Archive for January, 2013

This story is so vile that I am not going to post the pictures or the links to them. It is wholly unthinkable that a person that claims to be a leader of a victim abuse group, many of whom claim sexual abuse, would stoop to such levels as the recent email I just received about Trisha Lacroix.

According to numerous emails and some with the screenshots, Trisha had her leg wrapped around a pole that had the name of a now deceased fundamental Baptist preacher, Joe Boyd, on it. The pose drew immediate attention from group members, one even called it “poll dancing”. The comments then denigrated into describing the poll as the cross of Jesus Christ because there was a shadow effect that made the street sign appear to look like a cross. There were no objections by her faithful followers, and a friend of mine on another forum made a public post about it and was viciously attacked, slandered, and threatened. (One follower even sent her a picture of “Jesus” giving her the middle finger.)

It gets better. To take matters a step further, apparently Trisha hosted photos on her personal site of her grabbing the genital area of a statue of Jack Hyles. A few members have told me she has since removed them. Regardless of what I or anyone else think about the presence of that statue, to lower one’s self to such degrading acts just shows the nature of how depraved and immoral this group is.

Furthermore, apparently Trisha has now posted a new profile picture donning a bikini with partial nudity. ON A SEXUAL VICTIM ABUSE ADVOCACY PAGE!

Today, Trisha made the following command on her group page to members who were discussing theology. Her response was to Jerry Kaifetz, who wrote a book entitled “Profaned Pulpit: The Jack Schaap Story”. While I disagree with many of Jerry’s cohorts and why he associates with them, he has his reasons, but with a PhD, he has attempted to keep some stability within the DRHAC group, and what Trisha posted below is exactly why these type of associations do not work:

Trisha Lacroix: MEMBERS>>>>I have been out of town and discovered upon my return that members are posting theology discussions. That is not the intent of our group. Instead of us discussing theology…why don’t we do something positive like discussing how we can help victims to heal. How we can make a change in this world of abuse. How we can live our lives with more grace. How we can grow and nuture [sic] others. Having this banter on theology gets us nowhere…we did it in our IFB days. We put up with it in our IFB days… it was forced down our throats. Let’s move from arguing over the silliness of theology and put beauty out in the world by helping others. Tell me, what can each one of us do to change someone’s life today? How can we support one another? How can we hold each other up? I don’t care about theology… I care about your heart and the healing you are receiving.

While members are free to discuss atheism, Jeffrey Hoffman posting his regular rants about homosexual sympathy, and discussions about how fundamentalists are wrong about certain Biblical doctrines (slandering a Bible doctrine is OK, having a rational discussion about one as Jerry Kaifetz was doing is NOT acceptable), they are not free to discuss theology in an open group. Many of the members of the DRHAC were ex-members or recent members of a fundamental church. Although many are disgruntled toward the IFB churches, many have maintained some form of desire to remain Christian (regardless of how liberal that form may be) but as Trisha has exercised increasing control over the group, her true colors have continued to surface, and that statement above, which was pinned above Jack Schaaps sentencing, and the death of Brent Stevens, shows that in a survivor group, Trisha was more concerned about the group avoiding theology, than about the person that they claim was their target (Jack Schaap) and obtaining justice for the mysterious death of a 17 month old child.

Any Christian whether fundamentalist or not should be appalled by these above facts. If this doesn’t bother you, you have absolutely no moral compass. To display half nude photos on a supposed survivor group page for sexual abuse victims, and posing in a stripper pose on what was called the cross of Christ is just plain blasphemous. But know this, GOD IS NOT MOCKED.

I wouldn’t doubt if Trisha’s next contact for a media moment will be a publication owned by Hugh Heffner.

*******************

ON a side note, it is no secret that one of our admins, Marisa, and I have not seen eye to eye on a variety of issues, and I must publicly apologize for my response to her. Her and I and her husband made a harmless wager, that if she could do more push-ups than I could within 60 seconds, I would check my emails from her and post an article based on the information she provided and then admit the unthinkable. Even though my back hurt, and I had not yet had any coffee, she beat me by 3 push-ups. So with reluctance, and because I am a sore loser, “I got my theology from a woman”. Happy now?

Bob Jones University has been under scrutiny by another “do right” group led by homosexual activists called “Do Right BJU”. The group has the same anti-fundamentalist sentiment that the other Do Right groups have but seems to lean more toward complaints about BJU’s stance against the LGBT community(Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender)* The two prominent complaints appear to be over the alleged cover up of 9 cases of sexual abuse (which they later admitted was committed by one person on all 9 counts, although when they first reported the story, they gave the impression that it could have been 9 different offenders. Although one is too many, there is no need to embellish the story and sandbag the facts. And, it does appear that when one of the incidents was reported, BJU contacted the police, and the perpetrator was arrested, which was not mentioned in any of the earlier reports), and the cover up of the rape of Tina Anderson by BJU staff member, Chuck Phelps. ( We do believe that the perpetrator in this matter has been incarcerated for this incident. Tina’s story can be found here. Although the editors and religious experts GROSSLY exaggerated the doctrines of the IFB, the story that focuses on Tina Anderson is gut-wrenching)

Bob Jones University responded to the complaints for accountability by requesting the assistance of third-party victim advocacy group called G.R.A.C.E (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment). We will make more editions to information about this at a later time regarding any results of investigations posted by GRACE, but for now, we will post the main, and so far, only issue that we know that has our eyebrows raised in this report provided by Christianity Today:

The Bob Jones University/Academy leadership has communicated to GRACE that acknowledging and understanding any recognized failures will better equip both Bob Jones University and Bob Jones Academy to demonstrate authentic repentance to those who have been harmed, while also making the necessary institutional changes to insure that such is never repeated. [1] (emphasis added)

While we have no problem with an outside investigation agency using their legal resources for investigations such as this, it is quite a stretch for an outside Christian organizing to determine what is or is not the proper response that qualifies for “authentic repentance”. Repentance is a much debated topic from doctrines of “easy believism”, to Lordship Salvation a priori of salvation, and whether there needs to be sorrow, regret, change of action a posteriori.

The debate about repentance is not the issue in this article but a colleges right to define it. We ARE concerned about the appearance  that the colleges being investigated would have to meet GRACE’s definition of repentance in order to receive a “clean bill of health”. What if the colleges or religious institutions being investigated have a fundamentally different view of repentance than GRACE? This can certainly be an issue since the founders of GRACE are acquainted with the Billy Graham Association and there has been a traditional view of cynicism among fundamentalist churches regarding Billy Graham over the last 30 years. .

We are certainly not advocating that a corporate Christian body need not demonstrate repentance, but in this article the emphasis on “authentic” repentance allows for an outside institution that may not share the same beliefs to define that institution’s doctrine, and that can set a very disturbing precedent; particular if the government attempts to make these type of investigations mandatory (which many of the victim advocacy groups are pushing for).

While it is honorable that BJU appears to want to “do the right thing”, as fundamentalists and separatists, we must not become so desperate under pressure of criticism to compromise our core beliefs or give up the right to define those to satisfy the negative public opinions of our institutions, many of whom will not be satisfied with the results regardless of the efficacious effect the investigations may produce.

This will likely ruffle some feathers and be misinterpreted by our critics (as if we care) but if fundamentalist churches allow this type of precedent to be set, it opens the door for many other emerging church philosophies; something for BJU to prayerfully consider, and for G.R.A.C.E. to perhaps clarify the implementation of such statements and how they arrive at their conclusion as to what demonstrates “authentic repentance”.

_____________________

*A petition made by members of the Do Right BJU Facebook group on I-Petition created a complaint directed toward Pepsi who has apparently sponsored BJU sports teams in some manner. Some of the bulleted complaints are 4) BJU’s history on LGBT rights, 5) BJU’s views on other religious organizations — especially Catholicism.

How and why anyone would expect a fundamentalist Christian institution to be bullied into changing their views on homosexuality and the Catholic church is astonishing.

** We have a variety of major contentions with BJU doctrinally, but this matter has to potential to set a trend that if the body of this story has merit, could have a negative impact on all churches considered fundamentalist.

This is so funny I had to write about it even though it is really not a laughing matter.

On a youtube video, I had commented this lady, Sandra Gigi, for leveling false accusations against the IFB churches. In response, to stated that I was judging and that she feels that the church has no right to say that Jesus is the only way to heaven. When I responded with the Biblical evidence, she responded with this video, here

Three things I want to address here; judging, evidence of salvation and deny Christ as the only way to heaven.

Judging

This is the most common and popular hypocritical slur against Christians. Those antagonist toward believers are permitted to smear Christians with any form of accusations imaginable, but God forbid that you tell them Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven and accusations that they are being judged by you come in droves. What they should really say is that “I like to gossip and criticize Christians but don’t you dare tell me I’m a sinner”

Did Jesus really say “don’t judge”? With all the cliches spewed surrounding Matthew 7 (“judge not that ye be not judged”) you would think so. But Jesus said to “judge righteous judgment” in John 7:24. The context of Matthew 7 is about condemning someone for doing the same actions that you are guilty of. If I am not guilty of rejecting Jesus Christ, then I am not judging someone when I tell them they will spend an eternity in the lake of fire if they reject Christ. This comment was directed at those who thought their own righteousness could save them, and they quickly condemned others when they themselves did not follow the whole law. see Matthew 23, James 2:4-10, Romans 2:1-14.

Evidence of Salvation

Sandra responds in this video “I was saved when I was 16 and I was sincere”, so does that prove someone was saved?

“Not everyone that says unto me ‘Lord , Lord’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven” Matt 7:21-23. John said in I John 2:19

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had  been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us”

While I can not judge the sincerity of someone’s profession, sincerity is not a Saviour. You can be sincere and sincerely WRONG. Jesus gave an example of how there are those who murder in the name of God that believe they are doing God’s service. John 16:2. They were sincere in their belief, but they were sincerely wrong.

When a person is saved, and the Holy Spirit takes up residence, the Holy Spirit battles against the flesh to prevent you from living the same way you did before you were saved. Gal 5:16-17. A person that makes a profession of faith and then does not continue in it, and especially denies the work and person of the Lord Jesus Christ, has no Biblical evidence that they were truly saved, regardless of how much they profess sincerity. “They that worship him must worship Him in Spirit and in TRUTH” John 4:24.

Christ Is the Only Way to Heaven

In Acts 4:12 we read, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” and in John 14:6 Jesus claimed “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the father but by me”. That is quite plain.

Jesus said in John 10:1, 9

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber…. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

And John goes further to state that he that denies that Jesus is the Christ, is the antichrist:

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 1 John 2:22

When Paul confronted the men on Mars Hill about their superstitious beliefs in an unknown God, Paul corrected their error by declaring unto them Jesus Christ. Acts 17:22-34.

The saving power of Jesus Christ is exclusive of all other religions by the testimony of others in the Bible and Jesus’ own declarations. So if you believe in some other religion that believes Jesus is just a good moral character, what kind of good moral character lies to His followers and deceives them? If Jesus is not the only way, then He has lied to everyone because He clearly taught that He is the way, the truth and the life, and nobody comes to the Father but by Him.

Jesus went out of His way to prove He was not only the Son of God, but God manifested in the flesh. John 1:1, 14 , I Tim 3:16. Mary thought He was God. Luke 1:47, and even His enemies were going to stone Him because they understood His claims as being that of deity. John 10:33-35.  So for Jesus to claim to be God, and then suffer a horrible death for it, would make Him insane if it was not true.

But 3 days after Jesus was murdered, His tomb was empty, and He was seen of at least 500 people after His resurrection, and to this day the Jews had to create a story to explain His empty tomb. Therefore He is either a liar, a lunatic or He is what He claimed to be, the Lord Jesus Christ, God Almighty (Rev 1:8) and He is the only way to salvation.

Buddha is still in his grave. Confucius is dead and gone. Mohammad is buried and silent. There is not one religious leader who ever gave their life for the sin of the world, and then conquered death by raising from the dead as Christ did. All other religions emphasize what man can do for God, and attempt to create their own way to heaven ignoring that the God who created the heavens and the earth, the sea and fountain of waters who is perfect and of whom man’s righteousness are as filthy rags (Isa 64:6) compared to Him, made a provision in the death and resurrection of His Son where we would be permitted to rely on His righteousness to grant us eternal life by trusting in Him alone.

All have sinned, there is none righteous, no not one (Rom 3:10-23). Jesus is the only way because He is the only one that has ever been sinless, who lived in complete perfection from birth to His death on the cross. To make a profession that denies the Lord for who He is and what He has done is to blasphemously mock the life, deity, and work of Christ.

And if you believe that is “judging” you are going to be very angry with God the first 10,000 years in the lake of fire. You will regret it the first 30 seconds. People have created burn creams to cure small burn wounds on a small area of the body. Imagine that sensation being completely submerged in a flame that is never extinguished, and like the burning bush before Moses, you are never consumed by the fire, but are “tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels,and in the presence of the lamb” where “the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever, and they have no rest day nor night” Rev 14:10-11. And God will have righteously judged thus.

I sincerely hope and pray those who believe that Christ is not the only way would study these words and ask God to open their eyes. If I am wrong about this, what I have I lost? I will simply die and be a memory (or not). But, if the word of God is true, and He is who He says He is, and there is a literal burning lake of fire where you will spend eternity for rejecting Him, the consequences of being sincere but sincerely wrong will offer you an eternity of misery and regret.

Coming Soon. After I finish some other articles, I will opine on the notes taken from reading Darrell Dow’s “book” Fundamental Flaws.

In the mean time, I perused a response that Darrell gave to Mike Duran, who criticized Darrell’s Stuffed Undies Like website (or Stuff Fundies Like, I prefer the former definition, it better suits their inflated egos) as being among several evangelical hate-mongers in an article titled, “The Evangelical Hate Machine”. Several SFL members whined that Mike was unfair, therefore Mike granted Darrell an interview to allow Darrell to explain himself and defend his website. (Interview Here)

Darrell did nothing to refute the claims that Mike made that Darrell is a “hater”. Darrell merely attempts to mask his “hate” as laughter, much like a serial killer laughing at his victims for begging for mercy. He states that “laughter conquers your fear”. It is ironic that he says that there is so little of Christ in Baptist sermons, songs, or standards, but then claims the purpose of his website is to promote laughter as a therepeutic aid to conquering fear. I thought fear was conquered through Christ, not laughter (2 Tim 1:7, Acts 20:24, Acts 21:13, Hebrews 2:15, Romans 8:15, I John 4:18). In fact, isn’t there a verse in the Bible that says “even in laughter the heart is sorrowful”? (Proverbs 14:13). Furthermore, the type of jesting that Darrell promotes is specifically prohibited in Scripture. Eph 5:4.

What is telling though about his response is his stated goal for his followers:

My goal in pointing out the flaws, the missteps, the error, the cruelty, the heresy, and the narrow-mindedness is not to drive people away from the church but to draw them back from their small, splintered sect and back into fellowship with the larger community” (emphasis added)

Darrell does not say what he means by the “larger community”, but if that “community” consists of the same atheists, homosexuals, lesbians, agnostics, Buddhists, Catholics, Charismatics that he sponsors, promotes, and supports in his group, then Darrell needs to take a number and wait in line behind the Pope and his father (John 8:44) who have the same goals.

Darrell has yet to give an accurate description of what fundamentalists, Baptists in particular, believe. He makes use of repeated sweeping generalizations of the motives of fundamental Baptists with absolutely no evidence to support his claims:

You also would have to understand the power structures and cults of personality that drive most fundamentalist organizations. If you’ve never belonged to a church or gone to a college where you were taught that disobeying the slightest rule of the leadership (sometimes up to and including how you make your bed) was a direct affront to God himself then it’s hard to explain. This shared experience of being in these low-trust and high-stress environments is one of the key factors that forms the basis for the community we have here. (emphasis added to the sweeping generalizations).

And just what are those “power structures” and what are the “cults of personality” that “drive most fundamentalist organizations ? He doesn’t say, just paints fundamentalism with his own broad brush, but then whines when an another author allegedly did the same to him. Where is the evidence that any fundamentalist taught that failure to make ones bed is a direct affront to God? References please.

And the “shared experiences”? Shared by who? The atheists, homosexuals, dope addicts, whiskey guzzling party animals that complain about any rule whatsoever let alone any rule in a college : that “shared experience” crowd? And since Darrell claims to want to promote Christ, where can we find these fine examples of this cult of personality in all fundamentalist churches? Would it be under the subject of “Non-Believer Safe Space: A safe space for atheists and agnostics to discuss their beliefs” on his blog site? Or perhaps it’s in the music category where Darrell Dow has a video of what he is listening to, Dusty Springfield’s secular “Son of a Preacher Man” (here) (remember now, Darrell says he doesn’t see much of  Christ in any of the fundamentalist Baptist songs) or perhaps it’s described in the lyrics of the Metallica song he is listening to on post #8 of the same thread called “Don’t Tread On Me” (last I knew, Metallica was no where near “Christ in the songs”type of band). In fact, there’s not one Christian song on that page. (What a HYPOCRITE).

Darrell is a snake that attempts to veil his jabs at fundamentalism as harmless satire disguised as “therapy”. While fundamentalist’s certainly have their own issues, it is not because that is what is taught in fundamentalism, it is because of an egotistical, flesh-driven hypocrite that fails to follow what IS taught. There are some fundamentalists like Jack Schaap who taught blatantly heretical doctrines, but the positive history of fundamentalism and the trail of blood from which the Baptist church came far exceeds the recent abominable  history made by the few recalcitrant examples that have brought shame to it. People like Darrell Dow are mere closet practical atheists that capitalize on the opportunity to smear fundmentalists when any of among millions make a mistake whether it be the commission of a felony, or a fundamentalist mother that requires her children make their beds.

P.S. emails that accuse of me of supporting heretics simply because I disagree with YOU will be properly filed in our new “whiny anti fundamentalist” folder.

[Coming soon. It’s a 2 hour video, and I intend to make thorough notes on debunking every claim Steve Anderson made in this video in his butchering of Scripture to prove his view of a post tribulation, pre-wrath rapture  ( while he claims to be a fundamental Baptist). This article is still in the process of new additions but I am publishing certain portions as I finish each section to give readers a head start on studying these issues in advance of the completed article.

There is also as section at the bottom on other warnings about Steven Anderson’s teachings. I will soon be adding to that as I have watched videos this week where he attempts to debunk dispensationalism, and another video where upholds the Pentacostal “oneness” doctrine of the Trinity. While I have disagreements about his views on dispensationalism, the rapture, his attitude toward government, his praying for the death of the president, this last issue on the oneness doctrine is what any of his followers should be leary of as I would classify his church as a cult on that basis alone.]

A few of the upcoming issues I will touch on I will mention now.

There are many duplicates of this video on the internet, so the reference I will be using when quoting timelines of statements taken from the documentary will be taken from THIS VIDEO and the timelines will be in quotes (for example “(1:10:15)” would indicate the statement is found at the first hour and ten minute mark of the video.

Steve Claims He Learned His Views By Studying The Bible Alone

At the end of Steve’s documentary, he credits his revelation of this understanding of the rapture “myth” to a study of Matthew 24 when he was 12 years old. (1:40:00). He thanks Jesus that he learned this after all the brainwashing of scholars and Scofield. I must say that must be traumatic for a 12-year-old to undergo such brainwashing of so many scholars and C.I. Scofield.  His entire documentary centers around his understanding of “after the tribulation of those days” implying that the rapture of the church occurs after the tribulation. While he claims that no pre-tribber can point to the word “rapture” in Revelation prior to the tribulation, neither can he point the word rapture in Matthew 24 to prove that this passage proves that the rapture of the church occurs after the tribulation.

Nevertheless, despite Steve’s claim that he learned this on his own, it is ironic that the passage he cites is the exact same passage that inspired Roger Van Kampen and Marvin Rosenthal to write a book about a pre-wrath rapture titled “Rapture Questions Answered” where the same explanation for this pre-wrath rapture position taken by Steve is also found on pages 48-49 of Van Kampen’s book. Steve Anderson’s video is not a new theory or attempted refutation of the pre-tribulation rapture, it is merely a rehashed version of the works of Rosenthal and Van Kampen’s books on the pre-wrath rapture.

Steve’s Misconception of the Wrath of God and the Purpose of the Tribulation

Steve claims that the wrath of God is not the same as the great tribulation and is therefore a separate event. He also seems to confuse tribulation in general, with tribulation as a judgment.

The Tribulation As Separate From Wrath

John shows clearly that the wrath of God as called the wrath of God is based on the judgments and all of the judgments have their start from the book that the Lamb is only worthy to open in Rev 5:5. Thus to say that the tribulation is not the wrath of God fails to notice Who opens the book for all the judgments to take place. Furthermore, Steve fails to separate the wrath of God from the GREAT DAY of His wrath. It is clear that events become progressively worse during the tribulation, which culminates in the event known as the great DAY of His wrath in Rev 6:17. (See also Rev 16:14 where 3 unclean spirits come out of the mouth of the dragon, the beast, and false prophet to “gather them to the battle of that GREAT DAY of God Almighty”)

This event is not descriptive of a one time event that is immediately preceded by the rapture as Steve claims, it is a term used to describe the finality of God’s judgment.

The Purpose of the Tribulation

The purpose of the tribulation is ignored entirely by Steve. Knowing the purpose of the tribulation is important to understand why the church will not be present. Steve offers several verses to “prove” that Christians suffer tribulation. An associate of the film, pastor Jiminez, quotes Acts 14:22 where Paul says we must “through much tribulation enter the kingdom of God” as proof that Christians are not immune from tribulation. However, this ignores the difference between Christians that have suffered general persecution as a result of their beliefs, from tribulation designed to be a judgment on unbelievers. If all the verses cited by Jiminez and Anderson are evidence of the church going through the tribulation, then the church has been in the tribulation for 1800 years under the Dark Ages of Rome, but we are talking about a specific event that lasts 7 years. Therefore there must be a clear difference between tribulation in general and the judgments of Revelation, and since Paul made that statement 2000 years before the events of Revelation have even begun and was beheaded before AD 100, clearly Acts 14:22 is not a reference to the church going through the tribulation.

The purpose of the tribulation is described in Daniel 9:25-27, commonly called “Daniel’s 70th Week”. The relevant portion of that passage that shows this period is in reference to Israel is that part of those last 7 weeks (7 years) were for Israel to “finish the transgression” and “make an end of sins”. To claim that Christians are part of this is to lump  the church in with finishing a 490 year period of judgment that started with Israel and was postponed when Christ was crucified. Why would the church be required to finish Israel’s transgression?

Daniel also states the last 7 weeks are where God will make an end of sins to the nation of Israel. If Christians are part of the tribulation, that implies that where the Bible says that we have NOW received the atonement is ineffective. Romans 5:11. Believers are also sealed the moment they believe. Eph 1:13. Now to his credit, Steve does espouse to eternal security, but that doctrine is of no consequence if it is held that the church will be made to “make an end of sins” under God’s judgment. The church’s sins are nailed to the cross right now. Col 2:13-14.

Moreover, Jesus states the purpose of the tribulation in Rev 3:10

“Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation that shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth

Not only is this verse not addressed by Steve at all in this documentary, but the purpose of the tribulation is clearly stated to “try those who dwell upon the earth”. Since when in the epistles to the church is a believer tried under a judgment of God? Peter mentions that “the trial of your faith worketh patience”, and Paul says “there hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man”, but in both instances, there is a difference between testing of one’s faith and testing ones faith under judgments of God that were intended to try ALL THE WORLD. It is absurd to claim that God tests the Christian at the same time and under the same judgments as the rest of the world.

Scripture is certainly clear that Christians suffer tribulation at the hands of unbelievers. But the Bible NEVER says that the Christian suffers THE tribulation. Steve claims that tribulation is “what the world does to us” (37:25) but as shown above, this defies the plain teaching of the Bible that separates tribulation as a common form of persecution that has occurred over the last 2000 years, and THE tribulation as a specific event directed toward Israel in Daniel 9 and the unbelieving world that has rejected Christ.

There is therefore NOW no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. It is hard to reconcile the promise of Rom 8:1 with the judgments of the tribulation. Furthermore, Jesus told his believers to pray, “lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil”, so even Jesus did not expect his followers to be part of a judgment meant for unbelievers since He specifically told them to pray for deliverance from evil.

Who Are The Elect?

Steve claims that the elect are both Jews as well as the church, it is merely a term for anyone who is saved but that now the emphasis is on the church, and the church has inherited all of the covenants and replaced Israel (“replacement theology”). As a proof text, Steve cites Romans 11:7 which states “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for, but the election hath obtained it AND THE REST WERE BLINDED” (emphasis added). Steve rationalizes that how could the elect be Israel if Rom 11:7 shows a difference between the elect and Israel?

First, the term “elect” is not an all-inclusive term that means the same thing at every time and every place in the Bible. Elect must be defined by its context. The question must be asked, is it possible to have an elect within an elect? YES. In 1 Kings 19:18, God told Elijah that He reserved to Himself 7,000 men who have not bowed to Baal. Thus God used an elected group within the same group (Paul even uses this example in Rom 11). This same illustration is also used in the story of Gideon where God chose the men who did not lap the water like dogs. Judges 7:5. Steve fails to see that in the context of Romans 11:7, Paul uses an OT passage where God used an elect group of JEWS from a group OF JEWS.

What Steve also fails to notice is the END of Rom 11:7 where it says “..but the election hath obtained it and the rest were blinded”.  The rest of who?? Whoever “the rest” were that were blinded come from the same group. Was it the rest of the church that were blinded? No. In just a few short verses in Rom 11:25-26 it says that Israel was under blindness. Therefore the remnant or elect of Romans 11:7 are the elect OF ISRAEL that will be set apart during the tribulation. This is made abundantly clear in vs 15, and 28 where in verse 15, the nation is given “life from the dead” and in verse 28 Paul writes:

As concerning the GOSPEL they are enemies for your sakes, but as touching the ELECTION they are beloved for the father’s sake” Romans 11:28

Notice the clear distinction between those “concerning the GOSPEL” and those “touching the election”.  The gospel is referring to the church in this present time. Rom 2:16, Rom 15:16, Rom 16:25, I Cor 4:15. And Paul’s gospel is distinguished as the “gospel of the uncircumcision” Gal 2:7. Romans 11 is to the elect of Israel. Nothing could be more clear to show that there is a unique distinction between the church of the gospel and the elect of Israel. If those of the pre-wrath position insist that the elect of Romans 11 is the church, than to whom are those “concerning the GOSPEL”?

The entire context of Romans 11 begins in chapter 9, where Paul makes it clear that the people he is referring to our his brethren according to the flesh. Rom 9:3. These elect are physical. literal Jews and are found in Revelation 7:4-8, and Revelation 14:3-4. In fact, Paul writes a letter specifically to HEBREWS that contain instructions specifically to Jews during the tribulation.

The Elect of Matthew 24:31

Steve cites Matt 24:31 to show that the elect are the church raptured “after the tribulation of those days”. Matthew 24:31 reads;

And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds from one end of heaven to the other”

The first issue is whether this passage applies to “all” or specifically to the Jews. Steve claims that when Jesus says “and what I say unto you, I say to ALL” as evidence that this passage refers to all believers. The term all is often limited to specific audiences, and doesn’t always included everyone. Paul said that grace of God hath appeared unto all men in Titus, yet that would be impossible given the limited locations that the gospel had not been sent to yet at that time. Thus when Jesus says “what I say to you I say to ALL” is a reference to those not only available at that time, but also to all within the context of who He is referring to. It is quite odd to hear one who claims to be a fundamental Baptist use a Calvinistic and Universalistic usage of the world “all”.

Secondly, although this can be a technical semantic, it is worth further study. Matthew 24:31 does not say that this elect group is gathered FROM EARTH, it says from the four winds of HEAVEN. And in Revelation when Jesus comes back “after the tribulation of those days” when Steve says He comes back, ch 19 shows Him coming WITH his church. Of course this is not a new argument, but one that Steve ignores when he attempts to claim that Christ gathers His elect in the process of coming back to earth while ignoring that the church is already with Him in the air.

And, something that seems to have escaped the eye of most commentators is in Rev 19:6-8 when referring the the marriage and the supper, that “his WIFE hath made herself ready”. It did not say His betrothed or his fiance, but His WIFE hath made herself ready. She is already married before the event begins. Considering that in Jewish Biblical custom that a bethrothed woman was considered a wife minus the ceremony that made it offical. Notice that in Matthew 1:19-23, Mary is said to be ESPOUSED to Joseph, but when he thinks she committed adultery because she was pregnant, an angel said to Joseph not to fear taking Mary they WIFE. They had not had the ceremony but were still considered husband and wife. Therefore betrothal period of the Lamb’s wife occurred PRIOR to the “wrath” and the marriage ceremony and the supper.

Thirdly, the manner of the calling of the elect is different from that which is described of the church in 1 Thess 4:16, and 1 Cor 15:51-52. In Matt 24:31, it is (a) the angels gathering the elect and (b) the angels give the sound of a trumpet.

Now notice is 1 Thess it is the Lord Himself that calls the church up to heaven, not the angels gathering the church. There is no mention of the Lord Himself giving a shout in Matthew 24 as it states in 1 Thess 4:16, and given Steve’s habit of making arguments from silence, the failure of Matthew 24:31 to mention the shout of the Lord, and the voice of the archangel (instead of angels) must mean that the gathering of the elect here is not the rapture of the church.

Forth, the trumpet events are not the same as those found in 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15.  The trumpet that follows the tribulation is the voice of the seventh angel in Rev 10:7 “But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared unto his servants the prophets” And this seventh angel is the last of six other angels with him which shows that all 7 angels are of the same rank. However, the voice described relevant to 1 Thess 4:16 is the voice of the ARCH angel. No other prophecy in Matt 24, Luke 17, Luke 21, Mark 13, Rev 10:7 mentions an arch angel’s voice being used to call out the church. This is found ONLY in 1 Thess 4:16 and the events are distinctly different from the gathering described in Matthew 24. (I will explain later the different stages of rapture in 1 Thess 4:16 that are all included in one verse, something overlooked by even pre-tribbers).

And finally, was Matthew 24 to the Jews or to “all” as Steve claims. Jesus stated in Matthew 15:24 that ” I am not sent but to the lost sheep of Israel”. Further on Jesus tells a woman that “it is not meet to take the children’s (Israel’s) bread and give it to the dogs (Gentiles)”. In Matthew 23:37, Jesus weeps over Jerusalem for their rejection of Him which clearly shows in both above passages that Jesus primary concern upon His arrival was with the house of Israel.

Furthermore, all of Matthew 24 is in response to a JEWISH QUESTION asked at the beginning of the chapter based upon events that Jews were familiar with from the Old Testament. Pre Tribbers point to the mention of the sabbath as evidence that this is related to Jews, and for good reason. Steve simple argues that Jesus mentioned the sabbath because it would be difficult to travel on the sabbath, but he fails to mention why the sabbath is mentioned at all considering that the church for 2000 years, beginning in Acts, met on the first day of the week instead of the sabbath. Acts 20:7, I Cor 16:2. Why mention the sabbath at all if the audience was intended to include Gentiles? To force this passage to include Gentiles would mean that a Gentile Christian would be required to some how travel to Israel to join the Jews in fleeing to the mountains.

Even after Christ’s ascension, the apostles preached to none but the Jews. It was not until Acts 10 when God told Peter to preach to Cornelius that a Gentile heard the gospel, ten years after Christ went to heaven. Paul did not cease dealing with the Jews altogether until Acts 28 which he promised to do in Acts 18:6. Thus even several years AFTER Christ’s ascension, the focus was still on the Jew first (Rom 1:16), and as the transition period progressed during the initial church phases, Paul eventually became the exclusive apostles to the Gentiles (Gal 2:7-8). The doctrine’s that effect the New Testament church were not developed until Paul was imprisoned in Rome and began writing his epistles.

This does not mean that previous Scriptures are not of any matter to the church. Paul states in Romans 15:4 that whatsoever things that were written afore time were written for our learning (not DOCTRINE) that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. But rightly dividing the word of truth means putting the Scriptures in their proper context.

Therefore any reader can reasonably conclude that Matthew 24 was in fact directed at Jewish believers at that time, and Jewish prospects that will be present during the tribulation.

Steve Claims We Fear Persecution.

Steve’s “show stopper” seems to be that Christians want to believe in a pre-trib rapture because they/we fear persecution. First, I personally have seen more bloodshed in war than Steve will ever see from getting his head bashed in on a car door because he was defiant of authorities in violation of Romans 13. There are missionaries all over the world who preach in atheist and Islamic countries that know at any moment their life could be taken because of what they believe who adhere to a pre-tribulation rapture.

There was even a famous story long ago in a movie based on the life of David Wilkerson, “Cross and the Switchblade” who was nearly fatally stabbed as a result of his preaching to street gangs in America. Therefore to make this claim is an unfounded speculative accusation that defies the evidence among the testimony of missionaries, and even soul-winners in this country who have witnessed in gang and drug infested neighborhoods and been shot, stabbed, beaten and killed for their witness. There are numerous stories from all over the world, particularly in Muslim countries, of Christians who have been imprisoned, tortured and murdered for their faith in Christ, many of whom were independent fundamental Baptists who believed in a pre-tribulation rapture.

Steve Quotes Revelation 13:7 As Evidence.

Steve relies on Revelation 13:7 to prove that the church will undergo the same judgment as the unbelievers that the tribulation was intended for which reads “and it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them”. And thus he claims “aha! there it is”. But if you read Revelation 12:17, it clarifies who Satan is going after, where also Steve neglects to notice a group of believers who are protected from the tribulation (Rev 12:5, 14)

And the dragon was wroth with the woman (Israel, read vs 12:1 to prove that) and went to make war with the remnant of her SEED” Rev 12:17

The church is NEVER referred to as the SEED of Israel. Seed is used to describe a literal, physical, bloodline JEW. Therefore the “saints” that the beast is pursuing in Rev 13:7 are the remnant of believing JEWS from Revelation 12:17.

Steve quotes Galatians 3:29 to show that we are Abraham’s seed (although he does not tie in Rev 13:7 with this passage). However, Galatians is not referring to believers being of the literal seed of Abraham, but a seed that is comparable to believers because of faith in Christ. There is a clear difference between the spiritual application of the seed in Galations, and the literal physical seed of Israel that is the subject of Revelation 13:7 .

Those in Revelation “keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ” Rev 14:12, and sing the song of Moses in Rev 15:3. Nowhere in the epistles to the church are believers told to “keep the COMMANDMENTS of God”, but this is a requirement of the Jews during the tribulation. Hence any Gentile that is saved during the tribulation is saved by the preaching of Christ through JEWISH ministers, because the ministry of the church is absent (as will be seen below in a discussion on Rev 14:6).

Steve Argues The Rapture Was Not Taught Before 1830

Again, as stated in our opening, this is evidence that Steve did not just learn this doctrine on his own. This lie is an oft-repeated cliché by preterists, historicists and all anti-pre-trib rapture opponents.

The scripture is enough. It is not necessary to find any historical “father” to support a doctrinal position and would be irrelevant if the doctrine was discovered 1800 years later, but history does show that that is not the case. In fact, there is nobody that argued that the rapture was not taught until 1800s until Dave McPherson popularized this accusation in 70s. It is ironic that Steve and his associate claim that pre-tribbers get their doctrines from extra-Biblical sources, but then rely on extra-Biblical arguments to prove that there was no mention of the rapture being taught prior to the 1800s.

Recent discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls have documents as far as AD 70 that read, “The Rapture will occur suddenly. And countless thousands will vanish from the earth. Swept up to heaven to live with Jesus and escape the torment of the Tribulation, the others will be left behind.”

Ephraim the Syrian writing in AD 373 stated that:

Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins

There is debate over the dating of Ephrem the Syrian, some argue that it was not written until the AD 500 circa. This argument is irrelevant, the debate is whether or not a rapture was taught before the tribulation prior to the 1800s as Steve claims, and even if Ephrem the Syrian’s writing was not published until AD 500, it is still over 1000 years before Darby in the 1800s or C.I. Scofield from 1843-1921.

There are at least 20 other citations of believers I can give that taught a pre-trib rapture prior to the 1800s, thus the assumption that Steve has merely repeated from others that the rapture was never taught prior to the 1800s is erroneous, and the evidence clearly pre-dates John Darby and C.I. Scofield.

What is ironic about this accusation is that Steve Anderson is quick to admonish believers to shun men’s doctrine who have demonstrated heretical and immoral practices (such as Jack Schaap, former pastor of First Baptist Church of Hammond) and rightly so. That is certainly scriptural, but a large portion of his documentary is based on an interview that he has with Dr Kent Hovind FROM PRISON who was convicted on 58 counts of violating federal laws regarding taxes, obstruction of justice, and 45 counts of structuring cash transactions, and Hovind . Thus Steve Anderson is quite inconsistent on who he is willing to obtain his information from, and even teaches a series about the current state of Israel based on the teachings of cult leader Herbert W. Armstrong. [*Note: the current editor, Dr. James A, PhD {not Ach} does not hold to the same position on Hovind as Ach does, but believes that Hovind was the target of government harassment]

Steve Implies Believers Are Resealed

Steve makes the case that the believers who are protected are those who receive the seal. The only seal mentioned are of JEWISH TRIBES that are sealed in Revelation 7:4. Nevertheless, this claim would defy common sense, and I will make 2 relevant points here:

  1.  The believer in this dispensation is sealed immediately after he believes. Eph 1:13, 4:30. To claim that believers must receive this seal during the tribulation to be protected from judgment defies the current Biblical position on the sealing of the believer RIGHT NOW. It has the implication that if the believer who is sealed now, survives going into the tribulation, that somehow he would have to be RE-sealed.
  2.  This brings up a proof that the church will not be present. If believers are sealed now, and they are sealed after they believe, there would be no reason to seal anyone during the tribulation. The reason there is an event of sealing during the tribulation is obvious, because the church is gone!

Steve Asserts John Fails To Mention The Rapture

Steve claims that John would not likely leave out such a major event such as the rapture of the church in Revelation. However, this argument from silence works both ways: John doesn’t mention the church undergoing the judgments of Revelation 6-18 either.

The rapture of the church was a revelation that was given to Paul, the apostle to the Gentile church. An often overlooked passage that proves this is in 2 Peter 3:16, where Peter argues that there are some things that Paul discusses that are hard to be understood. Now if you notice, this statement is made in the context of PROPHECY. Peter and Paul were both apostles, and both received direct revelation from the Holy Spirit that breathed their writings. Therefore you would assume they would both have the same understanding of end time events, but yet Peter says Paul’s writings are hard to be understood.

Peter was obviously aware of Matthew 24, Daniel 9, Joel 2-3, Zechariah 12-14, Ezekial 37-39, Jeremiah 50-51, Mark 13, Luke 17 and 21, so he was familiar with the existing understanding of end time events that were described by all the prophets, and by Jesus. So what was so different about Paul’s eschatology from what Peter had already known from the above passages to prompt Peter to make this statement? THE RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH

.

Some Issues That Steve Ignores

While Steve boasts of having “scripture after scripture” to refute the claims of pre-tribbers, he fails to refute a large portion or even mention of primary texts that pre-tribbers use as proof of the rapture.

Angel With the Everlasting Gospel

Revelation 14:6 states “and I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaving, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth..” If the church was present during the tribulation, why would it be necessary for an angel to present the everlasting gospel to “them that dwell on the earth”? Is not that the churches commission at this very moment? It is painfully obvious that the necessity for Rev 14:6 is due to the fact that the entity responsible for bearing the gospel, the church, IS GONE.

[I have several texts that I intend to add later in this category]

One More Nugget.

Here’s something that caught my eye as I was memorizing the book of Revelation and it’s Revelation 18:20 which reads:

Rejoice over her (destruction of Babylon), thou heaven, and ye holy APOSTLES and PROPHETS; for God hath avenged you on her”

Now a few things I want the reader to notice here. There are 3 groups of people who are told to rejoice over the destruction of Babylon: those in heaven, the apostles, and the prophets. Notice that church is not mentioned here. Now using Steve’s logic, don’t you think that if the church underwent all of the judgments of the tribulation, that God would have included the church among those that were to rejoice for being persecuted? Did God not exact revenge on the whore for what she did to the church?

And the second thing to notice, and this is free! is that this verse demonstrates that the beast is not just ROME, but the beast is the entire system of empires that have been under control of Satan since Nimrod at Babylon in Genesis 11! Notice that the revenge exacted is on behalf of the PROPHETS. If Babylon is limited to ROME as the whore, WHEN DID ROME KILL THE PROPHETS!! They didn’t. They killed the apostles. The Babylonian empire, the Medo- Persian empire, the Greek empire killed the prophets.

Daniel makes the prophecy about the succession of the beast in Daniel 2 in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar which described the first kingdom as Babylon, followed by Medo- Persia, followed by Greece, and then Rome. This is why the description of the beast in Rev 13:2 is seen as a leopard, bear, and a lion. Their were different kingdoms BUT ALL ONE STATUE. Satan is described as being the “god of this world” (2 Cor 11:3) and how does a “god” rule a world? Through kingdoms. Thus Satan has always had a kingdom to rule with and this is the meaning behind the description of the beast in Revelation 13.

Therefore the beast (and there are 2 described in Rev 13, the first is the kingdom which at the time of the tribulation will be Rome) and then the false prophet. Steve erroneously describes the antichrist as the first beast. It’s not. The second beast described in Rev 13:11 is the false prophet, the first beast is the statue of Nebuchadnezzar with its final kingdom being that of Rome.

Additional Warnings About Steven Anderson

Steven Anderson has demonstrated a blatant lack of respect for government authority in a clearly unbiblical manner. While I am no fan of the current government, and believe it is an extension of the Roman Empire being used to usher in a new world order, there is a difference in criticizing the policies of a nation that are wicked, and being able to identify trends that reveal steps toward fulfilled prophecy, and personal belligerent attacks.

Consider the following statement made by Steve in a sermon preached about Barak Obama:

And yet you’re going to tell me that I’m supposed to pray for the socialist devil, murderer, infanticide, who wants to see young children and he wants to see babies killed through abortion and partial-birth abortion and all these different things — you’re gonna tell me I’m supposed to pray for God to give him a good lunch tomorrow while he’s in Phoenix, Arizona. Nope. I’m not gonna pray for his good. I’m going to pray that he dies and goes to hell. When I go to bed tonight, that’s what I’m going to pray. And you say, ‘Are you just saying that?’ No. When I go to bed tonight, Steven L. Anderson is going to pray for Barack Obama to die and go to hell,

I hate Barak Obama. You mean you hate what he does. No I hate him. I hate the person, and I’m gonna show you from the Bible why God wants me to hate Barak Obama.

At one point, a person in the audience spoke up about his attitude, and Steven told him to “Get the he** out of my church”

Peter cast these type of people in with the same as various heathens:  “But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.” 2 Peter 2:10.

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.Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves *damnation [*judgment of the government]. Romans 13:1-2

It is not a pastors job to correct the government without the procedures offered within the government to do so. They may be corrupt, they may not be to his liking, but God does not expect a Christian to act like a total fool and demand their “rights” and compromise their testimony before the world.

Furthermore, it is wholly unscriptural and just plain EVIL for a so-called Christian to pray that anyone dies and goes to hell.

And some have compassion, making a difference: and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. Jude 22-23

I could list 100 verses off the top of my head that demonstrate just how wrong Steven’s approach is here. I have personally heard Obama mock the Bible and Jesus, but that does not give me permission to pray for his death and eternal damnation. “Love your enemies and pray for those you persecute you and despitefully use you” (Matt 5) does not seem to be in the KJB that Steve claims to preach from. That is not Christianity, that is pure evil.

Conclusion

I will edit this later after I am finished with my notes on his video, and then tidy up the article for the grammar police, but Steve’s new video is nothing more than rehashed Augustinian theology, it relies on mostly suppositions, misrepresentations of what pre-tribbers believe and bold claims that pre-tribbers do not have any verses that prove the pre-trib rapture.

Steve argues that Christians merely do not want to fathom suffering persecution. The same argument could be used against him that he simply wants to be different from other fundamentalists by pursuing a martyrs complex in which he deliberately invites persecution from government entities by antagonizing them. It is odd that Steve would claim Christians fear persecution of tribulation, but then defies government officials by demanding his “rights”. If Christians are subject to persecution as a matter of God’s will, then why would Steve rely on his “rights” when the government persecutes him? Think about that Steve.

Steve ends his documentary with a statement that “I hope I can endure” (1:35:36) which is in direct conflict with his belief in eternal security, because the reference to enduring is “they that endure unto the end shall be saved” Matt 24:13.

While I can appreciate Steve’s stance on the King James Bible, his position on certain conspiracy theories which are not theories really but FACT, and much of his doctrine that is similar to fundamentalism, it is clear that Steve has yet to exercise proper Biblical hermeneutics, consistency in those whom a believer should consider a credible resource of information, and his defiance of government authority to me appear to give the impression that Steve has a desire to be recognized as being different “from the pack”. While his zeal is admirable, his priorities are not Biblical, and his eschatology leaves much to be desired, and the sensationalized claim that this film refutes the pre-tribulation rapture theory is more hype than an honest evaluation of the Bible and the claims of pre-trib proponents.

Dr James Ach and J/A

I want to start a topic here to dispel the satanic heresy that the current Jews that comprise that land of Israel are not real Jews, a theory in which denies that the current state of Israel is the fulfillment of numerous Bible prophecies regarding Israel returning to her land.

I am going to post a link to a video here,. The video was created by Chris White, an 18 minute video that packs a ton of information in a short time, so take notes, but it thoroughly debunks the anti semetic view that the current state of Israel is made of fake Jews called the Ashkenazi Jews. Not only does this video debunk this ridiculous notion that spits in God’s face regarding fulfilled prophecy, but I am going to have a few questions to ponder over, with other proofs that today’s Israel is the Israel that has fulfilled prophecy. I am going to assume that most are aware of this history of the Balfour Declaration debates between 1914-1918, and the date Israel declared their independence in 1948, so I won’t repeat that at any length here. (Click Here for the full version of the video)

The Two Myths I want to debunk are: 1) That the current state of Israel is not the fulfillment of prophecy and 2) That the church did not take over as the Israel.

The Current State of Israel is the Fulfillment of Bible Prophecy

The contention is in a nutshell (the myth can be read on several places on the forum here) is that Lord Rothschild created the nation of Israel, the the flag of Israel is the number of the beast, and the current Jews living in Israel now are not real Jews and therefore no prophecy has been fulfilled.

This defies common sense and history of the development of Zionism prior to Rothchilds involvement. There were numerous Zionist congresses held by Jews in the land of Israel long before Rothschild was involved. Even if Rothschild was involved in the Illuminati (which he certainly is) and had evil intentions, that regathering of Jews to Israel is not contingent upon the spiritual life of Rothschild, Theodore Herzl, Lord Balfour, or anyone else. The Bible never said that the regathering of Israel depended on their faithfulness, the regathering of Israel was a PROMISE made in Ezekial 37, and Zechariah 14, and the salvation of Israel can only come AFTER they have been regathered. God did not gather Israel back together based on whether or not those who assisted could be judged by their professions of faith, but because God intends on working through Israel to demonstrates His faithfulness to Abraham, and his wrath upon the Christ rejecting world.

Just because Rothschild was not a Bible believing Christian, does not mean God does not use heathens to accomplish His purpose. God used heathens to assist Israel in rebuilding Jerusalem during the time of Nehemiah (in getting approval from heathen kings for materials and permission to build). Artaxerxes, Ahasuerus, Darius, et al, were certainly not godly kings, but God worked through and around them to accomplish His purpose in the rebuilding of Israel and the temple. Since Paul clearly states that the Jew is blinded until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled (Rom 11:25), how could anyone expect a godly Jewish people to reestablish the nation of Israel? The very first mention of the word “holy” in the Bible, is a reference to the land of Israel (Exodus 3), and God called the land Holy before any Jew occupied it. This demonstrates that God separated the land first, and then gathered the people to occupy it.

The Bible is clear that the land of Israel in the end times will be occupied by unbelieving Jews. Rev 2:2, 2:9 and 3:9. But Jesus praises the Jewish churches for trying them which say they are Jews and are not. To identify a false Jew, there has to be a true Jew as a standard of comparison. The entire book of Revelation revolves around the nation of Israel, and yet there are unbelieving Jews present in the land. Does the unfaithfulness of Israel negate the promises of God? (2 Tim 2:13). The gifts and calling of God are without repentance and can not be revoked (Rom 11:26). There is not one place in Scripture where the promise to regather Israel was based upon their acceptance of the Messiah FIRST. The fact is they are punished during the tribulation for their rejection of the Messiah, they will “finish the transgression” that was left out of the 70th week of Daniel. But they can not be purged unless they are regathered FIRST, and THEN they will be given the opportunity to receive Christ during the tribulation.

And just a parenthetical comment here about whether it is a 7 year tribulation. Not only is it a 7 year period based on Daniels 70th week, but read Revelation ch 11-13 carefully. Revelation is NOT in chronological order, and if you notice the time lines given of the 2 witness and the beast, they total 7 years. Now notice the 2 witnesses are said to prophesy “a thousand two hundred and threescore days” Rev 11:3, now note that this ministry comes BEFORE the second woe of Rev 11:14. So these 2 witnesses preached for 3 1/2 years BEFORE THE SECOND WOE. Note that. Now notice the third woe is given in Rev 12:10 “woe unto the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea, for the devil is come down unto having great wrath because he knoweth that he hath but a short time”. And how much time does he have? “and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months” Rev 13:5. Now do the math, 2 witnesses preach for 3 1/2 years BEFORE THE SECOND WOE, and the beast wreaks havoc for 3 1/2 year AFTER THE THIRD WOE. That’s 7 years.

Now back to Israel.

Here’s a common sense question for those that claim that the current Israeli’s are not real Jews. Since it is clear that the land of Israel is now occupied by a nation that has a charter called Israel, and there’s no disputing that the land traditionally known as Israel, is now called Israel again, if the real Jews show up somewhere, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO SET UP ANOTHER LAND? If the “real Jews’ are supposed to access the real Israel, and that Israel is already occupied, then where would the “real” Jews go??

And I’ll get the following subject in a minute, but if it is claimed that the church is the real Jew, than WHY ISN’T THE CHURCH FLOCKING TO ISRAEL? And why is there no mention any where in the Bible of God regathering his CHURCH BACK TO ISRAEL?

The argument is made that since the Jews are made of  nothing but immigrants, that they are not real Jews. Well DUH, they were scattered all over the earth. A prophecy about “RE gathering” implies that had to be scattered. None of us American’s that live here now call ourselves English-Americans, or French Americans or Russian Americans (funny that we force blacks to call themselves African Americans). We all refer to ourselves as AMERICANS even though every one of us are immigrants.

The arguments above, and the video are sufficient to prove that the current nation of Israel is the nation that God regathered in fulfillment of numerous prophecies.

The Church is Not Israel

*GRRRRRRR all of my external links went to a NKJV. Please look them up in a KJV.

The claim that the church has inherited all of the promises of the covenants to Israel and thus has replaced Israel is probably the most popular that unites all 3 views. All 3 views deny that God will restore the literal nation of Israel in the end times. The historicists and preterists even go so far as to blame the  dispensationalist view of those who believe in the literal restoration of Israel  on a Jesuit priest named Ribera in the 1500s. The claim is that the Catholic church (RCC) need a response to the claims that Revelation pointed to the RCC as the whore of Babylon, and thus Ribera created futurism which was then later passed on to John Darby, then to Scofield and Larkin.

Not only is that claim historically absurd due to the early church “fathers” that also held to a futuristic view, but Ribera’s commentary was never translated from Latin and there is no evidence that Darby ever read his works and he never referenced them. Furthermore, Ribera’s only similarity from what I have read is that there will be a future kingdom, there is nothing remotely similar about Ribera’s writings and the pre-millenial views. Moreover, the RCC has never believed in pre-millenialism or a pre-tribulation rapture, and those who hold to those views still identify the RCC as the beast and the antichrist so whatever views are attributed to Ribera, do not look like the scheme worked even if it were true.

This subject has had entire volumes written about it so I won’t do much justice to the subject here, but just a few short observations from Romans 9-11 which is a death blow to all 3 views regarding Israel:

*Paul argues that “hath God cast away his people that he foreknew?” Romans 11:1-2. So clearly, the contention is that someone had been cast away due to the dispensation of grace. If the church had replaced Israel, this question would not even be up for debate with Paul. If the church replaced Israel, why would the question be asked if God cast away His church which He foreknew? Who was Paul referring to that was cast away and that God foreknew? Surely Paul is talking about the literal Hebrews, and he answers the question with a resounding NO.

*Paul describes the nation of Israel as his brothers “according to the flesh”. Rom 9:3. The church are not Paul’s brothers according to the flesh, church members are made family by adoption through the Holy Spirit, not by promise of covenants with Israel. Rom 8:23. Thus Paul sets the entire tone of Romans chs 9-11 by identifying his discourse about Israel as being his physical lineage, not about promises given to the church by transference.

*The other view often cite Luke 13 where Jesus cursed the fig tree as evidence that Israel will never be restored. However, Rom 11:15clearly shows that God will raise Israel as a nation “from the dead”. Therefore Luke 13 can only be temporary as is confirmed by Paul in Romans 11:25.

*Paul repeatedly makes distinctions between the Jews and Greeks (gentiles) throughout Scripture (Rom 1:16, Acts 28:29 which you will only find in a KJV). In Rom 11:13, Paul confirms that he is the apostle to the Gentiles and makes the distinction between his office over the Gentiles, and those who are of his flesh (v 14).

*Revelation 7:4-8 clearly shows that during the tribulation, 144,000 Jews will be sealed. If those who profess that the church replaced Israel, then let me ask to which of the twelve tribes listed in Rev 7:5-8 do you belong to?

*It is obvious from Daniel 9:25-27, 2 Thess 2:1-12, and Rev 11:1-2 that there will be temple rites practiced again during the tribulation, such as would not be practiced by the church. Furthermore, saints saved during the tribulation are said to “sing the song of Moses and of the Lamb”. The church would not be singing the song of Moses, that is a clear indication that there will be literal, physical blood-line Jews present during the tribulation that are saved in accordance to God’s promises to them in the OT and Paul’s statement in Romans 11:26.

* I mentioned this early but worth saying again. In Rev 2:2, 2:9, and 3:9, Jesus praises the Jewish churches for identify false Jews. First thing to note, is that in order to identifying a false Jew, there needs to be a true Jew as a standard of comparison. Secondly, there is nowhere in the epistles to the church where a Gentile believer is admonished to “try them which say they are Jews and are not”. During the dispensation of grace, there is neither “Jew nor Greek” (Gal 3:27-28), but in Revelation 2-3, the emphasis is back on the Jew.

Another thing to note about Romans 11:26 where Paul says “all Israel will be saved”, if that was a reference to the church, would that not be redundant? The church is sealed right now (Eph 4:30, 1:13), there is no possible loss of that salvation so why would Paul make a reference to a future salvation of the church? That makes it obvious that Paul is referring to a future salvation of Israel as a nation, and not to a future salvation that is made up of Gentile believers.

*If the church replaced Israel, why would Paul bother writing an entire book to HEBREWS, and James write a book “to the twelve tribes scattered abroad”?

The church is under a completely different calling and set of prescriptions than the nation of Israel, and the confusion over Bible prophecy is the failure to understand the difference between the two. The church is a “mystery” not previously known, Eph 3:1-12, Col  1:26-27. Jesus said, “on this rock I will build my church”, thus the church can not be Israel because the church is in a building process build separate from the nation of Israel which will culminate when the voice John hears that speaks as a trumpet (and notice this trumpet sounds before the 7 trumpets begin) tells the church to come up hither. Rev 4:1.

Additional Signs That Validate The Current State of Israel

The following are numerous signs that have occurred in Israel that show that God is fulfilling prophecy in the CURRENT land of Israel.

*A PURE LANGUAGE: “I will restore until the peoples a pure language” Zeph 3:9. For nearly 2000 years, Israel has been scattered through out the earth, yet in the last 50 years, they have revived the Hebrew language spoken as it was 2000 years ago.

*ISRAEL BECAME A NATION IN A DAY: Despite the reneging by Churchill on the Balfour Declaration that chopped up the land of Israel, and the opposition of their enemies, in ONE DAY Israel became a nation in fulfillment of Isaiah 66:8. Not only that, but when they were regathered, the ORDER that they would be gathered in was predicted. Isa 43:5-6, and 21.

*LAND DIVIDED FOR GAIN. Winston Churchill and the UN and the Pope refused to allow the Jews all of the land that they claimed as part of their heritage with the borders listed in Deut and Joshua, and divided the land for gain. Joel 3:1-2.

*ISRAEL BECOMES CENTER OF WORLD CONTENTION: Israel is said to be a stumbling block to all the nations and there can be no question today that all of the conflicts in the middle east revolve around the nation of Israel. Zech 12:3

*THE SHEKEL REVIVED: For 2000 years Israel had not national currency, and now that they have been regathered and restored as a nation, they have revived the currency of the shekel as predicted in Ezek 45:12-16.

*ISRAEL BARREN LAND BECOMES PRODUCTIVE AGAIN: For 2000 years that land of Israel was barren, dessert, even under the occupation of Turks, and other Arabs and the Ottoman empire, there was never any agriculture in the land,and no forestation, but now Israel produces more fruit (particularly the grapes) to rival the largest producers in the world. Isaiah 26:6, Isaiah 35:1-2.

There are scores of other prophecies that I could list here, but these demonstrate clearly that the CURRENT land of Israel not only fulfilled prophecy in it’s regathering, but is CONTINUING to fulfill prophecy, and will be the center of prophecy during the coming great tribulation.

*******************

In a recent post by Monica Weimer, regular Do Right Hyles Anderson Facebook group contributor (DRHAC), Monica posts the following article taken from the “Church of Satan”

Third, we call for the re-establishment of Lex Talionis throughout human society. The Judeo-Christian tradition which exists secularly under the guise of liberal humanism has exalted the criminal over the victim, taking responsibility away from the wrong-doer with their doctrine of forgiveness. Such thinking is a disgrace towards the ideal of justice. This must stop! Individuals must be held accountable for the consequences of their actions, and not be allowed to scapegoat society, history, or other supposed “outside” influences. It should come as no surprise that many Satanists are part of law enforcement agencies, and a large number of people throughout this and other criminal justice systems who fully agree with Satanic philosophy on this point. If the law is not being enforced, Satanists advocate the practice of seeking personal justice, but you are warned to be fully aware of the consequences of such actions in today’s corrupt society. With the present state of affairs, the outcry may yet come to welcome justice back to stay.”~~~Magus Peter H. Gilmore

Monica follows up the article with here take on it as follows:

And we were told that Satanists are evil. I am reading the Church of Satan’s website to see what they really believe and practice. We have been lied to by those who know nothing about Satanism.

We have had conversations before with Monica on this site where she admitted to adhering to atheism and was openly hostile to Christianity. So I am not surprised to this article on the DRHAC page, especially with the other philosophies that this group adheres to. What I am surprised to see though are the several members I thought at least maintained some form of Biblical based beliefs defending this post.

Does it matter what Satanists “really believe”? Two things are known fact about Satanists: they glorified Satan, and they are openly hostile towards any form of Biblical Christianity. But, according to the Church of Satan, and Monica, we Christians have “misrepresented” their real beliefs. Although I suppose the very name they gave themselves, “Church of Satan” isn’t caveat enough, suppose I started a “church” and called it “The Church of Baby Killers”, would it really be necessary to accurately explain every tenet of “faith” that I held when the name itself implies something ominous?

Monica then encourages the group to “…. explore and learn outside your norm, research other philosophies, challenge yourself to see how much you have been lied to about them.” Translation: study anything but Christianity. Be openly tolerant of all views accept for those that revolve around the Bible. Research material that is intellectually dishonest, shallow in reasoning, absent of evidence, and full of supposition and hateful rhetoric towards Christians.

What did tickle me though was one member claiming they are saved but do not wish to “demonize” other beliefs. How does one inaccurately “demonize” a “religion” that openly claims to submit to demons! It is this type of compromise from Christians that are willing to embrace the beliefs and fellowship of other philosophies that are antagonist to even their own professions that make groups like the DRHAC poisonous to Christians, but for the sake of a common cause (exposing the corruption in churches), they are willing to trade in their Bibles for pitchforks.

In reviewing the many threads on here where the issue of dispensationalism seems to always end up  being a side discussion, I figured I’d start a thread on the 3 major eschatological theories that are gaining popularity that seem to have at least one thing in common, disdain or disregard for dispensationalism and futurism, particularly where it comes to the rapture of the church, and the place and role of Israel in the Bible. The 3 views are Preterism,Historicism and Covenant Theology (which I will commonly refer to as the “3 views” even though some may overlap).

I do not wish to list the differences between all 3, but the problem that I have with all 3 views in what they have in common:

*That the book of Revelation was written prior to AD 70

*That Daniel and the majority of the book of Revelation was fulfilled in AD 70 when Titus attacked Jerusalem

*That the church has replaced Israel

I have more objections to all 3 views than I have room to write on here so my explanations will not be exhaustive.

The Date of the Book of Revelation

Of the many objections I have against the 3 views, the early dating of the book of Revelation seems to me a blatantly dishonest and inconsistent interpretation of history and the Bible’s internal evidence for a late date (i.e. AD 95). Preterists such as Hank Haneggraff cherry-pick historians in that the “early fathers” are useful in supporting some of their apologetic claims for the validity of the Bible and early developed doctrines, but disgard them as reliable when their writings are in contradistinction to their eschatology.

If Revelation was written after AD 70, that destroys all eschatological views that view Daniels 70th week, Jesus Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, and Revelation 1-19 as having been fulfilled in AD 70 and demonstrates that all of Revelation is yet future.

Evidence For the Late Date of  Revelation

*Iraneus (AD 120-202)who was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John. Iraneus holds that John wrote Revelation during the end of the reign of Domitian who did not begin his reign until 81 AD and was killed in AD 96.

*Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215), Tertullian (AD 160-220), Victorinus (AD 304), Eusibius (AD 260-340), Jerome (AD 340-419).

Although these men were not always doctrinally correct, their citations of John writing Revelation while on the Isle of Patmos under Domitians reign is a matter of recorded history not doctrinal exegesis.

*The Laodiceans are prospersous in Rev 3:17. Laodecea was destroyed by an earthquake in AD 61, it is highly unlikely that they recovered to such economic prosperity in only 9 years.

*The church of Smyrna was not in existence prior to AD 70. It is only mentioned by John in Rev 1:11 and 2:8.

The Prophecies of Daniel and Revelation Were Not Fulfilled in AD 70

Preterists in particular lay heavy emphasis on the term “shortly come to pass” in Matthew 24 and Revelation 1:1 that shows the events described by Christ and John would have an immediate fulfillment. However, they are inconsistent in their application of these passages as Revelation 22:6, the counterpart to Rev 1:1 also states that the events the 3 views DO believe are yet future will also come to pass shortly. Furthermore, Paul states in Romans 16 that Satan would be bruised under our feet “shortly”. That has obviously not occurred. Therefore “shortly” is clearly not used to define an immediate fulfillment, at least from man’s perspective, but is a statement of an expecation of immanency.

Much of the futurist view and those who hold to a future fulfillment of Daniel’s 70th week are objected to by the other views as being fulfilled in Titus. It is almost a blasphemous interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27 where the text is clear that the “prince to come” is referring to the antichrist, and not Jesus (Not only is this fact clear in the text of Daniel 9, but also in Daniel 11:16-32). The other views attempt to squeeze Jesus baptism (which is not mentioned in Daniel), His ministry and crucifixion all in the final week of Daniel. However, Daniel makes it clear that the Messiah is “cut off” (crucified) BEFORE the one week is confirmed.

The other views attempt to allegorize the text claiming that Jesus rendered the oblations and sacrifices ineffective instead of as the text says, the prince would cause to cease. It is clear that the oblations and sacrifices did not cease until 40 years after Christ ascended, but their interpretation would require them to have ceased at Christ’s crucifixion if said event was the culmination of Daniel’s 70th week.

The other views point to the Olivet discourse where Jesus states “when ye see the armies compass Jerusalem about, flee into the mountains”. That never occured in AD 70. Titus surrounded Jerusalem and nobody was permitted exit from the city. What did happen in AD 70 after Titus regrouped was that the Jews were scattered throughout the world (“The Diaspora”), that is not quite the same as fleeing to the mountains “where the woman hath a place prepared of God that they shoud feed her a thousand two hundred and threescore days” Rev 12:6.

Other events that never occurred are as follows:

*Jesus never returned to the earth in VISIBLE fashion. Rev 1:7 (“every eye shall see him”).

*Nobody was subjected to the mark of the beast, or the number of his name. Although the other views attempt to ascribe this to Nero, 2 Thess makes it clear that the antichrist is destroyed by the brightness of Jesus’ coming, Nero committed suicide. Nero could only be considered a type of antichrist, but does not meet the requirements to be THE antichrist of Revelation 13, and Nero never had an image made that was to be worshipped and given life to (Rev 13:15). There is no historical evidence that anyone under Nero or Titus was prevented from buying or selling unless they had the mark of the beast or the number of his name, and there is no evidence that anyone was martyred because of rejecting such (Rev 15:1-3).

*The mount of olives did not split in two. Zechariah 14:4. Also, Revelation 6:14-15 states that every mountain and island were moved out of their places, and the heaven departed as a scroll.

*The Euphrates river was not dried up. Rev 9:14-15Rev 16:12

*The number of the armies in Rev 9:16 (200 million) far exceeds any amount of any army in existence at the time of Nero. Even today, the only army that could possibly fit that number would be China which fits Daniel and Revelation’s claim that this army comes from the East. This also brings up another fact that the armies gathered against Israel partly come from the East, Rome is WEST of Jerusalem. Therefore Titus and Nero could not possibly have fulfilled Daniel or Revelation.

*In AD 70, only ONE army attacked Jerusalem (Rome). Scripture indicates that God gathers ALL NATIONS against Jerusalem. Zech 12:314:2.

*The amount of the world’s population that is killed by the judgments never occurred in AD 70. Rev 6:8Rev 8:11Rev 9:15-20.

*The amount of physical destruction to the earth never occurred in AD 70. Rev 8:8-12.

Not only did these events not occur in AD 70, they have never occurred at any time since then. Historicists and some Covenanters attempt to explain they gradually occurred  through out history, but that is not only a gross interpretation of Scripture, but it defies all of the timelines given in Revelation that make it clear all of these events occur within a 7 year period. Rev 8:111:312:61413:5.

There are many more examples, but these should be enough to prove that the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation (among others) were not fulfilled in AD 70, nor at any other time in history to date.

The Church Has Not Replaced Israel

The claim that the church has inherited all of the promises of the covenants to Israel and thus has replaced Israel is probably the most popular that unites all 3 views. All 3 views deny that God will restore the literal nation of Israel in the end times. The historicists and preterists even go so far as to blame the  dispensationalist view of those who believe in the literal restoration of Israel  on a Jesuit priest named Ribera in the 1500s. The claim is that the Catholic church (RCC) need a response to the claims that Revelation pointed to the RCC as the whore of Babylon, and thus Ribera created futurism which was then later passed on to John Darby, then to Scofield and Larkin.

Not only is that claim historically absurd due to the early church “fathers” that also held to a futuristic view, but Ribera’s commentary was never translated from Latin and there is no evidence that Darby ever read his works and he never referenced them. Furthermore, Ribera’s only similarity from what I have read is that there will be a future kingdom, there is nothing remotely similar about Ribera’s writings and the pre-millenial views. Moreover, the RCC has never believed in pre-millenialism or a pre-tribulation rapture, and those who hold to those views still identify the RCC as the beast and the antichrist so whatever views are attributed to Ribera, do not look like the scheme worked even if it were true.

This subject has had entire volumes written about it so I won’t do much justice to the subject here, but just a few short observations from Romans 9-11 which is a death blow to all 3 views regarding Israel:

*Paul argues that “hath God cast away his people that he foreknew?” Romans 11:1-2. So clearly, the contention is that someone had been cast away due to the dispensation of grace. If the church had replaced Israel, this question would not even be up for debate with Paul. If the church replaced Israel, why would the question be asked if God cast away His church which He foreknew? Who was Paul referring to that was cast away and that God foreknew? Surely Paul is talking about the literal Hebrews, and he answers the question with a resounding NO.

*Paul describes the nation of Israel as his brothers “according to the flesh”. Rom 9:3. The church are not Paul’s brothers according to the flesh, church members are made family by adoption through the Holy Spirit, not by promise of covenants with Israel. Rom 8:23. Thus Paul sets the entire tone of Romans chs 9-11 by identifying his discourse about Israel as being his physical lineage, not about promises given to the church by transference.

*The other view often cite Luke 13 where Jesus cursed the fig tree as evidence that Israel will never be restored. However, Rom 11:15clearly shows that God will raise Israel as a nation “from the dead”. Therefore Luke 13 can only be temporary as is confirmed by Paul in Romans 11:25.

*Paul repeatedly makes distinctions between the Jews and Greeks (gentiles) throughout Scripture (Rom 1:16Acts 28:29 which you will only find in a KJV). In Rom 11:13, Paul confirms that he is the apostle to the Gentiles and makes the distinction between his office over the Gentiles, and those who are of his flesh (v 14).

*Revelation 7:4-8 clearly shows that during the tribulation, 144,000 Jews will be sealed. If those who profess that the church replaced Israel, then let me ask to which of the twelve tribes listed in Rev 7:5-8 do you belong to?

*It is obvious from Daniel 9:25-272 Thess 2:1-12, and Rev 11:1-2 that there will be temple rites practiced again during the tribulation, such as would not be practiced by the church. Furthermore, saints saved during the tribulation are said to “sing the song of Moses and of the Lamb”. The church would not be singing the song of Moses, that is a clear indication that there will be literal, physical blood-line Jews present during the tribulation that are saved in accordance to God’s promises to them in the OT and Paul’s statement in Romans 11:26.

*In Rev 2:22:9, and 3:9, Jesus praises the Jewish churches for identify false Jews. First thing to note, is that in order to identifying a false Jew, there needs to be a true Jew as a standard of comparison. Secondly, there is nowhere in the epistles to the church where a Gentile believer is admonished to “try them which say they are Jews and are not”. During the dispensation of grace, there is neither “Jew nor Greek” (Gal 3:27-28), but in Revelation 2-3, the emphasis is back on the Jew.

Another thing to note about Romans 11:26 where Paul says “all Israel will be saved”, if that was a reference to the church, would that not be redundant? The church is sealed right now (Eph 4:301:13), there is no possible loss of that salvation so why would Paul make a reference to a future salvation of the church? That makes it obvious that Paul is referring to a future salvation of Israel as a nation, and not to a future salvation that is made up of Gentile believers.

*If the church replaced Israel, why would Paul bother writing an entire book to HEBREWS, and James write a book “to the twelve tribes scattered abroad”?

This is, again, by no means an exhaustive approach, but is a very short analysis I have offered that demonstrates some serious flaws with Preterism, Historicism and Covenant Theology. I’ll spell check it later, so if there are critics who adhere to spell-checker-onlyism (the view that a discourse is only valid if everything contains perfect grammatical structure), you will be greatly disappointed.

 

 

As those of you who have read our article on the Trisha Fundamental Revolution Occult were aware, our site had posted information about Trisha Lacroix, founder of the Do Right Hyles Anderson Facebook page, that stated she was never a member of the First Baptist Church of Hammond. This information was based on a lengthy conversation that I had with Eddie Wilson, FBC spokesperson, and 2 emails from FBC staff.

However, credible information surfaced that I received this week with photos of Trisha Lacroix in a HAC yearbook that included Trisha Lacroix, and while I am no expert on the policies of HAC attendance, I would assume that some type of church attendance would be required. Thus it appears that Trisha Lacroix did in fact attend HAC for at least 2 years, and therefore we apologize for posting inaccurate information provided to us.

We do however though, have two major issues that we would like Trisha to address. If we are willing to admit our mistakes, then we would hope she would do the same.

ISSUE NUMBER 1, the Eddie Lapina Tapes

In or about September of 2011, Trisha claimed that she had audio tapes of Eddie Lapina admitting to a cover up of additional Jack Schaap crimes or at least cover up of details concerning the current crime for which he is incarcerated for and awaiting sentencing. Within the week that she claimed they would be posted, she retracted the claim with a statement that avowed that the tapes were in the possession of a grand jury.

The convening of any grand jury could not be verified by any of our legal team staff or attorney friends, but we do not deny the possibility of a grand jury considering all of the allegations that surfaced regarding Schaap’s finances and the potential for additional victims as it is reasonable to conclude that those who have an attraction to minors did not just start having an attraction to them at 54 years of age. We then do not doubt the possibility of a grand jury being convened, it was never verified.

After many members in the  Do Right Hyles Anderson (DRHAC) left over this issue, Trisha then stated that the information was given to a reputed journalist, and would be available in an article published by the Chicago Magazine. The Chicago Magazine released it’s article entitled “Let Us Prey” which derived much of it’s source of information about Jack Schaap, Jack Hyles and First Baptist Church from Voyle Glover (Attorney and former FBC member), Jerry Kaifetz (Ph.D. and former FBC insider), Dr. David Cloud and Dr Robert Sumner. Absent from the 7 page article was any mention of a cover up by Eddie Lapina or the mention of any tapes or any links where said evidence could be heard.

If there is evidence of a cover up, we would gladly post it on this site. If there is not, then we would like for Trisha to simply admit that there was never any audio tape of Eddie Lapina.

ISSUE NUMBER 2: Falsified Resume

Information was submitted to us that Trisha Lacroix had claimed that she had a marketing degree from Hyles Anderson College. Trisha then made a 13 numbered response on the DRHAC page which denounced that she ever had a marketing degree from HAC and that her resume did not reflect that (screenshot posted below at the end of this article).

However, several press releases, such as one by the JDH Group, stated the following:

“Trisha brings more than 10 years of sales, marketing and account management experience with her, along with a Bachelor of Science in Marketing from Hyles Anderson College in Crown Point , IN. She began her career as an account manager for Exhibit Dynamics in Dallas, TX. [1] (emphasis added).

JDH executive staff stated to us in a telephonic interview that new employees prepare their own press releases, and thus whatever information was prepared for the press release, was the creation of the employees themselves.

Now giving Trisha the benefit of a doubt  perhaps one company could have made a mistake. However, the same resume surfaced on another company she worked for called MG Designs [2]

Therefore, we would welcome an explanation from Trisha as to the anomaly contained within her statement that she never had a degree in marketing (which HAC has never offered) compared to her press releases for a couple of the companies she has worked for that claim she had a BA in marketing from Hyles Anderson College.

Certainly evidence such as this lends to the credibility or lack thereof toward Trisha’s reign over her group members. Trisha has attempted to start a group called “Fundamental Revolution” that offers merchandise with the group logo available for purchase, and if a potential customer were to spend, for example, $45 for a sweat-shirt, it is reasonable to inquire as to whether the product being marketed is being promoted by a credible source.

It also demonstrates that if the allegations are true, that Trisha defrauded her employers by receiving wages from them under false pretenses. Since these companies appear to be marketing companies, it is very likely that Trisha would have been chosen over other applicants by demonstrating she had a marketing degree. If she has in fact been dishonest about that, that would reasonably call into question her motives and credibility for other claims that she has made on her group page as well as the motives and credibility of others within the group that support her. You can not have it both ways, it is blatantly hypocritical to vilify fundamentalist churches of cover ups while maintaining the same type of dishonesty that you accuse abusers of.

trisha-lies