It's amazing, folks. The more Bill Parker
attempts to defend his spiritual whoredom with an annihilationist, the more
heresy comes out. He'd be better off shutting up and keeping his heresies to
himself. But as soon as he opens his mouth (so to speak -- his writing
"mouth"), he exposes himself more and more. (Sounds like William
Jefferson Clinton, doesn't it?) And the more and more I see him trying to
defend himself, the more and more thankful I am that God took me away from Bill
when He did. Just think -- had this whole McCulley
issue not cropped up, I may not have known Bill's views of annihilationism,
his true views of peace-speaking, and his true views of knowledge and
ignorance, and I may have continued on thinking that he was orthodox. Praise
God for showing me the truth before I was even more connected with Bill and his
church. And, as Bill gives us more heresy, it serves to remind me of the
goodness of God in taking me away in His perfect timing.
So what's the latest from Bill? Well, in a recent public post, he minimizes the heresy of annihilationism by saying that it's like an argument as to whether or not the "streets of gold" are literal or spiritual! Some of you might be saying, "WHAT?" But I have proof. Look at what Bill Parker has just written:
> >I will
> >say that Wildy himself does not know his butt from a whole in the ground
> >about the issue of the nature of heaven or hell to be so dogmatic as to
> >make it a vital issue of salvation. Consider a hypothetical --
> > Suppose I told you that I believe that the streets of heaven were
> >literal streets paved with literal gold because gold properly represents
> >the brightness of the glory of God. Suppose you told me that you
> >believe that this language is not literal but merely symbolic. Suppose
> >I responded by saying that I am so dogmatic about this, and that if you
> >deny that the streets of heaven are paved with literal gold which
> >properly represent the brightness of the glory of God, then you are
> >denying the glory of God.
> > This is the type of ridiculous reasoning Wildy uses to accuse
> >McCulley. McCulley does not deny the justice of God.
Can you believe it?! Bill Parker believes that the issue of annihilation is SO MINIMAL that it can be compared to an argument about whether or not the streets of gold are literal or symbolic!! He believes that it amounts to a petty squabble about unimportant matters! You can also see how this argument could be used to deny the reality of hell altogether! Now we can see even more clearly, can we not, how Bill Parker views what sin deserves as it relates to the infinitely holy God. It makes no difference to him if someone believes that sin deserves everlasting punishment or that sin deserves a little bit of punishment and then annihilation or that sin deserves just annihilation. It's a take-it-or-leave-it deal with Bill Parker.
(And by the way, if any of you are surprised that the crude words referring to a person's anatomy came from Bill Parker, don't be. That's the way he and his friends are. I and others have heard crude words and coarse jesting from the EAGC crowd, including sexual innuendo. One of the members of his congregation publicly e-mailed a person the following (this is a direct quote, with the profanity bleeped out): "SHUT THE F*** UP ANTONY !!! THE ONLY THING YOUR GOING TO STICK UP FOR IS YOUR KEY-BORAD." He also publicly e-mailed me this: "Also I'm 6'5" 250lbs. I've been shot and stabbed and I still don't take s*** off people like you. I know for a fact you would not say that to my face." Of course, I would have no problem saying that he is a back tracker and spineless to his face. And I guess if I said it to his face, he would knock me out, because I would not defend myself. Then what has he gained? I guess he would get some satisfaction. That's how they confront people, I guess. Welcome to the world of EAGC.)
The truth of the matter is this: Bill Parker DOES NOT believe the true gospel. The true gospel is God's promise to save His people conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. What does it mean TO SAVE? As I showed in the article "Essential Gospel Doctrine" (www.outsidethecamp.org/egd.htm) in the latest issue of Outside the Camp (which is a condensation of the series of sermons I preached on the gospel, which can be found at www.outsidethecamp.org/sermons.htm), TO SAVE includes being saved from the penalty of sin, or what sin deserves. The penalty of sin --what sin deserves -- is everlasting punishment in hell. The reason sin deserves everlasting punishment is because God is an infinitely holy and just God and cannot, because of His holiness and justice, punish sinners with anything less than everlasting punishment. Knowledge of the true gospel includes knowledge of the wages of sin.
In Bill Parker's gospel, TO SAVE does not include salvation from everlasting punishment. How do I know this? Because if Parker believed that this was part of the gospel, he would have to say that Mark McCulley is lost, as McCulley does not believe this part of the gospel. Instead, he has absolutely no doubts about McCulley's state before God, even though McCulley does not believe in eternal punishment. In fact, Bill goes further and actually DEFENDS McCulley, saying that it is not necessary to believe that, just as righteousness demands everlasting life in heaven and unrighteousness demands everlasting punishment in hell, and that denying eternal punishment does not impugn God's glory or God's justice. Let me make this very clear. Bill Parker has shown, in saying that eternal punishment is not an essential gospel doctrine, that he DOES NOT believe the true gospel of SALVATION (which includes being saved from everlasting punishment in hell) conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. Salvation from everlasting punishment in hell is just an option, just an add-on, just a non-essential, unimportant, frivolous little side issue.
Further down in his post, he judges us lost. Being judged lost by Bill Parker isn't something that angers or bothers me in the least. But I want you to take a look at his standard of judgment. Parker's defenders have written to me and told me that my standard of judging Parker lost is wrong, because I am not judging him by what he believes and preaches but by what he is doing outside the pulpit. Well guess what. Bill Parker is judging us lost based on motivation and attitude rather than the gospel we believe. Interesting, isn't it? But we have come to expect nothing else from Parker, because he has shown his two-faced double standards time and time again.
Lastly, Parker again has the gall to say that this is an example of his being persecuted for the sake of the gospel. Hmmmm ... let's think about that for a minute. For what reason are true Christians persecuted? They are persecuted for their refusal to speak peace when there is no peace and for their telling unregenerate people that they are lost and their deeds are evil. Now let's apply this to Bill Parker. What is this supposed "persecution" over? Are we "persecuting" him because he refuses to speak peace to someone? Are we "persecuting" him because he is telling those who believe the false gospel that they are lost and their deeds are evil? No. We are exposing him as one who speaks peace when there is no peace and telling him that he is lost and his deeds are evil. The fact that Parker cries "persecution" is just another proof that Parker is an imposter. Now, what about how WE have been treated by the Parker crowd? Because we are showing that Parker is lost in his false peace-speaking, we get threats of violence, and we get rejected and maligned and slandered. I ask, where is the persecution taking place?
So here we are again, pointing out where Parker exposes himself. Will it ever end? Probably -- as soon as Parker keeps quiet about his spiritual whoredom with a man who denies the holiness and justice of God.
Soli Deo Gloria,