[0]

One need not read far in the Bible to realize that it is definitely not an ecumenical book. In "the Great Commission," Christ commanded His disciples to make disciples of "all nations...teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..." (Mat 28:19-20 [1]). This is a sacred trust from Christ himself that places a grave responsibility upon everyone who claims to be a Christian.

If language has any meaning, then every true disciple today must be a disciple of a disciple of a disciple...all the way back to the original disciples, and obligated to obey the same commands Christ gave to them. No one was ever authorized by Christ to change this commission--and certainly not to change the gospel--yet this has been and is being done. What must our Lord think of church leaders despising His Word?

Truth is independent of time, space, and matter, and never changes. It has no location in the physical universe; it exists in the nonphysical realm of the soul and spirit. The indisputable fact that the brain is not the mind, with which we understand truth, provides one of the simplest proofs that we are nonphysical and eternal beings living temporarily in physical bodies. This solemn fact raises a question that most do not like to face. Preferring to give their attention to pleasures and plans related to this temporal world of the five senses, that which is of paramount importance is put off to "a convenient season" (Acts 24:25 [2]), which never comes. Every person must answer the great question: Where will my soul and spirit (the real "I" that is my unique self) be when this temporary dwelling in which I have lived these few years lies "moulding in the grave?"

To deny the existence of soul and spirit, materialists (which all atheists are) attempt to identify mind and all thought and ideas with the physical brain. Declaring that "materialism is dead," physicist Sir Arthur Eddington proves that fact quite simply:

In science...law...means a rule which is never broken....Thus in the physical world what a body does and what a body ought to do are equivalent; but we are well aware of another domain where they are anything but equivalent. We cannot get away from this distinction....The laws of logic do not prescribe the way our minds think; they prescribe the way our minds ought to think....However closely we may associate thought with the physical brain, the connection is dropped as irrelevant as soon as we consider the fundamental property of thought--that it may be correct or incorrect.

Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, is "the way, the truth, and the life." Truth does not change, thus "Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Heb 13:8 [3]). Yet many church leaders in our day (like multitudes of others throughout history) have taken it upon themselves to change almost everything. Some have done so by rewriting the Bible, as did Eugene Peterson in The Message; others, such as Norman Vincent Peale and Robert Schuller, by "positivizing the gospel," and others by "modernizing" Christianity. The Emergent Church movement has done so under the guise of restoring "original Christianity." They have only restored earlier traditions of men, which, in the days of the apostles, were already far from the truth. Only the New Testament--not "early church history"--gives the record of true biblical Christianity.

There is no justification to say, "Times have changed" so we now need "new truth" to meet the challenges of today's post-modern world. It is a delusion to imagine that going back to the thought and practice of the "early historic church" will make us more spiritual or restore first-century Christianity. Searching through "ancient church history" is not going back far enough. We need to go all the way back to the Bible.

Each true disciple has been given a sacred trust, having received in an unbroken line of succession through earlier disciples Christ's original "commission" to His first followers: to obey and to teach others to obey everything Christ taught them. No research is needed--only a simple understanding of, and faith in, God's Word-to recognize the brazen revision of the Great Commission underway. This is seen in the ecclesiastical hierarchy of many Protestant denominations, and especially in the Roman Catholic system, which the original humble fishermen-disciples would denounce were they here today.

Incredibly, John Hagee, in a letter dated May 12, 2008, to Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights, "apologized for calling the Roman Catholic Church 'the apostate church' and 'the great whore.'" But that's what Luther and all the Reformers called it in keeping with God's Word! Nor was this a recent off-the-cuff remark but a consistent declaration over many years. In a shameful "about-face," Hagee declared, "I want to express my deep regret for any comments that Catholics have found hurtful." Isn't Christ a "rock of offence" (Rom 9:33 [4]) and His cross an "offence" to unbelievers? Must we apologize for offending with the truth? Must we withhold the truth of the gospel to avoid offending those who need it? Isn't the Bible (not the hurt feelings of sinners) our unchangeable standard?

Let's be honest--Hagee's apology that denied the truth was political fence-mending by "one of John McCain's highest profile supporters from the religious right." It was not for the sake of Christ but for the presidential hopes of McCain. In apologizing, Hagee called the use of these terms in Revelation "a rhetorical device long employed in anti-Catholic literature and commentary." Now he must apologize to the Lord for calling "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him" (Rev 1:1 [5]) "anti-Catholic rhetoric"! It is only fitting that on May 22 McCain distanced himself from Hagee, who then withdrew his endorsement.

Instead of remaining true to Christ's commands, many of today's church leaders teach and practice "Christianity" as though the Great Commission were, "Go into all the world and try to find as much agreement with the major religions as possible, being careful not to criticize any 'faith,' but join with them in ecumenical union to abolish poverty, hunger, and disease." That sounds so appealing and it seems such a worthy cause that entire denominations have been swallowed up by this satanic heresy.

Isn't "satanic" a bit strong? No. Satan was the first to ask, "Yea, hath God said?" His followers are identified by ignoring, defying, or changing God's unchangeable truth. One might be put in jail for such harsh language. Not now, but that day may yet come sooner than we imagine.

To claim to know what God has said, to follow it, and to boldly oppose the errors taught by those who diverge from God's truth, is today's unforgivable sin both in the world and in the church. The mood worldwide is definitely toward both political and religious unity at any cost. As this movement gathers increasing momentum, anyone who has the moral and spiritual integrity to uphold the Bible will be seen as worthy of imprisonment and eventually death for standing in the way of global unity, the one hope to which the world and church still cling in desperate partnership.

As for true Christians, any compromising ecumenical agreement is rendered impossible by Christ's firm declaration, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (Jn 14:6 [6]). There is no way to soften that statement. True to their Lord, the apostles declared: "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 [7]). As their successors, we must proclaim the same.

In contrast, Satan's religious lackeys, true to their master, cry, "You can't say that!" His many other servants in legislative bodies and courts are determined to make it an international crime to suggest that any recognized "faith" (no matter how contradictory to every other) could possibly be in any error. The Bible could soon be outlawed as condemnatory of all non-Christian religions. But this is the nature of the Bible, and for that we make neither apology nor "religiously correct" adjustments. Simon Greenleaf, one of America's greatest legal minds, who turned from agnosticism to faith in Christ, declared nearly 180 years ago:

The religion of Jesus Christ aims at nothing less than the utter overthrow of all other systems of religion in the world; denouncing them as inadequate to the wants of man, false in their foundations, and dangerous in their tendency....These are no ordinary claims; and it seems hardly possible for a rational being to regard them with [merely] a subdued interest; much less to treat them with mere indifference and contempt.

We do not follow anyone except our Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles. Paul declared, "Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me...even as I also am of Christ" (1 Cor 4:16 [8]; 1 Cor 11:1 [9]). Our Lord continually referred to and quoted the Old Testament, the only Scriptures that existed in His day and all that was needed to proclaim the gospel then and now: "And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself" (Lk 24:27 [10]).

We should follow His example in witnessing for Him, as Paul did. He preached "the gospel of God (which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures) concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; and declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead" (Rom 1:1-4 [11]). The true gospel is founded upon hundreds of prophecies that cannot be changed. Woe to those who tamper with "the gospel of God"!

Declaring that the gospel he had preached was "according to the scriptures" (1 Cor 15:3-4 [12]), Paul affirmed once again that the gospel is so firmly founded in the entire Old Testament that it could not be altered without destroying the Scriptures. This is the testimony of the entire Bible. Those who dare to change God's Word in any way have denied God himself. They are saying that God did not know the future, that His plan of salvation is no longer adequate for modern man, and that today's theologians must patch up the mess in which Christ has left His church. In other words, the God of the Bible is not the true God. As T.A. McMahon has pointed out (02/08 [12] ; 03/08 [12] ), the Emerging Church leaders have declared that everything must "be reinvented" to arrive at a new theology adequate for our day.

Paul did not seek religious or political rapprochement with anyone. He and Silas were accused of having "turned the world upside down" (Acts 17:6 [13]). The apostles made no alliances; they followed the orders Christ had given them. They knew and uncompromisingly proclaimed "the truth [as it] is in Jesus" (Eph 4:21 [14]) with boldness and great power and with much disputation.

Disputation? Yes! That word describes much of the apostles' life and ministry, and especially Paul's, but is being trampled under the boots of the marching "seeker friendly" ecumenists. The fact that Paul and the early church leaders and martyrs spent so much time publicly disputing tells us much about what is lacking among Christians today, or shall we just call it Christianity Today? Consider these religiously incorrect, uncompromising, "negative" declarations-founded upon prophecy:

STEPHEN: "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost....[w]ho have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it." (Acts 7:51 [15])
PETER: "Thy money perish with thee....Thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness...." (Acts 8:18-24 [16])
PAUL: But Saul...confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ. (Acts 9:22 [17])
PETER: "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." (Acts 10:43 [18])
PAUL: "Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus....For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day...fulfilled them in condemning him.... And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree...." (Acts 13:23-29 [19])
PAUL, as his manner was...reasoned with them out of the scriptures...(Acts 17:2 [20]); Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him (Acts 17:17 [21]); He reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and Greeks. (18:4; Acts 18:19 [22])
APOLLOS mightily convinced the Jews...publickly, shewing [proving] by the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ. (Acts 18:28 [23])
PAUL went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading..." (Acts 19:8 [24]); ...disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus [for] two years; (Acts 19:9-10 [25]); "I...by the space of three years...ceased not to warn [about coming apostasy] every one night and day with tears" (Acts 20:31 [26]); And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled (Acts 24:25 [27]); Persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets." (Acts 28:23 [28])

I recently engaged in three debates in Toronto: with a Hindu leader of a large temple, with an atheist philosophy professor, and with a Muslim imam, who debates Christians worldwide. Is this what Christians are supposed to do? Is it productive? How can we obey "live peaceably with all men" (Rom 12:18 [29]) while disagreeing with opposing beliefs? (The DVDs will be offered in July for August delivery.)

The scriptures above show that disputing with unbelievers was Paul's life and ministry. He said we are to follow him. How else can we faithfully fulfill our commission?

There is no revelation more affecting than this, that God is of such a nature that the misery of fallen man has constrained Him to lay aside His heavenly glory, to become man, to bear all our sin and sorrow, and by death vanquish death and give to dying sinners eternal and divine life. Everyone who by faith receives this life is under the same necessity as He from whom he derives it, so that, on this account, every Christian is naturally a missionary. He hears in his soul as an impelling command, the words: "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature." (E.M. Broadbent, from The Pilgrim Church [29] )

Each true disciple must heed the Great Commission to "be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you" (1 Pt 3:15 [30]). The Lord will give those with willing hearts the opportunities, wisdom, humility, grace, and power to be true to His calling. TBC

QuotableRevelation 20:5 [31])? If this is the "first resurrection," does that not imply a "second"? You mentioned John 5:29 [32] and said, "but it couldn't be [that unbelievers] will be resurrected." But the verse says the dead "shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." Then there's Acts 24:14-15 [33]. "And have hope toward God...that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust." The Old Testament is also consistent in noting that "Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt" (Daniel 12:2 [34]).

What about Mat 18:8-9 [35], which talks about cutting off the hand or the foot rather than the whole body being cast into hell? Revelation 20:13 [36] very plainly says "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." This does not sound like scriptural support for only the saved having a physical resurrection. You have always been so consistent in upholding the Scriptures. Don't you think you should reevaluate your position?

Response: Neither biblically nor logically can it be argued that the term "first resurrection" necessarily implies a "second." In fact, the phrase "second resurrection" is not found in Scripture. In John 5:28-29 [37], Jesus said, "All that are in the graves...shall come forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation." The implication is certainly not that these resurrections are similar. Because the resurrection of life involves the body, that does not imply that the resurrection of damnation involves bodies at all. The term "first resurrection" is found only in Revelation 20:5-6 [38]. It is described there as including only "them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark" (Rev 20:4 [39]). This can't include "the dead in Christ" resurrected seven years earlier at the Rapture (1 Thes 4:13-18 [40]). Since that resurrection occurred prior to the one mentioned here, why is this called "the first resurrection"? It can only be to show that this is not a separate second resurrection but the culmination of the "first."

The "resurrection of damnation" is not even mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15 [41]. Wouldn't it seem odd, if you are right, that "the resurrection chapter," which provides the most detailed discussion in the Bible of a bodily resurrection, says nothing about a physical bodily resurrection of the damned? Everything this chapter says could apply only to the redeemed, not to the damned. For example: "So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body" (1 Cor 15:42-44 [42]). This "spiritual body" is the resurrection body of the redeemed, exactly like Christ's "spiritual body." It could be seen and handled and could ingest food, yet it could walk through walls and go anywhere, including heaven, in a moment.

Man is body, soul, and spirit--a triune being reflecting in part the triune nature of his Creator. The moment Adam sinned, he died ("In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die"-Gn 2:17). His body, soul, and spirit were instantly cut off from God, the Creator and only source of life.

Adam and Eve immediately knew that the Spirit of God had left them. The moral and spiritual image of God in which man had been created (Gen 1:26-27 [43]) was irreparably marred, a fact that quickly manifested itself. Adam blamed both Eve and God ("The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree"-3:12). Eve blamed the serpent ("The serpent beguiled me"- v. 13). The "don't admit guilt, excuse yourself, blame others" game continues to this day. The body also died instantly, though the process of dying that begins the moment we are born took much longer then than now.

You misquote me as saying, "but it couldn't be [that unbelievers] will be resurrected." In fact, I wrote, "Nothing is said in these passages about 'the dead' having bodies. How could those standing before God in judgment be described as 'dead' if they had been raised body, soul, and spirit?"

Another passage refers to the resurrection of the damned: "The sea gave up the dead that were in it...death and hell gave up the dead which were in them..." (Rev: 20:13). This scripture says nothing about bodies. Certainly the rich man didn't have a body to come out of hell; there are no bodies in graves or in the sea. They've all been consumed. Then what came forth? The souls and spirits of the dead, which are all confined to Hades, no matter where they were buried. What about the bodies? Nowhere does it say that the bodies of the damned are raised. Ask yourself why this must be?

Obviously Matthew 18:8-9 [44] do not refer to physical hands and eyes and bodies. Jesus is not suggesting that hands be literally cut off nor eyes literally plucked out. Therefore, neither is He saying that physical bodies are literally thrown into hell. That was not true for the rich man, and we know that there are no bodies in hell. Consequently, Christ's figurative language cannot provide the basis for saying that the physical bodies of the damned come out of the grave.

As for the bodily resurrection of the redeemed, that is as essential as Christ's bodily resurrection. Why? The wages of sin is death, the body dies, and "the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death" (1 Cor 15:26 [45]). Christ conquered death by paying the full penalty for our sins and rising triumphantly. If the bodies of the redeemed are left rotting in the grave, death has not been conquered. Would the damned also be physically resurrected because Christ conquered death? Do unbelievers share in the power of His Resurrection?

Of course not! They are still in death's grip as they are brought forth to judgment: "I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened...and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works" (Rev 20:12 [46]). "Dead" seems a strange designation for those who have been resurrected body, soul, and spirit. The resurrected redeemed are never called "dead"!

Christ conquered death for the redeemed, not for the damned! This "working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead" (Eph 1:19-21 [47]) was the greatest display ever of God's power. The redeemed share in Christ's triumph and therefore are raised bodily.

In contrast, the damned could not have been raised bodily, or death would not have conquered their bodies. Nor can death, the penalty for sin, ever release their bodies because they have rejected Christ, "the resurrection, and the life" (Jn 11:25 [48]).

The only possible argument for a bodily resurrection of the damned would be so they could be eternally tortured in physical flames. So say Islam and Catholicism, but that is not biblical. The torment of the damned will mean something that physical pain could not produce: the terror and guilt of being confronted with the "exceeding sinfulness" of their sin in the presence of Christ who died for their sins. Like Adam and Eve after they rebelled, the damned will have nowhere to hide from God's justice. The overwhelming moral and spiritual conviction of the exceeding wickedness of their hearts will burn for eternity in the conscience that God gave them and that they refused to heed but can no longer escape.

How could physical fire "try every man's work of what sort it is" (1 Cor 3:13 [49])? It couldn't! Then how could the fire of God's holy wrath against sin be physical? Everyone knows that to spank teenagers would not bring correction but anger and resentment. Is that because teenagers can stand the pain? No, but it is because physical pain has no moral or spiritual benefit.

The damned will be eternally tormented by the conviction of the sin of trampling upon the blood of Christ, accompanied by the hopeless realization that their doom didn't have to be, that God and Christ did all they could to rescue them by paying the full penalty for sin and pleading with them to receive the pardon and salvation Christ purchased and freely offered--and now it is forever too late.

Nowhere in 1 Corinthians 15 [50], the "resurrection chapter" (or anywhere else in Scripture) is there anything about bodies of the damned being raised. The bodily resurrection of Christ is offered as proof that the redeemed will be raised bodily: "they that are Christ's at his coming" (15:23). How could it be proof that the damned will also be raised bodily? Christ's resurrection signals the destruction of death, "the last enemy" (15:26). The damned have no part in Christ's triumph over death and are repeatedly spoken of as "the dead," never as "the living"!

What kind of triumph over death would Christ's resurrection have procured for the damned to be raised bodily so they might be tortured endlessly in physical flames? This doctrine gives occasion for those who hate God to denounce Him.

No one can complain against the justice of the damned being tormented eternally by the horror of what they have done, from which there can be no release. Otherwise, Hitler would have escaped the judgment by committing suicide. But what is either the purpose or justice of being tortured physically for eternity? I can't find a single biblical explanation.

I hope this answer has helped to explain what I believe the Bible teaches on this matter. As always, you must be as the Bereans and search these things out for yourselves and come to your own conclusions based on what the Lord shows you in His Word.

Question: I was wondering if you might share your interpretation of 1 Peter 2:8 [51] regarding the use of the word tithemi as applied to the faithless apeitheo. How does this reconcile with the clear statement in 2 Peter 3:9 [52] that God does not will anyone to perish? I searched for a reference to this in your book What Love is This? (which I found very helpful) but couldn't find it.

Response: In 1 Peter 2:8 [53], Christ is called a "stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient [apeitheo]: whereunto also they were appointed [tithemi]." Yet 2 Peter 3:9 [54] declares: "The Lord is...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Putting these verses together, you ask how God can simultaneously will that no one perish yet appoint some to stumble at His Word? Or, to phrase it differently, how can God "not be willing that any should perish" yet appoint some to disobedience and thus to judgment?

First of all, one must realize that God does not control all behavior and beliefs of men. Such teaching is an unbiblical Calvinist doctrine that makes God the author of evil, robs man of the power of choice and thus of the ability to love, and robs God of His love. He allows men to pursue their wicked ways on earth and only intervenes to rescue the righteous or to draw sinners with the gospel--which He continually does for all mankind, though most refuse His offer of salvation. Of course, God can overrule man's will to effect His own purposes, but He cannot change the rebel's heart. If He could, then the "first and great commandment...Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind" (Mat 22:37-38 [55]) is of no purpose. Why would God command men to love Him if they have no free choice but must be programmed to obey Him?

The fact that God doesn't will for anyone to perish doesn't mean that no one will perish. The prayer Christ taught His disciples to pray, "Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven" (Mat: 6:10), is proof enough that much if not most of what happens on earth is not God's will. God does not will that anyone sin; men sin freely of their own will. The fact that He has appointed rebels to judgment does not mean that He caused them to sin so that He could punish them for their disobedience.

The very few scriptures that seem inconsistent with God's love and man's power of choice must be interpreted in the context of the overwhelming number of scriptures (scores of them) that clearly echo "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" (Jn 3:16 [56]). Yet Calvinism declares that God could have all of mankind in heaven if He so desired but that He sovereignly chooses to send the vast majority to the lake of fire. What Love Is This?!

Let's take another closer look at the clause, "being disobedient [apeitheo]: whereunto also they were appointed [tithemi]." Apeitheo clearly means willful, deliberate disobedience. Therefore "appointed [tithemi]" cannot mean that God predestined, much less caused, their disobedience. It can only mean that He allowed it.

News Alert1 Timothy 4:1 [57]).]

Letters

Dear Dave,
Just re-read the book [Judgment Day!]. Extremely well-written and important. I have agonized over these issues for years and am convinced that this view of Scripture and the unfolding of history is the only one that even begins to make sense. May God raise up an army of preachers willing to tell the truth. JC (email)

Dear TBC,
I'd just like to encourage all of you to keep up the good work. I'm dismayed at the number of people that, while calling themselves followers of Jesus, castigate you for the slightest presumed error, unwilling to give you the benefit of doubt, exhibiting harsh, unforgiving attitudes. Please remember, not everyone is like that. Some of us know how to disagree in love and are humble enough to know we also could be wrong. R&RS (email)

Dear Dave, T.A., and Fellow Bereans,
Your 2008 issues have been exceptional! I have been a reader since the...mid '80s when [I read] Peace, Prosperity and the Coming Holocaust. I got saved in 1985 after many years in the New Age.... Jesus Christ has been everything He promised. His Word is alive and ministers to every need. MU (PA)

Dear Friends,
I am an avid...reader of your awesome free newsletter The Berean Call. I read many things. However, I am able to do without all these other things except for two. First, the very Word of God and secondly, your wonderful newsletter. CW (prisoner, NC)

My dear friends in Christ,
I am a missionary in [Eastern Europe]....After Dave ministered in one of the churches here, I was by his side as the pastor of that church asked him, "What would your positive message be?" Dave thought before he answered and during those few seconds there was a growing eagerness in me--This is an answer I have got to hear!--knowing instinctively that it would be important for my own spiritual growth. Dave's answer, "Why, 'Set your affection on things above not on things upon the earth, for ye are dead and your life is hidden with Christ in God!'"

That conversation took place at least 10 years ago, and Dave's answer has been one of the truths that God has been resounding in my mind throughout these years. It has been a catalyst that He has used in my own spiritual walk, as I am daily "setting my affection on things above...."

Why do I share this? I want to encourage all those reading not to shut TBC out of their lives because it may appear to be "too negative." The example I have cited above brings out this point: If you are having difficulty in hearing the positive message in what they say, simply because it also has the accompanying negative, then just ask!

Thank you Dave and Ruth...T.A. and Mrs. McMahon...TBC Staff! God knows how much He has used your ministry to minister His truths to my spirit, surely beyond whatever I could begin to tell. Anon by request (Europe)

Dear TBC,
I was at the debate in Whitby, Ontario [Toronto]. What an eye opener! I have re-decided to follow Jesus...as a deacon in my church. HK (Canada)

Dear Dave,
What an honor it was to see you again and hear you speak at Bayside Community Church last Sunday. Your topic, "Knowledge, Understanding, Reason, and Faith" was timely and so much where I am these days. After coming out of the Word-Faith movement a few years ago, I have committed to sound doctrinal positions using reason and objective thought as opposed to the subjective that is so prevalent today. Again, thank you, Dave, T. A., and the whole BC staff for your excellent biblical ministry. BM (FL)

Dear Dave,
Having come to Christ only ten years ago, I have a lot to learn. Your articles have lifted me to a whole new level, for which I thank you. God pointed me to the Bereans in Scripture, and a fellow Christian pointed me to your publication, for which I will be eternally grateful. BM (email)

Dear TBC,
I have begun to be very concerned about some of the teaching in the church I'm in. The emphasis on Scripture and good solid music is heartening, but the increasing amount of legalism as demonstrated by strict guidelines on what believers must wear is certainly a concern. There are no elders and the pastor is the sole authority in the group. RS (CO)

Dear Mr. Hunt,
As a Jew, I am humbled by your love and understanding of the Jewish people and their long struggle with humanity. I am married to a Christian woman and we...pray through Jesus that Israel will be a land for the Jewish people so that Christ may...come back to earth. The world must understand, as you do, that the Jews are God's chosen people and together Jews and Christians will make this world a more wonderful world....I lost many family members in the Holocaust, and Israel and its Christian support means more to me than any material object in the world. Thank you again for being such a wonderful teacher/prophet and for your support of the Jewish people. NK (email)

TBC Notes

Your Letters

Please don't be upset if you take the time to write to us and don't receive a reply. Though we continue to grow as a ministry, we are trying nevertheless to keep TBC's operation small and personal as well as economically efficient. Three of us answer letters among our many duties. Every letter is read and its input greatly appreciated; but we cannot answer them all.

It is our desire that our newsletter, radio programs, and website, along with the books, CDs, and DVDs that we recommend, will continue to be the minstry's primary information resource. The reprints of back newsletter issues have also proved to be tremendously valuable to our readers, providing answers to a great percentage of questions.