CallingForTruth.org

Approximately between 2006-2009 "Calling for Truth," a daily, live, call-in radio program was co-hosted by Dr. Dean and Kevin Boling every weekday afternoon from 1:00 pm until 2:00 pm EST. Via the use of Internet technologies (this website), the program was made available to audiences throughout the United States and around the world.

Website visitors could enjoy audio archives of the radio programs, Dr. Dean's Blog, along with relevant news stories and views affecting Christians. There were even FREE MP3 Downloads of all the "Calling For Truth" Radio Programs that were available in the Audio Archive Section. When this site's domain expired CallingForTruth.org disappeared from the Internet. However,the Pastor Kevin Boling now has his own website called “Knowing The Truth” also a live, call-in radio program providing Cultural Commentary, Doctrinal Dialog,and Insightful Interviews with some of today’s preeminent Christian leaders and authors. Go to:www.knowingthetruth.org/ for more information.

I always read the News & Views section of the Calling for Truth website.Recently I discovered that the domain for callingfortruth.org was available, so I bought it with the goal of recreating some of its content from archived pages. I definitely didn't want someone else purchasing the domain and re-purposing the site for something that had nothing in common with the original website.

There were lots of great nuggets of wisdom and insights revealed in Dr. Dean's Blogs. However, I did not come across any posts about online gambling sites aimed at US players. Online gambling is becoming increasingly popular. A person can easily find online casinos offering poker, slot machines, roulette, blackjack, and a variety of other table games. But does God view it as moral or immoral? Should a Christian gamble? What does the Bible say? The word "gamble" is not found in the Bible, yet the practice violates Bible principles regardless of the amount of money involved. And now that a person does not have to drive to a brick and mortar casino, but can gamble anywhere via their computer or cell phone, the desire to gamble is even more insidious. In Timothy 6:9,10 - Love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Greed leads to many foolish and hurtful lusts, and many sorrows. If gambling is greed, then Christians should expect to find it associated with all kinds of sin and immorality. As Christians, we should imitate the example of Jesus (1 Corinthians 11:1, Matthew 10:24,25, 1 Peter 2:21,22). How does gambling harmonize with the example of Jesus and the teaching of His word? I think it is pretty clear.

I have added enough blog content to give a good feel for what the blog area was originally like between 2006-2009. Please be indulgent with this truncated version of CallingForTruth.org.Consider the information on this site for its historical value.

What is Christmas All About?;

Written by Paul Dean
Friday, 15 December 2006

Christmas! It means so many things to different people. For example, WorldNetDaily reports that Senator Patty Murray “rebuffed instructions given last year by Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, that the national tree in front of the U.S. Capitol be referred to as the ‘Capitol Christmas Tree’ after having been called the ‘Capitol Holiday Tree’ since the 1990s. During the lighting ceremony, the senator from the tree's home state never used the word ‘Christmas’ in her speech to the assembled crowd, opting instead for the term ‘holiday tree’ twice.”

Friends had attended the lighting ceremony. It was a chilly evening. Many people were there with young children. Someone commented about the number of Northface jackets that were evident including the prelavence of comfortable North Face products including the best jackets for infants. What a stange observation, but then again perhaps it wasn't since the commentator had just bought a Northface jacket/ bunting for her 9 month old since they were going backpacking in the Maine woods during the Christmas holidays. Yes, folks Northface makes great ultralight bunting for 6 months old and up and great fleece one pieces for new borns and up that can be layered underneath. Great Christmas gifts for those living in the wintery north lands with wee ones. Perfect for little one's when you take them to Christmas eve services. Ah, but I digress.

But, it was her communications director Alex Glass’ answers to questions in the aftermath that were so intriguing: “She was speaking to a crowd, and she said what she said. This is the holiday season, we're just thrilled that the tree is from Washington state. It's just a time to bring everybody together to celebrate the season.” “When asked if there were any objection to calling the tree a ‘Christmas tree,’ she said the senator doesn't have a policy. ‘I think, you know, whatever people want to call it, we are accepting of all of it. It's a time to remember what the season is about.’ And that is? Celebrating, of course. And what are we celebrating? ‘The season,’ Glass said. And what is the season? ‘I'm not going to get into semantics with you guys,’ she said.”

Now, there is a sense in which we can forgive Glass and the senator for not knowing what the season is about. They apparently don’t know Christ and are merely politicians struggling in a politically charged climate. The problem lies in the fact that too many Christians are confused about what the season is about as well. Do we really know and live out the reality that Christmas is about the advent of the promised deliverer? Think about this wonderful verity for just a few minutes as we ground our thoughts in one verse from God’s word: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel (Gen. 3:15).”

First, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would be specially and sublimely a man. He would not be an angel or some other creature, but a man, “for there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5).” The deliverer was to be “her Seed,” the seed of the woman. How sublime is the fulfillment of this promise. Christ Jesus, “being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross (Phil. 2:6-8)”

Second, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would be unique concerning His human nature. He would be the Seed of the woman only and not the Seed of an earthly father. Much debate is centered on the virgin birth of Christ. The fact that Matthew and Luke are clear in their affirmations that Christ was indeed born of a virgin (Matt. 1:23; Lk. 1:27) should stop all debate on this issue. While alma in Isa. 7:14 literally means “young maiden,” not only is the implication of virgin clear in that text but declared with no equivocation in the gospels with the use of the word parthenos, or virgin. But more compelling is the unity of Scripture from Genesis to Isaiah to the gospels and the intent of the prophecies in the Old Testament concerning this wonderful reality. Those with eyes to see understand clearly the Seed of the woman in Genesis to be a clear gospel reference to the nature of Christ’s birth as the sinless One.

Third, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would accomplish His mission through vicarious suffering. The word of the Lord was “you shall bruise His heel.” This statement is the gospel in a phrase! “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit (1 Pet. 3:18).” Christ died as a sinner by way of imputation: our sin imputed to Him. The Just One suffered for guilty sinners. But, because He had no sin of His own, death could not hold Him and three days later He came out of the grave with all power and glory in His hand.

Fourth, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would ultimately defeat sin, Satan, and death. Christ abolished death (2 Tim. 1:10), destroyed the works of the devil (1 Jn. 3:8), and disarmed all principalities and powers, having made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them through the cross (Col. 2:15). These blessed realities are summed up in the promise, “He shall bruise your head.”

Fifth, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would be revealed in His divine nature. If the Seed of the woman was virgin-born with no earthly father, it follows that His origin is special in more than one way. Further, if this One was to suffer for guilty sinners though He had no sin of His own, and if this One was to conquer sin, death, and the powers of darkness, it follows that such a One would have a unique power and nature. One who could atone for sin and defeat Satan, reverse the fall, (and be not only typified in worship but worshipped in the process as we shall see momentarily), could be nothing short of Divine. The deliverer would be God Himself. As noted, He would also be man. Thus, the deliverer is none other than the God-man. “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which is translated, ‘God with us (Matt. 1:23).’” Here the response to Mary’s question, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?" And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God (Lk. 1:35).”

Sixth, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would reconcile His people to the Father. Out of the mass of humanity, Satan’s children, by nature, children of wrath, Christ would redeem a people for Himself (Jn 8:44; Eph. 2:3; Matt. 1:21). The mass of humanity is at enmity with God for the Lord declared “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed.” Of course, this enmity is the result of the first Adam. But, our reconciliation, the fact that “He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel” is the work of the Second Adam on the cross. “Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life (Rom. 5:18).” O how we must preach Christ at Christmas!

Seventh, Christmas is about the promised deliverer who would be typified in worship and worshipped. In this way God has declared fully “the way” and “the who” of our salvation. God has told us what worship of Him is. While the form of worship has changed from the primeval period to the patriarchal period to the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, the essence of worship has not. The essence of worship is the glorification of God though the person and work of Jesus Christ.

In the aftermath of Adam’s sin, it is obvious that men were commanded to worship God by way of sacrificing animals that were consumed wholly upon the altar after the skins had been removed. The skins were to be used for clothing (and not for food as men were not allowed to eat animals until after the flood). The Lord Himself demonstrated such in slaying the first animals and covering our first parents’ nakedness. Subsequently, Cain and Abel were given to the same activity. Cain’s offering of fruit was not accepted because he did not obey God in faith and offer that which had been commanded (Gen. 4:3-7; Heb. 11:4).

Of course, as Adam and Eve covered their own nakedness with fig leaves (Gen. 3:7), the fact that God slew animals and covered them with the skins demonstrated to them that they could never cover their own nakedness or work for their salvation, but that God had to cover their nakedness and He had to do so through the sacrifice of His Son and cover their shame with His righteousness by way of imputation. O what blessed gospel truth is here proclaimed!

And, what gospel truth is preserved in the revealed mode of worship given to Adam and his immediate posterity as they had Christ in a figure every time they offered a sacrifice to God! Every time they remembered what God had done and every time they made an offering to the Lord they were hearing and proclaiming “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel (Gen. 3:15).” Every time they worshipped they heard and proclaimed the gospel of Jesus Christ, even as we do the same.

So, let us therefore worship Christ at Christmas and let us put that worship of Him on display. After all, that’s what Christmas is all about: Christ the Lord our promised deliverer

FRAMING DEBATE IN THE CULTURE WAR

Written by Paul Dean

Friday, 16 February 2007

The use of language in argument is an art that secularists have mastered. The general populace and far too many Christians often embrace a godless worldview by virtue of a lack of discernment in this area (which of course is grounded in theological ignorance to a certain degree). For too long, the anti-God crowd has framed debate in the multi-front culture war and in so doing advanced their cause through forcing Christians to fight on enemy ground at worst or on neutral ground at best. In such a war, Christians must never give up ground nor must they fight on neutral or enemy ground through a lack of discernment.

Consider a recent story regarding a survey in connection with how physicians’ religious or moral beliefs affect patients’ care. According to the AP, “A disturbing number of doctors do not feel obligated to tell patients about medical options they oppose morally, such as abortion and teen birth control, and believe they have no duty to refer people elsewhere for such treatments…The study, conducted by University of Chicago researchers, found 86 percent of those responding, believe doctors are obligated to present all treatment options.”

“‘That means that there are a lot of physicians out there who are not, in fact, doing the right thing,’ said David Magnus, director of Stanford University's Center for Biomedical Ethics. ‘Conscientious objection is fine…as long as it doesn't conflict with the rights of the patient,’ Magnus said. ‘You can't abandon the patient or essentially coerce the patient by saying you won't do the procedure or refer them to someone else.’”

“Overall, 52 percent said they oppose abortion, 42 percent opposed prescribing birth control to 14- to 16-year-olds without parental approval, and 17 percent objected to sedating patients near death.” Serious issues are involved here, not the least of which is language.

First, referring to abortion or the morning after pill as “treatment options” frames the debate in biased terms. Treatment generally presupposes that something is wrong with a person; that illness has struck or some kind of accident has occurred. Pregnancy in and of itself is not and illness, malady, or dysfunction. The use of such language blunts the reality of the subject matter and facilitates the notion that the killing of unborn children is nothing more than a routine medical procedure with no ethical implications whatsoever.

Second, such language denigrates the essential dignity that is inherent to human beings and puts them on the same plane with animals or even excess tissue that is to be discarded. If human beings are not created in the image of God, if they have no essential dignity by virtue of that fact, and if they are no different than the animals, then the issue of ethics itself will cease to have meaning. No one sees a lion killing a gazelle for food as an ethical issue. The taking of human life in any context can then become a “treatment option” as human life in general has no more value than animal life.

Third, in light of the foregoing, to charge a doctor with being unethical because he/she will not perform an abortion, is not only meaningless in terms of the secularists’ worldview, but, it is hypocritical. If ethics are meaningless on an evolutionary or naturalist worldview, then the naturalist cannot level the charge of unethical. The language of ethics simply becomes artillery in the debate.

Fourth, the imposition of the larger medical community’s ethic upon all, is not only meaningless and hypocritical, but it is just that: impositional, that is, coercive. It is a violation of the individual’s liberty of conscience, a cardinal value that Americans have held dear for over two-hundred years. Thus, to refer to a doctor as coercive because he won’t do a procedure is, once again, linguistic sophistry. (A patient can always get a second opinion or go elsewhere).

Fifth, in connection with the above, to speak of the rights of the patient is also out of bounds. What about the unborn child’s rights? What about the doctor’s rights?

Sixth, the use of phraseology like “abandon the patient” simply because a particular doctor won’t perform an abortion is both disingenuous and inflammatory. Even the title of the article is devious: “Doctors’ Personal Beliefs Can Hinder Care.” How about the opening line of the piece: “A disturbing number of doctors?” Further, calling it unethical to refuse to prescribe birth control to underage girls without parental consent stands the definition of honesty on its head.

Again, a little discernment is needed when we look at how secularists frame the debate. Let us not abandon doctors, patients, and indeed the secularists themselves by abandoning our responsibility to be both theologically informed and literate that we might not only discern the fallacies the enemy foists upon us but that we might actually frame the debate with truth.

The Authority of Scripture in a Culture of Compromise

Written by Paul Dean
Friday, 13 November 2009

Compromise of any sort begins with an assault on the truth. Relativism is but one weapon that pounds away, day after day, on the notion of absolutes. As America’s new religion has been dubbed by some as “Moralistic Therapeutic Deism” one understands that for most people, God is a nice idea but He’s not someone they want to be bothered with on a regular basis. Of course, when there is no God, or when we can’t be bothered with God, there is no truth; when there is no truth, there is no authority – but oneself. Perhaps the single most destructive source of compromise in our culture is the marginalization and/or rejection of the authority of Scripture – not by unbelievers but by professing Christians.

Yet, all is not lost. The church still has her calling, message, and Lord who is in fact building that church. Three affirmations come to mind here.

First, in a culture of compromise, it is the authority of Scripture that is rejected by evil men who are deceived. We must never forget that one’s commitment to the authority of Scripture for his life is a spiritual issue. The true believer is one who is increasingly committed to God’s will as given through the Scriptures while the unbeliever is one who increasingly rejects the truth and its authority. Paul says to Timothy, “But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived (2 Tim. 3:13).” The issue is not intellectual or rational. People without Christ are deceived. They cannot understand the things of God apart from the work of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 2:14). No one can be forced, enticed, or even manipulated into embracing the Bible’s authority. The issue is spiritual and God alone can cause submission. Of course, when we believers reject Scriptural authority from time to time, and we do, we are mimicking those who are deceived. We must be confronted with this staggering reality often.

Second, in a culture of compromise, it is the authority of Scripture that is our only rule for faith and practice. In other words, what we are to believe and what we are to do in any circumstance is revealed to us in God’s Word. With reference to what we believe, Paul declares that it is the Scriptures that are “are able to make [us] wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus (2 Tim. 3:15).” It is from the Scriptures we get our doctrine (2 Tim. 3:16). This principle relates to what we believe about ultimate reality, politics, ethics, relationships, and so forth. In terms of what we do, Paul asserts that it is the Scriptures that are “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17).” This principle relates to what we do in terms of our attitudes, actions, vocation, the way we treat others, our worship, or even the way we carry out the work of the church in ministry or evangelism for example. We must search the Scriptures daily to get our doctrine. We must be reproved, corrected, and instructed constantly by the Scriptures. Only then will the Scriptures be our practical authority. Otherwise, all we will be doing is paying lip service; and that is hypocrisy.

Third, in a culture of compromise, because it is the authority of Scripture that is rejected by evil men who are deceived; while at the same time, it is the authority of Scripture that is our only rule for faith and practice; it is the authority of Scripture that is underneath the Lord’s solemn charge to us. That charge is straightforward: “Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching (2 Tim. 4:2).” We are to preach the Word whether it is popular or not; whether it is received or not; whether people like it or not. It is authoritative. And, it is the Word that God uses to change the hearts and minds of guilty sinners. We must not ourselves reject the authority of Scripture when it comes to our method of evangelism. Sinners cannot and will not be saved by fleshly means. Further, our culture cannot and will not be changed by fleshly means. We are in a spiritual battle and the weapons of are warfare are not carnal (2 Cor. 10:4). God Himself commands: “’And he who has my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat?’ says the LORD. ‘Is not my word like a fire? says the LORD, ‘And like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?’” This command affirms both that which we are supposed to do (preach the Word) and why we are to do so (it is the Word that breaks the rock in pieces). The Lord Himself says we must preach the Word.

Every now and then someone asks me what the vision of our church is. I usually say, “What do you mean,” when I know exactly what they mean. They want to know how we are going to go about building the church. Because the Scripture is my authority, I simply say, “Preach the Word; no compromise.” If the church doesn’t get hold of this reality, we will continue to lose our savor and be trampled upon by men in this culture (Matt. 5:13). On the other hand, if we do get hold of it, the fortresses of this culture will crumble before our God.

Obama’s School Talk: Should Christians Really be Concerned?

Written by Paul Dean
Monday, 07 September 2009

Scores of Christians and conservatives are denouncing President Obama’s announced speech to children in schools across the country tomorrow. Notables like Michelle Malkin are concerned with subversive activism. Republicans are accusing the President of imposing a political agenda on the nation’s children. Other conservatives see the move as socialist indoctrination. Of course, references to certain dictators’ propagandizing of children abound. Numerous parents intend to keep their children home tomorrow.

On the one hand, I certainly have some concerns of my own with the current administration, the direction of the country, and the increasing intrusion of government into our lives, including the speech tomorrow. At the same time, Christians who have children in public school ought to keep at least four critical thoughts intermingling here.

First, is the President’s speech not an opportunity for you to not only give your child the tools of critical analysis as you dissect it, but, is it not also an opportunity for you to train your child to engage with his friends and/or teachers? There will be discussion in the class room about the speech. Opinions will be offered. What better way for your child to really be salt and light than to offer an informed, timely, winsome, biblical response? If you and your children are going to engage the culture, you must be in the culture, not stay home that day.

Second, what do you expect? Is it really a surprise to you that government officials want to have influence over your children? Just today I received a phone message from one of our state senators who is also concerned about the speech from the President and is promising to promote legislation to “protect our schools from becoming propaganda tools.” While I do appreciate his sentiment, my first thought was, “You’re kidding right?” Is that not what they already are in so many ways? While you as a Christian parent can choose to send your children to a public school for a number of valid reasons, you should not do so with your eyes closed. The worldview being put forth in your child’s school is opposed to the worldview given by the Scriptures. This dynamic goes beyond the science class and affects everything that is taught. If God is not the foundation for what your children are taught, then they are getting a view that is opposed to God. Pluralistic indoctrination need not be directly taught, though it is, to set forth a worldview that is unbiblical. There is no such thing as neutral ground. Either the foundation of what is taught assumes the reality of God or denies Him. You need to understand that your child is being indoctrinated into a secular worldview each and every day. That being the case, why does it surprise you the President wants to address your children?

Third, the fact that your child is being taught something contrary to the Scriptures on a regular basis simply magnifies your need to intentionally influence his thinking. You need to teach the Bible to your child on a daily basis and apply it to his heart. It is not just a matter of information but devotion. You want your child to be devoted to Christ. Moreover, you need to engage in worldview dialogue with your little one or teenager constantly. Every message you hear flows from a particular worldview. When the news anchor talks about the “innocent slaughter of trees” you know he is coming from a different worldview than you. That comment provides you with a teaching moment. Talk to your kids and talk to them often about how to look at the world through the lens of Scripture. A review of what they learn at school would be a great place to start.

Fourth, you won’t change what the government does by political pressure of any kind. Sure, you will gain some ground here and there but it will be temporary and temporal in effect. In other words, it will pass when the next group gets their way by getting out the vote and the impact you have will be earthly. It will be what you want as opposed to what others want and of little, if any, eternal value since it will be the result of political action and not the result of God doing a work in the hearts of people. You should be engaged in the political arena if God has called you to that. You should have a say as to what goes on in your child’s school. But, just remember, the direction of our government and culture is a reflection of the ideas and attitudes that dominate our culture. Only when hearts are changed and the Christian worldview gains ascendency in our culture again will we see real change at any (and every) level of society. Use spiritual weapons (2 Cor. 10:4-5) and faithfully live out the calling God has given you, whatever it is.

More Background On CallingForTruth.org

CallingForTruth.org is a historically significant Christian broadcasting website associated with Calling for Truth, a live, call-in radio program that combined biblical teaching, theological discussion, cultural commentary, and interviews with Christian authors and religious leaders. Particularly active between approximately 2006 and 2009, the program was closely associated with Dr. Paul Dean and Kevin Boling, who used traditional radio broadcasting and emerging internet technologies to reach listeners interested in examining contemporary issues through a conservative Christian worldview.

Unlike websites devoted exclusively to sermons or religious announcements, CallingForTruth.org offered a combination of live programming, downloadable audio recordings, written commentary, news analysis, and discussions of controversial social issues. Its subject matter ranged from biblical doctrine and Christian parenting to politics, public education, popular entertainment, religious liberty, and debates within evangelical Christianity. The website provided a place where listeners could continue exploring the ideas introduced during broadcasts, revisit previous discussions, and examine how biblical teachings might apply to everyday life.

The original broadcasting operation belonged to an important period in the development of internet-based Christian media. Radio remained a familiar medium for religious teaching, but websites increasingly allowed broadcasters to distribute recordings beyond the geographical reach of individual stations. CallingForTruth.org participated in this transition by making programs available online and providing free MP3 downloads. Although the original website eventually disappeared following the expiration of its domain registration, the domain was subsequently acquired by an individual interested in preserving its historical content. The resulting website serves primarily as a retrospective resource rather than a continuation of the original live broadcast.

Origins and History of Calling for Truth

Calling for Truth developed during the mid-2000s, when American evangelical broadcasters were increasingly using websites to supplement conventional radio programming. Its historical material identifies approximately 2006 through 2009 as the program's principal period of activity, although the precise date of its first broadcast has not been independently established. During these years, the program addressed religious and cultural questions that were especially prominent among conservative Protestant audiences, including the authority of Scripture, the relationship between Christianity and public life, theological controversies, and the responsibilities of Christian families.

A particularly valuable independent historical record comes from Christian publisher Shepherd Press. On August 21, 2009, author Jay Younts announced that he would serve as a guest host for Dr. Paul Dean on Calling for Truth, interviewing Christian parenting author Tedd Tripp. The announcement identified WLFJ AM 660 in Greenville, South Carolina, as the broadcasting station and explained that the interview would subsequently be available through CallingForTruth.org. This contemporary account independently confirms the program's existence, its association with Dean, its South Carolina broadcasting connection, and the website's role in distributing recorded programs.

The original website was therefore more than a collection of religious essays. It was an extension of an active broadcasting operation with scheduled programming, identifiable hosts, guest interviews, and an audience that could participate through the call-in format. Historical descriptions generally identify a weekday afternoon broadcast running from 1:00 to 2:00 p.m. Eastern, although some surviving material describes Dr. Dean's live appearances on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. These descriptions may reflect different scheduling arrangements during the program's history. Without a complete collection of original station schedules, it would be premature to assume that the broadcast followed one unchanging timetable throughout its existence.

By 2009, Calling for Truth had accumulated a body of material reflecting several years of religious discussion and commentary. Its website made selected programs and written articles available to people unable to listen during the original broadcast. This arrangement was particularly useful for listeners outside the Greenville broadcast area, including those in other parts of the United States and potentially overseas. The surviving material demonstrates that the program remained active in August 2009, while the exact circumstances and date of its eventual discontinuation are less clearly documented.

Dr. Paul Dean and Kevin Boling: The Voices Behind the Program

Dr. Paul Dean was one of the principal personalities associated with Calling for Truth. Identified in the historical website material as a pastor, author, and cultural commentator, Dean approached public issues through a theological framework emphasizing biblical authority, Christian discipleship, and the relationship between religious conviction and everyday conduct. His contributions extended beyond live broadcasting into written articles that offered detailed interpretations of Scripture and commentary on contemporary events.

Dean's writings reveal a consistent interest in applying biblical teaching to matters that might otherwise be considered primarily political, educational, or cultural. His discussions of public education, medical ethics, Christmas observances, and theological compromise demonstrate an approach in which religious beliefs were not confined to church activities but understood as principles relevant to all areas of life. He also promoted a Christian worldview newsletter called The Dean's List and a book titled Disciple Like Jesus for Parents, reflecting his interest in family discipleship and religious education.

Kevin Boling was another important figure in the program's history. His association with Calling for Truth connects the original broadcasts to later Christian radio and internet ministries, particularly Knowing the Truth. Boling's subsequent work continued the combination of doctrinal discussion, cultural commentary, and interviews with Christian writers that characterized the earlier program.

Independent evidence of Boling's continuing broadcasting and ministry activity appears through SermonAudio, which identifies him with Mountain Bridge Bible Fellowship in the Greenville, South Carolina, area. The ministry's profile explains that many of its earlier recordings came from the Knowing the Truth radio program, while more recent recordings primarily document church worship services. The profile contains thousands of sermon and broadcast recordings, illustrating the substantial body of audio material associated with Boling's later ministry. Those recordings should not, however, be confused with an archive consisting entirely of original Calling for Truth episodes.

Location, Broadcasting Area, and Geographic Reach

Calling for Truth had a documented broadcasting connection to Greenville, South Carolina, a city in the Upstate region near the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Greenville is part of a larger regional population center that includes neighboring communities such as Greer, Simpsonville, Travelers Rest, and Spartanburg. The city's substantial church community and religious broadcasting traditions provided a relevant environment for a program devoted to evangelical Christian teaching and public discussion.

The independent 2009 Shepherd Press announcement identifies WLFJ AM 660 as the station carrying Calling for Truth. This establishes a specific connection between the program and the Greenville radio market. However, it does not establish the location of every studio used by the program, the full geographical extent of its terrestrial radio signal, or whether additional stations carried the broadcasts at other times.

The internet component greatly expanded the program's potential reach. Listeners who lived beyond the reception area of WLFJ could access the website, follow its written commentary, and obtain recordings of earlier broadcasts. This distinction between a regional radio presence and a potentially international online audience was one of the defining features of the website.

Boling's later ministry provides another geographical connection to the region. SermonAudio identifies Mountain Bridge Bible Fellowship with Travelers Rest, South Carolina, north of Greenville and close to the Blue Ridge foothills. Its current ministry activities should be understood as part of Boling's subsequent work rather than evidence that the original Calling for Truth broadcast originated from that particular church location.

Church Affiliations, Ministry Ownership, and Organizational Background

Original broadcast recordings provide more specific information about the organizational structure behind Calling for Truth. Introductions preserved in SermonAudio recordings identify the program as an outreach ministry of Providence Baptist Church in Greer, South Carolina, and Mountain Bridge Bible Fellowship in Travelers Rest. This is an important distinction because the broadcast was not merely an independent commentary project associated with two personalities. It had identifiable connections to local congregations that supported its religious mission.

A July 24, 2006, recording titled Ecclesiastical Separation identifies Providence Baptist Church at 2020 Gibbs Shoals Road in Greer and Mountain Bridge Bible Fellowship along Highway 25 in Travelers Rest. The recording also provides the CallingForTruth.org address and describes the broadcast as a place for biblically informed discussion. These details establish a church-supported broadcasting identity and show that the program was active by July 2006. Another recording, Together for Adoption, dated May 29, 2008, repeats the ministry affiliations, demonstrating continuity over a substantial portion of the program's documented history.

The distinction between ministry sponsorship and domain ownership is important. The original radio operation was publicly associated with these churches, but the available evidence does not establish the precise legal ownership of the original domain, the contractual arrangements with the radio station, or the financial responsibilities of each participating congregation. The modern website explains that the domain eventually expired and was later purchased by someone who appreciated the original material and wanted to reconstruct portions of the website. That individual is not clearly identified in the available historical account, and there is no verified basis for assuming that the present domain owner is the original broadcaster or either of the sponsoring churches.

Radio Format, Listener Participation, and Online Audio Archives

One of Calling for Truth's defining characteristics was its live call-in format. Rather than presenting every program as an uninterrupted sermon, the hosts encouraged listeners to ask questions, offer comments, and participate in discussions about religious and cultural issues. Historical recordings demonstrate this approach, including conversations in which callers raised questions about church membership, denominational separation, and the interpretation of Scripture.

The broadcast's toll-free participation number was 1-888-660-9535, corresponding to the station's WLFJ identification. Contemporary announcements encouraged listeners to call during the afternoon program, and surviving recordings show that the hosts incorporated audience participation into their discussions. This format helped create a sense of community among listeners who shared theological interests but might attend different churches or live in different communities.

The website complemented the live broadcasts through an audio archive that made previously aired material available for later listening. MP3 downloads were particularly important in the mid-2000s because podcast distribution and streaming technology had not yet reached their present level of convenience. A listener could download a program, save it to a computer or portable music player, and revisit the discussion without needing to be available at the original broadcast time. The recordings also made it possible for listeners to share discussions with friends, family members, Bible study groups, and fellow church members.

Independent evidence of this distribution model appears in a January 2008 announcement by Christian blogger Timmy Brister, who described the program's daily afternoon schedule, regional radio coverage, live internet stream, and downloadable audio archives. Brister also referenced the program's SermonAudio presence. This confirms that Calling for Truth was using multiple distribution channels during its active years rather than depending exclusively on its own website.

Notable Broadcasts, Guest Interviews, and Program Topics

The surviving program history demonstrates an unusually broad range of subjects for a local Christian talk show. In addition to conventional biblical teaching, Calling for Truth addressed books, movies, public controversies, church governance, parenting, and religious movements. Its guest interviews brought authors and ministry leaders into conversations that connected their published work with questions from listeners.

One notable episode aired on June 8, 2007, featuring Gary Bates of Creation Ministries International and discussing his book Alien Intrusion: UFOs and the Evolution Connection. The program approached reports of unidentified flying objects and extraterrestrial encounters through the perspective of biblical creationism. Rather than treating UFO reports solely as scientific or entertainment subjects, the discussion considered how such claims might relate to Christian beliefs about creation, humanity, and the supernatural.

On June 18, 2007, the program examined the film Evan Almighty and its marketing to Christian audiences. The discussion explored the use of biblical imagery in popular entertainment and questioned how Christians should evaluate commercial films that adapt religious narratives. Another June broadcast featured John A. Younts discussing his book Everyday Talk, which encouraged parents to incorporate conversations about God into ordinary family activities. These subjects illustrate the program's combination of doctrinal analysis and practical guidance for Christian households.

The historical listings also include an interview with pastor and author Mark Dever concerning the central importance of gospel preaching in pastoral ministry. Other featured material included discussions of the Word of Faith movement, criticism of the self-help film The Secret, and an interview with Joe Dallas concerning theological debates over homosexuality. A program involving Woodrow Kroll, associated with Back to the Bible, examined declining biblical literacy and the challenge of encouraging Christians to engage more seriously with Scripture.

The May 29, 2008, broadcast Together for Adoption provides another independently preserved example of the program's subject matter. Its discussion addressed adoption as a theological and practical concern, connecting the Christian understanding of adoption by God with the responsibilities of families and churches. The recording runs approximately 55 minutes and remains identifiable through SermonAudio's historical catalog.

The Puritan Reading Challenge and Engagement with Christian Literature

Calling for Truth also participated in a distinctive religious reading initiative known as the 2008 Puritan Reading Challenge. The project encouraged participants to read classic Puritan Christian literature and discuss its theological and devotional significance. Christian blogger Timmy Brister documented the program's involvement in January 2008, explaining that he had been invited to participate in recurring discussions with Paul Dean and Kevin Boling.

The January 30 discussion was scheduled to focus on The Bruised Reed by seventeenth-century English theologian Richard Sibbes. Sibbes's work explores spiritual weakness, divine compassion, and the Christian understanding of Christ's treatment of struggling believers. By bringing such a text into a live radio conversation, Calling for Truth connected historical theology with contemporary Christian experience and made older religious literature accessible to listeners who might otherwise never encounter it.

The initiative continued into the spring. In an April 1, 2008, announcement, Brister described plans to return to the program to discuss The Godly Man's Picture by Puritan author Thomas Watson. Listeners were encouraged to call and explain how the reading had influenced their thinking or personal religious practice. This approach moved beyond conventional book promotion by inviting an audience to participate in a shared educational exercise.

These collaborations reveal an important aspect of the program's theological identity. Calling for Truth was interested not only in responding to current controversies but also in introducing its audience to the history of Protestant thought, especially literature associated with Reformed and Puritan traditions. Its participation in the reading challenge placed the broadcast within a broader network of evangelical bloggers, pastors, authors, and readers who were using the internet to revive interest in historic theological writings.

Dr. Dean's Blog and the Website's Written Commentary

Dr. Dean's Blog was another major component of CallingForTruth.org. It allowed the broadcaster to develop arguments in greater detail than might be practical during a live radio discussion. The surviving articles provide insight into the theological assumptions and cultural concerns that shaped the program, particularly the conviction that Scripture should guide Christian responses to political, educational, and moral questions.

A December 15, 2006, article titled What Is Christmas All About? examined the religious meaning of Christmas against the background of public controversies surrounding seasonal terminology. Dean used debate over references to Christmas trees and holiday trees as an introduction to a longer theological explanation of the birth, identity, suffering, and redemptive mission of Jesus Christ. The article illustrates his tendency to begin with a contemporary news story before moving into biblical exposition.

In Framing Debate in the Culture War, dated February 16, 2007, Dean discussed how language influences public arguments over medical ethics and religious conscience. He questioned terminology used in debates about abortion and physicians' obligations, arguing that the framing of public controversies can influence how people understand their moral implications. The essay is representative of a conservative Christian approach to cultural analysis that emphasizes the relationship between language, ethical assumptions, and theological beliefs. Its arguments reflect the author's religious position rather than a neutral assessment of the medical or legal questions involved.

Another substantial article, The Authority of Scripture in a Culture of Compromise, dated November 13, 2009, examined what Dean regarded as the weakening of biblical authority within contemporary Christianity. He argued that Scripture should remain the governing standard for religious doctrine, personal conduct, church ministry, and evangelism. His discussion emphasized the importance of preaching, theological consistency, and resistance to cultural pressures that might alter traditional Christian teaching.

The September 7, 2009, article Obama's School Talk: Should Christians Really Be Concerned? addressed controversy surrounding President Barack Obama's planned address to American schoolchildren. Although Dean expressed concerns about government influence and public education, he also challenged the idea that Christian parents should simply keep their children home to avoid exposure to opposing viewpoints. Instead, he encouraged parents to use the event as an opportunity to teach critical analysis and discuss competing worldviews. This example shows that the site's commentary did not always follow the most confrontational response available within conservative political circles; it could also emphasize education, discussion, and religious engagement.

News and Views: Christianity, Politics, and American Culture

The website's News and Views material reflected the broader ambitions of Calling for Truth. Its purpose was not simply to report current events but to interpret them from a particular theological perspective. Subjects such as government policy, religious liberty, entertainment, education, and the changing role of Christianity in public life were treated as questions requiring biblical reflection. This approach appealed to an audience interested in connecting personal faith with the wider cultural environment.

The program operated during a period of significant political and religious debate in the United States. Between 2006 and 2009, controversies surrounding abortion, same-sex relationships, public education, religious expression, and the role of evangelical Christians in politics were prominent in national discussions. Calling for Truth participated in these debates from an explicitly conservative Protestant standpoint, generally emphasizing biblical authority, individual responsibility, and the importance of Christian engagement with society.

The site's commentary was not designed to represent every Christian denomination or theological tradition. Its discussions frequently reflected Reformed theological interests and conservative evangelical interpretations of Scripture. Readers examining the material today should therefore distinguish between the historical value of the arguments and the question of whether those arguments are universally accepted. The website is particularly informative as a record of how one segment of American Protestant Christianity interpreted the cultural controversies of its time.

Audience, Popularity, and Listener Reception

Calling for Truth primarily served Christians interested in biblical teaching, theological discussion, and conservative cultural commentary. Its audience likely included pastors, church members, Christian parents, religious educators, and readers of evangelical literature. The combination of live radio, guest interviews, and downloadable recordings also made the program accessible to people who were not regular listeners to WLFJ but encountered its discussions through religious blogs or recommendations from Christian authors.

Contemporary references demonstrate that the program reached beyond its immediate broadcasting market. Timmy Brister's 2008 announcements described the terrestrial signal as reaching parts of South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee, while internet streaming allowed listeners elsewhere to participate. The Puritan Reading Challenge collaboration also connected the broadcast to an online community of readers and bloggers. These are meaningful indicators of audience engagement, although they do not establish precise listener totals.

Reliable historical figures for the program's ratings, website traffic, monthly downloads, or subscriber numbers have not been identified. It would therefore be misleading to describe Calling for Truth as one of the country's most popular Christian radio programs or assign it an audience size without supporting documentation. Its demonstrated importance lies in its sustained programming, recognizable guests, participation in religious discussions, and preservation through independent recordings and contemporary references.

Formal consumer-style reviews are similarly limited. The website's surviving material includes a favorable listener testimonial praising its discussions of biblical authority and Christianity's representation in popular culture. However, an isolated testimonial cannot establish general audience satisfaction or serve as a substitute for independently collected reviews. The stronger evidence of listener interest comes from the program's collaborations, guest appearances, live call-in format, and continuing availability of historical broadcasts.

Press Coverage, Media Recognition, and Awards

Calling for Truth appears to have received most of its documented exposure through Christian publishing, religious blogging, and ministry-related broadcasting platforms rather than mainstream national news organizations. The Shepherd Press announcement concerning Jay Younts and Tedd Tripp is a particularly useful example because it independently identifies the program, its host, broadcast station, website, and scheduled guest. Brister's contemporary blog posts similarly establish that Calling for Truth was recognized within online evangelical theological circles.

SermonAudio provides another important form of media documentation. Its archived recordings preserve program titles, dates, durations, speakers, and, for some recordings, searchable transcripts. These materials are valuable because they allow researchers to examine actual broadcasts rather than relying entirely on retrospective descriptions. The recordings also establish that the program addressed real callers and maintained identifiable relationships with sponsoring churches.

No independently verified major broadcasting awards, industry nominations, or national media honors specific to CallingForTruth.org were identified during this research. Likewise, the available evidence does not establish substantial coverage by major newspapers or television networks. This absence should not be interpreted as proof that the program lacked influence; rather, its documented visibility was concentrated within a specialized Christian media environment.

The Transition to Knowing the Truth

An important part of the Calling for Truth story is the later broadcasting activity of Kevin Boling. The historical website identifies Knowing the Truth as a subsequent program associated with Boling, continuing an emphasis on doctrinal discussion, cultural commentary, and interviews with Christian leaders and authors.

The relationship between the two programs reflects continuity in personnel and subject matter, but they should not automatically be treated as the same organization. Calling for Truth was associated with Paul Dean, Kevin Boling, and the original church-supported broadcasting operation. Knowing the Truth developed its own identity and accumulated a separate collection of recordings.

SermonAudio's Mountain Bridge Bible Fellowship profile provides evidence of this later ministry. It identifies Kevin Boling as a principal speaker and explains that numerous older recordings originated from Knowing the Truth, while more recent material focuses on congregational worship services. The catalog contains more than 2,700 recordings, although that total includes multiple kinds of ministry content and should not be attributed to Calling for Truth itself.

For people researching the original program, this connection is useful because it offers a way to trace the subsequent broadcasting career of one of its hosts. It also demonstrates how religious media personalities can continue serving audiences through changing program names, church affiliations, and digital platforms.

Domain Expiration, Website Restoration, and Historical Preservation

CallingForTruth.org eventually ceased functioning as the original program's website after its domain registration expired. The current version explains that a former reader discovered the domain was available and purchased it with the intention of preserving some of the site's earlier content. The restoration was motivated, according to that account, by an interest in maintaining the original subject matter rather than allowing the domain to be repurposed for unrelated commercial activities.

This distinction is essential for understanding the website today. The present version is a selective reconstruction, not necessarily an exact reproduction of the original site. It contains historical articles, descriptions of radio programs, and commentary about the earlier broadcasting operation. Some material represents the original period, while other passages reflect the later domain owner's observations. The restored website should therefore be read as a combination of preserved historical content and retrospective interpretation.

The site also contains commentary about gambling and Christian morality, reflecting the later owner's interest in applying biblical principles to modern online activities. Such passages should not automatically be attributed to Dr. Dean or treated as evidence that gambling was a central subject of the original broadcasts. Similarly, occasional commercial references appearing within restored articles require caution because the surviving text does not independently establish that every passage reproduces the original publication exactly.

Historical research can benefit from comparing the restored material with independent recordings, dated blog posts, and archived versions of webpages. The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine is a potentially useful resource for examining earlier layouts, navigation, and published content, although the completeness of its captures varies. Original audio recordings are especially valuable because they preserve the actual voices, discussions, and program introductions associated with the broadcasting operation.

Cultural and Social Significance

Calling for Truth illustrates an important stage in the evolution of American Christian media. Its combination of terrestrial broadcasting, internet streaming, downloadable recordings, and written commentary anticipated the integrated digital distribution model that later became commonplace among churches, religious organizations, and independent commentators.

The program also demonstrates how local religious broadcasting could participate in national conversations. A discussion originating in the Greenville area could address a Hollywood film, a presidential speech, a theological controversy, or a book by a nationally recognized author. Through the internet, that discussion could reach people who had no geographical connection to the broadcasting station or sponsoring churches.

Its participation in the Puritan Reading Challenge is particularly revealing. The program did not simply react to current events; it also sought to connect contemporary listeners with older theological traditions. By discussing authors such as Richard Sibbes and Thomas Watson, Calling for Truth helped bring historical Protestant literature into a modern conversational format.

The program's emphasis on biblical interpretation also makes it a useful historical source for understanding conservative evangelical attitudes during the late 2000s. Its treatment of medical ethics, public education, religious authority, and popular entertainment provides evidence of how certain Christian communities approached questions about the relationship between faith and secular society.

What Visitors Can Learn from CallingForTruth.org Today

For contemporary visitors, CallingForTruth.org is best understood as a historical introduction to a Christian broadcasting project rather than a regularly updated religious news service. Its surviving material provides information about the program's hosts, theological priorities, selected broadcast subjects, and written commentary. Readers interested in the history of evangelical radio can use it to identify important dates, topics, and personalities for further investigation.

The most informative approach is to read the restored articles alongside independently preserved recordings and contemporary announcements. The written material reveals the theological arguments associated with the program, while the audio recordings demonstrate its conversational format, audience participation, and broadcasting identity. Together, these sources provide a more complete understanding of Calling for Truth than either type of material could offer alone.

Although its original period of activity was relatively brief, Calling for Truth left a traceable historical record. Its connection to Greenville-area churches, its interviews with Christian authors, its participation in theological reading initiatives, and its use of early internet audio distribution make it a useful example of regional religious broadcasting with a wider digital reach.

CallingForTruth.org preserves the memory of a Christian radio program that brought biblical teaching, theological debate, cultural analysis, and listener participation together during the late 2000s. Associated with Dr. Paul Dean and Kevin Boling, the original program operated within the Greenville, South Carolina, broadcasting market while using internet streaming and downloadable recordings to extend its reach beyond the region.

Its historical importance is supported by surviving broadcasts, contemporary announcements, identifiable ministry affiliations, and documented collaborations with Christian authors and bloggers. The restored website offers a partial view of that history, while independent archives provide additional evidence of the program's content and operations.

Today, CallingForTruth.org is valuable primarily as a record of an earlier era of Christian digital media. It illustrates how regional broadcasters used emerging technologies to build communities around religious discussion, preserve theological teaching, and engage audiences in debates about faith and public life.

CallingForTruth.org