Monday, June 30, 2008

Truth in Today's World

Dr. Couch, what has happened to truth in today's world?

ANSWER: The core of all truth is spiritual and it comes from the Bible. God's Word is truth itself and the Lord says He is the Way and the Truth and that men must come to God through Him (John 14:6). He is also the Light of the world, and without Him, as clearly revealed in Scripture, the world gropes in spiritual darkness (9:5). The Way and the Light are being further erased from our culture. The Bible is being rapidly buried from sight, and thus Christ is being forgotten! There is no return in my view; and, we are sinking further into the apostasy of the church. This is impacting every aspect of life: political, social, domestic, educationally, and of course morally and spiritually!

The Lord has made Himself available to the lost but they must come to Him by way of Truth (Psa. 145:18). Truth comes only through the Lord (146:6). He keeps or maintains the standard of Truth personally. His truth is reflected only in Scripture!

Human beings cannot claim glory nor do they know what truth is apart from revelation! Glory belongs to Him and His name. He alone reflects true mercy and truth (115:1). A good synonym for truth is reality. We cannot know reality, what is true and right, apart from divine knowledge given only in the Bible.

We human beings will fade away because we are like grass (Isa. 40:8). "The grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our God stands forever."

We are seeing the death of truth in the American culture. We are seeing it in choice of our elected officials by people who do not understand reality. Few are able to discern today. The judges and leaders are blind and the people do not know the difference.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch


Dr. Couch, a well known Bible teacher whom you know says he sees no problem with cremation. What do you say?

ANSWER:  Even in far ancient times the Hindus of India were cremating their dead. Cremation has pagan origins. On the other hand, the Bible pictures the body being respected even in death, if possible. When Sarah died in Hebron, Abraham bargained with the sons of Heth for a burial place. He purchased a cave at Machpelah (Gen. 23:19) for her burial and the site became a family burial plot for several generations.

   He told the sons of Heth "give me a burial site among you, that I may bury my dead out of my sight" (v. 4). They replied "bury your dead in the choicest of our graves; none of us will refuse you his grave for burying your dead" (v. 6). Even they understood the importance of burial and respected Abraham's wish. The place of Sarah's burial was to be an honored place. It was by the city gates for all to see, facing Hebron (v. 19). All the way up to the NT proper burial was the accepted method for laying the righteous to rest.

   Christ was given a most prominent burial site—the tomb of a wealthy man located near the outer walls of Jerusalem.

   While there is no command against cremation there are some important principles to note in the Bible, both in the OT and in the NT. The body is to be respected. It would only be right in my opinion to follow the continual example throughout Scripture.

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Bible Interpretation

Dr. Couch, I do not see many premillennialists writing about the history of Bible interpretation, but I see a lot of the covenant advocates doing this. Can you help?

I can see you have not purchased some of my books that really deal with this issue nor have you read some that have already been written by others. To be quite frank I find it just the opposite. I know none in the allegorical camp who can really hold a candle to their view from a historical point and make any sense.

   There are three books that you need:

  1. Dr. Pentecost's Things to Come (Zondervan) has an extensive chapter on the history of interpretation. Excellent!
  2. You need my Introduction to Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics (Kregel) that goes even deeper than Dr. Pentecost on some very important historical points.
  3. And, you need my Dictionary of Premillennial Theology (Kregel) that covers the writings of Philo, Origen, and Augustine on this subject.

   Reading my Dictionary no one could be foolishly tempted again to believe in allegorical, fuzzy, non-literal interpretation. I have all of the interpretation volumes by the allegorical guys. None of them are consistent with their own principles and views. They have to fudge somewhere along the line, and of course they do that when it comes to "trying" to interpret biblical prophecy. I really don't see how they can live with themselves and look themselves in the mirror in the morning! They really are intellectually dishonest!

   What I still do not understand is why most people do not see through their inconsistent theories. I really believe deep down many people do not like the idea of a Jewish kingdom that is yet to come. They are anti-Semitic at heart!

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Was Luke a Jew or a Gentile?

Dr. Couch, was Luke a Jew or a Gentile?

ANSWER: Harrison in his excellent volume on the introduction to the NT books says that without a doubt he was a Gentile. Though he gives circumstantial evidence, the evidence seems clearly to point that way, though we may not be able to be overly dogmatic on the issue.

 After he had made a list of "circumcised" fellow workers, Paul in Colossians 4:14 includes Luke who seems to be in that same list. Luke, the author of Acts, says in 1:19 that the Jews mentioned the "field of blood" near Jerusalem "in their own language." Luke seems to have been free of persecution that was put upon Christian Jews. He must have been seen in a different light by the Gentile antagonists of the gospel. This would possibly show that Luke was a Gentile. Luke is so Hellenistic in his language and thought forms that more than likely he was a Greek.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Friday, June 27, 2008

Connection Between The Rejection of the Gospel and Evolution?

Dr. Couch, I read somewhere that you said there was a connection between rejection of the gospel and evolution. Would you explain that?

ANSWER:  While the idea of evolution is not in the context of Acts 14:15-17, I believe a connection can be made. For example Paul said to the crowds at Lystra that God sent the gospel in order that the pagan world might turn from their vain idolatry to "a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them." The gospel will lead men to the sovereign Lord who created all things. This means there is no room for the godless teaching of chance-evolution.

   In the past God permitted the nations to go their way in their disbelief and false theologies (v. 16). "Permitted" (aeo) is in the Aorist Tense and should be translated "to leave alone," "to let go." The Lord left men to follow their own sinful tendencies and inclinations. The root idea of "way" is road. They were left to travel their own roads to destruction without the knowledge of the gospel.

   However, He left a witness, i.e. He did them good and gave them the rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, even satisfying their hearts with food and gladness (v. 17). Yet men spurn the blessings of nature. They refuse to believe the benefits of this world come from Him. It all materialized by natural, evolutionary processes, and man with his own strength and ingenuity is now somehow responsible for it all. God is left out of creation and even the sustaining of the natural world.

   Because the world is more adamant about the rejection of the gospel than ever before, I believe we are now in the apostasy. God's anger is building and the end will soon be near.

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Hidden Bible Codes

Dr. Couch, I know of some Bible teachers who believe in what they call the "hidden Bible codes." Is this heresy?

ANSWER:  I know some of these brothers personally and I think it is unfortunate that they take this view. The problem is God has revealed to us His revelations in full without any hidden messages or methods needed to find out what the truth is. This means that some people are "in" on secret truth and some are "out" in knowing what God has revealed. This makes them special and gives them an "up" on the rest of us.

   If God is giving us His truth why would He then give a secret code in order to unlock what He has to say? It does not make sense! The book of Acts says the Bereans searched the Scriptures daily in order to confirm the truth of the gospel (Acts 17:11). They used inductive reasoning and searching and did not employ some secret key to try to understand the Word of God. Paul says the Thessalonians "received from us the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God" (1 Thess. 2:13). Again, no secret code was needed.

   Some people like to be sensationalists and mystics in interpreting the Bible. Don't fall for it. God spoke to us in plain language!

   Is the "code" view heresy? No, maybe not, but it is certainly wrong and terribly misleading!

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Is The Church Under The Sabbath?

Dr. Couch, is the church under the Sabbath?

ANSWER:  No it is not. The early church met on the first day of the week which was Sunday. "And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, …" (Acts 20:7). Nine of the ten commandments are moral and spiritual in nature. They are eternal principles that reflect eternal values. They are repeated (but not as the Ten Commandments as a law system) throughout the NT. The Sabbath, while extremely important to the OT economy, is not repeated as an imperative for the NT church age and dispensation. We are not under the Sabbath commandment. Since it is a day of body and spiritual rest, we have transferred those qualities to Sunday, and there is nothing wrong in doing that. But as a heavy moral imperative, we are not under the law, any part of it, including the Sabbath.

   It is important to add however, we are not now antinomian. We have the law of Christ, to love one another, and we have all of the moral commands stated in the NT epistles that are incumbent for believers to live by today.

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Does Revelation Mention the 7 Year Covenant with the Antichrist?

Dr. Couch, the book of Revelation does not mention the making of the seven year covenant with the antichrist. Or does it?

ANSWER: The book of Revelation does not have to mention the making of the seven year covenant (Dan. 9:27). It is assumed because the book is clearly dealing with the Prince, the Beast, the antichrist, and that covenant is there by the reference to the half-life of the covenant. For example, 11:2 says, "the temple (the rebuilt one standing at the time of the tribulation) … has been given over to the nations; and they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months (or three and a half years)." It is stated again by days in 11:3: "twelve hundred and sixty days" and in 12:6: "one thousand two hundred and sixty days." This is repeated in 13:5.

This ties in with the desecration of the temple as spoken of by Christ in Matthew 24:15: "the Abomination of desolation which was spoke of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (the temple)." And it ties in with what Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4: "The man of lawlessness … who takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God." This would connect with what Daniel says in 9:27: "the Prince (the antichrist) will make a firm covenant with the man for one week (seven years) and in the middle of the week (3 and ½ years) he will put an end to sacrifice."

Three and a half years is also mentioned in Revelation 12:14 as "times and time and half a time." This is directly quoted from Daniel 7:25 and 12:7. Daniel 12 closes the book of Daniel and speaks of the distress coming upon the Jews, God's people (v. 1). At the end of "a time, times, and half a time; and as soon as they (the enemy) finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed."

In conclusion Revelation focuses down on the final 3 ½ years of the tribulation and quotes directly time passages in Daniel to prove that these events are the same. One does not have to have a seven year covenant mentioned in Revelation in order to make the obvious connection.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Another "The Already But Not Yet" Theory Question

Dr. Couch, what does the Progressive Dispensational expression "The already but not yet" mean?

ANSWER: It is a stupid view that says the kingdom has begun and finds its present expression in the church, though the PDs add, there is yet to come also an earthly millennial reign of Christ on earth. It is a compromise position to make the Covenant guys happy, and maybe cause them to like dispensationalism a little more. Finding "common ground" is part of the whole movement toward modernity. It is a form of liberalism that is afraid to be dogmatic and correct. "We just don't want to offend!"

It does not matter schmatz to me what the false Covenant guys think. They are wrong from the get-go to say the church has replaced Israel, and that the promises to the Jews have been transferred to the church. In my opinion this view is heresy and denies the literal coming of my Lord to reign and rule on earth as promised Him!

While it is true the church will be in the kingdom, still the church is not presently fulfilling the kingdom nor is it the key kingdom people. It is true however we will have some authority during that millennial period on earth. Christ promised in the future (not presently) believers will be granted (Future Tense) "to set down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne" (Rev. 3:21).

John further says in Revelation that (in the future, not presently) Christ will grant that church believers will exercise like-authority with Him in the kingdom! We will even be given judgmental rights over the nations (Rev. 2:26-27).

But no verse says the church is now fulfilling some sort of kingdom reign in this present age. Christ ratified the New Covenant, which is to be fulfilled by Israel in the kingdom when the Jews accept Christ by the work of the Spirit. Presently however, the church benefits from it by the salvation it provides, but nowhere does it say we fulfill the New Covenant. It was not promised or made first and foremost for the church but for Israel! (See Luke 22:42; Acts 2; 2 Cor. 3:1-6). But again, we are not now in the kingdom itself.

The PDs, allegorical and Covenant guys, have the right to be wrong, and sure enough, they are!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

What Is The Difference Between a Bible Church and a Baptist Church?

Dr. Couch, what is the difference between a Bible Church and a Baptist Church?
ANSWER: Traditionally, Bible churches focuses on the verse by verse exegesis of the Word of God from the pulpit. Simply put, that means a clear explanation of the Bible. It means, "Let the Bible speak for itself." As with many denominational congregations some Baptist churches may have a Baptist agenda rather than simply letting the Scriptures speak!

Many independent Baptist churches, especially in the South, may be dispensational, premillennial, and hold to the scriptural teaching of the rapture of the church. But this is certainly not true of all of them. Few Baptist churches have elder leadership, which is called for from Scripture. They only have deacon boards. (I don't understand this. I don't know how they avoid the elder requirement! You need to get my book from me: "Biblical Theology of the Church" [Kregel])

Some Baptists argue, "Well, the pastor is our elder!" Wrong! They miss the fact that every time elders are mentioned they are seen as "plural". Some Baptists still think the Baptist church was founded by John the Baptist. Some hold to closed communion for their congregation only. Neither view is biblical! Some teach that baptism is tied only to the local church. This too is not biblical otherwise the Ethiopian servant could not have been baptized.

Many Bible churches are now moving into the Emerging Church format and no longer exegete the Scriptures. They do not see (as they used to) the "teaching" (not preaching) of the Scriptures as their main task. They did in my day, and that is what I continue to do. They are slipping to the left with hot rock music, plays, skits, devotional messages, moving women into key positions, etc. The pastors see themselves as coaches, facilitators, group leaders, but no longer as strong and determined exegetes of God's Word.

I just heard about a "big" seminary leader in a school in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area who was attending a Bible church that is rapidly moving into the Emerging Church direction. When asked about it he answered, "Well, we're just celebrating Jesus!" What in the world does that mean? The word "celebrate" is an idea created by liberal churches. This shows you how he is being influenced in the wrong direction.

I no longer trust a church simply because it says it is a Bible church. They now are few and far between. The newer ones are products of our independent seminaries, of which almost all of them have moved to the left!

We are now into the apostasy of the church. It will only grow worse! The apostasy becomes full blown just prior to the rapture of true believers to be with the Lord, before the terrible seven year tribulation strikes the earth.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Willow Creek Church and Bill Hybels

Dr. Couch, have you read the "confession" of the Willow Creek Church and Bill Hybels? It looks like they have admitted their mistakes in leading people, pastors, down the prime rose path into the Church Growth Movement! 
    Yes, I have read it. Their confession does not make me mad, in fact I welcome it. But I really get furious when I look at all who followed that garbage like mice and repudiated us who urged "Steady as she goes" in remaining faithful to strong Bible teaching and exegesis. 

    Pastors like mice jumped ship and scurried over to the latest piece of cheese. They had no biblical discernment of their own. They follow fads and what is the latest. They have been indoctrinated by the cultural and no one at the time could tell them anything different. They "knew it all" and thought those of us who were giving warnings were just old fuddy duddies. Those of us who have remained faithful to exegesis had to take their criticism in the chin, but more, we had to stand in silence as family after family joined the mouse scurry to the "big" churches that had all the noise and the modernity going on behind their walls. This makes me angry! 

    When Hybels started his church he admitted he began by wanting to give people WHAT THEY WANTED in a church. He accommodated truth for entertainment, which is what the "crowd" desired. The former ABC-TV newsman, Peter Jennings, did a documentary on Willow Creek. It was tremendously revealing, but never mind, the "sheep" and easily impressed Christian crowd still wanted the new, the glitzy and the glamorous in the doing of church! You could not tell them otherwise if you had gotten on top of a building with a bull horn. At that "big" seminary in Dallas some of the professors went up to Hybel’s mega-congregation "to learn" how to do church. They came back to the students and spread "the word" on the "blessings" of Hybel’s revelations! Many students were led astray and bought into the glories of what was being propagated. What amazes me is that none of those teachers or students noticed the smell of "something-is-really-wrong-here." 

    The same repentance may someday take place in the minds and hearts of the Covenant guys. Their eyes will be opened to what God is doing, as promised in prophecy, with the land and the nation of Israel. Some may abandon their Replacement Theology, and allegory, and come to solid, biblical premillennialism and dispensationalism. Of course, for now, they have the right to be wrong! 

Thanks for asking.

Dr. Mal Couch

Saturday, June 14, 2008

No End Time Teachings From The Pulpit?

Dr. Couch, my church never teaches about the end times. The pastor says he believes in Bible prophecy but never reveals to us scripturally the doctrines of the coming rapture of the church or the tribulation. What should I do?

ANSWER: I would leave that church. I am finding that many pastors are lulling the people to sleep. They want to give only the positive. They need to discuss the issue with the Lord. HE is the One who gave us the revelations of what is yet to come. One pastor said recently "I don't want to give all that prophetic teaching, the doom and gloom, to my congregation. I want to give them only hope!" The backdrop of hope is the truth about what is going to happen that is bad. But too, all prophecy is not doom and gloom. It is about the blessed hope, the return of Christ for the church, and the blessedness of the kingdom following the end of the tribulation.

There are dozens if not hundreds of verses our people need to hear about God's future judgment upon the world in the tribulation. The tribulation is about His wrath upon a disobedient world. Isaiah writes in 13:11-13:
I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; I will also put an end to the arrogance of the proud, and abase the haughtiness of the ruthless. … Therefore I shall make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken from its place at the fury of the Lord of hosts in the day of His burning anger.
And in 26:21:
For behold, the Lord is sure to come out from His place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity.
What could get more plain as is in Jeremiah 25:30-32?
"Therefore you shall prophecy against them all these words and you shall say to them, The Lord will roar from on high, and utter His voice from His holy habitation; He will roar mightily against His fold (even the Jews). He will shout like those who tread the grapes, against all the inhabitations of the earth.

" A clamor has come to the end of the earth, because the Lord has a controversy with the nations. He is entering into judgment with all flesh; as for the wicked, He has given them to the sword," declares the Lord.

Thus says the Lord of host, "Behold, evil is going forth from nation to nations, and a great storm is being stirred up from the remotest parts of the earth."
On these terrible verses in Jeremiah 25 Unger writes:
God is pictured as a judge. He has a controversy with the nations and pleads with all flesh, slaying the wicked with the sword. … The coming great tribulation is prophetically unfolded as a great whirlwind raised up from the remotest parts of the earth with evil spreading worldwide. The frightful carnage is pictured extending from one end of the earth to the other.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Friday, June 13, 2008

'Already, Not Yet' Theory?

Dr. Couch, what do the Progressive Dispensationalists mean by the "Already, Not Yet" theory of the kingdom? This sounds confusing to me.

ANSWER: They are claiming that we are now in a certain aspect of the kingdom, the millennial kingdom! I am going to give a full biblical study and treatment to that subject on my August Gathering Storm monthly CD. The only way you can hear it is by the yearly subscription of $30. I am going to answer the question: "Are we now into the prophesied apostasy of the church?" on the September Gathering Storm. A subscription to the Gathering Storm of $30 will assure you get the full biblical answers to these important questions.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Is The Abrahamic Covenant For Both Jews and Gentiles?

Dr. Couch, I have friends that believe the entire Abrahamic Covenant is for both the Jews and the Church (Gentiles). They use Genesis 17:4-5 and Romans 4:18 where Paul quotes Genesis 15:5. How do you answer?

ANSWER: Genesis 17:4-5 reads: "As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you. And you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. … I will make you the father of a multitude of nations." Paul quotes this in Romans 4:18: "[Abraham] believed in order that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, 'So shall you descendants (seed) be.'" In the last part of the verse Paul is quoting Genesis 15:5.

The argument is that since the Gentiles are Abraham's children spiritually speaking, they too inherit the land promises. But that will not fly!

The Gentiles get in on the "blessing" aspect of the Abraham Covenant as shown in Genesis 12:3: "And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." But the land is not promised to the church or to Gentiles. First of all, this covenant is God's covenant ("My covenant," 17:4) made with Abraham and his descendants (physical seed, v. 7). Gentiles get in on the blessing aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant by faith not by being of the physical seed of Abraham. Paul writes "Also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all" (Rom. 4:16b). "Be sure that it is those who are of the faith who are sons of Abraham" (Gal. 3:7). "Those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer" (v. 9). And, "In Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith" (v. 14).

The land promises come only to the physical descendants of Abraham. The Lord said this to Abraham five times in Genesis 17:6-10. The after you in these verses is a reference to his physical progeny or descendants through the flesh. And that has to do with Isaac and not with Ishmael as said to Abraham: With Sarah's son, "you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, for his descendants after him" (v. 19).

  1. "I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants (seed) after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you" (v. 7).
  2. "I will give to you and to your descendants after you the land of your sojourning, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God" (v. 8).
  3. "This is My covenant, which you shall keep between Me and you and your descendants after you; every male among you shall be circumcised" (v. 10).

Gentiles nor the church receive the land promises. End of discussion!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Sunday, June 8, 2008

Prayers of Unbelievers

Dr. Couch, I have always thought that God did not hear the prayers of unbelievers unless the lost is calling out to God for salvation. How can we explain that the prayers of Cornelius were heard?

ANSWER: Cornelius was "saved" in OT terminology, though he nor his family had yet heard of Christ. Many true believers may never have heard of the salvation in Christ but they were godly and righteous in the way of the OT. Cornelius was one in the transition from OT thinking to the message concerning Christ. We will see him and others from the OT economy in glory! Acts 10:22 says of Cornelius: "He was a centurion, a righteous and God-fearing man well spoken of by the entire nation of the Jews, was divinely directed by a holy angel to send for you (Peter) to come to his house and hear a message from you."

Because he had seen the angel (v. 30), Cornelius assumed that Peter was another angel from God and fell before him thinking he was other worldly! (vv. 25-26).

Peter makes it clear that Cornelius' prayers were heard and answered (vv. 31-32). Because of Cornelius' spirituality and Peter's message, everyone who heard the message were baptized by the Holy Spirit. While I believe Cornelius was already saved (in OT terms) he too received the Spirit.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Friday, June 6, 2008

Did God Use Hitler?

Dr. Couch, what do you think of Pastor John Hagee's remark that God used Hitler to cause the Jews to return to the Holy Land? I understand he was under pressure to "repent" of that statement.

ANSWER: That statement was not original with Hagee. It has been an old belief of the Jews in Israel for sixty years. I had Jews tell me that on many of my trips to Israel. "God used Hitler to drive us back to the Land."

I am fed up with us being so weak in resolve that we back down from truth when the world squawks or yells when we say something that it does not like. God is using the evil of men as He pleases. He is the author of His own history. He is not impotent or passive. He brings the storms for judgment and uses men as He wishes to get things accomplished for His purposes. If you do not believe such sovereignty passages I suggest you read Job 12:13-25.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Women as Leaders

Dr. Couch, I hear a lot today about women being leaders. Does the Bible confirm this idea?

ANSWER: Feminist driven women today will drag out the story of Deborah from the book of Judges to try to prove that they should be pastor(ettes) and leader(ettes), but that argument will not fly. While it was true that there was a dearth of men who were spiritually qualified, the fact of her taking the role of a judge is an exception in Scripture and not the norm.

She was not a military leader as some try to claim. Barak was her general who led the armies in combat. He was a bit weak kneed in that he wanted her to go with him for spiritual support to fight and defeat Sisera (Judges 4:7-9).

The rule is that male leadership is meant to guide the churches, but I see more and more Bible schools and seminaries having conferences to train women in "leadership." Our military schools claim they are training women to be military leaders, but the elephant in the living room that no one speaks about, is that women cannot really lead men. It takes men to lead men! The Pentagon lies to us and tells us they are not putting women in combat positions but the reality is they are! Women are trained as jet fighter pilots, etc. I heard one misguided military girl say, "I feel it is my duty to defend my country!" Wrong! It is her duty to raise godly children and make a wonderful warm home for family spiritual training. It is the duty of the men to defend both home and hearth!

In Scripture, young men are told to "be subject to your elders" (1 Pet. 5:5). Young men are wild horses and need the firm guidance of older men as roll models and as those who exercise their authority in reigning in the waywardness of the young.

As long as the churches follow the dictates of the culture and what is politically correct, spiritual failure will only increase in the life of the Evangelical community.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Wednesday, June 4, 2008

What Is Going On In The World Today?

Dr. Couch, what is going on in the world today?

ANSWER: Everything is happening that I was teaching some forty years or more ago. Dispensationalists certainly do not know the timetable of the rapture or the tribulation but we can look clearly at the Bible and see patterns being formed that are there in Scripture. We are now in the period of the dress rehearsal, the prelude, the forming of the storm clouds that will soon overshadow the world and bring on the tribulation, the terrible wrath of God.

But of course, the church will not be here. It will be raptured away before the wrath comes. See 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 5:1-9.

Note how the world is interlinked together more than ever before. And everything is aiming at the Middle East and Israel. The economic and energy crisis will at some point bring the world to the brink in which the people of earth will all together seek earnestly for a strong man to get them out of the mess.

America could fall much quicker than we can imagine. And selfishness and greed will be the catalyst. The average American family owes over $15,000 in credit care debt. One woman interviewed, owes over $80,000 and pays $600 each month on interest. There is no way the country will get out of that mess. Trillions of dollars are now owed on credit cards. In some places food costs have risen some 80%.

The Word of God gives the full scope of doctrine, including the larger picture of history. We would be smart to pay attention!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Tuesday, June 3, 2008

What About The Word 'Saint'?

Dr. Couch, I have been told that every time one sees the word "saint" in the Bible, Old or New Testament, it has to do with the church saints, or all the saints of Scripture, both Jewish saints and church saints. What do you say?
ANSWER: Wrong! The Bible makes it clear that there are saints in different dispensations but they are not all balled up together into one big lump. In the OT there is a family of words that come from the Hebrew word kah-dohsh that can be translated "holy," "saint," "sanctified." In all cases when applied to people it would be to the Jewish people, though maybe there would be an instance or two in which it would apply to some faithful Gentile. But that Gentile would be living in OT times and the reference would certainly not be about the church, the spiritual body of Christ.

In Daniel 7, "saint" is used seven times with the reference to the citizens of the coming messianic kingdom. Our poor Covenant theological guys would see kingdom as the church but of course they would be wrong, as usual! In 7:18 it says the saints "will receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, for all ages to come." And in verse 22, the same thing is said. Now it would not make sense to say the saints "take possession of the church"! The Covenant guys are not very good observers. They bring their theology to the verses instead of allowing the verses to create their theology!

In verse 25 it says that the antichrist (the other horn who comes out of the ten) "will speak out against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One." This happens in the tribulation and the church saints have already been raptured. So this is not referencing church saints, however, could it be referring to Jewish and Gentile saints during that seven year period of wrath? If so, we would simply label them together as "tribulation saints."

Yet, more than likely, saints here are Jewish believers. This is what Daniel would have in mind in the context in chapter 7 of Daniel. But too, note that verse 25 says the antichrist will "wear down the saints of the Most High." This fits perfectly with Revelation 12 where it is stated that Satan pursues the woman, who in John's illustration, is the nation of Israel which gives birth to the "child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron" (v. 5). It is said further that Satan goes off to make war with the woman "and with her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus" (v. 17). This Revelation 12 scenario fits perfectly with Daniel's reference to the "saints" whom the antichrist attempts to pursue and wear down, destroy.

On Daniel 7 and the reference to "saints," Unger writes: "The ultimate outcome, reflected in the fifth Kingdom (the Millennium), will be that 'the saints of the Most High' (vv. 22, 25, 27), that is, the saved Jewish remnant that will pass through the Great Tribulation shall take (receive) 'the kingdom', according to the covenants and promises made to Israel in connection with it."

In summary, there are (1) OT saints, (2) church saints, (3) tribulation saints (whether Jew or Gentile). OT saints nor the tribulation saints are seen as being in the church, the spiritual body of Christ. The body of Christ is a unique entity of both Jew and Gentile, which has a special place and a special mission in this dispensation.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch