[Permission is granted to duplicate this article in its entirety,
but only without additions, alterations or omissions of any kind,
including the author, ministry name and address at the end.
Nothing may be removed from this page including links to other pages.]
Dear David Servant:
Greetings in Jesus' name.
Unfortunately, after reading your revealing teaching entitled, As a Father, I am more convinced than ever that you are dangerous. Your holiness doctrine, even though you teach one can lose his salvation, is definitely not holiness at all. Your grace message is clearly a license for immorality and a unique snare, especially for people who reject Calvinism and eternal security. Please know that we have nothing against you personally, but it is your dangerous counterfeit gospel with its double message and false grace that we righteously abhor and oppose.
Somehow you can teach your dangerous distortions of holiness, while also teaching a Christian (like Peter) can disown Jesus three times and fall away yet not be disowned by Jesus; that King David didn’t lose his salvation after he committed adultery and sinisterly plotted/planned the murder of innocent Uriah; etc.
Regarding King David you clearly wrote what you believe/teach about him retaining his salvation:
So the Christian who commits adultery places his future, ultimate salvation in jeopardy. The Holy Spirit who indwells him, however, does not abandon him, but rather convicts him to bring him to repentance, a wonderful indication of God’s grace.... You may also recall that David, under conviction, prayed to the Lord, “Do not cast me away from Thy presence, and do not take Thy Holy Spirit from me” (Psa. 51:11). David believed the Holy Spirit was still with him.... Concerning David, no scripture states that he forfeited his salvation during that time. (As a Father, article by David Servant, September 19, 2009, all emphasis mine)
Where is there any clue in the above that you have taught David did NOT retain his salvation when in adultery and murder? It was only ONE ACT of adultery and only ONE ACT of murder and not practice, lifestyle, etc. Do you forget what you wrote in your own book The Great Gospel Deception about this? You have clearly gone on record to teach:
● The Holy Spirit does NOT abandon a Christian who turns to adultery. Such is under God’s grace, according to you.
● The Christian who turns to adultery places his salvation only in jeopardy.
● No scripture states King David forfeited his salvation during his time in adultery and murder.
You ignore the context of Psa. 51:11 to teach David had the Holy Spirit in him all during the time he was an unrepentant adulterer and murderer. The context of Psalm 51 is after he was forgiven! He was forgiven at 2 Sam. 12:13 or before and Psalm 51 was written afterwards. You also teach adultery will only place a Christian's salvation in jeopardy, but not bring forth spiritual death with one act. You believe it has to be practice of sin, as you have taught in your books!
Surely your mishandling of God’s word has been an unholy relief to people, who have been convicted by the Holy Spirit of their sin and need to repent for salvation’s sake. You have now reassured them, as many others, that salvation is retained in such wickedness, the same way Charles Stanley, John MacArthur, Dave Hunt and others have. There is no essential difference between you and these teachers regarding King David and Peter both retaining their salvation in wickedness.
I have observed that grace changers we have exposed like to (unjustly) scream slander, even after their exact teaching is accurately presented, documented and refuted with Scripture. Rather than humbly changing for one’s own good and the good of many, such instead try to discredit Christians for obeying God’s word to contend for the faith and expose the unfruitful deeds of darkness. You are no better. Let it be known, you have been accurately quoted and refuted with Scripture. Neither you nor any others have been misrepresented here.
Furthermore, for any one to say he has been slandered by me in an expose is to slander me. Such a person, therefore, is the real slanderer—not me. Some want so badly to try to make me out to be inaccurate (and a slanderer) they even inconsistently present their own doctrine.
How is it that you can teach one murderer is condemned to Hell while another murderer remained saved? You want us to think that King David retained his salvation, even after he committed adultery and carefully, wickedly planned (for an undisclosed period of time) the MURDER of Uriah, but somehow it was different for George Sodini. Again, you have Sodini condemned for his one-time act of multiple slayings and suicide, but not another. Your doctrine is sinisterly inconsistent, except when it comes to being consistently lethal and deceptive regarding reporting what it takes for a righteous person to die spiritually.
Among other things, you have violated the Biblical definitions of what it takes to become an adulterer, murderer, thief, etc. by presenting an unscriptural image of God and salvation, which is dangerous. The Bible says one act of adultery produces an adulterer, just as one act of murder produces a murderer:
If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. (Lev 20:10)
If a man strikes someone with an iron object so that he dies, he is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. (Num 35:16)
Adulterers and murderers are not saved (1 Cor. 6:9,10; Rev. 21:8). Hence, your salvation/security/grace doctrine is not salvation at all, but a snare to one’s SOUL. There are no Christian adulterers, Christian murderers, etc.
Again, your teaching on holiness has also reassured professing Christians that if they ever disown Jesus, at least up to three times, and fall away (like Peter), they will remain saved! You do this with your fairytale explanation of Peter retaining his salvation after disowning (or denying) Jesus! You wrote:
For example, Jesus solemnly warned, “Whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven” (10:33). Remember that Peter denied the Lord three times before men. Did Jesus instantly disown Peter because of it? When the cock crowed after Peter’s third denial, did Jesus look up to heaven and say, “Father, I deny that I know that wicked man who just denied Me”? No, Jesus simply looked at Peter, and He didn’t even silently lip the words, “I told you so,” (which is no doubt what I would have done). (As a Father article, emphasis mine.)
Why don’t you just teach, as the Scriptures do, that if a Christian disowns (or denies) Jesus, the Lord will disown him, as he himself taught and Peter (as well as the others) unfortunately did?
But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. (Mat 10:33)
Then Jesus told them, “This very night you will all fall away on account of me, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’” (Mat 26:31)
Peter replied, “Even if all fall away on account of you, I never will.” “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “this very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times.” (Mat 26:33,34)
You have dreamed up a mythical interpretation, which indirectly calls Jesus a liar in Mt. 10:33 and nullifies his warning to the Apostles. You are not led by the same Holy Spirit, which inspired the Scriptures and works with the Lord and the heavenly Father. If you were, you would agree with Jesus. Instead, you have reduced his Mt. 10:33 warning to Christians, and other Scriptures, to something far less—basically meaningless words!
If your teachings are viewed consistently on grace, holiness, and God’s love, they have certainly comforted some of your readers to think that they can also take the mark of beast and retain their salvation (because it would only be a one-time act)! Again, you have done a wonderful job of setting up Christian people, globally, for a fatal spiritual plunge into the lake of fire. You probably have some thinking that God’s discipline of His wayward children (whom he loves so much) won’t allow such to be on the road to hell again instantly just for receiving the mark of the beast ONE TIME:
A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: “If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name. This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God’s commandments and remain faithful to Jesus.” (Rev 14:9-12)
NOTE: That warning was to Christians (or saints) to remain faithful to Jesus, so don’t try to say real Christians wouldn’t take the mark of the beast, because they can! If you are consistent, then Christians, who take the mark of the beast, will remain saved because it is only a one-time act.
Your discipline teaching implies all wayward Christians will be disciplined by God, but that is wrong too. Various Scriptures disprove that all get disciplined before spiritual death:
●Adam and Eve lost their salvation immediately after one sin;
● the Apostles disowned Jesus and fell away over it. Such happened in one night;
● Ananias and Sapphira were slain by God with no time lapse to bring them to repentance.
Furthermore, did you notice that Rev. 14:9-12 does NOT mention God’s discipline between receiving the mark of the beast and the language of condemnation? Your version of God’s love, grace, etc., if correct, would produce such before spiritual death, but doesn’t! The Bible simply warns that receiving the mark of the beast, even ONE TIME, will result in damnation, but you scoff at such truth as with Mt. 10:33; David losing his salvation when in adultery and murder; etc. Your allowances for wickedness, even multiple times (which somehow isn’t “practice”), screams out who the spiritual source is behind your message to all who have ears to hear. Your message kills the fear of God and fear of sin, as the Calvinists have been doing for centuries. SOULS continue to be imperilled by you, even though you oppose Calvinism!
Again, I have not treated you differently than others, who are also a snare to souls. Let it be known: I am the enemy of all who are misleading others to hell. You are no exception. As a Christian, I’m commanded to be such, though it is not popular and invites slander similar to the lies spoken against other servants of God, such as Paul and John the Baptist.
After you get done indoctrinating those who trust you, not only will they hear a double message from you and be somewhat confused, but they will also surely have their guard down to commit “occasional” adultery, drunkenness, theft, murder, rape, lies, etc. Your message is so well received by some, they don’t even seem to inquire how often they can do such and still have it just be “occasional” and not “practice,” so they can know salvation is retained or when they have crossed the invisible line where it becomes “practice” and they then forfeit salvation or prove they were never really saved.
Surely, if you were consistent, you would have to agree that a first-time rapist and murderer, who dies in the very act, could be Christian, just like eternal security teacher Charles Stanley wants us to think. Certainly, your devoted audience would have to also conclude that a one-time child molester and butcher, who dies in the very act, could be a Christian, after you are finished with your explanations about grace and God’s discipline.
How can you claim that Charles Stanley’s version of a murderer or adulterer being forgiven after salvation is grace gone mad, yet in the next breath teach the Christian who commits adultery is still indwelt by the Holy Spirit (while his salvation is only in jeopardy) but that God’s wonderful grace convicts him to bring him to repentance?
Like others, you also want it both ways. You want the illusion of teaching holiness, while you are teaching a license for immorality, which might be better labeled “occasional wickedness allowed without loss of salvation.” That is what you call conditional eternal security.
Your message is spread and disguised with your acts of helping orphans, widows and the poor in foreign lands. Hopefully, your readers have not forgotten that Mother Teresa did the same type of deeds and to a much greater extent, yet taught dangerously wrong about salvation too!
David, one’s doctrine is true or false based on Scripture—not on good deeds that same person does! (All false teachers have some good deeds.) The truth is: You have taken much more than just material things with you as you travel. The doctrinal poison you have spread to the poor and uneducated, taught under salvation and holiness, is reprehensible and DEADLY.
All who have not read our Skull And Crossbones Award to you, and want more evidence, can read it for themselves here David Servant Gets The Skull and Crossbones Award. Your teachings are documented. There is no slander anywhere, so please stop slandering us!
You have also added confusion to this whole salvation-related issue by deviating from the established definition of eternal security (once a person is saved he will remain saved) and identifying yourself with a brand new term— conditional eternal security. You wrote:
Clearly, our eternal security is conditional, not unconditional.
You can now tell people, when convenient, you teach eternal security. By clouding the issue like this you can appeal to a broader audience for acceptance, instead of being clear on what you teach. After some find out that you believe in eternal security (your so-called conditional brand) they might even think you are like John MacArthur, especially since you also use his Calvinistic terminology of practice, lifestyle, occasional, etc.
You will certainly dupe some of the unwary and easily-deceived as you try to mask salvation in wickedness by teaching against sin, salvation can be lost and giving your illustrations of grace from the natural. You speak out against Calvinism, but teach exactly like them about David and Peter retaining their salvation when in wickedness. You are a master at deception. David Serpent is much more appropriate for you than David Servant.
You have been corrected repeatedly over the years by me and through our materials, yet you refuse to change. You remain a lethal spiritual snare to others. People need to be warned. Precious SOULS are in danger.
Sincerely and In Christ,
David Servant or David Serpent? (His IMMORALITY Exposed)
David Servant Gets The Skull and Crossbones Award
Email To HERETIC David Servant
Two More Emails Sent To "David Servant"Evangelical Outreach
P.O. Box 265
Washington, PA 15301-0265, USA
Contact Us Or Join Our Email List