (see Genesis 22:15, 16; Numbers 22:22-35; Judges 2:1-5; 6:21-23). He is often thought to be the Second Person of the Trinity (Jesus Christ) in a preincarnate form. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. I, p. 697).

The Bible tells us that our eternal fate is sealed once we have departed this life. We cannot offer prayers for those who have departed this life as the Bible teaches that once we die we immediately go either into the presence of the Lord in Heaven (II Corinthians 5:8) or we are cast into Hell forever (Matthew 25:46; John 3:18).

The testimony of the Bible is that God is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" (II Peter 3:9). If you will examine John 3:16, you will see from this verse that if you repent from your sins and then place your trust and your faith in the love of God that put Jesus on the cross for you, and to let Jesus come into your heart as your Savior and your Lord, that you are then assured that you will not "perish," but you will have "everlasting life," and that you will go to Heaven and not Hell when you die.

If you have never trusted Christ as your personal Savior, or you are not sure if you would be in Heaven should you die suddenly, may I invite you to settle this question right now? If you are willing to repent of your sins, by confessing to the Lord that you are a sinner and that you will pray the following prayer, from a humble and sincere heart, God will save your soul right now: "Lord Jesus, have mercy upon e a sinner, and come into my heart and life as my personal Savior and Lord, and forgive me of my sins and save me for your sake. Amen." Romans 10:13 tells us, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Death would never have come into the world if it had not been for sin. God told Adam and Eve as recorded in Genesis 2:16-17 the following words:

"And the LORD God Commanded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

Adam and Eve died spiritually, not physically, the day they disobeyed God's command. Later, they died physically. Physical death came as a result of sin, and followed spiritual death which came immediately from the sin that was committed.

James 1:15 tells us the following words:

"...and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death."

Romans 6:23 says:

"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

You can see from this that, "the wages of sin is death." However, it is wonderful that God tells us in the same verse that Jesus can cancel the effects of sin, death, and give us everlasting life. Jesus who died for our sins, did not stay in the grave. He came alive physically and bodily, and came out of that tomb. Because Jesus was resurrected, He gained the victory over death and the grave for us. Therefore, when we are saved, when we repent of our sins and accept Jesus as our Saviour, God gives us everlasting life right then. We immediately begin living spiritually, and will never die spiritually. Although the Christian may die physically, he never dies spiritually. His body will be resurrected and glorified so that both body and soul will live on forever and ever.

Jesus taught us that physical death for the Christian is only a state of sleep. We simply fall asleep in Jesus, when we die physically. Then our soul goes immediately into the presence of God. Later, Jesus will resurrect our bodies from the grave, will make them perfect and glorified, and will let our soul from Heaven re-enter that perfected and glorified body. Then body and soul will go sweeping up into the presence of Jesus to be with Him forever.

It is a beautiful thing that Jesus taught us: for the Christian, death is only a "temporary" sleep. For this teaching, read John 11:11-14.

Jesus teaches us, in Luke 16:19-24, that, for the unsaved person, (one who has never repented of his sins and has never accepted Jesus as his personal Saviour) death is a horrible experience in which the soul leaves the body, when the body dies, and plunges directly into Hell, and into all of the eternal, conscious torments.

The Bible also teaches us that the unsaved people who die will have a resurrection of their bodies also. However, their bodies will not be perfected and glorified bodies like the resurrected bodies of Christians. Their bodies will still be rotting and decaying and sick and painful and growing older and more infirmed all the time. Their souls will be dragged out of Hell and placed into that kind of resurrected body. Then body and soul will be cast back into Hell to live there forever--the miserable and unhappy and guilty soul trapped in a body that is always dying but can never die, that is always growing more imperfect but can never be healed, that is always growing older and weaker but can never be made young again. Genesis 3:23-24 is as follows:

"Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

You can see from this that God did not want Adam and Eve, after they had already sinned and had become susceptible to sickness and to pain and to old age, to put forth their hand and eat from the tree of life (which could not give them spiritual life but could make them live on forever physically) and live forever trapped in a body that would always be growing sicker and older and weaker and more painful, and yet never die. This is what happens to people who die unsaved, and are resurrected in due time with souls to re-enter their imperfect, rotting, resurrected bodies, and body and soul to be cast into Hell. This is what happens as indicated in Revelation 20:13-15:

"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and Hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and Hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

In these verses God is talking about people who have died, still unsaved, still without Christ, because God mentions in verse 15 above their names were not found written "in the book of life."

You can see in verse 13 that Hell is going to deliver up the souls of those who had died without Christ, and death is going to deliver up the bodies of those who have died without Christ. Then, of course, the unsaved soul would be placed once again in the old body, still imperfect, still rotting, still sick and in pain, still growing older and weaker.

If you put together this passage in Revelation with that passage mentioned above from Genesis, and compare what could have happened to Adam and Eve if God had not protected them, after they had sinned, from eating of the tree of life, along with what will happen to the unsaved people, according to the passage in Revelation as mentioned above, when their bodies are resurrected, you can see very clearly that unsaved people cannot wait until it is too late to take Jesus as their Saviour. Death is certain, but our salvation is also certain if we will simply trust in the Lord Jesus Christ.

I Thessalonians 4:14 tells us that when Jesus returns for His church He will bring with Him those "which sleep in Jesus." I Corinthians 15:51 tells us: "We shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed." Additionally, in John 11:11 Jesus spoke of Lazarus as "sleeping" and said to His disciples, "...but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep."

Thus we see that the Bible pictures death for the Christian as a type of "sleep." Yet we also know from II Corinthians 5:8,9 that, "...to be absent from the body" is "...to be present with the Lord." The soul of the believer goes immediately to be with the Lord upon death.

The Bible further teaches us that when the Lord comes for His church in the Rapture that we will be given new bodies that will be incorruptible like His (I Corinthians 15:53-57).

In Philippians 3:21 we read, "Who (Jesus) shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the workings whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto himself." Additionally, in I John 3:2 we read, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is."

These verses tell us that those of us who die having trusted Christ as our personal Saviour, will be given bodies exactly like that of the Lord Jesus Christ. It will be a body that is not subject to disease and death any longer. It will be in all points perfect as the Lord Jesus Christ's body is also perfect. We further know from II Corinthians 5:8 that a Christian immediately upon his death, goes into the presence of the Lord.

It should be noted, that the Christian will not receive his body until the time of the Rapture. Those Christians who die before the Rapture, must wait until the Lord comes in the clouds to call His church. At that point, those who have died in Christ, will have their bodies resurrected and they will be changed and united with their soul once again. It is at this point that we will receive our glorified bodies.

Concerning our memory of the affairs of this life while we are in Heaven with the Lord, though I cannot be dogmatic, it is my personal belief that once we enter into eternity with the Lord, which is at the conclusion of the millennial reign, that the things of this life, with all the tragedies and sorrow and suffering will be permanently erased from our minds. Therefore, we simply will not have any remembrance of the affairs, the struggles, the sufferings, and heartaches of this life.

God has much to say about debt. However, before we go any farther, let us define Biblical debt. The Scriptural definition of debt is the inability to meet obligations agreed upon. In other words, when a person buys something on credit terms that is not necessarily a debt, it is a contract. But when the terms of the contract are violated, scriptural debt occurs." (From Your Finances in Changing Times by Larry Burkett.)

One usually incurs debt through the violation of the contract because he violates Scripture in three other areas.

1) He presumes upon the future (James 4:13-15). He assumes things will go just as planned (increased salary, inflation, etc.) and that he will be able to pay back as anticipated. As a result he incurs a lot of debt.

2) He is not willing to wait on God to provide his needs within his means to pay. In other words, He borrows to get what he wants now rather than wait until he can afford it. (Psalms 37)

3) He incurs debt by over leveraging himself with the motive of getting rich quickly. (Proverbs 37)

Sometimes there is a fine line between borrowing and debt. Let us encourage you to prayerfully consider the following Scriptures and ask God what He would have you do in your situation.

1) Proverbs 22:7- "The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."

2) Proverbs 22:26,27--"Be not thou one of them that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts. If thou hast nothing to pay, why should he take away thy bed from under thee?"

3) Proverbs 23:4,5-"Labor not to be rich: cease from thine own wisdom. Wilt thou set thine eyes upon that which is not? For riches certainly make themselves wings; they fly away as an eagle toward heaven."

4) Deuteronomy 15:6-"For the Lord thy God blesseth thee, as he promised thee: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee."

5) It is God's plan that if one borrows he must pay back. "The wicked borroweth, and payeth not again: but the righteous showeth mercy, and giveth" (Psalms 37:21). "When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay" (Ecciessiastes 5:4-5). This means that bankruptcy is not an option for a Christian.

6) Proverbs 19:17--"He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord; and that which he hath given will he pay him again."

7) Matthew 5:14,16--"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid... Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."

Do you believe Christians can have demons?

No! Satan and his demons may tempt us, but they cannot dwell within us. Jesus says in John 14:15-17:

"If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know Him; for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

Thus, you see, the Holy Spirit lives in every child of God. Additionally, Jesus says in verse 23:

"If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."

Not only does the Holy Spirit dwell in every Christian, but the Father and the Son, through the Spirit, dwell in every Christian. No demon, nor the devil himself, can dwell in a Christian if the Father and the Son or the Holy Spirit are dwelling in that Christian. God and the devil cannot dwell in the same place or in the same person.

God emphasizes in His Word the Holy Spirit lives within those who have repented of their sins, have accepted Jesus as their Saviour, and have thus been born into the family of God. Paul tells us in Romans 8:9:

"But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.

Verse 11 says:

"But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you.

And, verse 16 says:

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God."

The Holy Spirit who lives in a born-again child of God bears witness with that person's spirit that he is a child of God. If the devil or a demon lived in that Christian, and possessed that Christian, the Holy Spirit could neither dwell in that person or bear witness that such a person was a child of God.

The word for demons in the Greek language is daimon and is found more than 75 times in the Greek New Testament. In each case it is translated by the word devil in the King James Version.

The Bible gives abundant evidence of the existence of demons. Satan's evil angels are known in Scripture as demons. We know from certain Scriptures that Satan fell from heaven and other angelic beings (demons) shared in Satan's fall and became evil (Ezekiel 28:18; Matthew 25:41; Revelation 12:4).

In our Lord Jesus Christ's teachings and ministry He often confronted demons and their activities, i.e., demonic possession of individuals (Matthew 12:22-29, 15:22-28, 25:41; Mark 5:1-16). Christ demonstrated His power over demons and, furthermore, He gave His disciples power to cast out demons (Matthew 10:1). (ANGELS ELECT AND EVIL, C. Fred Dickason, p. 150).

There are a number of theories concerning the origin of demons. Among these are the following:

a. They are spirits of deceased wicked men. However, this cannot be, for the Bible declares the unsaved dead are in Hades and not roaming the earth (Psalm 9:17; Luke 16:23; Revelation 20:13).

b. They are spirits of a pre-Adamic race. But there is no scriptural support whatsoever for this view. The Bible declares that Adam was the first man (I Corinthians 15:45).

c. They are the spirits from the unnatural union between angels and women in Genesis 6. However, this view, like the previous two, is without the slightest Biblical support.

d. The most logical conclusion is that the word demon is simply another title or name for fallen angels. (THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS, Dr. H. L. Willmington, pp. 23,24).

It is true that the various denominations and churches across America can be confusing to any people. This is especially true when each one claims to be the true church and all others false.

To help unravel this confusion, we need to understand what the Bible says about the church. The word "church" is used in the scriptures in two senses: 1) in a universal sense, and 2) in a local sense.

In the universal sense the church consists of all those who, in this dispensation, have been born of the Spirit of God and have by that same Spirit been baptized into the body of Christ (I Corinthians 12:13).

The gospel of Jesus Christ is simply His death, burial, and resurrection for the forgiveness of our sins and our justification before God (I Corinthians 15:3,4). The blood of Jesus Christ actually cleanses an individual from his sins (Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14, 20-22; Romans 3:25; Hebrews 9:12-14; I John 1:7). When an individual believes the Gospel of Jesus Christ and invites Jesus into his heart as his personal Saviour by faith, that person automatically becomes a part of the universal church.

The second sense in which the word "church" is used in the Bible is in the local sense. That is, a local church is a group of professed believers in any one locality. Dr. Falwell uses the definition that a local church is a group of born again believers who have been baptized and have banded together to carry out the Great Commission. Thus, we read in the Bible of the church at Ephesus, the church at Corinth, the church at Galatia, the church of the Thessalonians, the church in Jerusalem, and so forth.

In other words, once an individual accepts Jesus Christ into his heart as his personal Saviour, it is God's plan that that individual joins a gospel preaching, soul-winning, local church in his own area. This teaches us that Christians all around the world are a part of the universal church which the Bible describes as being the body of Christ or the bride of Christ or sometimes uses the expression "building of God." Yet, at the same time, the Lord wants us to unite with a good local church in our area.

There are two major problems that have developed which have caused confusion to those who do not know the Bible. First, those people who have genuinely accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour, interpret certain passages, excluding those concerning salvation, in a way different from other Christians. Therefore, they have started their own denominations.

Secondly, there are any people who have added other books to the Bible and have completely changed God's Word, including what the Bible teaches concerning salvation, and have therefore started their own "church." These types of "churches" are referred to as cults and they always claim to be the one true church. However, these people substitute the teachings and doctrines, of men for the teachings and doctrines of the Word of God. Though they refer to themselves as the church, and perhaps lead clean, wholesome lives, they, nevertheless, have no part of the body of Christ.

Our church has genuine, Christian fellowship with people from other denominations who are, themselves, Bible-believing, soul-winning Christians, and who believe the great fundamental truths of God's Word, such as the verbal inspiration of God's Word; the deity, virgin birth, and sinlessness of Jesus; the substitutionary death and bodily resurrection and ascension of Jesus; the premillennial return of Christ; the reality and everlasting, conscious torment in Hell for all those who die without Christ; and direct creation rather than evolutionary development.

In addition to these great truths in God's Word, we also believe the Bible teaches we should not baptize infants, but only those who have developed to the point where they can make a decision to repent of their sins and accept Christ as their Saviour. We also believe God's Word teaches baptism by immersion, not by sprinkling or pouring. Additionally, we believe God's Word teaches God's gift through Christ to penitent sinners who trust in Christ for salvation is a gift of "everlasting life" and not "temporary life." So you see, we are fundamentalists in the broad truths of God's Word, and we are Baptists concerning certain other distinctives in God's Word.

If you have never trusted Christ as your own personal Saviour, may I invite you to do so right now? Jesus Christ suffered for you and died for you on a cruel cross that you might have everlasting life and forgiveness of your sins. The Bible clearly teaches that you cannot save yourself, neither can church membership, nor baptism, nor even a life filled with good works. Salvation can only come through the blood of Jesus Christ. If you will confess to God that you are a sinner, and invite Jesus Christ into your heart, and trust him as your personal Saviour, God will save your soul right now. If you will pray the following prayer, from a humble and sincere heart, you can become a part of the body of Christ: "Lord Jesus, have mercy upon me a sinner, and come into my heart as my personal Saviour and Lord, and forgive me of my sins and save me for your sake. Amen." Romans 10:13 tells us, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

What the Bible says about those who deny Jesus as God:

"Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father; [.but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" (I John 2:22-23).

"Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God" (I John 4:15).

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him" (I John 5:1).

"He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life" (I John 5:12).

"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son" (II John 1:9).

I ask you to study the above Scripture passages and recognize the difference between your spending eternity in heaven or in Hell depends upon your personal relationship with Jesus Christ. My prayer is that you will receive Him as your Saviour today.

We believe that Satan was once holy and enjoyed heavenly honors but through pride and ambition to be as the Almighty, fell and drew after him a host of angels; that he is now the malignant prince of the power of the air, and the unholy god of this world. We hold him to be man's greatest tempter, the enemy of God and His Christ, the accuser of the saints, the author of all false religions, the chief power back of the present apostasy; the lord of the Antichrist, and the author of all the powers and darkness - destined, however, to final defeat at the hands of God's Son, and the judgment of an eternal justice in hell, a place prepared for him and his angels.

By H. L. Willmington

Some years back an article appeared in one of America's leading magazines concerning a little known agency in the United States Department of Defense. This agency was totally unlike the other branches of our defense system. Its agents were told to think and act like the Russians! They were paid to pretend they were the enemy. They received no more information or advantage than the Kremlin would already possess, but were ordered to probe and view our defense system through the eyes of Moscow.

In my opinion, this is an excellent approach. In fact, I believe the child of God could well profit by employing a little "spiritual subversion" of his own. Our enemy, of course, is Satan. Every believer is despised by this unholy and unclean angel of apostasy. Now, what would you do if you were the devil? Or what would I do?

The first thing I would do would be to deny my own existence The Bible informs us that God desires, perhaps above all else, to be believed in (Hebrews 11.6). But this is not so with Satan! The disciple of doubt seems to thrive best when he is either underestimated, ignored or denied.

Suppose there is a Bible-believing church which is going through a spiritual crisis. For some months no soul has walked its aisles. The attendance and offerings are down and the members are becoming restless. Finally, in desperation, a special committee is appointed by the congregation to discover the source of this coldness and lifelessness. After considerable prayer and probing, the committee submits its report. What are its findings? I believe it may be safely assumed that the average committee would lay the blame on one or more of the following: (1) the pastor; (2) certain officials; (3) a cold congregation; or (4) a difficult neighborhood. But what fact-finding group would return the following indictment? "We believe the main source of our heartaches for the past few months is Satanic! We believe the reason no souls have been saved recently is due to an all-out attack on our church by the devil! We close our report with a strong recommendation that the congregation call a special meeting, rebuke Satan, plead the blood of Christ and claim the victory! "

If I were the devil I would deny my existence in the world and downplay it in the local church, thus freeing me to go about my business unheeded, unhindered and unchecked!

The second thing I would do if I were the devil would be to read the Bible carefully. We often are reminded how Jesus answered Satan's temptations in the wilderness with Scripture. But note that Satan also used Scripture! During the second temptation the devil quoted Psalm 91:11, 12 to Christ. To be sure, he took it completely out of context and twisted it, but Shakespeare was right: "The devil doth quote Scripture." Another example of this "Scripture-reading serpent" is found in Revelation 12:12. Satan will be thrown out of Heaven during the middle of the Tribulation and will come down to earth, "having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time." How does he know this? The apparent answer is that he has carefully read the ninth chapter of Daniel! If I were the devil I'd read the Bible. I could then so twist and turn the Scriptures in such a way as to mislead saints and sinners alike.

The third thing I would do if I were the devil would be to prevent sinners from being saved. Many methods could be employed to accomplish this. For example, I'd confuse them by sending some Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormon missionaries around for friendly chats and I'd arrange for them to tune in to a false teacher on the radio or television. Or I'd encourage them to attend "the church of their choice" faithfully. (This is always safe.) Finally, I'd involve them in good works. I'd substitute the Red Cross for the Old Rugged one. Justification would give way to demonstration and ecology would replace theology.

The fourth thing I would do if I were the devil would be to prevent saints from being sanctified (that is, to grow in grace). Here also I could travel down many routes to arrive at this goal. I would confuse them theologically. I'd get them bogged down with other tongues and thus prevent them from using their God-given tongues to witness for Christ. Perhaps I would push them into one of many extremes. For example, I might tell them that doctrine and love are like alcohol and gasoline; that is, they should never be mixed! If I were successful here I could proudly point to an informed iceberg (a Christian minus love) or to a sugary sponge (a believer without theology).

I'd definitely attempt to discourage every saint. I know it has been said:

"The devil trembles when-he sees, The weakest saint upon his knees."

From my standpoint, I could say:

"The devil glories when he views, The strongest Christian with the blues."

Not only would I get the saints discouraged, but I'd also get them mad if at all possible. This I would do because of my knowledge that far more church splits have been caused by dispositions than by positions (of theology)!

I would also keep the saints idle! How heartily I would agree with that human sage who once observed that the average church consists of human types--the pillars and the caterpillars. The pillars are the faithful who hold up the work. They give, pray, attend and visit. But the caterpillars? They simply crawl in and out once a week!

There is a fifth thing I would do if I were the devil. My knowledge of the Bible would inform me that God originally created all things for His glory (Revelation 4:11). To demonstrate this glory He set up three human institutions: marriage (Genesis 2; Ephesians 5); human government (Genesis 9; Romans 13); and the local church (Romans 1:7; I Corinthians 1:2). This final thing, then, would I do. I would ruthlessly and viciously attack these three hated "foundations of the faith" with every ounce of my depraved nature. I would begin by flinging my fiery spears at the institution of marriage. I would advocate easy divorce laws and support abortion freedoms. I would gleefully encourage the most detailed sex instruction courses for tiny school children and I would beguile women by promising the same foolish and false freedoms I had used so effectively against their mother in a garden long ago.

Then I would turn my hellish fury on the institution of human government. I would change the cry of "we shall overcome" to that of "we shall overthrow." I would encourage students to burn everything on their campuses except the midnight oil! I would reduce grown men (who should know better) to common street stompers who rant and chant their four-letter filth. As the chief apostle of anarchy I would view with undisguised contempt all cops, courts, customs and constitutions! At my urging flags would be handkerchiefs and would be worn or scorned, but never honored! If I were the devil I would steal wholesome Biblical words such as grass, bread and fruit and so pervert them in a way that would cause entire societies to rewrite their dictionaries. All this I would do, and more.

Then I would turn to that most despised and deadly institution of all--the local church! I would continue to attack it from the outside (just to keep in practice), but would concentrate the bulk of my evil efforts from within. "The church is dead" would become my creed and cry. If I were the devil I would do y utmost to convince professing Christians that the local church is finished! Not weak, not ineffective; but dead and decaying! I would encourage them to dig a hole, carve an epitaph and bury it as quietly and quickly as possible. Christianity could then proceed to new glories where cell groups would replace Sunday nights and sermons would be set aside for buzz sessions.

If I were the devil I would strive twenty-four hours a day for weeks, months, years and centuries to accomplish all the goals set down in this article. Some of them could be achieved through my role of a roaring lion, while others could best be realized by my angel of light bit. But every goal would command my existence, my strength, my will, my craftiness, my all!

The Apostle Paul once wrote, "Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices" (II Corinthians 2:11). It must be sadly concluded, however, that many of us are, and therefore he has!

"And 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 8:28).

In the midst of the distress of this world, the Scripture gives us a source of strength and hope. The Spirit of God within us is also given as a source of strength. Romans 8:28 has been a source of encouragement for all believers down through the ages. In the midst of the sufferings of this life, God has given us knowledge that He is working every detail of life to the end established in His eternal purpose. It is God who works things out according to His will. This promise of all things working together for good is given to a specific group, the called (those who are in Christ Jesus and justified by His blood--saved). (Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, p. 376.)

Another good Scripture passage that explains why Christians often go through trials of their faith is found in I Corinthians 10:13:

"There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: 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."

What great comfort God provided for us through this passage. Though man and the world about be false, God is true, God is faithful, and God is our strength and security in and through Him and His Word. God knows our frame, and He knows exactly what we can take. Sometimes when the circumstances of life seem to overwhelm us, and we think we can take no more, take heart, God knows and God cares. If God did not know that you could take it, He would not have allowed you to suffer it. God makes a way to escape. He enables us to escape temptation, and He will enable us to live victoriously in Christ. To bear all hardships and difficulties of this life is only possible through the relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.

One further Scripture that may be of encouragement to you is found in Philippians 4:13: "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me."

In all things we as believers in Christ can be strong by the One who infuses the power in us. The apostle Paul had such strength as long as God provided the power (Greek dynamis) through Christ. A living Christ on the inside is more than sufficient to endure the circumstances on the outside. What Christ had for Paul to do, Christ enabled Paul to do it. Where the finger of God points for us to travel, the hand of God provides the way. (Liberty Bible Commentary, Volume II, p. 584)

Were there dinosaurs on board the ark?

Dr. H. L. Willmington addresses this question in Willmington's Guide to the Bible, p. 29, as follows:

Perhaps no other single question concerning the Flood will more quickly bring out the agnostic's sneers and the believer's fears than will this one. But there is now mounting evidence that man and dinosaurs did indeed live on earth at the same time.

a. In Rhodesia, paintings on cave walls by bushmen known to have left the caves in 1500 BC include paintings of brontosaurs. According to the nature of their art, cavemen only painted from what they could actually see. Thus, they would have had to see a brontosaur in order to paint one.

b. Evidence of these large reptiles has been found since the Flood. Dinosaur footprints have been located in the same strata with human footprints in Glen Rose, Texas.

c. To conclude this argument, we quote from Dr. Henry Morris, Ph.D.:

"The Book of Job is one of the oldest in the Bible and reflects living conditions in the early centuries after the Flood. The climax of the book is when God speaks directly to Job and his friends in Job 38, 39, 40 and 41. God is calling attention to His great power in creating and sustaining all things (exactly the message urgently needed by the world today).

"Finally, He calls attention to His two greatest creations in the animal kingdom, behemoth (Job 40:15-24) and leviathan (Job 41:1-34). Most commentators today suggest behemoth is either the elephant or hippopotamus and that leviathan is the crocodile. However, the actual descriptions (and these, coming as they do from the mount of God Himself, certainly refer to real animals) obviously do not apply to any animals known today. The most reasonable interpretation, therefore, is that they refer to extinct animals. Perhaps, then behemoth is a land dinosaur and leviathan a marine dinosaur. Suddenly these chapters become very much alive and meaningful! These great animals were still living in Job's day, even though they may have become extinct since.

"In reading God's description of behemoth, one can clearly visualize a great brontosaur, with his long neck protecting out to eat the swamp vegetation and to wash it down with great quantities of water, with his powerful legs and tail easily capable of demolishing his enemies with their overwhelming blows. 'Behold now behemoth,' God remarks...'he eateth grass as an ox...his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar.' (Ever see an elephant's tail?) 'His bones are as strong pieces of brass, his bones are like bars of iron' (no wonder so many fossil dinosaur bones have been preserved so long). Finally, God states, 'He is the chief of the ways of God' (thus the greatest animal God ever made); 'He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him' (thus God Himself can destroy the dinosaurs, even though man could not). 'Behold he drinketh up a river...his nose pierceth through snares."' (THE REMARKABLE BIRTH OF THE PLANET EARTH, pp. 32, 33).

Thus, to answer the question concerning whether dinosaurs were on the ark, it may be said that inasmuch as they definitely existed with man prior to the Flood, the chances are good that a young pair of these huge reptiles may well indeed have been aboard! (WILLMINGTON'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE, pp. 29, 30).

"And 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 8:28).

In the midst of the distresses of this world, God's Scripture gives us a source of strength and hope. The Spirit of God within us is also given as a source of strength and encouragement for all believers. Please understand that in the midst of the sufferings of this life, God has given us knowledge that He is working every detail of life to the end establishing His eternal purpose for us.

You should know first that God loves you, and has a wonderful plan for your life.

"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" (John 3:16).

All of us want to be loved. We are loved by the Creator of this universe. And that same Creator wants to be the personal God of your life and to give you the type of fulfilled life that you really desire to live. If you are not a Christian then I would encourage you to trust Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.

DISCOURAGEMENT

Proverbs 13:12 says, "Hope deferred (or lost) maketh the heart sick . . ." And it truly can. How you handle those feelings of hopelessness determines much of what will happen to your future. And it can go either way. What do humans prescribe for hopelessness? Too often, the wrong thing. We say, if there is a great void in your life, fill it with material possessions, wealth and fame. But let me tell you right now: No matter how much money you make, or notoriety you gain, you will not be happy and fulfilled.

Another "earthly" solution, unfortunately, is found in alcohol and drugs. These "mind-altering" substances certainly provide temporary relief, but the long-term affects are deadly. First, your loneliness will not go away. It is only stifled for a season. And don't forget that alcohol and drug consumption leads to alcohol and drug addiction, which can only lead to trouble. Many families have been torn apart, careers ended, and lives cut short by an addiction to alcohol or drugs.

The addictions don't stop with chemical substances. Many people look to sex, pornography or other harmful addictions to take their minds off their problems. As with drugs and alcohol, these addictions can only bring heartache, pain-and even death.

Finally, far too often some people's prescription for hopelessness is to take their own lives. They "bottom out" and have no clue how to deal with the feelings of utter gloom and despair. For these people, death is the only option-the only way to end the misery and pain.

But here is the truth, plain and simple: There is no earthly cure for hopelessness and despair. As humans, we have finite minds. On our own, we cannot come up with a lasting, effective cure for hopelessness. Any "medicine" we prescribe is temporary, meaningless and futile. If you look to money, you will never be able to make enough. If you look to material possessions, they will eventually fall apart, fade away, or just get old. If you look to people, they will eventually disappoint you. And if you look to alcohol, drugs, pornography or sex-a world of misery, disease, heartache, and even death awaits you.

Man's solutions to despair only lead to deeper despair. It becomes an endless cycle of hopelessness and destruction. And it can lead to death.

But if you are a believer, than you have the most perfect, unblemished solution to hopelessness that there is-or ever will be. It's not a miracle drug, a long vacation or a new-age psychotherapy. The answer to hopelessness and despair is Jesus Christ. He can bring you hope.

Maybe you think you are too far gone; that not even Jesus can heal the wounds in your soul. You couldn't be more wrong. Jesus loves you, and He wants to help you and give you peace and joy.

If you are ready to defeat the loneliness, despair and hopelessness in your life, accept that Jesus is the answer.

Webster defines the word "dispensation." as "a general state or ordering of things; specifically, a system of revealed commands and promises regulating human affairs; a particular arrangement or provision..." In defining the use of the word theologically, it is a stage in a progressive revelation, expressly adapted to the needs of a particular nation or period of time, also, the age or period during which a system has prevailed.

As far as the use of the word in Scripture is concerned, a dispensation may be defined as a stewardship, administration, oversight or management of others' property. This involves responsibility, accountability, and faithfulness on the part of the steward.

The theological definition of the word 'dispensation' is based on its Biblical usage and characteristics. Scofield's definition has been often quoted, viz., "A dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God." Fuller defines the word dispensation as denoting a period of time during which God deals with man in a certain way.

A concise definition of the word 'dispensation' would be, "A dispensation is a distinguishable economy in the outworking of God's purpose." The phrase "the outworking of God's purpose" in the definition reminds us that the viewpoint in distinguishing the dispensations is God's, not man's. The dispensations of the Bible are instituted and brought to their purposeful conclusion by God. (WHAT IS A DISPENSATION?, Charles Caldwell Ryrie, pp. 29, 30).

The Bible passage, which gives a clear usage for the term "dispensation of grace," is:

"If you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:" (Ephesians 3:2)

The word translated "dispensation" in the text is the Greek term olkonomia. This term combines the words "house" and "law" and has been translated "stewardship" in some of the other English translations (See RYRIE STUDY BIBLE, p. 1782.) The word is used in the New Testament to describe an epoch in which God emphasizes a particular aspect of His purpose for the human family. The meaning of the term used in the above passage (Ephesians 3:2) gives consideration provided for the dispensation of God's grace, the epoch in which we now live. (The CRISWELL STUDY BIBLE, p. 1386).

The Apostle Paul recognized that God had entrusted a special "dispensation of the grace of God" with particular reference to the Gentiles. Paul's epistle to the Ephesians was concerning the stewardship of the Gentiles God had entrusted to him (Ephesians 3:2; see also I Corinthians 4:1; 9:17). (TYNDALE N. T. COMMENTARY, -EPHESIANS, p. 90).

The use of the word "dispensation" by Paul (Ephesians 3:2) refers to his high privilege and sacred trust to the administration and stewardship of God's universal grace to all men. This was given to Paul, and not of his own choosing. "Of the grace of God" - the grace of God was to be shared with others; it was not a personal luxury (Colossians 1:25, 1 Peter 4:10). Paul was merely a channel of blessing to the Gentiles. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 547).

Paul was responsible for the revelation of a "mystery" (Ephesians 3:3-12) that was Divinely and distinctively Paul's for the publication. It was special truth committed to him as a sacred trust. Paul was the administrator of the revelation of the mystery. Paul was the instrument to proclaim it, but it was the Spirit of God that made it known unto him.

What was the mystery? The term "mystery" means "hidden in God," but now manifested by Paul; something previously not known until shown. That which was "hidden in God" was hidden from man until God willed to make it known. The mystery is revealed in the passage to follow:

"That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel" (Ephesians 3:6). (W. Leon Tucker, STUDIES IN EPHESIANS, Grand Rapids: Kregel Pub. p.p. 96-98).

In summary, dispensationalism views the world as a household run by God. In this household-world, God is dispensing or administering its affairs according to His own will and in various stages of revelation in the process of time. These various stages mark off the distinguishably different economies in the outworking of God's total purpose, and these economies are the dispensations. The understanding of God's differing economies is essential to a proper interpretation of His revelation within those various economies. Just as a parent would govern his household in different ways, according to varying necessity, so God has at different times dealt with men in different ways, according to the necessity of the case, but throughout, for one great, grand end. (Ibid. 31)

For instance, there are strong indications that the gift of tongues ceased after I Corinthians 14. The gift of tongues was given to enable the church, at a specific time in God's calendar, to meet specific needs--i.e., this gift was given to the apostles to authenticate them as true messengers from God, and thus to confirm the gospel of salvation. This being the case, we can understand why these miraculous signs should be so much in evidence in Apostolic ties. Yet, we can also understand why these miraculous signs should disappear when the apostles passed from the scene. In the early days of the apostles it was helpful for the message of the Bible to be confirmed by miraculous signs, such as tongues, healing, etc. However, today we have the complete Bible, including the entire New Testament--a new dispensation.

For a more detailed description of the theological aspects of the study of the "Dispensation of Grace," we would highly recommend: MAJOR BIBLE THEMES, by L. S. Chafer, revised ed. J. F. Walvoord; Grand Rapids: Zondervan publishers.

Matthew 5:31-32, 19:7-12, and I Corinthians 7 are passages that address the question of divorce. The following comments on these passages are quoted from our Liberty Bible Commentary, published by The Old-Time Gospel Hour.

MATTHEW 5:31-32

"It hath been said is. . .a reference to the Old Testament commandment of the Mosaic regulation (cf. Deut. 24:1). The normal custom of the ancient Near East was for a man to verbally divorce his wife. The Arab custom was to say 'I divorce you' three times and the divorce was consummated without any legal protection of any kind to the wife. In contrast, the ancient law of Israel insisted on a writing of divorcement or certificate of divorce. This written statement gave legal protection to both the wife and the husband. Jesus explained elsewhere (cf. Mt. 19:8) that Moses' concession was not intended to be taken as license. In ancient rabbinic Judaism, Moses' statement had been variously interpreted from meaning adultery (Shamai) to the trivial matters of personal preference (Hillel). The only legitimate exception for divorce allowed by Christ is possibly for the cause of fornication (Greek porneia), meaning sexual unfaithfulness. Ryrie (p. 14) notes that fornication may mean adultery prior to or after marriage, as well as unfaithfulness during the period of betrothal.

"These statements make it clear that adultery or fornication is a legitimate grounds for divorce. However, the legitimacy of the divorce does not necessarily establish the legitimacy of remarriage. That one must divorce an unfaithful wife or husband is nowhere commanded in Scripture. To the contrary, there are many examples of extending forgiveness to the adulterous offender (cf., Hosea 3:1; (Genesis 38:26; John 8:1-11). Nor does the discovery of premarital fornication on the part of the wife necessarily demand a divorce as is indicated by Atkinson (p. 78). Sexual involvement alone does not necessarily constitute a marriage in the sight of God (cf. the example of Judah and Tamar, who were both widowed at the time of their illicit sexual involvement). Though this temporary union produced twin sons, it resulted in no permanent marriage. Great care needs to be exercised when interpreting the New Testament passages regarding divorce and marriage. It should be remembered that Jesus made His statements about divorce to people who were already married, so that they might take seriously the marriage relationship. These statements were not necessarily made to add an extra burden to the already divorced person.

"The responsibility of divorce is clearly laid upon the one seeking the divorce. Whosoever shall put away his wife without biblical basis causeth her to commit adultery. Lenski (pp. 230-235) translates [this] 'brings about that she is stigmatized as adulterous and regards the sin of the divorcer as bringing about an unjust suspicion upon the divorcee.'"

MATTHEW 19:7-9

"The question Why did Moses then command? revealed the misuse of Deuteronomy 24 by the Jews of Jesus' day. Moses did not command, he permitted divorce. God had instituted marriage in the Garden of Eden. He is not the author of divorce; man is its originator. However, to protect the Hebrew woman from being taken advantage of by a verbal divorce, Moses commanded that it be done with a writing of divorcement, i.e., official written contract, permitting remarriage. The Jews tended to take this as an excuse or license to get divorced whenever they pleased. The original provision was for the protection of the wife from an evil husband, not an authorization for him to divorce her at will. Therefore, Jesus gave one exception to the no-divorce intention of God, for fornication (Greek porneia) 'sexual sins,' not to be limited to premarital sex only, but it includes all types of sexual sin: adultery, homosexuality, bestiality, etc. Among the Jews only the male could divorce, so Mark 10:12 reverses the statement for His gentile audience."

MATTHEW 19:10-12

"Since divorce, on any grounds, was common in those days...the disciples felt it is not good to marry. The severity of Jesus' statement was in total contrast to the society of that day and represented the true intention of God. While divorce appears to be allowed in both Testaments (cf., Deut. 24:1-5; I Cor. 7:15, 27-28) it is never encouraged because it always violates God's original intention in marriage...."

I CORINTHIANS 7

In I Corinthians 7:8-16, "...the apostle develops guidelines for three categories of individuals: the unmarried and widows (vs. 8-9), the married believers (vs. 10-11), and mixed marriages (vs. 12-16)."

FOR THE MARRIED BELIEVERS. 7:10-11 (Marriages in which both partners are saved)

"And unto the married I command.... Notice Paul's advice to the unmarried [vs. 8-9] is given as optional; his advice to the married is given as a command. In case his readers miss this point, he reinforces it with the words, not I, but the Lord. No doubt, the apostle has in mind explicit instruction of our Lord recorded in Matthew 5:32; 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18. Let not the wife depart. Paul's command here is in opposition to Greek and Roman law, which permitted a woman to divorce her husband. The command is unequivocal; let her not depart. And if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled. While Paul disapproves of separation on any grounds, he recognizes that there will be cases of unapproved separation. In these cases, they are to 'remain unmarried.' The Greek present tense emphasizes a permanent state. The only other option is reconciliation. And let not the husband put away his wife. This is tantamount to saying, "and the same thing goes for husbands."

FOR THE MIXED MARRIAGES. 7:12-16 (Marriages in which one of the partners is unsaved)

"Now the apostle turns his attention to the special case of mixed marriages. But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." This is not to be taken as marking a contrast between inspired Scripture and what Paul is about to say. On the contrary, while on the earth, the Lord explicitly gave instructions about marriage and divorce. However, He did not make any special reference to the case of a mixed marriage. Thus, it is incumbent on the Apostle Paul, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to give additional instructions regarding this kind of situation. The instruction is essentially the same. If a Christian person is married to an unbelieving spouse, and the unbeliever is pleased to dwell with the believer, then divorce or separation is prohibited. Paul's advice here is intended to answer any of his Jewish converts who might be inclined to make an unwarranted application of the situation recorded in Ezra 10:3.

"In the event that his readers should have any misgivings, the apostle shows why his advice is sound. The unbelieving ... is sanctified. And the children are holy. This is not to indicate that the children or the spouse of a believer are automatically born into the family of God. The words 'holy' and 'unclean' in this text are equivalent to 'sacred' and 'profane.' Again, the apostle's thought has Old Testament antecedents (cf. Hag. 2:11-13). The unbeliever and the children are considered holy in a positional sense. Hence, the principle of the communication of uncleanness given in the Old Testament does not apply here (cf. also Rom. 11-16). Together with the believer, they share in God's blessing, and are more likely to become converted by the presence and influence of the saved partner.

"But if the unbelieving depart .... In the foregoing instruction, the apostle presumes that the unbeliever is content to remain with the believer. But what of the situation where the unbeliever takes the initiative in dissolving the marriage? In such a case, Paul's advice is that the believer is not under bondage. There is no conflict here between Paul's advice and that of our Lord in Matthew 5:32. The point is that the divine standard cannot be imposed upon the unregenerate. There is nothing the believer can do but submit to the divorce. The overriding principle is that God hath called us to peace. The mild adversative clues us as to Paul's meaning in the use of this principle. He does not herein justify the divorce, even though the believing partner is free..." 7:27-28

SHOULD A DIVORCED PERSON REMARRY?

Because of this prospect of tribulation, Paul's advice is "Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? Seek not a wife." Although what Paul has said can never justify the dissolution of a marriage, hopefully it will discourage some from getting married. Notice that 'bound' refers to marriage and 'loosed' to divorce. This verse warns the divorced not to remarry, but also states that it is not a sin to do so..."

In I Timothy 3:2 and 12, we read:

"A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach..." (v. 2).

"Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well" (v. 12).

These verses teach that a "bishop" (a. overseer of one of Christ's flocks) and/or a "deacon" must be the husband of one wife.

Some good Christians think these verses simply teach that a pastor or a deacon must be the husband of one wife at a time. They think these verses do not prohibit a man who has been divorced from serving as a pastor or as a deacon. Most of Christendom, however, holds that a pastor or deacon must be one who has never experienced the sorrow and tragedy of divorce.

This does not mean divorced persons cannot serve in the church. Although the offices of "bishop" and "deacon" may be closed to the divorced man, there are many ways in which a divorced Christian can serve Christ in positions which do not require ordination. Our own church has people who have experienced divorce serving as teachers, counselors, and workers throughout our ministry. We use them in every way possible for the glory of Christ and the satisfaction of the yearning in their souls to serve Him.

Ordained positions may be closed for those who have suffered divorce, but God can and does use divorced persons. Many are excellent witnesses for the Lord, lay-evangelists, church workers, and missionaries (ordained positions are not the only tasks performed in the mission field--some mission boards use divorced persons in full-time Christian service in engineering; construction; program production for radio and television outreach; writing, printing, and distribution of literature; medical services; teaching; administrative and clerical positions, etc.).

When someone has truly repented of any sin or sins--whether that person has been or is divorced, married, or never married--God will forgive for Christ's sake and will use that person, within the boundaries of what He has laid down in His Word. He wants to use each Christian to serve Him to his/her utmost. Although some doors are closed, he will open other doors of service, and it is important for us as brothers and sisters in Christ to remember that God's Word teaches forgiveness, acceptance, and blessings for all who turn to him and are willing to serve Him.

I. Ministry & Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit as the "Comforter" who would come to reprove the world of sin, righteousness and judgment (John 16:7-11). His major ministry is one of convicting -an of sin and the seriousness of judgment and upholding the standard of God's righteousness. Thus the Holy Spirit is the great restrainer against the influence of sin in the world (II Thessalonians 2:6-7).

The New Testament Epistles clearly state that the Holy Spirit is the agent of regeneration. No one is born again or saved apart from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. (cf. Romans 8:14-17) "...as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God...ye have received the Spirit of adoption... the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God;" (I Corinthians 12:7) "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man..." (in context every believer).

In regard to the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, I Corinthians 12:13 makes it clear: "For by one spirit were 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." Therefore, we strongly believe that at the point of salvation every born-again Christian receives the Holy Spirit as the agent of the new birth and that every believer receives the baptism of the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ. Though we are told to be continually "filled" with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18), no where are believers admonished to receive the "baptism" of the Spirit as a second and subsequent work from salvation.

II. Place of Tongues in the New Testament.

Speaking in tongues occurred at times in the early days of the New Testament. The original coming of the Holy Spirit in baptism upon the church was accompanied by a manifestation of tongues in which every an heard their witness in his own tongue (Acts 2:8). At the conversion of the Gentiles (Acts 19:1-7) there is a reference to tongues in connection with the reception of the Holy Spirit. However, there are also several significant conversions mentioned where there is no reference to tongues speaking (cf. Acts 3 - Peter's second sermon; Acts 8 - Ethiopian eunuch; Acts 9 - Paul's conversion; the conversions on Paul's missionary journeys, etc.).

In light of the fact that I Corinthians 12:13 emphasizes that all believers have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and that all Christians did not have the gift of tongues (cf. I Corinthians 3:30), we believe that speaking in tongues was NOT the New Testament sign of Spirit baptism. Tongues were given on occasion as a confirming sign of the authority of the apostles' message.

III. Limitation of Tongues in the Early Church.

Though there are a few references to the experience of tongues in the book of Acts, there is only one clear explanation of tongue speaking in the epistles: I Corinthians 12-14. Here it is clear that the worldly-minded Corinthian church had misused an emphasis on tongues and spiritual gifts. To correct this misuse, Paul set forth these guidelines:

1. All believers have the baptism of the Holy Spirit (12:13).

2. Spiritual gifts should bring unity to the church, not division (12:25).

3. All believers were not intended to speak in tongues (even when the gift was valid) (12:30).

4. Tongues shall cease when "that which is perfect" is come (13:8-10). "That which is" = neuter in Greek, not a person but a thing. "Perfect" = "complete" or "full" in the Greek. Since the context is speaking about gifts of direct revelation (prophecy, knowledge, tongues), the point is that when complete (or perfect) revelation comes (in the form of the complete New Testament scriptures) then all partial revelations (e.g. tongues) will no longer be needed. We believe, therefore, tongues ceased at the end of the apostolic age (c. A.D. 100). Church history verifies that prior to the twentieth century tongues has been evidenced among the wildest of heretical groups: Montanists, Shakers, Irvingites; Mormons, etc.

5. Speaking is a known tongue (prophesying, preaching, or testifying) is far more important than speaking in tongues (14;2-6, 19, 23-25).

6. Tongue-Speaking, (even when it was a valid gift) was to be done in order by course") by no more than two or three people. Nowhere in the New Testament does one find the entire church in a state of total confusion from multiple tongue speaking (14:27-28).

7. Women were not to speak in tongues in public services at all (14:34-35). To do so was to claim authority over men in a matter of divine revelation and to contradict the biblical command for the wife to be in submission to her husband.

It is interesting to note that after Paul wrote these stern words of correction to the Corinthian church about the misuse of tongues, there were never any ore references to tongues-speaking ever again in the New Testament. He must have proven his point thoroughly.

IV. Tongue-Speaking Today:

In the light of the above observations, we reject the modern "Pentecostal" and "Charismatic" movements. Since these movements deny the cessation of tongues after the apostolic period and claim extra-Biblical revelation we cannot accept their claims as being of God. Since these movements generally violate the corrective limitations on tongues given by Paul in I Corinthians 14, we also reject their "spirit" and attitude. Since the majority of the modern tongues movement has spread division and disunity in the churches we do not see their ultimate purpose as being Christ-honoring.

Though any "sincere" Christians may be deceived by what they believe to be a genuine movement of the Holy Spirit, we DO NOT ACCEPT the modern tongues movement as being God-given. This does not necessarily mean that all "charismatic" influences are "of the Devil." Some may simply be psychologically induced. In either case we have found that tongues speaking as a proof of spirit baptism is neither scriptural nor a part of the ministry of America's strongest Bible-believing, soul-winning, revival-oriented churches.

(WILLMINGTON'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE, pp. 589-590)

Perhaps no other single word has been so successfully twisted by the devil today as has the biblical word "doctrine." in the minds of millions, doctrine involves the following concepts:

1. Doctrine is that silly and useless practice of arguing (in the spirit and tradition of medieval monks) such things as: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" "Could God create a stone so heavy that He couldn't lift it?" "Could He plant an immovable post in the ground and then throw an unstoppable rock at it?"

2. Doctrine divides, whereas love unites.

3. One cannot mix doctrine with soul winning.

4. Doctrine is dull and impractical.

5. Doctrine is over the heads of most people.

6. Why learn a lot of doctrine when we don't live up to the light we already have?

7. The key goal is to let the Bible master us, and not spend our energies in mastering the Bible.

In answering these charges, one could say that they are as far removed from the truth as the Babe in Bethlehem is from Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer! Each argument needs but a brief refutation.

1. The biblical doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with dancing angels, massive rocks, sturdy posts, and speeding stones! The word doctrine, as found in the Bible, refers to the systematic (and often simple) gathering and presentation of the facts concerning any great body of truth.

2. True doctrine does indeed divide. It divides light from darkness, right from wrong, and life from death. But it also unites, for God's love cannot be known or appropriated by sinful men without the involvement of doctrine.

3. These two (love and doctrine) not only can be mixed, they must be mixed if God's commands are to be followed. It is thrilling to note that the greatest soul-winner of all time and the greatest theologian who ever lived, were one and the same--the apostle Paul! The same man who went door to door, pleading with tears for men to accept Christ (Acts 20:20,21,26), also wrote some 50 percent of the New Testament, including the most profound of all doctrinal books, the epistle to the Romans.

4. To the contrary, doctrine will put both a fire and a song in the hearts of those who read and heed its tremendous truths.

"And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us the scriptures?" (Luke 24:32).

"Speaking to yourselves in psalm and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord" (Ephesians 5:19).

"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand" (Revelation 1:3).

"Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book" (Revelation 22:7).

5. This is simply not true, as refuted by Christ himself.

"At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, 0 Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light" (Matthew 11:25,28-30).

6. To follow this twisted logic would mean never to go beyond the first commandant (Exodus 20:3), which says we are to have no gods or interests placed before the true God. But who has not on occasion been guilty of this? Should we therefore conclude that the sixth and seventh commandments ("Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not commit adultery," Exodus 20:13,14) should not be kept simply because we do not always obey the first commandment?

7. This statement is pious nonsense, for one cannot possibly be even remotely influenced, let alone mastered, by that which he or she knows nothing about. It is true that the goal of Bible study is to become Spirit controlled. But the fruit of the Spirit can never come, apart from the root of personal study.

Having listed and answered those objections to studying doctrine, let us now give some important advantages for doing it.

1. Doctrine will help save us from theological food poisoning.

"Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them; for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee" (I Timothy 4:13-16).

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils" (I Timothy 4:1).

"I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (II Timothy 4:1-4).

2. Doctrine will help settle us.

"That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive" (Ephesians 4:14).

3. Doctrine will acquaint s with the details of God' s eternal plan.

a. Concerning the history of Israel.

"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" (I Corinthians 10:1).

b. Concerning the restoration of Israel.

"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in" (Romans 11:25).

c. Concerning spiritual gifts.

"Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant" (I Corinthians 12:1).

d. Concerning the Rapture.

"But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope" (I Thessalonians 4:13).

e. Concerning the destruction of this earth.

"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up" (II Peter 3:8,10).

4. Doctrine helps us edify God.

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (II Timothy 2:15).

5. Doctrine helps us equip ourselves.

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 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. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works" (II Timothy 3:13-17).

"Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" Ephesians 6:10-17).

Verily, Verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works that I do shall he do; because I go unto my father" (John 14:12).

When Jesus walked on earth, He did great and mighty miracles. In Matthew 4:24, we read, " . . . and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatic, and those that had the palsy: and he healed them." Jesus even raised a dead man, his friend Lazarus, from the grave.

And not only that, but Jesus worked wonders over nature. Remember the night Jesus calmed the stormy seas? Or when he walked on water? Or when he turned the water into wine at a wedding feast?

With all of those "works" to His name, how can Jesus possibly ask us to do "greater works" in John 14? Simply, Jesus had to die to make salvation an option for you and me. But after His resurrection, He left one simple command for the disciples: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

That same command applies to disciples of today. Our "greater works" are to share the good news of salvation with lost souls. Jesus healed physical infirmities through his earthly "works." You and I have the ability to lead people to the throne of grace for the healing of their spiritual infirmities-that's what Jesus means when He says we will do greater works.

Start right now to use the gifts and talents God has given you to lead others to salvation. If you have the gift of teaching, become a Sunday school teacher in your church. If you have great compassion for people, visit shut-ins. Whatever God gives you to do for Him-do it. And work hard at it.

Use your gifts and talents to bring others to Jesus Christ. He will use you to further His Kingdom for as long as you are willing.

Is it normal to have doubts about my salvation?

Yes, it is quite normal to have doubts because that is the Devil's tool to discourage you and to get you to give up in living a victorious Christian life.

In John 1:12, God's Word says:

"But as many as received Him to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name . . .."

You see, God says in this verse that if you receive Jesus, God will receive you. If you do one thing - accept Jesus into your heart as Savior, Lord, and Master, He will do one thing - give you the privilege of becoming one of His dear children.

If an individual truly repents of his sin and accepts Jesus into his heart as Savior, Lord, and Master, God says that He will accept that person. You accept Jesus and God will accept you as one of His dear children (John 3:15).

Some people wait for some amazing and strange sort of feeling. Some may have a feeling of joy or a feeling, which produces tears. But the main feeling God wants is that of sincerity. Just be sure that you sincerely are accepting Jesus as your Savior, the best you know how, with the help of God and His great love.

It may be simply a quiet surrender to God, a quiet decision to accept Jesus into one's heart, believe God's love that put Jesus on the cross, and God's promise in John 1:12 that if you accept Jesus, God will accept you.

After you are sure that you have Jesus as your Savior, are cleansed and washed in the blood of the Lamb, and God has accepted you as one of His dear children, set out to live for Him. First, make public your profession of faith in Jesus Christ. Follow Jesus' example in being baptized, buried in the water and raised again, symbolically as He was literally buried in the ground and raised up alive from the grave. Baptism is not a part of your salvation, but it is an act of obedience as a child of God.

Then, set out to read your Bible every day, pray, try to witness to others and go to church regularly so that you will keep your own heart warm and closer to the Lord. Make up your mind that you will go all out for Christ, put Him first in your life, and try to please Him above self, all others, or above anything else. Make up your mind you will do this for the rest of your life.

The book of I John is filled with practical things that Christians do. These things do not save a person, but they are good indicators that a person really is saved. So, read through I John and circle the verses that tell things that Christians do. For example, I John 1:7 says Christians "walk in the light, as he is in the light." I John 1:9 says Christians confess their sins. I John 2:5 says Christians keep God's Word. I John 3:6 says Christians abide in God. I John 4:4 says Christians overcome the world. I John 5:1 says Christians believe that Jesus is the Christ. There are many more. Find as many as you can and then ask God to help you improve your weak areas.

If you stumble and fall, repent and confess your sin(s) and ask God to forgive you. You can never lose your salvation, but if you have unconfessed sin, you will lose the precious close fellowship with God. After confessing your sin, get up and go to serving Him again just as faithfully as you possibly can under His grace and loving care.

To overcome doubts as they come, study God's Word, read good books about the Bible, pray regularly and faithfully, attend a good sound fundamental church, have fellowship with other Christians, and find a way in which you can serve the Lord Jesus both in personal witnessing and in your church. The more you study the Bible and experience the promises of God as they come true in your own life, the less doubts you will have about your salvation.

With reference to "Dungeons and Dragons," this is a mind-addicting game that is described as having violent and occult overtones. Those who become addicted to the game spend many hours immersed in fantasy-role-playing and large sums of money requiring additional characters and paraphernalia. This ministry would advise anyone familiar with this game to avoid any contact with the game itself or with individuals who are addicted by its powers.

If you desire further information on the game "Dungeons and Dragons," we would direct you to contact the Bob Larson Ministries, P.O. Box 36-A, Denver Colorado 80236, and order tape #3-0119 entitled Dungeons and Dragons.

The word "Easter" is found only once in Scripture and has a different meaning than the generally accepted meaning of the word "Easter."

And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people (Acts 12:4).

In this passage, the King James translators mistranslated the Greek word pascha, which denotes the Passover. Thus, in Acts 12:4 the phrase after Easter should read "after the Passover" signifying the whole festival of Unleavened Bread. Peter was incarcerated throughout the entire festival with the intent of Herod (Agrippa) to bring him out for public trial after the Passover period had ended. (LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, Vol. II, p. 292).

The term "Easter" is not of Christian origin. In fact, it is another form of the word "Astarte," one of the titles of the Chaldean goddess known as the queen of Heaven. The actual festival of Pasch held by Christians in post-apostolic times was a continuation of the Jewish feast of Unleavened Bread -- the Passover. This Pasch and the pagan festival of Easter were quite distinct, yet they were introduced into the apostate Western religion as part of the attempt to adapt pagan festivals to Christianity (this was not instituted by Christ). (VINE'S EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WORDS, pp. 344-345).

Some historians point to the origin of Easter as being the spring festival in honor of Eastra or Ostara, the Teutonic goddess of light and spring. As early as the eighth century, the name "Easter" was transferred by the Anglo-Saxons to the Christian festival designed to celebrate the resurrection of Christ. (DAVIS DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE, p. 193).

There are several Scriptures that mention the Eastern Gate. A specific passage that mentions the Eastern Gate is Ezekiel 44:1,2:

Then he brought me back the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary, which looketh toward the east; and it was shut. Then said the Lord unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the Lord, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.

The Eastern Gate is on the east side of the city of Jerusalem facing the Mount of Olives. This is the only gate in the Old Jerusalem city wall that leads directly into the temple area. The gate was closed by the Turkish governor of Jerusalem in 1530 A.D. in the hope of postponing the day of judgement and the end of the world. Many Christians believe that when Jesus comes again (the second coming of Christ), the gate will be opened and He will once again enter the Holy City. (KIRBAN'S PROPHECY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, p. 101)

When Christ returns to this earth (second coming of Christ) it has been prophesied that at the moment His feet touch the ground at the Mount of Olives there will be a great earthquake that will cause the Eastern Gate to open.

And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south (Zechariah 14:4).

It is now obvious that the so-called "ecumenical movement" of the 1960s is dying. I do not foresee its "revival" until the antichrist himself brings all religions together. It is never right to give up doctrinal truths for the sake of organic union. Evangelicals have certainly been right in their strong opposition to this very dangerous movement.

Unfortunate Aspects: Whenever any movement is being led by ministers and churches which openly deny the deity and substitutionary atonement of Christ, we ought to suspect the genuineness of that cause. I can evaluate a "movement" by the men who are leading it. None of the strong Bible preachers or soul-winning churches have backed the "ecumenical" cause. Revival today? I believe we are closer to the potential of genuine revival today than ever before in the twentieth century. But such revival will not be the product of cold ecumenism nor emotional charismaticism. True revival will only come when Christians get serious about the Lordship of Christ, His claims for discipleship and when God's people "turn from their wicked ways." Historically, revival has always come when sin abounded, when the church was indifferent and when God could get the glory for it. True revival will send the church to her knees in prayer, change her conduct and draw her heart close to the pure heart of God. That kind of revival is not yet happening today, but God's people are more hungry for it than ever before!

I am dedicated to the cause of seeing a genuine revival of godly living in America before the twentieth century closes. In view of our great need for such a revival, how dare we hold on to any habit, practice or association that is displeasing to God! True discipleship is measured by true obedience to the Master. You may think me a fanatic, but I want to be as close to God as I possible can. Therefore, mature Christians do not quibble over "standards." They are willing to go the "extra mile" in every area of life.

The word "elder" comes from the Greek word "Presbyteros," translated "elder," "steward," presbytery," "bishop." Elders were pastors. For instance, Timothy was the head elder (or pastor) at Ephesus. He had other elders who shared the load with him. However, he was the head authority.

In the churches founded by the apostles, "elder" or "presbyter" and "bishop" were interchangeable designations (Acts 20:17), though not strictly synonymous. The terms "elder" or "presbyter" had primary reference to the dignity of the office and the term "bishop" had reference to its duties.

The distinction between elder or presbyter and bishop, as two separate orders of ministers, dates from the second century. The origin of the office of elder is not recorded, but elders existed practically from the beginning. In AD 44 they already existed in the church at Jerusalem (Acts 11:30). Paul, on his first missionary journey, appointed elders in every church (Acts 14:23). The office of elder in the Christian church was evidently suggested by the office of elder among the Jews, and was invested with similar authority. Elders were associated with the apostles in the government of the circle (Acts 15:2,4,6,22,23; 16:4; 21:18). They were the bishops or overseers of the local churches (Acts 20:17,28; Titus 1:5), having the spiritual care of the congregation, exercising rule, and giving instruction (I Timothy 3:5,17; Titus 1:9; James 5:14; I Peter 5:1-4; Hebrews 13:17), and ordaining to office (I Timothy 4:14).

There were several bishops or elders in the early local church Philippians 1:1 and Acts 11:30). There is no situation of any division of labor among the bishops and elders. As in the synagogue, so in the Christian church of apostolic times, preaching was not the peculiar function of the elders, nor was it restricted to them. They were, indeed, the regular pastors and teachers. Aptness to teach was an essential qualification for the office (I Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:9). But any man who possessed the gift of prophecy or teaching exhorted (I Corinthians 12:28-30; 24:14,31).

In the government of Reformed churches the teaching elder is the minister, and the ruling elder is a layman who is an elder. The arrangement is convenient, but its existence in apostolic times is not universally admitted. Calvin interpreted I Timothy 5:17 as teaching two kinds of elders: first, those who both teach and rule; and second, those who rule only. But there is a wide dissent from this interpretation. It is argued that the apostle is speaking of two functions of the same office, the primitive elder having been, it is contended, both teacher and ruler. (Davis Dictionary of the Bible Illustrated, pp. 211-212, John J. Davis)

At Thomas Road Baptist Church we have many associate pastors and assistant pastors (who, by definition, could be called elders). They share the responsibilities of the spiritual care, the governmental affairs, etc. of the church. However, Dr. Falwell has the head authority.

Presbyterian circles have elders--not a set number, but a number determined by the church. The congregation elects them, and their function is to speak for the church. Sometimes these elders are broken up into two groups--ruling elders and teaching elders. They, rather than the pastor, have the final voice in the affairs of the church.

"Plurality of" means "multiple"--in other words, more than one "elder," or "pastor."

The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) sounds deceptively simple. It contains only three sentences:

Section 1: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.

Section 2: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation the provisions of this article.

Section 3: This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

This is an amendment which strikes at the foundation of our entire social structure. If passed, this amendment will accomplish exactly the opposite of its outward class. By mandating an absolute equality under the law, it will actually take away any of the special rights of political issue, but a moral one. It is very definitely a violation of scripture in many areas.

ERA will yield great power to the federal government. Jurisdiction over marriage, property rights, divorce, alimony, child custody, abortion and inheritance rights may well be transferred from the hands of the individual states to the hands of the federal bureaucrats and the federal courts.

This cold result in a great loss of freedom. If a law is "locked in" by constitutional mandate, states are powerless to change it.

ERA is not necessarily for women to gain the right to equal pay for equal work, better paying jobs or promotions for better working conditions. This right has already been guaranteed under the:

Equal Pay Acts of 1963

Title VII, Civil Rights Acts of 1964

Equal Employment Opportunity Acts of 1972

ERA can do nothing more in this area. Discrimination results from a lack of enforcement, not a lack of laws.

ERA may harm working women by doing away with protective laws regulating weight lifting restrictions, rest periods, excessive working hours, and maternity leaves.

ERA is not necessary for women to obtain equal credit. This has already been mandated by the Equal Credit Opportunity Acts of 1974.

ERA can do nothing more for teachers. They are protected under the Education Act of 1972.

When discussing the Biblical doctrine of eternal security, it is important to understand its distinction from one's assurance of salvation. Eternal security is addressed in Romans 8:28-39. The assurance of one's salvation is addressed in the book of I John (see 5:13 for example).

First, note that eternal security is objective; assurance of salvation is subjective. Secondly, eternal security is one's personal salvation viewed from God's perspective; assurance of salvation is one's personal salvation viewed from their perspective. Thirdly, when the Christian bases their perspective on God's perspective, they will experience the assurance of their salvation; when the Christian bases their perspective on a substitute for God, they will frequently doubt their salvation. And fourthly, when a non-Christian bases their perspective on a substitute for God, they may frequently think they are saved; when a non-Christian bases their perspective on God's perspective, they will recognize their actual need for salvation.

It is now in line to note some of the errors involved in rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security. Note that such an erroneous theological position fails to adequately understand (1) the nature and effects of all sin; (2) the nature and effects of salvation; (3) the nature and effects of Christianity; and (4) the nature and effects of the context of the Word of God.

Let us examine, first of all the nature and effects of all sin. What sins actually cause the Christian to lose their salvation, or how many times must they be committed? This question has never been adequately answered. The tendency is to focus on the severity of certain sins, while overlooking or underestimating others. The various types of sin recorded in the Scriptures may be categorized as: (1) the sinful nature in the essence of humanity (Romans 5:12); (2) sins of human behavior (Romans 3:23); (3) sins of ignorance (Acts 17:30); (4) sins of knowledge (James 4:17); (5) sins of weakness (Luke 22:31-34); (6) sins of presumption (Psalm 19:13); (7) sins of incomplete hard-heartedness (Galatians 2:11-14); (8) sins of complete hard-heartedness (I Timothy 4:2). (For an elaboration on these, see the late Dr. Henry Thiessen's comments on pp. 193-194 in LECTURES IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, revised edition, Eerdmans, 1979.) Even though there are degrees of guilt with its respective sin, all sin falls short of God's holiness. If one sin terminates the believer's salvation; then any sin terminates the believer's salvation; if any sin terminates the believer's salvation; then all sin terminates the believer's salvation (see James 2:10; Galatians 3:10-11). Roman Catholicism errs when making a distinction between "venial" sins and "mortal" sins. The Scripture makes it clear that all and any sin is mortal (even if it means eating the wrong fruit; see Genesis 3) because all and any sin is alien to the nature of God Who is the Source and Sustainer of all life.

With regard to the subject of sin, mankind is a three-time loser through (1) Adam (Romans 5:19), (2) birth (Romans 5:12); and (3) experience (Romans 3:23). Thus, either Christ "finished" the complete payment of past, present, and future sin in one's life once and for all, or He did not finish the payment for any sin at all (John 19:30; Hebrews 10:10-12). It is this finished work of Christ applied to the Christian's life (imputation) that grants them a righteous and pure standing before God (justification), and not their human ability or merit (Isaiah 64:6). If the sacrifice of Christ is not sufficient for the Christian's eternal security, then all believers would be incapable of experiencing eternal salvation.

However, since the finished substitutionary sacrifice of Christ is sufficient, and has been applied to the Christian, there is nothing for the believer to lose their salvation over, since all their sin has already been paid for in Christ (Hebrews 7:23-28). Thus, God the Father is just in judging the Christian's sin in Christ and is merciful in forgiving the Christian through Christ (Romans 3:26). The sin of the believer was legally credited to the account of Christ at Calvary, while the righteousness of Christ was legally credited to the account of the believer at conversion (Romans 4:t-8). Thus, Christ experienced the Christian's Hell, so that the Christian could experience His Heaven (a complete legal transaction takes place at conversion, permanently changing the destination of the convert; eternal life can never become temporal life).

Now let us seek to properly understand the nature and effects of salvation. The Biblical terminology, "born again" (see John 3:3, 7; 11 Peter 1:23; John 1:12-13; Titus 3:5) illustrates the fact of eternal security by comparing/ contrasting the individual's only and first birth and family relation physically with the individual's only and second birth and family relation spiritually (see John 3:1-7). For example, first, the individual does not become a part of their physical family until that person is born into that family; likewise, the individual does not become a member of God's family until that person is "born again" into God's family (John 3:3).

Secondly the individual did not have anything at all to do with their physical birth; likewise, the individual did not have anything at all to do with their spiritual birth (salvation is not something that I do, but rather something that God does for me; see John 1:12-13).

Thirdly, the individual did not physically mature after their physical birth over night (it takes years for a child to mature physically); likewise, the individual Christian does not spiritually mature after their spiritual birth over night (it takes a child of God an entire lifetime of experience on this earth to mature, and does not fully do so until reaching their Heavenly destination; see I Peter 2:2-3; Phil. 3:12-14; 1 John 3:2).

Finally, the individual, as a physical child, frequently disobeyed their human parents either willingly (knowingly) or ignorantly (unknowingly). In times of disobedience, however, the child did not experience a broken relationship with their parents (he/she did -not cease being the parent's child), but rather, the child experienced a broken fellowship with their parents (he/she was not on "good speaking terms" with their parent, and came under disciplinary action due to the parent's loving protection). Likewise, the individual Christian, as a spiritual child, frequently disobeys their Heavenly Father either willingly (knowingly) or ignorantly (unknowingly). In times of disobedience, however, the child of God does not experience a broken relationship with their Heavenly Father (he/she does not lose their salvation; see I Peter 1:3-5), but rather, the child of God experiences a broken fellowship with their Heavenly Father (he/she is not on "good praying terms" with the Father, and comes under disciplinary action due to the Father's loving protection; see Hebrews 12:5-11).

To this, one may ask, "Well, cannot a parent disown their child? Cannot the Heavenly Father disown one who belongs to Him?" Psalm 27:10 answers this nicely,

When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take me up.

Furthermore, Isaiah 49:15-16 states,

Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.

Thirdly, at this point, let us examine the nature and effects of Christianity. It would be helpful to briefly note some distinctions between Christianity and differing world religions. First, various religions focus on "man seeking God"; however, Christianity focuses on "God seeking man" (Genesis 3:9; 1 John 4:10). Secondly, various religions stress man (the creation) as the initiator while God (the Creator) is seen as the reactor (in other words, the focus is centered upon human abilities/inabilities as the cause that determine/initiate Divine abilities/inabilities as the effect; God grants what man desires and what man earns, so that it is the Creator at the mercy and command of His creature's whims); however, Christianity acknowledges God (the Creator) as the Initiator while man (the creation) is the reactor (in other words, the focus is centered upon Divine abilities as the cause that determine/initiate human abilities as the effect; man is granted what a just and merciful God desires and sufficiently provides, and it is the creation at the mercy of its Creator's loving and sovereign wisdom - not the other way around; see Colossians 1:16-17; Acts 17:28; John 19:11; John 6:44; James 1:17). (God acts in accordance with human will inasmuch as it is first in accord with his.) Thirdly, various religions are humanistic in their philosophy (reliance is on the human self for salvation and security); however, Christianity is theistic in its philosophy (reliance is on the Divine God for salvation and security).

Finally, we should seek to understand the nature and effects of the context of the Word of God. There does not exist one passage anywhere in the pages of Holy Writ that supports the idea of the Christian ever losing their salvation.

Only when the Scriptures are interpreted contrary to their context - environment, and their translated text, do they ever become confusing. When one allows the Bible to do the talking for itself (by not reading one's culture, pre-conceived ideas, or bias in between the lines) the so-called "problem" passages are not problems at all. However, when the individual fails to have either a primary or secondary understanding of the translated grammar of the respective text being studied, and is unaware of the context of the respective text (recipients, purpose, environment, etc.) being studied, then it is not difficult for that individual to mishandle the text. This has indeed happened by some (unaware of the above) in what could be termed, "the apostate passages."

The "apostate passages" designate individuals who have been exposed to Christianity, who have externally gone along with Christianity, who have tasted Christianity on its very threshold, but who have finally spit it out in rejection (often by drifting off into theological heresy). These individuals were never saved to begin with (not unsaved, then saved, and then unsaved again; eternal life is not some "roller-coaster ride"; see I John 2:19).

Two such common examples of "apostate passages" that are occasionally misunderstood would include II Peter 2:20-22 (note (1) the recipient's identification in verses 1, 12, 17, 19, etc., (2) the recipient's comparison in verses 4, 5, 6, and (3) the contrasted eternal security of Lot in verses 7, 8, 9), and Hebrews 6:4-6 (note (1) the contrast between the unsaved apostate and the Hebrew Christians in verse 9, (2) the first phrase in verse 6 which is a Greek participle actually apart of the apostate's description in verses 4-5, and (3) the term "partakers" in verse 4 which is translated from the Greek term metochous, implying "to go along with"; thus, these apostates were influenced by the Gospel (having tasted it by having the only way of salvation being enlightened to their understanding), yet they reject and spit out God's will and "fall away.").

Many passages throughout the New Testament address the subject of apostasy in referring to those having been exposed and somewhat interested in the Gospel, but who have rejected it for some other system of doctrine in which they preferred (examine closely the epistles of Galatians, Colossians, II Peter, and Jude for just a few further examples among any; virtually every New Testament epistle addresses some form of apostasy; see II Corinthians 11:13-15).

So then, with regard to an individual who could potentially lose their salvation, he/she keeps it in as much as they are capable of keeping it (they reason that God does not turn his back on the individual, but that the individual best not turn their back on God, for they will undo what God has done!). The person, thus, will be secure inasmuch as they are capable of keeping themself secure. Therefore, the practical outcome of such wrong understanding is that human merit determines personal security or insecurity. What causes insecurity [personal sin] is the failure of one's previous security [personal ability].

Where does God fit in with all of this? Is God passively sitting back watching His children go to Hell? It is not hard to see such humanism in one's thinking. Individuals are not saved simply because they choose to be saved, but because God wills them to be saved (individual's could will and strive to experience salvation all day, but without that being God's sovereign will in which they reacted to, they never would experience salvation); likewise, individuals do not remain eternally secure because they choose or strive to be eternally secure, but because God wills them to remain eternally secure (individuals could will and strive to experience security all day, but without that being God's sovereign will in which they react to, they never would experience eternal security).

The point is this, the grace of God through the Gospel determines the individual's salvation; the grace of God through the Gospel determines the individual's eternal security. In both cases, this was accomplished in spite of the individual's merit or lack of merit. Eternal salvation is determined by God and not humanity. To assume that one is saved by Divine grace, but is kept by human merit is a logical fallacy (see Galatians 3:3; 4:9; 5:1).

It is this ministry's prayer that this commentary sheds some light on the topic of eternal security. Always remember that people are not saved today and lost tomorrow for Christians are "born twice, not thrice." The Christian life is not you holding on to God, but is rather, God holding on to us (notice the focus). Therefore, the issue is for us to continue to learn to live in accordance with who we already are in Christ (not in our human ability's creation, but God's creation), and not to live someone else's life (one cannot be something they are not; to live the life of God presupposes one has the life from God). Because we are permanently a Christian, we may as well live permanently like a Christian by not viewing/serving God in fear (fear of losing one's salvation), but in love (appreciation of eternal salvation; see I John 4:18).

The term eternity is found only once in the entire Scriptures. The Hebrew word for eternity is "ad," meaning forever, and is used in the passage of Isaiah 57:15 (DICTIONARY OF OLD TESTAMENT WORDS, by Aaron Pick, p. 136). The theological meaning of the word eternity is "infinity," with reference to time [It seems that time was created when the universe was made] (PRACTICAL CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY, by Floyd H. Barackman, p. 33).

No thought has ever confronted the finite mind of man which is less intelligible than that of eternity, and it is possible the idea that eternity will never end is more comprehensible than that it never had a beginning. In fact, the human mind cannot grasp the extent of that which is eternal. Philosophers and theologians alike have met with defeat when attempting to portray eternity. A slight increase of apprehension may be secured when it is contemplated in its relation to the eternal God. It should be noted that there is an abundant testimony given in Scriptures respecting the eternal character of God. God's existence is from everlasting to everlasting. He alone is the Sovereign Designer and Ruler over all ages of time. Jesus Christ Himself is the very God and Creator of all things. Hebrews 1:2 declares that He programmed the ages (SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, by L. S. Chafer, Vol. VII, p. 141).

Eternity itself has been defined as infinite duration ... without beginning or ending. However, it should be noted that there are three primary uses of the term eternity/eternal: (1) Figurative usage, such as "eternal mountains," "eternal hills," the "eternal snows," denoting antiquity or indefinitely long duration; (2) Limited sage, as denoting an existence having a beginning, but which will have no end, such as that of the angels and the souls of men, and the punishment of the wicked; (3) Literal sage, as denoting an existence which has neither beginning or end, like that of God. Time has past, present and future; God has not (ELEMENTAL THEOLOGY, by E. H. Bancroft, p. 42).

An anonymous poet wrote on the subject of eternity:

Eternity transcends all finite bonds of time, knows nothing of duration, with successive years, before thy vision, panoramic and sublime, past, present, future, at one glance appears, unnumbered cycles pass before thy view, the new is as the old, the old is as the new.

(ELEMENTAL THEOLOGY, p. 42)

For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

The LIBERTY BIBLE COMMENTARY, p. 1399, gives the following exposition for Isaiah 57:15:

God is described as the high and lofty One whose name, which is Holy (qadosh), describes His true character. Yet, this transcendent God is also a personal Savior. He inhabits both eternity and the heart of the contrite ones (daka, broken or repentant). Thus, this Old Testament passage envisions the New Testament truth that God both dwells in the eternal heavens and in the hearts of those who will receive Him. He promises to revive (to quicken or restore) those that are of a contrite and humble spirit. Herein we learn one of the great lessons of the spiritual life: revival comes only to those who are humble and broken before God. It is impossible to concoct a revival by mere self-effort and organizational enthusiasm. One may conduct a meeting by such a means, but there will be no genuine revival. Revival comes when the people of God set aside their idols and find a renewed and total dependence upon the Lord God Himself.

Does the Bible teach evolution?

The answer is a definite "No."

The Word of God tells us God Himself decreed that different kinds of creatures and growing things would produce each "after its kind." There is room for change and development and retrogression within any one specie, but that specie will always be the same specie. You may have different kinds of dogs developed through interbreeding, but the dogs are still dogs. Dogs will interbreed with other dogs, but they are still dogs. They are not a different specie, they are simply a different kind of dog.

Anybody who has been reared on a farm knows that you do not get mules from mules. Horses are one kind of specie, and donkeys are another kind of specie. And these two have to be brought together to produce mules. You cannot get numbers and numbers of mules from a male mule and a female mule. You have to go back to the process of putting horses and donkeys together. If evolutionists would allow this to be done, a mule could teach them something about the great truths in the creation story in Genesis, that one specie will never become another specie.

There is an agency that has begun by several scientists, who are Christians, to refute evolution and show that creation is actually more factual than evolution. The name and address of this agency is:

Institute for Creation Research 2100 Greenfield Drive P.O. Bo. 2666 El Cajon, CA 92021 (714) 440-2443

The men involved in this Institute are highly trained scientists with doctorate degrees in science. They are often called to debate in colleges with professors who teach evolution and usually they have more evidence than those professors. It is very important that we believe that the Bible is God's Word--without error and that it is correct even in areas of science. It is important that one believes the Bible account of creation. If one begins to doubt one part of God's Word, it always leads to doubts about the entire Bible.

In Genesis 32:30, Jacob said, "...I have seen God face to face," and yet in John 1: 18, "No man hath seen God at any time." Again, Jesus says in John 14:7, 9, "If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him ... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father...." How then do we reconcile "seeing the face of God?"

Certainly, no man has seen the face of God. As God told Moses in Exodus 33:20, when Moses was up on Mt. Sinai and wanted to see God: And he said, "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me and live. And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock."

What God did was actually hide Moses so that he could not see Him and all of His glory. So, we do know when God said, "no man can see my face," this is what He meant.

Now, what is meant by Genesis 32:30 when Jacob said, "I have seen the face of God?" We know that in John 1:18, Jesus refers to what God told Moses here in Exodus, that no man has seen the face of God; and yet, there are other passages in the Word of God that mention someone seeing God. This, of course, is dealing with a theophany, or really, a spiritual seeing of the face of God, but not in all of His glory. In the same chapter (Exodus 33) where God said, "There shall no man see my face and live," the Bible also says, "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face as a man speaketh unto a friend. So here again this has to be dealing with a spiritual seeing of the face of God, and it is not contradictory."

Moses certainly was in God's presence, just as he was in His presence when he walked up on Mt. Sinai and saw the bush burning. Although he did not see God, he saw the effects (the burning bush) and knew the relationship of God, as God said, "Take off your shoes, you are on holy ground." So, here is an instance of God supposedly meeting someone "face to face." Also, in Deuteronomy, it says, "The Lord make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee, and lift up His covenants unto thee." Certainly, God's Word says no man has seen His face, so what we are dealing with here is not only a physical and personal relationship with a man, because Genesis 32:24 says very simply, And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. Now, it doesn't say that God wrestled with Jacob. This could have been an angel, a theophany, or a preincarnate appearance of Jesus Christ, wrestling with him. Jacob was wrestling with God spiritually, as well as physically. So, certainly, when God had dealt with him through this wrestling match, if you will, and when God had not only crippled him, but also healed him, this is when Jacob said, "I have seen God face to face." It did not mean that he had literally looked into his face, but that he had met with Him in a very personal way.

There is a time in a believer's life when he meets God face to face. That is when he comes to know Jesus Christ as his personal Savior. When a sinner realizes he is lost, and the only way to be saved -- the only way for salvation is to come to God on His grounds and to repent (confess his sin of rejecting