Questions and Answers from Pastor John - Free pentecostal literature, baptism of the holy Ghost (with the evidence of speaking in other tongues), the new birth experience, ....

"Questions and Answers - Page 9 "
Today's Date is:

February 7, 2005

Hey Pastor John,

I have heard people talking about a TV show called "The Medium". It is based on a true story. They basically put this woman's life into a TV show. Well...she would actually help police solve violent crimes. I have been thinking a lot about this. I wanted to see if what I thought was at all correct.

A medium by definition is someone who communicates with spirits...basically a psychic. I know they are evil. But they are doing "good" by solving crimes. So would this mean they are just using the "good" of it as an illusion to lure people into believing in that spirit vs putting your trust in God to bring justice to the situation? So it is a crafty way of deceiving? What do you think?

Stephanie

Hi Stephanie:

There are a couple of issues here. First, all "mediums" who are in contact with an unseen being are in contact with a demon. Even those mediums who contact invisible spirits and say that they are in contact with deceased relatives of people are actually speaking with demons, not anyone's dead relatives. Dead humans "know nothing at all" about what is going on in this life, according to Solomon in Ecclesiastes. They contact no one and do not know what happens on earth after they die.

Secondly, it is not surprising at all that some of these demons would help solve crimes. Remember, demons are the fallen spirits who have seen God and were cast out of the kingdom of God, with Lucifer, when Jesus ascended and cleansed heaven to make it a fit place for him to minister. "The devil and his angels" prefer order to disorder. They have, after all, seen the order and beauty of the kingdom of God. That is part of what the devil envied. He didn't despise the order of God's kingdom; rather, he wanted a part of its glory. The devil is a "law and order" guy who unswervingly supports law enforcement. Gangs of unruly young men and women are not being directed by him; they are young people who are out of anyone's control, including Satan's. Murderers, rapists, thieves, terrorists, and the like, are failures, useless to God, the devil, and to men. Satan wouldn't have them. Jesus will take them in if they repent, but the devil despises them. They are a disgrace to themselves and to all men, and they will find mercy nowhere but in Jesus. Satan's successes are the men and women who look and sound good, and who speak to the world on behalf of Jesus Christ but have not been anointed by God to do so. They are Satan's joy. They are instruments of deception, though they may be respected in the community and honored.

Praise and honor from others. That is what Satan wanted in heaven, and that is what he wants on earth. He is wise enough to understand that society's outcasts can't deliver those things to him. Only those whom men admire can bring to him what he truly desires: the glory that belongs to no one but God. In our time, "mediums" are still on the fringes of respectable society, but that is changing as time passes and the perverseness of this generation worsens. Prepare your heart for the "lying wonders" that Jesus said we would see the wicked one perform as the time of the end draws nearer.

Pastor John

A response to the above email written on February 12, 2005...

Pastor John,

After reading your reply to Stephanie about mediums, I have questions about 1Samuel 28. I had always thought Samuel appeared to Saul when Saul had the woman with a familiar spirit bring him up from the dead. I noticed when I read this today that Saul asked the woman what Samuel looked like ("What form is he of?"), and Saul perceived that it was Samuel. The word "perceived" means to take in mentally or to become aware of through the senses. From this, I'm gathering that Saul didn't see anything, he only heard a voice. Whose voice was it, a demon or Samuel's?

Randell

Hi Randell:

The Lord actually allowed that witch to bring Samuel up from Hades to rebuke King Saul and pronounce his punishment from God. I don't think Saul was allowed to see the old prophet, but when the witch described him, he knew who she was seeing.

So, yes, mediums are speaking with demons when they think they are speaking with a client's departed loved one, but in this case in the Bible, it was the real thing.

Pastor John

January 31, 2005

Pastor John,

Christian T.V. evangelists are spreading their beliefs throughout the world. How are we who have come out of Xty do the same?

Dear SH:

We don't, unless Jesus sends us. And if we try to do it without being sent, what we will be doing is what most Christian TV evangelists are doing: spreading more Christianity.

jdc

January 23, 2005

Dear Pastor John,

Happy New Year. I would like to know if you think it is alright for born again believers to watch T.V. evangelists?

That is why we need the holy Ghost, SH, to let us know what to watch and what not to watch.

Pastor John

January 9, 2005

Christmas Time, 2004

Hey Pastor John,

Honestly, the relationship between my sister and me is stressed. There is unspoken tension between us, which stems from our beliefs. Whenever Jesus comes up, he is discussed briefly, which should not be. I want to share so many experiences with her, but I can't because I know she won't understand. When I do tell her something I get the same feeling as when I try to tell my mother a testimony. It robs my joy. So I try not to talk to her about Jesus at all. It hurts.

I know it hurts, and that is part of what "bearing your cross" means. That pain is also part of your "being crucified with Christ". It is also part of what is meant by the phrase "bearing the burden of the Lord" for his people. So, you may be both humbled by and thankful for that pain because in reality, it is not your hurt; it is Christ's, and he is letting you feel it. If you were still in sin, you would know nothing about it.

Terri, there are times when the Spirit tells us just to be quiet, but if the Spirit is telling to you speak, but you do not because you dread the reaction, you are failing to do the will of God. Don't allow a dread of people's reaction determine what you do. You must be led by the Spirit. I have seen people fail to do what is right because of dread of people's reaction many times, and have probably done my share of it myself. We have to get past that if we are ever to be happy in Jesus.

After leaving her house the day we [a portion of Terri's email is deleted here], I was so angry. I was just disturbed. This is the first time I have felt real anger for Christianity. I understood the harm it does to the children of God, but I am experiencing what I knew to be true . . . if that makes any sense.

Of course it does. It's the only thing that does make any sense.

It's like I knew how sad it was, but it didn't touch my heart like it is now. It is just frustrating and sad.

Multiply your experience by a billion or two, and think of what God sees all the time, and how He feels.

Anyways...I do have a question...that I was thinking about emailing you yesterday but never got around to. If you see a brother or sister in the Lord doing something wrong...as in a lifestyle choice....but they think there is no problem with it...should one mention it?

Terri

Absolutely yes. In the Old Testament, God commanded His people to watch out for each other and to reprove one another if they saw a brother or sisters wandering off the right path. In Leviticus, right before the famous verse that Jesus quoted ("love your neighbor as yourself") is this: "You shall not bear hatred for your brother in your heart. Though you may have to reprove your fellow man, do not incur sin because of him" (New American Bible-for Catholics). That translation is not as forceful as are some others, but we can glean from it that speaking up to warn a brother is the will of God. Paul also exhorted the saints to speak up against sin when he told them to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" (Eph. 5:11). And when Paul saw the need, he repeatedly proved himself, that he was able to do that to, and for, God's children. And, of course, Jesus provokes us to prepare ourselves to do the will of God in the face of unkind reactions from those who reject the light, when he told his earthly brothers, "The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it, that its works are evil" (Jn. 7:7 PJV)

So, yes. Mention it . . . and hold on to your love and faith!

Pastor John

January 3, 2005

Hey Pastor John.

I was wondering, what does the word humble mean?? What are some example's of being humble? Also, what does it mean, when it says in the bible that Jesus was meek and lowly?? Thanks.

Margo

Hello Margo.

In the kingdom of God, humility is demonstrated by doing the will of God instead of doing your own will. Jesus was "meek and lowly" toward men when he lived on earth because that was the will of God for him at that time. However, when Jesus returns, the will of God for him will not be to "turn the other cheek" as he did then; instead, it will be to slay many hundreds of thousands of the beast's army and to rule "with a rod of iron" over the nations of the earth. And Jesus will do exactly that because he is humble and always chooses to do the will of the Father instead of his own will.

Jesus' going to the cross is an example of humility. Paul's testifying in Caesar's palace is an example of humility. Noah's building the ark is an example of humility. The prophet Samuel, doing the will of God, cut wicked Agag into pieces because Samuel was humble before the Lord. Are we humble enough to do the will of God instead of our own will? You can tell who is humble as long as you can tell who is doing the will of God. The proud consider their own ways to be better than the way of the Spirit. The humble understand that what God says is more important than what any man or woman thinks or desires.

Pastor John

January 1, 2005

Pastor John

I have two questions I would like to ask you.

1: How do you know when your ready for marriage? and

2: How do you know that you have met the right person?

The reason I ask this is because I have been thinking about marriage. Could you please help me out on this one, if you can?

Dear TM:

I will do the best I can.

It is of primary importance that you marry "only in the Lord". Paul said that everyone in Christ is free to marry whomever he chooses, "but only in the Lord". So, the first thing you must consider is this: Is the person born again whom you would like to marry?

One of the basic ways that you can know that you have made yourself ready for the responsibilities of marriage is, can you take care of a wife and family financially? Do you have a way of providing for yourself and any children that may follow?

Another basic issue is compatibility. The difference between male and female is so great that every other difference between you that is more than that compounds the problems that you will face. Paul warned the saints that if they married, they would certainly have "trouble in the flesh". So, even under the best of circumstances, there are problems that the institution of marriage forces husbands and wives to deal with. They are not insurmountable problems, but they are real. If both partners in a marriage love Jesus and obey him, any potential problem can be overcome, and will be; still, the problems will arise. You can count on that. And you can count on Jesus, too, to help you overcome every problem and be happy together. So, ask yourself these questions: Are you and your potential spouse compatible in other ways, such as sharing the same level of commitment to Jesus, being of roughly the same age, being of the same race, having similar social backgrounds, and having similar educational levels, etc.? Every difference between you and your spouse that is beyond the male/female difference will add to the "troubles in the flesh" that you will have as married people. And just as with every earthly difference comes more problems, so with every similarity comes more harmony.

Still, don't forget Jesus. He will help you overcome everything that stands in the way of your happiness if you trust and obey him.

Another important issue is emotional maturity. Are you mature enough to not to be embarrassed by humbling yourself to be gentle and kind to your mate? Righteousness includes gentleness. The fruit of the Spirit are essential for a happy home. There has never been a happy home anywhere on earth without somebody living the way the Creator has told us to live. Even if they don't even believe in the true God, the people with some peace in their homes have that peace because they have treated each other the way God wants people to treat each other.

It is impossible to supply in an email all the answers to your very good questions, but the things I have described above are some of the things that will help you to determine whether or not you are ready for the very weighty responsibilities of marriage.

Pastor John

December 20, 2004

Hey John,

I have a question. I was thinking about the word "cross" on the way home. In Gary's song, I heard him say something about Jesus dying on the cross, and every were I looked in the hills on top of mountains and on buildings, I saw crosses everywhere. I got to thinking, what is the Greek word for cross? and if that is what its meaning is, like a "T". I looked it up in the String's Concordance, and this is what it said: "a stake or post (as set upright), that is, (specifically) a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively exposure to death, that is, self denial; by implication the atonement of Christ"

John was a cross originally just a stake or pole, and the Roman church made it the cross, as like a "T"? I hope this makes sense.

Thanks

Stuart

Hi Stuart:

I can find no reason to think that the Roman "cross" wasn't actually a cross as we know it, and that it was that way a long time before Christianity arose and twisted so many things out of shape. Nailing a condemned man's two hands to a cross indicates to me that the cross was in a figure "T" shape, but I will keep my eyes open for any contrary information.

jdc

December 17, 2004

Hey Pastor John,

I have been listening to Revelation tape series and I have a couple questions. Alright...when we die we are either sent to heaven or hell...so isn't this a judgement in itself? Won't we know then whether or not we are saved at this point.

Yes, it does seems as if we would.

Can you clarify what takes place when we die and the white throne judgment. It is confusing to me. Can you explain how all of this fits together.

The judgment in which Jesus sits upon a white throne comes after the second resurrection (Rev. 20). Everyone's final, eternal judgment is pronounced, both upon the wicked, who all have been raised from the dead, and (apparently) upon the righteous, since the Book of Life is also opened before the Lord at that time (Rev. 20:12).

After death, the righteous enter into the presence of the Lord. Paul said that plainly. But it cannot be in a body because the natural one has decayed and the spiritual one has not yet been given. It must be in a something like dream. Such people are aware of their surroundings, and it seems as if one has a body (as in a dream), but they have no body because they are not yet raised from the dead. Wherever we go, it is a pleasant place.

My second question is regarding judgment of the angels. You mentioned that we will judge them, but I don't understand this.

Paul told the Corinthian saints that God's people would judge both the world and angels. I think this refers to our reigning over the new earth and the angels that have been faithful to God and did not follow Lucifer. The sons of God will be given a position of power and authority througout eternity that is much higher than an angel. They are even now our servants (Heb. 1). Reigning over the world also refers to reigning over THIS world for a thousand years with Jesus when he returns. Agfter that, both this present heaven and this earth are forever destroyed (Rev. 21), and we reign with Christ on the new one.

I also wanted to mention that I learned many important truths while listening to the tapes. I was surprised to learn that the letters to the congregations were sent to Pastors not congregations. I was taught that each congregation represented a different type of person and that we each fit into one category. AND! I learned that our mansions are our glorified bodies! Not actual houses! :) Yeaaa! It was definitely wonderful to hear those truths! :) Alright, talk to you soon.

Stephanie

Dear Stephanie:

There have been several theories offered by Christian teachers concerning what the "seven churches" represent. As usual, none of the Christian theories prove to be true. The truth is, first of all, that there never were seven "churches". As we have recently discovered, the Greek word rendered "church" by Christian translators should have been translated "congregation" all along. (Prasie God for showing us that!) Secondly, those congregations of saints in Revelation 2 and 3 represent nothing. They were real people with real problems and real blessings. I am glad you learned that. The messages Jesus sent take on an entirely different meaning when we read them not as "messages to the congregations" but as messages to the individual pastors of those congregations. You can read more about this in tract #49: Jesus' Messages to the Seven Pastors". When you read it, ignore that word "church" that infects it. I haven't cleaned that one up yet.

Keep up the work of learning about who you now are in Christ. It will pay off as you continue to live on this sin-plagued planet.

jdc

December 14, 2004

Hey Pastor John,

I had a question about the following part of your email correspondence with Christof:

He asked, "There are people who claim that the Holy Ghost baptizm (of the 20th/21st c.) is in fact just another form of demon possession. I don't agree with them. But could it be possible that at least some of the people who say that they're baptized are actually possessed?"

And you answered, "Yes, that is very possible. I would even say, likely."

What did you mean in question 3 when you said that it's possible for some of the people who say they're baptized to actually be possessed? And being that it's probably not the holy Ghost, what are they possessed with?

Thanks,

Sarah

Hi Sarah:

First of all, let me say that nobody who is sincerely asking God for the holy Ghost will receive a bad spirit from God. Jesus said so. But there are many extremely religious people out there in Christianity who claim to be of God who are not. That is as obvious as anything can be. I am persuaded that some of these people are demon possessed or, at a minimum, that they are controlled to some extent by ungodly, religious spirits. The Pope, the father of Christianity, is an excellent example of this. Another good example would be some of the Pope's children, certain fundamentalist Christian ministers, for example. These kinds of people hate the truth with a vengeance and would kill to prevent it from being spread. The Popes have ordained untold thousands of murders in an attempt to put out the light. And many Christian have the same spirit of hatred for the real Jesus; they just don't have the political power to carry out the desires of that spirit.

These are the people to whom I was referring. They say that they have the Spirit, but the spirit they have cannot be the sweet Spirit of Christ.

Pastor John

December 14, 2004

Hi John,

Of course I don't mind that you put me on this list.

Unfortunately I haven't been "successful" in receiving the Spirit of God yet, so I didn't really know what to write to you. :) But - if you don't mind - there are some questions which have come up to me since my last mail.

First of all some things about praying:

- Is there a difference between praying silently (in your mind) and actually speaking the words out ? If yes, why is that?

Hannah was pouring out her heart to God, and was heard by Him, without uttering a sound in 1Samuel 1. On the other hand, there are other verses that exhort us to "cry out" to God, and there are many examples of righteous men and women doing that. The righteous, then, pray in all ways.

I think the principal point is that we should be sincere, and that, to God, volume is a secondary consideration.

- Is it ok (or even necessary) to repeat a prayer to God continually until He answers it (like in Luke 11, 1-13 or Luke 18,1-8)?

It is absolutely necessary to persevere in prayer and faith, but merely persevering will not move God. He is not impressed with our strong will. Jesus' point was that our heavenly Father hears us when we pursure steadfastly a right thing, or a goal that He has set before for us, in an humble and contrite spirit.

- Should I pray to Jesus and God or only one of them? Does it make sense to talk to both of them at the same time?

It makes no difference. Whatever prayers or praise offered to God never get to him unless they go through Jesus first, anyway. "No man comes to the Father except by me", is what Jesus said. Whatever prayers are directed toward Jesus get to God, if they are worthy, because "I and my Father are one."

I also have some general questions:

- I think I don't really understand your opinion about sinning. If somebody is baptised and commits a sin (not unto death), can he be eternally lost because of that even if he repents?

If he repents, God will forgive him (1Jn. 1). So, no, a child of God who has stumbled will not lose his soul if he repents. Jesus will forgive him and cleanse him anew.

- In my last mail, I asked if you think that there are kinds of ("non-secular") music that one shouldn't listen to. Maybe you overlooked that question, but could you please tell me what you think about that?

I apologize for overlooking that question. It is a good one to ask.

All worldly music comes short of the glory of God; I never listen to it at home. On rare occasions, however, when I am traveling, I may have the radio on and a song begin to be played that I will listen to and enjoy. Most of the time, if it is a love song, it makes me think of Jesus and his love for people. Music is produced by people, and depending on the kind of spirit a person has, the music may be worthwhile or worthless. There is no music I would condemn just because it belongs to a certain genre. I can usually feel the spirit that produced a song when I hear it, and the vast majority of the time, if it is a song that belongs to the world, the spirit of the song is unclean, and I am not attracted to it.

There is an old adage to the effect that we become what we eat. I believe that. If we feed our spirits music or books that this unclean world has produced, we will also become unclean. Feed your inner man with good things from the Lord.

- If I chose to visit some Pentecostal / Charismatic Assembly to have other people pray for my baptism (while not joining it, of course), would that be a wise decision?

It would not be your best option, but I would not tell you that you should not do it. Ask Jesus. he will put it on your heart what to do. Trust the feeling he will give you, and don't be afraid or worry about anything, even if he causes you to feel that you should go. Those who trust jesus are free to do absolutely whatever God wants them to do.

Well, these are actually quite a lot of questions, but I hope I won't keep you away from more important things. Thanks for your time and your help!

May God bless you!

Christof

There is not a lot that is more important than answering your questions. You must have life from God, Christof. I want to do all that I can to help you receive it. To that end, I am

Your servant in Christ,

Pastor John

On December 17, 2004 this response was sent...

Hi John,

Thank you very much for your great and wise answers !

Yours,

Christof

Thank you for the questions! Stay in touch.

jdc

December 9, 2004

Hey Pastor John,

I have a question that I was wondering you could clear up for me.

Ok, so the Word of God- is that the Bible at all? Or is it just hearing from God, touches from God, testimonies, etc.? Is it both the Bible and those things? What is it? If someone says, "the Word", can it mean the Bible? Thanks for you help... if all these questions don't make too much sense, let me know and I'll try to clarify my question(s).

Anna

Dear Anna:

Thanks for the question. It is good that you are thinking about such things while you are at school.

Only what God is saying right now is His word. The Bible is a record of what God has said to others in the past, but the point of those men making that record of the Word that came to them (the purpose of the Bible) is to encourage us, the readers, to draw close to God so that His word will also come to us. Jesus said to some men in his day who would have considered the scriptures to be the word of God, "Search the scriptures. In them, you think that you have eternal life, but they are they that bear witness of me, and you will not come to me that you might have life." You can own a Bible for just a few bucks, but the word of God has never been for sale.

Many times, while we are reading the Bible, the Spirit of God speaks to our hearts. It is not the Bible speaking to us but God. If the Spirit does not touch our hearts while we are reading the Bible, it cannot mean anything to us. It is only the living word of God that makes the Bible meaningful to us personally.

During your upcoming Christmas break, I would like for you to read my little book titled, "Is the Bible the Word of God?" It can be read in one or two sittings, depending on how quickly one can read. You will learn from that book that the Bible never calls itself the word of God and that it always challenges us to go to Jesus and hear the words of God for ourselves.

Pastor John

November 30, 2004

Pastor John:

I would like to ask for some instruction. We pay our tithes and then a five dollar offering for each weekly paycheck that comes in the home. My wife was told by someone that the offering should be half of the tithes. My wife then told her that we are paying off debt and that you had instructed us in a meeting in Louisville while talking about someone else's situation that if we were paying off bills, then just limit our offerings to five dollars and use what else we would have given to pay on the debt.

Do we have that right?

The tithes and offerings are the Lord's. All God's people are required to bring them to the Lord. I have never told anyone, however, that offerings should be half the tithes. In fact, I have warned the people here not to lock into a certain amount for offerings because each person's situation will be different. Paul said to give "as each man purposes in his own heart" to give. Uncle Joe, for instance, always gave the same amount of offerings as he did tithes. But when some other people tried to do that, and I stopped them. They needed their money to pay bills, and it was too much for them to give. Every person must use wisdom in determining what God wants him to give. It is wrong to set an amount for everyone when it comes to offerings and gifts, as some are still inclined to do, in spite of the warnings to the contrary that I have given.

The reason that we have "gifts" beyond the offering is that I am required by law to pay taxes on tithes and offerings that I receive, but gifts are not taxable. It was suggested at one point that we call all the money which people bring to me "gifts", but I can't do that. It would not be true. There is a "moral obligation" to bring tithes and offerings to the Lord, and I must by law pay taxes on money that people give to me because of a "moral obligation". Brother Taylor did some research on Supreme Court decisions concerning this matter, and from them, we saw that if everyone brought their tithes and a five dollar offering, then their "moral obligation" would be satisfied. Then, whatever else they gave could legally be considered a non-taxable "gift". At least, that is how we read those rulings. That is why people in our meetings write one check for tithes ($5 offering included) and another check for their "gift". One is taxable to me, and the other is not.

Now, as for your situation, everyone has bills to pay. Simply having bills is an insufficient reason to not bring gifts to the Lord. But if you are behind in your financial responsibilities and owe people money that you cannot pay, then it has been my custom to help you to pay those debts by not taking any "gifts" from you until those debts are settled. I don't have to do that, but I want to do it because I want to help everyone in our meetings to stop bringing a reproach on the name of Jesus by owing people money and not paying them. To rob somebody of money due to him is a bad testimony for God's children, and I feel responsible to help the children of God who meet in my house to avoid having that bad testimony.

I am not obligated to help you get a new car. But I very much want to help you stop being a reproach to the name of Jesus, when it is beyond your power to do so.

Lastly, Do you have anything that you could use me for, Like editing of any material(s)-(or any thing else).

Not at the moment, but I will let you know if something comes up. Thanks for asking.

Pastor John

November 16, 2004

Dear Pastor John,

I found your site to be very interesting and helpful. I mostly agree with you on your opinions about Christianity, being "saved" and the Holy Ghost baptizm, but I have some questions for you...

1. You think that communion is "idolatrous". I most certainly do not! In fact, I believe that unless one partakes of the communion of Christ, he cannot be saved in the end and have eternal life (Jn. 6:48-58). Jesus himself said that!

What do You think about 1. Corinthians 11, 20-34? Was that something else, or why didn't Paul tell them to stop doing so?

Your question is very broad, but generally speaking, Paul is condemning the habitual gathering to eat natural food when the saints meet; he would never have condemned the saints partaking of the communion of the Spirit. He was telling these precious people of God that as long as they had divisions among them, they could not possibly partake of the Lord's supper (vv. 19-20) because fellowship in the light IS the Lord's supper, not the eating and drinking of dead substances such as wine or wafers.

In chapter 5 of my book "Spiritual Light" this is all explained in detail. Also, I can send you a free CD of my sermon in Louisville KY from this past weekend on the subject, if you would like to have it.

2. I have to say that I don't completely agree with your attitude to water baptizm. I'm not sure if it is necessary for salvation or not. Would it be a sin to get baptized in water just to "be on the safe side" ?

Safety is of the Lord. Water baptism is not.

3. There are people who claim that the Holy Ghost bapti! zm (of the 20th/21st c.) is in fact just another form of demon possession. I don't agree with them. But could it be possible that at least some of the people who say that they're baptized are actually possessed ?

Yes, that is very possible. I would even say, likely.

4. I agree that it is not right to attend "church" service or to participate in "church" activities, but is it ok to just be registered as a member of a church or would that have any negative effects spiritually ?

You can't obey God's command to "come out of her" and still have your name on the "church" membership rolls. That would be another way of trying "to be on the safe side". But safety is of the Lord; "church" membership is not.

Thanks for answering...

Christof

Thank you for the questions. I hope that my answers help to clear up some things for you.

Your non-Christian servant in Christ Jesus the Lord,

Pastor John

November 6, 2004

Hey Pastor John,

God instructed Moses to make the curtains and the veil for the tabernacle of fine twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet. My question is: Is fine twined linen a fourth color, or is it the base material which is then to be died blue and purple and scarlet? Thanks!

Billy H.

Hi Billy:

I have always assumed that the fine twined linen was a color all its own, forming the background for the other colors in Moses' tabernacle. What leads me to that conclusion is the wording of the verses in which the Lord commanded Moses to make the curtains (Ex. 26:1), the veils (Ex. 26:36), cloths for the tabernacle service (39:2), and even for the priests' holy garments (Ex. 39:5). We know for certain that the gold contained in these items was not simply a died color of fine linen but was actually gold that was twisted into thread. So, the blue, purple, and scarlet colors that you mentioned is the only issue, and actually we have at least one specific verse that would seem to prove that they were indeed separate from the fine linen. This reference is Exodus 25:1-4, where God commands Moses to gather materials to build the tabernacle. In verse 4, God tells Moses to gather the colors blue, purple, and scarlet, in addition to fine linen.

Pastor John

November 3, 2004

Dear John,

Take a look at these questions:

1. Where do God keep men when they die pending the judgement.

The wicked are kept in hell until the final Judgment. After that, they are to be cast into the Lake of Fire, which is "the Second Death", and is far worse than hell. The righteous are kept in the place called "paradise".

2. Is purgatory real as the Catholics proclaimed.

No.

3. Do spirit die.

"The Spirit is life." It is difficult to see how the spirit can die if what it is, is life, but I am not fully sure what you are asking.

Thanks,

Pius

Lagos, Nigeria.

Pius:

These questions are some that we may ask, but there are other questions that are much more important. For example, "When is a person born again?" Have you asked them yet?

Pastor John

BTW, what does your email heading, "neutral ground", mean?

October 31, 2004

Pastor John

I note this voting thing has come up a bit lately, I guess because the presidential election looms in the US. Here in Australia we have just had our federal election which produced a very interesting result but more on that in a moment. I thought folk there might be interested in the laws governing voting in Australia.

Firstly, it is compulsory for all persons aged 18 or over to be enrolled to vote. Secondly, it is also compulsory for enrolled persons to vote (and this includes state government elections and local authority elections). We only vote for councils and the two levels of government. There is a $20 fine for not voting.

I haven't voted for 20 years or so as even the xtn sect I was in understood that those who belong to Christ should not be involved in such matters except to pray and obey wherever possible. I have never been fined but the Electoral Commission is using more and more sophisticated data matching techniques so it will come one day I expect.

Back to the result. Our federal parliament has two houses, the Lower House, the House of Representatives (corrresponds to your Congress) and the Upper House, the Senate (similar to yours). Who is in government is decided by the Lower House result. There is no president but a prime minister (PM) who is the leader of the group which commands the lower house majority. The government led by PM John Howard was returned with a greatly increased majority, his 4th successive victory. More significantly, he now commands an absolute majority in the Senate, a situation which has occurred very rarely in Australia. Politically, Howard is in the strongest position a PM in Australia has ever enjoyed. Given the rigid party line voting that occurs in Australian politics he can now pass whatever laws he wishes.

A new party entered the fray at this election and did win one senate position. It is called "Family First" and it is closely aligned with the Assemblies of God church and other charismatic groups. For a while it looked as if they may have held the balance of power in the Senate but perhaps God has not cursed them so completely as to give them such influence. The party is headed by a woman, not surprisingly, and featured many female candidates. While not all [of them] would have the Spirit, it is sad that the zeal for right living that God's children possess is being directed toward the pursuit of political solutions under the guise of the social gospel so many believe Christ brought to earth. If only they understood their true liberty in Christ and had a zeal for that!

God's children here as well as in everyplace need our prayer. We understand to a point where they are and where they need to be. They will be worn out by the task masters that xtny places over them. Our PM needs prayer, too. He has virtually absolute power and a strong economy. He needs wisdom as well.

Hope this was a little interesting.

See you soon

Damien

Thanks, Damien:

The coming "Beast" who will rule absolutely over the earth will be a man whom even many among God's people will embrace and supprt politically and militarily, to their own destruction. Jesus said that if we use earthly weapons (specifically, a sword), we would perish by those same earthly weapons. I wish our family in Christ could understand that if they take up the sword of politics, they are doomed to have politics turn on them. What a trap Christian ministers have set for God's unsuspecting sheep by leading them to the pit of politics!

Pastor John

Later, on November 1, 2004, this comment was written regarding the email above...

John:

This is a situation where it is better to disobey the law and obey God since the law requires him to vote, correct? As always the motive for doing so must be done with a right spirit.

Thanks:

Wendell S

Hi Wendell:

Yes, this would be a case for paying the fine and obeying God.

jdc

October 29, 2004

Pastor John, please help me with this:

In Matt 10:16, Jesus tells his disciples to go out into the world with caution, as sheep into the midst of wolves and to "be as wise (shrewd) as serpents, yet harmless (innocent) as doves."

Yet, I recall in another NT writing, Jesus says words to the effect that the children of God are not as clever as those in the world, implying that the innocence of God's people are no match for the cunning people of the sinful world.

How does one reconcile those two characteristics?

Jesus encouraged us to be wise as serpents and yet, the truth is that because of our sincerity and lack of guile, we are mere innocents compared to the sly people in the world, who are more like serpents than we can hope to be. How can we find that balance, according to Jesus' description? I already know I'm a sincere, trusting and naive person; harmless, never seeking to do someone evil. But it's the other side of the equation that I can't seem to develop. It seems to be against my new nature, to be "wise" like a serpent. I'm no "used car salesman". I'm not a liar or deliberate deceiver, nor am I a slanderer, as the serpent was to Eve.

Brother Barry

Dear innocent, trusting, sincere, naive, and harmless Brother Barry:

The answer is simple. There are at least two kinds of wisdom. There is a carnal, worldly, devilish wisdom (Jas. 3:15) and there is a spiritual wisdom taught only by the holy Ghost (1Cor. 2:13). The children of God who "mind the things of the Spirit" are not as cunning concerning worldly things as are sinners. This is what Jesus meant when he said that "in their generation, the children of this world are wiser than children of the light" (Lk. 16:8).

Concerning craftiness and evil, Paul desired that God's children be "simple" concerning evil, preferring that they be wise to do good instead (Rom. 16:19). You can safely be "wise as a serpent" in knowing how to live and function in the kingdom of God, as long as you do not have the spirit of that serpent who is also called the devil.

Pastor John

October 28, 2004

Dear Pastor John,

What are your views on the saints participating in elections? David C. Pack has written an extensive article on why Christ would not want His followers to vote in this worldly process. Please comment soon. I do trust your judgment. Thank you.

P.S. That article was found by typing in "should christians vote".

Hi there.

God's people are to stay out of politics. Politics is a worldly weapon, and Jesus warned those who believed in him not to use such things. We have better weapons than the ballot box and guns, if we will just use them.

As for Christians, since you mentioned them, their religion is of this world, and so it only stands to reason that they would vote, run for political office, become soldiers and kill people, etc. etc.

I have written an article on politics and the saints that gives many clear biblical reasons as to why it is sinful for God's children to resort to earthly political action to accomplish what they want to do. I don't think the article is on the web site yet, but I will send you a copy if you would like to have one.

In the mean time, use your "Mighty" weapons of faith and love, and overcome the world!

Pastor John

October 26, 2004

Hi Pastor John!

This past weekend, I talked to a friend that I used to work with at Burger King. We talked for a while, and he brought up the subject about the Bible and asked me what I believed. So, I told him about our meetings, and I asked him if he believed in the Holy Ghost, and he said that he believed it was a gift. He said that he couldn't fit what he wanted to say in the AIM message box, so he sent me an e-mail about it. This is the first time I've ever been in such a conversation and I was unsure on how to respond to him. He sounds very head-strong about what he believes in the e-mail and is ready to back them up with scriptures. I asked him what he thought of John 7:38-39, and this was his response. (He didn't use any periods or commas, and no spell check! It may be hard to pick out what he is saying......sorry!)

He wrote:

yes but it still does not say that you have to speak in toungs to go to heaven we all have the living water in us when we accept christ the holy spirit is a gift just like the gift of healing what about the gift of interpreting what was said it does not say everyone that believes and speaks in toungs will be saved it says who ever should believe in me should not perish but have everlasting life i dont even believe that first verse is talking about the holy spirit look at john 4 10 if thow knowest the gift of god and who it is that saith to thee give me to drink thou wouldest have asked of him and he would have giving thee living water then there is john 4 14 whosoever drinkest of this water that I shall give him shall never thirst but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life look at john 14 / 6 I am the way the truth and the life no man cometh unto the father but by me then look at john 14/16 and I will pray the father and he shall give you anouther comforter that he may abide with you forever and john 14 26 but the comfoter which is the holy ghost whom the father will send in my name he shall teach you all things and bring all things to your rememberaance what soever I have said unto you where does it say that you have to speak in toungs to go to heaven I would also like to point out revlation 22/18 for I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book , if any man shall add unto these things , god shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book . and rev 22 19 and if any man shall tke away from the words of the book of this prophecy God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city and from the things which are written in this book if I mis qouted the bible it was by accident I was typing alot but I have to go to work but I cant find it any where in the bible where it says you have to speak in toungs to go to heaven it says he is a comforter talk to you later

Can you help me answer him back? I was also confused on why he quoted the two scriptures in Revelation....I wasn't aware that I was adding anything... Thank you!

Ellen (Savelli)

Dear Ellen:

The Bible never says, and I have never said, that a person "has to speak in tongues to go to heaven". I think it is discouraging to tell anyone that because people know they cannot speak in a language they have not learned.

Your friend seems to think, as many do, that "speaking in tongues" is a gift. The gift is "diverse tongues", and that gift is given to some among those who already speak in tongues to enable them to communicate with people of a different language. There is also a gift of faith, given to those who already have faith. And there is a gift of wisdom, given to those who are already wise. This is how it is with the gift of diverse tongues; it is given to those who already speak in tongues.

So, his opinion that "speaking in tongues" is what Paul was talking about in 1Cor 12 is mistaken. But almost no Christian on earth understands that. I have never personally met one who did.

The real issue, Ellen, is how are we to know who is born again and who is not? Surely there is a way to do that. Jesus said that we would hear something every time someone is born again (Jn. 3); Paul said that the Spirit "cries out 'Abba' ("Father")" declaring us to be the sons of God (Rom. 8; Gal. 4). Isaiah prophesied about the "rest" that Jesus would give to us in Isa 28:11-12, "For with stammering lips and another tongue will God speak unto this people...." There are many other such Scriptures that I have collected and summarized in my book, "Spiritual Light", in the last chapter, and also in the "Ye Must Be Born Again" teaching series. But those few verses will give you an idea as to which way to take the conversation.

I never tell people that they "have to speak in tongues"; that is discouraging. But I do tell them that when they receive the real Spirit of God, they WILL speak in tongues, or have "stammering lips". Rather than being a discouragement to them, that fact is exciting, or ought to be.

If you have any other questions about this, let me know!

Pastor John

October 25, 2004

Pastor John:

I really enjoyed the Bible study that we had on baptism. Let me number the "major" points that I got from it:

1. John the Baptist baptized the Jews in water with a message saying another, the Messiah, was coming with the holy Ghost baptism.

2. John the Baptist baptized Jesus with water and recognized Jesus was the Messiah.

3. John the Baptist was prematurely killed and his work of water baptism with a message was finished by his disciples and Jesus' disciples.

4. Jesus died, was resurrected, and returned into heaven to offer his blood to the Father for sin - and the holy Ghost was given on the day of Pentecost to all those Jews who were prepared by having had water baptism and having kept the Law. (Peter's Key #1)

5. The holy Ghost was given to Samaritans after they received water baptism (did they keep the Law? They did not keep the whole law, but they were circumcised, according to God's commandment to Abraham, and believed Philip's preaching when he brought the word to them). (Peter's Key #2)

6. The holy Ghost was given at Cornelius house to the Gentiles BEFORE they received John's water baptism, which was a new thing. (Peter's Key #3)

7. Paul was anointed with a message to the Gentiles saying that they were free from the Works of the law and only needed the holy Ghost baptism to belong to God. While, the Jews still practiced the law, and were water baptized before receiving the holy Ghost.

Since the Bible study on baptism, I feel as if I could talk to anyone about the subject clearly...except for one point. Could you help me? You said that John's baptism of water was a Work of the Law. Where in the Bible do we learn that water baptism became a part of The Law? I remember you teaching us that Gentiles had no need to be water baptized because God never required them to keep the Law of Moses. Where in the Bible do we learn that water baptism was part of The Law?

Thanks,

te.

Token:

John the Baptist was born under the Law of Moses, just as Jesus was (Gal. 4:4). Both Jesus and John were sent by God only to the Jews (Jn. 1:31; Mt. 15:24; Rom. 15:8), and if they initiated any ceremonial act, it had to be a part of the Law. There was nothing else for it to be a part of.

Here are the four criteria that must be met in order for any deed to qualify as a "Work of the Law":

1. It must have been required by God for the Jews to do or to make.

2. It must have been ordained by God during the time the Law was in effect.

3. It must have foreshadowed some spiritual reality. (In other words, Works of the Law were symbols, and were prophetic in nature.)

4. It must have been ceremonial (i.e., a repetitive form, connected with worship or religious duty).

John's baptism meets these criteria perfectly. It was required by God for the Jews to do. It was ordained by God while the Law of Moses was still in force. It foreshadowed the baptism of Jesus (which was the message that went along with John's water baptism). And it was ceremonial in form, repeated many thousands of times for the many thousands of Jews who repented.

A religious act, by the way, did not have to come through Moses himself in order for it to become a part of Moses' Law. Other men of God along the way added to Moses' Law as God led them. You saw that in the Old Testament study we just completed. David added much music and a new order of service for the priests and Levites. David and Solomon added the temple. This adding to the Law could be done because the Law of Moses was not from Moses; it was from God, and God can do whatever He wills to do with His Law and His people.

John the Baptist was chosen and anointed by God to add the Work of a prophetic baptism to Moses' Law. As with all other Works of the Law, it was required by God of His people, the Jews. Every Jew who lived during those days who refused John's baptism was cast into hell when they died. Jews who truly loved God understood this and wisely submitted, in fear of God's wrath, to the preaching of John. (As James told Paul in Acts 21, many thousands of Jews believed.) Wise people now submit to Jesus and his baptism. This is the truth that John's work foretold.

Pastor John

October 20, 2004

Pastor John,

I have a few questions. I was reading the book of Daniel and I became engulfed with Daniel's visions. The one on the image and the end of days. What marvelous dreams and visions from the Lord! Wow, I tried to imagine what Daniel was thinking after those visits. My questions are:

Is Grecia the same as Greece?

Yes.

What is meant by the Abomination of Desolation?

It refers to that spiritual thing that is an abomination to God (but "highly esteemed among men) that makes the saints desolate of the righteousness, peace, and joy of the holy Ghost. Under the Law of Moses, it was the spirit that persuaded God's people to worship in ways that the heathen had invented. That robbed them of their spiritual riches and their hope. In our time, the abomination of desolation is the spirit of Christianity, the demon that persuades God's people of doctrines and ways of worship that are not from God and makes them desolate of fellowship in the light.

Do we know what the four winds are that are referred to in this vision?

The great sea upon which those four winds "strove" are the peoples and nations of the earth. We learn that from John's Revelation. Spirits are often called "winds" in the Bible, and it seems clear to me that the four winds mentioned by Daniel are spirits that keep the people of the earth stirred up. Isaiah said, "There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked." The peoples of this earth have no more rest in their souls than does the ocean by the seashore. They are restless and constantly in a turmoil about something. Fads rage across cultures; political systems rage across generations and turn children against their fathers; religious beliefs rage across continents and divide nations.

The waves of fashion and form grow and crash and conflict with one another, and the people of the earth are caught in the storms. Only Jesus can get us safely to shore.

And, lastly, what does it mean when it says the daily sacrifice shall be taken away?

Antiochus IV was a Greek ruler of the huge territory north, northwest, and northeast of Palestine, including Mesopotamia, in the time after the OT books and before the beginning of the NT. In an effort to unite the nations in his realm, which was inhabited by many different peoples and cultures, he tried to force the Jews to surrender their religion and adopt the customs of his other subjects. He outlawed the OT, and executed the Jews who dared to continue practicing the most basic of their rituals, including circumcision. Owning a copy of Moses' Law was punishable by death. He defiled the altar at the Temple on Jerusalem by offering a pig on it. This is the man, it appears, who "took away the daily sacrifice." And God is the one who sent him with an army to do this, "by reason of transgression" (Dan. 8:12). God was punishing His people for their disloyalty to Him, as His prophets had warned them many times before.

Thanks!

Amy

October 19, 2004

John:

Our bible study last night reminded me of a few questions I had on my mind a few months ago. There are two sections of scripture below, one from Luke and one from Matthew. It looks to me like they are two different accounts (in very small part) of the same conversation Jesus had with his disciples. The first four verses of each section seem to be saying the same thing; namely, ask and you will receive. However, the last verses of each section seem to be saying two different things (1) the Father will give the holy Spirit to them that ask him, and (2) the Father will give good things to them that ask him. It just occurred to me that it is possible that Jesus said both things; Luke recorded one and Matthew recorded another (this answers one of my questions).

Here are the verses from Luke and then from Matthew:

Lk. 11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
Lk. 11:10 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
Lk. 11:11 If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
Lk. 11:12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? <
Lk. 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Matt. 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
Matt. 7:8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
Matt. 7:9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?
Matt. 7:10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?
Matt. 7:11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

I'm hoping you'd be able to comment, however, on the rest of what I was thinking about. When I was reading over these two sets of scriptures, I was wondering (without realizing it entirely) if perhaps Matthew got it wrong. Perhaps Jesus was just talking about the holy Spirit here. I was wondering, Is it really true, if we ask for any "good thing", the Father will give it to us (I'm assuming the Father is pleased with us when we ask the question)? I'm fairly confident the answer to this question is yes, but thought you might be able to help shed some light on this for me.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

Hi TC:

A few years back, I discovered something about this general issue when I combined the four Gospels into one story. That is, Jesus must have done many things that were similar, and that he must have preached sermons that were similar. The scholars under whom I studied in the seminary seemed all to assume that if the account of a story in Matthew resembled a story in Luke, then Matthew's story was a version of the same story Luke was telling, and that one of them had it wrong, or maybe even both of them. Being stuck in pride and unbelief, my professors' point was, in the main, that we could not trust the stories of Jesus found in the Bible because they were produced by the fundamentally flawed imaginations of men. We have another option to that dark, discouraging view.

It is obviouly true that there are cases in which one of the Gospel writers adds detail to a story that another Gospel writer tells. At the same time, what I noticed in trying to combine the four Gospel narratives is that a story found in Mark that is similar, sometimes very similar, to a story found in Matthew, or Luke, may in fact be a completely different story, not a re-telling of the same one.

The Gospel of John concludes by saying that if all the things Jesus did were to be written on paper, the world would not be able to contain the books that should be written. Then, shouldn't we expect that some of the miracles Jesus performed in one place, and some of the sermons he preached in one place, should resemble the miracles he performed and the sermons preached in other places?

When the Bible presents us with what appear to be contradictions, we have to decide what to do. We can elect to take the easy way out, the way most of my professors chose, and discard the information as unreliable. But that is the way of the flesh, seeking to find a justification for continuing in unbelief and disobedience. We also have the option of choosing to defend the Bible as the Word of God and refusing to admit that any contradictions (or apparent contradictions) are even there. Both these ways are unwise.

The third option is the one I have always taken, and I believe that Jesus has rewarded me for doing so. First, I have assumed that if there is something in the Bible that seems wrong or contradictory, then the reality is that I just don't understand the Bible or God well enough yet. Feeling that way caused me to humble myself to God more, not puff myself up against the Book that God provided for us. However, as I grew in grace (God is merciful!), it became obvious to me that there were some actual errors in the King James translation of the Bible, the one I trusted the most. There was no getting around that fact, if I was going to be honest with myself. Nor, if I was to be honest, was there any getting around the fact that what the Bible tells us Jesus said and did is true. This is the narrow way: neither condemning the Scriptures nor defending them, but humbling myself before God and asking Him for wisdom to see what is really there, and to understand it. I feel blessed that Jesus took me down that narrow path.

So, to answer your comments directly, Matthew was not wrong to record Jesus as saying that the Father would give "good things" to those who asked him, and Luke was not wrong to record Jesus as saying that the Father would give the holy Spirit to those who ask him. Jesus probably said both those things many times during the years he walked the long, dusty roads of Palestine with his multitude of followers. The verses you asked about, taken from the "Sermon on the Mount" in Matthew, are a record of Jesus talking to his disciples in one place, while the verses quoted from Luke are words Jesus spoke while in another.

Matthew's "Sermon on the Mount" (Matt. 5-7) is an excellent example of what I mentioned earlier. It seems that everyone thinks that Jesus' "Sermon on the Mount" is repeated, with variations, in Luke 6. Those two sections of Scripture are very similar in content, but in Luke, we are plainly told that Jesus "stood in the plain" when he spoke his words (Lk. 6:17) and that he spoke them "in the audience of the people" (Lk. 7:1). In Matthew, he was on a mountain (Mt. 5:1) and delivered that much longer message only to his disciples. It is very likely that Jesus delivered this same message fifty times, with variations each time.

Concerning God giving us "good things", I will say this: David in Psalms said, "The Lord is a sun and shield; the Lord will give grace and glory. No good thing will He withhold from them that walk uprightly" (84:11). And Solomon later said, "There shall no evil happen to the just" (Prov. 12:21). If we feel that God IS, in fact, withholding something good from us, and if we feel that something evil HAS happened to us, then we have the same options as do the people who think they have found contradictions in the Scriptures. We can reject those verses and say that the writers of the Bible were wrong, or we can hide our heads in the sand and say that the Bible is the "infallible Word of God". Or, we can do neither of those foolish things and just humble ourselves to God, to find out why He is withholding something good from us, or why some evil has befallen us. God has blessed me for choosing this latter approach to life, and I pray that He will continue to do so.

Thanks for the question. I hope my answer did digress too far from a direct answer.

jdc

A comment written October 19, 2004 to the above email...

John

After reading this, I pray God will help me hate pride and unbelief enough not to be robbed (any more than I already have been) of any good thing he has for me.

Sarah H.

Hi Sarah:

The flesh controlled and deceived us until Jesus had mercy on us and helped us. Man has no choice but to be wrong about how to live without God's intervention. If we love God and His ways now, it is only that He has visited us and changed our hearts. It is embarrassing to have to admit that, as good as God is, we didn't love Him and were ashamed of Him while we were "in the flesh".

When we look back and see how much we were once robbed by our own ignorance of God, it ought to make us love dearly every mite of truth that Jesus has given to us. To cleave to the right way of living that He has taught us is wisdom and safety. May God help us, again, to do that constantly.

jdc

A comment written October 20, 2004 to the above email...

Good Day,

Just a comment on what TC wrote about the verses of Matt. and Luke; What myself has come to conclude about the gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John is that they are all there when most of Jesus preaching, miracles and others happened but just as some incidents will take place today and the witnesses will be call to testify or give account of what happened most I know will come out and say or write it according to his/her view, understanding and assumption. That's what I thinked occured those days I may be wrong but....

bye

Frank

Hi Frank:

Matthew and John were with Jesus when he was on earth, but Luke was not. Mark probably was not there with Jesus either, but we cannot say for certain about him. Many assume that Luke and Mark were disciples, but while walking on earth, Jesus had no disciples by those names. Luke got his information from eyewitnesses (Lk. 1:1-4). Mark probably did, too, but he doesn't tell us.

Pastor John

September 2, 2004

I have some Bible questions:

Matthew 10:38 & Matt 16:24 both speak of denying oneself and taking up one's cross, in following Christ. By those statements, did Jesus mean to deny one's own will or deny something else about oneself?

I've heard you preach about the cross of Christ being God's will (not the Roman cross), and I think this applies to my life, trying to find out how to bear my cross, and what it is, exactly.

Philippians 3:18 drew my attention also. "Those who mind earthly things are the enemies of the cross." Please give me your explanation of that.

Thanks for your time, John.

Your earnest brother, Brad

Hi Brad:

To "take up your cross and follow Jesus" means to do the will of God that is for you, just as Jesus did the will of God that was for him. We cannot bear Jesus' cross; he was the only one who could have borne it successfully. We do well to bear our own cross. To "take up your cross and follow Jesus" includes yielding to God's will rather than demanding your own be done, just as Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane yielded to his Father's will, with the famous words, "Not my will, but thine be done."

The "enemies of the cross of Christ" whom Paul sorrowfully mentions in Philippians 3 were brothers in Christ who were teaching error to the saints for money. They were carnally minded, and they had not been sent by God to say what they were saying to the congregation of the Lord. It broke Paul's heart because (1) he could not stop them from teaching that error and (2) he could not persuade God's people to stop listening to them.

In this case, Paul is referring to the cross as the Roman tool of torture upon which Christ suffered and died. What made some of Paul's precious brothers in Christ "enemies of the cross of Christ" is that with their doctrine, they were making the sufferings of Jesus on the cross basically unnecessary. They were teaching God's people to worship in ways they could have worshiped if Jesus had never died on the cross. Those ways included serving God with water baptisms, physical circumcision, using natural food in worship (e.g. "communion services"), wearing special clothes for worship (e. g. ministerial vestments and choir robes), the burning of incense, and the invention of "holy days" (such as Christian Sundays and Muslim Fridays), and so forth. All such things could be done, and were being done, before Jesus ever went to the cross.

We avoid becoming "enemies of the cross of Christ" when we humble ourselves to worship as God wills that we worship Him. We must serve God in the "new and living way" that Jesus' suffering made possible; namely, "in spirit and in truth", as Jesus said. Jesus went to the cross to make our sanctification by the holy Ghost possible so that we could worship God as He demands to be worshiped. Those whose doctrines deny the exclusive necessity of the holy Ghost are also denying, in fact, the need of the cross of Christ because we could perform all other forms of worship without him ever suffering on it. No man ever worshiped God "in spirit and in truth" before Jesus went to the cross, ascended into heaven, and purchased eternal life for us with his own blood.

The cross of Christ was necessary because we were so blind and sinful that we could not worship God acceptably. In fact, we were so blind that we did not even know we needed help. Only when we live in the Spirit that Jesus purchased for us do we avoid becoming enemies of his cross.

Pastor John

Question #2

Hi John,

I've heard you say that "God is NOT a great big one of us."

God is not human, true enough.

But...Today I was listening to the first of the Genesis series OT tapes, and reading from the scriptures you said "Let us make man in our image", and you explained that the Hebrew translation meant in "physical" form the same, in the same image, not to spiritualize it to mean anything allegorical. So... if God and His son created us in their own image, we ARE a little version of them. God IS a big one of us after all, or am I trying to split hairs and find a contradiction where there is none?

I would appreciate your comments.

Brad

Dear Brother Brad!

You're thinking backward. Our being created in God's image doesn't make Him be a big one of us! It only makes us (very) little ones of Him! Read Luke 3:38. Adam's being a "son of God" in a physical sense makes all people who came from Adam descendants of God in the same way. Jesus became the new Adam of a new race (1Cor. 15:45-49). It is a race of people who are sons of God inside as well as out. But even that does not make God a great big one of us. It is still only that we have been blessed to be made (very) little ones of Him.

Pastor John

August 23, 2004

Hello Pastor John,

I keep thinking about that scripture from Romans you brought up in your sermon when you were here: "In my flesh dwelleth no good thing." Well, I think I see some good things about some people I've met, even though I know they are carnally minded. Will you give me some understanding in that scripture?

Well, I've got to get some things done. Email me back if you get a chance.

Bye!

Sarah

Dear Sarah:

Of course, you see some "good" things in people who are carnally minded. You will probably also see some things "good" in people who are very wicked. This was true about the Canaanites and other ancient cultures. They were extremely immoral, and extremely superstitious, extremely cruel, even to the point of child sacrifice, but many among them were gifted craftsmen, skilled artists, dedicated scientists, etc. So, the issue is not whether there is some "good" in sinful people; there always is. There were likable qualities in almost every one of the most cruel and ungodly people in human history. In fact, there are "good" qualities about Satan himself. Even the Bible says he is "perfect in beauty" and "full of wisdom".

What we want, Sarah, is what is pure. If Satan is a mixture of "good" qualities and bad ones, then we want nothing to do with anything that is partly good and partly evil (such as Christianity). We depend upon God to guide us into all truth, just as Jesus said He would do by the Spirit (if we will only listen and follow its lead!). My prayer for you, for me, and for everyone else is that God will continue to help us to know and to love the truth that He reveals. We don't want to be partly, or even mostly good. We want to walk perfectly before the Lord "unto all pleasing", as Paul said. And we can, if we will only be filled with the Spirit and live in it.

Thanks for the question. It was a good one. I have a Broadcaster on "How To Hate Sin" that you might want to check out on the web site for a fuller explanation, and other examples, of this.

Pastor John

August 23, 2004

John:

I listened to the message from your last trip out in L'ville -- "What Makes Sin Sin?" It stirred up some good thoughts, and some questions. I was reading in Proverbs 20 and came across this verse: "It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy, and after vows to make inquiry."

Since we have been talking about "holy", I was wondering what this verse means. Does it mean to continue seeking after something else after God has already blessed? I can see where that could be a snare and even a sin.

Thanks for taking time to answer.

Sandy

Hi Sandy:

Yes, it is sin (unbelief) to continue to seek for God's way after He has blessed us by revealing His way to us. Both Moses (Dt. 30) and Paul (Rom. 10) warned God's people not to do that, not to "seek God" for the answer, after God's answer has come. Balaam, you know, did that, and he lost his soul. The real reason Balaam continue to pray after God had told him what to do is that he did not like God's first answer. He wanted a different answer, and God, in anger, gave it to him. That is the real reason people continue to seek God for direction after He gives direction to them; they want to go another way.

As for the verse from Proverbs, there are two parts. In the first part, Solomon warns his son not to intrude into holy matters when he is not anointed to do so. Leave God's work to God's servants.

The basic meaning of the second half of that verse is that it is unwise to do something, and only then seek God to find out if it is ok to do it. Find out what is right first, then go ahead. Don't rush into something and later wonder if it is right or wrong. In other words, ask for advice before choices are made.

Pastor John

August 11, 2004

Dear pastor John,

Could you please send me your thoughts on proper prayer. It seems to me that so many people who say that they are spirit filled pray words that do not line up with God's M.O. COULD YOU LET ME KNOW HOW YOU BELIEVE THAT JESUS WANTS US TO PRAY WITH WORDS.

Thank you so much.

I just found your web site and I am thankful for the conformation of things that I've been thinking that I just knew in the spirit were true.

God bless you,

David E

Dear David,

There are no "proper prayers" in God's kingdom. There are prayers that are acceptable to God; they are the prayers from a sincere heart and a clean spirit. Prayers made by wicked people are an abomination to God (Prov. 15:8; 29; 28:9.) So, the main thing for us to focus on is to live according to God's commandments; that way, anything we have to say to God will be tolerated, if not enjoyed.

I know that many of God's dear children may offer prayers to Him that are not exactly in line with His perfect will or wisdom. That does not mean, however, that they are wicked; nor does it mean that they are willfully rebelling against their Father. Paul himself admitted that "we know not how to pray as we ought", but he gloried in this wonderful blessing, that "the Spirit helps our weakness, making intercession for us according to the will of God" (Rom. 8:27).

Don't be concerned with specific words that should or should not be prayed, David. If you will just be filled with the holy Ghost and let it pray through you, then you can't be wrong. Everything the Spirit prays through us is proper in every way.

Pastor John

And later on August 11, 2004...

Dear Pastor John,

Would you tell me what you think about "laughing in the spirit" or "rolling around on the ground in the spirit" or " barking in the spirit ". None of this seems to be of God. I can't see Jesus doing these things.

Please let me know if I've got it right.

God Bless you

David E

Hi David:

Be careful. Don't take another step in that direction. If you do not understand a thing, do not speak evil of it (2Pet 2:10-12). Wait for understanding.

I am unclear as to what exactly you mean by people "barking" in the Spirit, but the other two human responses to the power and joy of the Spirit that you mentioned are not uncommon among saints who know God. If such behavior does not seem to you to be of God, it may be because God is a God who hides Himself (Isa. 45:15) and who demands that men and women humble themselves to seek and to find Him.

Please be cautious when speaking of how people look to you when they are in the presence of Almighty God.

Your servant in Christ Jesus,

Pastor John

August 11, 2004

Hello Pastor John,

It's been long I wrote last. I have been reading the TFT all through, they are always helpful. I give God the praise for that.

I have a question on the TFT labeled "Making The Word Of God Of None Effect". In paragraph three where you made mention of Jesus rebuking a rich young ruler for addressing him as the "good master" saying that "there is only One who is good, and that is God; does it mean that Jesus was not good at that time? i was in a Christian church one sunday in 1999 when that very verse was read and the explanation was that, because Jesus was not yet crucified, buried and ascended to heaven that was what made him not to accept the remark of being a good master. i will appreciate more comments on it Pastor.

Thanks a lot pastor.

Regards.

Frank

Hi Frank:

Jesus said that there is none good but one (God) because only God is good. Whatever goodness anyone else possesses, including Jesus Christ, they received from Him. Jesus, of himself, could do nothing (Jn. 5:19, 30). His power, his wisdom, his goodness, his holiness, his very life (Jn. 5:26), all came from His Father.

Another example of this is "immortality". God alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16), but we may share in His immortality through faith in Jesus (Rom. 2:5-7).

Pastor John

July 30, 2004

Comments:

What do you think the apostle Paul meant when he said in Acts 16:31, speaking to the jailer who had just asked him "what must I do to be SAVED." Paul replied immediately, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be SAVED and your household. Saved from what? ETERNAL DEATH. The penal consequence of sin is eternal death, or eternal separation from God and His mercy forever in a lake of fire. Have you given this much thought? You should you're dying too. Meaning you are in the process of being separated from God forever. Wouldn't you like to be SAVED from that consequence? You and I have an opportunity to be saved from this awful consequence by trusting in the Lord Jesus Christ and His death for us on the cross. God can forgive you and me because of the cross. Jesus was God manifest in the flesh, the God-man, so trust Him today, you may not have tomorrow. Floyd

Thanks, Floyd. To counsel someone to trust in Jesus is good, sound advice. Keep up the good work, and if we both will be faithful to Jesus, we will meet in a better place by and by.

Pastor John

Dear pastor John,

You did not answer my question. What do you think the apostle Paul meant when he told the jailer to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and he would be SAVED?

Floyd

Hi Floyd.

By that phrase, Paul meant that if the trembling jailor would surrender to Jesus, God would not destroy him. That is, after all, what the jailor meant by his question, "What must I do to be saved?"

Most people, Floyd, assume that the jailor was asking, "What must I do to be born again?", but the strange Christian tradition of equating "saved" with "born again" had not yet been invented. It just is not possible that the jailor was asking how to be converted into the body of Christ. The jailor had never heard about being born again, or about membership in the body of Christ. He was not a theologian. He was a terrified civil servant, trembling at the thought that Paul's God was angry enough to send an earthquake; he thought he was a dead man because he had beaten Paul and Silas and locked them in the dungeon.

When Paul told him, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved", the jailor probably answered, "I WILL! I WILL! . . . . . . Who is he?" As Paul explained to the saints in Rome, "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" (Rom. 10:14).

You will notice that after this scene, the jailor took Paul home to treat his wounds, where Paul explained to him the truth of the gospel. Then, the jailor received the baptism of the holy Ghost and became a member of the body of Christ. What a beautiful story!

Anyway, I hope that answers your question. Thanks for writing again.

Pastor John

Dear pastor John,

Thanks for your reply. However, it appears to me that something very important is missing in your answer. So I have another question, in your opinion, who is Jesus Christ?

Floyd

Now, now, Floyd, my friend. That is an old trick. (It would be ungodly for me to give an opinion, or even to have one, on such an important, holy issue. We must believe, not philosophize, about God.)

You wouldn't be trying to change the subject, would you, Floyd? You said nothing of my answer to your question. Why? If you are trying by accusation or challenge to change the subject, that would be typical of Christians when they are shown light from Jesus that contradicts what they have been taught. You guys always change the subject when Jesus comes close to you, trying to love you!

As for the subject we were discussing, please notice that you were mistaken in your first email (see above) about what the jailor meant when he asked Paul, "What must I do to be saved?" This is important because if the jailor was not asking "What must I do to be converted?", then the way most Christians use that portion of Scripture is wrong. Apparently, you have been misusing those Scriptures as well. If so, it is ok. It doesn't mean that you are a monster, or that I don't care about your welfare. It just means that you have found an answer from Jesus, who loves you enough to send you an answer.

It's ok to be wrong, Floyd. Jesus still loves us, even though we don't understand everything. So, let's stay on target here and come to an agreement concerning this "get saved" theology of 20th century evangelical Christianity before we start discussion on any other issue.

Nowhere in the New Testament does the phrase "get saved" exist. Nowhere in the New Testament does the phrase "get saved" exist. Nowhere in the New Testament does any apostle testify of the day he "got saved" or plead with sinners to "come get saved". Nowhere in the New Testament does the word "saved" mean "born again"; and if you can take that in, and be reasonable about it, you are blessed.

Your non-Christian servant in Christ,

jdc

Dear pastor John,

This is not a trick. Who do you believe Jesus Christ is? When He was here on earth, was He Almighty God in human flesh or was He an imposter? That is the issue here not some form of doctrine you have developed. The question every man must face is who is Jesus Christ and what are you going to do with Him.

Floyd

How disappointing! (How typically Christian of you!) Not even an attempt at a response to the truth I showed you! There is something ungodly about that. I responded fully to you when you demanded a better reply to your Acts 16 issue, and then all you had to say is "Thanks. Now let's move on"? Nah. "Salvation" is far too important a matter simply to say "thanks" and then walk away from it like that. Pardon me, but that seems terribly unthankful of you.

When you get serious about our correspondence, I'll reply. I have to say, it appears to me that if you were serious, and not just looking for a doctrinal fight, you'd be rejoicing that I helped you find out something true about Jesus that you didn't know, instead of abandoning that road and searching for fault in something else I may be teaching.

This is the end with you, Floyd, unless you will bring yourself back to what I will call spiritual integrity and respond earnestly to the light I brought you concerning Christianity's ridiculous "get saved" culture. I will not reply to any other emails from you that have to do with any issue other than that.

Pastor John

July 29, 2004

Pastor John,

You have said that if the Bible some one is using contains footnotes, the result is that he learns less. Why?

Stella

Hi Stella:

It has been proved a hundred times by my Bible students that those who use Bibles with footnotes learn less than those who study only the Bible, just as it is. This is because footnotes are about the Bible; they are not the Bible itself. In addition, many footnotes and commentaries actually contradict what the Bible plainly says. When a person uses footnotes and commentaries, they often think they are learning more because they are learning what scholars say about the Bible. Well, they may be learning more, but they are not learning the Bible more. Instead, they are learning what someone has said about the Bible. People often think that learning what commentaries say is learning the Bible. It is not. And the net result is always that those people know less about the Bible, in the end, than the people who simply study the Bible.

To use commentaries when you have not yet learned the Bible well is dangerous. How are you to know whether or not the commentary is trustworthy unless you know the Bible well first?

Pastor John

July 20, 2004

Pastor John,

Hello again! Well, lately I have been thinking alot about the crucifixion of Jesus. I spoke to Amy about it, and she said to ask her dad for that sermon too, so I emailed them again asking for it...but I am writing because I have a question for you.

I don't know if you touched on this during the sermon. So, if you did, just let me know and I will wait until I hear it. When Jesus was in the garden of Gethsemane and was in agony, what was he in agony over specifically? I mean, was it the pain he was about to endure? I heard a pastor once say it wasn't the pain, but because he had to bear our sin, like being sinless having to bear all the disgusting sin of all of us. Can you explain that to me?

He was dreading the awful suffering that he was about to go through, praying for strength to endure it.

Also, I forget where exactly in the Bible, but there is a verse which says something like "as Jonah spent 3 days in the belly of a whale so will the Son of Man spend 3 days in the heart of the earth." Does this mean that Jesus actually went to Hell and suffered or went to Paradise? To the thief on the cross he said "You will be with me this day in Paradise." Paradise wasn't in heaven; it was just a different section of Hell. I understand what Hades and Paradise are, how there was a gulf in between them, how in the torment part of Hades men were burning and on other side were the righteous in Paradise. I just don't get what happened from the moment Jesus died until his ascension. I have always wondered about this.

When Jesus descended into Hades, he preached to souls that were in "prison" (1Pet. 3:18-20). These were the souls who had lived before Moses came. From Adam's time to Moses, there was no Law given to men by God, and so, these had not been judged yet. Jesus went down to where their souls were being held in prison in Hades and preached to them. After that, they were either cast into torment or were taken by him into Paradise.

I heard once that Jesus did go to hell and suffered.

You can forget that.

Also, when did the people who were in Paradise go to actual heaven?

Thanx, Pastor John.

Stella

They were moved when Jesus ascended into heaven, apparently. I heard a godly man say one time that this is what Paul was talking about in Ephesians 4:8-10. There, Paul said that when Jesus triumphed over death, "he led captivity captive". That sounded right to me, especially considering that before Jesus' resurrection and ascension into heaven, when the righteous died, they were "carried by the angels" into Paradise (which was in Hades), but afterwards, for the saints to die was for them "to be present with the Lord", who is now at the right hand of God in heaven.

There is not much said in the Bible about this, and so, any conclusions are subject to change. But this is the most biblically sound scenario I have found concerning those three days that Jesus spent "in the heart of the earth" and concerning the change in the location of Paradise that the Bible clearly reveals.

Thanks for writing, and keep in touch!

Pastor John

July 20, 2004

Dear John,

Recently, I've been feeling so immensely thankful for being able to know even a little about the God we serve. Fortunate to have been given a small measure of knowledge and wisdom, while the people in the world claim that God is a Divine being that cannot be comprehended. (They're content with that concept, which is amazing to me! They settle for everything being a big mystery rather than to desire to KNOW God who allows us to know Him. That's mind-boggling. It's a pity that God's never given them an appetite for His truth.) And my testimony to them falls on deaf ears. They're unable to take in the irrefutable evidence of the new birth and the events in the scriptures that validate my experience. Whew! It's just so unbelievable that people hold to their prideful opinions and then claim that I'm arrogant and narrow. Well, it only proves that conversation convinces no one---unless the power of God is demonstrated. (Even then---they're probably blind to that unless God has prepared their hearts first.)

I just had a conversation with an old friend who presented some points that I wanted to clarify..... In the OT classes, you have said, John, that the Gilgamesh epic and other stories that were orally passed down from generations around the world were perversions of the truth---of the original writings in the Bible. If I'm not mistaken, you've said that the Bible came first and the other interpretations and myths came after. Are you certain of this, based on your research? Are the holy scriptures the oldest written documents on the Earth? (Obviously, the Bible itself was not complied and printed until the 1500's or 1600's. But the parchments/scrolls existed since Moses and the subsequent writers assembled them in the OT days, right?)

Are there older religious writings, from other cultures, with similar stories, that pre-date the scriptures?

I hope these aren't foolish questions.

Hope you've had a wonderful weekend!

~Brad

Hi Brad:

There are certainly older religious writings than Moses' writings. The Egyptians, you remember, had a priesthood even in the days of Joseph. The Egyptians had a complicated religious view of the afterlife, so, I assume, they would have had religious writings to go with their religious rites, hundreds of years before Moses wrote the Pentateuch. Moses' writings preceded many ancient myths and philosophies, but not by any means all. And we can easily see in many of those ancient myths and legends that followed Moses' time, many distortions of the truth God revealed to Moses.

So, no, the scriptures we have are not the oldest of history's religious writings. Their value does not lie in the fact of their age, anyway. Their value lies only in the fact that they are true, revealed by our loving Creator to guide us all into eternal life. None of the fanciful tales of the ancient heathen world could ever do that.

jdc

June 20, 2004

Dear Pastor John:

I have a question about my tithes. I have been paying tithes on my net income. This year (for the first time in 20 years) my husband, and I received a rebate on our income tax. So included in this check is tithes on half of the amount we received. Is this the correct way to do it?

Thank you again for being my pastor and for all your wonderful lessons.

God bless you,

Sister Lacy

Hi, Lacy!

Many years ago, the saints here agreed that tithes should be rendered based on the gross amount of income, after business expenses are deducted but before taxes are taken out. Then, no tithes are to be rendered on any tax refund received.

If we had decided to tithe on net income, then we would have also been tithing on tax refund checks, as you have done,. but we just chose to do it the other way. From now on, I would prefer that you tithe as we have been doing. It isn't a matter of doctrine, really. But I would like for us all to be on the same page with how we handle the Lord's money.

Also, I advise believers to render their tithes only on their income, not their spouses'. Everything brought to God must be brought voluntarily on the part of the rightful owner; otherwise, it is not acceptable to the Lord.

Pastor John

June 16, 2004

Good day Pastor John

After what i experienced in Xty i find it difficult to pay tithe and to say the fact, i have not for once pay tithe, and it never occur to me to pay but what i use to do is to assist people with what i have atimes to the detriment of my financial welfare if i'm parmited to say so. But there's a kind of guilty that i do feel whenever i hear or read anything partaining tithe though i always console myself with the satisfaction i always derive from the alms that i give.

I have been thinking of writing to ask you about this very act of mine lately and lo and behold Sally came up with her question and your reply to her comforted and at the same time gave me a good insight on tithe. Please I will appreciate more highlight on this very issue.

thanks for reading my mails

Regards

Bro Fred.

Dear Fred:

It is extraordinarily difficult to be specific when dealing with situations continents apart. However, there is much information, of a general nature, available for you about tithes and offerings to be found on our web site, PastorJohnsHouse.com. Beyond that, you must be led by the Spirit of Jesus in order to keep a pure heart concerning anything you do, including you handling of God's tithes and offerings.

Jesus will not let you down. Ask him to guide you.

Pastor John

June 9, 2004

Hi Pastor John:

I was watching TBN the other night and a man named TD Jakes was on there. They were all in a big basketball arena, and those people were shouting and dancing all over the place!! I immediately felt sad for those people. But at the same time I felt this cautiousness though, because I didn't want to think or feel anything wrong against them. I think after that thing came up about Bro Angeley, my whole attitude about God's people in Xty changed. They have the same Spirit from God that we do, and sometimes some of them feel the same sweet feelings of the holy Ghost that we do. And they don't know anything.

So, after watching that and Benny Hinn that night, a question came to me. There are some people who have lived right and good their whole lives with the holy Ghost. What about the people who never made it out of Xty, but they lived clean? Will they make it? Are there going to be people who are going to be saved without the Truth?

When you see people like that though, who don't know the truth, it makes you feel like you want to be so much more Thankful than what you are. I know after I watched that, and felt what I felt, I definitely know I should be more Thankful for the things I have. Because most of God's people don't get the opportunities that I have.

Thanks for answering my question,

Margo~

Dear Margo:

Thanks for the questions. They are good ones.

Yes, there are many of God's children still inside Christianity who are sincere and have kept themselves pure. There were a few saints, for one example, in the city of Sardis (Rev. 3:1-4) who managed to keep themselves pure even though their pastor had some major spiritual problems. So, it is possible for saints to live in a bad situation and yet remain clean in the sight of God. So, we can feel thankful whenever you see God's children being blessed by the power and joy of the holy Ghost; that is the thing that will guide them out of Christianity. That is what we all need. That is what will eventually unite all God's children!

We will not be saved, Margo, based on the truth that we know; rather, we will be judged according to the deeds we have done. The Bible is absolutely clear and consistent about that. Of course, if we are taught more truth, then we are expected to live according to the will of God more perfectly. Jesus said it. "To whom much is given, much shall be required."

May God help us please Him perfectly all the days of our lives. That is our purpose and our privilege in Christ. If we do that, we will be gathered together will all those whose hearts are pure, no matter what they have been taught.

I will add this, though, about coming out of Christianity. As that abomination continues to slide ever more deeply into the pit of its own filthiness, I believe that God's call to come out of it will become so clear and powerful that any one of His children who refuses to come out will be in danger of suffering God's fierce wrath. That is, after all, what the warning from God says: "Come out of her, my people, that ye partake not of her sins and receive not of her plagues."

Pastor John

June 9, 2004

Pastor John,

My question is this...is giving our tithes to our parents acceptable with God?

Sincerely,

Sally

Hello Sally:

I cannot in good conscience tell anyone to give what God says belongs to Him to anyone else for any reason. God said that we are thieves if we fail to bring to Him His tithes and offerings (Mal. 3:8), so that duty must come be performed first. A godly person's list of priorities will always have "responsibility toward God" at the top.

The religious leaders in Jesus' day taught young people that it was better to bring offerings to God (beyond their tithe) than to help their needy parents. Jesus sternly rebuked and condemned those elders for teaching that covetous doctrine in the name of the Lord (Mk. 7:9-13). The right thing for all of us to do is to help others, after we have done what is right toward God with our tithes and offerings. Everyone can afford to do that. Jesus will help us do what is right, forever.

Pastor John

June 5, 2004

Gary or John,

a study question:

After seeing The Passion movie yesterday, I began studying the gospels and comparing all of their different writings; their different viewpoints.

I'm trying to reconcile some O.T. verses with the quotes in the N.T. gospels. For example, Matthew is the only writer of the gospels who depicts Judas' repentance, his returning the bag of silver, and confessing his sin to the priests. Matthew 27:9 quotes Jeremiah, but Jeremiah doesn't seem to be prophesying about this incident at all (in Jer. 32). The details are very different, e.g., 17 shekels of silver, etc. I can't discern the comparison.

However----- Zechariah 11:12, 13 is more accurate in comparison to Judas' 30 pieces of silver and the prophecy of potter's filed. So how could Matthew record this incident of the "blood money" and claim that it fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah? It looks like a vague comparison at best.

Brad

Dear Brad:

I am glad you are looking up the Old Testament references that are found in the New Testament. Would to God that all of His people had that much interest in the faith they are trusting to save their souls. God will reward you for your diligence.

Matthew's reference is to Zechariah 11 in combination with Jeremiah 32, where Jeremiah is commanded by God to purchase his uncle's field. Zechariah says nothing about a field, but does mention both the potter and the thirty shekels.

In the sphere of God's prophecies through His OT servants are many mysteries, Brad. You have stumbled upon a peculiar kind of mystery related to those prophecies. There are, as you have noticed, places where the original meaning of an OT verse seems unrelated to the way it is used by God's NT servants (e. g. Mt. 3:23). In those cases, it is best to assume that the apostles were right in their inspired use of the OT and that if we can't understand what they wrote, then we need to be more filled with the holy Ghost than we are.

Many a "biblical scholar" has made shipwreck of his faith by condemning scriptures to the junkheap of superstition because what God's holy men said did not make sense to his carnal mind. I learned the Bible by confessing that if the scriptures did not make sense to me, then I needed more of God in my soul. And God helped me. Praise His holy name forever!

Pastor John

Dear Brother John,

Thank you.

Your response to my letter felt really good. I'm filled me gratefulness and hope. It's nice to receive validation for seeking God's truths diligently, as I felt I was led to do that night when I studied those verses.

Thank-you for writing this: "...it is best to assume that the apostles were right in their inspired use of the OT and that if we can't understand what they wrote, then we need to be more filled with the holy Ghost than we are.. . .if the scriptures did not make sense to me, then I needed more of God in my soul. And God helped me. Praise His holy name forever!"

AMEN! That's precisely what I needed to hear! Exactly what the the doctor ordered!

Praise God!

Thank you for the encouragement, Pastor John.

Brad

June 4, 2004

Comments:

Acts 2.38 says that we are to repent and be baptised and we shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The word 'baptism' comes from the Greek word 'baptismos' which means to fully submerge in water. How can you say you have been baptised when in you do not mention anything about you being baptised in water and your sins washing away? Please feel free to email me regarding this.

Hi Derrick:

Acts 2:38 was Peter's message for the Jews. It included John's baptism, which was also for the Jews. That was not Paul's message for us Gentiles. Paul did not baptize Gentiles with water because it wasn't part of his gospel. That is why he once said, "Christ sent me not to baptize." No "apostolic" minister, such as the ones who have taught you, would ever have said that.

The "apostolic" doctrine you have been taught is in error for attempting to apply Peter's Jewish gospel to us Gentiles. In Paul's "gospel for the Gentiles", there is only "one faith, one lord, one baptism". For more on this, you can read many emails that I have received from others who have been indoctrinated as you have been. It is located at our web site at

http://www.pastorjohnshouse.com/apostolic.htm

May God bless you as you continue to search for Him.

Pastor John

June 2, 2004

people sin every day of there life no man has come short of sin but my daughter says that u can live with out sin with the holy ghost but consciously and unconsciously you sin every day of your life . please explain .. ...

annie s.

thank you for helping her find the right way

life is full of love you just have to know where to find it, in your heart!

Dear Annie:

Every man who "preaches", preaches his own experience. You have obviously been taught by men who are still sinning, and they tell you that you are just like them. And you probably are.

As for me, Jesus delivered me from sin, and so, I tell people that with God's help, they can stop sinning.

Some people don't want to stop sinning, so they believe the men who tell them that they have to sin every day, and Jesus does nothing to deliver them from it. Other people sincerely want to stop sinning, so they believe the men who tell them there is a way out of sin and that Jesus' power can make them clean.

What do you want, Annie?

Pastor John

May 31, 2004

Brother Gary,

I am so grateful the Lord has opened a door for me to receive my own personal income again. It's not as much as the book business I had but I am much happier because now, I am a born again employee filled with the Holy Ghost.....Whooo! How and where do I write the check out for my tithes. It feels so good to do this and know that this is all about our Father's business......Hallelujah! I still don't know why He loves me so much but I am not complaining at all. Glory! Glory! I truly appreciate you.

Shauna

Hi Shauna.

I am glad to see that you are such a "cheerful" giver! As for Pastor John, he never accepts money from anyone except members of congregation that meets at his house, but you can make (tax-deductible) contributions to the publishing work of the congregation here: The Pioneer Tract Society, Inc.

Hey... since you have been made aware of the truth of Christ, have you ever read Pastor John's writings on Tithes and Offerings? They are excellent teachings on this often misunderstood principle - I think every child of God would benefit from the truth about giving, and you can read it at: http://www.isaiah58.com/tithes.html .

It's good to hear from you again Shauna. Keep in touch!

Bro. Gary

May 21, 2004

Pastor John:

Hi...I have a question for you. It isnt pertaining directly to the bible. I just would like your thoughts. I have a friend who just graduated a bible college. He studied evangelism. Anyways...we stopped talking awhile ago because I was questioning what I believed and he stood strong in his so we parted ways. I sent him an email with a link to your web site enclosed and I got a bad response. He said to me that all his life God has kept him. He has never done drugs, drank, had sex...etc... he said if he had been following false doctrine why would God keep him and bless him in all the ways He has so far. Can you help me? I am really confused. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Sally

Hi Sally:

Many thousands of young Muslims have virtually the same testimony as your friend: no drugs, no immorality, no alcohol, no cigarettes, etc. When you really think about it, there is not much difference between a good, moral Christian who rejects the truth of Christ and a good moral Muslim. Now, that statement might provoke a good moral Christian to anger, but then, I suppose it would also provoke a good, moral Muslim to anger. So, there you go again.

You could ask your friend why God blesses and keeps young Muslim men and women from the evils of Western Culture (I bet most of them have never even watched an "R" rated movie!) if they are following false doctrine.

Sounds as if your friend may have fallen into the trap of becoming proud of how good he has been. I know people like that, people who lived much better lives than I did before Jesus called me. (How proud they are of themselves! In my judgment, it would do them a world of good to fall flat on their faces, commit some horrible sin, and finally learn true humility before God. Some people have very strong will power and they determine at a young age that they will never say a bad word, or hit another person, or get drunk, etc. But the temptation to become proud of that is great. And "all our righteousness is as filthy rags" compared to the holiness of our God, which holiness is imparted to man only by the holy Ghost which God gives to every one who obeys Him (Acts 5:32).

If your friend has not received the baptism of the holy Ghost (the real one, with the evidence of speaking in tongues), then he has not fully obeyed God. And if he refuses to submit himself to the living word of God, then he is hiding some secret sin (see Jn. 3:19-21) that, in time, will be exposed.

Do not be impressed by any man in his goodness; be impressed with Jesus and his power to save. And if you have any other questions, feel free to contact me or Brother Gary. I will be out of town for a week or so, beginning tomorrow morning.

Pastor John

May 18, 2004

hello god bless.i have a bible question.can you tell me more.about in the chapter mathew.when god says.if two of you shall agree.on touching anything on this earth.it shall be done for you.how does that work.do you have to agree.with what someone says.or does.thankyou

Hi:

Jesus said, "If two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done of my Father who is in heaven" (Mt. 18:19). This verse is often used by born-again children of God, and by Christians as well, to encourage one another to hope that anything they ask, together, God will do for them. This is obviously not the case. God's children, as well as Christians, have often agreed on something, either some action or some doctrine, that was not just misguided but at times downright perverse. God is not obligated to answer prayers that are contrary to His will. John said that if we ask anything according to God's will, then He will answer (1Jn. 5:14). And this is the key to understanding what Jesus said.

Jesus' promise does not apply to, and was not directed toward everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ. It was directed toward followers of Jesus who were living according to the perfect will of God. James said that if a believer is unstable in his soul, he could not expect his requests to be answered by God (Jas. 1:5-8). What if two, or two thousand, unstable believers agree to ask God for a ton of gold? Is God obligated to answer that prayer? I think not.

Notice that Jesus said, "If two of YOU shall agree . . ." Who was the "YOU" to whom Jesus was speaking? It certainly was not unstable believers. No, it was his faithful disciples.

Let's look again at the verse to which your question refers: "If two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done of my Father who is in heaven." Notice that the verse following this one says, ""For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." And in another place, Jesus said, "Whatsoever you shall ask in my name, that will I do" (Jn. 14:13). What does it mean to be gathered "in his name"? It obviously means "in the Spirit", for the Spirit was sent from the Father in the name of Jesus (Jn. 15:26).

So, to sum it up, Jesus' promise of always doing what is prayed for was made only to saints who are led by the Spirit to agree together to ask something that is according to the will of God. (We need God's Spirit to help us pray prayers according to His will!) Jesus never promised all of us that he would do whatever any believers agreed to ask him. He is not the saint's slave; nor is he a slave to the prayers of ignorant people, who "ask amiss, to consume it on their lusts" (as in Jas. 4:3).

Walk in the Spirit, my friend, and find someone else who is walking in the Spirit, and when you two agree on anything, you can rest assured that God will do it. In fact, He already had it planned that way.

I hope that clears up for you some of the confusion that often attends the reading and interpretation of that verse in Matthew 18.

Pastor John

May 14, 2004

Gary:

May I inquire as to what Church Organization "group" did John Clark Sr "Come Out of Christiany"

Hi Sue.

Pastor John, and his father before him, were never involved with any of Christianity's sects since John's father was put out of the Church of God sect for believing that the baptism of the holy Ghost was the new birth experience (I think that was back in the 1930's or so). Officially, he was expeled for "teaching doctrines contrary to the Church".

Their messages were amazingly the same as they are now in most doctrinal things, but they did not have the complete understanding that it was the entire "religion of Christianity" that was NOT of God. However, both were still calling God's holy Ghost filled people to "come out of her" - not knowing exactly what the "her" was entirely - until Jesus showed this to Pastor John in 1993.

and what date in time did John Clark Sr receive the new revelation and in my understanding in reviewing your website that God spoke to John Clark Sr.? He says that it was in the year of 1993. Is this correct?

Yes, in May of 1993 God spoke to John and told him that Christianity was not the body of Christ, although it pretends to be. It is the will of God that NONE of his children join ANY of the sects that make up that religion. Before 1993, this was not known to many (perhaps anyone), as far as we can find.

Is it possible that John Clark Sr. was a member of the Apostolic Church group?

No - he was not a member of the Apostolic sect. The apostolic denomination (UPC) is NOT of God. It is one of the many prisons for "unclean spirits" that make up the religion of Christianity.

Do you reach out to various Church Organizations, other than the Apostolic Church Organizations? I am in question due to viewing your website, it clearly mentions the Apostolic Doctrine, UPC.

Best Wishes,

Sue

ALL of Christianity is not of God Sue. The thing that binds all Christian sects and groups together is the fact that they do not require what Jesus requires to be born again (which is the baptism of the holy Ghost ONLY); or, that they require something OTHER or ADDITIONAL to the holy Ghost baptism to be saved in the end, (such as water baptism, joining some sect, etc.)

I hope that my explanations help. If you have other questions, please feel free to write. This makes me feel so wonderful to talk about - and I am so thankful to have had Jesus show this to me - that I'd love to tell you more if you're interested.

Best regards,

Gary Savelli

A post script from Pastor John to our web site visitors:

Let me encourage all our visitors to spend your time and energy on searching for the truth of Jesus. I am happy to answer these kinds of questions, but really, it isn't about me. I understand the curiosity, but don't become side-tracked. Your goal is the knowledge of God, not the knowledge of John Clark. There have been people, including minsiters, who spent so much time trying to figure me out that they didn't even study the Bible as they should have. If some people I have met had prayerfully and sincerely sought God for the answers about the way of Christ in the same manner that they laboured to analyze me, they would have discovered wonderful new worlds of love and light. As it was, they never got to know Jesus as he wants us to know him.

Pastor John

May 2, 2004

Dear Pastor John,

Hello! My name is S-------. I have written to Gary before, but I have not introduced myself to you. So HI!!!!!

Thank you for writing.

In my first email to Gary I explained my situation, I hope that you have read it. Recently, I read the tract "the sin of silence". I have a question. Even though I have not been baptized with the Holy Spirit, is it still a sin for me not to speak out against certain things...for instance...this seems to be a very prevalent thing in my life...I meet lots of people who are Catholics...including my family...and when I hear people talk about things...like talking about a upcoming confirmation party or communion...I think to myself...the catholic church is evil and does not deserve your worship and allegiance...It makes me upset.

There is a time to say that sort of thing and a time to be silent (Ecclesiastes 3). The fact that a thing is true does not mean that you have to talk about it. Be willing to speak or to be silent, and then trust Jesus to let you know when to do either. He will let you know.

I want to tell them so much, all the things I have learned. I want to print out pages of information that I have found on web pages...but in their presence I find myself just sitting there silent. For a lot of reasons....I feel like I don't know enough about what I am talking about to actually debate with them and I cant quote scripture to back up what I am saying...also...I am not baptized..so I don't have the Spirit of God, which is the One who would be doing all the work in the person I am speaking to and me also..in conveying the message that I am trying to share.

If you want to tell them, then do. Jesus leads us often by our feelings. Just relax and be yourself--and let your happiness that you have found the right way shine!

Also...I was working at a diner and before I even was hired I told that I could not work on Sundays.. ( I now realize that the Sabbath is not about a day, and that in the OT it wasn't even Sunday) my employers and co-workers of course questioned me as to why I couldn't work this day and I told them it was because I go to church (this was when I was "going to church"). They didn't like it at all because they were short-handed on Sundays. Then a manager had questioned me about my faith and why I was a "Christian" and I told him my testimony...how I used to do drugs and other things and when I met Jesus this all stopped. Well...he basically turned that around and said some really mean things about me, which I found out through other workers. He would make fun of me a lot and all sorts of things...but the point is...my mother told me that next time I get a job, I should not share my personal beliefs with anyone. That way, I wont make trouble for myself where I work. She said I should have never been specific about the "skeletons in my closet"...but I just felt that sharing the truth about all the bad things I was doing...and how serious they were...and then how Jesus truly changed me would be so inspiring to anyone! It is to me!!!!!!!!

(To me, too! Praise the Lord!)

Like to show that you can be so bad but then He has the power to change you and heal you. Ya know?? Then a friend I had said "don't cast your pearls before swine" So...I don't know, I am confused about this.

Forget everything you have been told and just be yourself. Jesus will put it in your heart when to speak and when to be silent. Don't be afraid to do either.

Another question I have is regarding my family. My Grandmother and Aunt have spoken in tongues before, but we haven't discussed this together... My Mom had mentioned it when telling me a story....but they all put the pope on a pedestal...pray to saints, and do other things that are contrary to what God tells us.

Yuk.

So, I have talked to my Grandmother about this, but she dismissed what I said....should I press these things, should I continue to bring them up or just let it go?

Let it go. You have told them. Now show them--in sincere love and meekness of faith.

It disturbs me that they do these things

of course.

and I would want someone to tell me if I was doing something that God specifically tells us not to do..I dunno... I want to help them.

You did, didn't you? Obey Jesus and trust him. Let them see what liberty really is.

I am afraid of coming across self-righteous...like I am trying to show them...ya know what I mean?

Go ahead and show them how to live. Jesus will be happy, and you will be blessed.

Anyways, all thoughts would be greatly appreciated. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

S--------

Let me know if I can do anything else, and let me know when you receive the holy Ghost!

Pastor John

THANX PASTOR JOHN !!!

May 2, 2004

Dear Gary,

Thank you for the email. It definitely was encouraging. I will wait on the Lord. I would like those tapes that you mentioned. I also have two other questions for you. The first question is regarding 1Cor. 11:1-16. The way I understand this is that a woman, when praying in private, prophesying, or praying with fellow believers, she is to have her head covered out of respect for God...is this correct?

Hello again Sophia.

Paul's point in 1 Cor. 11 was not really about the ceremonial aspects of women praying. It was about women having a "head" (re-read his "point" in 1Cor. 11:8-9). The "head" of the woman being the man. Paul was telling the Corinthian believers that it was wrong for women to be the spiritual head of a marriage, just as their custom (one that we do not have in this country, in this day) taught them that praying without a covering on their heads was disrespectful. The point, as I said, was that the man ought to be the head, not the women; otherwise, things are spiritually out of order. The timeless truth in Paul's writings was that if a man and woman are married, the man needs to lead the way in spiritual things.

My second question is regarding Deut 22:5. I realize this means do not mistake your God given role of the sex which you are.... man or woman. This is also pertaining to dress...like for a man not to wear a dress...so would this also pertain to a woman not wearing pants...back in the olden days women never wore pants, they were always in dresses and skirts...only recently have pants been the norm. So what do you think of this?

In the time these verses were written, and in the country in which they were written, there was no such thing as pants for either men or women. The point was that God did not want any person to be a transvestite. That is a perversion. Women should wear women's pants, and men should wear men's pants. It is perfectly normal in our society for women to wear modest women's pants. A man would look silly wearing pants made for a woman.

Our world is a much more "casual" place than it was even 40 years ago. When I was a young boy, I had to wear a suit to just about every occasion other than school. We should be able to change with the times and customs where we are, learn to fit in, and not make ourselves "noticed" one way or the other. I think in this day, for a woman to wear a dress everywhere may actually be odd. Jesus makes us normal, and so we want to stay that way.

For now, Sophia, concentrate mostly on learning and doing the things that will lead you to receiving the holy Ghost. If you have questions such as these, I am happy to answer them - but the "pressure" that many sincere people feel about such things comes from the Christian "religion", not from Jesus. There are opinions and controversies over such things in that religion, and they are a "weight". Jesus will make your burden light. Keep searching out and loving the things that make you feel closer to Him. :)

I will mail those materials to you shortly.

your servant,

Gary Savelli

April 25, 2004

Mr. Clark,

I've just read your web page entitled: "What is a Non-Christian." I still have the research to do, but I think I too am a Non-Christian. I am now wondering what your belief is regarding the rapture, and speaking in tongu