Title of the message is the Hyper D Delusion. Hyper Dispensational Poison. Dear God, as I expose this doctrinal heresy, I pray you'll give the fullness of your spirit. Guide my words, Lord, and we do pray that you will stop this hindrance of revival, and holiness, and truth, and your fear. Bring clarity, God. In Jesus' name, amen. I'm gonna start in Hebrews 1. It says, God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world." These last days refers to this whole New Testament time period. It refers from the time of John the Baptist till the present time. all the way up to the coming of our Lord. Now, right now, I believe we are in the last days of these last days referred to here in Hebrews. But the point is, God did not speak merely by prophets in the Old Testament, as He did in the Old Testament. But He has in these last days spoken by His Son. Jesus is the head of all things. Jesus is the head of the church. And although God used Paul, and although the Lord spoke through Paul in inspired scripture, Paul is not the head of the church. You will find in Hebrews chapter 12, the scripture says, and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, not Paul the mediator, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel. See that you refuse not him that speaketh, for if they escape not who refused him that spake on earth, that would be Moses, Much more shall we not escape if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven. That is the Lord. My point in all of this is to show that Jesus Christ is our head. To show that Jesus Christ is the head of his churches. and to show that the Lord Jesus, His words are our authority today, not merely those words spoken through Paul, but the words that the Lord spake in the Gospels that are meant for us today. The Bible contrasts Him that spake on earth, Old Testament, and Him that speaks from heaven. The Lord Jesus is now literally in heaven. But even when He came to earth the first time, He was God in heaven at that very moment. John chapter 3, And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven. So the Lord Jesus came directly from heaven. Even the Son of Man, which is in heaven. The Lord spake from heaven because He was in heaven. That is through the omnipresence of His nature as God. His divine unity with the Father. Now as I said, a great error has come to full fruition in these last days. In these last of the last days. And in many ways it has arisen where there is otherwise much truth. Why is that? It's more beneficial for Satan to attach great deceptions, confusion, and doctrinal heresies where much truth is found. It's better for his scheme. Why? for the same reasons that vicious, blood-sucking deer ticks jump from the blades of grass to attach themselves to your legs as you walk by in tall grass in a wild area. Even a murderer, as Satan is from the beginning, finds it more effective and expedient to poison good food or good drink than to try to poison something already poisonous that everybody knows is poisonous. Who would eat it? So Satan seeks to hide the leaven of sin and error inside good bread. Even the world and some world leaders that were very, very rich and wanted a world government They knew that hiring somebody like Harry Emerson Fosdick to be just a blatant heretic, a blatant liberal, denying the virgin birth, denying all of the fundamentals of the faith, it went nowhere with their program. It's a lot easier to have somebody from the inside, even inside the fundamentalist camp, or at least appearing conservative. Where you will find a great revival of premillennialism and futurism and literal interpretation. There you find Satan planting seeds of hyper-dispensationalism. So in the 19th century you had something called Darbyism that came from Darby. You had Bollingerism that came from E.W. Bollinger. And you had Schofieldism that came from C.I. Schofield. And this is the line Darby led to Bullinger, which led to Schofield, which got implanted in the fundamentalist movement of the 20th century by way of the Schofield Bible. Schofield reference Bible. And then you start finding an awakening to the preserved Word of God, an awareness of the perfect scriptures in the English language preserved for the last days. And if you think Satan's going to allow that to happen without implanting some toxic error in the midst of it, and we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. So we better examine ourselves now to make sure Satan is not using us Every pastor, every teacher, every believer that is seeking to spread truth, make sure the devil is not using you along with the truth that you have. Because when you get truth, our forefathers, many of the great Puritans even, they said that pride grows on anything. The devil will seek to make you proud of your good works. He'll seek to make you proud of the truth that you have that nobody else has. And then what does truth, what does pride do? It blinds us to further truth. So you end up in great error or great sin. So it is not unreasonable at all to see why Satan would seek to attack wherever there is much truth, because there can also be much arrogance. And I'm not accusing anybody individually of arrogance. I'm just telling you, this is what the devil does. This is what we are capable of. So in the 19th century, where there's this great revival of truth, literal interpretation, a lot of understanding about prophetic things in the last days, a great love for the second coming, then you have this doctrinal heresy that ended up being hyper-dispensationalism implanted right there to try to destroy and stagnate and paralyze the revival that will come. from that understanding of truth. And so it did. Because later on in the 20th century, you had the premillennialism. You had the awareness of the coming of Christ. You had futurism, but you had dead Christian life. Why was that? because you had premillennialism with no teeth. You had the coming of Christ without hardly anything taught about the judgment and accountability in regard to that coming. When speaking of the second coming of the Lord, the Bible says judgment begins at the house of God. Meaning, it should start with us. The awareness, the terror of the Lord, the fear, the desire to be holy and ready for His coming. It ought to begin with God's people. So then when you have the great awakening to what God has done with the AV, the authorized version, the Bible in the English language, right there with many of the leaders of the movement, you had hyper-D, hyper-dispensationalism implanted right there at the forefront of that movement. Now, Satan benefits in a threefold manner by these methods of using people that he's given much truth to by hiding the leaven, not in something worthless, but in the good bread. Number one, He benefits because he's able to spread his pernicious falsehoods and get dangerous explosives in the very heart of the enemy camp. He uses the Lord's own soldiers to spread the explosives, to spread the plagues and the infections. A lot of times when exterminators use these horrible chemicals to try to kill these bugs. They give poisons designed for the bug to take back home to the rest of the ants or whatever it might be. This is what the devil does. He wants these plagues and infections to be spread among the Lord's people in biblical churches. He's already got the other churches. He wants to put out the fire and make sure there is no fervency and awakening among God's people, among the biblical churches. He does use wolves who creep in, but oftentimes he will use otherwise good, gifted leaders that get blinded by pride. I don't want to be as David's older brother that said, I know thy heart and I know your pride, but you can hear boasting. The Bible said in the last days, there'll be boasters. Pride does manifest in a lot of ways. Maybe there's good, otherwise gifted teachers blinded by pride, blinded by fame or other accomplishments. Or maybe he just uses their sin or failings. But I'm telling you, the devil loves to take a good man with a whole lot of truth, and if he can, somehow, use him to spread a whole lot of error. So the man is tearing down what he is so wonderfully building. Number two, It's not merely the spreading of the infectious, dangerous doctrine that Satan seeks. He also uses otherwise good teachers because he knows, as I said, by their false doctrines attached to true doctrines, he can then bind up and often make ineffective the true doctrines that they have. So you have a great teacher who understands the premillennial, literal coming of Christ. But yet he has a doctrine that strips that very doctrine of its power. And such is hyper-dispensationalism. Wherever you find warnings to God's people, And the warnings sound severe. They sound dreadful. They sound terrible. They sound sobering. They're so sobering that people on the street would say, if I knew that that was applied to me, I would change a lot of things about my life. I've heard Christians say that. They said, if what you're saying is true right here, I've got a lot of things I need to change. There was something dead about their prior doctrine that they had been taught. And I believe in eternal security, but I do not believe in a toothless, watered-down judgment seat of Christ, because the Bible does not present such a thing. So you can have on one hand literal truth about the second coming. You can have literal truth about the preserved word of God, some wonderful things. And then with the other hand, pour water all over the fire. Take away with one hand what you have given people with the other. People do it with the gospel all the time. They try to get people saved and then try to tell them that to stay saved or to really be saved. And then they, They put in the blank what all has to be done, you know. It happens all the time. Taking away with one hand what you give with the other. One hand has truth, but then you have poison and you pour the poison all over the truth that you have. And finally, in the end, number three, After the great destruction that is reaped, mentioned in the first two things, the first two benefits of Satan, there is a third benefit for Satan. A great mass of believers will then react to what they suspect is poison. They will begin to discern that poison has crept in. But just as sheep are known for doing, they will stampede in the opposite direction, overreacting. And Satan sits back and laughs at the carnage that is reaped. I have a baby lamb now, and I had a baby lamb several years ago, and you would not believe how it can run from the slightest thing that it sees. I mentioned that before. It saw a squirrel and about killed himself to run away from it, but had no fear of getting close to the woods at night where there's coyotes and dogs and things creeping behind the bush. Such is God's people, sheep. They can run to such an extreme that they overreact and go to the other side of the boat. See, if people receive the poison because their trusted teacher or teachers have other great doctrines that nobody else or few people are teaching. And we know Satan comes to kill But we know that a King James Bible can be just as dangerous as an NIV if it's interpreted wrong, right? It might even be more dangerous. If Satan can't stop you from using the right Bible, if Satan can't talk you into one of these NIVs or NASBs or whatever it might be, If he can't talk you into following Sinaiticus manuscripts, which Satanists say is the most wonderful manuscript in all the world, the most wonderful book in all the world, says Manly P. Hall, the sorcerer. If the devil can't get you away from the King James Bible, he'll just try to get you to interpret the King James Bible wrongly. Satan quoted scripture correctly when he tempted the Lord Jesus or tried to. He just took it out of context. He wrongly divided it. He myth-applied it. So don't get confused. If you say, well, how can hyper-dispensationalism be a great error, a dangerous heresy? if somebody promoting the King James Bible was behind it, or at least was used to help promote the truth. And we also know if multitudes of Christian people begin to discern the errors of, say, Scofieldism or whatever it might be. Satan knows it's human nature, just like sheep, to stampede from one danger to the other right off the cliff, to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater, God forbid, to run from the crocodile on one side of the boat and capsize the boat on the other side and get eaten by the crocodile anyway. I was in a river one time, and we're just drifting down, having a good time, relaxing in a canoe. And I can't remember if it was Sianna or Josiah, but they looked down, and here was a copperhead or a water moccasin, and it was just right here, beside the canoe. You could reach out and touch it. It's minding its own business, but here it comes. And of course they get so afraid of it. The copperhead or the snake was no danger until they stood up and wanted to run to the other side of the canoe. Now we were about to get bitten by the copperhead, you know, whatever it was. It's not a good idea to run from something so far to another extreme. right into another destruction. It says in Amos 5, woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord. To what end is it for you? The day of the Lord is darkness and not light. As if a man did flee from a lion and a bear met him. Understand, you can overreact. You can overreact. And this brings us back to this thing called hyper dispensationalism and its falsehoods. They have spread a lie that if you happen to be this very, very minor percent percentage of all of humankind that has been or ever will be created. If you happen to be in this small little period right here, you have nothing to fear at the judgment seat of Christ. nothing to do with real judgment, certainly no terror. And by such means, this hyper-dispensationalism has taught that the majority of mankind in history past, as well as in the future, either has already or will be eternally saved by grace through faith and works. They say only a small number of people in what they call the church age is saved by grace through faith alone. But everyone in the Old Testament time period, everyone in the coming tribulation period, everyone in the coming millennial kingdom period has been or will be saved by grace through faith and works. That of course is a horrible, blasphemous doctrine. But it is also dangerous to teach that the warnings of the New Testament directed to believers do not apply to believers in this age, but to believers in the tribulation period that are Jewish. or that the warnings in the gospel are not to disciples of Christ for this age, including those of this age, but are to Jews only in the coming tribulation period. And they go further. The destruction goes further. Hyperdispensationalism not only undermines the gospel for most of humanity, it not only takes the judgment seat of Christ and any true accountability and fear for believers of this age, but by teaching believers that many of the books of the New Testament are not fully doctrinally applicable to them today, You're robbed of not only warnings, but also of promises, my friend. And you also are warned of much needed truth to navigate the Christian life. And it ends up making believers nutritionally anemic, spiritually. Or swollen in inflammation and diabetes, spiritually. There's so many teachings that are emphasized or taught in books that Bullinger, Schofield, Ruckman, and those that follow these men would say, oh, well, that's not for you today. Oh, you can get some out of it. There's some things you can get out of it, but it doesn't apply to you. And certainly the warnings don't apply to you. Let's examine what I mean by hyper-D. Hyper-dispensationalism. First, let's give just a little bit of history concerning Bible prophecy. The biblical writers, as well as the post-biblical writers that were not inspired of the first three centuries, were what we call pre-millennialists. The millenniums, the coming thousand-year kingdom. Pre means that they believe that Jesus must bodily, literally come before that thousand year kingdom is set up, that he brings in the kingdom. Pre-millennialist, that Jesus comes before the millennium to set it up. They were also what we call futurists, which means that most of the book of Revelation, is written about things in the future, directly before the second coming of Christ. And if they were premillennialist and futurist, that means they were literalists, because that's what literal interpretation brings you to. You have to use figurative interpretation. to start spiritualizing the numbers. 1,000 doesn't mean 1,000. All these other numbers in the book of Revelation are not literal. Jesus doesn't literally come. Maybe that was Constantine, or maybe that was the Roman general Titus, or maybe it's the good work of Christians. It's not a literal coming of Christ on a white horse. See, you have to use figurative interpretation. But since the early church fathers were very much literalists, For 300 years or more, they believed in premillennialism and futurism. Men like Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Commodian, Hippolytus, and other men. Now, when the Catholic Church began to persecute, when it came into full power around the 6th century or 7th century, and it began to bring in the dark ages and this dark time of persecution, Much truth had to go up to the mountains. It left the mainstream. Christians had to hide and go into the woods and the caves, and they were persecuted all down through the ages, the true believers. But then there was a reformation, an awakening among some Catholics to leave and protest the Catholic Church. And this Protestant movement was born, protesting the Catholic Church. During that reformation period, Baptists and others were able to come out of hiding and many were converted. And with that revival of the reformation came much revival of literal truth in the mainstream. So premillennialism naturally began to spread wherever you find the Reformation. Wherever you find freedom. Now remember the Protestants, many of them, they fled from the persecution of Catholics only to persecute Baptists and anybody else they disagreed with. But in this environment, where there was much truth, able to be propagated, able to be understood and spread in a more open way. Men began to say, not only is there a literal thousand-year kingdom to come, but Jesus must literally come before that kingdom is set up. And these numbers in the book of Revelation are literal. Just as the thousand year kingdom is literal, so are the 1,260 days of the book of Revelation and Daniel. That's also literal, and it's also future. The 42 months, same time period, the 3.5 years, they are literal. They are as literal as the thousand years of the book of Revelation chapter 20. So in the 19th century, you had a great revival of consistent literal interpretation. One of the men that led this movement, not only William Berg in 1820, but Robert Govett a few years later, early 1840s, he began, the name of his commentary was the book of Revelation, literal and future. Futurism was reviving. The teaching of the first 300 years of Christianity was reviving. Great revivals were breaking out. All over the world there was this expectation and looking for the coming of Christ. And there was accountability. People were looking at the parable of the ten virgins and applying it to true believers. They wanted to be ready for the coming of Christ. But then what happened? In the midst of this revival of premillennialism and futurism, there began to be this other teaching creeping in. It used the word dispensation. I want you to notice what Webster says a dispensation is. It's not a bad definition. He says in 1828, that which is dispensed or bestowed. So it can refer to a system of principles and rights enjoined. For example, the Mosaic dispensation. There were things you had to do under Moses. The gospel dispensation. Some of the things under Moses you don't have to do today, such as bring animal sacrifices and things like that, you see. According to Webster, a dispensation can, in a loose way, refer to an age, a dispensing by God of certain principles that he wants you to follow, certain commands. And I don't oppose that use of the word in a general sense. It was common for people to speak of a new dispensation in New Testament days in contrast to the former. Barnes, for example, in Hebrews 12 says, the apostle introduces this sublime comparison between the old and new dispensations. Barnes wasn't what you would call a dispensationalist, and certainly not a radical dispensationalist, and certainly not a hyper-dispensationalist, but he uses this word dispensation to refer to the differences between the old and the new. the Levitical priesthood contrasted to the Melchizedek priesthood, you know, the two different covenants. And regardless of one's specific prophetic views, Every Christian that I know of believes in at least two dispensations. Every Christian that I know of believes that in the Old Testament, animal sacrifices were commanded, but they are not in the New Testament age. So every Christian already, that's why getting rid of the word dispensation altogether, call it ages if you want, many people, Many great teachers referred to seven ages they could point to in history, including the coming millennium. You can look throughout biblical history and what the Bible says about the future, and you can start seeing, okay, well, this age will be a little more different than this age. There'll be some changes between this age and this age, but there are some things that never change. And this is where hyper-dispensationalism comes in. erroneous dispensationalism, dangerous dispensationalism. They start coming in and they say, oh, there's some changes as we can see between these different ages. And we believe that salvation changes. in all of these ages. And there's only one small age that is salvation by grace through faith alone. Everybody else has to work. Everybody else has to sacrifice. Now, what could go wrong with something like that? Not only is it perverting the gospel, because Paul says all have fallen short. If a man can get saved by works, why did the Lord Jesus Christ come? But not only that, there is a perversion, a lack of accountability. And you don't want to put people under works, which many do with Lordship Salvation and all these other schemes of work salvation that they call grace. So without perverting the gospel, how do you make believers accountable? How do you urge them toward accountability? You give them their own warnings. And as we said, hyper-dispensationalism perverts the gospel in most ages of history and future, but it leaves this present age with almost no accountability at all. Now there were many theologians in the 19th century that embraced a replacement theology, where they no longer believed in literal interpretation. They denied the future restoration of Israel in unbelief. Before Israel's great coming revival spiritually, there's going to be a time when Israel is restored in unbelief, as we see today. Even though there's a remnant today of Jewish believers, and there's going to come a great awakening Literal interpreters and even many of the spiritual figurative interpreters understood that there would be a great revival of Israel literally as a nation in the last days and even spiritually after their revival or rebirth in unbelief. So what happened is the literal interpreters often came to be called dispensationalists. by these people that embraced replacement theology, the figurative interpreters. But then some of these dispensationalists began to teach very radical, unscriptural, unbiblical teachings, such as that entire books of the Bible, even in the New Testament, do not apply fully and doctrinally to believers in this age that they call the church age. Some only leave you with a few of the prison epistles of Paul. And they say, these are the only ones that can be fully doctrinally applied to us today. And they go on to teach that all the other books are teaching a works salvation. a salvation by grace through faith and works. But not these other prison epistles. Only those are teaching Paul's gospel, which they believe is the only gospel of grace through faith alone. Which means, for eternal salvation, the one that supposedly came and brings the teaching of this gospel of grace through faith alone is Paul. Which is why there's this great emphasis of Paul. The Gospels end up being despised. They might say, oh you can get some things out of them, but you know, they're for Israel in the coming tribulation period. And they'll go through like Matthew 25 and they'll say, well see this isn't for us. You can get some applications, maybe a few practical things out of it, but you don't have to fear these warnings. This is for the Jew in the tribulation period. Then you turn to the Sermon on the Mount. They say, oh, this isn't for believers today. That would be ridiculous to put believers under this. This is for Israel. Or this is the rule of the coming kingdom. Just nonsense that they come up with. Absolute nonsense. And it's no wonder that anybody with a little bit of sanity who has read the Bible, or even some of it, can hear these teachings and not say, I am appalled. This is absolutely, it's grotesque what you're saying here. If this is what literal interpretation is, if this is what so-called dispensationalism is, if this is what premillennialism is, I'm leaving this whole thing. And then they go right back into the teaching of origin that started the whole Catholic church. No man, you jumped off the other side of the boat. What you need to do is fix literal interpretation, not throw it out. So the line of what I would call heretical dispensationalism goes from men like Darby to men like E.W. Bullinger, right through to Schofield, that got implanted by big money, where he put his notes in a Bible at the height of the fundamentalism battle, and folks were so, they were being attacked on all sides by liberals and evolutionists and people that did not believe in premillennialism. The first world war had not even started yet. People were like, hey, we gotta get rid of premillennialism. It's just this, Doctrine that doesn't have any motivation whatsoever for us. It says everything's gonna end bad, but look how wonderful everything is going So I believe in somewhat desperation Otherwise, good men decided, hey, we might disagree with Schofield in a lot of places, but if he's got the money, if they're gonna publish this thing, let's put these premillennial notes in the Bible and put it in everybody's hand. So then you got fundamental Baptist pastors all over the world saying, get you a Schofield Bible, get you a Schofield Bible. It was some type of desperation to push the doctrine of premillennialism, but at what cost? The devil was laughing all the way. You should have never put man's notes in a Bible and then tell everybody to bring that Bible to church as the Bible you read for devotion. You can have notes, you can have libraries, you can have Schofield's books. Read what he says if you want to, but don't put his words in a Bible and have people carry it around. J. Vernon McGee saying, if you get your Scofield Bible, you know, that's what you need. Even good men like Jack Hiles, like, you know, opened up to a page so-and-so of your Scofield Bible. I mean, it was considered a bedrock of fundamentalism to carry around a ridiculous Scofield Bible. I don't care that it had some truth in it. I don't care that it taught premillennialism. There's a lot I agree with in the Scofield Bible that probably others wouldn't even agree with today. But there's some trash in the Scofield Bible. There is some doctrinal heresy. And one thing he does is he puts a big bracket over the epistle of James, the epistles of Peter, the Gospels. He goes through and says, well, this isn't Scripture for you today. Or put it this way, it's not applicable to you. It's for the Jews. Now they will argue. And some of these men will say, well, the reason that the Lord Jesus didn't preach Paul's gospel is because he had not sacrificed himself yet. So everything was law. The Lord was teaching Old Testament law. Old Testament doctrine. because he hadn't been sacrificed yet. And I said, now, wait a minute. The Lord is New Testament, right? New covenant, right? What happened at the first covenant? Was the law read after the sacrifice that Moses shed, or was it read before the sacrifice? Let's read it. Hebrews 9 says, When Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats with water, and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people, saying, This is the blood of the testament which God had enjoined unto you. So I asked you, Mr. Hyper D Man, what happened here with the first covenant? You had the law of the first covenant read, the precept and commandments of the first covenant, and then you had the shedding of blood. And it said, this is the blood of the testament. Now obviously the blood that is shed for the New Testament is the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. So what would the Lord do? I believe he would follow the same order. He's going to read. the precepts of the new covenant. He's going to read the law of the new covenant. He's going to read the royal law of the new covenant. And then he is going to what? Die and sacrifice. And now as the high priest, we have the power of that blood. We have the ability to come before the throne of God and his mercy seat to receive power and mercy as believers. with our Lord as the High Priest. And we also have eternal salvation, redemption by His blood. But we have words of the New Testament. We have the words. And what did the Lord say? The Bible says that He has not spoken by Moses in these last days, not spoken by the prophets in these last days, Hebrews 1 and Hebrews 12, but He's spoken by the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven. And what did the Lord say? Moses said this unto you, but I say, Moses said this about divorce, but I say, the Lord was not shy to change what Moses had said. And that's why they were shocked and wanted to kill him. That's why they said this man, he doesn't speak like somebody interpreting the Bible. He speaks like somebody that can say, oh yeah, but we're not doing it that way today. It says in Hebrews 7, for the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. You see that? There were things that the Lord Jesus changed. Now he didn't change anything such as, oh, well now sodomy's okay. Now, necromancy is okay. No, there is a moral law that will abide and stay the same throughout the ages. But there were ceremonial things. There were some things like whether you bring a sacrifice or not or exactly what a sacrifice is. All of these things, the Lord is able to change and did change. But whatever changes occur, It doesn't mean that you are necessarily able to discard whatever didn't change. And that's the same throughout every dispensation. People say, well, what do I need to obey in the Old Testament? I don't believe I'm under the Old Testament. I don't have to obey anything. Well, then why did Paul tell the Ephesians that they ought to obey their parents? And then he referenced one of the 10 commandments and says the first commandment would promise as if, well, why did he say Timothy had the scriptures from a child? This idea that you're not supposed to study the old Testament and make applications to you as a believer today, it's taken way too far, way too far. There are some things that have changed and there are some people unwilling to see that the Lord has changed some things. But then there's another camp that says, I can just discard everything that's in the Old Testament because it's old. God killed or judged cities, Gentile nations. I'm gonna tell you, if God judged a Gentile nation for something in the Old Testament, the same God will judge people today for the same thing. You commit sodomy, God will judge a nation and a city the same way. God said, don't be as the Canaanites. Because for all of these things, I've judged them. Those things that the Canaanites were doing are still wrong to do today. And you'll still be judged for them today. Things that were found before Moses, that's for today still. A lot of people say, well, we don't have to do tithing. That's Old Testament. Hey man, tithing was before the law of Moses. Now, some people will say, I don't go far enough because I believe the Sabbath days are one of the things that you shouldn't be judged for today. As Paul says, people say, no, no, you got to apply that today. Well, I don't agree. But others on the other side would, I don't think God wants you to eat a buzzard today that vomits all over himself any more than he wants you to eat a buzzard in the Old Testament. And according to the book of Revelation, the book of Isaiah, when the Lord comes, a buzzard's still unclean. Certain birds are still unclean. I believe that they're just as bad for you today as they were back then. And no one knew what was clean and unclean before the mosaic law. I believe when he says cross-dressing in Deuteronomy is wrong. I believe it's still wrong today. I don't believe you ought to mark yourself all up. I believe there's a lot of things in the Old Testament that are still applicable today without getting off into Hebrew roots and things that take things too far. But this idea that the gospel is not in the gospels, this idea that this thing called the gospels are Jewish gospels and have nothing to do with what a Christian should be following today. I don't know how a greater heresy could ever be brought into the churches of God. Let's read John chapter 3. Ye yourselves bear witness that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before Him. The Father loveth the sons, and hath given all things into His hand. Now listen to what John the Baptist says. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life. And he that believeth not the Son shall not see life. But the wrath of God abideth on him. John the Baptist is saying that life comes by believing in Jesus. That's the gospel, my friend. That is Paul's gospel. That is Jesus's gospel. That is the gospel of eternal salvation. It says in John 1, the next day, John seeth Jesus coming unto him and saith, behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. That's gospel. It's the gospel Jesus preached in John 3, 16. For God so loveth the world, he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. I admit that in the gospels, There is much, much teaching other than the gospel of John. The gospel of John still has teaching to believers, but he tells you plainly in John 20 that the whole thing, the whole book was written so that you might believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ. but God ordained three other gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which contain much information on discipleship to the disciple, to somebody who already believes on Jesus. That's why in the gospel of John, you got the woman at the well, you got Nicodemus, you got John chapter six, you've got all of these teachings about how to be saved and illustrations in eternity with some teaching on discipleship. But in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, you've got a lot of discipleship teaching on what we need to do to be ready for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now, a man named Peter Ruckman. Rail zone. People. that apply the Gospels and the book of Hebrews and the book of Revelation and Peter and James and their epistles. He rells upon them. He's dead now. He died 1916. I'm sorry, 2016. But he would not apply doctrinally fully much of the New Testament to true believers in this age. He wrote a track called The Big Flap, where he says, I am the one, talking about himself, that has come up with this doctrine. I'm the one. Why do you think, he says, and he goes through all the denominations that believe in a loss of salvation and eternity. And he says, all of them are just taking Matthew and Hebrews and applying them to this age. All of these books are about salvation by works in the coming tribulation period. So in 1995, I sent Ruckman a letter. And I said, listen, you are inviting everybody to come debate. You're challenging everybody to come debate. After much study, this is a terrible error that you have. And my desire wasn't to get one up on Peter Ruckman. My desire was to keep the King James Movement pure from this horrible heresy that was hurting it. So he wrote me back, July 31st, 1995. He says, Dear Brother Faust, as you can see by the enclosure, the big flap, you're not ready to debate anybody in regard to Hebrews, Acts, and Matthews. If you wish to write a book refuting my teaching on tribulation and millennial salvation, I suggest you get off your lazy tail end and write it. Well, that's already what I was doing anyway. Since he declined my offer of debate, after he invited anyone to come up there and he would debate them, I didn't respond to this. I just went back to writing my book, which wasn't directly against Ruckmanism, but it was interpreting these warnings in the rightful way that so many men of God down throughout the ages had interpreted them. Men such as Pember and Govett and Nee and all these people all down through history. But Ruckman says he's the one that has come up in the last days with this proper interpretation. That should tell you something's wrong already. Are you telling me nobody saw what you're teaching, but suddenly now you know how to interpret all the New Testament in a way that nobody has in all of history, and it's because you have come. That's what you call a cult, man. But after ignoring him now, he decided to write me again. So the next month or two, about two months later, he wrote me September 9th in 1995. It must've made him start thinking. And he says in Hebrews 6, he says, Hebrews 6 is not written to a Christian. You better keep reading the chapter. Hebrews 10 is written to Israel with the quotations coming from Deuteronomy 32. You didn't check them. I'm sending you a book called, How to Teach Dispensational Truth, which you know nothing about. I won't get into it, but. One of my first churches I attended was a scholar that was an author that was known for dispensational truth, who was friends with Tommy Ice. And I learned a lot about dispensational truth under these men. I studied, I read, I read all of the theocratic kingdom by Peters. I read the works of Pember. I've read anybody that was a dispensationalist that I could find hundreds and hundreds of books out in the, throughout the 1800s and earlier. But he writes me back in November 5th, 1995, and he says, Dear Brother Foss, you say your theory is based upon a preconceived opinion taught to you by tradition. That tradition has never been taught. He's saying nobody has taught what he teaches before him, as he says in the big flap. You forgot that Hebrews is also written to a people who can lose their salvation. Now, Peter Ruckman died in 2016. His son, Peter Ruckman Jr., right after a horrible divorce, committed suicide after he allegedly murdered his two sons. The boys attended a Christian school. Peter Ruckman Jr. was a professor of political science. Just days before this event of murdering his sons, or killing himself, and then killing himself, supposedly, he emailed his life's work to the media. That kind of speaks a little bit that he really had suicide in his mind. I don't know if he was on psych drugs. I know nothing about the situation. I say allegedly, but this is what is reported. And I must say this. If he did it, it is one more horrible tragedy and example that keeps being found everywhere you find zero accountability. Anywhere you tell people you're saved by grace through faith alone and you have nothing to fear at all at the judgment seat of Christ that you could really be called fearing, you see some horrible things happen. And God says these things, this type of sin will come from a doctrine without accountability. He says, I'm in a hurry. He says in Jeremiah chapter 23, I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran. I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in my counsel and had caused people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way and from the evil of their doing. What was it that was in God's words? It was warnings against sin. God says here, if you give people My warnings, they will turn. Many of them will turn from their sin or be kept from sin. So the opposite is also true. If you don't give the proper warnings to God's people, many of them, not all, but many of them will go into sin that they would not have gone in had you given the warning. Which means, if hyper-dispensationalism is a great heresy that I say is. If these warnings are to be taught to God's people, what are we doing by taking away the gospels, the book of Revelation, the epistle to James, the epistle to Peter, the epistle to the Hebrews? What are you doing to the churches of God by robbing them of their warning? You are promoting great sin. He says in Ezekiel three, son of man, I have made thee a watchman into the house of Israel. That's before you get into Ruckman's teaching on the new man, which also brings people away from accountability. He says, The Son of Man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel. Therefore, hear the word at my mouth and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, thou shalt surely die, and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way. See, warnings bring people from their wicked way to save his life. The same wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thy hand. That's what we need to hear today about anybody that will take away New Testament warnings from God's people. Again, when a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die. Why? Because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin. Notice, the warning brings accountability and responsibility. Nevertheless, if thou warn the righteous man that the righteous sin not notice that the righteous sin not warning and he does not sin, he shall surely live because he is warned. Also, that has delivered thy soul. According to God, his warnings are important. According to God, if his warnings are taken away, at least a great horrible sin in the people of God and any who do not hear it. Let me give you a text here in Matthew 28. It closes out the book of Matthew. Our Lord, it says, then the 11 disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them saying, all power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. teaching them, listen to this, to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. He sends his disciples into all nations, not just the Jews, to teach all things whatsoever I have, past tense, commanded you. Where are those things at? They're recorded in the gospels. They are recorded in the four gospels. All the things that he has taught them that we need today that should be taught to the nations is given to us right now. teaching them to observe not some of the things, all things whatsoever I have commanded you." And then just to show that this wasn't a temporary thing, he says, I'm with you always, even to the end of the world. Now, Ruckman, a hyper-dispensationalist, says in the book of Matthew that he first began, the first edition was in 1970, he says, the Great Commission is found here, and it's taken for granted by 95% of Christendom that this commission is the present commission to the church in this age. Bullinger and O'Hare and Stam have pointed out some difficulties with this commission, however, which should not be overlooked. See, Ruckman is really, he just takes Bullinger, which was heresy, to a whole new level. But he's saying, if you go read Bullinger, you'll see why you shouldn't take this commission as applicable to us today. Horrible thing. Horrible thing to say. Bullinger, you'll see him at many of the prophetic conferences of the 19th century. And you'll see people get up and warn about the coming of Christ and give the parables to believers and other New Testament scriptures. And Bullinger, when everybody gets to talk about it, Bullinger will say, well, I object. These things are Jewish. They need to be given to people in the tribulation period. This shouldn't be given to God's people today. And it was a terrible thing. You had Schofield at some of these conferences, but you had great men like Pember and D.M. Panton and so many others that did apply the warnings to believers while they also believed in eternal security and salvation by grace through faith alone. So which path did Ruckman follow? Instead of following the Pember-Panton line, he followed the Schofield-Bollinger line right into hyper-dispensationalism and no accountability for this age. Well, what is the great reasons that we should not apply the Great Commission to believers today? He says the Commission includes teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you. Which would mean, if you applied it, foot washing, healing the sick, cleansing lepers, raising the dead, going to Israel only, plus pork abstaining, and the whole Sermon on the Mount. Rukman's saying, if you applied this commission, then you would have to teach all the things I've commanded you, which means you would have to teach the Sermon on the Mount is for believers today, and all these other things. Without getting into every one of these things and giving an answer, since I'm running out of time, I want you to see how ridiculous this argument is. Number one, the Sermon on the Mount should be applied to believers, if you interpret it right. If you can't interpret it right, then maybe study somebody that can help you. Ask God, because I'm gonna tell you, the Sermon on the Mount is applicable to believers today. There are accommodations that you can make. that are justified and not sinful. And the Bible teaches that. Ruckman himself makes accommodations in the prison epistles that he claims are applicable fully to New Testament believers today. He mentions that you'd have to believe in foot washing if you believe the gospels were for today. But look at first Timothy five, which is a prison epistle that he applies to believers. Listen to what Paul says. Let not a widow be taken into the number under three score years old, having been the wife of one man. Well reported up for good work. If she had brought up children, if she had lost strangers, if she has washed the saints feet, if she has relieved the afflicted, if she has a diligently followed every good work, then you could support her. These are the qualifications. If she has washed the saints feet, What is Ruckman gonna do with that in a prison epistle? Why, he accommodates it. He says in 1989 in his pastoral epistles, the foot washing here is obviously not a church ordinance. It has to do with personal ministries to travelers who stopped by for a meal. It is apparent that walking barefoot or with sandals will produce a pair of dirty, dusty feet in a few hours. So guess what? Anybody with a mind ought to be able to say that a widow today, if you're gonna support her by the church, you don't have to say, wait a minute, have you ever washed anybody's foot? You can take foot washing that they did back then and apply it to this age when people are not walking in dirty roads. They're not walking as much as they did back then. And they're not walking with sandals and other shoes that could end up with dirt all inside of them and things like that. So in our culture here, there's not the need that there was like there was then. Just as they had chariots and we have cars. Just as they walked many places when you could take a car and fly. There are some accommodations that you can make without destroying the moral teachings that you have been given by the Lord or in the prison epistles or any of the epistles of the New Testament. Ruckman goes on and says, nobody can find the 11 going into all the world. They stay in Jerusalem. Well, was God happy that they stayed in Jerusalem or did God scatter them with persecution and make them leave? That's a ridiculous argument. Then he says, the end is nearly always found referring not to the end of the church age, but to the end of the tribulation. So in other words, you are to apply the book of Matthew to the tribulation period. That people were for 2,000 years supposed to read that commission and say, now we know this isn't to us. This is the people in the future tribulation period. That's not what the Lord said. He didn't say go into all nations and tell them that all my commandments are about the tribulation period to come. It's so ridiculous that it's no wonder people want to leave premillennialism altogether. He says, after Acts 7, the commission is altered by a gospel of salvation by grace through faith and a blood atonement, and is explained as a free gospel of grace plus nothing in order to be justified. I believe the Lord Jesus, just like John the Baptist, was talking about a justification by faith. through the blood atonement. So when he says in verse 20 of the commission, teaching them to observe what all things, that came after, he says in verse 19, go ye therefore and teach all nations. What are you to teach them? The gospel. You're to teach the gospel, comma. That's the gospel of the blood atonement through faith alone. Then you're to get them baptized. Then you're to disciple them into all the things they ought to do as a Christian to please God and be ready for the judgment seat of Christ. It's so plain right here. It's so plain. Let's take a look at Schofield real quick. Schofield reference Bible of 1917, introduction to second Corinthians. Listen to what he says. It is evident that the really dangerous sect in Corinth was that which said, and I am of Christ. First Corinthians one. They rejected the new revelation through Paul of the doctrines of grace, grounding themselves probably on the kingdom teachings of our Lord as a minister of circumcision. Seemingly oblivious that a new dispensation had been introduced by Christ's death, this made necessary a defense of the origin and extent of Paul's apostolic authority. I find it horrible that you have Schofield saying the most dangerous of all, The really dangerous ones were not the ones that were saying, I am of Paul, but the ones that were saying, I am of Christ. And he says, because they were teaching Jesus's kingdom teachings. He's saying it was dangerous to teach what the Lord Jesus taught in the gospels. That was the dangerous. These were the bad guys. I continually called for Ruckman to produce in my letters to him going back and forth. Show me one verse or statement. He knew I would do this in a debate. Show me one verse or statement in the Bible teaching that the various books you dismiss for this age are only to be applied to Jewish believers in the tribe. How in the world did the original recipients of the book of Hebrews, after the signed gifts had passed, how did the original recipients, those Jewish believers, how were they to know that this is supposedly, now make sure you don't apply the warnings to yourself, those are all for future Jews in the tribe. It's insanity is what it is. What about Hebrews 13? Paul says, know you that our brother Timothy is set at liberty, with whom, if he comes shortly, I will see you. Salute all them that have the rule over you and all the saints. They of Italy are to salute you. How are they to say, now, you know, even though he says, you know that our brother Timothy is set at liberty, this epistle is not written to us. All of you Jewish believers, this isn't really written to us now in the first century. It's about the future tribulation period, not now. Really. Were they to ignore Hebrews 13 that says, Let brotherly love continue? Were they to ignore, Be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels? Were they to ignore, Remember them that are in bonds as bound with them, and them which suffer adversity as being yourselves also in the body? Were they to ignore, Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled, but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge? Somebody doesn't like the book of Hebrews. Were they to ignore, verse seven, remember them which have the rule over you, have spoken unto you the word of God, whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation. Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and today and forever. Somebody who wrote the book of Hebrews believed that there were some things that remained the same yesterday, today, and forever. Hebrews 10, let us, let us consider one another to provoke and to love and to good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as a matter of some is, but in exhorting one another and so much the more as you see the day approaching. I believe people in the first century, brother, we're supposed to obey that. I believe people in the 1st century were supposed to not forsake themselves. I believe people in the 6th century that were believers were not supposed to forsake the assembling of themselves. I believe people in the 19th century were supposed to go to church and not forsake the assembling of themselves. And he says to keep doing this, keep assembling, keep going to church, never lose that institution, never lose proper attendance, never lose that. As you see the day approaching, that means all the way up to the second coming of Christ, we are to obey what it says in the book of Hebrews. But what about the next few verses? If we, the same us, the same ourselves, the same plural we that he's talking to, that he told him to go to church, if we sin willfully after we receive the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. And you know, that certain fearful looking for a judgment, which shall devour the adversaries. And then he goes on to say, God will judge his people. You know what they want to do today, brother? They want to say, that's just for the Jew. You know what they want to do today? That's just for the Jew in the tribulation period. Doesn't it say written to the Hebrews? That's like saying that the book of Ephesians is just written to Ephesian Gentiles in the city of Ephesus. That's like saying the epistle to Corinth is just written to Corinthians. And if you're in any other city, it doesn't apply to you. The whole thing. That's like saying, well, The epistles of John are written to individual people. Or Luke wrote his gospel to Theophilus, and so therefore it doesn't apply to anybody else but Theophilus. The whole thing's absurd. The whole thing is just horrible, false teaching that has perverted the gospel by showing that people can somehow be saved through their works, even if it's by grace. It's a horrible, damnable heresy. And then, It strips people from commands and teachings that we need. It strips people from warnings that we need. It strips people from promises that we need. Dear Holy Father, we thank you for those that have made it to the end of this message. Lengthy, but I wanted to get at least this introduction. I believe all these things are important. In one message, I pray you'll use it to your glory. Father, I do pray that you awaken many to the commands that they are overlooking, to proper interpretation of those commands and to your warnings and the wonderful promises about reigning with you in the coming millennial kingdom and the warnings about being excluded. Oh, Lord, you said if we suffer, we shall reign. And God, how ironic that so many of these people that I hear quote Matthew 25, and they say in their own sermons, oh, may I be a good and faithful servant, while taking away the very warning that you show, the things that will happen if they are not a good and faithful servant. There's just so much folly, so much contradiction. Lord, revive your people, revive your truth, revive proper division of your word, in Jesus Christ's name, amen.