Dan Corner debate with David Servant
After being directed by a friend to an article at Dan Corner's website, I learned that I had received an award that he periodically gives to those whom he deems to be false teachers, what he calls the "Skull and Crossbones Award." In that article, Dan Corner repeatedly misrepresented my position on eternal security as he interprets it from a few sentences taken out of their context from my book titled, The Great Gospel Deception.
Although we both teach against the doctrine of unconditional eternal security or "once-saved-always-saved," Dan Corner believes that a Christian who lusts, for example, instantly dies spiritually, forfeits the indwelling Holy Spirit and loses sonship in Christ. If he was to die one second after lusting, he would be cast into hell according to Dan Corner.
I do not at all agree with Dan Corner in that regard simply because the Bible doesn't teach such a strange doctrine. Certainly unrepentant adultery will prevent a Christian from inheriting God's Kingdom when he stands judgment before Christ (see 1 Cor. 6:0-9-10), but a Christian who lusts does not instantly die spiritually and so on as Dan Corner teaches.
Dan Corner slanderously misrepresents my teaching, claiming that I teach that a Christian can occasionally and unrepentedly commit adultery, murder and so on, and still go to heaven (which I don't believe or teach). And for this, he awarded me his "Skull and Crossbones Award." I, as well as others, have done our best to try to persuade Dan Corner that he has misrepresented my teaching, but he apparently knows better what I teach than I do.
For no apparent reason, Dan Corner also posted my website pseudonym along with my actual name in his misrepresentation of my teaching, putting my life and the lives of Christians with whom I work in restricted nations in danger. So I immediately wrote to him. What follows is our dialogue via email over the next several months, during which time Dan Corner added additional slanderous and misrepresentative articles about me to his website. You can judge for yourself what the truth is by reading our exchange, although it is rather lengthy. Near the end, it includes my response to Dan Corner's most recent article titled, "David Servant or David Serpent?" If you would like to just read that particular article and my response, click here.
In the course of our debate, I uncovered a number of facts about Dan Corner that would shock his supporters if they knew them, facts that are a matter of public record about how he has invested the contributions of his ministry's supporters in mutual funds that promote what God hates. I questioned Dan Corner about those things, but he continues to hide the truth from his supporters. -- David
My response to Dan Corner, July 14, 2009
Dear Dan Corner,
I was directed by a friend to read an article that you posted about me on your website. I would like to meet with you face to face concerning that at your convenience. Please let me know when you are available.
In the meantime, I have a small request that will not hurt your cause at all. The reason that I don't reveal my actual name on our website, and the reason we have worked very hard have my real name changed on all the other websites that have posted my articles, is because my life is endangered otherwise. I can't tell you via email all the details about that, but I will be happy to tell you more details about that when I meet with you personally. Briefly, there are restricted countries in which I travel and minister where it is of utmost importance that my true name is not associated with what I am doing in that country.
You are literally putting my life at risk by publishing on the internet my true name along with my pseudonym. You are also literally putting the lives of other believers with whom I work in those restricted countries at risk. I know that you believe that murder is wrong, and so I assume that you would also believe that it is wrong to help people murder Christians like myself and those with whom I work overseas.
So again, I request that you remove "______ ________" from your article and just leave "David Servant." It is a small thing for you to do that is a very big thing for me and my family, all of whom are very upset at what you have done.
Thanks so much,
From Dan Corner July 14, 2009
Greetings in Jesus' name.
Within the next 2 hours "_____ _______" should be removed. The worst part about this whole thing is how you are spreading a "license for immorality" under the guise of holiness and a person who rejects eternal security! (You reject OSAS but still teach heaven without holiness.) You are a unique snare to all who believe your message. I have nothing against you personally, but your doctrine is DEMONIC and I will fight that message till my last breath, if it comes from you or from other people.
What good will come out of our meeting face to face? You remain unchanged and glued to demonic doctrine. You contaminate pastors around the world and those they teach. The real fear you should have is over what you have spread to others around the world. How will you ever make this right? How many SOULS have you stumbled just by your book alone? I have sent you enough in the past where you should have seen these errors and changed, but you have rejected all the Biblical evidence to your own spiritual harm and those you love the most. Part of the great gospel deception is that your book, which is supposed to teach holiness, is teaching a license for immorality.
Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers. (1 Tim 4:16)
Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. (James 3:1)
To teach God's word is a very serious thing and one can go to HELL just by preaching a false gospel (Gal. 1:8,9), according to true grace teaching.
My response to Dan Corner, July 14, 2009
Dear Dan Corner,
Thanks so much for removing my actual name from your website.
Regarding meeting face to face, well, I haven't seen you in so many years I thought it would be good to see you again. And perhaps we could discuss our doctrinal disagreement as Christ would have us do, since I am sure we are both seekers of the truth.
So let me know when you are available to meet.
Looking forward to seeing you again,
After waiting two weeks, Dan Corner did not respond to my email, so I wrote him again on July 31, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner,
I never received a reply to my July 14 email below. Did you receive it?
From Dan Corner August 1, 2009:
Greetings in Jesus' name.
It is futile to meet since you refuse the holiness message of the Bible. I shared these truths before (more than once) and you have discarded them. It is nothing personal, but your message is demonic and makes us want to "vomit" at times when we think about it.
My counsel to you is: Plead with God for mercy, then collect all copies of your book, "The Great Gospel Deception" and video tape yourself burning them while you verbally renounce what you taught there. Place it on the internet and sent the DVD out to all you know. Contact as many pastors, etc. that you have taught or given your book to and tell them you were wrong and that it is a deadly teaching. Go public as much as possible with your change and then live holy. The USA is in deep trouble. The "party" is over. Very hard days are ahead. There is never a time to play games with God, especially now. This is very serious.
Please ponder 1 Tim. 4:16 and James 3:1.
Fearfully Following Jesus,
Dan Corner(& Cheryl Corner)
My response to Dan Corner, August 2, 2009:
OK, Dan Corner, I will respect your decision to not meet with me.
But will you do me one simple favor? I just would like clarification on where you and I disagree. Is our disagreement that you believe that any time a Christian commits any sin, he immediately forfeits his salvation, the Holy Spirit immediately leaves him, and if he were to die in that state, he would ultimately be cast into hell, and that I don't believe those things?
No need to send me a list a scriptures, as I have read the Bible a few times. Just a simple "yes" or "no" will be sufficient, or if there is something in between what I have written, a short clarification would be all that is necessary.
From Dan Corner August 3, 2009:
Greetings in Jesus’ name.
Please do NOT discredit us by misrepresenting our holiness-endurance teachings. Some dishonest people try to do that through suggesting that our message is utter foolishness by saying we teach any sin will cause loss of salvation. (As Paul’s teaching was slandered [Rom. 3:8], so has ours been.) We do NOT teach every time a person sins he will always lose his salvation. NOTE: All sins are not the same in their effect on our souls. Some sins are greater than others (Jn. 19:11). One type is eternal (Mk. 3:29), while others are not. Another type of sin is uniquely against our bodies, while other sins are outside our bodies (1 Cor. 6:18). 1 Jn. 5:16 declares there is a sin that does not lead to death while there is a sin that leads to death. Sins such as worry (Phil. 4:6), unthankfulness (Col. 2:7, 3:15; Lk. 17:11-18) and not being completely humble and gentle (Eph. 4:2) are not included in any of the lists of sins that will send people to the lake of fire, even if they were once saved. However, other sins certainly will send any person to hell if they die unrepentant, even a person who was once saved. (See 1 Cor. 6:9,10; Rev. 21:8; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:5,6; Jude 7; Rev. 22:15; etc.).
Again, sins like worry, not being completely humble or gentle, not always overflowing with thanksgiving to God, etc. are not in any Biblical list saying such will go to the lake of fire or such a person will not inherit the kingdom as are sexual immorality, idolatry, murder, theft, swindling, slander, etc. There are other sins, however, which will cause loss of salvation over one sin and are not listed with those sins. For example, disowning Jesus (Mt. 10:33; 2 Tim. 2:12). Other sins such as not bearing good fruit or remaining lukewarm will also cause loss of salvation unless one changes, but not immediately. To teach one must "practice" sin is dangerous at any time, especially before the mark of the beast is issued. Receiving that mark (just one time), negates one’s salvation. Taking words away from the Book of Revelation just ONE time will also cause loss of salvation (Rev. 22:19).
A further explanation of these things is found in our book, "The Believer’s Conditional Security," which we know you had at one point. You can also read about one sin of certain types causing loss of salvation here http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/onesin.htm
My desire not to meet with you is because of your deadly doctrine, which I have already written you about at various times. Material on the same is readily available to you, but you remain unmoved thinking even King David, while in adultery and murder, remained saved. Your message is especially a dangerous snare to those who reject eternal security because you will have them thinking "occasional" acts of such sins as listed in Rev. 21:8; Eph. 5:5-7; 1 Cor. 6:9,10, etc. will not cause spiritual death. From Genesis 2 through Revelation 22, we are told ONE sin (of certain types) will cause loss of salvation. Please do NOT dismiss such as foolishness or error. It is fact. Our apostate day filled with people who profess salvation and believe in a counterfeit "grace" (even as you teach) would find these facts strange unless they look into these things for themselves. Your teaching will almost entirely remove any concern about sinning to be extinguished from a Christian’s life. That will set a Christian up for a lethal fall and is clearly demonic. Hopefully this clarification will suffice since apparently the others have not.
GOD BLESS YOU.
It was abundantly clear to me that Dan Corner did not understand my position on the matter. Although many years ago, he and I had some exchanges on the subject, he was sure he was right and I was wrong, as Dan Corner is always right and everyone else is always wrong. I wrote to him again on August 3, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner,
Thank you for this clarification. I agree with you that there are certain sins that are listed in the New Testament that will exclude one from eternal life and other sins that will not.
May I, however, ask for more clarification? One sin that is listed that will exclude one from heaven is adultery. Do you believe that when a Christian commits adultery one time, that he instantly forfeits his salvation, the Holy Spirit instantly leaves him, and if he were to die one second after committing that sin, that would guarantee that he would spend eternity in hell? I assume you will say "yes," but you can correct me if I am making a wrong assumption.
Dan Corner did not reply to this email, and so I wrote to him again on August 6, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner,
Now I know that you are a very important person who has little time for lowly people like myself. Perhaps that is why you did not reply to my email of August 3. But you requested that I "not discredit you by misrepresenting your holiness-endurance teachings." And so for that reason, not wanting to misrepresent you, I have requested a clarification of your teachings. Even what you wrote in your letter below is confusing to me. You wrote:
Again, sins like worry, not being completely humble or gentle, not always overflowing with thanksgiving to God, etc. are not in any Biblical list saying such will go to the lake of fire or such a person will not inherit the kingdom as are sexual immorality, idolatry, murder, theft, swindling, slander, etc. There are other sins, however, which will cause loss of salvation over one sin and are not listed with those sins.
After listing sexual immorality, idolatry, murder, theft, swindling, and slander (a sin, incidentally, that you have committed against me), you then say that "there are other sins, however, which will cause the loss of salvation over one sin and are not listed with those sins." It sounds as if you are saying that committing one act of sexual immorality will not cause a Christian to forfeit his salvation. But that seems to contradict other things that you have written, and in fact, seems to contradict your disagreement with me. I would hate to misrepresent you by saying that you believe contractions.
So again, I would appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to clarify your belief. Do you believe that when a Christian commits adultery one time, that God instantly revokes his salvation and sonship, immediately removes the Holy Spirit from him, and if he were to die one second after committing that sin, that would guarantee that he would spend eternity in hell? And since Jesus equated lust as a sin by which one "commits adultery in his heart," could the same thing be said of the sin of lust? That is, if a Christian lusts one time, do you believe that God instantly revokes his salvation and sonship, immediately removes the Holy Spirit from him, and if he were to die one second after committing the sin of lust, that would guarantee that he would spend eternity in hell?
If you don't answer this email I will have to assume that you can't answer my questions, and if I tell someone that, I will not be misrepresenting you or your teachings, having given you two opportunities to respond. This is the very thing you say to those who refuse to debate with you.
Dan Corner never replied to that email either. So I gave up trying and left him in God's hands. However, although Dan Corner would not write to me, he found time to write about me again on his website, slandering me once again. So I wrote to him more than a month later, on September 19, 2009:
Dear brother Dan Corner,
I noted that among the other places that you have slandered me and misrepresented my teaching on your website, you recently slandered and misrepresented me again at www.evangelicaloutreach.org/Bernie_Koerselman.htm, in a new article in which you bestow upon Bernie Koerselman your "Skull and Crossbones Award" for his defense of me and my teaching. In that article, you quoted part of a recent email that you wrote to Bernie in which you stated:
Would you like to text debate: Can a Christian lose his salvation over one sin or does it have to be ‘practice’? and post our exchanges on our mutual web sites for our readers to examine? If you refuse, please pass this same debate invitation on to David Servant. (We believe that message is demonic and nothing better. It must be exposed and refuted.)
It seems strange that you would make this challenge to me when you have not been willing to meet with me personally to discuss our disagreement, as I requested in my email of July 14, and you have not bothered to reply to my last two emails to you of August 3 and August 6, in which I requested clarifications of your position so that I might know exactly what you believe lest I misrepresent your position as you have misrepresented my position.
In any case, I happily agree to your challenge, unless your challenge is really just a lie. I will post our entire dialogue at www.ShepherdServe.org/dan_corner_debate.htm and you can post our entire dialogue at www.evangelicaloutreach.org/David_Servant_Debate.htm. That way our readers can verify that neither of us are neglecting to post our dialogue in its entirety. I would also request that you tell everyone subscribed to your "internet church" email list (to whom you have already slandered me) about our intended debate, giving them both the URLs listed above so that they will know about our debate and can monitor it from both of our websites.
I will begin by soon posting this email to you at my URL mentioned above. I will ask for your patience to my responses to your debate points, as I am quite busy and have to attend to many responsibilities of the ministry of Heaven's Family. I am often out of the country with poor internet access, as I am now, serving widows and orphans in Kenya and Burundi, East Africa (on my journey to hell, as you would say).
From Dan Corner September 20, 2009:
Greetings in Jesus’ name. I’m glad you want to text debate the following:
Can a Christian lose his salvation over one sin or does it have to be ‘practice’?
These are the rules I propose. We each give an "opening statement," which presents our case. After each has done that, then we give "Response #1," "Response #2" and "Response #3" which allow for additional material and/or an opportunity to rebut the opponent. Lastly, we each do a "Closing Statement." In each of the 5 exchanges the maximum number of words that can be used is 1,500.
This text debate is to be: (1) Posted on our websites and (2) Sent out to our entire email lists. (Do you have an email list you send teachings, notices, etc. to?) (3) This debate is between David and Dan Corner and is not to be posted on a blog, etc. where many people can post comments. (4) We can each mention books that we have written on this related subject: The Great Gospel Deception and The Believer’s Conditional Security.
The time limitation to submit our 1,500 word maximum written teaching is 3 weeks, unless circumstances would hinder this. If that occurs additional time will be granted.
If you agree, write me back and we will begin. (NOTE: We will decide on what url our debate will be placed on our website.)
May many people be helped, brought to salvation and awakened to God’s stirring truth.
My response to Dan Corner, September 22, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner,
Thanks for actually taking the time to respond to my email, something you have not had the courtesy to do with my last two emails to you.
You invited Bernie Koerselman to text debate our disagreement and post the debate on our respective websites. And then you wrote that if he refused he could pass that invitation on to me. I accepted your invitation. Now you are altering your offer, proposing "rules" which were not included in your original invitation. And I suppose that if I don't agree to your rules, you are going to back down on your original offer, making it a lie.
What are you afraid of? Why the sudden list of "rules"? You did not limit yourself to any number of words as you misrepresented my position and slandered me on your website, nor did you give me an opportunity to respond before or after you posted your slander. You have not limited yourself to any number of postings that have slandered me on your website. When I attempted to discuss our differences in a face-to-face meeting, you refused. And when I wrote to you twice asking for a clarification of your position, you didn't reply to either of those emails. Moreover, you posted on your website none of my emails to you, but deceivingly posted only part of your responses to me so that your readers would not know the truth about our exchanges and, in particular, your unChrist-like spirit.
So why are you, who has not treated me as you would want to be treated, and who has not shown any sense of fairness and Christian civility in interacting with me these past two months, now laying down rules to insure that you get a fair chance in a debate against me? You have ignored Christ's golden rule but now want me to agree to rules so that our debate will be "fair"? Isn't that hypocritical?
I have already posted the exact wording of your offer and my reply to your offer at www.ShepherdServe.org/dan_corner_debate.htm. I will soon be posting your reply below and the reply that I am writing now. That way the truth will be known by anyone who investigates it. This debate has already begun by you posting at your website at least seven slanderous mentions of my name over the past few weeks. I challenge you to post on your website our entire dialogue that we've had since you posted your slanderous mentions of my name. If you refuse, please explain why. What are you afraid of? Dan Corner, do you believe that one has to "practice" slander in order to lose his salvation, or can one lose it by one act of slander? In either case, you are in deep trouble.
I have accepted your original offer. Will you keep your word or did you lie? Dan Corner, how many lies does it take for one to lose his salvation?
Most amazingly, although I have repeatedly accused you of misrepresenting my position and slandering me, you don't seem to even care to know the grounds of my complaint! Be that as it may, you might take a few minutes of your valuable time to investigate what I actually believe before you further slander me. I suggest reading the following article at my website: www.heavensfamily.org/ss/e_teachings/as-a-father.
From Dan Corner September 22. 2009:
Greetings in Jesus’ name.
Regarding our debate, what proposed rules would you like us to abide by? What I submitted was written from experience regarding text debating and correspondence with various people. Those rules are 100% fair, as anyone can tell. No one should have any advantage as issues are examined. I’m looking forward to our debate. (Please save all criticisms, etc. you have against me until after your "Opening Statement.")
Again, what are the rules you want us to abide by as we debate:
Can a Christian lose his salvation over one sin or does it have to be ‘practice’?
I’m ready to start as soon as possible. (Debates are a Christian practice and very needed, especially when salvations are on the line, as MANY are here.)
My Reply to Dan Corner September 23, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner,
What you are asking for is not actually the establishing of rules for our debate. You are now asking to change the rules, because the debate began and you established the rules the day you posted your first slanderous mention of my name on your website. What rules have you been following since then, as you slandered me at least seven times on your website? Please tell me...I would be interested to hear them. Don't ignore this question Dan Corner, as you ignored the questions in my last email.
Speaking of those ignored questions, I again ask: Why are you, who has not treated me as you would want to be treated, and who has not shown any sense of fairness and Christian civility in interacting with me these past two months, now laying down rules to insure that you get a fair chance in a debate against me? You have ignored Christ's golden rule but now want me to agree to rules so that our debate will be "fair"? Isn't that hypocritical?
Yes or no, Dan Corner? Please just answer the question.
I also ask again: I challenge you to post on your website our entire dialogue that we've had since you posted your slanderous mentions of my name. If you refuse, please explain why. What are you afraid of?
You say you want to post our entire debate on your website in the name of fairness, "so that no one will have an advantage," so why don't you post our entire dialogue to date in order to be fair so that "no one will have an advantage"? Why have you deceptively only posted a few excerpts of your emails to me?
The only reason you are interested in setting up rules now to make everything fair is because you are concerned that you may not get a fair chance to present your side. It is obvious that you are not at all concerned that I receive a fair chance to present my side from the slander and misrepresentation you have posted on your website to date.
It is so hypocritical for you to write of your proposed rules, "Those rules are 100% fair" in light of how you have ignored the most fundamental rule laid down by Christ in regard to how we are to treat one another. Dan Corner, I ask you again, have you treated me as you want to be treated? Have you kept the Golden Rule Christ commanded? And yet now you want me to abide by rules of fairness that you have ignored. Amazing hypocrisy!
You also request, "Please save all criticisms, etc. you have against me until after your "Opening Statement'"! Is that what you have done? Have you saved all criticisms of me until after your opening statement? No, you have criticized me to the point of calling me "Pope" and a "dangerous false teacher" on your website. Amazing hypocrisy! You ask me to do what you do not do!
Dan Corner, how much of a hypocrite does one have to be before he is assigned "a place with a hypocrites"? Can one sin of hypocrisy send one to hell or does one have to "practice" hypocrisy? You obviously believe by your actions that one must practice hypocrisy quit a bit! Do you think you may be getting close to God's limit?
So if you want to bind me into your rules, you'll first need to take a dose of your own medicine and actually follow Christ by doing the following:
1.) Remove all your slanderous mentions of me and what I allegedly teach from your website.
2.) Post an apology on your website that asks my forgiveness for publicly slandering me and misrepresenting what I teach, and keep it permanently on your website so that through the years, anyone who may have read your slanderous postings and was influenced by it will be able to see that you admit you were wrong.
3.) Send an email to your entire "internet church" list to whom you slandered me, apologizing for publicly slandering me and misrepresenting what I teach in order to undo the damage that you did by your slanderous email to your entire email list.
4.) Send personal emails to everyone to whom you have sent personal slanderous emails about me, including, but not limited to Bernie Koerselman and Tom Adcock, apologizing for your unChrist-like actions and words. Here is a copy of the email that you sent to Bernie Koerselaman, so that those who view this on my website will know the truth of the real Dan Corner:
Greetings in Jesus' name.
We just published an important warning about David _________, a dangerous false teacher who now mostly goes by the name David Servant. Please read over our review. We regret that we did not expose/refute him years ago.
We noticed several weeks ago that you removed yourself from our Internet church and are wondering why?
GOD BLESS YOU.
Here is a copy of the email that you sent to Tom Adcock:
Greetings in Jesus' name.
We just published an important warning about David ________, a dangerous false teacher who now mostly goes by the name David Servant. Please read over our review. We regret that we did not expose/refute him years ago.
Tom, are you still promoting the damnable heresy of Calvinism?
GOD BLESS YOU.
As you are well aware, both of these ministers rebuked you firmly for your slander. Bernie Koerselman pointed out that your misrepresentation of what I teach reaches "the point of idiocy." The result was that you awarded Bernie Koerselman your "Skull and Crossbones Award."
So now you want to be treated fairly???? Again, amazing hypocrisy on your part. If you will make a sincere attempt to live up to the standard that you set for me by doing the four things I listed above, then I will remove from my website our correspondence which I have posted and will soon post. Then we can talk about changing the rules (as you desire to do) that you have already established to start our debate.
I will be posting your reply, as well as this reply on my website at www.ShepherdServe.org/dan_corner_debate.htm, as well as all of our correspondence since my first email of July 14 so that anyone who investigates what they find on your website will know the truth about you.
And I have one final question: Have you even read my book, The Great Gospel Deception, in its entirety? Yes or no?
Sincerely in Christ,
Dan Corner never answered that email. I wrote to him again on September 27, pointing out that, based on his beliefs, he should award the apostles Paul and John, Jesus, and himself his "Skull and Crossbones Award."
Greetings in Jesus' name.
I'm still patiently waiting for your reply to my September 23rd email so that I can post it at my website along with the rest of our text debate, and I'm still patiently waiting for you to post our text debate at your website as you originally offered to do. Why the delay?
In the meantime, I've found a few other people who deserve your Skull and Crossbones award because they believe that it is the practice of sin that prevents one from inheriting God's kingdom. The first one is Paul:
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you just as I have forewarned you that those who practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21).
You quote Gal. 5:19-21 on your website scores of times, usually using the NIV:
The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Wow, I guess since Paul used the phrase "practice such things" (or "live like this") in that passage, he must have believed that Christians can occasionally commit immorality, idolatry, sorcery and so on, and still go to heaven, just like you claim that I believe! So why don't you slander Paul just as you have slandered me, and give him your Skull and Crossbones Award also?
Another one who deserves your Skull and Crossbones Award is Jesus. He said:
Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord,’"will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?" And then I will declare to them," I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness" (Matt. 7:21-23).
I guess since Jesus used the word "practice" in that passage, He must have believed that as long as people commit only occasional "lawlessness" that they can still enter heaven, just like you claim that I believe! Jesus must have believed that George Sodini may have gone to heaven since his act of mass-murder was only an "occasional" instance of lawlessness and not a practice, just as you claim that I believe. So why don't you slander Jesus just as you have slandered me, and give him your Skull and Crossbones Award?
Another one who deserves your Skull and Crossbones Award is the apostle John:
No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother (1 John 3:9-10).
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death (Rev. 21:8)
Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood (Rev. 22:14,15).
I guess since John used the word "practice" in these passages that he believed that as long as people only occasionally sin that they can still enter heaven, and that those who occasionally indulge in magic arts or occasionally tell lies can go to heaven, just like you say I believe! So why don't you slander John just as you have slandered me, and give him your Skull and Crossbones Award also?
Referring to Rev. 22:14-15 in your writing at www.evangelicaloutreach.org/mail72.htm, you stated:
We are ALWAYS informed that those who practice the magic arts will be excluded from God's kingdom and will be thrown into the lake of fire unless they repent of their evil behavior.
Wow, you must believe that the person who occasionally indulges in magic arts can go to heaven, since you said that it is those who practice magic arts who will be excluded from God's kingdom. I guess you should give yourself the Skull and Crossbones Award.
In noticed that you also quote the ESV of 1 Cor. 6:9-10 at your website at: http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/davidstewartskullcrossbones.htm:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9,10, ESV).
You must believe that occasional acts of homosexuality won't disqualify one from inheriting God's kingdom, since you quote from a version of the Bible that says it is those who "practice homosexuality" who will not inherit God's kingdom. Dan Corner, I'm so surprised.
You should also give yourself your Skull and Crossbones Award for giving people a license for immorality when you write at your website:
God’s warning is: ALL adulterers, as well as others listed above, are unrighteous and will not inherit God’s kingdom but instead go to the fiery lake of burning sulfur (unless they repent and get forgiven). You can be sure of that. So, do NOT be deceived by their teachings to the contrary, which are nothing more than empty words.
What dangerous doctrine! Christians will think that they can commit all the sins they want as long as they repent and get forgiven! What a license for immorality! You are a dangerous false grace teacher!
You also teach (and I quote from one of your emails to me):
Other sins such as not bearing good fruit or remaining lukewarm will also cause loss of salvation unless one changes, but not immediately.
So you must believe that Christian can be occasionally lukewarm and still go to heaven, just as long as they don't practice lukewarmness! But you don't tell us how long in lukewarmness it takes to pass from temporary to a practice of lukewarmness! What a license for lukewarmness you give to people, just like the eternal security teachers!
GOD BLESS YOU.
After waiting a month to receive a reply to my September 23 and September 27 emails with no reply, I wrote the following email to Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner on October 24. I had just discovered, to my amazement, that they were taking the money people donated to their ministry and investing tens of thousands of dollars in mutual funds that held shares in companies that produce and pump pornography into millions of households.
Dear Dan Corner & Cheryl Corner,
Please make sure you read all the way to the end of this email to read my exposure of your hypocrisy in profiting from pornography while you preach holiness and warn people about the consequences of their immorality. This letter will soon be posted along with all of our other correspondence to date at www.heavensfamily.org/ss/dan_corner_debate.htm in accordance with your offer to a text debate in which we would both post our exchanges on our websites (which you have not done to date). This will also reveal, to anyone who cares to investigate the truth about you both, exactly where your donor's contributions are being invested. I am also considering exposing your incredible hypocrisy of investing in pornography via email to the thousands of people on our email list, yet delaying as I pray for your genuine repentance.
In your article about Rick Knapp, for some odd reason you can't resist taking a shot at me, which I read some weeks ago (www.evangelicaloutreach.org/rick_knapp_george_sodini.htm). I have noted that you have since altered your slander of me there. Apparently some of your more discerning readers have been objecting to your previous slander. Now you have posted the following:
For the record, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, I have publicly taught that George Sodini, who murdered several women before he shot himself, is now in hell (see www.heavensfamily.org/ss/e_teachings/as-a-father).
Also for the record, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, I believe that if King David had not repented of his murder and adultery, he would have gone to hell, because Scripture teaches that adulterers and murders will not inherit God's kingdom. To respond to your foolish question in the above-quoted slander, there was a difference between King David and George Sodini that you have apparently missed. King David repented and was forgiven before he died. George Sodini did not. Again, you have slandered me and misrepresented my teaching.
Using your absurd logic by which you condemn me, one could claim that Jesus, Paul and John would have to say that George Sodini could be in heaven, since all three of them said that those who practice lawlessness or sin will not inherit eternal life (Matt. 7:23; Gal. 5:21; 1 John 3:8).
John wrote, for example, "the one who practices sin is of the devil" (1 John 3:8). I guess John must have believed that one could commit adultery occasionally, and still got to heaven, right? Because that is what you claim that I believe, simply because I teach, like Jesus, Paul, and John, that it is the practice of sin, which means unrepentant sin, that insures one will not inherit God's kingdom. You yourself teach that, saying that being lukewarm will not immediately cause one to forfeit eternal life. As I said in a previous email (to which you never bothered to respond), you should give yourself your "Skull and Crossbones Award" for giving people a license to be lukewarm for a while. You are a dangerous false-grace teacher, just like me!!!!!
You accuse me of teaching inconsistently, yet you teach that one single act of lust causes one to die spiritually, forfeit the indwelling Spirit, and one's forgiven status before God, while you maintain that one can be lukewarm for a while before one loses his salvation! Whose teaching is inconsistent?
I believe that David would have gone to hell had he not repented just as much as I believe that both of you will go to hell if you don't repent of your slander, deception, lying, hypocrisy and your financial investment in pornography. As you know, the Bible teaches that slanderers, deceivers, liars, hypocrites and immoral people will not inherit God's kingdom. But would I say that you have currently "lost your salvation"? No, God is graciously warning you and disciplining you in an attempt to effect your repentance because He still loves you and does not want you to spend eternity in hell. The Holy Spirit who came into you when you first believed in Christ is still within you pleading with you to repent. David's prayer after his sin, "Do not take Your Holy Spirit from me" (Ps. 51:11) would be an appropriate prayer for you to pray right now.
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, you are slanderers, having slandered me repeatedly on your website and in your broadcast emails. You repeatedly claim that what I teach allows adulterers and murderers into heaven. That is patently false. You wrote, for example, at www.evangelicaloutreach.org/emails080209.htm : "It is clear that he [David Servant] thinks one can commit occasional acts of adultery, drunkenness, theft, etc. and retain his salvation." Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, I believe that when unrepentant adulterers, drunkards and thieves stand before God, they will be condemned to hell, even if they were once genuine Christians.
You are liars, as you offered to text debate me on our disagreement while both posting our debate on our websites. That is what I have been doing. You have done no such thing. There are none of my emails to you anywhere on your website.
You are deceivers, as you have misled those who come to your website, posting portions of your emails to me, leaving out those parts which would incriminate you, and posting none of my replies to your slanders. You also misled one of your readers who wrote to you and asked if you contacted me regarding your slanderous statements on your website, and you deceptively wrote that you had a "brief email exchange" and then offered a link to the postings of a portion of two of your emails to me, and which included none of my replies in our exchange. (Note to all readers, this can be verified here: www.evangelicaloutreach.org/emails080209.htm .)
Just today I found on your website an article titled, "An Open Letter to David Servant" (which I will reply to, once I've read it) that was dated October 9th, two weeks ago. You attempt to lead your readers into thinking that you sent a letter to me, a letter that I've never received. Incredible deception on your part! I have been waiting for weeks now for a reply from you to my September 23 and September 27 emails. You have never sent a reply to either. Yet you post an "Open Letter to David Servant" on your website on October 9 that you never sent to me! Again, incredible deception on your part.
You are hypocrites, because you preach holiness but don't even obey the second greatest commandment, not treating me as you would want to be treated to the point of not even showing the most simple courtesies, evidenced by you ignoring my emails and refusing to meet with me. You are both also cowards (see Rev. 21:8) who hide behind your website.
Finally, you are hypocrites because you have unquestionably used your ministry's funds to purchase shares in the "Prudent Bear Fund" and "Prudent Bear Safe Harbor Fund," as revealed in your ministry's 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 990 Forms. (Note to all readers: You can read these 990 forms for yourself at the following URL by typing in "Evangelical Outreach" and selecting "Pennsylvania" :
http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/esearch.php). These 990 Forms submitted by you to the IRS show that you have taken contributions and invested them in the Prudent Bear Fund, which has holdings in such companies as Comcast Cable Company, which pumps porn into millions of homes, as well as Time Warner, which produces pornographic movies and also pumps filth into millions of homes. Your ministry is a part owner in Comcast and Time Warner (which holds HBO and Cinemax, among scores of other companies), while you hypocritically warn others about pornography! You are profiting from porn! You tell Christians not to watch television (www.evangelicaloutreach.org/tvcartoon2.html), yet your ministry, at your direction, owns shares in HBO, Cinemax and CNN, among others! Amazing hypocrisy on your part.
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, why has your ministry not filed a 990 Form since 2004? All 501C3 non-profit corporations are required by federal law to annually submit a completed 990 Form which becomes a matter of public record. Are you now calling your ministry a "church" to avoid this requirement, just as all of the prosperity preachers have done, in order to hide your financial dealings from your donors? Did you start your "internet church" in hopes of collecting people's tithes so that you could have more to invest in what God hates? Have you received so much money to hoard that you now must hide it from your donors?
I have one final question: Why is it that on your website, that contains hundreds of pages warning about conditional eternal security and where you so frequently warn about immorality and murder and so on, do you not once warn about not caring for the poor, as Jesus warned His closest disciples in His foretelling of the judgement of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25:31-46? Could it be because your lives more resemble the goats in Matthew 25 than the sheep, as you hope to get rich investing His money in what He hates while so many of God's children around the world are starving?
Praying for your sincere repentance,
On October 24, I discovered that Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner had posted an article titled "Open Letter to David Servant" on October 9. On October 26, I sent them my response to that article, which is below. His "Open Letter" is in black and my response is in blue.
October 26, 2009
Dear Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner,
After waiting about a month now for any reply from you to my emails of September 23 and 27th, and hearing nothing from you, it was brought to my attention that you have posted yet another slanderous article on your website titled, "Open Letter to David Servant," which is dated October 9, 2009. So while you didn't have time to write to me, you apparently had time to write about me. You posted what is supposed to be perceived by your readers as a letter to me, but you never sent that letter to me. This, once again, shows how deceptive you are.
In any case, I will continue to keep our agreement to post our text debate on my website, an agreement that you have not kept. What follows is your "Open Letter to David Servant" in its entirety, along with my response clearly marked within your text. Unlike both of you, who have never yet posted anything that I've written from our text debate (a text debate that you originally proposed), and who have deceptively posted only parts of what you have written months ago, I'm keeping my word and posting both your and my letters.
October 9, 2009
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 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. 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.
What you have written is patently false. Had Peter not repented after having denying Jesus, continuing in a refusal to be identified with Christ because of potential sufferings he might face, Jesus would have denied him before His Father at his judgment, just as He solemnly warned. Peter, however, instantly repented after his third denial of Christ. Yet in your unique theology, at Peter's first denial of Christ, Jesus (on earth) instantly disowned Peter before the Father (in heaven), removed the Holy Spirit from him and Peter died spiritually! So was Peter saved, then unsaved for a few seconds, and then saved again a few seconds later? All who are reading this would like you to answer that question, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner. Why do you not answer my questions? Why do you, who offered to text debate me, not even reply to my emails, much less post them on your website as you said you would do?
Regarding David, it is just the same. Had David not repented, he would not have inherited God's kingdom. But David did repent. Yet in your unique theology you have David instantly dying spiritually the first moment he looked at Bathsheba with lust, and God instantly removing His Holy Spirit from him, even though David prayed some time after his sins of adultery and vicarious murder, "Do not take your Holy Spirit from me" (Psalm 51:11). Your entire theology about David losing his salvation is based on one scripture that promises that no adulterer will inherit God's kingdom (1 Cor. 6:9-10). Inheriting God's kingdom is something that does or does not happen in the future. Yet you strangely say that disobedient Christians---whom the Bible warns will not inherit God's kingdom---instantly die spiritually, have the Holy Spirit removed from them, forfeit sonship in Christ, at the very instant they commit the sin of lust, for example. You say what the Bible does not say. In thirty years of ministry, I have never run into anyone who teaches what you teach. Your unique theology is on the extreme fringes, to say the least.
Consider this, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner: Jesus warned in His foretelling of the judgment of the sheep and goats that many will be surprised when they are condemned to hell because they failed to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick, "the least of these" among His brethren (Matt. 25:31-46). So it cannot be debated that those sins for which the goats are condemned are not "exclusionary sins," just as are adultery, murder and so on. But do you believe that if you fail to visit a believer whom you know to be sick today that you instantly die spiritually, and instantly forfeit the Holy Spirit and sonship in Christ? I doubt that you do. But if you were to be consistent, you would have to believe that, because according to you, as soon as a believer commits lust (another "exclusionary sin"), he instantly dies spiritually and forfeits the Holy Spirit and sonship in Christ. So to be consistent in your theology, you would have to say that when a believer fails to visit one sick person whom he could visit, he would instantly die spiritually, and forfeit the Holy Spirit and sonship in Christ.
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, anyone reading Matt. 25:31-46 would come to conclusion that the goats lived lifestyles that are characterized by neglecting the pressing needs of poor believers. And they would conclude that the sheep lived lifestyles that are characterized by meeting the pressing needs of poor believers. For that reason they will be justified or condemned. (Incidentally, do your lifestyles reflect that you are sheep or goats?)
I also observed that you have reacted like some other grace changers we have exposed, that is, you unjustly scream slander, even after your exact teaching is accurately presented, documented and refuted with Scripture. You have not accurately presented my teaching. You have twisted my words and forced a meaning into them that no other readers ever have. I don't mind being criticized for what I do believe and teach, but I don't appreciate being criticized for what I don't believe and teach. That is precisely what you have done and continue to do. Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, I know what I teach! You are slanderers. Rather than humbly changing for your own good and the good of many, you instead try to discredit Christians for obeying God’s word to contend for the faith and expose the unfruitful deeds of darkness. That is part of your weak defense of your gospel.
Let it be known: Evangelical Outreach has not misrepresented you or any of the others. If you, or ANY person, can offer evidence where we have made such an error it will be changed or removed entirely, if necessary.
I have already repeatedly proven where you have misrepresented me, but all you do is continue to slander me. But let me take you up on your promise to see if you will prove yourselves once again to be the liars that you have already proven yourselves to be.
In the very first slander of me that you posted at your website, when you gave me your "Skull and Crossbones Award" at www.evangelicaloutreach.org/david_servant_great_gospel_deception.htm, you wrote in the first two paragraphs the following:
Everything that I have just quoted from you is slander. You base your slanderous accusation on the fact that I wrote in my book, The Great Gospel Deception, "Although it is certainly possible for a born-again person to temporarily stumble into one or more of these various sins, no true believer will practice these sins." It is incredulous that from that sentence you have extracted your slanderous accusation that I'm teaching that Christians can occasionally, without repentance, commit those sins which the Bible warns will exclude them from inheriting God's kingdom. That is not what I said at all, nor is that what I believe. You are slandering me. I challenge you to find one other minister or intelligent person on the planet who would extract the meaning that you have extracted from that sentence you quoted from my book, The Great Gospel Deception!
What I said was this: Born-again people have free wills, and it is possible for them to stumble into adultery, for example. But if such a person is truly born again, he will feel immense guilt that will motivate him greatly towards repentance. If he does not experience such guilt, he shows that he is not truly born again at all. No true believer will habitually, unrepentedly, commit adultery. That is precisely what I wrote: "No true believer will practice these sins." I did not at all mean, as any intelligent person can see, that true believers might occasionally and unrepentedly commit those sins and still go to heaven. If a person does practice those sins, it proves he is not a believer. True believers obey. And if a true believer does not repent under the immense guilt that any true believer would experience after stumbling into adultery, God will discipline him to bring him to repentance. If he does not repent under God's discipline before he dies, he will not inherit God's kingdom, just as Scripture promises. That is what I believe because that is what the Bible teaches and that is what I teach in The Great Gospel Deception. Yet you have forced your twisted and bizarre interpretation into what I wrote and slandered me.
Here's another slander and misrepresentation of me, posted on your website, in which you responded to an intelligent reader who objected to your giving me your "Skull and Crossbones Award." You wrote: "According to the book, The Great Gospel Deception, a Christian could turn and be a part time prostitute. There is no question about this, since it would be only part-time and not practice." No such thing is taught in The Great Gospel Deception. There is an entire chapter in that book titled, The Immoral "Christian" (note that the word Christian is italicized, indicating that the title means there is no such thing as an immoral Christian) which completely debunks the idea that any immoral person is bound for heaven. Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, have you ever read my book, The Great Gospel Deception, in its entirety? This is the second time I have asked this question, and you never have answered that question. Your silence leads me to believe that you have not read it.
So now that I have proven where you have misrepresented and slandered me, will you keep your promise to remove your slander from your website, or are you the liars that you have already proven yourself to be? Your slander not only requires that you remove all of your slanderous statements about me on your website, but also requires a public apology to be posted at every URL on your website where you have slandered me, and it requires that you send out a public apology to your entire email list before whom you have repeatedly and publicly slandered me. That is what a true Christian would do.
Incidentally, that same sincere reader asked you, "Have you contacted David Servant to discuss this with him?" You deceptively replied, "After I posted the Skull and Crossbones to “David Servant,” I entered into email exchange with him briefly. You can read that here: http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/david_servant_letter.htm." The truth is, you said nothing to me until I contacted you after learning about your first slanderous article. You refused to meet with me, although we live a half-hour away. You have not replied to at least five of my emails. Your alleged posting of our "email exchange" is nothing more than the partial (not the full) contents of a few of your emails to me, and you left out what might make you look bad, such as your refusal to meet with me. You posted nothing that I wrote to you in our "brief exchange." This, again, demonstrates your deception.
Furthermore, you have slandered me by unjustly accusing me of slandering you.Therefore, you are the real slanderer—not me. In fact, you want so badly to try to make me out to be inaccurate and a slanderer that you have inconsistently presented your own doctrine about what it takes to lose one’s salvation by condemning George Sodini, but not King David. 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 and wickedly planned (for an undisclosed period of time) the MURDER of Uriah, but somehow it was different for 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.
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, did you notice that one of those two men died without repenting? People who are alive can't go to hell unless they first die. George Sodini murdered three people then shot himself. Then he died. He died as a murderer. David vicariously murdered one man, but he didn't then commit suicide. If he would have committed suicide, he would have gone to hell. But he kept living. And then he repented. And then he was forgiven. And when he died he inherited God's kingdom. You make the assumption that because God warns certain kinds of sinners that they will not inherit God's kingdom (a future event) that means if a Christian commits lust, for example, that he instantly dies spiritually, has the Holy Spirit instantly removed from him and is instantly no longer a child of God, yet if he repents, he regains all those things instantly, but if he commits lust again, he again instantly loses all those things. That is your unique and strange theology that is not found in Scripture. In thirty years I have never read after or met anyone who holds to your very unique and strange theology.
Among other things, you have violated the Biblical definitions of what it takes to become an adulterer, murderer, etc. by presenting an unscriptural image of God and salvation, which is dangerous. The Bible says one act of adultery produces anadulterer, 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, yoursalvation/security/grace doctrine is not salvation at all, but a snare to one’s SOUL. There are no Christian adulterers, Christian murderers, etc.
Again you clearly show your error. Those two scriptures that you just cited (1 Cor. 6:9-10 and Rev. 21:8) warn of future consequences for people who die guilty and unrepentant of certain sins, such as immorality. Both of you, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, are immoral persons, having invested your ministry's contributions in companies like HBO and Cinemax (as I showed from your own 990 forms in my previous email), and those two scriptures that you just cited promise you that you will not inherit God's kingdom and that you will be cast into the lake of fire. But those two scriptures do not say that you have presently died spiritually, have had the Holy Spirit removed, and are no longer God's children.
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 Jesus! Why don’t you just teach, as the Scriptures do, that if a Christian disowns Jesus, the Lord will disown him, as he himself taught and Peter (as well as the others) unfortunately did? Unfortunately?
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 HolySpirit, 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! You have slandered me again, and you again show your error with your unique and very fringe interpretation of Matthew 10:33. In Matthew 10:33, Jesus was warning of what will happen when people stand before Him and the Father at their judgment. The context clearly shows that. Just a few verses before, Jesus was clearly referring to what happens to people when they die: "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matt. 10:28). It is absurd to think that in Matthew 10:33 Jesus was saying that He would instantly deny before the Father any believer who denies him, so that such a believer would instantly die spiritually, forfeiting his sonship in Christ and the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Why don't you also force your unique interpretation of Matt. 10:33 on Luke 9:26 as well, where Jesus promised, "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the Father and of the holy angels"? Why don't you also force your unique interpretation on Luke 12:8-9: "And I say to you, everyone who confesses Me before men, the Son of Man will confess him also before the angels of God; but he who denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God"? Why don't you also force your unique interpretation on 2 Tim. 2:12: "If we endure, we will also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us"? All refer to the future judgment, just like Matt. 10:33.
Your primary error is that you make "not inheriting God's kingdom" to mean "instantly die spiritually and forfeit the indwelling Holy Spirit as well as sonship in Christ." It is obvious, however, to everyone other than you, that those are not synonymous terms. Just because one is currently spiritually alive does not guarantee he will inherit God's kingdom. Just because one is currently spiritually dead does not guarantee that he will not inherit God's kingdom. This is so simple, a child can grasp it.
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 the 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.
You have slandered me once again. For the record, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, I believe that if a believer turns his back on Jesus and decides to follow Satan, he will ultimately be cast into the Lake of Fire. For that single sin, he will ultimately forfeit his salvation. Those who take the mark of the beast will fall into that category. But notice once again that in Revelation 14:9-12, the warning for those who take the mark of the beast is very much like the warnings for those who commit adultery and murder and so. It is a warning about what will happen to them in the future. You, however, apparently have special knowledge to know that those who commit exclusionary sins instantly forfeit the Holy Spirit, sonship, and die spiritually. You extract from Rev. 14:9-12 what is not there, just as you do other scriptures that warn of future consequences to unrepentant sinners.
Your discipline teaching implies all wayward Christians will be disciplined by God,but that is wrong too. Various Scriptures disprove that all get disciplined beforespiritual death:
●Adam and Eve lost their salvation immediately after one sin;
Adam and Eve did not "lose their salvation" and the Bible never says they did. In order for someone to "lose their salvation," they have to have been saved first. To be "saved" one first has to be lost. Adam and Eve were created spiritually alive but died spiritually the day they ate from the forbidden tree. That is because God said, "In the day that you eat from it you will surely die." But that does not prove that Christians die spiritually the day that they commit certain sins that God warns them will cause them not to inherit His kingdom in the future. There is no scripture that says, "When a Christian sins, he immediately dies spiritually." Only Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner say that. And they only say it because the Bible says that no adulterer will inherit God's kingdom, which is not a promise of instant spiritual death, but a warning of what will happen in the future to unrepentant adulterers.
● the Apostles disowned Jesus and fell away over it. Such happened in one night;
I'm not sure what you are trying to prove with that statement. If you are saying that all the apostles died spiritually that night and that Jesus, "who loved His own until the end" (John 13:1), denied them all before the Father so that if they had died physically during those few days they would have gone to hell, you are the only two people in the history of Christianity who believe such a far-fetched and strange idea.
● Ananias and Sapphira were slain by God with no time lapse to bring them to repentance.
Indeed, Ananias and Sapphira met with swift discipline. Were they the norm in the early church? Shall we conclude that God deals with every believer exactly as He did with Ananias and Sapphira? What other New Testament examples can you cite? How many people do you know who have dropped dead in the midst of a church service at the hand of God's judgment?
Moreover, how do you know Ananias and Sapphira were even believers? And how do you know they went to hell? The New Testament speaks of Christians who were disciplined by the Lord with sickness and even death so that they would "not be condemned along with the world" (1 Cor. 11:32). That means they died as a result of God's judgment, but went to heaven, not hell.
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, please explain to all us who are reading this what the Bible means when it says that God disciplines every son whom He receives? Tell us your theology of God's discipline.
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? Yes, I did notice that! Those who take the mark of the beast are promised that in the future they will be cast into the lake of fire. They have, apparently, no hope or opportunity of repentance. That one sin will seal their doom. That is what I believe and teach. You have, however, found one example in the Bible of what you want to make the norm for many other sins! Yet you can't find a scripture that says that if a Christian commits lust, that single sin results in instant spiritual death, any more than you can find a scripture that says that if a Christian commits lust, that single sin seals his doom and he has no opportunity for repentance (as in the case of taking the mark of the beast). You can only find a scripture that states that no adulterer will inherit God's kingdom, a future event. That is what I teach. I don't add to the Scripture as you both do. And I do not teach or believe that as long as one only occasionally commits adultery, one is in no danger of not inheriting God's kingdom. Yet you slander me, saying that is what I do teach. 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 (That again is slander again on your part. I just affirmed for all our readers that anyone who takes the mark of the beast will be cast into the lake of fire.) as with Mt. 10:33; David losing his salvation when in adultery and murder; etc. Your allowances for wickedness, even multiple times (more slander on your part) (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, That is strange to hear you say that. Many people have told me how reading The Great Gospel Deception has put the fear of God into them and motivated them to live holy lives. You should read it sometime, as it will put the fear of God in you if you read the chapter titled, The Immoral "Christian." (Note that in that title, the word Christian is in quotes, indicating that it means there is no such thing as an immoral Christian.) I suggest that you also read the chapter titled, The Greedy "Christian," as that one will also put the fear of God into you both. as the Calvinists have been doing for centuries. SOULS continue to be imperilled by you.
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. So you slander me and don't like the fact that I am exposing your slander, and so you are suffering persecution like Paul and John the Baptist????? Hmmm....
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. Utter nonsense and more slander regarding what I teach. I could say the identical thing about your teaching, which allows for some lukewarmness before one "forfeits his salvation." I'll bet your readers never ask you about that "invisible line" from acceptable lukewarmness to damning lukewarmness. You teaching also allows for people to think that they can sin as many times as they want as long as they repent and receive forgiveness before they die.
Beyond that, it seems that the kind of "Christians" with whom you associate are a different kind than those with whom I associate. Those with whom I associate are new creations, born of the Spirit, and they hate sin. None of them are looking for ways to commit adultery, drunkenness, murder, rape, lying and so on. They are Bible Christians. It seems you associate with a kind of a "Christian" that I've never met, who are looking for ways to commit adultery and murder and still go to heaven. Be that as it may, if I was actually teaching what you slanderously say I teach, then I could understand your concern. If someone was actually teaching that one can commit occasional acts of adultery and murder and still go to heaven, then phony believers might well be attracted to such teaching and be strengthened to sin. But I'm not familiar with these kinds of believers that you seem to be so concerned about, "believers" who are looking for ways to commit adultery, murder, rape and so on, and still go to heaven.
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 a 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. Pure misrepresentation and slander. No one but you, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, has ever extracted such nonsense from what I actually teach.
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? Those who preach unconditional eternal security claim that there is nothing a Christian can do that would result in him ultimately being cast into hell. I completely disagree with them, as I have clearly and repeatedly proven.
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. As I have already repeatedly stated and proved, what you have just said is misrepresentation of what I teach and believe and is slanderous.
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!
Since you bring that up, I'll comment. Every person who may have sponsored and orphan or helped a widow through our ministry who does not because they have believed your slander about me, the blood of those orphans and widows will be on your heads, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner. So not only are you slanderers, liars, deceivers, and immoral, but you also rob the poor.
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.
Your claim is ludicrous. You have already demonstrated that you have no idea what I actually teach, and that you have twisted what I do actually teach, focusing on a few sentences in a book that argues, with the use of hundreds of scriptures, that heaven is only for the holy. Your extreme and fringe doctrine is embarrassing to the rest of us who are trying to contend for biblical truth, and makes it harder for those of us who are doing our best to teach that eternal security is conditional and not unconditional. If you don't believe me, just do a search for your own name on the internet and see what people are saying about you and your fringe teaching.
You have written me saying you want to debate, but I’m convinced it was only empty words. You didn’t want to debate this issue. You just wanted to vent your anger and nonsensical defense over being exposed and Scripturally refuted publicly. All who have not read our Skull And Crossbones Award to you, and want more evidence, can read it for themselves here http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/david_servant_great_gospel_deception.htm. Your teachings are documented. There is no slander anywhere, so please stop slandering us!
What you have just written is an incredible deception that you are trying to pull over on your readers. I accepted your invitation to a text debate, and to post our debate on our respective websites. That is what I have done. All of our debate to date is posted at www.ShepherdServe.org/dan_corner_debate.htm. To date, you have posted none of our debate, except for a few excerpts of three of your early emails to me, and your recent "Open Letter to David Servant" (that was never sent to me). Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, who is it that doesn't want to text debate the issue? Will you post this reply to your Open Letter to me? I'm willing to bet that you will not.
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.
I'm sorry, but if the phrase "unconditional eternal security" describes a false belief because eternal security is conditioned upon continued faith and obedience, then I can't see what is wrong with defining the correct belief as "conditional eternal security." If you want to see someone else who uses the phrase "conditional eternal security," just type in this URL--- http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/whatsnew.htm, and read the words at the top of the page: "Conditional Eternal Security." Why do you condemn me for using a term that you use? Again, pure hypocrisy on your part.
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.
My teaching is extremely clear to everyone except to you. For the record, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, I have never listened to John McArthur's teaching on unconditional eternal security. I got the word "practice" from Jesus, Paul and John, as all of them use it in Scripture in regard to sin and lawlessness.
Regarding the word "lifestyle," I also got that from Paul, who said in Gal. 5:19-21:
The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
You quote that verse scores of times on your website just as I have just quoted above, in the NIV. Is the phrase "live like this" not synonymous with the word "lifestyle"?
Regarding the word "occasional," which you repeatedly accuse me of using in regard to my allegedly saying that Christians can occasionally commit adultery and murder and so on and still inherit God's kingdom, I challenge you to find the word "occasional" one single time in my book The Great Gospel Deception. You won't find it. So once again, you misrepresent my teaching and slander me publicly on your website. You are slanderers.
You have been corrected repeatedly over the years by me and through our materials, yet you refuse to repent. You remain a lethal spiritual snare to others. People need to be warned.
Again, you attempt to deceive your readers. As you know, many years ago you and I discussed our disagreement with an exchange of emails. That was a one-time event. I have not heard from you "repeatedly." Again, you are lying and you know it. Moreover, I don't agree with your "correction" for biblical reasons which I have clearly communicated.
And speaking of warning people, I noticed in your latest email responses in your "internet church" that you thanked a recent contributor for his donation, saying, "THANK YOU for the donation and kind words. It is GREATLY needed. We remain on the front lines with God’s truth. We are after SOULS and not to tickle ears with excuses for wickedness. This is VERY SERIOUS. What we are doing now will stretch throughout eternity. Your support and prayers qualify you to share in our spiritual fruitfulness. We are laboring with YOU."
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, how are donations "GREATLY needed" when your ministry has so much money invested in the Prudent Bear Fund, the Prudent Bear Safe Harbor Fund, FISERV, and silver bullion? Do you mean that donations are "greatly needed" so you can invest more of your contributors' money in stocks of companies that produce and promote porn, as you have been doing? By my calculations, by now you may well have over $200,000 of your donors' contributions hoarded away in those funds. Why do you deceive your donors to think that their contributions are being used for ministry when they are being stockpiled in hopes of making a financial killing on a stock market decline?
Sincerely and in Christ,
By November 4, I still had not received any replies from Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner to my September 23, September 27, and October 24 emails. However, it was brought to my attention that they had added some text to their "Open Letter to David Servant" at their website since I first copied and pasted it in my response of October 26. It was also brought to my attention that Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner wrote yet another article that disparagingly mentioned my name. So I sent an email on November 4 responding to the added text in their "Open Letter to David Servant." Below is my response in black, while their added text to the "Open Letter" is in blue.
Dear Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner,
I'm still patiently waiting for your replies to my September 23, September 27 and October 24 emails. I've noticed that, although you won't take any time for the simple courtesy of reply (even after your proposal that we text debate), you have taken time to adjust your "Open Letter to David Servant." Why do you write an "open letter" to me to give your readers the impression that I am ignoring your correspondence, when in fact, it is you who doesn't reply to my correspondence? This once again shows how deceptive you are. In fact, you have never sent me your "Open Letter to David Servant," which shows even more how deceptive you both are. I also noticed that in the past few days you have posted yet another article that mentions my name in a very negative way. You are only digging your grave deeper, as everyone who is coming to my website and reading our correspondence is discovering the truth about you. So many are shocked to learn of your promotion of porn through the investment of your ministry's contributions.
In any case, I will also be posting this email on my website, in keeping with our agreement to a text debate in which each of us would post that debate on our websites. You have still not posted any of my text in this debate on your website, again, making you liars. You amazingly even state in your "open letter" to me (and I quote), "You have written me saying you want to debate, but I’m convinced it was only empty words. You didn’t want to debate this issue." That is an incredible lie on your part, as I am debating this issue with you and posting it on my website. So far, you have only posted part of what you have written to me, and much of that is designed to deceive your readers, and you have posted none of what I have written to you in our debate, whereas I have posted it all from the beginning.
It has been brought to my attention that you have added some more text to your "Open Letter to David Servant." So I am responding to your additions.
Regarding King David you clearly wrote what you believe/teach about King David at that time retaining his salvation:
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. So stop slandering me, by saying I have slandered you regarding David.
You again attempt to mislead your readers, as you both know quite well (as does everyone who has read the posting of our debate in my website) that I have not accused you of slandering me in regard to what Scripture says (and which I agree with) regarding David's spiritual status after he committed adultery and vicarious murder. And I have shown quite clearly in my last email and previous emails exactly how you have slandered me, primarily by stating that I allegedly believe that as along as a person only "occasionally" commits murder or adultery then he can go to heaven. That is what you claim I believe, and I don't. I have repeatedly proven that and you know it and so does everyone who has read our correspondence. Yet your slander remains on your website, and you even accuse me of slandering you!
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.
That is what I teach, because the Bible does not teach that the Holy Spirit abandons a Christian who commits adultery. Only you teach that. Everyone reading this would love for you to show us one scripture that states that a Christian who commits adultery (or even lust, as you teach) instantly forfeits the Holy Spirit, sonship in Christ, and dies spiritually. I have never accused you of slandering me in this regard.
● The Christian who turns to adultery places his salvation only in jeopardy.
I have clearly stated that a Christian who commits adultery who dies unrepentant will not inherit God's kingdom. If he repents, he is forgiven, and he will inherit God's kingdom. What is amazing is that you believe both of those things as well, yet you find fault with me and slander me about it! In your theology, the Christian who commits adultery places his ultimate salvation in jeopardy only if he doesn't repent before he dies. As long as he repents, he has nothing to fear. How is my teaching a "license for immorality" but yours is not? You are two very amusing people.
The only difference between my teaching and your teaching is that you go beyond what the Bible teaches, claiming that the instant a Christian lusts, he dies spiritually and the Holy Spirit leaves him, a teaching for which you have no scriptural support. And you are too proud to admit that.
● 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.
Psalm 51:0 states. "For the choir director. A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came to him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba." So there is the context, according to the Bible. It was when Nathan confronted him that David repented, and Psalm 51 is David's prayer of confession, where he asked God "to blot out his transgression" (Psalm 51:1), and "cleanse him form his sin" (Psalm 51:2). It was during that prayer that he asked God not to take away the Holy Spirit from him. How do I ignore the context? It seems that you are ignoring the context.
● No scripture states King David forfeited his salvation during his time in adultery and murder.
That is what I teach because it is true. All of us are still waiting for you to show us a scripture that states that King David forfeited his salvation then. You haven't produced one yet.
You teach adultery will only place a Christian’s salvation in jeopardy, but not bring forth spiritual death with one act. You seem unaware that David had already been forgiven by the point of 2 Sam. 12:13.
I teach that adultery places a Christian's ultimate salvation in jeopardy if he doesn't repent, because that is what the Bible teaches. "No adulterers will inherit (future tense) the kingdom of God." In 2 Sam. 12:13, David admits to Nathan for the first time, right after he was confronted by Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Then Nathan immediately stated, "The Lord also has taken away your sin; you shall not die." David was immediately forgiven as he confessed his sin. If from what Nathan said to David after his confession you extract the incredible idea that David had before that point already been forgiven, before his confession, you are pathetic Bible expositors, and it shows how desperate you are to protect your unique and fringe doctrine. And as I already stated, if you place Psalm 51 as written by David just after the point when he was confronted by Nathan, as the Bible does (Psalm 51:0), then it is quite clear that David believed that the Holy Spirit was still with him, since he prayed for the God not to take away His Holy Spirit from Him.
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, all of this debate about what exactly happens to a Christian who commits adultery seems rather silly in light of the fact that both of you are promoting pornography through your investment of ministry funds in the "Prudent Bear Fund" and "Prudent Bear Safe Harbor Fund," thus investing in Comcast and Time Warner. Who are you to condemn others for their immorality in light of yours?
Sincerely and in Christ,
Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner finally replied on November 5 with one sentence. That email is posted below in blue along with my reply in black.
Email received from Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner on November 5, 2009:
Serpent, do NOT send your TRASH here!
My Reply to Dan Corner on November 5, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner,
May God bless you.
Your long-awaited reply is the final proof to our readers of your true character and motivation. All of us sympathize with you, knowing how embarrassingly painful it would be for you to address the actual issues that I've tried to discuss with you, or answer my questions that you have continually ignored, or explain to us why you invest so much of the contributions that are given to your ministry in companies that produce and distribute pornography, not to mention the investment in silver coins. It must feel good to be able to ignore all those things simply by calling me "Serpent."
I will continue to monitor your website to watch for any future misrepresentations of my teaching or slanderous statements, and I will continue to post my responses at my website. I will soon be exposing your true character to my entire email list. And I want you to know that I will be praying for you and patiently waiting for your sincere repentance. If you ever want to apologize for your sin against me and discuss the steps necessary for a public apology on your part, just give me a call. I will be willing to even come to your deathbed if you decide to wait until then.
Sincerely in Christ,
Dan Corner's reply of November 5, 2009:
David Serpent, you are a FRAUD and your doctrine is demonic. Your double stand Again, SEND NO MORE TRASH HERE. For you to say "God bless you" to me E. For you to say "God bless you" to me is a viper telling a Christian, who refutes him, those words only to deceive those you hope will read your email. NO MORE TRASH!
My Reply to Dan Corner on November 5, 2009:
Dear Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner,
Again you reveal your true character for all of our readers to see, but to an even greater degree. From the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.
And you are wrong yet again in regard to my reason for blessing you. Jesus commands me to bless those who curse me. When you cursed me, calling me a serpent, I obeyed Jesus and blessed you. And since you have cursed me again, may God bless you again!
Following a different Jesus than both of you,
On April 19, 2010, it was brought to my attention that Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner had written yet another article about me and posted it on their website, an article titled "David Servant or David Serpent?" Below is that article in its entirety (in blue letters) and my response (in black letters). Their article reveals that Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner have been taking some heat after I revealed in my correspondence with them that I had discovered that they had been using donations given to their ministry to speculate in the stock market and invest in pornography. Their defense makes for interesting reading.
Dear Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner,
Once again it has been brought to my attention that you have posted yet another article on your website about me, titled "David Servant or David Serpent?" A Google search now reveals that my name is found on your website about thirty-five times. I appreciate the fact that you continue to drive people to our website to investigate the truth as they read there all of the correspondence that we've had over the past year. Your most recent article is sure to drive many more people to our website. Thanks again.
As I have been doing with all our correspondence ever since you challenged me to a debate, your most recent article is now posted in its entirety on Heaven's Family's website along with my response. I continue to wait for you, who challenged me to a debate, to do the same, posting all our correspondence on your website, rather than just a few tiny pieces that distort the truth in your favor.
You will find my response to your article, "David Servant or David Serpent" within your article below in black letters. I have highlighted your words in blue.
It is of course true that "David Servant" is an obvious pseudonym (as most intelligent people immediately assume the very first time they read it) that I use for safety reasons and ministry purposes. I don't know how you have determined that it is a "self-exalting name," especially since you describe yourself (in your paid advertisement on Google Search) as a "Christian evangelist, God's servant, Arminian-holiness apologist, author." If it is self-exalting to refer oneself as a servant, then you are exalting yourself, and you are a hypocrite to condemn someone else for doing exactly what you do.
These days, when someone like me travels into restricted nations, those who decided whether or not to grant me an entry visa often Google my name to see what they might find out about me. So when foreign officials Google my real name, which is in my passport, they won't discover the reason that I am applying for a visa to enter their countries. And it is true that in one particular nation, there are certain people who would want to kill me if they knew I was coming. We are working to build God's kingdom in many nations, including many restricted nations.
One thing is certainly true, however, that you have alluded to in your first paragraph, and that is that I'm not a hero. I am just a sinner saved by grace and an unprofitable servant (Luke 17:10).
And as anyone knows who has read all of our correspondence which I have posted at www.heavensfamily.org/ss/dan_corner_debate.htm, I have not slandered you and your wife at all. I have simply replied to your articles against me, exposing your deceitfulness and slander, and I have exposed the undeniable fact of your investing ministry funds in porn, which you yourself prove is true in the very article to which I am now responding---as all our readers will soon see for themselves.
It seems that I have now been officially labeled by you as "David Serpent." In light of the danger of hell of which Jesus spoke regarding those who do nothing more than call their brother a fool (see Matt. 5:22), I wonder if you should be at all concerned about renaming a follower of Christ "David Serpent"?
Concerning your alleged expose' and refutation of my doctrine, everyone who has read our correspondence posted at www.heavensfamily.org/ss/dan_corner_debate.htm knows that you have only exposed the error of your own strange and unique doctrine. No one else in the entire world believes, for example, that when a Christian lusts one time that he instantly dies spiritually, forfeits the indwelling Holy Spirit, and sonship in Christ. Only you two hold to that unique and unscriptural doctrine.
Moreover, I have never implied that "Evangelical Outreach (EO) illegally submitted and withheld information about ministry funds from the authorities and they just let it pass by." Rather, I questioned why Evangelical Outreach has not submitted 990 Forms since 2004, as submitting 990 Forms is required annually of all non-profits except churches. As you know, 990 Forms are public documents open for the public's view. Where are your 2005 - 2009 990 forms? Do you have something to hide? If not, then I challenge you to post them on your website. Or mail them to me, as is required by law of anyone who requests them of you. I'm requesting them now. Will you break the law? (Incidentally, anyone can view the 990 Forms of Heaven's Family on our website here: www.heavensfamily.org/financial-transparency .)
Actually, I simply took a few minutes to visit a website where the 990 Forms of thousands ministries are posted and found the 990 Forms for Evangelical Outreach for 2001 to 2004. And by examining them for a few minutes, I was amazed to discover that you had speculated in the stock market with tens of thousands of dollars contributed to your ministry, betting on a stock market decline, and that you increased your ministry's holdings more each year from 2001 to 2004. You can't deny that you speculated with a large percentage of your ministry income, while misleading donors into thinking that their contributions were being used to promote your teachings. For the sake of our readers, let me state once again what is revealed in your 2001-2004 990 Forms, as I revealed in an email to you last year:
I was even more shocked when I spent another three minutes looking up the top twenty-five stock holdings of the mutual funds in which you had invested ministry funds.
I did not research what companies were being held by those mutual funds in 2001 to 2004, as it seemed very likely that, if your ministry funds were invested in two mutual funds from 2001 to 2004, it would still be doing so in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. As I said (as is quoted above, "The Prudent Bear Fund's current third largest holding is in Comcast.")
You clearly admit that Evangelical Outreach was in the Prudent Bear Fund "6 to 9 year ago." Are you saying that Evangelical Outreach was not invested in the Prudent Bear Fund in 2005? 2006? 2007? 2008? 2009? Yes or no? If no, then prove it to our readers and let us all see your 990 Forms for those years.
What a surprise! Of course Prudent Bear, as any mutual fund, was invested in hundreds of companies. I wrote, "The Prudent Bear Fund and the Prudent Bear Safe Harbor Fund are both mutual funds that are betting on the decline of the stock market, and which have stock holdings in scores of publicly-traded companies."
And so there is the proof for our readers, thanks to your investigation. What I wrote was true to this extent: During the years 2001-2002, the Prudent Bear Mutual Fund was invested in Time Warner. And Evangelical Outreach owned shares during those years of the Prudent Bear Fund. So Evangelical Outreach was invested in porn during those years. End of story.
And I find your statement, "The only one company of all of them which could have any connection to porn was Time Warner!" very interesting. Why don't you post, for all our readers to see, all of the companies that the Prudent Bear Fund was invested in from 2001 to 2004 since you have the list? We will be interested to know all of the companies that Evangelical Outreach was a part owner of during those years.
And again, please post your 2005 through 2009 990 forms for all of us to read as well. We will be very interested to know where you have been investing ministry contributions during those years. If you don't, that proves to all of us that you have things to hide from your ministry's donors.
It was during 2001 to 2002, according to your own words above. And your ministry was invested in the Prudent Bear Fund during those years. And the Prudent Bear Fund was invested in Time Warner then. So your ministry was a part owner of Time Warner in 2001 and 2002.
That is incorrect. It was invested in Time Warner in 2001 and 2002, according to your own research. Every filthy thing that Time Warner did and produced during that time, Evangelical Outreach's donors helped them do, because of the decisions of Evangelical Outreach's board members, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner.
I assumed that Evangelical Outreach was still invested in the Prudent Bear Fund, as well as the other funds that it was invested in 2001 through 2004, which included not only the Prudent Bear Fund, but also the Prudent Bear Safe Harbor Fund, and FISERV. But you can prove me wrong, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner. Just post your 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 990 Forms on your website for all of us to see. If you don't, that proves you have something to hide. And if you took your contributors' donations out of those funds in 2005, please tell us where those funds are invested now. If they are invested in different mutual funds, we'd like to research to find out what companies are now partly owned by Evangelical Outreach. If you don't reveal this, it again proves you have something to hide from your donors.
Also, you have never explained why you were taking such a large percentage of your donors' contributions and using them to speculate in the stock market. At the end of 2004, as reported in your 990 Form, you were holding $63,206 in three mutual funds as well as $7,240 in silver bullion! That amount increased every year from 2001 to 2004 according to your 990 Forms. We can only wonder how much of your donors' contributions have been speculating on a stock market decline since 2004, and what companies Evangelical Outreach is now invested in. Please tell our readers! Unless, of course, you have something to hide.
You are correct that I cannot prove the Prudent Bear Fund was invested in Comcast from 2001 to 2004. But it is now. So Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, is Evangelical Outreach currently invested in the Prudent Bear Fund? Yes or no? Just tell us. And if "no," prove it by posting your 2005 - 2009 990 forms and by telling us what Evangelical Outreach is currently invested in. And what is the dollar amount invested? Then we'll know what companies Evangelical Outreach is part owner of.
No, it is not irrelevant if Evangelical Outreach is currently invested in it.
This is becoming funny. Dan Corner, your own research proves that Evangelical Outreach was invested in porn from 2001-2002 via Time Warner. You admit this in your very next sentence below...
Now it is becoming very funny to all our readers. So just a little investment in porn is OK? As long as keep our investments under 5%, it is OK? I guess you believe that one has to "practice" investing in porn before he has anything to worry about! But that seems to contradict your own theology a little bit!
Again, please tell all of us what companies the Prudent Bear Fund was invested in from 2001 to 2004, since you have the list from your research. I'm sure there will be other companies listed that we'll all find interesting investments for a ministry that claims to promote holiness and righteousness. If you refuse to send that revealing list, it shows that you know that you have something to hide.
Now it has become hilarious. I'm so glad to know that Time Warner was a righteous, God-fearing company from 2001 to 2002! Surely during those years Time Warner, or its subsidiaries HBO, Turner Broadcasting or Warner Brothers, didn't produce or distribute any films that bothered God! Here is a partial listing of films produced by Time Warner's subsidiary, Warner Brothers, during 2001 and 2002 just so you can make a determination about that:
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (PG), Ocean's Eleven (PG-13), The Pledge (R), Valentine (a "slasher" film, rated R), Sweet November (PG-13), 3000 Miles to Graceland (R), Exit Wounds (R), Driven (PG-13), Swordfish (R), A.I. Artificial Intelligence (PG-13), Osmosis Jones (PG-13), American Outlaws (PG-13), Summer Catch (PG-13), Rock Star (R), Hearts in Atlantis (PG-13), Training Day (R), Thirteen Ghosts (R), The Affair of the Necklace (R), Heist (R), A Walk to Remember (PG), Collateral Damage (R), Queen of the Damned (R), Showtime (PG-13), Death to Smoochy (R), Murder by Numbers (R), Insomnia (R), Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood (PG-13), Juwanna Mann (PG-13), Eight Legged Freaks (PG-13), Blood Work (R), The Adventures of Pluto Nash (PG-13), FeardotCom (R), City by the Sea (R), Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever (R), White Oleander (PG-13), Ghost Ship (R), Femme Fatale (R), Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (PG), Analyze That (R), and Two Weeks Notice (PG-13).
And to imagine that Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner helped all the contributors to Evangelical Outreach to invest in those films for the glory of God, as they preach holiness!
Wow, you are really stretching it to use my wife, quoted by myself, out of context by you, as proof that I'm a hypocrite! I'm glad a have a wife who loves me enough to point out my inconsistencies, as I confess I have not reached the perfection that you, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, have attained.
Yes. Absolutely. No doubt about it. Maybe you can enlighten all of us regarding what fraction one has to own of a porn-producing company before that person is a part-owner!
Nice try, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner. Buying stock in a company makes a person a part-owner of that company who profits if the company profits and who does not profit when the company does not profit. Purchasing something from a company does not make a person a part owner in that company.
So I guess we have no choice then but to all invest in a little porn by calling our stock brokers and buying a few shares of Time Warner! Thank you, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner, for helping us all better understand what Paul was trying to say in 1 Corinthians 5:10!
I have only addressed both of you because in your initial correspondence you always spoke of "we," meaning you (Dan Corner) and Cheryl Corner. For example, your August 1 email was signed "Dan & Cheryl." Your August 5 email began with the sentence, "Please do NOT discredit us by misrepresenting our holiness-endurance teachings. Some dishonest people try to do that through suggesting that our message is utter foolishness by saying we teach any sin will cause loss of salvation" (emphasis mine).
Moreover, we all know that Cheryl is your webmaster, and that nothing goes on your website without her. So she is equally responsible before God for what you have put on your website about me and what I allegedly teach and believe. She, like you, will have to answer to God for the deceit and slander.
No, Dan Corner, please tell us why you think my "name change" is "bogus." We'd all be interested in your view.
Repent Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner!
If you are legal with any and all filings, why have you not filed 990 Forms for 2004-2009? If you have, let us all see them! You may be honest followers of the Lord Jesus, but you are the slanderous, deceitful, lying kind who call followers of Christ names like "David Serpent."
And God bless you too, Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner.
Just for the record, I'm going to change all the places in our correspondence at www.heavensfamily.org/ss/dan_corner_debate.htm where it reads "Dan and Cheryl" to read "Dan Corner and Cheryl Corner" so that we get a little better rankings when people search for either of your names on the internet as they search to find my responses to your many slanderous articles.
Praying for you today,