Gum: When Adam sinned, he died spiritually.
COMMENT: For Gum to say that is to admit that Adam lost his salvation. That is, for Adam to die spiritually is to say he had spiritual life before that point. Later, Gum denies spiritual death for David in adultery and murder. In other words, Adam died spiritually through one sin, but David did not die spiritually through various sins. There is not consistency with their doctrine so they can teach security in even heinous, wicked vile devilish sin. That is shown by the OSAS radio host asking Gum the following question:
Radio Host: Pastor Gum, can you commit adultery and be a Christian?
Gum: Of course you can!
COMMENT: Gum is dogmatic. Of course a Christian can commit adultery and remain a Christian. The truth is, Gum thinks a Christian can commit any sin or large number of sins and still have his salvation and never get that salvation negated. That is the essence of his whole theology. Once you're saved you are always saved, even if you turn to wickedness and never repent. To them, there are two types of people in adultery—one saved and one lost. Listen to what else Gum said:
Gum: How will they get in the Kingdom? They are already in the Kingdom. But in the flesh, we've got two people. We're saved. We're born again. We have a new nature. And the Bible teaches that new nature cannot sin. But the old nature. And that old nature is not going to go to heaven. The flesh is not going to go to heaven to be resurrected. It will not go to heaven. It will be a brand new body joined with the departed spirit. And this flesh, there's sin in this flesh, but the flesh will remain here.
COMMENT: That is Gum's fairytale explanation erected around the heresy of eternal security. The new nature or spirit can't sin, only a Christian's flesh can. Paul crushes that demonic idea in Gal. 6:7-9. This is what he wrote:
Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.
Gum's teaching is an actual attempt to mock God by thinking one can sow to please his sinful nature (or flesh) and still reap eternal life. Paul warns Christians not to be deceived by such a thought. If you sow to please the sinful nature or flesh you will reap destruction (or hell), which is the opposite of eternal life. To reap eternal life, Christians were told: the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Gal. 6:8,9 is a salvation passage, not a rewards passage. That was part of Paul's grace teachings. Gum also said this:
Gum: Salvation is of the Lord.
COMMENT: Gum refers to Jonah 2:9 there, but he rejects flatly the verse before, that is Jonah 2:8:
Those who cling to worthless idols forfeit the grace that could be theirs.
NOTE: Grace will be forfeited, if one clings to idols. That is not the grace of OSAS, but the grace of the Bible. Gum mentioned Adam again and said this:
Gum: When Adam sinned against God in the Garden of Eden, all mankind, every human being that has ever been born, has been born spiritually dead with no life to God.
COMMENT: Based on what Gum said, he therefore believes in infant and child damnation. That is, all infants and little children will go to HELL if they die. They won't go to heaven. This is the typical Calvinistic jargon. Hand in hand with his gospel is this typical false view of grace:
Gum: Grace means unmerited favor of God.
COMMENT: To Gum, grace means even though you don't deserve heaven, because of your after-conversion unrepentant acts of adultery, drunkenness, murder, rape, swindling, theft, hate, idolatry, etc. you will still go. That flies square in face of scores of Scriptures. We are saved by grace, but we can fall from grace (Gal. 5:2-4). If we are saved by grace and we fall from it, we also fall from salvation. Furthermore, God gives grace to the humble. One must be humble to get grace. The proud don't get grace. During the debate, I asked Gum this:
Corner: Do you tell Christians that it is just as vital to remain faithful to Jesus after the point of salvation as it is to get born again?
Radio host: Pastor Gum.
Gum: Of course, of course I do.
COMMENT: Gum just denies his own teaching and creates confusion. His doctrines can NOT allow him to view faithfulness to God for a Christian to be just as vital as getting born again, even though Rev. 2:10,11 show it is! You will soon hear his heretical version of the sin unto death—where a Christian turns to wickedness, remains unrepentant and is struck dead by God and he goes to heaven! Such a person was not faithful, yet goes to heaven. How vital was faithfulness to God there for salvation? Also, Gum previously said there are saved adulterers, who are obviously not faithful. They have a double message and teach what is convenient for the moment. Gum said this:
Gum: But, but to be so bold as to say that you walk without sinning, that you can't lose your, that you'll never sin to where you could lose your salvation.
COMMENT: That was a shocking statement from Gum. It sounds like he is rejecting his own theology from what he said earlier. It was Gum himself who was so bold as to teach the new creation does not sin. Here it is again:
Gum: We have a new nature. And the Bible teaches that new nature cannot sin.
Gum also says it will never sin and lose salvation!
Gum: But, but to be so bold as to say that you walk without sinning, that you can't lose your, that you'll never sin to where you could lose your salvation.
I also teach not all sins are of the same degree, which Gum opposes:
Gum: There's no distinction in sin....
COMMENT: Gum denies there are sins that lead to death and sins that don't lead to death (1 John 5:16,17). To him all sins are the same. Worry is just as bad as adultery, not being completely humble and gentle is just as bad as murder. Though he didn't cite a reference, the OSAS people only have James 2:10,11, which they misuse for that thought. All that passage says is, there is more than one way to become a lawbreaker. No Scripture, including James 2:10,11, teaches all sin is of the same degree. The Bible teaches just the opposite. Gum also said this:
Gum: By saving yourself from this untoward generation. Of course by following the Lord you're saving your life, not your spirit, not from hell.
COMMENT: Gum refers to Acts 2:40, KJV, but apparently denies Peter spoke that to unsaved people while teaching a salvation sermon. Hence, Peter was talking about them saving themselves from hell, but that goes contrary to Calvinism's total depravity doctrine, which his twisted view of salvation is based upon. Then the radio host jumped in and tried to make some points for OSAS:
Radio host: Okay, if I stay in Hebrews 12, cause I wrestle with this passage, it says you're not a son if you don't respond to discipline.
COMMENT: The radio host starts to debate and makes a false, authoritative statement, which is NOT found in Heb. 12, to try to protect Calvinism and once saved always saved. I was supposed to debate Gum, not two people, especially one who had the controls. To compound the problem, he is now saying something was in Scripture when it wasn't. Discipline does not always work as I cited Jer. 32:33 to prove. The radio host asks Gum a question about David:
Radio Host: Okay, Pastor Gum, David, did he die spiritually at that point?
Gum: No, of course not. Of course, not, he'd, he has been born again.
COMMENT: Gum believes Adam died spiritually after one sin, but David didn't after various sins. There is no consistency with their doctrine. It is filled with contradictions and antithetical to Scripture, yet they teach it under grace and the infinite work of Christ to the damnation of all who like their security-in-sin gospel and act accordingly. Again Gum said “OF COURSE NOT” because of his theology. To him, David didn't die spiritually—of course he didn't even though he committed adultery and pre-meditated murder! Clearly, such is a license for immorality taught under his distorted view of grace.
Gum: When a Christian sins and will not repent, that's what the Bible says in 1 John 5 that there is a sin unto death, and I do not say that a man should pray for it. Because when you cross, when a child of God crosses over that line, they're going to be taken out of this world.
COMMENT: Gum just refuted the radio host who wrongly said Hebrews 12 teaches one is not a son if he doesn't respond to discipline. Also, Gum's false version of the sin unto death is physical death, not spiritual death, like the Bible teaches! Spiritual death is shown in Rom. 8:13 and the two other times Paul also taught the consequences of sowing to please the sinful nature. Those two times are found in Gal. 5 and Gal. 6. In Gal. 5:19-21, such a person will not inherit the kingdom of God, and in Gal. 6:8,9 he will reap destruction and not eternal life. The radio host asked me this:
Radio host: Dan, you don't think Moses lost his salvation, do you?
Dan: Of course not.
COMMENT: The radio host confuses the issue afterwards and misrepresented me by then sayingabout me :
Radio host: although he does agree with Moses.
COMMENT: I agreed Moses didn't lose his salvation, but Moses was NOT an example of the sin unto death! Moses wasn't unrepentant after he sinned by striking the rock. He wasn't in some kind of vile, heinous sin and refused to repent after a period of time and God strikes him dead and he goes to heaven. Moses went to heaven, but make no mistake about it, even after he sinned in that manner he continued to serve God. He was not allowed, however, in the Promised land. In Dt. 3:25,26, we read where Moses asked God to go over and view the good land, the land of Jordan, and God told him not to speak of this matter any more. Gum commented on parables with this:
Gum: ... try to establish a doctrine with a parable and it just doesn't work.
COMMENT: Gum is wrong again. Why can't a parable be used for doctrine? A parable is Scripture and Scripture is given for doctrine, according to 2 Tim. 3:16,17. During the debate I said:
Corner: What these people do, they confuse the issue with a question like that. What they're trying to say is that you cannot lose the possession of an eternal thing. Remember this: That it was eternal life before we ever possessed it. And if we stop possessing it, it will remain eternal even though we no longer possess it. Now the bible teaches eternal life is a gift and a present tense possession, but it also says about eternal life, is a hope yet to be reaped, in the world to come, for the ones who persist in doing good and do not grow weary and give up. And the adulterers will not enter the Kingdom like Jerry Gum wants us to believe.
Radio Host: Okay Pastor Gum, go ahead.
Gum: Well, that's exactly what you've done. You've confused the whole issue there.
COMMENT: Gum falsely accuses me of confusing the issue because I revealed that is what they do. Truth most often bounces off these people, especially the ones who are teachers like Gum. I didn't confuse the issue at all. I merely stated the possession of an eternal thing can be lost and mentioned Biblical truths about eternal life. Gum places the responsibility of continued salvation on God alone, with man having no role:
Gum: He maintains the elect, he maintains them, he preserves them.
COMMENT: Gum is saying man has NO ROLE in his salvation after getting born again. It is all up to God. If that was true, that is, if we are maintained by God, who does everything perfectly, why do Christian ever get deceived by false teaching and turn to sin sometimes? Rom. 7:14-25 was brought up:
Radio host: Is Paul talking about himself? Or is he talking about another group of unregenerates?
Gum: He is talking about himself.
COMMENT: To say Paul was referring to himself as a Christian in Rom. 7:14-25 is the most blatant display of Scriptural ignorance I have ever heard, yet it is taught consistently by the grace changers. Paul was the greatest example of a committed and holy man Christianity ever produced. Rom. 7:19 says:
For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. (Rom 7:19)
If that was Paul as a Christian, he continued to do evil continuously as the Greek shows, which is a denial of Paul being holy, righteous and blameless as 1 Thess. 2:10 and other Scriptures clearly show. The following phone caller is a prime example of a victim of the heresy of eternal security:
Phone Caller: I know that myself, I have never done anything that didn't have some sin in it, and neither will I ever do anything until I'm glorified. So personally, I'm grateful that the imputed righteousness of Christ and his blood pleads for me, or else I wouldn't be saved.
Radio host: Okay, Okay, Pastor Gum, Pastor Gum, do you agree with Tom? Let's put you in here.
Gum, Oh, I agree with the caller.
COMMENT: What the caller said is the fruit of the false gospel of eternal security. He thinks he must sin all the time and is not thinking about seeking God to get freed through repentance, because he thinks he can't. He also is not concerned about his salvation because he has been deceived by those who change grace into a license to sin. Since David didn't lose his salvation he won't either, according to their dangerous version of salvation. Gum denies his doctrine is a license for immorality:
Gum: We do not teach licentiousness, but we teach the reality, the truth of the old man and the new man. In our church if a man falls into sin, we try to rebuke him, we try to encourage him. But if he will not repent of that, we exclude him and turn him over that his flesh may be destroyed and for the chastisement of God.
Corner: But they're still saved in their adultery and drunkenness?
COMMENT: For Gum to deny his teaching is a license to sin doesn't change that it is. Again Gum stated it is possible for a previously saved person not to repent, which contradicts what the OSAS radio host said earlier about discipline resulting in repentance. Gum also referred to 1 Cor. 5:5, without citing the reference. The context shows a man in sexual immorality who was wicked (v. 13) and therefore hell bound. Verse 5 says, may be saved. It does not say, saved now. Gum thinks the 1 Cor. 5:1-5 man committing sin worse than pagans was a saved man! That is his version of Christianity. Gum veers off the subject of eternal security to a different point of Calvinism:
Gum: He did not die for all the sins of all of the people. He died for all the sins of all of his people.
COMMENT: Gum shows he believes in the 3rd point of Calvinism, limited atonement, which is also false. Jesus died for the ungodly (Rom. 5:6). To deny Jesus died for all people is to say those who go to hell are not ungodly. Getting back to OSAS, Gum tries to make an unscriptural point:
Gum: And what God does cannot be taken from ...
COMMENT: Does God take back what he has given? YES. Rev. 22:19 says:
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
God will take away one's share in the tree of life and holy city, if he sins in that way. Again, once saved always saved is shown to be unscriptural and therefore not a Christian teaching. It is built on various false concepts taught under Biblical terms which seem on the surface to exalt Christ. Such a masterpiece delusion has resulted in the damnation of multitudes. Please consult our books, The Believer's Conditional Security and The Myth of Eternal Security for more information. Please fight against the grace changers and the damnable heresy of eternal security.
Because the radio host believed in eternal security, Gum was given more overall time than me. He was also given more opportunity, without interferences, to comment. The OSAS radio host would cut me off, go to a break or a caller when it would help save OSAS from apparent problems. The radio host started to debate me. Therefore, I ended up debating 2 people, and one was actually behind all the controls.
May souls be helped and God's truth shine forth. God bless you.