Unshakeable Trailer

Unshakeable Trailer

Check out the new fortune teller gospel tract!

You can download this for free at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/48875353/fortune-gospel.zip

Friday, August 29, 2014

A True Christian at College!

Today as I went to Crafton Hills college to share the gospel with some of the students, I met a man named Aldo who is a true Christian. It's been such a long time since I met a true convert on the campus. He is 18 years old. My mom first talked to Aldo, and told me that he's been saved for about two years now. But the way he got saved is an amazing testimony. After being involved in the Roman Catholic church with the rest of his family, he started to read the Bible for himself and discovered that the Catholic church was wrong - heretically wrong.


So, I decided to meet and talk with him. He told me that he was encouraged by what we were doing there (i.e. sharing the gospel with strangers). He also told me that he is going through cancer, although he doesn't feel any pain yet (praise God!), and is still going to the Catholic church. Why? Because he lives with his family, and they want him to be a Catholic so bad and to reject Biblical Christianity. He doesn't go to a Christian church because he is afraid that his family will be upset at him. He has, although, shared the truth of the gospel to them. So I encouraged him to be salt and light to his family by going by himself to a Christian church. I told him of how the apostles died, and how many Christians around the world are now dying for their faith. I told him that if he goes to another church, his family would be upset, but they sure wouldn't murder him for his faith.

He then asked me what was the difference between the Catholic Bible (i.e. The New American Bible), and the modern Bibles. He didn't seem to notice a difference (because there isn't much difference between the Catholic Bibles and the modern ones). I then told him that I was a KJV-Onlyist, and he said he would look into that a little more. So I gave him my KJV-Only website (i.e. www.KJVOnly.us) My mom and I also gave him some great websites to help him grow as a Christian (e.g. www.Refnet.fm). As I talked with him, he told me that he regularly visits www.Jesus-Is-Savior.com, which is a horrible website. I told him the heresies of the author of it, and he agreed with me that he shouldn't visit that website anymore.

Please pray for Aldo, that God would give him the courage to leave the Catholic church for the true church. Please also pray for his cancer to go away, and for him to grow more into the image of Jesus Christ. Also pray for him to have the courage to share the gospel with strangers. (And for my KJV-Only friends, please pray that he would become a KJV-Onlyist. ;-) ).

Monday, July 21, 2014

A Biblical Solution to the Border Crisis

As our current border crisis continues, I have been disturbed by various Christians and republicans. There are those who dehumanize these illegal immigrants by calling them various names. Another way they do this is by claiming that they are simply going to become democrats and are bringing deadly diseases to us. In this way, many are treating these children as if they were sub-human rats. This kind of attitude is contrary to Genesis 1:27, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Since these children, who happen to be illegal immigrants, are made in the image of God, we should value them the same as any healthy, American republican. I didn’t say that we should therefore let them in. All I said is that Biblically, these children are the same as us.

Some of the immigrants.

Romans 14:1 says, “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.” The Bible teaches that we are to obey the law of the land, unless it directly contradicts the law of God, for we are told, “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” Sending back illegal immigrants to their countries (btw, it’s not just Mexico.) does not break the law of God, and keeping them here doesn’t violate it either. Right now, there is a heated debate in Washington of what we should do with these illegal immigrants. After the debate has ended, and the law for immigration is set, we should strive to obey that law - whether it sends the children back or not.

At first this seems as a simple solution - to obey the coming law of the land regarding immigration. But we must consider from what environment those children must have had to have fled it. Many of these children are fleeing from gangsters, from becoming sex slaves, etc. In short, their countries are morally and spiritually dark. These tragedies should move us as Christians to do something more.

So what is the Biblical solution to the tragedies of other nations? It is to go out to those countries and make a difference. In Mark 16:15, Jesus commands us to “...Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” The only solution to the tragedies of other nations is the gospel. Think about it. If most gangsters there became saved, there wouldn’t be a significant terror. If most who are involved in making young girls into sex slaves became saved, there wouldn’t be a significant sex slave business as there is now in those countries. But even if those evils remain, souls would be saved and God would be glorified. Also, we should seek to preach the gospel to these children. The only solution is the gospel.

In conclusion, the Biblical response would be to both obey the coming law and to go to their countries and proclaim the gospel in those foreign countries. Thus, we would be following the law of the land, and the command of Mark 16:15, and we may even improve the lives of those who live there. For those of us who cannot go to those other countries to preach the gospel, we should pray for others to go out there and share the good news of Christ. We shouldn’t dehumanize these children, but should pray for their salvation. If you disagree with this solution, at least do so on Biblical ground. Not political ground, not right-wing ground, not founding-fathers gound, but on Biblical ground.

Saturday, June 14, 2014

New Evolution Poster!

I just made a printable human evolution chart starting with Lucy all the way up to modern man. The only difference between my chart and the evolutionists' charts is that important critical information on these missing links are included. So print these out for when you run into the evolutionist who claims that we came from an ape-like creature. Enjoy!

Note: Adapted from Chick Publications.

Thursday, June 5, 2014

Crickets: Evolution in Action?

Crickets: Evolution in Action?

Ten years ago, crickets on two of the islands of Hawaii began to stop chirping, and recently, scientists believe that they have discovered why. The crickets have undergone a mutation that has altered their wings to prevent chirping. The reason being that a parasitic fly threatened the chirping crickets. The crickets that don't chirp don't get killed by this fly, since the fly can't find them.

Evolutionists claim that this is evolution in action. But this mutation on their wings was actually a loss of genetic information - they don't have the ability to chirp anymore. This is the opposite of evolution. Also, this is only evidence for micro-evolution (variation within a kind), since the cricket is still a cricket and not another kind of creature. And since the mutation removed genetic information, adding millions of years to this process won't ever produce macro-evolution (one kind of animal changing into another kind of animal).

This isn't evolution in action, but one of the many examples of micro-evolution. There is yet to be scientific evidence for macro-evolution.

This scientific discovery actually confirms the Bible's account of creation, "And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so." ~ Genesis 1:24. Every animal and insect brings forth according to their kinds. Dogs will always produce dogs, cats will always produce cats, and in this case, crickets will always produce crickets.

Source: Nathan Bailey

Brought to you by "Evolution Is Pseudo-Science". See the original article here: on.fb.me/1tLixMt.

New Facebook Page!

Just recently, I created a new Facebook page called, "Evolution Is Pseudo-Science". It will discuss the scientific debate of creation/evolution, it will show the scientific evidence against evolution and for creation, and it will equip you to answer atheist objections to the Bible. Please "Like" it here: http://www.facebook.com/EvolutionIsPseudoScience.

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

Creationism Beats Evolution...or does it?

In a recent Gallop Poll (www.gallup.com/poll/170822/believe-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx), 50% of Americans believe in evolution, 42% believe in creation, and the other 8% don't care or don't know. That means that 1 in 2 people you run into believe that evolution is scientific. Sadly most of the 50% believe that God guided evolution. Creationists need to rise up and show why evolution is pseudo-science (false science), and why it doesn't fit with the Bible.

Here is the biggest reason why evolution and the Bible are not compatible: The Bible (specifically Genesis 1) has God creating everything in six, normal 24-hour days. The rest of the Bible's genealogical records from Adam to today add up to about 6,000 years. The Bible teaches that the universe is only 6,000 years old, yet evolution teaches the universe is billions of years old. They are polar opposites.

As for the scientific evidence for creation, there is one evidence that prevails above all: the human population level is too small if humans have been around for millions of years. In fact, ancient population records show that man appeared only 4400 years ago. That's about the time of the global flood of Noah.

Saturday, May 24, 2014

Why Peter Never Preached Baptismal Regeneration

Many heretics claim that Peter taught baptismal regeneration (that a sinner is saved by water baptism). There are two examples where it seems as if this is the case. The first is Acts 2:38:

““Repent,” Peter said to them, “and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (HCSB).

There is a very simple explanation for this verse. Notice, in Peter’s message, after the word “Repent,” there is the word “and”. This word could either mean the kind of “and” that connects two phrases, or the kind of “and” that means “and THEN”. You can see this clearly in the both the KJV and the original Greek, where “and” is used to mean “and THEN” in the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1. Baptismal regenerationists wrongly assume that the former definition is true. Since we are saved by grace, and not by works (see Ephesians 2:8-9), and since baptism is a work, the only possible solution is that the word “and” means “and THEN”. Peter is telling the Jews to repent, and THEN after they repented, after they became saved and justified in Christ, to THEN“be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,. Also, the word “for” can mean “in order to gain” or “because of” (e.g. “I need to take an aspirin FOR my headache.” It doesn’t mean you take an aspirin to gain a headache, but because of your headache). In effect, Peter is telling them to repent, THEN after they repented and became saved, to be baptized BECAUSE their sins have already been forgiven. Peter isn’t teaching baptismal regeneration.

The second example heretics use is 1 Peter 3:21:

“Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God) through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” (HCSB).

There is also a very simple explanation for this verse. The key is the parenthesis. The content in the parenthesis in the verse explains the “saves you” part. The content says, “not the removal of the filth of the flesh”. The filth of the flesh is the sin that has stained us. The removal of the filth of the flesh is the removal of the stain of sin. In other words, it’s salvation, it’s justification, it’s the forgiveness of sin. It’s salvation. Peter is saying that baptism saves you, and then makes it clear that he doesn’t mean salvation as we think of it as a forgiveness of sin, but a different salvation, which is “the pledge of a good conscience toward God”. Peter isn’t teaching baptismal regeneration. I actually think this verse is excellent in showing that Peter is saying in effect that baptism doesn’t save you!

In conclusion, Peter never taught salvation by works, but salvation by grace alone in Christ alone.

Friday, May 9, 2014

A Review of "Moms' Night Out"

Moms' Night Out

Ally with her friends.
I just came back home from a local movie theater that was playing the new film, "Moms' Night Out." While this film had plenty of good comedy, I fear that the unbiblical messages sent from this film swallows any laughter that may come from watching it.

Ally's Stress Justified

The film starts off with Allyson ("Ally" for short), the main character of the movie. She is a complete clean-freak who is filled with extreme stress, because of her responsibility as a mother to three chaotic children. When she brings her stress to her husband's attention, he justifies it. This is unbiblical, as stress is a sin according to the Bible. Matthew 6:25 has Jesus saying, "This is why I tell you: Don’t worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Isn’t life more than food and the body more than clothing?" Since, "sin is the breaking of law" (1 John 3:4), and since one of Jesus' command (or law) is to not worry, worry by definition constitutes as a sin. It may be normal (because of our sin nature), but it is not right. Stress and worry are sins against God, and should never be justified like Ally's husband did. He should have done his duty as a husband by bringing her to Matthew 6:33, "But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided for you." He should have told her to seek God's kingdom, that is to seek salvation in Him. Since Ally is allegedly a Christian, her husband should have told her to remember the salvation that has been brought to her in Jesus Christ. The cross is the remedy for stress. Matthew 19:6 says, "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, man must not separate." The Bible teaches that marriage is to be lifelong, while parenting a child takes only about 18 years. This shows that marriage is more important than parenting. Ally's husband should have taken her out on a date to help take her mind off of her stress, since marriage is an extremely important union. Instead, he sent her away to go with her friends.

Leaving Responsibility For Fun

Afterwards, she gets the idea to have a "moms' night out" with two of her friends to ease off her stress. Again, what should ease off her stress should be the cross of Calvary, and the remembrance of how God crushed His own Son to satisfy His wrath on her (see Isaiah 53:10). This night out includes dressing up and "having fun." But 1 Peter 3:3-4 says, "Your beauty should not consist of outward things like elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold ornaments or fine clothes. Instead, it should consist of what is inside the heart with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very valuable in God’s eyes." Ironically, Ally had an "elaborate hairstyle", wore "ornaments" and "fine clothes", the very thing God commands against. She should be at home where she belongs with no encouragement to leave, or at least on a date with her husband. As she speaks about this night out to her husband, he encourages her to do so in order to "put on her oxygen mask." In the middle of her night out, she justifies her sinful actions of stress and avoiding her responsibility at home by saying that the Bible says to "listen to your husband." Her husband shouldn't have encouraged this behavior in the first place. Ally practiced extreme selfishness. Even at the end of the film, this behavior was never addressed at all. Also, before she went out, she complained of how she wants to look "beautiful" by wearing sparkly high heels.

Men Acting Like Boys

In the film, Ally makes it known that her husband is obsessed with video games. He is supposed to be the leader of the house, but instead he is the boy of the house.

Worldly Music

During the film, Ally and one of her friends dances to worldly carnal music in her car. This is contrary to the Biblical command in 1 John 2:15, "Do not love the world or the things that belong to the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in him."

The Heresy Of The Carnal Christian

After a while, a biker named "Bones" shares with Ally of how he used to go to church as a child, but "drifted away from the faith". Ally never corrected him. The Bible makes it clear that Christians live like Christians, and bear good fruit. Those who "drift away from the faith" prove themselves to never be in the faith (see 1 John 2:19). This error is subtle, but deadly, as it promotes the heresy of the "carnal Christian".


During the film, I noticed that they used God's name in vain three times. Two were, "Oh my G-D!" Another was "Christ!". This is dishonoring to God, and is a sin (see Exodus 20:7).

Invitation Without The Gospel

At the end of the film, a Pastor of Ally's local church (Alex Kendrick) invites a man who works for a Tattoo shop to come to his church where he would (hopefully) hear the gospel. It should be the other way around. He should have shared the gospel with that man, and then invite him to church.


In conclusion, while this film is funny, the errors in this film are deadly. It promotes stress as normal for the Christian, it promotes the so-called doctrine of the carnal Christian, it promotes men who act like boys as acceptable, it gives no gospel where it could have been shared, it blasphemes God's name, it promotes worldliness instead of godliness, and it lacks the gospel or looking to the cross. Todd Friel once said, "We are the people of the cross." The focus of this movie should have been the cross of Calvary, not the comedy. Comedy is fine, but if it is the main point of the film, something is radically wrong. Are you ready to give up the Bible and submit to error just to have a good laugh? I pray not.

Tuesday, May 6, 2014

Is AHA teaching heresy? | #AHA

Just recently, GospelSpam shared this post on their Facebook page. I shall deconstruct this post one bit at a time.

"The following photo was shared by AHA on their facebook page.


This is true. But all this picture says is that every Christian should become an abolitionist.

"The AHA false teaching as described in Part 2 of 3 of the recent Gospel Spam AHA series is clearly not limited to the founding AHA members, but is manifest in other societies."

Parts 2 and 3 have already been refuted here and here.

"The implication of the following scheme, like the implications found in Russell Hunter’s Wake Up Church! video, is that every Christian is called to be an abolitionist in a manner that meets AHA’s expectations..."

True. But AHA's expectations is to help fight abortion. It can be in small ways (like using their drop cards), or in large ways (like standing in front of an abortion clinic). This picture is not requiring everyone to stand in front of an abortion clinic.

"...and unless one is an abolitionist, their faith is dead."

No abolitionist has ever claimed that you must be an abolitionist to keep your faith alive, or to prove you are a Christian. Rather, they have said the opposite. This picture, in its proper context of abolitionism (which doesn't claim you must be an abolitionist to be a Christian), doesn't claim that unless one is an abolitionist, their faith is dead.

"Or to work the scheme backwards: “become an abolitionist because faith without works is dead because abolitionism is every Christian’s calling.”"

Loving your neighbor IS every Christian's calling.

"The charges of backdoor Galatian heresy are valid."

AHA is not teaching heresy.

GospelSpam keeps trying to find a way to reject AHA with strawman arguments.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

History of BAMH's attacks on AHA | #BAMH #AHA

By T. Russell Hunter
  1. It began with opposition to our symbol.
  2. Next there was opposition to the fact that we sold gear.
  3. Then we were opposed on the grounds that there was a rumor that we all opposed all street preaching.
  4. Then it was our name. They didn't like the word Abolitionist.
  5. Then it was our connections in history to past Abolitionists. They claimed that there were some abolitionists in the past who were not 5 point Calvinists or members of Presbyterian Churches and that "ALL" past abolitionists were pagans and unitarians.
  6. Then it was an opposition to the setting up of local societies that had members from multiple local churches working together. That's not allowed in the Body of Christ!
  7. Then it was an opposition to the church repent project as it was being planned. Even though we were inviting older experiences men down to Norman to counsel us in the creation, formation, and application of the project!
  8. Next it was opposition to AHA leadership because they had been opposed by some churches and pastors in the past (Incidentally, church leaders who thought AHA was wrong to call abortion murder, believed that compromising with abortion was the only way to maybe-eventually-gradually-abolish-it-but-probably-not-before the rapture, and believed that birth-control and IVF were in and of themselves Christian, and that supporting the rape exception was one and the same with using abortion to save the life of a mother.)
  9. After this it was opposition to church exhortation in general and a defense of LifeChurch.TV as a body of believers that we had no right to exhort in the first place (LifeChurch.TV is the only evangelical pro-life church that "AHA" has ever exhorted with signs, pamphlets, etc).
  10. Then it was opposition to AHA as a whole because some AHA leaders where members of church plants, house churches, and organic churches while other leaders had the full support of their elders. All of AHA was bad because like earlier abolitionists of slavery, abolitionists today were not members of the large presbyteries that had turned an apathetic eye towards child sacrifice or treated like a special ministry for some or political issue better left to those working in the second kingdom (politics).
  11. After that it was opposition on the grounds that AHA spent too much time exhorting professing believers to keep the commands of Christ and love their neighbors as themselves. Preaching such things was said to mere moralism and proof that AHA didn't preach the gospel at all but actually perpetuated a false gospel.
  12. After that, AHA had to be opposed for their audacious claim that professing Christians had not really failed to be pro life (vote Prolife, support CPCs, express a moral opinion against abortion from the pulpit, etc) but had failed to do all that they ought to do in regard to the decimation of the image of God and destruction of their unborn neighbors. All we asked the professing church to do was to examine themselves and repent of abortion apathy. The opposition said that this was heresy because we had elevated the keeping the commands of Christ above just being in the elect. 
  13. We are now being opposed because we do not give religious tests to everyone and anyone who adopts the ideology of abolition and wants to work with others seeking to figure out what it means to be consistently Christian in a culture that practices child sacrifice. Our opposition has decided that the best way to attack and undermine AHA as a whole is to scour the ranks of anyone associated with AHA in any way and grab a hold of their theological views and use them to label the whole movement as heretical. But get this, our opposition is grabbing a Wesleyan here and there or finding a non-cessationist here and there, or uncovering open theist who like what abolitionism stands for and does in time as it unfolds before our watching sovereign God (dumb as that is) and using these people to paint all of abolitionism as a whole as though we were full blown pelagic universalist, process theologians. 
  14. Now we are being opposed because it is wrong to claim that all disciples of Christ can and should be doing something to stand up for justice and mercy in this present evil age. Opposing abortion is just for some people. Incidentally, the only people who are really allowed to oppose abortion are those who have been working tirelessly to oppose AHA.
PS: When we respond to all of this opposition by stating the truth or exposing the lies and misunderstanding these lines of opposition are built up, we are then opposed for defending ourselves. Well… we aren't defending ourselves so much as we are doing what we always do: EXPOSING UNFRUITFUL WORKS OF DARKNESS.