The King James Bible issue explained (for people who don’t know)


King James BibleIn light of Phil Stringer’s speech to the King James organizations last year (which I finally just listened to!) I thought I’d explain the whole King James issue.

One person who reads my blog wrote on their own blog, “I don’t mind the King James issue, but I hate the people who defend it.” And to a certain extent, I can’t blame them for thinking this way. Presumably that means me as well, but hey… a lot of us do deserve the comments. I’ll explain.

For starters, no one person speaks for the King James only movement. There’s a lot of people who speak for the issue. And there’s several that most of us frankly wish, would shut up.

I don’t own any writings, ebooks or audio recordings by Gail Riplinger. She’s written some things that I’ve seen quoted that I agree with… and she’s written many things that I do not agree with.

She’s said many mean-spirited things… and honestly, some wild-eyed things that make us KJV defenders all look like idiots. I own – and use – a Strong’s concordance. From what I’ve seen quoted in it, the “Toxic” book sounds like, well, lunacy. She’s done a poor job of research, and makes the same mistake a lot of evangelical Christians do as well.

Briefly, if I get a book published by Tyndale, I’d probably be bouncing like an idiot. “I got published! Yes!!!” I’d send my manuscript off, check my proofs carefully, and very possibly, if the editor was feeling generous, I might even get to okay the book cover.

It does not mean I’m having any secret meetings with any of the other Tyndale publishers. Let’s just hypothesize that James White also landed a publishing deal with Tyndale. It doesn’t mean we’re getting together and having coffee. It also doesn’t mean he and I are plotting to edit (HORRORS!) or destroy the King James Bible.

Gail Riplinger does make those kinds of leaps of logic. But so do a lot of evangelical Christians I’ve seen books by. Many of the people who investigate the Illuminati, new world order, etc make those very same leaps of logic. I guess it’s okay for Texe Marrs to do it, but not a King James only person?

Let me briefly distance myself from another King James defender I wish would shut up. Or at least tone it down. Peter Ruckman. The man’s a cult leader. He makes some very strange statements, is very bigoted, and no doubt would dismiss me as a “jackass” and a “kike”. Yes, he does talk like that. My seminary president visited his church once, and testified that yes, Ruckman says the “N” word from the pulpit. Racism really is not helping the cause of the King James Bible any.

Those kind of people really do the King James world a disservice. NO, I don’t stand on street corners with a megaphone shouting, “You’re going to hell! You’re going to Hell!” Peter S. Ruckman’s church does that, from what Marc Monte says.

Okay, there you go. I know I’m rough. I know I speak very strongly. But then again, I’ve read the Bible a lot, and Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, and many others did so as well. I get so absolutely fed up with people – heretics, really – question the bible, deny the Bible, make up their own doctrine, and steer my Christian brethren on a sleepwalking road back to Rome. So, I tend to speak very harshly about such people.

So, let me explain the King James issue. I know you’re not James White. I know you’re not Ron Rhodes. I know you’re not John Ankerberg. These people all speak against the King James issue, and in reality,most of the people who speak against the King James Issue have never studied it.

When you see us slam the opponents of the King James issue, pause and consider this – we’re defending our beliefs. And many of the people that oppose us often have agendas. And many of them hold to secret heresies they won’t admit to. That’s very often the people we’re mentally imagining when we write these articles.

The first thing you should be aware of is… who is on these Bible translating committees? Check these people out. Read about the names of these people. Oh, wow… hey, James White is on the translating committee of some modern translations – that means financially he’s got a stake in attacking the ing James Only movement!

What about Virginia Mollenkot? What are her beliefs about Bible inerrancy, God, the inspiration and preservation of Scripture?

What about Cardinal Carlo Martini? The Jesuit? What agenda does he have?

What about some of these other names? Kurt Aland. Matthew Black, Bruce Metzger, Allen Wikgren? what do these people believe? What are their statements of faith? Should these people be deciding how to translate the Greek texts into English? Some words such as Uranos can mean heaven or sky. Do you want someone who does not believe in heaven translating your Bible?

Let me ask a question – and again, I understand that many of you have simply never been educated in the Bible issue.

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 1 Timothy 4:1 (KJV)

Okay, we all understand, agree, and are aware the Bible says that in the last times heretics will arise.

1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 2 Peter 2:1-3 (KJV)

Even the most trusting evangelical Christian begins to suspect this may not be a person in the congregation, but also pastors as well.

If Satan was going to weaken Christians and lead them astray, where’s the best places to get his tools? His wolves? In the pulpits.

And translating your Bibles

Are you aware that Kurt Aland, of the Nestle’-Aland Greek Texts, is a heretic? He does not even accept that the 66 books we have in our Bible belong there. And he’s open to other books being put in, and probably even some of ours being taken out. There’s quotes from Aland about that very subject. Read them.

And keep in mind, he’s the man responsible for the Greek texts used by the Bible societies.

Scared yet? You should be.

Because the truth is that all the modern texts come from codex sinaiticus – a Greek text that a known manuscript forger confessed to forging over 100 years ago… – and from a copy of Codex Vaticanus. Not the original, but a copy. Vaticanus is exhibited at the Vatican library, but if it looks like you’re reading it or translating it, it’s yanked away and placed back in the back rooms.

Neither of these books are complete. Sinaiticus has several apocryphal texts and pseudopigraphal texts in it. Does that mean we should be accepting these books as canon?

Sinaiticus is written in the wrong Greek, Attic Greek, not in Koine greek – this places it either in the wrong era (100 BC) or… as a clumsy forgery. And remember, Constantinus Simonides (a known Bible and manuscript forger) had already admitted to forging it early in his career. Even he admitted it was a clumsy forgery!

Here’s the issue. Vaticanus does not have some books. Sinaiticus does not have some books. They disagree with each other in tens of thousands of places.
If I were to translate the New Testament from these texts, I’d have years of heartache about it, trying to decide which of the texts are correct. Do I choose the verse that is missing half the words, or do I choose the one that has left out some words? One verse is missing in one text the name of God, the other is missing the name of Christ. Almost every reference to fasting is removed from one of the manuscripts.

And both of them disagree GREATLY with over 5200 other Greek Texts, that all the Christian churches had been using since the times of the Apostles.

Now, those 5200 agree. There’s some minor copying errors between them, and a few misspelled words – but aside from that, they all agree. You can go from one to the other of those 5,200 manuscripts and find that they all pretty much say exactly the same thing word for word.

So, which would you choose? The copy of Vaticanus and the possibly forged, incomplete Greek text that disagrees with Vaticanus in 10,000 places? Or the 5,200 other manuscripts?

You and I would find this one a no-brainer. Go with 2 flawed manuscripts, or go with the 5,200 ones that agree? I think we’d all turn to the really big pile. The work would actually go faster. You don’t have to decide which version to go with! You just simply read them, and when you come to a repeated word or a space that looks like a word was misspelled or left out, you consult another. You could do it with three or four manuscripts.

Or, you could use one of the manuscripts that’s already been compiled by men who’ve done just that! The compilation often bears the same name as the same family of texts, the Textus-Receptus.

But what do Nestle and Aland choose? Or Wescott and Hort? What did they ALL choose for the modern translations? Why, the forged manuscript and the copy provided by the Vatican.

Huh. The… very choice you’d expect men who deny the deity of Jesus Christ, the inspiration, preservation and canon of the Bible to make.

It’s the only conclusion I can come to. The protests of James White and John Ankerberg cannot sweep away that fact. They’re choosing texts that are flawed, incomplete, and possibly forged.

By an amazing coincidence, these Greek texts neglect almost every reference to fasting. They omit many references to the Blood of Jesus Christ. There’s a few Charismatics who follow this blog. They’d be shocked to find that out!

And many of the verses deliberately change many of the verses that affirm the deity of Christ. Would you trust the manuscripts that affirm many times that Jesus Christ is God, that ye must be born again, that Christ rose from the dead? Or do you want the ones that omit these references?

this is the King james only issue. This is the issue at hand. And Christians who love the Bible, once they become aware of it and begin looking up the translations of various verses, all become convinced of the issue. And they get fighting mad!

I’m furious we have allowed men like Bruce Metzger who denies openly the deity of Jesus Christ and calls Genesis “a fable” to translate our Bibles. We allow Unitarians to suggest wordings they can live with. After all , the thought of Hell makes Unitarians uncomfortable! If they deny the existence of Hell, and give it names like “tartarus” “gehenna” and “hades”, they can sleep a little easier at night.

Because they deny that Jesus Christ is God. And if you believe that, you are not saved. And if you’re not saved, where will you go when you die?

If you’d like, I can list verse after verse after verse that will scare you and will make you put away your other Bibles. And even get you to the point that you will start calling the Modern Bible Versions… well, you’ll start adding the prefix “per” to “version.”

I’m betting that if you can stay a follower of my often-too blunt blog for more than a week, you must be a committed Christian with a love for Christ and His Bible. And if that’s the case, you need to look into this issue. Because a lot is at stake.

Advertisements

7 Must Have Books by David Cloud


When assembling your Christian Library, there are certain books and authors one MUST own – and David Cloud’s name pops up a LOT on that list. I’ve assembled a quick and ready list you can use for birthdays, shopping lists and Christmas (There’s NOTHING wrong with celebrating Christmas!!!). I own all of these in eBook format, but for traditionalists he also sells these in Hardcover as well.

When starting a church plant, the church planter should consider buying these in bulk.

  1. Way Of Life Encyclopedia. I bought this to look things up with, and I…ended up READING it. Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopedias are often neglected items in your library, and trust me – if I only had ONE Bible dictionary or Encyclopedia to own, this is IT. It doesn’t just list words and definitions, but this also includes errors in peoples teachings, etc.
  2. Things Hard to Be Understood. I’m waiting impatiently for Vol. 2 – includes several often misinterpreted Bible passages.When you want to check yourself on difficult to understand Bible passages, this is the book to have. If this book had been around 20 years ago, NOBODY would have become involved in the Messianic Judaism/Hebrew Roots cult.
  3. The Effectual Bible Student. I think the eBook of this is FREE.Has much more info than the video series. Since it’s about Bible study, most people don’t own it, but you NEED this.
  4. The One Year Discipleship Course. Every Christian on earth needs this book. Just like the Three above it. After finishing it, I was embarrassed to find out it was intended for teenagers!
  5. Give Attendance To Doctrine. Want to know what the Bible teaches on any subject? Here’s a systematized book telling you what the Bible teaches, cross-referenced with every passage on it! You’ll end up reviewing this book constantly!
  6. The Four Gospels. An Advanced Bible Study book! Detailed, complete entries on many passages on the Gospels. Truly Indispensable for Bible study.
  7. The Bible Version Question and Answer Database. Whenever I get the urge to read any other translation besides the King James, I go right to this book. I’m not King James Only because of David Cloud – it was the result of my own study. But this book gives lots of information on the subject, and will easily convince others (and give you the tools to convince them!) to be King James Only!
Conclusion

There are many more books and materials I could recommend, but these in my opinions are must have items!

You know you’re reading too much David Cloud when…


Your shopping lists have 200 pages.

When a note on “pick up dry cleaning” has a warning against 1 Hour Martinizing.

And when your blog posts are as long as mine!

I’m seriously trying to shorten them, I promise!

Why does everyone hate Ray Comfort?


You know, something I don’t understand about most IFB. Most of them absolutely hate Ray Comfort. I disagree with part of what he says, and agree with the rest.

Ray Comfort maintains that if you do not bear the fruits of temperence, longsuffering, forbearing, etc. that you are not saved.

I mantain instead that if someone comes to the Lord, and their life changes, they begin to read and study their bible when they didn’t before, they begin to worry about if they’re pleasing the Lord or not, etc… that’s fruit of salvation.

The hallmarks that Ray Comfort associates with salvation are actually the hallmarks of Christian maturity. That’s his error.

But David Stewart (who must have a thousand IFB blogs and websites) just hates Ray Comfort, I haven’t asked him why, but I assume that because Stewart pushes Jack Hyles, Jack Hyles, Jack Hyles he’s 100% Hyles. And what Hyles believed about salvation was almost in complete agreement with Campus Crusade for Christ’s definition of salvation.

In that sense, Jack Hyles was wrong. Hyles believed there was only one sin, that of unbelief. And if you repeated Hyles’ prayer, you’d be saved. Well, if over a million people supposedly accepted the Lord under Jack Hyles, why was his church only a few thousand in attendance? If supposedly a million people accepted Hyles, his church should have been over a million people attending every Sunday. Even the Wednesday service.

In this, Ray Comfort is absolutely right. Someone who does the sinner’s prayer, and then has nothing to do with Chrisitanity, no evidence in his life that he’s saved… is not saved. Hyles may have gotten a million people to recite the sinner’s prayer, but unless those people had changed lives, avoided wordliness, read their Bibles, prayed… they’re still lost.

You CANNOT claim to have saved 10,000 and have a church of 400. If you preached to a thousand, had a thousand come forward, and attendance increased by two… how many got saved?

Answer- two.

We don’t like this. I don’t like this. How many have gotten saved reading my blog? Answer – zero. How many have I preached to? According to WordPress, thousands. I could probably fill the QEII with all the people who’ve read one page of my blog.

Ray Comfort is absolutely right in most of what he says. The rest of what he teaches is a form of Lordship Salvation, and we should disregard that.

Why do people hate Ray comfort? They don’t hate him for the LOrdship Salvation part, they hate him for the other part, the part he’s right about. Let’s think about that for a while.

Because unlike some of the other quick prayerism types, when Ray counts someone as saved, there’s no “Attend two weeks and gone forever”. THey’re there forever.

Walking The Tightrope


Being a fundamentalist today is like walking a tightrope. You’ve got to make it past Lordship Salvation without getting wrapped up in it.. You’ve got to make sure you’re a dispensationalist. You’ve got to avoid Ruckmanism/Pearlism/Hyles-ism/ Riplinger-ism. You’ve got to avoid THeological liberalism.

Every teaching tool you turn to, you’ve got to be careful. Many commentaries, dictionaries, encyclopedias, harmonies, teaching tools of all kinds, are written by theological liberals.

Logos is the most serious Bible study tool I’ve ever owned. But I’ve got to wade through interviews of people who’ve uncovered “Startling new discoveries on salvation” on the homepage – and what it boils down to is, it’s a heretic with a new book Logos is triyng to sell. Logos runs it by their resident scholars, who are theological liberals, and they see nothing wrong with it, because they don’t believe ether.

Accordance is written by a woman who’s devised a great study tool, but it’s clear from her blog entries on the Accordance web site that she too is caught up in THeological Liberalism.

Bound up in ALL of this is CS Lewis, JRR Tolkien, and Roman Catholicism, because all Christian denominations should be one and united, despite serious doctrinal error and the basic facts that most people who claim to be Christian are not saved.

We need to be TOGETHER, and UNITED! It would be RUDE to tell someone who believes in Salvation by works that they’re hellbound! Why, it might make them feel bad!

“What about the eternity in hellfire part?”

“That’s not my responsibility.”

It IS your responsibility. If you partner with some theological liberal and don’t bother to tell him he’s hellbound, what will you say to him at the Great White Throne judgment when he says, “Why didn’t you say something?” Yes, you’re going into heaven. But he’s going to Hell. I have ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT that the resident scholar at Logos is not going to be with me in Heaven, but will be screaming in torments forever, in the lake of fire. So much so, that when his materials are free giveaways by Logos, when his classes are avialable, I avoid them like the plague. The same goes for NT Wright, and this new guy that looks so grim when he talks about his new discoveries about salvation being works oriented. The same goes for David Stern, the mis-translator and author of the Jewish New Testament translation. And CS Lewis. Etc.

I can understand why many IFB just lock themselves away with their King James and plug their ears. I’ve been tempted to do that myself. But I’m learning HUGE amounts about the Bible.

THe single hardest thing for me is, staying away from other translations, to stay away from other denominations. Wow, it would be GREAT to stop fighting, to stop swimming against the current. But we’re in the middle of the great falling away, the great apostasy. To give in is to join up, to help establish the wordwide faith that will help the Antichrist move into power. And I don’t want my eternity in heaven to be tainted with the knowledge that because I gave up, because I stopped fighting, I helped establish the Antichrist.

WAAAY too many people are going to have their eternity tempered with that realization. Way too many.

Don’t you be one of them.

How to find a Biblical Church


How to find a Biblical church.

In today’s world, finding a Biblical church sooner or later is going to become a necessity. The church you’re in right now probably has plans to turn into something that’s not a church, if they haven’t already.

The first thing you should ALWAYS do is ask to see the statement of faith. If they don’t have one on the website, be worried. A statement of faith nowadays has to be incredibly long, not a short little three paragraph thing.

  • What’s their stand on the Bible? Any Bible? The Message? Do they believe the Bible was inerrant and Inspired ONLY in the original manuscripts, or do they believe the one in your hands is inerrant and inspired?
  • What’s their stand on Salvation? I ask this becase literally, the most popular and famous Christian writer today – N. T. Wright – is preaching heresy, and so many Christians are dazzled by his writings that they’re not stopping to say “wait a minute…” Does this church believe salvation is a free gift of God and not of works, in accord with Eph. 2:8-9? Don’t assume they believe a Biblical message of salvation. If their altar call doesn’t mention Repentance… worry about it.
  • Do they baptize by immersion? If they teach baptism is not for today, avoid that church. I mentioned Jason Cooley a couple of times on this blog until I realized that was his stance, and now I reccommend people avoid him. If they offer you a choice, or baptize infants, leave that church.
  • Does it feel like a house of God, or a rock concert? I strongly feel that churches should play doctrinally strong hymns and not rock music for the service. While there are strong arguments for and against Christian contemprary music, there’s one thing you cannot deny – once a church makes a move for including modern music in its service, the doctrinal positions soon change. That’s not even a 70% type of statistic from what I’ve seen, that’s a 100% statistic. That alnoe should make you nervous. find me one church with a drummer, a bass player, and guitar solos that preaches the wrath of God against sinners and a literal eternity in burning fire and torment for anyone who is not born again. You can’t play half the service of universalist man-centered music and then preach a God centered message – it won’t last that way for long.
  • Do they preach a literal eternity in a fiery Hell for any who are not saved?
  • Do they accept EVERYONE who names the name of Christ as saved, despite evidence to the contrary?
  • Are the Deacons saved? Big question.
  • Are the walls painted black in the sanctuary? Really. I’m not kidding. There are several churches in my town whose walls are painted black, so that the light show works better.
  • Do they preach the whole word of God?
  • Do they make their doctrines based upon emotions, feelings, and what’s pleasing to the flesh – or do they base their doctrinal stand upon the Bible? THat’s a strong question nowadays. Believe it or not, David Cloud’s latest book makes the charge that Southern Baptists respond institutionally more by emotions than the word of God – and I can’t refute that.
  • Do they join hands with those who take unBiblical doctrines, or do they advocate Biblical separation from those in error?
  • Do they preach a Biblical pre-tribulation rapture, or do they assume somehow that there won’t be a rapture, or that “The Church” must go through part of or all of the Rapture? This is a big issue. Like the contemporary music issue, it’s the tip of the iceberg that something is wrong.

Okay, now let’s examine the other side of the issue.

  • Does the congregation look like they’re afraid to raise their eyes to look at the pastor?
  • If you try talking to someone before the service, do they cast a fearful eye at the pastor first before answering you?
  • Do the congregation member’s eyes pass by you as if you don’t exist? I learned in seminary that “As the congregation is, so is the Pastor first.” If the congregation ignores you, so wil the pastor.
  • Do they kick the homeless and needy out of the church – or does the Deacon pull them aside and give them money so they can get some real food? Big issue for me. I saw the Deacon in my old church pull a homeless man who was begging during the service out of the sancutary – and then empty his wallet into the man’s hands. That deacon remains my hero, dsepite my leaving that church. By the way, that Deacon was a military retiree, on a fixed income.
  • Is there a constant theme of, “you’re not getting this kind of Biblical truth anywhere else!”
  • Does the church have pictures of Jack Hyles or Peter Ruckman prominantly displayed?

As we get farther and farther into the age of apostasy, it’s getting harder and harder to look for a Biblical church. So many churches are starting to remove denominational names from their church name (Baptist is not a denomination, but you know what I mean). And some are even removing the word “Church” from the name.

If they’re taking the word Church from the name… it’s a hint.

Being a Pastor 9 – The Sermon 2


Let me be blunt in one more point, and then I’m going to start showing how to build a sermon.

If the sermon is boring, it’s… not the sermon’s fault.

I gave instructions on how to preach. Listening to a dull speaker, you quickly get the feeling for how to keep people’s attention. Danny Castle is never boring. John MacArthur is sometimes boring. All of the associate pastors that work for MacArthur are deadly boring. I’m sure jokes are made about the sermon so boring, it killed fifteen people.

By the way, when I mention John MacArthur, it’s not an endorsement. Most of us have heard him preach, so I’m using something you’re familiar with. While I’ve listened to many of his sermons, he is a 4 point Calvinist, and that skews how he sees the Bible. I can’t recommend him for that reason.

Getting back on topic.

Adding TIME to a sermon does not guarantee interest. The thought is, “If I preach for an hour, I’m bound to say something interesting.”

I’ll say this – I love a good sermon. But I’ve felt the agony of a church goer who knows the sermon’s going to be an hour, and it’s DULL. AAAUGH!!!!

If you haven’t struck oil in 30 minutes, stop boring.

I pace a little while I preach. Nothing like Danny Castle. I vary my voice, tone, inflection, because I had an accounting teacher who our class actually complained about to the college and he droned in a soft voice… talking about accounting… and cash is a debit… so if we open a special ledger….zzzzzz…..

Sermons that do not challenge the congregation are essentially hot air.

So, I’ve made impossible demands upon many pastors. That’s okay, that’s in the job description, we’re kind of used to it.

Who can do everything I just spoke about? Marc Monte, myself (i hope – nobody’s told me if I’m boring or not!), Danny Castle, David Cloud… I’m still trying to compile a list. Vincent Sawyer’s not too bad, but he’s not very good at the tone, inflection, voice part of it.

Okay, so, let’s get started on how to choose a text to preach from. I’m going to tell you I’m a big believer in Expository preaching. The idea is that you’re going to preach from the Bible in sequence. I guarantee that way, I cover every topic addressed in Scripture. So, my recommendation is this – Start in Matthew, and preach until you hit Revelation.

“What about Sunday Nights?” Easy… Start in Genesis.

Method two is to assign a one-year Bible reading program, and choose a passage somewhere during the previous weeks’ passage to preach from.

Method three is Topical. You pick a topic and preach from it.

Method four is actually how it was done in the Jerusalem church. Judaism is Liturgical – they have weekly readings from the Torah and the Haftorah, the books of Moses and the prophets.

When Christianity first started, they took the same thing, and added the New Testament as a third part. You could have gone to a synagogue anywhere in the empire for the first twenty years of Christianity,  and not known it was Christian until you heard them read from the Gospels. And then one of the Apostles or a pastor they’d trained would get up and preach on that.

That kind of system is called by Christians a Lectionary. There are quite a few Lectionaries available. There isn’t one for Baptists – we don’t do that, and actually, it may be wrong we’re not! – but if you’re one of those people that insists on being like “The Early Church”, here was how it was done in Jerusalem.

Most people are familiar with topical preaching. With absolutely no apologies to false teacher Andy Stanley, topical preaching is a relatively new thing, and was looked upon with a great deal of suspicion at first. The old method was to find a text and twist it out of all recognition as you spiritualize merrily away.

Topical preaching involves taking a topic – like Adultery – and preaching on it. I don’t know why ANYONE has a hard time finding a topic to preach on, at all , through the year. Seriously. Orville Nave and R. A. Torrey took care of that for us. Get their topical Bibles, turn to “A”, and there you go. They even give you texts to look up! Compare them to each other, and look in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge for more.

Since the other methods are essentially Expository, let’s talk about one concept that will make this a lot easier… the unit of thought. The word for it is a Pericope (per-ih-ko-pea). If you hear someone talk about THE Pericope, they’re referring to John 7:53-8:12. But if it’s A pericope, they’re talking about every unit of thought in the Bible.

Some Pericope’s actually are so long, you’ll have to find a point where you can split it. Otherwise you’re preaching Hebrews for, well, most of the book. And Romans. You just may make it through the New Testament before the Congregation fires you for the 3 1/2 hour sermons.

So, I’ve solved one of the major dilemmas that haunt Pastors – “What am I preaching on Sunday?” Really, that shouldn’t be a question. And one question that haunts the Pastor is, “I’m stuck between this text and that, and I don’t know which…” And you end up working on BOTH texts.

Choose your system I’ve settled for doing New Testament Sunday mornings, Old Testament Sunday Evenings, and topical on Wednesday nights. Decide for yourself, and DON’T DEVIATE.