Dear Folks, (December 1, 1998)

My dad is a 52-year-old pastor who suffered a stroke two years ago. Since he is unable to preach, he goes around town and passes out tracts. He has been told by the authorities at Augusta Mall in Georgia that he is not allowed to do so. He was escorted by about 20 police officers to the mall authorities who gave him a warning notice that if he comes back within a year, he will be prosecuted. He plans to return to continue giving out tracts. What do you suggest?

Thanks,

Tim Fellows, Jr.

_____________________________________

Dear folks, (December 5, 1998)

I accompanied my dad to the Augusta mall today, fully prepared to drive back alone. Since he has been given a one-year ban from the mall for passing out tracts, he was told he would be prosecuted if he returned. I followed him and took pictures. It was not long before a security, guard (female sheriff’s deputy) confronted him and told him he was not allowed to pass out tracts. He continued, kindly, and she followed him, picking up the tracts that he left behind. She knew who he was and informed the others on her radio set.

He then began giving them to individuals in passing. Not one person refused the tracts. (The woman did not take them from the people who accepted them.) I was taking pictures from a distance along the way. They soon had more security guards from the mall on the case. I heard the woman with him exclaim, "I have been taking his pamphlets! // Nobody will make up their mind! // I’ve been following him around the mall!" Another security guard said from the second level as she was descending down the escalator "fill out a ban form on him."

The mall head security showed up and escorted him outside of the mall. I got a last picture of them escorting him outside the mall, and one of them saw me taking pictures. One of them approached me and asked if I was taking pictures in the mall. I said that I was, and didn’t know it was not allowed.

On my way out, the same security guards saw me, and told me to give them my film. Upon finding out that Timothy Fellows was my dad, one said, "Do you want your father to go to jail?" I said that he was exercising his religious freedom. They said that mall policy does not allow passing out literature of any kind, and that the mall was private property. I asked if they therefore could deny a black man to visit the mall unless he left his blackness outside, since it was private property. (They became uneasy). I said, that neither could they deny a Christian man to visit the mall and leave his Christianity outside.

I quoted part of the first amendment. They said they were following orders. I said, so were the Russian Communists and the German Nazis. They still had not taken my film, so I asked, "Do you want my film?" The guy said, "no," that I could go ahead and keep it.

They escorted us to our car and followed us out. They did not arrest my dad—this time. They were all kind, and were not rude --just following orders. I think that they don’t want to make an issue of it right now, but I suspect that by the time we get there next time, they will have talked with some lawyers about what action to take.

Keep us in your prayers,

Timothy Fellows, Jr.

_______________________________

Dear Folks, (December 6, 1998)

Well, as you read this letter, my dad is behind bars in the downtown jail in Augusta, GA. His horrible crime was simply passing out Gospel tracts at the Augusta Mall. Yes, the mall would rather have cursing, swearing, drinking, drugs, pornography, dancing, rock music, immodest dress and every other wicked thing imaginable, than a 52 year old Gospel preacher who is still recuperating from major heart surgery, and a stroke, and whose only offence is his Christianity. It seems that our first amendment rights and our constitution do not apply to "private" property.... The bond was set at 200 dollars – which we have refused to post, as my dad requested. Isn’t it good to know that our mall is safe now?

Tim Fellows, Jr.

___________________________________

Dear Folks [published in part by The Augusta Chronicle],

(December 7, 1998)

Well, an amazing event has transpired (I am writing this Monday morning at 2:51 A.M.) If you have ever heard of Peter getting let out of jail by an angel; it happened again.

After they arrested him yesterday (for "disorderly conduct"), and called us at home, I sent the material to a local television station and the local newspaper. The local station aired the news at 6:00 Sunday evening and again at 11:00 Sunday evening, with (what appeared to be) a picture of my dad, handcuffed by the sheriff’s car outside of the mall.

Since we refused to pay bail, we were quite surprised to hear that a preacher who had been arrested almost l0 hours earlier was walking home at 1:45 Monday Morning. The folks at the jail called us in serious earnest, saying, "He was such a nice man, we just had to let him go." Evidently, they didn’t call us when they did, because they called an hour later saying they were all looking for him – "We didn’t know he would walk home." What did they expect him to do? Stick around? Of course they didn’t bring his car when they arrested him. He walked home from that jail from 1:45 to 2:45 A.M. I found him walking.

Upon asking my dad if they had given him his medicine that night at the jail—which I called in and specifically spoke with "his nurse" earlier – who said that he would give my dad all of his medicine – my dad said that he was never given his medicine Sunday evening – which his major heart surgery and stroke required. I think he might have just died in that over-crowded, Law-enforcement center, if they hadn’t let him go. Without his medication, he could have had another stroke, or possible death.

Grateful to the Lord,

Tim Fellows, Jr.

__________________________________

Dear Editor [The Augusta Chronicle], (December 9, 1998)

Law is not based on popular opinion –what people’s changing wants are. Law is established by God and does not change. Men make ordinances and legislation; God makes laws. While we are to submit to man’s "laws" as much as possible, when man’s "laws" conflict with God’s laws, we ought to obey God rather than man.

The Bible defines a legitimate "law enforcement officer" in Romans 13:3-4: "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

Perhaps mall officials should be arrested for playing Rock music in their stores promoting drugs, adultery, fornication, uncleanness, riot, rebellion and revolution among our young people? Perhaps shop owners should be taken to jail for posting pornography in their store windows? But a preacher of righteousness?

Consider the areas where Christianity is no longer allowed: the public schools, day cares, state colleges and universities, government buildings (including the Capitol), sports events and ball games, and now this broadly interpreted "private property." What’s left? Is this still the land of the free and home of the brave?

We have lost our religious freedoms in this country because Christians have run scared trying to protect their worldly interests, and preachers have been afraid to preach. [This paragraph was not printed by The Augusta Chronicle.]

If the mall doesn’t want godly people, then godly people should refuse to patronize the mall.

Sincerely,

Rev. Timothy Fellows, Sr.

______________________________

Dear Folks, (January 5, 1999)

Please be in prayer for my dad, as his court date is Thursday, January 7. They will ask whether he will plead "guilty" or "not guilty" to the charge of disorderly conduct -- which is all a smoke screen for passing out tracts in the Augusta Mall. The judge is supposed to determine whether to fine him (which we will refuse to pay) or to set up a jury trial or a judge trial.

We have had a call from a "pre-attorney service" seeking to know if we had chosen a lawyer yet, and asking for us to consider them. We certainly do not wish to be represented by the ungodly in this matter. The supposedly "Christian" attorneys in our city have remained silent about our case which they all know of.

Please pray the Lord gives us wisdom. We are willing to suffer the wrath of man for the horrible deed of giving out the Gospel of the Son of God. Nor do we seek to get tangled up in technicalities which do not involve the main point.

Thanks,

Tim Fellows, Jr.

_____________________________

Dear Folks, (January 7, 1999)

We just had my dad’s arraignment this morning regarding the charge of "disorderly conduct" for passing out Gospel tracts. He pled "not guilty." Had he been charged with "giving out the Gospel of the Son of God," he would have gladly pled "guilty," but the charge was disorderly conduct. Upon looking up the definition in the law library, it read, "It shall be unlawful for any person to assault, strike or in any way oppose or molest, interfere with, interrupt or abuse, by word or act, any officer in the Sheriff’s Department in the execution of his duty." Anyone who knows my dad, only laughs at such an accusation as that! It was quite interesting to accompany a kind and compassionate pastor to a court room filled with thieves, drunks, prostitutes and thugs.

From here we go to a jury trial. There is one thing about doing what is right, and that is, it does not matter the verdict of the judge, the cleverness of the lawyers, the sway of the jury -- if you are right you are right, and God knows it and all His holy angels.

We have had great opportunities to witness for the Lord during this whole thing. We have been interviewed and covered by local papers, television stations and radio shows. My dad was also able to witness to prisoners during his time in jail. We even got a preaching opportunity at a watch night service as a result.

Since most lawyers are in it for the money, and we don’t want to be represented in this kind of case by the ungodly, I may have to represent my dad personally. It couldn’t be all that bad anyway, considering that to most of them, it is just a game anyway. Perhaps the Lord will be our defense after man has failed us.

Please pray the Lord gives us wisdom and discernment, boldness in speaking the truth, and charity in all things. "I was sick and in prison and ye visited me,"

Timothy Fellows, Jr.

It has been amazing what kinds of things have developed from the above saga. We have had ungodly people who have recognized the injustice of the whole situation and have stood beside us in this matter -- one ungodly man even said he would take some tracts to the mall and would give them out himself! Yet, the "Christian" community has largely remained silent. Some Christians have actually stood against us, saying that when the government tells you not to witness, you shouldn’t.

Let the reader note that such "Christians" don’t exist in communist countries or times of tribulation and persecution -- they easily conform themselves by conviction to the "laws" of the land.

In all ages of history, there have been two kinds of "churches" -- The established, politically-correct, law-abiding, visible church which meets all the codes and governmental regulations, and the underground, offensive, often-jailed, invisible church which will not conform itself, or subject itself to be both the bride of Christ and of the World. The former has all the glitter and glamour; the latter are hated, and considered the off-scouring of the earth.

It’s times like this when I reflect and muse upon all the zealous Arminians who say that Calvinists don’t witness. Where are they? Most of them are in good standing with society, government and the "laws" of the land. Most of them teach in government schools where they agree to hide their "testimony" under a bushel. Most of them agree to work in good-paying jobs which discriminate against their own professing

"Christianity." That’s why most of their kids would rather go to hell. Oh, for true religion! Will some Arminian who has actually been a "soul-winner" in his own house, please tell my dad he’s not supposed to witness for Christ when man tells him not to do so? His kind always gets killed, while religion moves on "accomplishing so much" for a Christ they have betrayed. And so has been the story throughout history where true religion has always been spread by "Calvinists," and where the established religion has always been bred with Arminianism.

I also reflect in times like this, how much crime and theft went on undetected in the Augusta Mall, while the security guards were chasing down a minister of God’s Word.

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter. Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!" (Isaiah 5:20-21) "Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him! Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel. Therefore is the anger of the LORD kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their carcasses were torn in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still" (Is. 5:23-25).

Since his arrest, Pastor Fellows has been back to the Mall at least ten times. He has not been arrested since, but has been escorted out when caught. Some times, they are not able to find him, but he sees them frantically looking for him. He replied to one security guard after having been caught once, "Oh my! Have I been bad again?"

We have not heard a date set for the jury trial. It will be interesting, considering that the week of Pastor Fellows’ arrest, the headlines of The Augusta Chronicle Metro section read, "Mall denies seeking minister’s arrest."

Back to top

June 4, 1768. In Spotsylvania, Virginia, three Baptist ministers have been arrested for violation of a statute by preaching the Gospel Today they are arraigned on the charge of "disturbing the peace." Their crime is stated: "for preaching the Gospel of the Son of God."

"The clerk was reading the indictment in a slow and formal manner, and he pronounced the crime with emphasis: ‘For preaching the Gospel of the Son of God,’ when a plain-dressed man dismounted his horse, entered the courthouse, and took his seat within the bar. He was known to the court and lawyers but a stranger to the mass of spectators who had gathered on the occasion. This was Patrick Henry, who, on hearing of the prosecution, and ridden some fifty to sixty miles from his residence in Hanover county to volunteer his services in the defense of the prisoners. He listened to the further reading of the indictment with marked attention, the first sentence of which that had caught his ear was "For preaching the Gospel of the Son of God.’

"When the indictment had been read, and the prosecuting attorney had submitted a few remarks, Mr. Henry arose, stretched out his hand and received the paper, and then addressed the court:

"‘May it please your Worship: I think I heard read by the prosecutor as I entered this house, the paper I now hold in my hand. If I have rightly understood, the King’s attorney of this colony has framed an indictment for the purpose of arraigning and punishment by imprisonment, three inoffensive persons before the bar of this court for a crime of great magnitude – as disturbers of the peace. May it please the court, what did I hear read? Did I hear it distinctly or was it a mistake of my own? Did I hear an expression, as if a crime, that these men, whom your Worships are about to try for a misdemeanor, are charged with -- what?’ and continuing in a low, heavy tone, ‘For preaching the Gospel of the Son of God?’

"Pausing, amidst the most profound silence and breathless astonishment of his hearers, he slowly waved the paper three times around his head, then lifted up his hands and eyes to heaven, with extraordinary and impressive energy, he exclaimed, "Great God?’ The exclamation – the action--the burst of feeling from the audience were all overpowering. Mr. Henry resumed:

"‘May it please your Worship: In a day like this, when truth is about to burst her fetters; when mankind are about to be raised to claim their natural and inalienable rights; when the yoke of oppression which has reached the wilderness of America, and the unnatural alliance of ecclesiastical and civil – liberty of conscience – is about to awake from her slumberings and inquire into the reason of such charges as I find exhibited here today in this indictment.’

"Another fearful pause, while the speaker alternately cast his sharp, piercing eyes on the court and the prisoners, and resumed: ‘If I am not deceived, according to the contents of the paper I hold in my had, these men are accused of preaching the Gospel of the Son of God! – Great God!’ Another long pause during which he again waved the indictment around his head, while a deeper impression was made on the auditory.

"Resuming his speech: ‘May it please your Worship; there are periods in the history of man when corruption and depravity have so long debased the human character that man sinks under the weight of the oppressor’s hand and becomes his servile – his abject slave; he licks the hand that smites him; he bows in passive obedience to the mandates of the despot, and in this state of servility he receives his fetters of perpetual bondage.

"’But may it please your Worship, such a day has passed away! From the period when our fathers left the land of their nativity for settlement in these American wilds – for Liberty – for civil and religious liberty – for liberty of conscience – to worship their Creator according to their conceptions of Heaven’s revealed will, from the moment they placed their feet on the American continent, and in the deeply imbedded forests sought an asylum from persecution and tyranny -- from that moment despotism was crushed; her fetters of darkness were broken, and Heaven decreed that man should be free -- free to worship according to the Bible. Were it not for this, in vain have been the sufferings and bloodshed to subjugate this new world, if we, their off-spring, must still be oppressed and persecuted.

" ’But may it please your Worship, permit me to inquire once more: For what are these men about to be tried? This paper says, For preaching the Gospel of the Son of God? Great God? For preaching the Saviour to Adam’s fallen race!

"After another pause, in tones of thunder, he inquired: "What Law have they violated?’ Then, for the third time, in a slow dignified manner, he lifted his eyes to Heaven, and waved the indictment around his head. The court and the audience were now wrought up to the most intense pitch of excitement. The face of the prosecuting attorney was pale and ghastly, and he appeared unconscious that his whole frame was agitated with alarm; and the judge, in a tremendous voice, put an end to the scene, now becoming extremely painful, by the authoritative command: ‘Sheriff, discharge those men?’"

In the last article, part III on Bob Jones University, we made an error in re-printing parts of Stephen Alligood’s account concerning sodomites in the Art Gallery. We did not re-print his entire letter, because he later retracted parts of it which it seems were incorrect. However, some of what we re-printed, he had also retracted as well. His original wording "More than two dozen sodomites took their first steps into a Bob Jones University facility today" and "The university’s announcement that sodomites are now welcome to entertain themselves in the art gallery and museum..." -- both sentences give the impression that BJU had a policy change in favor of the sodomites. According to Dr. Bob Jones, III himself, the school did not compromise, because they never had a policy against the sodomites visiting the Art Gallery or Museum. It seems that well-behaved sodomites have always been welcome. We hate to have given the impression that BJU actually compromised, since they never had a policy to break.

Does BJU really imagine that God would never re-enact the fire and brimstone incident while the perverts are within "The Fortress of Faith"? Of course BJU is not allowing them entrance for the love of money – if they were really thinking in monetary terms, they would have barred the sodomites from the entire campus!

back to top

I’m always amazed at the audacity that people would dare to say there are errors, doubts and mistranslations in their version, yet continue to put "Holy Bible" on the front cover and inside page: That’s a Lie!

Every single version that sheds doubt anywhere inside the front covers, as to any of the wording, is lying to put "holy Bible" on the front cover. They would do better to put "Holy Bible?" or "Somewhere Holy Bible" or "Partially Holy Bible" – which all equal "Unholy Bible."

If it’s not wholly holy, then it’s not holy, and if it’s just a little hole-ly, then it’s not wholly holy. And to the degree it is not holy, to that degree it is not authoritative. That leaves us with only one translation today which does not question its own validity or doubt it’s own veracity – the KJV.

For anyone to use or even to "prefer" the KJV, yet claim it has mistakes, mistranslations, etc., but to still call it a "Holy Bible" is to behave and to reason and to act like a Liberal -- who would say he believes in the virgin birth.

[This article was distributed by the Way of Life Literature’s Fundamental Baptist information Service, 1701 Harns Rd., Oak Harbor, WA 98277. It was written by Dennis Costella, who heads up the Fundamental Evangelistic Association, P.O. Box 6278, Los Osos, Calif. 93412]

Clever "one-liner’s" and biblical phrases lifted out of context are heard on every hand today. More often than not, they tend to encourage what God has forbidden, or discourage what God’s Word has commanded. As Bible believers, we must exercise great care when we speak to an issue. Our response must be with the correct application of Truth, and not with a commonly used idiom that unwarily pops into the mind and roils

easily off the tongue. We will mention a few that are especially deceptive.

"TOUCH NOT THE LORD’S ANOINTED!" Time and again we hear this cry parroted as a counter to those who attempt to alert the unsuspecting of the dangerous, unbiblical teachings of a particular ministry. As a result, key religious figures fall into a category that is apparently safe from scriptural examination; since their ministries influence millions, they MUST be God’s anointed--don’t you dare "touch" them!

If you give a warning about doctrinal inconsistencies within the programs headed by men such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Jimmy Swaggart or even the pope, you can be sure that in the estimation of many, the moment the word of caution was uttered, you became guilty of "touching the Lord’s anointed"! This indictment sounds ominous to say the least, but the question still remains, "What does God’s Word have to say about this?" That’s what really matters.

A look at the actual context from which this phrase is lifted provides clear-cut proof that scriptural reproof and rebuke does NOT constitute "touching God’s anointed" at all. In fact, God made sure that Saul was forced to face up to his compromise. The ministry of the King of Israel was judged according to the Lord’s commandments, and no man today is exempt from this same kind of biblical scrutiny.

David refused to slay King Saul with the sword, even though in doing so, he would rid himself of his arch enemy, and also clear the way for his own ascent to the throne of Israel (I Sam. 24:1-15). God, not David, would remove Saul in His time and in His way (26:8-10). But some say there is a "secondary application" found in this text which would also bar ANY negative comment about another’s far-reaching ministry, for this, too, would constitute "speaking against" one of God’s servants and is, in essence, "touching God’s anointed." Is this a viable, secondary application? Absolutely not!

Samuel certainly "touched God’s anointed," if by that you mean speaking out against his disobedience (I Sam. 15:20). God told Saul to "Smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not..." (I Sam. 15:3). But under a pretext of pious intention, he "... spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord..." (v. 15). Partial obedience--Samuel said it was tantamount to witchcraft and idolatry! TO OBEY is better is better than sacrifice!!!

Saul had a very visible testimony that affected all of God’s people. When he failed to minister according to the absolute standard, God’s faithful prophet was commanded to cry out against the error. Take his life--no, rebuke his sins--yes! Let’s get straight what the Bible forbids in this account, and what it demands. Scriptural reproof and rebuke of a disobedient brother is not "touching God’s anointed." It is compliance with God’s order.

"JUDGE NOT THAT YE BE NOT JUDGED" is another example of a frequently misapplied scripture. It is invariably quoted as a response to any attempt at exercising spiritual discernment. When the rest of the passage from which the phrase is taken in Matthew seven is considered, it is found that it is hypocritical judgment which is disallowed, not the act of judging itself. On the contrary, spiritual judgment is required by this text, not forbidden (Matt. 7:1-23).

True, much "judging" today by Christians is displeasing to the Lord, for it is carried out in a censorious, critical spirit bent on causing injury rather than edification; it is set on character assassination [that’s another one] rather than doctrinal clarification. That’s wrong and the Bible warns about such fleshly behavior. But in no way does this preclude the believer’s responsibility to judge, or discern, what is acceptable to an all-holy God as revealed in His holy Word. A circumspect walk requires the identification of those teachings and practices to be avoided. You simply cannot do this without judgment.

"WE WILL EITHER STAND TOGETHER OR WE WILL HANG SEPARATELY" is often advanced by the new-evangelical, and sad to say even by some supposed fundamentalists, in an effort to justify unbiblical fellowships while opposing common enemies. Fundamentalists today join in common cause, not only with compromised brethren, but also with liberals and outright cultists to fight immorality, abortion or other evils. But has God suspended His guidelines for separation from whatever is contrary to doctrinal purity for the sake of added political or theological clout? No!

The fact remains, God will bless the testimony of a separated witness, and will perform His will in and through it, rather than condone an alliance built upon compromise. The notion that a visible unity wields more influence with the powers of this world is humanistic reasoning, not divine revelation. Stand true! Stand alone if need be! In so doing, you need never fear being "hung" by anyone as long as your sole confidence is in God, and not in the strategy of men.

God’s Word still declares that the source of power in opposing the evil of our day comes from absolute dependence on the arm of God, not on the concerted efforts of men. The biblical doctrine of separation is based on the premise that the holiness of God will never allow for the joining together of that which is true to the Word; and what is contrary to the Word in a common cause, regardless of how righteous or needful it might appear to be. The end does not justify the means [that’s another one] in Christian ministry.

"THE CHRISTIAN ARMY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT SHOOTS ITS WOUNDED." We have heard this last phrase all too often in recent years. What is usually implied by this phrase is that a Christian should NEVER speak in a negative way about any other brother, regardless of what error the latter may be involved in. On at least two occasions, the above statement was used at Billy Graham’s big Itinerant Evangelist’s Conference held in Amsterdam last summer. This was one of the major dangers of that conference--the concerted effort to silence any form of Scriptural rebuke.

It’s sad when biblical exhortation is equated to "taking pot shots" at another. God’s Word tells the faithful servant to "... reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine" (2 Tim. 4:2); with respect to the disobedient brother we are to "... note that man, and have no company with him...yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a

brother" (2 Thes. 3:6,14-15). This is not "shooting the wounded"; it is employing God’s methodology for healing the breach caused by straying from the divine Standard!

Let’s earnestly endeavor, by God’s grace and through the light of His Word, to answer all that concerns our walk and witness with Truth correctly applied. Quaint sayings make for easy responses, but if the responses themselves are unbiblical, then we must be very careful of their use. Misrepresentations of truth are hard to dispel.

We have recently received Pastor Fellows’ latest book entitled, Letters. The book covers about ten years of correspondence to people on various issues. It is a very profitable book to have on hand for all of those hard-to-answer questions. (292 pages)