The initial intent of this preacher’s heart in writing this paper was much like Jude’s when he started to write about "the common salvation." However, the past few weeks the Lord has impressed upon me some Biblical issues that I believe must be addressed again.

When we were visiting our daughter in Atlanta, Georgia in the mid-90’s a card with the following was placed in her letter box. It said "If you think church is out of style and filled with stuffed shirts-think again. …Community Church is a contemporary Christian church with a relaxed, casual atmosphere. …services are an entertaining and enlightening mix of pop/contemporary music, ‘slice of life’ dramas, and messages that relate to today’s concerns. At … we address the issues people want to know about." (Emphasis was in the church brochure).

This card was distributed by a newly formed church in the Atlanta, Georgia area back in the 90’s! What was taking place then in, I think, mainly new-evangelical churches is sadly taking place in many independent Baptist Churches today. These new thinking independent Baptists have laid aside the old ways of simply preaching Christ and Bible doctrine and upholding Bible separation from the world’s music and entertainment for addressing "the issues people want to know about" as well as an accommodation to the world’s music and entertainment in the expectation to win the world to Christ.

Pastor Jack Seaton in HOW WE USED TO DO THINGS page 17 The Sword and Trowel 2002 No. 3 said "Now this does not for one minute mean that everything that was done in former days was well done or wisely done. But in the light of the circumstances that surround us now, it would appear to be a good thing if some of the past practices were returned to, or at least reinforced in the hearts and minds of God’s people." I agree!

In 2 Samuel 23: 11, 12 we read "And after him was Shammah the son of Agee the Hararite. And the Philistines were gathered together into a troop, where was a piece of ground full of lentiles: and the people fled from the Philistines. But he stood in the midst of the ground, and defended it, and slew the Philistines: and the LORD wrought a great victory."

Shammah was one of David’s three mighty men of whom Herbert Lockyer says his name means "loss." What prompted his parents to name him this is not known but as a warrior with God Shammah knew nothing of loss or desertion of duty! When others fled Shammah stood his ground and with God’s help a victory was wrought. Now exactly what did the Philistine’s seek to take from Israel? They sought to take just a field of lentiles. Too many of us a field of lentils would not be worth risking one’s life for but in that day and today in many parts of the world a field of lentils could mean the difference between survival or starvation.

Shammah "stood in the midst of the ground, and defended it, and slew the Philistines" and "he: and the LORD wrought a great victory." Today we need some Shammah’s who will "…stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong." as we read in1Corinthians 16:13 for there are still pieces of ground that are being assaulted and with God’s help a great victory will be wrought! In this standing and defence of some pieces of ground it may be well "if some of the past practices were returned to, or at least reinforced in the hearts and minds of God’s people."

What are some of the pieces of ground under assault today? In this study only four will be considered. The first two pieces of ground are being assaulted by some of our friends and by all of our foes. The last two are only under attack by our foes as far as I know.

The First Ground Under Attack Today--

The First piece of ground the foes and some "friends" are attacking are the SCRIPTURES and in particular the preservation of the Hebrew and Greek Texts underlying the English Scriptures known as the King James Bible. In spite of what those leading the assault say this matter of word preservation is not a minor piece of ground and is worth defending. Our very faith and eternal destiny rests on the authenticity of the Hebrew and Greek Words from which we have received the Scriptures in our language. Jesus said in John 17:8 "For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them…" Do we or do we not have the Word and Words of

God in our language or do we merely have the message and thoughts of God? According to Detroit Baptist Seminary Professor Rolland McCune one’s standing solidly in defence of the Hebrew and Greeks Texts underlying the King James Bible "is one of fundamentalism’s greatest present distractions." Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 1 (Fall 1996) page 177.

The attack on this piece of ground should come as no surprise to us for this assault began in the Garden of Eden when Satan said "Yea, hath God said?" It is a known fact that the Bible, the King James Bible, has been the standard of Bible believing English speaking people for over four hundred years. Sadly in this day some of our "friends" have fled from the defence of this piece of ground and have sided with foes such as Bruce Metzger, Kurt Aland, and Carlo Martini. For example, Detroit Baptist Seminary says that "While the Bible clearly teaches the ultimate indestructibility of the verbal revelation of God (Matt 24:35; 1 Pet 1:25), it does not tell how and where the written manuscript lineage of that Word is preserved. We believe that God has providentially preserved His word in the many manuscripts, fragments, versions, translations, and copies of the Scriptures that are available, and that by diligent study, comparison, and correlation, the original text (words) can be ascertained. We therefore hold that the integrity of any text, text type, translation, version, or copy of the Scriptures is to be judged by the autographs only and not by an English translation or any other reproduction or translation." (Emphasis not in the original) Detroit Baptist Seminary Statement on INSPIRATION AND PRESERVATION.

These men at Detroit Baptist Seminary say they believe in the preservation of Scripture but they do not know "how and where." What saith the plain sense of the Scriptures given by the Detroit men; Matthew 24:35 "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." and 1 Peter 1:25 "But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you."? Simple Simon reading these two verses in our English language would conclude a clear understanding is that the "my words" of Matthew 24:35 and "the word" of 1 Peter 1:25 to which these two passages speak will never pass away or cease to be. The HOW is that God Himself will and has preserved His Words. Again Jesus said in John 17:8 "For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them…" The WHERE He has preserved them I believe is in the Hebrew and Greek Texts which are those underlying the King James Bible. But our Detroit brethren say they "…believe that God has providentially preserved His word in the many manuscripts, fragments, versions, translations, and copies of the Scriptures that are available, and that by diligent study, comparison, and correlation, the original text (words) can be ascertained." So, according to Detroit Baptist Seminary they know WHERE God’s words are but those "words" to which Matthew 24:35 refers and the "word" to which 1 Peter 1:25 refers has been "providentially preserved" by God but are discovered only by "diligent study, comparison, and correlation" of "the many manuscripts, fragments, versions, translations, and copies of the Scriptures." and then and only then "the original text (words) can be ascertained." That may be an acceptable statement to those at Detroit Baptist Seminary but the average believer may be somewhat disappointed and frustrated with this explanation. Exactly how is the average Christian and for that matter the average pastor going to study and compare "the many manuscripts, fragments, versions, translations, and copies of the Scriptures."? Those who follow the Detroit Baptist Seminary line of thinking should pay very careful attention to the words of Jesus in John 12:48 "He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." Now the Detroit men and those of their ilk "...emphasize that not all of Christ’s Words or God’s Words are written down (p. 367). That is true. But that for which the mankind will be responsible are the preserved, written canonical Words of God (Mt. 24:35). Christ wrote some unknown Words in the sand (Jn. 8:6, 8), but man will not be held responsible for them at the judgment. Christ presumably said things in His teachings that were not written down (Jn. 21:25) and man won’t be accountable for those words. Believers will now be accountable for "it is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35) only because Paul preached and Luke recorded this "agrapha" of the Lord. Man will not be held responsible for God’s spoken revelation other than the perfectly preserved and inscripturated canonical Scriptures." Dr. Thomas M. Strouse in A CRITIQUE OF GOD’S WORD IN OUR HANDS: THE BIBLE PRESERVED FOR US.

Yet, after telling us "God has providentially preserved His word in the many manuscripts, fragments, versions, translations, and copies of the Scriptures" Detroit Baptist Seminary turns around and tell us "any text, text type, translation, version, or copy of the Scriptures is to be judged by the autographs only and not by an English translation or any other reproduction or translation." Therefore "any translation that is faithful to the autographs be held up as the Word of God." Detroit Baptist Seminary Statement on Inspiration and Preservation. The question is what autographs is Detroit Baptist speaking? What English translation is "faithful to the autographs"? They know the original autographs are not available to us today so will we ever know the joy of having the complete Word with the Words of God?

Let us be honest, most lay people and pastors do not have the availability or capability to study the existing manuscripts or fragments etc. Most of us study the works of others who have done their own study and many times their study has been the study of others. In the end it means we are following another man’s study of manuscripts, fragments, etc since the original manuscripts are not available to any of us today. Listen to what Dallas Seminary professor Daniel Wallace says "The first major English translation of the Bible to appear since the King James (1611) was the Revised Version of 1881. Since then, numerous English translations have sprung up, almost all of which have used a different textual basis from the one found in the KJV. This difference is especially seen in the New Testament. Simultaneously published with the RV was the Greek text of Westcott and Hort, two Cambridge scholars. This Greek text had been in the works for 28 years, coming to light on May 12, 1881." (Emphasis added by DCB) Daniel Wallace THE CONSPIRACY BEHIND THE NEW BIBLE TRANSLATIONS. So according to Wallace until 1881 the English speaking world had accepted the King James Bible as God’s Word and Words in the English language. They also accepted those Hebrew and Greek Texts underlying the King James Bible as the Word and Words of God in the original Bible languages. But, then in 1881 as Wallace says because of Westcott and Hort’s love for the fourth century manuscripts, B and Aleph, they produced a New Greek Text and from that came the Revised English Bible. Subsequently since 1881 the scholars have followed one of two textual paths which believers will follow.

The first path is the path crowded with the majority of witnesses of the original autographs. These witnesses are those underlying our King James Bible. This path is not only crowded but well worn for it was followed by almost all believers before 1881. This path was the path of faith. This path led God’s churches to trust the Text upon which the King James Bible is based and in turn trusting by faith the words of the King James Bible. God’s people believed that God preserved the original Hebrew and Greek words in those manuscripts comprising the Texts underlying the King James Bible and by faith believed those preserved Hebrew and Greek words were carried across from the Hebrew and Greek faithfully by the King James translators into our English language.

The other path is less crowded with basically two manuscripts walking the path and not always together. This path was also less worn until Westcott and Hort. Sadly the multitude of English versions of today are a result of Westcott and Hort’s Text and these versions differ not only from the King James Bible in their English Text but they differ from their English relatives as well. These brethren at Detroit Baptist Seminary say they "…do not grant the legitimacy of regarding one text, text type, or translation as the very Word of God to the exclusion of all others." So take your pick of any of the English versions, preferably not the King James Bible, and somewhere within the pages will be found the Word and Words of God. This is a great comfort to dying men?

Instead of standing with the modern day Shammahs (D. A. Waite, D. Cloud, Tom Strouse, David Sorenson, and others) for the Text that underlies the God honoured King James Bible Detroit Baptist Seminary stands with apostates such as Metzger and Aland, and new-evangelicals such as Wallace and Carson.

While Detroit Baptist Seminary and others are seeking to ascertain the Word and Words of God some have settled the matter by simply believing God has preserved His Word and Words in the Texts underlying the King James Bible. In concluding this point here are seven principles Dr. O. Talmadge Spence founder of Foundations Bible College has given "whereby we may teach others how to preserve the Preserved Word of the King James Version." These principles are found in chapter one of his book PRESERVING THE PRESERVED WORD OF THE AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION and they are:

"1. Preserve it in Love. This means to simply preserve it, not prove it.

2. Preserve it by always using it publicly. This means to publicly preserve, not publicly compare it.

3. Preserve it by defending its English words publicly. This means to use its English words paramount to the English audience, not defending it by Biblical languages as a greater authority for the audience.

4. Preserve it in English Bible departments in Christian schools. This means teach the Elizabethan English distinctives of that time of the unity of the KJV in reaction to the contemporary time in which we live.

5. Preserve it by witnessing and evangelizing—planting KJV words for evangelism and revival. This means we teach that God has His Word in our English-speaking world.

6. Preserve it in power. This means that an English word, under the work of the Holy Spirit, has the power of the Word of God behind it.

7. Preserve it in the doctrine to others, too. This means that all the fundamental principles of the Gospel can be easily found in the KJV."

The SECOND piece of ground under attack is that of STANDARDS. Standards or sometimes known as convictions used to be one of the hallmarks of the fundamentalist. But were they just a fundamentalist’s legalistic list of do’s and don’ts? No I do not believe so. They were Bible based, Bible principled standards likened to the battlements that were to be erected upon the Israeli’s home; Deuteronomy 22:8 "When thou buildest a new house, then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof, that thou bring not blood upon thine house, if any man fall from thence." These standards, these battlements, help the believer from falling into the many traps of sin that lie on the pathway of life. In his sermon BATTLEMENTS’ OR SPIRITUAL PARAPETS Spurgeon said "We should carefully discern between places of public entertainment." He said some places were "perfectly harmless" while others "stand on the border land between the openly profane and the really harmless." Spurgeon concludes this sermon by saying "You are least likely to fall into sin by keeping well away from the edge, and you cannot afford to run risks." We should not "give to our children an example which will cause them to run that much closer to the edge."

Was Job being legalistic when he said "I made a covenant with mine eyes" Job 31:1? No, he was desirous in keeping his heart, mind and life clean before God and man. What we think of God will shape our lifestyle and conduct! In his message PLACES OF ENTERTAINMENT the Prince of Preacher’s said that "We are all subject to human passions, and this wretched flesh of ours is too easily fascinated by those who would pander to its indulgences. In seconds the soul may be led into captivity. Watch unto prayer, especially in these evil days." "These evil days" of which Spurgeon spoke were in the 1800’s! If he believed they were evil then what would he think the days in which we live are?

This piece of ground, Standards, is divided into many paddocks of which one is that of which we earlier read Spurgeon say was entertainment. In Spurgeon’s day it was the theatre of which he spoke openly and adamantly against. Of the theatre Spurgeon said "If our church members fall into the habit of frequenting the theatre, we shall soon have them going much further in the direction of vice, and they shall lose all relish for the ways of God. If theatre-going became general among professing Christians, it would be the death of piety. Yet one finds the taste for such things increasing on every hand." When was the last time you preached or heard a preacher speak out against the movie cinema and other places of worldly entertainment? When was the last time you heard a sermon preached on 1Thessalonians 5: "Abstain from all appearance of evil."?

The same day I read the sermon PLACES OF ENTERTAINMENT by Spurgeon the Baptist Bible Tribune NZ, March, 2004 Issue No. 21 arrived in the post. This paper always has something within its pages revealing what I believe is a drift in the New Zealand Baptist Bible Fellowship from original moorings of the Baptist Bible Fellowship International. God knows the hearts of those who write the articles for the Baptist Bible Tribune NZ but the articles that appear in the BBT NZ clearly show a move toward contemporary worship and entertainment and away from the old standards of fundamentalists. In the BBT NZ the Editorial page written by the Editor John K. Young says "The purpose of the NZBB Tribune is to inform, inform, inform and to inform." It has certainly met its goal!

In the March, 2004 issue the president of the New Zealand Baptist Bible Fellowship Zane Edwards wrote DIVERSITY + UNITY = STRENGTH. Just the title raises a red flag and sounds the alarm. Edwards writes in the last paragraph that "The only way that diversity will weaken the church is that we do not except this reality." I think he meant to say accept instead of except. Edwards went on to say "We as churches are different and we have different styles of ministry." Now what do you think he means by this having "different styles of ministry."? Is it just different styles of preaching? I think not. I think there is much more to it than preaching styles. Edwards says that "Many times the various styles of ministry are simply the results of the personality of the Pastor and the particular people we minister too." I know what he is saying without him saying it, don’t you?

The glue that holds the BBF New Zealand together according to Edwards is the "never ending truths of God’s Word" to which "we add our gifts and our styles and we become stronger." (Emphasis added by DCB). I believe the different styles are simply another way of saying some of our pastors and churches have gone the way of contemporary worship, music and entertainment.

Peter Masters in the SWORD AND TROWEL 2001 No. 1 said in A NEW KIND OF PRAISE page 5 that "A ruling principle in Christian worship for generations was the need to distinguish between sacred and secular, or between sacred and profane, or spiritual and worldly."

"Until recently, evangelicals believed that the church and the world represented opposing standards and lifestyles and tastes, and so the most of the world’s popular jollities were treated with great suspicion."

On page 13 of the BBT NZ, March, 2004 Issue No. 21 is the article THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST – A REVIEW by David Wakefield. According to the Tribune David Wakefield is a helping his father in planting a church.

Now, what would have been preached from independent Baptist pulpits some years ago by those in spiritual leadership (perhaps more years than David Wakefield is old) as unacceptable places to patronize is all too often accepted by those in some fundamentalist circles today. The problem is that Wakefield writes a review of the movie THE PASSION from the perspective of an eyewitness to a movie that The Hour of Power Robert Schuller, Jerry Falwell, and Billy Graham approve. This alone would cause a fundamental independent Baptist to question the movie. Wakefield did say he was "Apprehensive as to what to expect when," he "entered the cinema…" He had preconceived ideas of the movie but "most aspects of the movie were excellent" he said. It is still a surprise to read about an independent Baptist preacher entering a movie cinema! Can you hear the distant sound of the old prophet of God thundering against the movie house and its related sins of pleasure? No? That is probably true for that message is sadly only an echo of former days. Let it be known the movie house is not cleaner today than it was in the fifties. In fact it is filthier! Even if a movie is supposedly "clean" a portion of the money a Christian spends to view that "clean" movie goes to support the theatre to show movies the Christian considers not "clean".

Spurgeon in PLACES OF ENTERTAINMENT said "Beware of the leaven of worldly pleasure, for its working is silent but sure, and a little of it will leaven the whole lump. Keep up the distinction between a Christian and an unbeliever and make it clearer every day." Distinction between the Christian and the believer did he say? He went on to say "Avoid the appearance of evil. ‘But we must not be too rigid,’ says one. There is no fear of that these days." It is almost as though Spurgeon was with us today, is it not? As only he could Spurgeon said "I cannot suppose that at the last great day our Lord Jesus Christ will say to anyone, ‘You were not worldly enough. You were too jealous over your conduct, and did not sufficiently conform to the world.’ No, my brethren, such a wrong is impossible."

What distinctions are there between the Christian and the world today? Sadly the question might be asked "What standards are to be found on the piece of ground occupied by today’s Christian that the Philistines would even lay siege upon it?" The music is pretty much the same, the dress is the same, and now even the places of entertainment are the same.

David Wakefield concluded his article by saying "If someone was to ask me how the movie was, I would say it was amazing, but that wouldn’t do it justice. The movie was an extremely moving, emotional experience." Now, there has been enough information out there in cyber space throwing up red flags concerning this movie and Roman Catholic traditionalist Mel Gibson that one would think that an independent Baptist preacher of all people would not go see it. But even if a preacher had no convictions concerning going into a cinema to view this film directed by a traditionalist Roman Catholic one would think that the preacher or the editor would hesitate in publishing the fact in a paper that is mailed far and wide to which some (perhaps a small number but still some) would be of another mind! Oh, no, that is not the case today! The cry goes up that we are at liberty in Christ and these amusements and activities that were once considered worldly and off limits are no longer that. Any negative remarks on such an activity as this are often labelled as legalism!

Think about this; is viewing movies such as the Passion of Christ produced by a traditionalist Roman Catholic helping a believer to "press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."? Do the Hollywood cinema and Hollow-head actors and directors present anything that would help a believer fulfil their walking worthy "of the vocation wherewith" they "are called."? Does worldly entertainment create the desire within a believer to "walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing" and to be "fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God."? Are the movie house and other places of worldly entertainment places where a believer "might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ."?

Oh, that our hearts would break as Ezra’s did when he cried "O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God: for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up unto the heavens." Ezra 9:6.

In closing this second point please listen once again to Spurgeon as he shares in his unique manner that "The Lord’s ways are ways of pleasantness, and all His paths are peace. There is a safe and sweet pleasantness in holy living, and the pleasantness lies very much in the fact that an abounding peace springs from it. God grant us grace to keep in those peaceful paths, even though others should call us Puritans and ridicule our holy fear of sin." (Emphasis added by DCB).

The third piece of ground under attack comes from the foes of God and His Word upon the ground of Sanctified Life. Two of the many issues concerning the sanctity of life today’s Shamma must stand against are abortion and euthanasia. Psalm 139:14 "I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well."

In New South Wales alone there are forty thousand abortions each year. Nation wide in Australia there are over one hundred thousand babies murdered through abortion each year. Our politicians’ presently holding government (supposedly conservative) have openly said they do not believe abortion is an election issue and yet the politicians admit our nation is in crisis with a majority of the population growing older and not enough young people to replace them.

Sadly, the killing of the unborn is pretty much accepted today in and out of the churches. Now that the society and the churches are somewhat deaf to the cry of the murdered unborn the foes of God and His Word are now entering with full fury into attacking the Sanctity of Life through legalized euthanasia.

In 1995 the Northern Territory in Australia approved a euthanasia bill and it went into effect in 1996. Thankfully, it was overturned by the Federal Parliament in 1997. However, the war is not over. Euthanasia is still on the agenda of the political parties and the Christian must be valiant in the fight for the sanctity of life! Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." Genesis 4:10 "And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground."

The fourth and last piece of ground for our consideration is that of SANCTIFIED MARRIAGE. Who would have ever thought twenty years ago those who claim to be ministers of the gospel would be able to divorce their wife and mother of their two children to live in a sexual relationship with another man and continue to hold his ministerial position within his denomination?! Not only does he hold onto his position within the denomination but he is promoted!

The Bible is very clear on the matter of marriage for Jesus Christ Himself said in Matthew 19: 4-6 "…Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

God says in Romans 1:27 that "… the men, leaving the natural use of the woman" and committing sexual acts with another man "…is unseemly" and for such an act they receive "in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." God does not take lightly this "lifestyle". It is also with sadness that we read about professing Christians going into this lifestyle or have been living two lives.

Homosexual marriage and other issues relating to this lifestyle, I believe, will be an issue in the 2004 Australian Federal elections. Murdering unborn babies will not be an issue but two people of the same sex wanting to marry will be! Hard to understand is it not? In the New South Wales local council elections just held a few weeks ago The Greens gained in their number of candidates being elected to office. On The Greens web site they say "The Greens NSW believe that the acceptance of diversity, including human sexual diversity, is the key to survival and that homosexuality, bisexuality and transgender along with heterosexuality, are legitimate aspects of human sexual diversity." The Greens "acknowledge the diversity of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, their special needs as a disadvantaged community, the strength and durability of their aspirations and their unique and valuable contribution to society."

Rather than going into detail here about what disgusting things same sex people do to each other in having sex and the diseases that are transmitted through homosexual behaviour go to the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado USA. There you will find an abundant amount of information on the homosexual lifestyle and note especially the paper on MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HOMOSEXUALS DO. This is a revolting eye-opener.

We know sin is going to become more open and accepted by the world but that does not negate the Bible believing preacher of his duty to stand and proclaim Bible truth and the issues facing the churches today! I do commend the Editor of the BBT NZ for writing in the BBT NZ, March 2004, Issue No. 21 that "As independent Baptist, we have always held that human sexuality is reserved only for one man and one woman committed to each other in holy matrimony…for life."

In closing, those who have already fled the lentile field will not take much notice to what I have said in this paper other than think I need to get with the times and on with the job. However, those who may not be in the "midst of the ground" but yet haven’t left the boundary of the lentile field there is still hope. This man has the opportunity to look again at what the Bible says about Preservation of the Word and Words of God. Read Burgon’s works and others such as Dr. D. A. Waite who is fighting in defence of God’s Word and Words. Many of the deficiencies we see among independent Baptist today stem from a weak position on the preservation of the Word and Words of God!

This man on the boundary of the lentile field must look again at what the Bible has to say about the Christian’s Standards for living and ministry. Our Standards will have much to do with our position and practice of ecclesiastical separation as well.

These men on the boundary of the lentile field should stop and take a careful look and see where the path they are now following will eventually take them. It is important to remember Billy Graham did not begin as he is today.

All independent Baptists should be more vocal against the murder of the unborn and the desire to murder the living through euthanasia. May God help you and me to fight a good fight, finish our course, and keep the faith.