Friday, February 24, 2017


1. The apostle Paul was not saved like the thief on the cross.
2. The apostle Paul was not saved by saying the sinner's prayer.
3. The apostle Paul was not saved by grace alone.
4. The apostle Paul was not saved by faith only.
5. The apostle Paul was not saved by baptism alone.
6. The apostle Paul was not saved by confession alone.
7. The apostle Paul was not saved by repentance alone.
8. The apostle Paul was not saved on the road to Damascus.


The apostle Paul was saved like the three thousand that were saved on the Day of Pentecost. He was saved just like every person saved under the new covenant.

 What did Peter preach on the Day of Pentecost? 

1. John 3:16  Saved by faith.The apostle Peter preached Jesus as Lord and Savior.(Acts 2:36)
2. Romans 10:9 Believe the resurrection of Jesus. Peter preached the resurrection.(Acts 2:25-35)
3. Acts 3:19 Saved by repentance. The apostle Peter preached repentance. (Acts 2:38)
4. Mark 16:16 Saved by water immersion. Peter preached forgiveness through water baptism. (Acts 2:38)(Acts 2:40-41)

1. Saul (Paul) Believed and repented on the road to Damascus. (Acts 9:3-6)

2. Saul (Paul) Prayed three days while on the road to Damascus, however, neither faith alone, nor saying a sinner's prayer was sufficient for him to have his sins forgiven. (Acts 9:9-11)

3. Saul (Paul) had his sins forgiven after three days on the road to Damascus. Acts 22:10-16......16 'And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.(NKJV)

Faith only advocates say that Saul's sins were forgiven because he called on the name of the Lord, not because of water baptism. That contradicts their own "faith only" belief that you are saved the minute you believe. Saul believed and repented three days prior on the road to Damascus.

The apostle Paul was saved just like every other person that was saved or will be saved under the new covenant. 1. Faith, John 3:16 2. Confession, Romans 10:9 3. Repentance, Acts 3:19 4. Immersion in water, Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16

NOTE: The thief on the cross was saved before the New Testament was in force. He was not saved on or after the Day of Pentecost. The new covenant was only in force after the resurrection and Ascension of Jesus.          

Thursday, February 23, 2017

DISCREDITING GOD'S WORD by steve finnell

The Pharisees did not deny the miracles of Jesus, they just tried to discredited them. (Matthew 12:22,24 Then one was brought to him who was demon-possessed, blind and mute;  and He healed him, so that the  blind and mute man both spoke and saw. 24 Now when the Pharisees heard it they said, "This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons."(NKJV)

Certain contemporary believers in Christ do not deny what Jesus and the apostles said, they just ignore or change the meaning.

Acts 10:25-26 As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him  and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But  Peter lifted him up, saying "Stand up; I myself am also a man."(NKJV)  

The apostle Peter rejected the worship of men, however, many today worship dead saints and the Virgin Mary by praying to them. Praying to anyone or anything is worship. Writing doctrine in a church catechism does not make it the word of God.

Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptize will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.(NKJV)

Some believers in Jesus discredit the words of Jesus, found in Mark 16:16, by claiming that since some early manuscripts do not include it; therefore it is not trustworthy. Still others simply assert that, is baptized will be saved, actually means is baptized has already been saved. [Mark 16:16 is included in every Bible translation that I am aware.]

In order to discredit God's word, the Bible has to be deemed untrustworthy. The only effective was to discredit God's word is to add to or take away from the Bible. Creed books, new revelations, books written by men and other man-made doctrines are the keys to discrediting the word of God.



Dear Brother Faull, 
Who is the antichrist?  I have heard that it was Hitler!  Stalin!  Mussolini!  Even Sadam!  Who do you believe it is?  How about Bin Laden?
I personally suspect your next door neighbor!!! Why would I say such a thing as that?
The word antichrist appears five times in four Scriptures.  All we can know about the antichrist must appear in the verses that speak of “him.”  We will quote those verses for you and then study them.  We can know no more than God has revealed about the subject.  All else is speculation.
I John 2:18, “Little children, it is the last time:  and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.”
I John 2:22, “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?  He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.”
I John 4:3, “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 tit should come; and even now already is it in the world.”
II John 1:7, “For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.  This is a deceiver and an antichrist.”  [The Greek word has “the antichrist.”]
Now what do these verses reveal to us about the antichrist?
1.                  The disciples had heard that the antichrist (the opponent or the adversary of Christ) was coming in the last times.
2.                  John corrects their thinking by pointing out:
A.                             There are many, not one.
B.                             They are present now, not future.
C.                             These are the last times now!!!
3.                  He reveals who the antichrist is.
A.                             The liar who denies that Jesus is the Messiah is the antichrist.
B.                             The denier of the Father and the Son is the antichrist.
C.                             The spirit that denies that Jesus Christ came in the flesh is the antichrist.
D.                             The deceiver who will not confess that Jesus, the Messiah, has come in the flesh is the antichrist.

Do you see why I suspect your next door neighbor?  There is nothing sensational, and no great fanfare about the antichrist.  It is very simple.  If you know someone who holds to the Jewish or Mohommedan religion, he is the antichrist, for they do not believe Jesus is the Messiah.  If you know a Jehovah Witness or one in the “Jesus Only” cult, he is the antichrist, for they deny either God the Father, or God the Son.  If you know a Christian Scientist, he is the antichrist, for they believe flesh is a mere allusion and thereby deny that Jesus came in the flesh.  If you know an atheist, an agnostic or anyone who will not confess that Jesus is the Messiah who came in the flesh, he is the antichrist.
This little, brief article should alarm you.  You should not believe all you hear about the coming antichrist, who is coming to rule the world and fight against Christ.  The one referred to as “the man of sin” by Paul, or “the little horn” of Daniel’s vision are not the antichrist.  These are also “against Christ,” but it is not biblically correct to call just one man or system “the antichrist.”  There are many, and they are all around us now.  Do not be misled by “sensationalists” and “time setters” who are always calling your attention to some political leader as the antichrist.  Convert your neighbor and there will be one less antichrist. Remember, one opposes Christ when he denies that God the Father has sent His Son in the flesh to save us from our sins.
John 3:35-36, “35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.  36 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.”

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

CONFIRMING GOD'S TRUTH   by steve finnell

If you are confirming God's truth by reading Bible commentaries, man-made creed books, and books written by preachers, priests, and theologians. Then you should throw away your Bible.

The Bible confirms man's view. Man's view does not confirm the truth of the Bible.

Acts 17:10-11......11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so, (NKJV)  


It is not uncommon for today's teachers and preacher to become multimillionaires. Does that raise a red flag?

How many millions did the apostle Paul receive from the 13 letters (books) he wrote in the New testament? He received, not one penny. He made tents, (Acts 18-1-3....3So, because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and worked; for by occupation the were tentmakers.) NKJV

How many personal jets did the apostle Paul have? That would zero. How many million dollar estates did Paul own? That is correct, none.

How much money did Paul receive for baptizing babies or teaching a class on infant baptism? Not one dime, because he did not baptize infants.

Yes, it is Scripturally correct to make a living preaching the gospel. (1 Corinthians 9:14 Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.) NKJV)


1 Timothy 3:2-3 A bishop....3 not greedy for money....(NKJV)

1 Timothy 6:9-10 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and many into foolish and harmful lusts which drown men in destruction and perdition...........10 (NKJV)

I cannot name one multimillionaire preacher who preaches the same gospel as Paul and the rest of the apostles. If you are honest, neither can you. 


THE GOSPEL IS THE GOOD NEWS by steve finnell

The gospel is the good news, but what is the good news? The good news is that those who hear and obey the gospel are saved from the penalty of sin.

1 Corinthians 15:1-2 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which you received, in which you also stand , 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached, unless you believed in vain. (NASB)

The apostle Paul said the gospel saves. Paul said you have to hold fast to the gospel or you have believed in vain.

Did Paul preach a different gospel than Jesus? No he did not.

After Jesus was resurrected from the grave He preached the gospel plan of salvation. Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.(NASB)

Yes, those who deny that being immersed in water is part of the gospel plan of salvation are denying the gospel that Jesus and the apostles preached. 

There were men who believed in vain. Galatians 5:4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.(NASB)

Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!(NASB)

The apostle Paul said those who deny that immersion in water is part of the gospel will be accursed. Church leaders today say those who pervert the gospel should be part of joint evangelistic efforts and joint good works in the community.

Galatians 1:8 Let God's curses fall on anyone, including  myself, who preaches any other way to be saved than the one we told you about; yes, if an angel comes from heaven and preaches any other message, let the be forever cursed.(The Living Bible Paraphrased)

Paul and the apostles preached the gospel plan of salvation.
FAITH: John 3:16
CONFESSION: Romans 10:9


Why do church leaders teach false doctrine and participate in practices condemned by the apostles.

1. Fear of losing their positions in the church.
2. Ignorance of Scripture.
3. Self deception.
4. Pride.
5. Lack of prayerfully asking God for His truth.
6. Peer pressure.
7. Trusting men, Bible commentaries, and their own opinions more than they trust God and His words that are written in the Bible.     


Tuesday, February 21, 2017

by David Vaughn Elliott

   They tell us planes will fall out of the sky. Automobiles will careen and crash. Surgeries will be halted mid-way. Communications systems will be in shambles. Husbands will frantically search for their wives. Why? Because all believers instantly and mysteriously vanished. In spite of such chaos, they tell us life on earth will continue for years. They call it the rapture.  

    Some people emphasize that the word "rapture" is not found in the Bible. This is true; but it is not the real problem. First Thessalonians 4:17 says that believers "shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord." "Caught up." The dictionary gives one meaning of rapture as "the carrying of a person to another place or sphere of existence." If by "rapture" one simply means that Christians will be carried up to be with Christ, then there is little objection to the word "rapture." 


    However, "rapture," as used by religious teachers today, means far more than the simple definition given above. Indeed, there is a whole body of doctrine wrapped up in today's word "rapture."  

    One obvious problem with the modern rapture theory is the portraying of dramatic scenes of plane crashes, missing babies and all such. There is not one verse in the Bible that hints at such a scenario. No verse teaches that after the "rapture," regular life will continue in this world. One of the most cited texts, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, is totally silent about conditions on earth when the saints are lifted up.  

    Another frequently cited text is Matthew 24:37-42. But did Jesus have the modern rapture scenario in mind? Let the context decide. Starting just 5 verses earlier, Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away... but as the days of Noah [were]... the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two [men] will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left." Jesus' return will be like Noah's time. The flood was the end of that old world. Either you were safe in the ark or you perished under the wrath of God. That is how it will be when Jesus returns.  

    The context of "one will be taken and the other left" is "as the days of Noah [were], so also will the coming of the Son of Man be." The rapture will be like Noah's time. Did Noah mysteriously disappear? When Noah entered the ark, did the world continue with normal daily life? We all know better. "The world [that] then existed perished" (2 Peter 3:6).  

    Jesus did not have the modern rapture doctrine in mind. Rather, He said that when He returns, the earth will pass away.  


    If the popular rapture theory were correct, Jesus would have used totally different examples. Jesus would have said, "As the days of Enoch were," "as the days of Elijah were." Righteous Enoch disappeared out of this world and the world continued on. Elijah's case is even more striking. After the whirlwind took him up into heaven, 50 men went searching for him for three days. Now there is the flavor of today's rapture doctrine! There is only one problem. Jesus never said, "as the days of Elijah were"! Jesus said, "as the days of Noah [were]."  

    Jesus never said, "As the days of Enoch were." However, He did say, "Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot... it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed [them] all. Even so will it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed" (Luke 17:28-30).

    The comparisons that Jesus made are with Lot and Noah. Both involved the immediate destruction of the wicked, while the righteous were saved. Both canceled out any possibility of second chances. Both were the end. The case of Sodom, of course, was not the end of the world; but it certainly was the end of Sodom and Gomorrah. Those cities have never been found. Those people never lived long enough to wonder what happened to Lot. There were no chariot wrecks or search parties. God simply blotted them off the face of the earth with fire and brimstone. Jesus said His coming would be like that. 


    The "secret rapture" theory uses as a proof the statement that Jesus will come as a thief. Yes, but what does this mean? Figures of speech can be tricky. Both Jesus and Satan are likened to lions. A red flag goes up: "Interpret with caution." Jesus is called both a lion and a lamb. Another red flag. We dare not wring every possible meaning out of any figure of speech. To do so is to make the Bible a plaything for our every imagination.  

    How do thieves come? Consider two ideas. A thief may come and go secretly, without being detected at the moment. On the other hand, a thief may come openly, but suddenly, without warning. Which of these two ideas does the Bible teach regarding Jesus' coming? If the figure were never explained in the Bible, your guess would be as good as mine.  

    Out of six New Testament texts that use this figure, only one does not state which meaning is intended. In the other five, the idea is always lack of warning. Secrecy is never an issue. Example: "If the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" (Luke 12:39,40). The message is clear: Jesus will come as a thief, when you least expect Him. Be ready at all times. 

    Notice 2 Peter 3:10: "The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up." "Thief... great noise... earth... burned up." Hardly secret. It is the end of the world!  

    No Bible text hints that "coming as a thief" contains the idea of secrecy. No Bible text hints that Jesus' coming will be hidden from the eyes and understanding of the masses. When Jesus comes, there will be no secrecy and no second chances. Eternity will have arrived. Everyone will know it. 


    The well-known text that speaks specifically of being "caught up" (raptured) makes it clear that it is anything but a covert operation. "For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive [and] remain shall be caught up" (1 Thessalonians 4:16,17). Shout! Voice of an archangel! Trumpet of God! Jesus coming certainly will not be secret.  

    In fact, Jesus specifically warned us not to believe those people who claim His return is a private, secret, hidden affair. "Therefore if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; [or] 'Look, [He] [is] in the inner rooms!' do not believe [it]. For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be" (Matthew 24:26,27).  

    If someone tries to explain to you that Jesus has come again, don't believe it. If he tries to convince you that Jesus came in 1914, don't believe him. If he tries to convince you that Jesus will secretly rapture away the believers and the world will not know what happened, don't believe him. No TV newsperson will have to tell anybody of the return of Jesus. Neither will any self-appointed prophet have to explain it to anybody when Jesus returns. It will be like the lightning from the east to the west. All will see for themselves. Everyone will know.  


    Today's rapture theory says that Jesus is going to return to earth two more times: once before and once after "the tribulation." Some refer to the supposed two future events as "the rapture," followed by "the second coming." Others prefer to teach "two phases" to the "second" coming. None seem willing to openly admit that they really believe in: a "second" and "third" coming. 

    Various arguments are used to sustain the concept of two future comings. For example, it is said that two comings are required because the Word says that Jesus will come "for the saints" and also that He will come "with the saints." They say "for the saints" refers to the next time He comes, to take Christians to heaven. They say that "with the saints" refers to seven years later when He returns with those same saints. 

    Although no text uses the exact expression "for the saints," there is no problem here. All believers have as their hope that Jesus will return to receive us unto Himself.  

    But 1 Thessalonians 3:13 talks about "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ WITH all His saints." Jude 14 also says, "Behold, the Lord comes WITH ten thousands of His saints" (upper case emphasis supplied). The problem is to understand what coming "WITH His saints" means. Does it mean that Jesus will first come to get His saints and then bring them back with him seven years later? Or, is there some other explanation?  

    With the Souls of the Dead Saints. Some believers find in 1 Thessalonians 4:14 the explanation of Jesus coming "with" the saints. "Even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus." They believe Jesus will come to earth bringing with him the souls of the departed saints in order to unite those souls with their bodies in the resurrection. 

    Some, however, object to this view of "bring." The Thessalonians text does not say that "Jesus will bring with Him to earth." It says, "God will bring with Him." "Bring" depends on the viewpoint involved. Jesus, not the Father, returns to earth. The Father will bring the resurrected saints with Jesus to heaven. Just like John 14:3: "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, [there] you may be also." Both expressions--"bring" and "receive"--are from the viewpoint of heaven. 

    With the Holy Angels. This may be a better explanation of "with the saints." In 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Paul speaks of "when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels." Mark 8:38 says, "when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels." Clearly Jesus will come with the angels and the angels are "holy." 

    For the benefit of "the common man," I seldom appeal to the original Greek. In this case, however, it is especially helpful for English readers. Spanish, by the way, requires no Greek explanation here, because the Spanish closely follows the Greek. The Greek word "hagios" is always translated into Spanish "santo(s)." But in English, it is sometimes translated "saint(s)" and sometimes "holy." In other words, the two English words, "saint" and "holy" come from just one Greek word. 

    Angels are "holy." Thus, they are saints (same word in the Greek). Therefore, when Scripture says that Jesus will come WITH the saints--the holy ones--we have a book-chapter-and-verse clarification that this may well refer to His holy angels. 

    It is debatable whether Jesus will come "with the souls of the dead saints." It is not debatable whether Jesus will come "with the holy angels." Whichever view seems the best, Jesus' coming "for" and "with" the saints in no way necessitates two more comings. "For" and "with" easily harmonize with just one future second coming of Christ.  

    No verse of Scripture says that Jesus will come a third time, bringing "with" Him human saints whom he came "for" some seven years earlier. The Bible clearly says of Jesus, in Hebrews 9:28, that "He will appear a second time." No verse says he will appear a third time.  


    According to the rapture theory, there will be several future resurrections of the body from the grave. They claim 1 Thessalonians 4:16 teaches that Christians will be raised long before the wicked are. Paul indeed wrote that "the dead in Christ will rise first." But, "first" what?  

    If I tell you, out of the clear blue sky, "I am going to the mall first," you have no clue about where I will go next. But put some context to it. Such as, "Are you going to the post office?" "Yes, but I am going to the mall first." Now "first" has meaning.  

    So with Paul's text. Do not try to guess what is second unless you look at the context. "The dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds." "First. Then... " Paul is not talking about dead saints and dead sinners. He is talking about dead saints and live saints. He is saying that before the live saints are caught up in the clouds, the dead saints will first be raised. Nothing whatsoever is said about two resurrections. 

    Jesus did speak of two resurrections, but not in reference to time. He spoke of the condition of two groups. Some participate in "the resurrection of life," while others experience "the resurrection of condemnation." However, these two resurrections will take place at the same time. "The HOUR is coming in which ALL who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation" (John 5:28,29; upper case emphasis supplied). 

    Revelation 20, on the other hand, does speak of "the first resurrection." However, since no text speaks of a "second resurrection," care must be exercised in determining the identity of the "first." (Space does not permit a full discussion of Revelation 20:1-7. Watch for future article(s) on the millennium.) Suffice it now to point out the following: 

    1) Revelation is highly figurative. Who takes literally the dragon, the key, the chain or the seal? 

    2) Futurists believe that the resurrection of Revelation 20 will occur after "the tribulation." According to them, that is seven years after the resurrection of "the rapture." Therefore, by their own doctrine, this "first" resurrection is actually the second. 

    3) A better explanation seems to be found in New Testament first principles. "Buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were RAISED with [Him] through faith in the working of God... If then you were RAISED with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is" (Colossians 2:12; 3:1; upper case emphasis supplied). "Raised"--past tense. See also Romans 6. Just as conversion is "a new birth," so is it also "a death, burial and resurrection." For the Christian, this is the first resurrection. 


    The rapture theory holds that "the day of the Lord" (or "day of Christ") is neither the Second Coming nor the Third Coming. Rather, they say, it is something in between the Second and Third. As in many other matters, they lean heavily on Old Testament usage to uphold their claim. In the New Testament, however, how did the apostle Peter use the term? "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up" (2 Peter 3:10). Clearly, "the day of the Lord" to Peter was the end of the world. 

    Follow Peter's argument throughout chapter 3. He warns of "scoffers" who will mock Jesus' return by saying: "Where is the promise of His coming?" Peter replies by arguing that these men "willfully forget" all about the flood in Noah's day. Then Peter affirms that the earth will next be consumed by fire on "the day of judgment." Peter further says that "The Lord is not slack concerning [His] promise." What promise? In the context (verse 4), it's "the promise of His coming."  

    Peter continues (verse 10): "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise." Since this is so, we should be prepared for "the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat." You see, Peter builds his argument about the "coming" of the Lord by discussing "the day of the Lord," which is the end of the world. 


    The expression "the last day" appears six times in Scripture, all in the Gospel of John. Four times in the sixth chapter, Jesus says of the believer, "I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40,44,54, and with slight variation in verse 39). In 11:24, Martha affirms her belief in this truth: "I know that he [Lazarus] will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." The resurrection of the righteous clearly will take place "at the last day." 

    According to the modern "rapture" doctrine, the resurrection of the righteous is followed by the tribulation and the millennium. Only after that, so the theory goes, will there be a resurrection and judgement of the wicked. 

    However, the remaining "last day" verse in John denies such a scenario. Again Jesus is speaking--this time, not of the righteous but of the wicked. He says, "He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day" (John 12:48). Thus Jesus taught that both the resurrection of the righteous and the judgment of the wicked would take place in "the last day." 

    The parable of the tares in Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43, teaches the same truth. Notice in verse 38 that the field is the world. This parable is not a contradiction of Jesus' teaching on church discipline. It is a parable about the entire world. It is a parable about good people and bad people living together until the end: "the harvest is the end of the age" (verse 39). 

    "Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, 'First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn' " (verse 30). Saint and sinner are in this world together until the end. I do not understand it all; but did you notice who is taken out first? The popular rapture theory says, "First gather the wheat." However, Jesus said, "First gather together the tares."  

    We may not understand it all, nor may we be able to explain the exact sequence and timing of all the events. Nevertheless, if the parable of the tares teaches anything, it teaches that the righteous and the wicked live together until the end of the world. At that time, the wicked are cast into "the furnace of fire." Their judgement has come; they are finished forever. It is truly "the last day." 


    According to the modern rapture theory, Jesus' next coming will just be the beginning. According to the theory, most of the book of Revelation and large amounts of both Old and New Testament prophecies cannot be fulfilled until after the rapture. They say the rapture is just the beginning of at least 1007 years of world history. 

    A careful look at Scripture, however, presents a totally different picture. Jesus' next coming (there is only one more coming) will be the end of this world, the end of history, the end of time, the end of "life as we know it," the end of the wicked living unpunished, the end of tears and death, the end of the battle between God and Satan, the end of the antichrist, the end of opportunity to get right with God. 

    On the other hand, His return will be the beginning--the beginning of eternity. "Prepare to meet your God!" "Watch and pray!" 

    (Scripture in the preceding article is taken from the New King James Version. Copyright (c) 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.) 
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

Monday, February 20, 2017


Adam was the first man to sin. Adam was guilty of sin. Mankind does not share in the guilt of Adam's sin. Men are guilty of the sins they themselves commit. No person has to be forgiven for the sin that Adam committed. There is no such thing as guilt from original sin. Men do not inherited sin from Adam.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and death spread to all men,because all sinned---

All men will die because they sinned; not because Adam sinned.

James 1:14-15 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

Men sin and taste death because of their own desires. Do not blame Adam for your sins.

Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Men will receive wages for their own sin. They will not receive Adam's wages for his sin.



(All Scripture from: NEW KING JAMES VERSION)


Can you imagine the apostle Paul convening an interdenominational  convention? It might look something like the following.


1. Preaching session, by Hymenaeus and Philetus. Their Bio:Timothy 2:17-18...Hymenaeus and Philetus...18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and have overthrown the faith of some. (NKJV)

2. Message on Christian giving, by Ananias and Sapphira. Their Bio: Acts 5:1-3 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession. 2 And he kept back part of the proceeds, his wife also being aware of it, and brought a certain part and laid it at the apostles' feet. 3 But Peter said,"Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? (NKJV)

3. Seminar given by a representative from, The Jerusalem Judaizers for Christ. Their Bio: Galatians 2:3-4 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 4 But this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus,that they might bring us into bondage), (NKJV)

4. Workshop on preaching the gospel truth as a ministry for Jesus, by the Cretans. Their Bio:"Titus 1:11-12 ....teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain. 12 One of them, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons." (NKJV)

Paul would have never tolerated an interdenominational convention.

Paul said, Romans 16:16-17...The churches of Christ greet you. 17 Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. (NKJV)

Contemporary believers in Christ note those who cause divisions by teaching multiple ways to become saved, and offend them by teaching things contrary to Scripture, and then invite them to participate in interdenominational conventions as preachers and teachers.

Paul said those who pervert the gospel should be accursed. (Galatians 1:6-9) Today's Christians say those who teach doctrine contrary to Scripture should be invited to preach and teach as brothers in Christ. 


Do non-believers receive forgiveness from sins when they are baptized in water?

If atheists and other non-believers are baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and the Holy Spirit do they receive forgiveness from sins? Of course not.

John 8:24 Therefore, I said to you, Your will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.(TBVOTNT)

Water baptism alone does not wash away sins. Non-believers will die in their sins.

Mark 16:16 He who has believed, and has been immersed, will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.(TBVOTNT)

Nonbelievers will be condemned.

Acts 3:19 Repent, therefore, and turn again, in order that your sins may be blotted out, so that there may come seasons of refreshment from the presence of the Lord; (TBVOTNT)

Water baptism that is not preceded by repentance is meaningless. There is no forgiveness without repentance. Repentance means to change from unbelief to belief. Repentance means to make a commitment to turn from sin and turn toward God.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, Let each one of you repent and be immersed, in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to the remission of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.(TBVOTNT)

Atheists and other non-believers do not have their sins washed away by being immersed in water.

Newborn babies and small children do not have their sins washed away by being immersed in water. Why? First they have not committed any sins and they are not guilty of sin. Second, if they were guilty of sin they are incapable of believing in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God.

There is an age of accountability.


NOTE: (TBVOTNT-The Better Version of The New Testament by Chester Estes)