Bio

Dr. Mike Halsey is the chancellor of Grace Biblical Seminary, a Bible teacher at the Hangar Bible Fellowship, the author of Truthspeak and his new book, The Gospel of Grace and Truth: A Theology of Grace from the Gospel of John," both available on Amazon.com. A copy of his book, Microbes in the Bloodstream of the Church, is also available as an E-book on Amazon.com. If you would like to a receive a copy of his weekly Bible studies and other articles of biblical teaching and application, you can do so by writing to Dr. Halsey at michaeldhalsey@bellsouth.net and requesting, "The Hangar Bible Fellowship Journal."

Comments may be addressed to michaeldhalsey@bellsouth.net.

If you would like to contribute to his ministry according to the principle of II Corinthians 9:7, you may do so by making your check out to Hangar Bible Fellowship and mailing it to 65 Teal Ct., Locust Grove, GA 30248. All donations are tax deductible.

Come visit the Hangar some Sunday at 10 AM at the above address. You'll be glad you did.

Other recommended grace-oriented websites are:

notbyworks.org
literaltruth.org
gracebiblicalseminary.org
duluthbible.org
clarityministries.org

Also:

Biblical Ministries, Inc.
C/O Dr. Richard Grubbs
P. O. Box 64582
Lubbock, TX 79464-4582

Friday, July 31, 2015

DID YOUR TEACHER TELL YOU ABOUT THIS?

Emma Willard said this about George Washington:

"His mortal remains repose at Mt. Vernon near the scene of his domestic enjoyments. To that spot will every true son of America, in all future ages, be attracted in mournful, filial pilgrimage and thither, from every clime, will the votary of the rights of man repair, to renew his vow of devotion, and draw fresh inspiration in the sacred cause."

THE FAMOUS HAVE COME, HAVE SEEN, HAVE STOOD IN AWE

Many, the famous and the not famous, have made the "mournful, filial pilgrimage" to Washington's tomb. His military partner Lafayette came in 1827, and his personal assistant wrote: "Lafayette descended alone in the vault, and a few minutes thereafter reappeared, with his eyes overflowing with tears. He took his son and me by the hand, and led us into the tomb... We knelt reverentially near his coffin, which we respectfully saluted with our lips; rising, we mingled our tears with his.”

Other visitors who've stood in reverential awe at the tomb include the Prince of Wales and President Buchanan in 1860, Thomas Edison, King George VI in 1939, (the first reigning monarch of Britain ever to visit America) President Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Madame Chaing Kai-shek, and French President Charles de Gaulle, photographed standing by the sarcophagus with his hat in his hand.

I was there; I stood, cap in hand, at the stately tomb of George Washington on the grounds of Mt. Vernon. As I looked at it through the iron gate, I saw something, and it made me wonder, "Do our teachers tell our children what I saw?"

BACK UP

But let's back up for a minute. When George Washington died on December 14, 1799, he died of an unpronounceable bacteria that we never hear of today because it's so easily cured. (All the doctors did for him was worse than useless.) When George Washington died, our nation deeply mourned him; they'd lost their "father" and they knew it. But we weren't the only ones who mourned the great man:

"[His] death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colors to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams." (History Today)

BUT DO OUR TEACHERS TELL US WHAT I SAW?

At George Washington's funeral on December 18, 1799, Washington's body lay in a coffin that featured silver-plate ornament at the head inscribed with a Latin phrase, SURGE AD JUDICIUM and another inscribed with "GLORIA DEO."

Do our teachers tell our students about those words and what those Latin phrases mean? The first means, "Rise to Judgment" and the second means, "Glory to God." If ever there were two biblical concepts, there they were, right there at the funeral for all to see. "Rise" implies a bodily resurrection, life after death, while "to judgment" states man's accountability to God after death. "Glory to God," is a statement of praise to God. Do our teachers mention these things?

But that's not what I saw.

WHAT I SAW AT WASHINGTON'S TOMB

As you look into the tomb, you see the stately white sarcophagi of George and Martha Washington; their marble whiteness draws your eyes to them. Yet, if you stand there taking it all in, you notice something written on the back wall of the tomb. It's in a dim light, it shows a bit of age, but it's there, it's there all right. You see the words, "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. John 11:25-26"

I saw those words. They comprise one of the great promises Jesus made, they're right there, plain as day, but do our teachers speak of this inscription? Right there, for however long visitors want to think about it, John 11:25-26 penetrates their minds. The Word of God is powerful, sharper than any two-edge sword, so we would expect those words to be like a stone in the shoe of the unbeliever who reads them and that stone is something he just can't seem to get out of his mind. He may suppress them; they may torture him, like Stephen's sermon was torturing Saul on the road to Damascus. 

Those words come as a lightning bolt from the tomb of the great man. The famous and the not famous have read them, and God says, "So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth. It will not return to Me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it." (Is. 55:11)

NO WAY

No way. No how. Few, if any, teachers and historians mention that inscription on Washington's tomb. Many of them are debunkers, trying to bring the great man down. They spend their time telling students and readers of their books that he was a failure as a general (really? get real!), that he was rich and sought to get richer (yet, what's wrong with that, does not I Cor. 7:21 encourage us to better ourselves when possible? He refused to take a salary as commander-n-chief of the Revolutionary army from the Continental Congress; He refused the $25,000 salary offered by the Congress while he was president. He used his acreage to become as self-sufficient as possible. He and Martha let any and all visitors stay in their home, free of charge for as long as they wanted; in his will he stipulated that his elderly slaves or those who were too sick to work were to be supported by his estate in perpetuity. He freed them all.), and historian Sir Arnold Toynbee, without one shred of evidence, deemed Washington immoral. 

THE WORLD AT WORK

In the descriptions I've read about Mt. Vernon and the final resting place of George and Martha Washington, I've never read about Jesus' words being there. But isn't this what the world system does? Does it not do everything in its power to shut God out? The world-system engages in a systematic effort to censor all references to Christ, Christianity, and the Bible.

Yet, "since 1860," according to the Mt. Vernon Ladies Association, "over 85 million people have visited Mount Vernon, when the estate officially opened to the public. Today, Mount Vernon welcomes an average of one million guests each year."

And what is it that the observant visitors see--John 11:25-26, carved large. When they read it, we have God's assurance that those famous words won't return empty; they will accomplish His purposes. They will either lead to trust in Christ, consideration of Christ, investigation about Christ, or expose rejection of Christ.

Those words, carved with artistic care, are great words, spoken by One greater than Washington.

 



Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpu
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf
Washington’s death brought tributes even from the British who had fought him. Royal Navy battleships blockading Brest lowered their colours to half mast and The London Morning Chronicle opined that ‘The whole range of history does not present to our view a character upon which we can dwell with such entire and unmixed admiration’. The US army wore black armbands for six months and many ladies went into formal mourning, led by the First Lady, Abigail Adams. Congress, meeting in Philadelphia, adjourned on the day of the funeral. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/death-george-washington#sthash.aMJGGYz5.dpuf

Friday, July 17, 2015

IT MEANS THAT BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT

The Time: 1999
The Place: Mobile, Alabama

The pastor has prepared his Sunday morning sermon. It's typed and ready to go. It took 13 pages and 7,425 words. Sunday morning has come. The choir has sung beautifully, as usual. The announcements are over, the offering received. The pastor strides to the pulpit, ready, confident, and polished. He begins his sermon and one and all note once again that their pastor is a good speaker.

Time passes as the clock ticks its way toward noon, lunch, and the NFL. The pastor now comes to page 12, nearing the end, at which time the choir will sing all four verses of "Just As I Am" as the pastor stands at the front of the auditorium inviting people to come forward to be saved, to rededicate their lives, to be baptized, and to join the church.

Coming to the climax, of the day and his week, he says:

"The word 'repentance' means 'a change of mind.' But, biblically, it encompasses more than that. According to Scripture, repentance includes three necessary components —a change of mind, a change of heart, and a change of will—leading to a change of life and a change of eternal destiny.

"Reversing the effects of human depravity, repentance is a deep work of God’s Spirit which turns the heart away from all false gods, false beliefs, and false hopes in order to exercise faith in the finished work of Christ alone.

"No longer married to the world, a sudden divorce has occurred with all one’s idols. Believers are separated from previous allegiances, whether they be religious, secular, material, or otherwise. In genuine conversion, Christ becomes one’s newly recognized Lord who allows no rival loyalties or divided affections. Such radical repentance ushers in a complete commitment to Christ of those who genuinely belong to Him."

Seated in the section just to the left of the speaker, the fifth pew from the front, was John Bookman, a visitor that Sunday, who's been listening intently. But Mr. Bookman, new to church circles and churchspeak, begins to have a problem with what he'd just heard. Something didn't make sense. He went over it in his mind: "Did I hear this right? Didn't he just say, "The word 'repentance' means 'a change of mind.'" But didn't he go on to say in the very next sentence, "Biblically, it encompasses more than that"?

John started to think about what he'd just heard from the standpoint of logic. "It sounds like he's saying, 'Repentance means X, but it doesn't mean X," he thought to himself. "How can repentance mean a change of mind, but not mean a change of mind?"  

This puzzled John, so he made sure he picked up a copy of the sermon the church always made available after the service in the foyer on a CD, a DVD, as well as in print. John Bookman made sure to got the print version, because he wanted to really get into the sermon.

That Sunday, after lunch and after watching the Dallas Cowboys, John sat down at his desk with the sermon and started to read over it quickly until he got to page 12, then he slowed down and noticed some things. The first thing he noticed was that the pastor had said, "The word 'repentance' means 'a change of mind.'" He'd heard that part right.

Reading on, he found that the pastor said "repentance" means "a change of mind, heart and will, leading to a change of life. .  it means no rival loyalties or divided affections . . . a complete commitment to Christ, a sudden divorce, if his conversion is genuine. Yes, he had heard the pastor correctly; that's what he said.

John became despondent. He knew that he had never given Christ his full loyalty and he had some those divided affections. The idea of complete commitment bothered him to no end, as did the need of a sudden divorce from from previous allegiances, whether they be religious, secular, material, or otherwise. How "sudden" is "sudden?"

John began to doubt his salvation because he knew that his commitment wasn't anywhere near a complete one, he had rival loyalties from time to time, the divorces the pastor spoke of wasn't sudden by any means; it was still in progress.

John didn't like this doubt, but what else was he to do? The only thing he could think of was that in the future, he'd try harder to be a good Christian, one who gave evidence of the genuine conversion the pastor was talking about. 

From that day forward, John spent the rest of his life examining his works, just to make sure that he was saved, but he never found any assurance in those. At times, John could be most carnal and he knew it. He lived the rest of his life always looking over his shoulder at his deeds. When it was all said and done, Bookman concluded, "Christianity isn't like they said; it's not joy, peace, stability, and happiness. It's made me miserable."
_______________________________________________________________________________

The portion of the sermon included above is verbatim, a sermon by a pastor given in the time period specified. John Bookman is fictional, but what happened to him isn't. His name is legion. What John had run into was a pastor who packed "repentance" with the baggage of complete commitment, works, and no rival loyalties. What John had heard was a speaker who talked about the finished work of Christ, only to go on and say it really wasn't finished, because you have to add all the works he mentioned to it.

The pastor was right when he said that "repentance" means "a change of mind," but then he went on to say that it doesn't mean that. John caught the logical problem, but few do. 

Repentance is a change of mind about who Christ is, that is, He's the God-Man who died for our sins, rose from the dead and promises everlasting life to all who trust Him and Him alone for salvation from the guilt and penalty of sin. That's why it's called the "gospel," the "good news." 

What John heard wasn't good news, it was news that tormented him for the rest of his life because works for salvation is never good news. All the works the pastor had mentioned have nothing to do with salvation; they have to do with discipleship. He mixed the two and thus the confusion. Why did he do that?

For many, faith alone is too simple. They'll say, "There's just got to be more than faith; you've got to do something," not realizing that "more than that"  and "you've got to do something, mean works and the addition of just one work crushes grace. "More than that" and "you've got to do something changes grace into works. "More than that" and "you've got to do something" take the focus off Christ and place it on me and my commitment, my deeds, my allegiances, my sudden divorces. In short it puts the focus on the life I live, not the death He died. 

John Bookman eventually quit, not only that church, but also all "church." He was just too miserable; he couldn't take it any more.








Friday, July 10, 2015

THAT GOOD OLD BAYLOR LINE

That good old Baylor line!
That good old Baylor line!
We'll march forever down the years,
As long as stars shall shine.
We'll fling our green and gold afar
To light the ways of time,
And guide us as we onward go;
That good old Baylor line!

Baylor is the oldest university in the state of Texas, established in 1845, whereas the University of Texas wasn't founded until 1881. (This would make a great Jeopardy answer, "The oldest school in the state of Texas.") It's the world's largest Baptist college with 16,000 students.

The words above are those of Baylor's school song penned in the fall of 1931. Up until recently, Baylor's football teams were a joke of Rodney Dangerfield proportions for decades. ("They don't get no respect.") But a recent change at Baylor is no joke. The change is a change in language, in the wording of the university's policy.

To understand the change, let's look at the way it was:

"Baylor will be guided by the understanding that human sexuality is a gift from the creator God and that the purposes of this gift included (1) the procreation of human life and (2) the uniting and strengthening of the marital bond in self-giving love. These purposes are to be achieved through heterosexual relationships within marriage. Misuses of God's gift will be understood to include, but not be limited to, sexual abuse, sexual harassment, sexual assault, incest, adultery, fornication and homosexual acts."

The new statement, replacing the old one:

"Baylor will be guided by the biblical understanding that human sexuality is a gift from God and that physical sexual intimacy is to be expressed in the context of marital fidelity. Thus, it is expected that Baylor students, faculty and staff will engage in behaviors consistent with this understanding of human sexuality."

We can easily see the omissions: the specific naming of "sexual abuse, sexual harassment, sexual assault, incest, adultery, fornication and homosexual acts" as is the positive statement about "heterosexual relationships as fulfilling God's purposes for marriage." We note the addition which turns the old explicit statement into fog, one which raises a question, a big question: What do they mean by "the context of marital fidelity"?

The Supreme Court recently redefined marriage, so is the statement in line with the new definition? Is the statement calling for "marital fidelity" in the context of the redefinition of marriage? Is the statement a cave-in courtesy to the world? Was the statement born of fear because the university board of governors read about the case of the Oregon bakers? Is Baylor compromising and trying to head off troubled times in court? Is Baylor fearful of offending?

Lori Fogleman, Baylor’s assistant vice president for media communications, said in an e-mail to The Washington Post that the changes “were made because we didn’t believe the language reflected Baylor’s caring community.” She went on to say, "We are pleased with the recent changes to the policy language and that it states more plainly the expectations of the university."

In support of the new statement, Sophomore Jailyn Parnell told The Lariat (the Baylor campus newspaper), “It is saying that we are not going to pinpoint homosexuals. It is saying that homosexual acts are wrong but heterosexual acts committed outside of marriage are also wrong. It is making it more equal.”

Say what? "More equal?" "Pinpointing homosexuals?" How's that possible when six other sins are mentioned in the old statement? And where does the new statement say that homosexual acts are wrong?

Really? More plainly? Fogleman said the statement is good because it states things more plainly. If the statement is so plain, then why did those who hailed the Supreme Court decision in June, praise the Baylor statement as a touchdown for their side, and why did others say that the statement was a reaffirmation of the Bible's definition of marriage, a statement which showed Baylor to be a "caring community." (One might ask, "What does that mean?" Is it an act of caring to stop calling sin "sin?")

If the statement is so plain, why did the two groups read the same statement, examine its wording, and come to two opposite conclusions as to its meaning? If it's so plain, why are both sides pleased with it? The statement is like something we'd hear from a consummate politician, a statement so vague that both sides take it as a victory.

We could ask the question, "And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle?" (I Cor. 14:8)

That good old Baylor line; in saying something, they said nothing. Or did they?














Friday, July 3, 2015

HANG DOWN YOUR HEAD, TOM DOOLEY

On July 4, 2002, a man shot a New York policeman 15 times, drove over him with a car, then shot the officer twice more, in his face. 
 
In 1997, a man kidnapped his former boss, 76, and then tortured, killed, and dismembered him — with a hacksaw. Later, he murdered a man in a bar fight. A detective described him as "the most cunning, evil, sadistic person that I ever investigated."
 
STILL LIVING?

In 2015, those two men shouldn't have been, but they were. And there they were, the object of a million dollars a day manhunt, with the final total at $21 million of the taxpayers' hard earned money. Not only that, but they were terrorizing law-abiding men, women, and children who were locking their doors day and night, keeping their children inside, and looking over their shoulders with fear that one or both of the men might be behind them. 1,300 men had to go gunning for those two for three weeks in the jungles of Upper New York State, taking them away from their families and regular duties as law enforcement officers.

Finally, the authorities killed one of them, shot and captured the other one who was running away, back towards the tangled woods from which he had come. The officer shot him right square in the back twice as he was fleeing. (A round of applause for the officer.)

HEAR THE SOBBING?

Wouldn't you know it: this raised a hue and cry from some who thought that shooting a man in the back was somehow not the way to handle the matter. But it's all well, good, and proper to shoot a fleeing felon in the head, chest, or back. What if he'd made it back into the dense woods of Upper New York State, and what if he'd killed more people after that? But no. For some, they must shed tears for a monster shot in the back.

Sane people would say that those two men earned the bullets that brought them down, and they'd be right, but a better comment would be, "They shouldn't have been."

This is one more classic example of how the farther away from the Bible a society gets, the higher the price that society has to pay. The manhunt, terror, and fear shouldn't have been because those two shouldn't have been. 
 
HANG DOWN YOUR HEAD, TOM DOOLEY

They should have been dead long ago, not serving "life terms with no possibility of parole." Genesis 9 says that they should have been dispatched with extreme prejudice way back when. Genesis 9 is the record of when God instituted government into the human race, giving it the authority to execute murderers. If any two people deserved to ride Old Sparky, face a firing squad, or a feel a noose tightening around their throats, those two did.
 
THE UNBEARABLE BEAR REPUBLIC
 
As an act of accumulating defiance against God, as of April, 2015, 746 people sit on death row in California awaiting execution because the powers that be are studying the issue of capital punishment. Included in those 746 are Charles Manson and Richard Davis, the killer of 12-yr. old Polly Klaas who was murdered 22 years ago. (!) Manson and Davis, along with the 744 others will die of boredom before they meet the needle or inhale the gas in the Bear Republic.

Those two New York murderers aren't the only two who have been spared the death penalty and escaped to wreak havoc, terror, and kill again. If you'd like to read the accounts of the many killers who escape from prison, go to ProDeathPenalty.com, but before you do, you need a great deal of time to read through the list. Then go and lock your doors and secure your windows.
 
THE DEFIANT ONES
 
Do not think this defiance of God is only an American aberration:
 
The UN voted to abolish the death penalty in 1994 and . . .
 
"Since 2007, the European Day against the Death Penalty is celebrated by the Council of Europe every year on October 10,  along with the World Day against the Death Penalty. The European Union has joined this initiative as from its second edition in 2008. 
 
"The aim of the European Day against the Death Penalty is to achieve a complete abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances in Europe, to support efforts by the international community to introduce a world-wide moratorium and, ultimately, universal abolition of the death penalty, to react against attempts to re-establish the death penalty, and to raise the awareness of the public about the fact that the death penalty is a travesty of justice. Every European and World Day against the Death penalty is marked by a joint declaration issued by the Council of Europe and the European Union."
 
As of February 2015, 99 countries have banned capital punishment, showing that this manifestation of defiance against God is one of Satan's worldwide strategies. 
 
In March 2015, Pope Francis issued a strong statement against the death penalty when he wrote: "Today the death penalty is inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime committed. Capital punishment contradicts God's plan for man and society and does not render justice to the victims, but rather fosters vengeance." (What Bible is he reading?)
 
WHY HAVE IT?
 
Capital punishment shows the value of human life. To kill a man is not like killing an animal or destroying  plant. Capital punishment is a statement that man is a special creation of God, a creation created in His image and likeness; therefore, his life is precious to God. 
 
Does the New Testament give the thumbs up to the death penalty. Yes, in Romans 13.  

We read the accounts of the manhunt for two men who shouldn't have been alive to escape. In California we read of 746 who shouldn't be. We look at the worldwide secular and religious demands to abolish the death penalty.
 
That's the way it is on this, the defiant planet.