The Grace Proclamator

and Promulgator

"To testify the gospel of the grace of God." Acts 20:24


Bouquets and Brickbats

ALABAMA: After reading your last four issues concerning the restoration of the nation of Israel, I still stand a little bit confused. Would you please explain to me what takes place during the millennial concerning the re-establishment of the law, the rebuilding of the temple, and the establishing of a new covenant?

Editor’s Reply: I am a little confused by the brother’s questions. I do not recall saying anything about the re-establishment of the law during the millennial reign of Christ. If he will tell me the issue of the paper and location where I said the law (I assume he means the law of Moses.) would be re-established, I would be glad to explain what I meant. It has always been my position that the law was taken out of the way and nailed to the cross. Colossians 2:14-15 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. If I remember the teaching of Scripture, Christ fulfilled every jot and title of the Law of Moses. He fulfilled every type and shadow and met every demand and precept. Over the years I have inadvertently said and wrote things I did not mean, and I may have slipped up again. If the brother will cite where I said the Law of Moses with its sacrifices and offerings would be re-established, I will look at what I wrote and deal with it.

Did I ever say the temple would be rebuilt? If I said anything, I probably said it would not be re-built. Again, if the brother will cite the issue and page on which I declared the temple would be rebuilt, I will be glad to address the matter in more detail. The tabernacle and temple were types of Jesus Christ. He is the true tabernacle which God pitched. Hebrews 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. When his blood flowed from his brow, his face, his back, his hands, his feet and his side, the true and heavenly mercy seat was sprinkled for he was the mercy seat typified by the one in the tabernacle and temple. He is the true sanctuary and tabernacle which God himself pitched. Believing as I do on this I find it hard to imagine my writing (and reading, since I proof read what I write) that the temple would be rebuilt during the millennial reign when the One typified by the tabernacle and temple will be reigning. If I did, I would like to know issue and page.

In the holy city, the new Jerusalem, there will be no temple because the true temple is there. Revelation 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. When Christ reigns in his glory on this earth, will not the True Temple be here?

What new covenant did I say would be established during the millennium? Maybe I have slept too many times since I preached that series and then wrote them out for publication, but, for the life of me, I don’t recall saying there would be a new covenant established during the millennial reign. If the brother will please cite page and issue where I said there would be a new covenant established during the millennial reign, I will be glad to address the matter more fully.

I would ask some questions. Why would the law be re-established when he who took it out of the way and nailed it to his cross is ruling and reigning? Why would the temple be rebuilt when he who is the true tabernacle and temple, the true ark and mercy seat, the true shewbread and light, will be present and reigning? Why would a new covenant be established when it has already been established and, when he who is the covenant of his people is ruling and reigning? Isaiah 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles. Isaiah 49:8 Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages. Why establish a new covenant when the living covenant, the one who is the covenant, the one who shed the blood of the everlasting covenant is present bodily and visibly reigning? Christ is our covenant. Christ is the covenant of all the elect, whether they be the saints who are ruling and reining with him or the elect Jews who will be brought into the millennial reign in their natural bodies.

I have not gone back and read the articles since receiving the brother’s questions, but I have no recollection of advancing the ideas that he has called into question. If I did say the law (I assume he refers to the Law of Moses) would be re-established, if I did say the temple would be rebuilt, and if I did say a new covenant would be established, I simply cannot recall doing so. If he will just let me know where I said these things I can put them in perspective or correct the matter forthwith. I look forward to hearing from him with this information.

Editor’s Second Note: I recently heard from this brother who is a Gospel-millennialist in his view of eschatology, and he apologized for inferring in his letter that I had said that I believed the things which he called in question. He admitted that I had not mentioned them and explained, "Since you (Wayne Camp) are a futurist I just assumed you believed these things."

This brother is not the first to assume that I believe things that I do not believe. I have another letter in which a person questions me about believing in infant damnation, a doctrine that I have denied believing many times on these pages. But, the brother who wrote the letter above referred to me as a "futurist." LET ME PLEAD GUILTY TO BEING A "FUTURIST" even though this is the first time I have every been called such. (Please see the article, Confessions of a "Futurist" in this issue.)

CALIFORNIA: I found your Web page on the Internet . . . I always enjoy your paper.

OHIO: I came across your home page while surfing across the Landmark Independent Baptist Church home page. I want you to know I thank the Lord for your church, its faithfulness to the truth and willingness to stand on the truth.

I have heard of your paper before, but have never received it. Could I be added to your mailing list.

TEXAS: I received my first copy of your paper this week. I have finished examining and I appreciate what I read. Thank you so much for adding me to the mailing list. I was very interested in both articles, however, the one on the ABA was of particular interest because that is where my roots are found . . . God bless you and keep up the good work.

NORTHWEST TERRITORY: Just wanted to drop you a line and tell you how much we enjoy The GP&P. Like many others, I suppose, I have been meaning to write a note of appreciation for some time, but just did not until now. We do appreciate The GP&P. I distribute most of the ones you send. Bro. Reti, the preacher recently come to see grace is "first in line" to get his. He is quite a reader! Keep up the good work. THANK YOU for sending them to us.

KANSAS: I have just read April 1, 1996, paper. Please put me on your mailing list.

CALIFORNIA: Just got your paper, (May 1, issue) and read both articles. I hope you will continue your article on The Meaning and Men of Inspiration. I often read or hear of men taking such an extreme position without dealing much with the facts that your brought our or approached.

As to your article on unconditional election it reminded me of an article I read in another paper which took quite a different approach. It also ended up with quite a different conclusion. He approaches the subject by dealing with Calvin rather than Baptists who have always taught unconditional election. One erroneous statement and conclusion he comes to is: When a lost alien sinner accepts Jesus Christ as his personal Saviour, that man becomes one of the chosen-the elect in Jesus Christ. Of course, we can see he completely ignores the doctrine of regeneration and total depravity. He has now made God’s quickening power of a dead sinner dependable upon that dead sinner.

TEXAS: I appreciate your paper and thank you for sending it. May our Lord continue to bless you.

CALIFORNIA: This letter is one of mixed reactions. Some times I am bewildered, confused, amused, entertained, etc. I still don’t know if you all believe babies don’t go to heaven? I know they do! Some times I do laugh with the hidden humor you all put forth. I appreciate the paper being sent to me. I have no money to send (due to the living cost) to pay for the paper. Still you send it and I do appreciate this.

There are 247 kind of Baptist in the World, (I think more). We were not at the meeting of Baptist from all over the world who met in Los Angeles in 1988 as I was told by a Southern Baptist preacher. I am an Independent, Missionary, The, and a number of other Baptist names we have and use as Baptist. Actually I am a saved Baptist and preach for people to repent and seek the Lord until they find Him. I do know about and preach the perpetuity of the Ekklesia GK.

You must understand, there are too many ideas out there, with less for The Christ Idea. I learned one thing in this walk as a Missionary, people "believe what they want" and "do what they want." Only the Holy Spirit changes people. So I am interested if you ask sinners to bow and pray? How long does the sinners pray or to what extent? Does the preacher tell the sinner when to stop, or what? This is a very serious doctrinal point with me as the basis of the foundation.

Please, feel this is a letter of inquiry, not of animosity. Your article in the April 1, 1996, issue was very good and well written on "New Testament Church Certainties". Hope to see you some day.

TEXAS: Dear Brother, I want to express to you my thanks for a recent article that was published in The Baptist Challenge, entitled, "Why? Why? Why?" This is an excellent article, and most timely as we continue to be plagued with the grave errors that you have so eloquently and forcefully addressed. I commend you for the work and I thank God for you and for His use of your keen mind, diligent study, and God honoring humility as you deal with these many issues that you are dealing with constantly in the pages of The Grace Proclamator and Promulgator, as well as in other publications from time to time. Well done, Brother, and may God continue to use you in these fearful times.


I have no desire to be offensive to anyone but I want to point out two common errors some of our brethren make. These are not errors in theology, but in writing. In all humility I offer these corrections:

The plural of Baptist is Baptists. Quite often in print, such as a tract I have on my desk at the moment, Baptist is used for the plural. "Baptist believe in the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures."

A small piece of literature that is used to get out some message is a tract, not a track. I received a piece of mail from a missionary recently in which he reported that they had hand out tracks in a certain city. I jokingly thought, I wonder if they handed out tire tracks, cow tracks, dog tracks, or human tracks, or maybe even railroad tracks. I received a piece of email last week that included a "track" (sic. tract).

We all make errors and I am not talking about typographical errors here. These two errors are consistently and regularly made. There is probably not a week that goes by that I do not see them. Please, if you have made them, accept this in the spirit in which it is written. The Editor.


Return to Index Page for Past Issues of The Grace Proclamator and Promulgator

Send mail to

Last updated on Friday, March 04, 2011

free hit counters
free hit counters