Radio Programs - Now Playing
Point of View

Listen to Archives, Read/Leave Feedback
Today's Schedule, Radio Show List
The Uniqueness of Jesus Christ in a World of Religions
by Brannon Howse
Upcoming Conferences
November 22, 2008
Wichita, Kansas

November 23, 2008
Kansas City, Kansas

April 24, 25 & 26, 2009
Branson, Missouri

Meet Brannon Howse
President & Founder, View Bio

Brannon Howse

Schedule Brannon
for your next event
Search
Search:

View articles by:











Summit Ministries















Worldview DVDs
Bob Cornuke and David Limbaugh DVD
Only $14.99!

Brannon Howse / Voddie Baucham Jr. DVD
Only $14.99!

Candace Cameron/Brannon Howse DVD
Only $15.00!

David Barton / Carl Kerby DVD
Only $14.99!
David Barton and David Jeremiah DVD
Only $14.99!

David Barton DVD
Only $9.99!
Dr. Marshall Foster / Janet Folger
Only $14.99!
Jason Carlson/Mark Cahill DVD
Only $15.00!

Ken Ham DVD
Only $14.99!

Kerby Anderson / Dr. Marshall Foster
Only $14.99!
Michael Reagan DVD
Only $14.99!

Norm Geisler / Norm Geisler
Only $14.99!
Ravi Zacharias and Brannon Howse DVD
Only $14.99!

Ron Carlson / Brannon Howse
Only $14.99!
Sean McDowell / Josh McDowell DVD
Only $14.99!

Woodrow Kroll / David Jeremiah DVD
Only $14.99!

Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?



Posted: 12/17/2006

Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?

 

The self-styled “Bible Answer Man” will have to give an answer to God someday.[1] He will have to give an answer for why he has sued a Christian brother and is now suing another Christian brother in a court of law and disobeying the Bible, the Bible he quotes famously as the “Bible Answer Man.Hank additionally is siding with the “Local Church” in a lawsuit against apologists and Harvest House Publishing.[2] Is Hank’s foray into these legal battles indicative of biblical incredulity on his part in light of passages such as 1 Corinthians 6, or does he just not know what 1 Corinthians 6:1, 7-9 states? Shouldn’t the “Bible Answer Man” revere all chapters of the Bible from which he teaches? Would that standard be too high?

 

Just look at us. Have we come to the place in the American Church where we can take any proud, irreverent interpretation of “being persecuted for righteousness sake” straight to the bank? Surely the Bible Answer Man would not teach us such a lesson. Would it be too presumptuous of us to expect the Bible Answer Man to live in obedience to the Bible, like we are all commanded to live as Christians?

 

Harvest House, John Ankerburg, and John Weldon are being sued by the Local Church, and Hank is supporting this lawsuit. Gretchen Passantino has chimed in, too, to aid Hank against these apologists in this lawsuit. It is funny how most of Hank’s audience is not aware of this lawsuit against apologists. As I have spoken to radio hosts and Hank’s “fans”, they have all seemed astounded at this news. If there is nothing wrong with it, then why not feature this story on a segment of the radio show? Christians would be interested in your answer, Hank!

This recent letter in support of the Local Church is only the latest in Hank’s suing record. Hank currently has a law suit filed against Dr. Bill Alnor at Spiritual Counterfeits Project.[3] Moreover, Hanegraaff counter-sued another Christian, Brad Sparks, a former employee of CRI back in 1995. Here are some of the details from Brad:[4]

 “…I, along with my wife and children, were punished for publicly speaking out. We suffered from Hank Hanegraaff's $400,000 of harassment from an international secular law firm (Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher) (according to figures given in CRI's audited annual financial statement for June 30, 1995), as well as from an unknown amount CRI spent for a private detective agency (Allied Management Resources), which was conveniently withheld from the audit report. That was approximately how much CRI donor money was spent by Hank without the donors' knowledge or approval of such shocking amounts (roughly 10% of the CRI budget), all to protect Hank from accountability…It apparently does not even include an unknown amount of money spent on Hank's and CRI's countersuit against me [Brad Sparks] (undertaken without even a pretense of Matt. 18 action), which the audit report also conveniently failed to mention. And it doesn't include any amounts spent in July 1995 after the cutoff date of the audit (such as the $20,000 settlement).

I was forced to settle my case because of the abuse and vicious tactics engaged in by Hanegraaff and CRI…CRI has certainly taught the cults a thing or two using all this CRI donor money to frustrate and harass me with high-priced lawyers and private detectives. If my case was so ‘baseless’ and ‘frivolous,’ as Hank and his minions claim, then how come with all these hundreds of thousands of ‘ministry’ dollars to pay $200- to $300-per-hour attorneys, they still couldn't even prove it ‘baseless’ in a court of law?”

Hank Hanegraaff obviously has no qualms about Christians suing Christians.

 

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? I Corinthians 6:1


Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated? No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren! 1 Corinthians 6:7-9

 

So, it begs the question, does the “Bible Answer Man” care about what the Bible teaches? Maybe he has given that verse about not suing a “new interpretation” which is another current trend in disobedience to stifle the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

 

“Vengeance is Mine, and I will repay” (Romans 12:19), and no amount of money can appease God’s wrath!

 

Does it matter to Hank that Walter Martin defended the faith against the cults?  Walter Martin used to spend his time defending the Bible, not defending the cults. Here is what Walter Martin had to say about the Local Church:

 

“Witness Lee worked with Watchman Nee and in the 1940s was sent… by Watchman Nee to carry forth his specific views…What you begin with in the Local Church is exactly the error committed in the kingdom of the cults…We are dealing with: this is the church of the recovery. Christianity has suffered great reversals, and it has to be recovered. What is the agency of the recovery? Witness Lee’s theology and the Local Church. So, when they are in session…and we are in session…they are the church of Jesus Christ, and we are not. Well then who are we? We are told by the Local Church that we are the ‘Daughters of the great Whore of Babylon’, all the denominations are the ‘Daughters of the Whore’…” –Walter Martin, “Witness Lee and the Local Church[5]

 

In a day where cults are being called “sacred tribes” by Christians, this news of Hank Hanegraaff siding with the Local Church should not be surprising. May we pray for Hank Hanegraaff and never get used to the wrongs committed against God in this current age of apostasy…even when the wrongs are from people who are known for having Bible answers.

 

[For other articles on the lawsuit go to: Jackie Alnor, http://www.apostasyalert.org/Bible-Answer-Man_Traitor.htm and Don Veinot, Midwest Christian Outreach: http://www.midwestoutreach.org/]

 

Details from Jill Martin Rische’s blog at www.waltermartin.com , October, 2006:

 

In the 1970s Walter Martin met with Witness Lee in an effort to discuss the theology of the Local Church before he commented on it publicly. Walter Martin felt that the Local Church was dividing the Church of Jesus Christ. They were using methods of evangelism and biblical interpretation similar to those used by the cults, and Walter Martin believed they were in serious error. Bob and Gretchen Passantino did extensive research on Witness Lee and the Local Church at Dr. Martin’s request. They provided him with the primary documentation he needed to challenge them. As a result of this research, Walter Martin gave his lecture on the Local Church:

http://www.waltermartin.com/listening_library/Witness_Lee11.ram

http://www.waltermartin.com/listening_library/Witness_Lee12.ram

Today, it seems not much has changed in the methodology and beliefs of the Local Church.[6] CRI must agree that not much has changed,[7] and yet, Hank Hanegraaff and Gretchen Passantino (Christian Apologists) decided to publicly support the Local Church against John Ankerberg and John Weldon (Christian Apologists) and men with a record for a bold defense of the Christian faith.

 

Is “The Local Church” a Cult?

 

Is the Local Church a cult of Christianity?
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/378-lc-cult

Why the Local Church was included in the Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/379-encyclopedia

Friend of the court or friend of the cult?
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/380-cultfriend

CRI’s statement explaining its Friend of the Court brief
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/377-cri-statement

Jill Martin Rische responds to Hank’s Claim:

“They seem to think that by throwing around big words and phrases like ‘First Amendment rights’ and ‘dangerous precedent setting decision’ that this somehow justifies their sneaky behavior. . . it does not…First, they advocate Christians suing Christians--because it protects free speech and free exercise of religion. Second, they accuse Harvest House of lowering the standard for religious publishing…As for commitment to truth . . . (wait--I have to get my inhaler)…Third, they drag in the great saints of God from across the seas--people living through hell every day of their lives for the glory of God--and say that they (Hank and Gretchen) are supporting the Local Church for their sakes! …How can this egocentric lawsuit set any precedent in the U.S. or overseas? Sorry Hank and Gretchen, it's just not that important…”[9]

Recapitulation from Jill Martin Rische:

“The Local Church sued Harvest House, John Ankerberg, and John Weldon in December, 2001, claiming they defamed them in the Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions. [10] Then in August, 2006, Hank Hanegraaff and Gretchen Passantino filed statements with the Texas Court of Appeals in defense of the Local Church--and consequently--in support of the Local Church's position in this lawsuit. Why did they do this? Only God, Hank, Gretchen, and the Local Church know the answer to that. The Local Church is upset--they reject any link to the word cult. My answer to the leaders of the Local Church is this: if you are truly Christian brothers, then show the love of Christ. You have no business taking your brother to court. You are acting more like cult members than Christians. Stop it now. To Hank I would say this: Actions speak louder than words. Either stand by CRI's position on the Local Church, or take it down. Don't say one thing and do another--that makes you a double-minded man (James 1:23). And while you're at it, drop your lawsuit against your brother in Christ, Dr. William Alnor. Where is the love of Christ in your actions?…How foolish are these lawsuits in the light of God's instructions to us? You tell me: And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. (Eph 4:32). Who is being kind? Who is tenderhearted? Who is forgiving? I think my father got it right when he pounded the pulpit and said, ‘The whole world is going to Hell around us, and we're fighting about nothing!’” [11]

“File a Complaint” In Defense of the Bible:

The Local Church: http://www.localchurch.org/contact-us/index.htm
John Ankerberg:
http://www.johnankerberg.com/survey-series.htm
Gretchen Passantino: http://answers.org/
Hank Hanegraaff:
http://www.equip.org/

 

APOLOGISTS SPEAK OUT:

 

Back when I used to listen to “The Bible Answer Man” radio show with Hank as host, I recall books being promoted by Norman Geisler on the program. Interestingly, he was lauded as a great apologist by Hank, given his current stand against this lawsuit (as quoted below). We can only presume that this is of authentic significance, testifying to a concern beyond a mere conflict of interest. (See the section below which I have bolded for emphasis):

 

 “My name is Norman L. Geisler. I am the Dean of Southern Evangelical Seminary near Charlotte, NC. I am an author, co-author, or editor of over sixty books and some 200 articles on cults, apologetics, theology, and related topics. I have four earned degrees from accredited schools (B.A., Th.B., M.A., and Ph.D.).

 

I have been teaching on the college or graduate level for 47 years. I have written many articles for The Christian Research Journal published by the Christian Research Institute (CRI) whose president is Hank Hanegraaff. These including [sic] a two part series on The Essentials of the Christian Faith, which sets forth doctrinal norms for determining which groups fall short of the claim to be Christian and can thus be appropriately labeled as unorthodoxy, heretical, or a cult.

 

I am aware that Hank Hanegraaff, President of CRI, has filed an Amicus Brief urging this Court to grant the Petition for Review filed by The Local Church, Living Stream Ministries, et al. in the above captioned case. To the contrary, I believe that it is critical that this Court deny that Petition. I state my reason for this position below.

 

In over fifty years of research on doctrinal matters, it is my professional opinion that 1) It is doctrinally appropriate to label some groups by the terms unorthodox, heretical, or a cult. 2) It is appropriate to use these labels of The Local Church.”[12]

 

December 1, 2006—Local Church Appeal is Denied:

 

Texas Supreme Court Denies Petition for Review of Defamation Lawsuit Against Harvest House Publishers and Authors John Ankerberg and John Weldon

On December 1, 2006, the Texas Supreme Court denied review of the Local Church and Living Stream Ministry’s $136 million libel lawsuit against Harvest House Publishers and authors John Ankerberg and John Weldon. At issue in the

 

case was the book Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions (ECNR), which The Local Church claimed was defamatory of them.

 

http://www.harvesthousepublishers.com/downloads/HHStatement12012006.pdf

 

 

So, at least for now, this matter has been laid to rest. I will keep Hank in my prayers. As I have written this article, I had moments of personal sadness, remembering how much I used to love his radio program and how God used his radio program to inspire me to tell others about Jesus. Listening to him used to make me want to get out there and defend the Gospel!

 

Well, reading about Hank today still makes me want to defend the Bible and the ways of the Holy Spirit, but it is a different defense—to stand against these grievances which have been going on behind the scenes at CRI (documented in this article and other articles such as the LA Times) through Hank’s example of leadership. And I can only listen to him discerningly with a heavy heart these days, to observe voyeuristically what I pray to avoid in my own life as I learn from what has happened over time at the Christian Research Institute. His actions have spoken louder than his words to me, and I can’t hardly listen to his radio program anymore.

 

I am inspired today afresh in apologetics from listening to taped recordings of the original Bible Answer Man, Walter Martin, and I never cease to be excited and exhilarated in the ministry of evangelism, even when an article must be written to defend the Bible and the humble ways of the Holy Spirit against unbiblical tactics of the current CRI.

 

Dwayna Litz

www.ltwinternational.org

 


Disclaimer:



[1] Matthew 7: 22 (see also John 3:36; 10:14; 14:15 and1 John 2:3-4; 9-10)

 

 

[3] Lawsuit is not against Spiritual Counterfeits Project.

 

 

[8] Jill Martin Rische’s blog, www.waltermartin.com , October 18, 2006 [emphasis added]

 

 

[9]  http://www.waltermartin.com/blog/2006_10_01_archive.html; see posts for October 15,18,19, 2006

 

[11] http://www.waltermartin.com/blog/2006_10_01_archive.html ; see posts for Oct. 15,18,19, 2006

 

[12] Source: Amicus Brief by Norman L. Geisler, Nov. 7, 2006

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/404-norman-geisler

 

Distributed by www.ChristianWorldviewNetwork.com

Read and post feedback

By Dwayna Litz

Click here for bio and archived articles

Disclaimer: Worldview Weekend, Christian Worldview Network and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the feedback button.

7627 Views

Printer Friendly Version | E-mail this article to a friend | Return to home




Reader Feedback

Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?
Posted On: 12/22/06 04:11:10 PM Age 57, CA
There is no way in which the action undertaken by Hank Hanegraaff could possibly be construed as filing a lawsuit against John Ankerberg and John Weldon. To do so either indicates the authors total ignorance of the legal system or it is a deliberate misconstruction of fact. An Amicus Brief is not and cannot be submitted by a party to a lawsuit; it is filed by a non-party to bring certain matters of interest to the attention of the court. While Ms Litz is free to criticize the content of the brief filed by Hanegraaff, she should not misconstrue the facts. If it was possible to say that Hanegraaff sued the apologists (which it is not), then it would follow that the various Christians who signed and filed other Amicus Briefs in this case also sued fellow Christians. (Walter Martin never claimed that the Local Church was a non-Christian group although he was critical of them.) However the author neglects to criticize the actions of the other Amicus filers. In attacking Hanegraaff for filing a lawsuit against Brad Sparks, she neglects to point out that Sparks filed the original suit against Hanegraaff. In the citation she used from Sparks, he references Hanegraaffs countersuit; a countersuit is only filed in response to another suit. Ms Litz should know that there was reportedly a group of Christians including Sparks who were willing to sue their brother but, upon advice from counsel, only the strongest case was chosen for litigation. It is an untenable position to use one lawsuit filed by a Christian against a fellow Christian to criticize that same one for filing a Amicus Brief in a litigation involving fellow Christians. It is also more than a little hypocritical. In this post, I have not addressed the tone of the article or many of the other issues that should be discussed. The points I raise above are important in this conversation and Ms Litz should try to address them without the rancor evident in her article.
Click here to reply to this post

  1. Re: Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?
    Posted On: 12/24/06 11:18:22 AMAge 28, TX
    Thank you for the additional information.
    Click here to reply to this post



Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?
Posted On: 12/20/06 12:30:03 PM Age 50, KS
Not defending Hank's stand on the Local Church (whether it is a cult or not) nor am I commenting on any other lawsuits in which he may have participated, but in this case I don't believe he was a participant in the suit. I have pasted the definition of "Amicus" below and after reading the CRI position statement, PSL001, I would have to agree that a very bad precedent may have been set by the court that could be used by anyone (secular media, government, etc.) to make any claim they wish (child abusers, wife beaters, drug users) about an organization (such as Grace to You), throw in the word "cult" and the organization would have no legal recourse. READ THE POSITION PAPER, READ THE DEFINITION BELOW. God bless. Amicus curiae From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Amicus curiae (plural amici curiae) is a legal Latin phrase, literally translated as "friend of the court," that refers to someone, not a party to a case, who volunteers to offer information on a point of law or some other aspect of the case to assist the court in deciding a matter before it.[1]. The information may be a legal opinion in the form of a brief, testimony that has not been solicited by any of the parties, or a learned treatise on a matter that bears on the case. The decision whether to admit the information lies with the discretion of the court. The situation most often noted in the press is when an advocacy group files a brief in a case before an appellate court to which it is not a litigant. Appellate cases are normally limited to the factual record and arguments coming from the lower court case under appeal, and attorneys focus on the facts and arguments most favorable to their clients. Where a case may have broader implications, amicus curiae briefs are a way to introduce those concerns, so that the possibly broad legal effects of court decisions will not depend solely on the parties directly involved in the case.
Click here to reply to this post

Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?
Posted On: 12/20/06 10:45:08 AM Age 42, AZ
" It is funny how most of Hanks audience is not aware of this lawsuit against apologists. As I have spoken to radio hosts and Hanks fans, they have all seemed astounded at this news. If there is nothing wrong with it, then why not feature this story on a segment of the radio show? Christians would be interested in your answer, Hank" Just a note there is a large disclaimer on CRI's website if you would like to look there. So I would say they are disclosing it to their "fans". Thank you for bringing this to our attention, there were no links to prove what you were saying Mrs Litz so I went to CRI to get my info.
Click here to reply to this post



Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?
Posted On: 12/20/06 01:05:57 AM Age 36, CA
Your article was patently one-sided and confusing. That much was obvious from the get-go. Your opening sentence gives you away: to use the term "self-styled" belies your true feelings toward Mr. Hanegraaff's use of the title Bible Answer Man. The article contained no information for Mr. Hanegraaff's point of view, only statements (without examples) of how great Messers Ankerberg and Weldon are, about how Mr. Hanegraaff has let so many Walter Martin supporters down, about how awful he is (according to Brad) and a FEW examples of people who are siding with you. How is anyone supposed to objectively come to a conclusion? I agree with a previous post: this is gossip, and it made me sick to read it. Had you been objective, fair by giving examples from both sides, it would be different. Simply saying "We must pray for Hank..." doesn't cut it when you're so one-sided. Why didn't you post the Amicus Curiae by Mr. Hanegraaff on behalf of the Local Church? You'd see that he disagrees with some of their theology and ecclesiology, but after conducting his own research he concludes they are not a cult. After conducting his own research. Obviously his research yielded a different answer than Messers Ankerberg and Weldon. To label a group a "cult" has potentially devastating consequences, and because he did not agree with the label, Mr. Hanegraaff supported the Local Church. It's also interesting that you've linked to Jackie Alnor's article on this topic; she's a staunch supporter of the Calvary Chapel movement and its Senior Pastor. She blasts away at Mr. Hanegraaff for the lawsuit (is he suing or did he lend his support to the Local Church?), yet nowhere on her site will you find an article about the many lawsuits currently taking place between Calvary Chapel's Senior Pastor and other pastors and churches and ministries within the movement. Maybe you should also do an article on these lawsuits? I would love to read an in-depth, objective, well-written article that would allow believers to come to some honest conclusions.
Click here to reply to this post

  1. Re: Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists?
    Posted On: 12/20/06 08:08:08 PMAge 48, FL
    What exactly are you insinuating about Calvary Chapel? Does this website consider them to be part of the "mega-church" movement? Do you know the specifics about any lawsuits involving C.C. pastors?
    Click here to reply to this post

Going to your brother first
Posted On: 12/19/06 04:00:47 PM Age 42, ID
I also would like to know if you approached Hank directly before writing this article. You don't say. I think these things need to be exposed, however, we need to do all things in an orderly and Biblical manner. (I'm not accusing you, just asking and hoping you will answer.)
Click here to reply to this post

  1. Re: Going to your brother first
    Posted On: 12/20/06 11:28:36 AMAge 42, AZ
    Here is a quote from the disclaimer on CRI's site. This is not about LC but about the wording of "cult" and the opportunity of any secular or non-christian group falsly accusing a church or other christian organization of something criminal or abhorant. See below what ECNR included in the term cult. This IS about our 1st amend rights. This was appealed by the lower courts and CRI is trying to make the court system fair for you and I. "While our courts quite rightly are prevented by our Constitution from deciding the truth or falsity of theological or religious claims, our courts are expressly charged with deciding whether or not secular claims are upheld or libelous in issues such as fraud, sexual abuse, false imprisonment, larceny, bioterrorism, pedophilia, and so forth (the kinds of characteristics ECNR uses for cults). When ECNR attributes those kinds of actions to the groups they term cults, they are placing themselves in a position to be challenged legally in the realm of libel if they cannot substantiate their charges. That ECNR frequently uses terms such as criminal in association with these accusations underscores this point."
    Click here to reply to this post

  2. Re: Going to your brother first
    Posted On: 12/20/06 12:18:25 AMAge 61, TX
    I'm afraid Hank would have an awfully long line if everyone went to him to discuss an issue first, as the Bible instructs us to do. He has changed his mind and teaching in the last few years, and we no longer listen to him or use him as a resource. I'm afraid his new insights are not inspired by the Holy Spirit. If you do follow Hank, be a Berean, and check everything he says against Scripture and see if it holds up to the test of truth.
    Click here to reply to this post



Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult?
Posted On: 12/19/06 01:37:10 PM Age 37, MI
I agree that if a Christian brother sins, we who are the body should speak the truth in love to restore him to the right path. I agree that lawsuits between Christians are not biblical and should be addressed. However, the tone of this article made me feel wrong in reading it, as if I were listening to the most poisonous gossip. I can't judge the writer's heart - only God can do that- but if the intention of her heart was as hateful and vengeful as her article came across - then she is in need of loving correction as well ( We ALL need it from time to time). What happened to speaking the truth in love? We can judge the action of the lawsuit against a Christian brother as wrong, but we cannot say that it is Mr. Hanegraaf's heart intention to get money so he can spend it on golfing and country clubs. This is unnecessary slander and gossip. As Christians, none of us do everything right all the time (he who says he has no sin is a liar, right?) We need to speak the truth, but we need to speak it in love. Jesus was full of grace and truth, and it seems that we as Christians tend to lean one way or the other, but our goal should be to let the Holy Spirit lead us into TRUTH and GRACE. Thank you for listening and I hope my comments are taken as they were meant - to give a reader's perspective on this article. May God receive glory from all of our lives and actions!
Click here to reply to this post

Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult?
Posted On: 12/19/06 12:43:53 PM Age 48, RI
This article lacked any facts that would help anyone to know why the individual placing the lawsuit did so. I could berate this site for running a pop up while I was reading this that said "would you like to make or save money!!![click here to organize something for us]". I could assume you are using money to incent and motivate Christians to do something to benefit what your beliefs. Without knowing the facts I'll try not to judge as harsly as this article did! Thankfully every believe has the ability to discern truth from error via the Holy Spirt. Praise God he has provided for that, and none of us are dependent up on the internet, the radio or even a local pastor to be 100% perfect! Silly that we'd expect it, actually. Praise God he will work all things to good to those called according to his purpose regardless of our own frailties! And as for bashing the Bible Answer Man, I'm not into it. But I'll pray that all believers in America are led by the Holy Spirit to change lives and make us as his people be what God desires.
Click here to reply to this post



Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult? (Part One)
Posted On: 12/19/06 11:46:34 AM Age 41, NM
I am not now, nor have I ever been, a fan of the Bible Answer Man or his radio show. It often seems to display a critical spirit. However, I have a question for you, Dwayna. Since you are concerned that The Bible Answer Man has engaged in a lawsuit without following the prescription of Matthew 18, did you follow Matthew 18 in approaching your fellow brother in Christ seeking to win your brother over, before spreading gossip about him to the rest of the Christian world who reads these articles? What if, by spreading these issues around, you cause a young brother or sister in the Lord to take offense and/or stumble and have a bitter root grow up within them? What if non-christian who read this article use it to speak against the church and defame the name of the God whom you and Hank both serve? I just think we as Christians ought to practice the things we tell others to practice. Don't you? Just a thought. Perhaps you did contact him directly and follow the Matthew 18 edict. If so, I am thankful. Dear God I ask that you would work in the heart of my brother Hank, and draw him nearer to you. If he is in error, I pray you would restore him and increase his effectiveness. May Your kingdom grow even through what we see as a setback. I pray, Lord, that those reading this article would not let a bitter root grow up in them and that they truly would pray for those involved and not just talk about it. Bring glory and honor to your name through this situation. You are able and You are worthy. In Jesus' name, Amen.
Click here to reply to this post

  1. Re: Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult? (Part One)
    Posted On: 12/20/06 12:32:03 AMAge 61, TX
    I've already said that if everyone that wanted to practice Mt. 18 with Hank, the line would be discouragingly long. Hank has changed his teachings on some topics, and not for the better. This has been going on for more than a few years. You asked the author about possibly causing a fellow believer to take offense/stumble, or a non-Christian reader to use it against the church. I COMMEND THE AUTHOR for WARNING fellow believers and non-believers that everyone who considers themselves an authority on the Bible is not one! Beware! Be a Berean! Acts 17:11-12 Please read it.
    Click here to reply to this post

Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult?
Posted On: 12/19/06 11:40:06 AM Age 63, OH
ARE ALL THE VERSES IN THE BIBLE IMPORTANT or can we throw some of them out or excuse them away. I think you have made a good point about Hank and the answer is yes; all the verses of the Bible are important. Your article has brought a serious question between it and my faith. Please answer my question for this is a serious matter. The following are some of the questions that came to mind: While Hank seems to be in violation to the verse about taking a brother to court; we are also told to talk to a brother privately 1st and then to take serveral brothers with you to talk to him. After this we are told to take the matter before the whole church. Have you done this. There is another verse in 1 Timothy 11-15. Is that verse still part of the Bible. If we say it is outdated because culture has changed; then can't we say the same of the verses about lawsuits. Is this scripture about how women should act in church; or about how women in the church should act. Is the church a building or a meeting; or is the church the Body of Christ. This scripture also has a witness in 1 Cor 14:34-35. If it is OK for you to talk to another womens husband this way; then would it be OK for that women to talk to her husband in the same way. Ephesians 5:22-24 tells the women to submit to the husband as she would the Lord; so would it be proper to talk also to the Lord this way. It also says in the Bible that the love between a man and a women explains the mystery of how Jesus loves the church and how the church is to love Christ. Is a women to love her husband only and not her brother. Is not this scripture also an indication of how women who are in the church are to treat men in honor of our Lord. If we throw these scriptures out; are we not saying to the homosexuals that they are correct in throwing out the ones that offend them. Would it not have been better for you to go to a brother and get him to correct this brother so as to honor our Lord. I no not if you have a husband as you did not mention one or your father. So I humbly ask their forgivness and address these questions and comments to them so as not to offend them.--- Hoping to honor the only One worthy; the Lord Jesus. -- Lou
Click here to reply to this post

  1. Re: Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult?
    Posted On: 12/20/06 01:11:23 AMAge 61, TX
    You've asked many excellent questions that can't all be answered here. I believe all scripture is important, and that they can be applied to our lives today. But we must study the Bible with the understanding of WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHY, and HOW, the books were written. Each had its own purpose for coming into existence. The Gospels were primarily written for the Jews. Jesus was a Jew, as was nearly all of the early church (which translates to assembly of believers). Jesus kept the OT Law and Feasts, I'd believe He was kosher, and don't think He'd wear garments of both cotton and linen; it would break the Law, etc. The Epistles were written to certain churches (again, assemblies of believers) or individuals for specific reasons, based on what the struggles of the believers happened to be at that time, and in their situations. As to whom a woman is to love: we should all try to 'agapao' everyone, just as God does; We should all 'phileo' unselfishly, and "philanthropia' out of love for mankind, but we should feel 'eros' for our spouses only. It's not quite as cut and dried as you make it sound. While we may read 'love' in our translations, there were many different words that were translated into that one word 'love.' Their definitions were more extensive than ours. The OT and NT Scriptures addressing homosexuality are very clear: it is a sin. I thank God for study resources, Hebrew and Greek dictionaries, and solidly sound preachers and teachers who can explain on a level I can understand. And I thank Him for exchanges with people like you, because I always learn something. God bless you.
    Click here to reply to this post

    1. Re: Re: Re: Bible Answer Man Sues Apologists and Defends A Cult?
      Posted On: 12/21/06 01:33:28 AMAge 63, OH
      Thanks for your kind answer.We are accepted by trusting in Jesus, but trusting in Jesus brings obedience to Him. As Jesus said " if you love me you will obey my commands". Notice He did not say you will try to obey my commands; or He did not say you will obey as you understand. He said you will obey my commands. There is one way to judge our love for Him and that is our obedience. Obedience does not save us because of our wicked sinful hearts. There is part of us that always wants its own way. But thank God if he lives in our hearts there is part of us that always wants to obey. I have found IF I AM WILLING TO BE MADE WILLING he is always able and willing to cause me to be obedient. If we ask we will receive. If we have not it is because we ask not. I have always wondered about Jephthah in Judges 11 and the mystery of him sacrificing his only daughter. I had not because I asked not or I asked for wrong motives, my glory and not his glory. But the other day I studied the scriptures and did a word study to prepare myself and the Lord gave me a revelation of what the mystery was about. It was almost to easy; I had wondered about this ever since the 1st time I read the story 32 years ago. I don't get any of my revelations from men but they all come from Je