Speaking of people who backpedal so fast it will make your head spin, here are the words of some EAGC supporters:

The first conversation is with a man named Darrel Stricknite. MC is me, and DS is Darrel. The quotes are from Mark McCulley.

> MC: A person, who claims to believe the doctrines of grace, says that
> Christians
> can confess a false gospel. Is this person who claims to believe the
> doctrines of grace lost?
>
>
DS:YES!
>
> MC: A person, who claims to believe the doctrines of grace, says that
> Christians
> need to keep repenting of believing a false gospel. Is this person who
> claims to believe the doctrines of grace lost?
>
>
DS:YES AGAIN!
>
> MC: Also, I asked you about a person who made the following statements:
>
>
"But there may be cases where both the true gospel and the false gospel is
> believed/confessed at the same time"

>
>
DS:FALSE!
>
>
"But maybe a regenerate person can with his mouth confess the belief that
> those who believe in universal salvation are nevertheless saved."

>
>
DS:FALSE AGAIN!
>
>
"How can Chrsitians still speak peace to nonChristians? Because we are not
> under the dominionn of that sin, so that if we do speak peace to
> nonChristians, we are still not condmened for speaking peace to
> nonChrisians."

>
>
DS:INFACT, BECAUSE WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE DOMION OF SIN WE
> WILL NOT IN
> ANY FORM OR MANNER SPEAK PEACE TO A NON-CHRISTIAN. SO, INTURN IF
> WE DO SPEAK
> PEACE TO NON-CHRISTIANS THIS EVIDENCES OUR CONDEMNATION.

>
>
"But there are those who accept personal redemption (individual particular
> atonement) but who at the same time suspend the jsutification of
> the elect
> on the work of the Spirit in them. While I am convinced that this is a
> denial of the gospel, I am not sure that an untaught Christian cannot say
> this."

>
>
DS:JUSTIFICATION IS THE WORK OF CHRIST NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT. JUSTIFICATION
> HAPPENS THE MOMENT ONE BELIEVES THE GOSPEL. IT'S A ONE TIME DEAL, FULLY
> JUSTIFIED UPON BELIEF BASED ON CHRIST IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS.

>
>
"A true Chrsitian can still be ashamed of the gospel, and even still speak
> peace to people who are condtioning their salvation on things the true
> Christian has repented of. How can that be? How can he speak
> peace based on
> what he now says is the false gospel? It makes no sense. sin
> makes no sense."

>
>
DS:I DISAGREE. HE CANNOT SPEAK PEACE BASED ON WHAT HE NOW SAYS IS A FALSE
> GOSPEL.

>
> MC: How do you judge such a person who made the following statements?
> And what
> if a person, after reading these quotes, does NOT judge this person
> lost based on the above statements?
>
>
DS:SIMPLE BUT SAD. BOTH ARE LOST!

So here, Darrel says clearly and plainly that both these people are lost.

But what happens when I mention NAMES? What happens when I say that those two people are Mark McCulley and Bill Parker?

Here's Darrel:

<<Your actually saying that I said a couple of people are lost? I never said such a thing.>>

<<They seek not the recovery of a brother (Bill Parker), it should be obvious to all.>>

Backbackbackbackbackpedal as fast as you can!

----------------------------

Next we go to a man named Steve Brown, who is a member of EAGC:

> >[Marc] Do you realize that anyone who says that Christians can confess a
> >false
> >gospel and/or that Christians need to keep repenting of believing a
> >false
> >gospel is lost?
>
>
[Steve] YES

But what happens when I say that it was Mark McCulley who said such things? Here's Steve:

<< I believe Mark believes the gospel and has repented, you don't.>>

<<I SEE YOU THAT YOU HATE MARK MCCULLY AND ALMOST EVERYBODY
WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU.>>


Backbackbackbackbackpedal as fast as you can!

-----------------------------

Now for a man named Chip Lowell. I wrote:

<<Next, I have some quotes for you that a man named Mark McCulley made (with typos intact):>>

And Chip responded to each one of McCulley's quotes:

<<[McCulley] But there may be cases where both the true gospel and the false gospel is believed/confessed at the same time

[Chip] Impossible. However, there may be confusion on implications during "growth in knowledge and grace." For example, I believed the true gospel and was baptized, but had no idea that the disciples were in a lost state prior to Pentecost -- until I heard it explained to me that they couldn't have known the gospel if they tried to keep Christ from the cross. So was I believing two things at once? One could make that argument -- but I feel it has more to do with discernment and implications than it does the ground of my salvation.>>

<<[McCulley] But maybe a regenerate person can with his mouth confess the belief that those who believe in universal salvation are nevertheless saved.

[Chip] Nope. Universal salvation means Christ died for all, but something other than His righteousness alone makes the difference.>>

<<[McCulley] How can Chrsitians still speak peace to nonChristians? Because we are not under the dominionn of that sin, so that if we do speak peace to nonChristians, we are still not condmened for speaking peace to nonChrisians.

[Chip] That's pretty wacky. He basically believes that whatever god you believe in, you're okay. He just happens to choose the "christian god".>>

<<[McCulley] But there are those who accept personal redemption (individual particular atonement) but who at the same time suspend the jsutification of the elect on the work of the Spirit in them. While I am convinced that this is a denial of the gospel, I am not sure that an untaught Christian cannot say this.

[Chip] I don't believe I even understand what he's trying to say. The person believes in particular atonement, but shrugs it off until another day? Sounds like mental agreement to a point or two of Calvinism -- certainly not a belief of the truth.>>

<<[McCulley] A true Chrsitian can still be ashamed of the gospel, and even still speak peace to people who are condtioning their salvation on things the treu Christian has repented of. How can that be? How can he speak peace based on what he now says is the false gospel? It makes no sense. sin makes no sense.

[Chip] Another wacky one. Obviously, we can believe and do anything we want, because sin makes no sense. Yeah, right.>>

Now for my questions:

[Marc] Mark McCulley claims to have been regenerate while making such statements. Now my questions related to the above quotes are:

Do you know Mark McCulley?

<<[Chip] Nope.>>

[Marc] What is your judgment of the spiritual state of Mark McCulley?

<<[Chip] He may understand aspects of the gospel, and TULIP, but he does not know and believe the truth. He fights too hard to keep unbelievers in the ranks of the regenerate -- thereby exposing his own true feelings.>>

[Marc] What about a person who has read these statements, has heard Mark McCulley admit to these statements, and who still considers Mark McCulley to be regenerate?

<<[Chip] They're in the same state as he is.>>

Pretty clear, eh? Chip believed that Mark McCulley is lost and that the person who knowingly still considers Mark McCulley to be regenerate is lost.

But I can hear that backtrack train a-comin' ...

Here's Chip after I told him that it is Bill Parker who is the one who knowingly speaks peace to Mark McCulley:

<<Time to hear the "other 1/2 of the story." I'll talk to Bill and find out more of the context of McCulley's quotes.>>

<<If, as I mentioned in one of my answers, that they were uttered by a new believer not knowing the full implications of what he wrote -- and that that believer has acknowledged the error in those ideas -- then I see no reason not to accept this person's fellowship.>>

Backbackbackbackbackpedal as fast as you can!

------------------------------

Now for a woman named Traci Miller.

I wrote regarding McCulley:

[Marc] Not only has he said these things, but he also believes that the reprobate do not suffer eternity in hell but are annihilated into nothingness after a period of suffering. What would you say about a person who believes that Mark McCulley is saved?

<<[Traci] Let me state it this way, if Mark believes what you just stated and I believe he is saved, I'm a lost person. I mean, annihilation! This is a denial of God's holiness.>>

Sounds pretty clear. Mark McCulley, in his annihilationist heresy, denies God's holiness, and if one believes McCulley is saved knowing that McCulley is an annihilationist, that one is lost. But what if that person who speaks peace to the annihilationist is none other than Bill Parker? Here's Traci:

<<I am saved and so is Bill>>

Backbackbackbackbackpedal as fast as you can!

-------------------------------

David Adkins, Media Director, said that McCulley was lost, but when his pastor spoke peace to McCulley, David did the backpedal shuffle and now considers McCulley to be a brother in Christ.

And I wonder about Pat Innis, who is also a member of EAGC. I asked:

> [Marc] Do you realize that anyone who says that Christians
> can confess a false
> gospel and/or that Christians need to keep repenting
> of believing a false
> gospel is lost?

Pat responded:

<<Yes, anyone.>>

Yet he remains in a church that embraces such a man as their brother in Christ.

And then there's Mark Estrada, who initially said that McCulley was lost but then went on to defend Parker.

I have found that many self-righteous religionists are so bold to judge some abstract person to be lost, but once names are attached, they do a swift backtrack. It's very telling, isn't it? They lose all spine when it comes to judging particular people, especially pastors, even after they just said that a person who would do or say such things must be lost. They esteem men more than God. We want to fellowship with people who TRULY believe and judge by the gospel, EVEN WHEN names are attached. May we always be wary of the backtracking hypocrites.

Soli Deo Gloria,

Marc


Home

E-mails, Forums, and Letters