----- Original Message -----

From: Name Withheld

To: Paul Stringini

Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 4:29 PM

Subject: shepherd's chapel

Hello Paul,

I am a student of the bible who studies using Pastor Murray as a source for helping in understanding of the scriptures.  I also use a Strong's concordance, people whom I go to church with (I attend a non denominational bible teaching church by my hometown).  That being said, I will get onto my question to you.

If you disagree with what Pastor Murray is teaching and have been a long time student before you broke away, then why don't you bring your concerns and issues to Pastor Murray and let him answer for himself.  I have heard him say over and over don't trust this man's word or any other man's word, but read for yourself, study for yourself.  He also invites questions, the only thing I have heard him ask is that you don't make any baseless accusations, but back up your issues with the bible itself.  

I don't blindly follow anyone's perceptions or teachings on the Bible, it is too important to let someone lead me astray (I was really dismayed when I found out that not all versions of the bible are equal, but I do have my King James Version and use it with the strong's).  I also will say that I don't think that Pastor Murray is leading anyone astray on purpose (if he is leading people astray),  that he genuinely believes the things that he is teaching.  I don't fully understand all his teachings (sixth and 8th day creations of man seems to be based on a hebrew grammatical difference in how it is written), the changing of the length of the tribulation, the serpent seed,  and when a tree is a tree (or water is water) and when do these things represent people, those teachings really confuse me.  Other things like there is no rapture makes a lot of sense to me.

Any thoughts you have on these I am glad to hear them

Thanks and have a great day

Name Withheld

----- Original Message -----

From: Paul Stringini

To: Name Withheld

Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 12:29 PM

Subject: Re: shepherd's chapel

Name Withheld,

 

Thanks for writing and for your questions.

 

I am a student of the bible who studies using Pastor Murray as a source for helping in understanding of the scriptures.  

 

That is pretty much the way I was. It seems like you are reluctant to call yourself a student of Arnold Murray.  You view yourself as a bible student first, and that is good.  I don't believe I ever called my self a student of Arnold Murray until long after I stopped studying with him.  The friends I knew through our involvement with the chapel and I saw ourselves as followers of God and of the bible, not of Pastor Murray.

 

But whoever is taught by someone is their student, whoever learns from someone to a greater or lesser extent, at least in some sense of the word, is their student.  There is nothing wrong with being a student, or a teacher, what matters is what is taught.

 

One of the things about Pastor Murray is that he does not really help people understand the bible, he uses the bible to support and promote ideas that are not in the bible.

 

What the bible teaches is what the bible says.  After all, we believe this is God's word.  But Pastor Murray is not helping us understand the bible so much as he uses the bible as a source to support his own philosophy and beliefs which are loosely drawn from the biblical tradition.

 

I also use a Strong's concordance,

 

This is a case in point, Pastor Murray definitely abuses the Strong's Concordance.  For example, in Genesis where he connects the word for "tree" to the word for "backbone" is a blatant misuse of the Strong's which betrays either ignorance of the proper use of the Strong's, or corrupt intent, I tend to think it is ignorance.  Another example is his use of the Strong's to corrupt the meaning of the verse "in the air" from 1 Thessalonians 4.  I don't believe in the rapture either, but I do believe in the resurrection, the word "air" does not indicate "breath of life body."  As far as I can tell, no such idea even exists in the bible.  The Strong's certainly does not teach that. 

 

Pastor Murray pulls out the Strong's to create confusion about the meaning of words, another example is the word exapatao (pronounced expatio by Murray) He says it means wholly (read sexually) seduced.  Seduction is only sexual in a sexual context.  The word exapatao simply means to trick or delude, the problem is that Pastor Murray opens his Strong's and puts on the bravado slams his desk and says "wholly seduced!"  as if "seduce" ALWAYS means (or even implies) sexual seduction (which it does not).  If you are an honest student of the Strong's I shouldn't have to explain this to you in detail. I'm pressed for time.  Look at that yourself, the Strong's is not giving any support to the idea that Eve's seduction was sexual.  Genesis plainly tells us she was seduced by the lust to be made wise and like God, not by sexual advances.  You don't even need the Strong's concordance to see that.

 

Here is another issue with Pastor Murray and his Strong's, he uses it selectively, and his students tend to use the Strong's only to prove his teachings.  They do not tend to use it in a general way.  If they did they might notice that "replenish" (In Genesis) does not mean REplenish (i.e. to fill again from the world that was), the Hebrew word means "to fill"  not refill a second time. 

People often ask me how I came to know what I know.   It was all by first hand research, Pastor Murray was my only human teacher.  After my first four years studying his teachings I decided to embark on an intense study of the scriptures on my own, I used the Green's interlinear bible (a Hebrew/Greek/English parallel translation with embedded Strong's concordance numbers)  I corrected many (number) errors in my Green's Interlinear.  I went through the whole New testament and most of the Old  and I would look up all the words and write the definitions of important words in the margins of my companion bible.  One thing I learned is that the translation is pretty good, for the most part, except in casting light on archaic English words, the bible is pretty much good to go. I also learned that Pastor Murray was using the language barrier to hide his own shortcomings as a teacher.  He likes to brag and call himself a linguist, but his pronunciation of Hebrew and Greek is absolutely awful.

 

people whom I go to church with (I attend a non denominational bible teaching church by my hometown).

 

I hope that is going well for you, not many places tolerate the truth.

 

That being said, I will get onto my question to you.

I guess I've been over responding again.

 

If you disagree with what Pastor Murray is teaching and have been a long time student before you broke away, then why don't you bring your concerns and issues to Pastor Murray and let him answer for himself.  

 

Pastor Murray is not a safe person to rebuke.  A student should not rebuke is teacher.  That is why he does not repent on his own.  He is not a student of the bible, the bible is his tool, but I am a tool of the scripture, the scripture has been rebuking him for years and he heard it not.  So now the bible uses me to speak on it's behalf.  He does not deserve any more private rebukes.  The one he has sinned against has been trying.

 

1Tim 5:19 Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

 

I could not approach Pastor Murray as an equal and force him to respond to me.  He is a "great man"  by that I mean that he has no peers, he answers to no one.  Who calls him to account?  He will laugh at them.  Have you read my page?  His students hate me.  He has been teaching these things for years and shall a little boy such as myself instruct him now?  I don't think you understand what spirit he is of.

 

If he was my brother and had sinned against me, then I  should have done as you have said. But he has not sinned against me, but against the truth and this he did in public and continues to do so.  The truth is sitting in from of him every day and speaking, and every day he repeats his blasphemies against the truth.

 

I have heard him say over and over don't trust this man's word or any other man's word, but read for yourself, study for yourself.  

 

That is an old confidence trick, "Don't take my word for it!" Pastor Murray gains the confidence of people by calling himself a Doctor, a linguist, a scholar, (and he is not likely any of these things) There are many Doctors  out there but very few who sound a trumpet before themselves as this one does.  He tells people to study for themselves and not to take his word and the general effect is that he DISARMS people

 

Don't let men disarm you with confidence tactics.  Just because I tell you not to trust me, don't let that disarm you so that you place your trust in me.  Just because I tell you to, "check me out," that doesn't mean that you should assume you don't need to.  Never settle for what they give you to prove their point.  Selective use of evidence is a commonly used tactic.  They prove their points with their choice verses.  That is why I try to make sure what I teach squares with all the verses. Of course, it takes some time to get familiar with all the verses and it seems like so many teachers become corrupted along the way.

 

He also invites questions,

 

But have you noticed that the questions are pretty much always the same?  And that the questions are usually driven in the directions of his teachings?  Such as questions like:  How did Cain's descendants survive the flood?  Etc.  The questions are leading. Besides, I don't have any questions for Pastor Murray, I listened to everything he offered that he had to say up to 1996 and when(if)  I listen to him now, I wish you could be there for me to show you how he corrupts people with his flatteries and confidence tactics because they stick out to me like sore thumbs now.

 

the only thing I have heard him ask is that you don't make any baseless accusations, but back up your issues with the bible itself.  

 

That is simple enough.  That is all I do.  I don't make baseless accusations.  The things he teaches are false doctrines.  I do not mischaracterize his teachings, that would be slander, and pointless and discredit my arguments.   I have had people send me accusations against him, accusing him of personal misdeeds, but I refuse to accept those accusations,  I do not accuse Pastor Murray of anything except for teaching false doctrine. 

 

I don't blindly follow anyone's perceptions or teachings on the Bible, it is too important to let someone lead me astray

 

Glad to hear it, I should say though, if you have confidence then I challenge you to listen to my bible studies, you will get a completely different angle on the bible (the 90 degree angle)  I teach the bible line by line, but not the way Pastor Murray does, the bible teaches me, not vice versa. http://oraclesofgod.org/studies/studies.html

 

(I was really dismayed when I found out that not all versions of the bible are equal, but I do have my King James Version and use it with the Strong's).  

 

I started with the King James and I stick with it because that is the bible I know and have memorized.  It is the language in which the ideas of scripture were committed to my mind.  In general, I don't do much bible reading, and people are shocked when I tell them I do not study the bible anymore.  I'm just being honest, I have not done a personal bible study for myself in years.  I teach the bible to others because the bible is not merely on a page for me anymore, it is in my mind and in my heart, that is the most important bible translation of all the one that you have internally, the one that can never be taken away.

 

I also will say that I don't think that Pastor Murray is leading anyone astray on purpose (if he is leading people astray),  that he genuinely believes the things that he is teaching.

 

I agree, but that does not excuse him.  People make that statement to me all the time as if it means something.  So what?  So what if he thinks he is doing right?  Did not the Scribes and Pharisees also think so?

 

John 16:2 ...yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.

 

What does it matter what the evildoer is thinking?  Did someone tell you it mattered?  Shall his innocent thoughts excuse his evil deeds?

 

Eze 14:9 And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

 

The bible is the teacher.

 

1 Corinthians 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Those who teach false doctrine and corrupt the word of God are false teachers, by their fruits you know them.  You don't judge motives.  In real life, deceivers do not all behave like bad movie villains, the best liars believe their own lies and are deceived themselves  because God withholds enlightenment from them.  If we don't like it then we ought to examine ourselves, God is not a man and is not justified by men. 

 

 I don't fully understand all his teachings (sixth and 8th day creations of man seems to be based on a hebrew grammatical difference in how it is written),

 

The sixth and eighth day creations are myths created by men.  All men are of the same race and descend from a single family. 

 

Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Acts 17:26 And hath made of one all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

 

I have explained this extensively in many letter on my website,  since you are a good student of the bible I'll leave the research to you.  Pastor Murray's race conscious Christianity is a step backward from the doctrine of Christ.

 

There is no eighth day, here is a Key  introducing the account of Adam.

 

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

 

This verse indicates that the account of Adam's creation which falls takes place chronologically within the time frame in which God did his creating in chapter 1

 

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

 

Verse 4 clearly places the context of verse 5-25 in the context of Chapter 1. 

 

Let your bible teach you don't let confidence men lead you astray.

 

the changing of the length of the tribulation, the serpent seed,  and when a tree is a tree (or water is water) and when do these things represent people, those teachings really confuse me.  

 

Rightfully so, I have written extensively on those topics, they are confusing because they require you to accept a conditioned response to the scriptures.  You have to swallow all his "documentation"  and learn to see the bible with his eyes, and then you will no longer feel confused.

 

Other things like there is no rapture makes a lot of sense to me.

 

I agree but do not let the idea slip from you mind that a little leaven leavens the whole lump.  

 

People ask me all the time, "What's the big deal, we all have a little false doctrine." We do?  Then none of us will inherit the kingdom of heaven.

 False doctrine is called heresy and it is a grave sin:

 

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Heresy itself will cause people to fail to inherit the kingdom of God.  So don't let anyone lie to you and tell you that a little corrupt doctrine is acceptable before God. 

 

Doctrine matters.

 

1Timothy4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

 

Titus 2:7 In all things showing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,

 

Good teachers do not spread corrupt doctrine.  You tell a tree by its fruit.

 

2Timothy 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
 

And Pastor Murray teaches the dead are raised and gone to heaven, (though he does not use those words, he teaches that the dead are alive and have ascended into heaven,  heresy.  Most Christians believe this heresy.   The resurrection is yet to come.  A perfect example of itching ears.

Any thoughts you have on these I am glad to hear them

Glad to speak them, thanks for asking.

 

Thanks and have a great day

You too,

 

Sincerely,

Paul Stringini

----- Original Message -----

From: Name Withheld

To: Paul Stringini

Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 7:16 PM

Subject: Re: shepherd's chapel

Paul,

Wow, thanks for the speedy response, I have to admit I didn't think that you would respond at all, especially not this quick (I have emailed other places only to have never seen a response come from them).  

A little background on myself,  I was raised Roman Catholic and that was all I knew till I went in the service (United States Navy).  Then I experimented around with different stuff,  everything from scientology to more dangerous things (spiritually speaking).  Eventually, after my military service I ended up converting to Lutheran (of the ELCA senod).  I was a Lutheran for a about 8 years, after that the ELCA senod voted to allow things that the bible spoke out against and I could 

no longer support the Lutherans,  this occured almost two years ago.  for a while I studied on my own and I was talking to a close military friend of mine about my situation and he told me about Pastor Murray.  After a few times of him asking me if I had watched shepherd's chapel, I finally watched him and he did make some sense, I got the mark of the beast (well there are some issues there but I "put them on the shelf" like PM said).  But it came down to that I listened to 3 or 4 single studies and then bible books (I was mostly concerned about the bible messages as opposed to single studies).  I did genesis, daniel and revelation (the beginning and the end) and then matthew and the minor prophets.  I found an online forum that was also students of Shepherd's Chapel (and no they don't have a lot of good things to say about you...mostly that you are disgruntled and misguided), though one of the concerns I have about them is their fanatical following of PM,  to the point to where they don't even want to see what someone else thinks if it is not a PM teaching (I have been around the block a time or two and don't need to be hit with a 2x4 in order to see that this could be kinda cultish...the blindly following is something that does turn me off as I am interested in serving Father, not being a statistic like jonestown, heaven's gate, koresh's group etc).  Sometimes it seems thick with doctrine but thin with biblical proof if you get what I mean here....much of it not having a second witness.  Sorry about naming religious groups here, but it gives you an idea on my background (there is a big thing about not naming religions with shepherd's chapel so I don't know if you feel the same way or not).  At any rate, I feel the need to study and there seems to be a feeling of urgency with that need to study the bible,  I do believe we are in the end of end times (though I am pretty sure the events of revelation haven't begun as of yet, the seals are most likely still sealed, the trumps haven't sounded [I am sure those will be undeniable], and the vials are still full).  I know that PM says that the Mark of the beast is an ideology as opposed to a physical mark, but I think he is in error there since revelation says that those who support the beast will take it upon their foreheads or on their right hand.  

I guess I would concede that I am a student of PM since I do use him to help me with my understanding of what I have read in the bible.  Though now that I reflect on these teachings I find more problems as opposed to understanding.

As for my church it is going, I feel kinda compelled to be there so I am there...I have had several issues with the church as of now, their going to the English standard version opposed to the King James Version (for ease of teaching their high school students so they don't have to take so much time with explaining old english terms and meanings leaving more time to teach what God wants us to know) and their belief in the rapture of the church (I have spoken to the pastor about this and several of the elders and they are telling me there are several schools of thought on this...which is a bit dismaying as they are looking to man for solutions as opposed to looking to God and I have expressed this to them).  I had even stopped going (though I didn't stop studying the Bible)when they announced the switch to the ESV, but one of them called and we talked a long while about my issues with the church as of then.  It is hard to be solo when you are trying to follow God.

I wouldn't say that you over respond, your thoughts are helpful and appreciated.  

I guess I am poor student, for I do think that if you think the Pastor is wrong, you need to bring it up to the pastor, maybe not in the form of a rebuke, but tell them and display your proof of the error.  I am not too much for playing games and tend to be to the point,  I do give a measure of respect as they are supposed to be in positions of respect, but if they are wrong or I think they are wrong I would approach them about it.  (Now I am not going to call them on the carpet in front of the congregation in order to accomplish it).  I just think we should deal with people face to face about our grievences.  

I gotta go for now, talk with you again

Sincerely 

Name Withheld

----- Original Message -----

From: Paul Stringini

To: Name Withheld

Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 12:17 PM

Subject: Re: shepherd's chapel

Name Withheld,

 

I finally watched him and he did make some sense,

 

I agree that his teachings are sensible, and that is the key to his appeal, his "common sense" approach.  He basically judges things he reads in the bible according to his own "common sense,"  many people are attracted to that approach because it speaks directly to the questions of the human mind.  The problem is that he also tends to prefer his "common sense" over things that are plauinly written.  When he comes to a passage that violates his concept of sensibility, he consults his common sense and makes an interpretation based on what he thinks is right.  This is not a good way to approach the bible, we need to let the scripture teach us what is true as opposed to taking what we know as human beings and judging the scriptures in the light of our own wisdom.

 

Sometimes it seems thick with doctrine but thin with biblical proof if you get what I mean here...

 

I think I do.  "Standing against Satan in the world that was" is my favored example, but there are others.

I'll never forget when my Shepherd's Chapel buddy became irritated with me for not agreeing that the rich young ruler who approached Christ about salvation had become wealthy only through "ill-gotten gains"  this was straight out of Dr. Murray's common sense thought process, because it did not make sense to him that Christ would tell him to sell his possessions unless they had been obtained by sinful means.  It never occurred to him that God might look at the act of clinging to our possessions as being evil on its own.

 

Sorry about naming religious groups here, but it gives you an idea on my background (there is a big thing about not naming religions with shepherd's chapel so I don't know if you feel the same way or not).  

 

 Don't apologize.  After all, I name Murray and I get letters every month trying to convince me it is a sin.  That is a prime example of Murray actually corrupting the doctrine of the bible in order to insulate himself from criticism.  It is entirely appropriate to name heretics and expose frauds. 

 

Romans16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

 

No one has ever been able to support the idea that it is a sin to criticize a false teacher. 

 

2Timothy2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

Pastor Murray basically teaches the same thing.  People usually ignore this verse, but it is plain that most Christians have become heretical in their belief that the dead are already in heaven instead of waiting for the resurrection.  They don't say "the resurrection is past," but that is what it means.  It means the dead are not waiting for resurrection but have already obtained resurrection bodies.  If you listen to Dr. Murray teach 1 Thess 4 it becomes plain he denies the resurrection.

 

On the other subject, It is actually a hate to keep silent.

 

Lev 19:17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 

At any rate, I feel the need to study and there seems to be a feeling of urgency with that need to study the bible,  I do believe we are in the end of end times (though I am pretty sure the events of revelation haven't begun as of yet, the seals are most likely still sealed, the trumps haven't sounded [I am sure those will be undeniable], and the vials are still full).  

 

  I think we probably agree more than disagree, I just prefer not to invoke the term "end times."  They have been telling me I was in the end times since I was on my tricycle and I'm sick of it.  I deny that we are in the end times because I resist going with the crowd anymore.  I'm looking for signs, I have never seen or been shown a single sign that indicates we are in the end times or even close.  The  closest thing would be Israel, but that is generational, I do believe that I will be part of the final generation, but to speak plainly I think the end will come some time after 2020, somewhere around 2026-2029, about 2000 years after Christ's ascension.  2012 will be turbulent but not the end.  To hell with the Mayan calendar.  Pagan's will not predict what God's prophets have not seen. I don't believe we are in the end times yet but sometimes I feel this panic like they are almost on top of me, I feel crushed by weight of all the things I want to accomplish before that time in which I intend to die a violent death.

 

I know that PM says that the Mark of the beast is an ideology as opposed to a physical mark, but I think he is in error there since revelation says that those who support the beast will take it upon their foreheads or on their right hand.  

 

Satan might call it a "seal of God"  I keep an open mind.  I think it is far more important to fight temptation and sin right now than to know the exact nature of the mark because if i cannot resist the urge to look at a pretty girl then what makes me think I will be able to resist the temptation when Satan appears?

 

Jer 12:5 If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, then how canst thou contend with horses? and if in the land of peace, wherein thou trustedst, they wearied thee, then how wilt thou do in the swelling of Jordan?

 

In basic training they put you through some rigorous tests, partly to weed out the unfit, if we can't handle temptation in the time of peace, how will we do when the stakes are so much higher.

 

I guess I would concede that I am a student of PM since I do use him to help me with my understanding of what I have read in the bible.  Though now that I reflect on these teachings I find more problems as opposed to understanding.

 

You have to swallow them whole.  There were certain verses that always troubled me, because they didn't seem to fit.  I put them "on a shelf" too but eventually they had to be explained, I studied and studied and I couldn't see my way past certain blocks, I became disillusioned and apathetic, I began to think nothing really mattered because it could not be understood, I thought that perhaps Does God did not really care about doctrine, then I got the holy spirit and everything changed. 

As for my church it is going, I feel kinda compelled to be there so I am there...I have had several issues with the church as of now, their going to the English standard version opposed to the King James Version (for ease of teaching their high school students so they don't have to take so much time with explaining old English terms and meanings leaving more time to teach what God wants us to know)

 

They may have a point, I take my preference for the King James to be a personal preference, but I do like that my bible is in a special language, in an English that is not common anymore, because it makes the words of the bible seem more unique and special.  Maybe I'm wrong, but even though the language of the newer versions is more familiar, it does not really make the bible more accessible to people.

 

That kept me out of many churches. The rapture is everywhere. The churches that do not believe in the rapture tend to be corrupt in other ways (I count the seventh day Adventists among my enemies).

 

The rapture is the replacement for the resurrection, that is the real doctrine

 

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Hardly anyone believes this anymore.  And those who do have other heresies. 

 

 

People ask me what the big deal is.  Does God really care about doctrine?

 

Titus 2:7 In all things showing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,

 

1Timothy 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.

 

False doctrine will cause some to fail to inherit God's kingdom, doctrine is very important.

 

Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

 

I had even stopped going (though I didn't stop studying the Bible)when they announced the switch to the ESV, but one of them called and we talked a long while about my issues with the church as of then.

 

I understand.

 

 It is hard to be solo when you are trying to follow God.

 

That has been my story, but I have never been completely alone, I have never been able to stay in any church for long but  I have maintained and slowly grown a small network of brothers who believe as I do.

 

Titus 3:10 A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject;
11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

 

It is hard when the majority are subverted and unwilling to listen.  Heresy is often unrecognized, unrepented sin, Paul lumped it in with fornication and murder, but Christians act like false doctrine is no big deal.

I wouldn't say that you over respond, your thoughts are helpful and appreciated.  

 

I was just being funny, my dry humor does not always translate well into writing.

I guess I am poor student, for I do think that if you think the Pastor is wrong, you need to bring it up to the pastor, maybe not in the form of a rebuke, but tell them and display your proof of the error.

 

That is a case in point, what I said was not meant to make you think you were a poor student.  It is like this, children should not rebuke their parents, but when they do it means that the parents have failed in their duty.  What I was saying is that when a student has to rebuke the teacher it is a great evil. 

 

Two years ago I "rebuked" the pastor of my church (the church where I received the holy spirit) in exactly the form you suggest, a man I respected very much.  In the most polite way I could conceive I wrote him a letter explaining why I thought certain things which were in the pulpit were leaven and ought to be eliminated, they were the ideas that Jesus did not have long hair, that he was crucified on a Wednesday, his ministry was only one year long, that the earth was 6000 years old, and a few others, I told him that these things which might be true were nonetheless not important or essential and ought to be eliminated because they could be stumbling blocks to people who might otherwise hear our message. I provided evidence that made other opinions more than reasonable. I did this privately. The response was, " I am not talking to a brother I am talking to pride. You Are right and no one can tell you are wrong.  It is your world and you are its god."  Honestly, I thought that was a pretty good summation of his own situation.  I came to him in humility, there was nothing proud about it.  Some people are not "safe" to rebuke or even quietly admonish, or even meekly explain yourself to.  have you ever met Arnold Murray?  I have, he does not take criticism from anyone,  people have brought my writings to his attention, to him I am a fly.  He is a huge TV minister, he does not bother himself with anybody's opinions.

 

I am not too much for playing games and tend to be to the point,  I do give a measure of respect as they are supposed to be in positions of respect, but if they are wrong or I think they are wrong I would approach them about it.

 

Ok, then I challenge you to take your concerns to Arnold Murray.  And tell me how that goes (you will not get a satisfactory response and he will certainly not change for you, he KNOWS the bible)

 

There is also a point I think you are missing, if it was one or two things I think it might work, but Pastor Murray is so far out of line with biblical philosophy that I would have to reprint the bible with a corrective commentary to even satisfy the extent of my disagreement.  I do not look at him as a brother.  I am an apostate from his cult, we differ so sharply that there is nothing I could say to him that he would hear and would persuade him or satisfy me.  I think you are looking at this idealistically, and I admire that, but your ideal is for brothers, Pastor Murray is my former teacher, and I am his apostate student. 

 

See how you took your concerns to the elders of your church how little your words count with those in power?  When men begin to see themselves as more than brothers they become unrebukeable, how can you rebuke them?  They are not men, they are a machine, LUTHERANISM, FENDEMENTALISM,  they are entrenched.  I talked with a local pastor once about the rapture and he basically told me it that even if he wanted to change the doctrine he could not, because he answered to the denomination.  Arnold Murray does not answer to anyone and he only answers questions he likes, he has been rebuked thousands of times.  My webpage is public, he could read it, but I'm fighting him like an enemy because he can't be effectively handled any other way.

 

 (Now I am not going to call them on the carpet in front of the congregation in order to accomplish it).  I just think we should deal with people face to face about our grievences.  

 

I can't go to Arkansas and I don't think it would be wise. The guy is a TV minister, the only time I see him face to face is on the TV, he is too big to waste time personally rebuking him.  I had stopped studying with Pastor Murray for ten years before I wrote my first negative words against him.  I guess I'm a little perturbed with your insistence on this point because I feel like you are blinded by it.  I mean, you are talking to me about Arnold Murray.  Shouldn't you be talking to him?  But of course he won't talk to you like I will because I actually treat people like they exist and have value, I actually respond to the rebukes of people.  I actually give people the time of day some of them do not even deserve.  I don't really have all this extra time, I' already sacrificing all my free time, and I don't have any money to travel to Arkansas, I have seven kids and a wife, I routinely work 14 hour days or more plus the ministry and I'm barely making it.  I spend my free time contending for the faith.  How about this, why don't you see if you can make an appointment to see Pastor Murray to discuss areas of disagreement?  Tell me how that goes, maybe he will sit down with you and talk over your concerns with you, or maybe he will talk with you via email.  You judge me based on your own judgment of a situation you have not fully considered, you go talk to Pastor Murray if you feel so strong about it, I believe the Holy Spirit led me to do what I'm doing, maybe you are supposed to go talk to Pastor Murray. Try it.  Don't write me again or try to tell me what you think is right until you do what you think is right. 

 

Sincerely

Paul Stringini

----- Original Message -----

From: Name Withheld

To: Paul Stringini

Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:11 PM

Subject: Re: shepherd's chapel

Hello Paul,

Well all I can say at the moment is WOW, what a rebuke.  I was only trying to convey what I feel when it comes to these matters in response to what you replied with, and I kinda meant it as pastors in general.  As for Pastor Murray, yes I have met him, but early on in my studying using his teachings as a guide.  He seems like a nice enough fellow.  I went to a broadcast, but he doesn't leave a lot of time for individual counseling (perhaps if I was a regular parishioner of his church).  I also was pressed for time having to be in oklahoma for the graduation of my son-in-law from boot camp.  I have tried to phone them over at the chapel once as well, but the pastors won't take phone calls (maybe for the reason of his being on TV, never called a televangelist before so I am not sure why...but whatever).  But in light of what you say, I would tend to agree it would most likely be a futile effort. 

The end times (I too do not like the term end times, it has become a label and everything has a label nowadays), I am referring to are the frequency of big (great?) earthquakes in many populated areas (chile, Japan, etc)  The severity of the weather and frequency of the storms, the political situation, the decay of education, the removal of God from everything, the list goes on and on with our sad situation here.  I don't buy into the 2012 thing, nor do  I look toward any occult to find out when the "end of the world" is gonna be.  It makes for interesting reading like any other fiction.  

I have far to go with my studying, as I have only been going for a couple of years, it is slow going as I am trying to understand what God is trying to tell me.

Sincerely,

Name Withheld

----- Original Message -----

From: Paul Stringini

To: Name Withheld

Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 3:17 PM

Subject: Re: shepherd's chapel

Name Withheld, Sorry if the rebuke sounded harsh, it was mostly a product of being in a rush and having too many letters yesterday, so please read it as more earnest than angry. I would rather talk face to face with any person I disagreed with too, but some people just get too big for their britches and become inaccessible to us common folks, this in and of itself is a major problem, ministers ought not be celebrities.  I felt like I wasn't getting that point across but it seems we understand each other better than I thought. 

 

I'm just not convinced the earthquakes floods and such are really any more frequent than they ever have been, and even if the activity is slightly increased that it is not out of the normal range of oscillating frequency.  What I look for is a mountain sized rock to fall into the sea and destroy a third of the sea life, now that is a sign of the end.  If you look at the turbulent times in the past such as the 30's this is really very small by comparison, I mean, the whole world was at war, or even the 60's and 70's.  Not to mention the turbulence of preceding centuries.  I was a History major and I'm not convinced that there is anything remarkable about our times other than the fact that we are living in them.  But still, I do share the sense that the time is very close when we shall see "men's hearts failing them for fear and for looking after the things which are coming on the Earth."   I still remember when they were saying Chernobyl was the "wormwood" of Revelation, now there is an even bigger nuclear disaster, but so what?  What about the black plague which killed off  30-60% of the people of Europe (1348-1350), think about that.  Did they think it was the end of the world, you bet they did.  But what have we had to compare with it?  Aids?  Not even close.  My point is that from an historical perspective our era is relatively peaceful.  Also, I do not even believe that an increase in the frequency of Earthquakes is actually a sign,  I know it comes from the "labor pain" theory, but I have begun to question that interpretation.  I do not think that the labor pain reference is directing us to look for increases in plate tectonic activities.  What it is saying is that, earthquakes and famines and troubles are just the beginning of our troubles, not that they signal the onset of labor, the whole thrust of that passage is to tell us not to be troubled by events such as those.  "But take heed to yourselves" that is the point.  So I don't see an increase and I don't even think an increase means anything.  We need to hear some trumpets sound, the trumpets must be clear, that is why they are called trumpets, so I am looking for hail and fire mingled with blood, a mountain burning with fire to be cast in the sea (which has never happened in human history) those first two signs will be clear signals that we are in the end times, until then, "take heed to yourself."

 

Sincerely,

Paul Stringini