Proof that the Bible is the Word of God from the Book of Daniel

Dear brethren,

I have revised and expanded an apologetic composition explaining the evidence for the Bible as the Word of God from the predictive prophecies in the book of Daniel.  The occasion for the expansion was my recent debate with Dan Barker of the Freedom From Religion Foundation in conjunction with our church's campus ministry at the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater.  We debated "The Old Testament is mainly fiction, not fact."  Barker was in the affirmative, while I (obviously) took the negative.  (I plan to say more about the debate in a future blog post, Lord willing; the video should be here if you would like to see it shortly after this blog post is published.)  I used the book of Daniel heavily in my presentation.  In any case, if you would like to have more resources defending Scripture as God's Word available for your church, feel free to print out copies of my work and personalize the church information at the end.  Websites are also, of course, free to link to the work.  You can read The Book of Daniel:  Proof that the Bible is the Word of God by clicking here.  To personalize the work for your church, use the webpage here to get a Word document of the (short, c. 80 pages) book.  The outline of the book is as follows:

I. Introduction: Predictive Prophecy as Proof of the Truth of the Bible

II. Does the Book of Daniel Predict the Future? The Prophecies of Daniel Expounded

            A.) Daniel 2 & 7: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome

            B.) Daniel 8 & 11:  Medo-Persia and Greece

            C.) Daniel 9:  The Year and Day of the Messiah’s Coming to Jerusalem under the Romans

III. Has the Text of Daniel been Corrupted?  Evidence for the Preservation of Scripture

1. Did Daniel Write the Book of Daniel? The Authorship of Daniel Defended

            A.) Introduction

            B.) The Book of Daniel’s Own Claims and their Reception

            C.) Early References to the Book of Daniel in Other Works

            D.) Manuscript Evidence Supporting Daniel’s Authorship

            E.) The 6^th Century Hebrew and Aramaic Language of Daniel

            F.) The Knowledge of 6th Century History Supporting an Early Date for Daniel

            G.) Miscellaneous Evidences for the 6th Century Date of Daniel

            H.) Weak Arguments for a Late Maccabean Date for Daniel

1. Unavoidable Predictive Prophecy in Daniel

            A.) Daniel’s Fourth Kingdom: Rome, not Greece

            B.) Daniel’s 70 weeks Prophecy an Unavoidable Prediction

1. Conclusion: The Bible: A Supernatural Book—The Meaning for You

VII. Appendix: A Technical Linguistic Justification of the Translation of Daniel 9:24-27 in the Authorized Version (KJV) and of Related Questions Pertaining to the Coming of Messiah Jesus in A. D. 33.

VIII. Sources for Further Reading and Bibliography

            A.) Recommended Sources for Further Reading

            B.) Bibliography

May the Lord use it to tear down intellectual objections to the Bible and bring sinners to the new birth.

TDR

Against Trump

National Review Online has put together a stream of columns by conservatives against Donald Trump as the Republican candidate for President.  It's worth looking at here.  I'm pretty sure they tried to put together their most influential bunch, because some of them I don't like and others I really do.  All things considered, it's a hefty sampling. They don't tell us who is good.  They don't.  Maybe they don't know.  I guess it's anybody but Trump, but if it isn't Trump, why should someone vote for someone else?  Rubio?  Cruz?  Christie?  Kasich?  Bush?  Carson?

Here is an article from the American Spectator from Reagan White Houser, Jeffrey Lord.  Also look at this moment on Fox with Roger Stone and Charles Hurt.

The other day when the media mocked someone for misusing the Bible, when Trump said "Two Corinthians," which is how you would hear it from someone from Britain, a day later, when there was a bad van crash of Ben Carson staffers, Cruz tweeted.

Heidi and I are lifting up in prayer the @RealBenCarson staffers injured in a car accident in Iowa. By His stripes, we are healed. Is. 53:5.

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 19, 2016

Crickets there for that atrocious use of Isaiah 53:5 and public notice of prayer.  Is it all just funny? Or very, very sad, the pandering?

Destructive Fellowship in Fundamentalism

The New Testament does teach fellowship between churches.   In Acts 15, the Jerusalem and Antioch churches tried to get along.  It was worth it to try.  They got together for the sake of the truth.  I can see the Asian churches collecting money for the Jerusalem church in 1 and 2 Corinthians.  In 3 John, John says that when someone comes traveling through, out of fellowship for the truth a church should take care of him.  The Philippian church sent a gift to Paul.  I see that and believe that.  However, I don't see in many instances today the New Testament emphasis of fellowship, but rather the building of coalitions.  I also witnessed this early in my pastoring.

The truth was so important to Paul that he confronted Peter to his face in a very severe way.  I don't see these first century churches putting up with garbage.  Paul parted ways with John Mark for a time. Every New Testament epistle teaches separation, mirroring the very first Psalm among all the other Old Testament books.  Names are named, associations are discontinued.

When we pray, thy will be done, it's as it is done in heaven, which is also how Jesus performed God's will on earth.  Whatever is built, God builds.  It doesn't come through careful assessment of the smallest common denominator.

We could talk about music, dress, methods, buildings, Bible versions, tithing, Promise Keepers, who has the biggest congregation, or whatever the subject du jour.  Sure.  Fundamentalism started over fundamentals -- its term.  If that is so, and someone is a fundamentalist, one would think that the gospel would figure prominently in consideration in the fellowship.  What does someone believe, what does someone teach on the gospel?

When someone asks me for a recommendation somewhere, it is the first place I look.  What does that church believe about the gospel?  What they profess, write, post, and teach on the gospel says a lot about their thinking about all the other biblical teachings they might hold.  It says a lot about what they think of Jesus.  If someone is wrong about Jesus or at least not contextual with Jesus, giving Him a scriptural representation, should that not trouble a Christian, someone who names the name of Jesus?

It seems in many cases today, the lack of curiosity about belief and practice is rewarded.  What's best is to learn not to ask too many questions.  When you ask questions, you find things out, and you really don't want to find things out.  If you find something out, you might have to talk about it, and someone will be uncomfortable, let alone separate over some thing.  No, the thing is to keep the coalition, and call that fellowship.  "We had a great fellowship" means that we had a good time of not mentioning too many truths that would reveal something awkward and throw an ill will over the gathering.

When I was in fundamentalism, I began to notice what and why things were overlooked.  It almost never made any sense, and then it didn't help to ask about whatever it was.  You wouldn't be surprised how often it related to money.  Bigger coalitions are needed for money.  Bigger churches are needed for money.  Bigger churches are needed for bigger coalitions.  The participants think they need all this for success.  Doctrinal and practical precision suffer for it all to work.  It's easy to see.  What bothers the most is the corruption of the gospel and most because of the dishonor to God.

The above isn't just fundamentalism.  It's worse in evangelicalism.  Evangelicalism doesn't separate. Evangelicals today write mean tweets -- their version of separation.  They produce a podcast and mock someone they don't like without mentioning his name.  Everyone knows, wink, wink, but the name very often isn't mentioned.  If the name is mentioned, the participants explain how it really is too bad.  It doesn't stop the fellowship from continuing.

I wish I was wrong about everything I've written so far.  I'd be happy to hear how I'm not, if I'm not. None of what I have written reflects on the unsurpassed beauty and wonder of actual Christianity, of God's Word itself, and of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  All of that remains intact, pristine and majestic.  It is the truth.  The participants of fundamentalism and evangelicalism hopefully know this.

If you consider fellowship with another church, then look at the doctrinal statement and observe the practice of a church, and especially look at what a church says the gospel is and then what it says evangelism is or practices as evangelism -- at least.  If you walk past that, ignore that, or diminish that for what you call fellowship, it's destructive fellowship.  The Apostle Paul wouldn't do it.

Our church practices closed communion.  We're local church only in our ecclesiology.  We use the King James Version.  We believe in the autonomy of the church, the Baptist distinctives, and that true churches have always existed separate from a state church.  If another church believes all those things, just like us, and they don't preach a true gospel, the former doesn't excuse the latter. I start with the latter.  The former buttresses the latter.  The gospel precedes all of those in priority.

Somebody might be "King James," but if you rarely hear the actual teaching of the King James from the King James, using the King James doesn't condone or excuse false teaching.  No one should sit and listen to something the King James doesn't say and allow for it, as long as the King James is being used.  If someone takes a wrong view of spirituality and sanctification from the King James, it's not fine now.  When false teaching or bad preaching is excused or allowed just because it came from the King James Version, it's no wonder someone could receive the wrong impression about that translation.  If someone teaches what the King James Version actually says from the English Standard Version, and someone massacres what the King James Version actually says from the King James Version, the preaching from the English Standard was superior.  The King James is not the supreme test of fellowship for a church.  If it is, that is destructive fellowship.

Even as I write about destructive fellowship in fundamentalism, the only fellowship not destructive, really the only fellowship at all, is in and about the truth.  That fellowship occurs in a church and then between churches.  The truth is the basis for this ecclesiastical fellowship and is also the basis for ecclesiastical separation.  Churches either fellowship or separate based upon the truth.  When they forsake truth for fellowship, that is destructive fellowship.  The fellowship that continues into eternity proceeds from, exists in, and revolves around the truth.

Demagogue: Sausage Maker

In my life, I've never heard the English word "demagogue" used more in public life than in this presidential election cycle.  Demagogue comes from two Greek words, the first, demos, "the people," as in "democracy," rule by the people, and agō, "to lead."

No one surpassed Pericles (495-429BC) of Athens in the history of the Greek city-state as an orator and statesman, proclaimed by ancient Greek historian Thucydides, "the first citizen of Athens."  His death left a political vacuum in the democracy for rich merchants to exploit the people.  Five years later, Aristophanes, an Athenian comedic playwright wrote a satire on the social and political life of classical Athens, The Knights, describing the conditions where a sausage maker possesses the necessary qualities to rule the Demos, the name of an actual character, the owner of the house, because the people (the demos) were supposed to be in charge in Athens.  In the play, upon meeting the sausage maker, Demosthenes, an escaped slave of Demos, attempts to recruit the sausage seller for the job:

Sausage-Seller:  But I have not had the least education. I can only read, and that very badly. 

Demosthenes:  That is what may stand in your way, almost knowing how to read. A demagogue must be neither an educated nor an honest man; he has to be an ignoramus and a rogue.

Later, again:

Sausage-Seller:  The oracles of the gods flatter me! Faith! I do not at all understand how I can be capable of governing the people. 

Demosthenes:  Nothing simpler. Continue your trade. Mix and knead together all the state business as you do for your sausages. To win the people, always cook them some savoury that pleases them. Besides, you possess all the attributes of a demagogue; a screeching, horrible voice, a perverse, crossgrained nature and the language of the market-place. In you all is united which is needful for governing.

You get a perfect earliest and fascinating portrayal there of the usage of the term "demagogue." You might be thinking:  "Rich merchant?  Horrible voice?  Sausage maker?  Donald Trump!"  I understand, but stay with me here.

As I thought about the word "demagogue," especially as it applied to this presidential race, I googled the term and on December 10, 2015, Megan Garber at The Atlantic provided a one-stop-shop of recent usage, especially related at that point to Donald Trump.  Trump is portrayed as the veritable definition, his picture next to demagogue in the dictionary.  Is Trump really the sausage-seller? What's his sausage?  Or, who really offers sausage to the people?

I hear the Democrats and the media (almost one and the same) call Trump a demagogue.  Democrats now most use the term, but it is they who have perfected actual demagoguery in democracy.  They thrive by cooking something savoury for every special interest.  Democrats fit the modus operandi (m.o.) of the demagogues of democracy as described by Aristophanes.  They're the sausage-sellers.

What sausage does Trump offer to the masses, what does he mix and knead together?  The Democrats and the media say it's fear and mainly two examples:  Muslims and illegal immigrants.  They say Trump plays on people's fear of either or both to win an election.  If there is one other, it's jobs stolen away by China from American white working men, another dog whistle to summon the support of a racial majority.   If Trump is a demagogue, it really does take some to know one.  Trump is the rich merchant with the qualifications to compete with the longstanding champions of demagoguery. Donald Trump is a unique Republican candidate, rare in his ability to make and sell sausage.  Democrats are envious, it seems.

No one makes sausage like Democrats.  Nothing stands in the way of the voters Democrats need the most like an education.  They are who Rush Limbaugh calls the "low information voter."  Democrats pump out sausage of every shape and size, embarrassing Jimmy Dean with their production.

No one is better than Democrats at the perverse, crossgrained nature and language of the market-place. Raise the minimum wage.  Tax the rich.  Free healthcare.  Women's rights.  Affirmative action. Same-sex marriage.  Open borders.  Easy voter registration.  College tuition.  Sanctuary cities. No one represents Aristophanes' demagoguery better than Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton is doing everything she can do to catch up. They are both now to promising sausage that doesn't even exist.

The expiration date on most of the sausage has already arrived.  People are still waiting for the promises of eight years and four years ago.  Until very recently, I had never heard the terminology, "labor force participation."  Part of demagoguery is saying people have jobs when they don't.  They kind of know when they don't have one or even one that is full time.  You can't really have lower unemployment and the very lowest labor force participation in decades.  Those two concepts contradict each other.  When people will lie about the unemployment rate, you have to start using labor force participation as an instrument to measure employment.

In December of 2015,  the percentage of participation in the labor force was 62.6%.  The last time it was that low was in October of 1977, which was during the Jimmy Carter presidency.  Let's be honest.  Let's not demagogue the issue.  Less people are working today.  Labor force participation in January of 2009, when President Obama began his first term, was 65.7%.  By the way, I didn't gather these statistics from demagogues who encouraged fear in the unemployed.  I looked them up on the Department of Labor website.  They will tell you the labor force participation in every month since 1948.  January of 2016 hasn't ended yet.

Aristophanes said sausage makers make good demagogues in a democracy.  It's simple.  People like sausage, even if they don't know what's in it.  The bloated nature of the United States government and its overrunning debt is a testimony to American love of sausage, ripe for the sausage sellers.

Democrats appeal more to the base nature of the people, their voting constituents, the coalition they wish to cobble together to remain in power, more than any other American entity.  They are the sausage makers.

Join Us in Israel with Samson Tours

[Friday is a Thomas Ross post, so this is Thomas Ross going to Israel, not Kent Brandenburg.]

I have had a desire to visit Israel for some time, to see the land of the Abrahamic covenant, the land of the earthly ministry of the Messiah, the Lord Jesus, and the land of the vast majority of the Bible.  I am very excited that my wife and I are now scheduled to go (Lord willing, barring the Rapture or other providential hinderances) in January of 2017.  We are going with Samson Tours on a tour called a Pastor's Familiarization Tour that is designed not only to give one a great experience in Israel but also to equip church leaders in order that they might be able to become guides themselves in the future.  Many tours of Israel are very expensive;  for example, this one with Bob Jones University costs $4,650 per person, and this one with Friends of Israel is $3,850 per person.  The tour we are going on costs just $2,200 per person, or, if we acquire our own plane tickets, only $1,200 per person--something we actually can afford, unlike these other tours!  (See below how to get there for even less than this!)

The tour we are going on is not limited to independent Baptists, and I would like to have as many like-minded people on it as possible.  If you are a like-minded independent Baptist, and you qualify for this tour (i. e., you are a pastor, deacon, or other church leader who could get a letter on your church stationary affirming such), I would love to have you come with us.  Indeed, I would rather have genuinely converted people, even if not entirely like minded, to fill up the tour instead of, say, Roman Catholics or Mormons.  Space is limited, so if you qualify, why not take advantage of this great price and plan to join us in January, 2017?  You can find out more by clicking on the link here, using the menu for "Tours," and then clicking on "Group Tours."

You can sign up for the tour for even less than $1,200 by doing two things.  First, use the coupon code MNRE when you sign up, and you will get a discount.  (I will also be benefited if you use this code, and will be much obliged).  That is a part that anyone can do.

Second, you can try to do what we are trying to do, namely, fund and pay for everything with bonuses from credit cards and banks.  We should, Lord willing, be able to pay for our airfare entirely with credit card points from two opening bonuses, and it should not be too difficult to earn more than the $2,400 that is left through various bonuses.  My wife and I both opened up the bank account discussed here to get $500 each worth of points, and were able to fund our opening of the bank account with a credit card ($300 extra per person), for a total of $1,600.  There are other banks that will give you hundreds of dollars for opening accounts with them.  There are also a number of credit cards that offer $500, $600, $700, or more as an opening bonus.  The cost of our plane tickets has thus been provided in God's providence through two credit card opening bonuses, one of 150,000 points worth $1,500 and the other of 75,000 points worth $750.  I discuss how to do this sort of thing in my article on credit cards here.  Of course, you should never, ever carry a high interest rate balance on a credit card, and I would highly recommend reading my article on credit card dangers before thinking about funding a trip to Israel with credit card points.  You should also (obviously) tithe on such bank or credit card opening bonuses.

Third, if you lead a tour with them after going on this tour within the following 2.5 years, they will actually refund you the entire base cost of the tour--this is another way of experiencing the tour for exactly nothing!

Anyway, I hope you can join us in Israel.  Next Year in Jerusalem!

TDR

The Truth Shall Make You Free, pt. 2

Part One

When Jesus said "the truth shall make you free" in John 8:32, He was saying that the truth, which was salvation truth found in Him, could set men free from bondage to sin, which would dominate and damn them.  The freedom Jesus teaches is freedom.  No one can be freer than the freedom Jesus offers.

The freedom Jesus taught was the same freedom that the Apostle Paul taught all over His epistles and especially in 1 Corinthians, Romans, and Galatians.  I wrote in part one that this freedom was not freedom from the law, that is, it was not freedom to disobey God's law.  Some people think that being free from the law (Romans 7:6) means that we’re no longer responsible to obey the moral commandments of God.  It has nothing to do with that.  It is to be free from the condemnation of the law, that is, it is to be free from being killed by the penalty of unsuccessful law keeping.  Being free from the law doesn’t mean that now I can do whatever I want.

When a person is free, he can and will keep God's commandments, that is, he is not compelled to sin any more as a lifestyle.  He can flourish and thrive as a human being, which could be described as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That is to be "free indeed" as Jesus described it (John 8:36).

I wish to apply this freedom to the type of obedience to God that is most characterized today, even by professing Christians, as bondage and not freedom.  Paul describes the bondage, the opposite of freedom, of human beings in Romans 1.  Because they believe the lie and not the truth that would set them free, they continue captivated to their own vile lusts, which includes the perversion of the God designed roles of men and women.  For instance, when a woman can function more like a man, people call that "women's liberation."

In more than any other way, a country is considered to be "repressed" if it's women must dress and behave according to biblical, often called traditional, roles.  If women must dress distinct from men, that requirement is portrayed as stifling to freedom.  Women are considered to be most free if they are free to take their clothes off and reveal as much skin as they desire.

Even to Christians today, being free from the law, to them means being free from Deuteronomy 22:5:

The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

To many, the least free women are where their church or their men require them to wear dresses and skirts with a plain distinction from pants as a male garment.  To many Christian leaders, women are not free if they cannot wear pants.  They now characterize designed distinction, a plain symbol of the male and female role, as controlling women's freedom with arbitrary laws.

No, freedom enables obedience to God's law.  Women can dress according to their designed roles, with a distinct symbol of femininity.  This is freedom.  Women are not free because they "get to wear pants."  Jesus said (John 8:34), "Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin."  Sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4).  Women transgress God's law when they wear the male garment.  Men transgress God's law when they abdicate male headship.

I very purposefully struck where believers have capitulated on freedom.  They think they are more free, and not legalistic, because they have taken away the restriction.  Restrictions are necessary for freedom.  There is no free enterprise when a market cannot operate without robbery.  There is no free trade when the government picks the winners and the losers.   John Adams said,

Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.  The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue; and if this cannot be inspired into our people in a greater measure than they have it now, they may change their rulers and the forms of government, but they will not obtain a lasting liberty. They will only exchange tyrants and tyrannies.

Believers concede freedom when they choose license.  Freedom is not license.  I am not free to play horseshoes in my neighbor's lawn.  I am not free to shoot a bald eagle.

Think of the bondage of a grudge and of revenge.  If there is no God, survival at any cost, the law of the jungle, is the supreme law.  Since there is a dimension that transcends nature, a God who provides a moral compass and presides over human affairs, one can let go of vengeance and seek a higher justice.  This is freedom.  You don't have it without the restriction of God on you that will only succeed without the compelling desire for vengeance, making you a slave to it.  You may really want revenge, but you don't have to have it, because you can trust God with justice.  Men will not get away with sin.

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the liberty that allows and enables to keep His law.  The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us when we walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh (Romans 8:4).  The works of the flesh do not reveal freedom, but bondage.

The Truth Shall Make You Free, pt. 1

One of the most well-known statements in the Bible Jesus made in John 8:32:

And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

These words are carved in stone on the outside of Berkeley High School in downtown Berkeley, California.  We know that Jesus meant that the truth would make someone free from the domination of sin.  We also know that's not how Berkeley High School was taking the verse to mean, which it etched on its educational edifice.

Freedom is one of the most confused and controversial concepts in the minds of men.  They don't know what freedom is.  After Jesus' audience objected that they were already free (John 8:33), verse 34 reads:

Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

People commit sin, present tense, as a lifestyle, because they are slaves of sin.  Sin is a bad act, but there is a power underneath the bad act that makes people do it.  They do it, they sin, because they are compelled to do so.  They are not free to live righteous by nature.  People are slaves to a power inside of them, which destroys them in two ways, through the domination of sin and the damnation of sin.

I understand that people think that when they sin, they do so according to freedom.  They even see the sinning as a kind of statement of freedom.  Our founding fathers didn't see this as freedom.  In their writings, they called this license.  License is different than freedom.  It isn't freedom.

You will hear today people call someone "ignorant" who opposes same sex marriage.  In this concept of freedom, the truth sets someone free to marry someone of the same sex.  The people who oppose are ignorant, that is, they don't know the truth about marriage that will set them free to marry someone of the same sex or at least accept others who do.

God ordained government to restrict people.  Restriction seems to people as something that isn't freedom.  If you are restricted, you are not free.  However, government exists not to restrict freedom, but to protect it.  Government protects people's rights and their rights are their freedom.  This subject that I'm addressing, that relates to everything that we do, Paul addressed in the epistle to the Galatians.

In Galatians 5:13-16 Paul wrote:

13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. 14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. 16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

Freedom is not the indulgence of the flesh (v. 13a), is not the opportunity to injure others (vv. 13b, 15), and not disobedience to God's law (vv. 14, 16).  The essence of human freedom is, like Jesus (Romans 15:1-3), not about pleasing yourself.

When you do what you do compelled by your lust, that is bondage, not freedom, and everyone is compelled by lust to choose something other than God, which is idolatry, worshiping and serving the creature rather than the Creator.  You think you're getting your way, but you're getting domination of sin and damnation of the soul.  The desire of things more than Jesus sends you on a ride all the way to hell.  People call that freedom, but it is license.

Knowing that men call the indulgence of the flesh, freedom, Jesus said in John 8:36:

If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

The Son shall make you "free indeed," that is, compared to the other, so-called "freedom," or truly free.  You are not truly free when you are in bondage to your own lust, to sin.  You are not free indeed.  Samuel West wrote:

The most perfect freedom consists in obeying the dictates of right reason, and submitting to natural law. When a man goes beyond or contrary to the law of nature and reason, he becomes the slave of base passions and vile lusts; he introduces confusion and disorder into society, and brings misery and destruction upon himself. This, therefore, cannot be called a state of freedom, but a state of the vilest slavery and the most dreadful bondage. The servants of sin and corruption are subjected to the worst kind of tyranny in the universe. Hence we conclude that where licentiousness begins, liberty ends.

Pay $0 / month for Cell Phone Service: FreedomPop

FreedomPop is a company that offers totally free talk, text, and data plans with no contracts required.  It utilizes Sprint’s 4G LTE network for its services, so one has coverage wherever Sprint has coverage.  In addition to the totally free plans, they offer very inexpensive plans with more features.  (They also offer free Internet, which I will not discuss further at this time.)  The main reason I mention their company first is, well, you can get a totally free plan.  Is their free plan for everyone?  Certainly not–I don’t have it personally, and if the free plan is not for you, then you have to consider whether a plan you pay for with them is better than a plan you pay for with a different company.  Freedom Pop has a C+ rating with the Better Business Bureau and they are not BBB accredited.  I would be extremely surprised if a company that offers totally free service like this would have an A+ rating, but the fact that they get a C, and not an F, shows that they are not some scam but are a real and legitimate company.  I asked them about the C+ rating and they said that they got it largely because they have had long hold times for customer service agents in the past, but they have been working on that and the wait times have been vastly reduced since they hired extra agents. Does that mean that their customer service personnel will always be top-notch? No, of course not.

How does their organization make money?  It makes money when customers opt for a better plan than the free one that, while inexpensive, does cost something.  They claim to offer “top phone services at a fraction of the cost.”  According to their service plans page, they offer:

(a) a free Monthly Plan providing a voice allocation of 200 minutes to landline and mobile phones in the United States, excluding Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories, each month and a text messaging allocation of 500 text messages each month at no cost to you [500 includes both ; and (b) prepaid Monthly Plans providing specified limits of voice minutes and text messages to landline and mobile phones in the United States, excluding Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories, each month. All subscribers of FreedomPop’s Phone Service must choose a plan to activate the Phone Service. The minutes and text messages included in each Monthly Plan for Phone Service do not roll over from month to month and will be lost if not used within that month. . . . Prepaid Monthly Plans are set up as recurring charges. Your subscription will continue to recur until you terminate your Phone Service by using the Support feature on our Site, or by calling FreedomPop at (888) 743-8107.

In addition to the 200 free monthly minutes, one has unlimited free minutes when one is calling another Freedom Pop customer–minutes only count calling those with other cell phone companies.

Freedom Pop’s Unlimited Talk and Text Plan & Premium 1GB data plan costs $19.99 after the initial 30 day trial period expires (you can try them free for 30 days to see if they are a good fit or not–if you don’t like them, you only pay the return shipping costs for a phone.  You can also transfer in your own phone instead of getting one of theirs).  If you are skeptical of them, you might consider trying them out for 30 days for free, or use their company for a backup or emergency family phone or something of the like first, and see if they are a fit for you.  The way they recommend that you get their totally free plan is:  1.) Sign up for the free month of their Unlimited Talk and Text plan, and then 2.) During the free month, call their customer service number (888) 743-8107 and ask to switch to the totally free plan.  Get more information about, or sign up for Freedom Pop by clicking on the banner below:

This post is an excerpt and abridgment of the study here.

TDR

Note: I have affiliate links with FreedomPop. If you use the banners on this blogpost to sign up for their services, I will receive financial compensation.  I can in good conscience say that there is nothing on this website that I would not have said were I not an affiliate of the companies, and I believe that it is appropriate that we both benefit from the information I have put together for your betterment (1 Timothy 5:18).  However, if you are bothered by the fact that I will be compensated if you use these banners to sign up, you can sign up on the webpage without clicking on these banners, and I will get nothing.  If you choose to use the buttons on this webpage, I offer you my sincere thanks.