From the editor ...

(From Outside the Camp, Vol. 5, No. 4)

I would like to share with you an update regarding the Mark McCulley/Bill Parker situation. It gets more and more bizarre (and more and more clear that their fellowship is of the devil). It has already been documented that McCulley believes that the damned do not suffer eternally in hell and believes that he was regenerate when he said that a saved person can confess the belief that salvation was/is conditioned on himself. Parker, who claims to believe that those who believe and those who speak peace to those who believe in salvation conditioned on the sinner are unregenerate, still considers McCulley to be his brother in Christ, thus showing that he does not practice what he preaches.

That is bad enough in and of itself. But there is more.

Bill Parker claims to believe that those who believe and those who speak peace to those who believe the "time lapse" heresy are unregenerate. The"time lapse" heresy is the belief that a period of time (days, months, and even years) can elapse between regeneration and conversion; thus, a regenerate person can, for a period of time, be ignorant of the gospel. I wrote about this in an article review entitled "The Irrelevant Gospel" in the May 2001 issue of Outside the Camp. But does Parker practice what he preaches?

Mark McCulley, writing about the above-mentioned article, said this: "I certainly am not dogmatic about a difference about a time lag between quickening and conversion vs 'gospel quickening'. We could have different opinions about that and still believe the same gospel. Even if we conceded a time-lag, there would be no warrant for dogmatism about when the unconverted was 'regenerate'. My fundamental difference with Morris is not about the time-gap but about 'what is the gospel' and related to that 'what is sin'."

A man wrote the following to McCulley: "But as long as Morris says that all regenerated people must eventually believe the true gospel, the timing of conversion isn't the issue. The issue is what Gospel does Morris say they believe (finally) at their conversion." McCulley responded, "exactly right. All issues are related. We may posit a time-lag simply because of our exegesis of I Peter. But others may posit a time-lag because they have a false gospel."

As we can plainly see, McCulley does not believe that a belief in a "time lag" is necessarily indicative of lostness, as long as the gospel that is believed after the "time lag" is the true gospel. Thus, McCulley believes that a person who believes in a "time-lag" (i.e., who believes that a regenerate person can be ignorant of the gospel for a period of time after regeneration) could be regenerate. His peace-speaking is plain for all to see.

And what does Bill Parker think about this? Does he practice what he preaches, or are his words merely to give the illusion that he is orthodox? Parker has been informed about McCulley's heresy, and he continues to speak peace to McCulley. Do as Parker says; don't do as Parker does.

There's more. This is the most bizarre of them all (as of the writing of this article). Mark McCulley has recently shown that he believes that Jesus Christ's humanity ceased to exist when He died. This is consistent with his annihilationism: If Jesus Christ took on the punishment that the elect deserved, and this punishment is cessation of existence, then Christ's humanity must have ceased to exist.

This heresy means that, upon death, the humanity of Christ was separated from the deity of Christ; i.e., Christ was not man but only God. This means that Jesus Christ ceased to be the God-man mediator.

Not only does McCulley believe that only the God part of Jesus remained in existence upon death, he also said that he is not convinced that Jesus as God was consciously with God the Father during the three days. So, according to this heresy, Jesus as man ceased to exist, and Jesus as God continued to exist unconsciously.

Jesus Christ said to the thief on the cross, "Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43). To whom does the "Me" refer? It refers to Jesus Christ, of course. Who was the Jesus Christ who spoke to the thief that day? He was the God-Man Mediator. The God-Man Mediator told the thief that he would be with Him, the God-Man Mediator, in Paradise. According to McCulley's heresy, Jesus Christ lied. Perhaps McCulley would say that Jesus actually meant to say, "Today you will be with the God part of Me in Paradise." Yet if Jesus as God was not conscious during that time, this "being with" the thief that day would have meant mere coexistence with the thief in heaven, not fellowship.

Is the doctrine of the person of Jesus Christ just another nonessential doctrine over which Christians can disagree? Of course it is not.

When Jesus took sinless humanity into union with His deity, He became the God-Man from that point on. Jesus Christ has had, from the moment of conception, two unconfused, unchangeable, indivisible, and inseparable natures. Had there been any point after the incarnation where there was a separation of natures and Jesus Christ ceased to be human or ceased to be God, He would have ceased to have been Jesus Christ. He would have ceased to have been the Mediator, the Intercessor. Mark McCulley believes in this cessation. He believes that Jesus Christ ceased to be the God-Man Mediator in that very event in which the mediatorship of Christ is most fully manifested.

If you want to see a doctrine of demons, look no further. This is just like the heresies that infiltrated early Christendom. This is a heresy about the person of Jesus Christ.

And what does Bill Parker think of this? Parker has been informed about McCulley's heresy, and he continues to speak peace to McCulley.

What does this show about Bill Parker? Most of his sermons sure do sound solid. But what does Parker really believe? From what we have seen thus far in his spiritual whoredom with Mark McCulley, we see that he considers the doctrine of the holiness of God to be non-essential (since annihilationism strikes at the very heart of God's holiness and justice), we see that he considers the doctrine of the person of Christ to be non-essential (since the heresy that Jesus as God-Man Mediator ceased to exist strikes at the very heart of the person and thus the work of Christ), and we see that he fellowships with one who believes he was regenerate when he spoke peace to those who confess a false gospel of salvation conditioned on the sinner and who considers the "time-lapse" issue to be nonessential.

"Everyone transgressing and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ does not have God" (2 John 9). This includes Mark McCulley.

"For the one speaking a greeting shares in his evil works" (2 John 11). This includes Bill Parker.


From the editor