Return to "The Shepherd's Chapel and Dr. Arnold Murray" Main Page

"I am recently married to a man who has studied with Murray for years..."


----- Original Message -----
From: Name Withheld 
To:  Paul Stringini
Cc:  Name Withheld
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 6:55 PM
Subject: help for marriage


  I am reading your testimony of freedom from Murray…. I am having huge struggles…  I am recently married to a man who has studied with Murray for years and is buying the whole gamete of  trumped up doctrine.  It started with his mother finding Murray and I think she would have jumped on any bandwagon to escape the Catholic Church.  I hear them both use the same Murray terminology when they speak.  On a visit last year, she even said…”we know the truth, don’t we son…”  like it is some big secret…  Before we married, he was going to my church, Calvary Chapel (and loving the expository teaching)….but when we were studying anything to do with rapture, I’d find him freaking out and flipping back to all the Murray passages. He almost seemed possessed…  He also has the kjv and accompany which Murray recommends and it is also marked all over with his twisted ideas.  His whole twisted flood idea about how the Kenites got on…..really…would God allow Satan's child if it did exist to sneak on…whenever I point to scripture or try to just read what is there, he goes back to the Murray dialogue.

   We are still living in separate states while he secures employment here.  He has 6 siblings and a father who do not follow Murray…His mother has this “secret” with only my new husband.  We are in our fifties, this is crazy…I see that they have made this man their god and if I tell husband, he gets loud, and defensive.  He has made every excuse in the book for his mother and Murray…when I hear Murray speak and his condescending nature, it makes my skin crawl and I asked my husband not to have his tapes in our home….His mother is calling me controlling.  I’ve been a Christian for 25 years and have been in the word and published myself…this man has issues…I love my husband and don’t want false doctrine in our home, does that make me controlling. 

   His mother told me last night that she knows her daughter who passed of cancer is “in heaven” because she agreed with the Murray doctrine….SICK….If she is in heaven, she believed in the saving blood of Jesus!!! There is no other way…..His mother even said to me last night she will pray for my soul…..and my husband said today that I just want to “fly away without suffering”   what kind of nasty comment is that…When we attempt to discuss, all he does is get loud, condescending, talk over me and sound just like Murray verbatim…

  My husband does listen to a variety of preachers, so I felt there is hope….but no matter what I point out he doesn’t get the Murray thing….he makes excuses for him…if I even saw fruit from his mother, I’d be more hopeful…she has an ugly spirit and does nothing but sit around the dining table complaining about her life, everyone around her and even puts down her own children and grandchildren…I can only imagine what she says about me…I’m probably just a Kenite in her mind…

   I told Husband that I thought we were unequally yoked before we were married, but he assured me that he was a born again believer and we did so much praying together, and we read devotions together on the phone each night and went to marriage seminars together….its just the Murray challenge that has almost become our demise…I feel that he knows in his spirit that it is false doctrine, but doesn’t know how to convince his mother.  He even asked me a couple times to let his mother know that…..I can’t tell this woman anything.  She is stubborn, mislead, confused and NOT reading her bible for herself !!  I think these Murray people can be arrogant…thinking they have some secret answer…SCARY.. His mother told me last night she was going to pray for my soul”  that put me over the edge and my husband made all kind of excuses for her… 

   I hope that you can help me or talk to my husband about this.  I told him about your site and he says…so what … on upset Murray student…He does not get it..

Please help me…… Begging…..

In the Vine,

Name Withheld  

My First Response:

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Stringini
To: Name Withheld 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: help for marriage

Wow, well. For one, your husband ought to know that I am not an upset Shepherd's Chapel student.  I was a dedicated chapel student who owned every study Murray had for sale, I was married in from of Arnold Murray's desk. Murray seemed like a nice guy.  Through studying for myself I came to reject the teachings of Pastor Murray, but this took place over many years.   I stopped intensely studying with Murray in 1996, and completely stopped by 2001, but it was not until 2007 that I began to write about my objections to the Chapel.  So I am not some disgruntled chapel student spouting off. I really loved Murray and it is though love for the truth, for Chapel students, and for Murray that I write. 
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.
I should warn you though, hard-core long-term chapel students are not usually influenced by me.  I use the bible, logic, and reason to try to persuade people.  But long time chapel students have become conditioned to accept interpretations based on speculation and on Murray's imaginations.  They have learned to "read between the lines."  And have bought into Murray's very questionable tactics.  They don't have much respect for the bible.  You can quote Genesis to them all day.
Hey, Husband, Adam was Cain's father! Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.  The bible says so.
But they think they know better than which is written.  So they can just make things up and totally change the story.  Hard-core students have very little reverence for the bible.  They are always looking for loopholes and strange secret doctrines...intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, all the while Ironically calling the bible "our father's love letter,"  too bad He seems to write in code and innuendo.
It makes them feel good to believe that they are superior to other Christians, and they don't have to walk righteously, all they have to do is agree with Murray's teachings.  If you can see the Emperor's new clothes then you are wise, competent, and fit for your office.  All they have to do is claim to see what is not there, and then point at the rest of us who don't see it and shake their heads at our ignorance.
Most of the people I am able to turn away from the Shepherd's Chapel have only been students for a short period of time.  After they are students for a long period of time they either come out of it on their own or they fall deeper under Murray's spell.  And it is a funny spell to fall under, because, as you have observed, Murray is condescending and abusive.  He is a bully, and his followers either wise up or become his toadies.
Are you being controlling about having Murray's tapes in the house?  Yes.  According to the scriptures you are supposed to submit to your husband even if he is an unbeliever (1Cor 7)  That does not mean that you give up your beliefs for him, or stop trying to convince him.   In 1 Cor 7 Paul was speaking "by permission" so you are not under bondage in this case if it becomes unbearable.  But it probably does not help your cause to try to control his possession of Murray's tapes, that is probably out of line. I have had many children, and I have learned this about babies of a certain age, unless you want to upset them, you don't forcibly take their toys away from them, you ask them to hand them over themselves.  Obviously your husband is not a baby, but we men are not much different, he will still resent being forced to give up his tapes.  He may hold on to the Chapel in order to feel like he is still in control of something, the harder you push a man, sometimes, the harder he pushes back.
I feel that he knows in his spirit that it is false doctrine, but doesn’t know how to convince his mother.  He even asked me a couple times to let his mother know that…..
When it comes to making decisions about what he believes, it is entirely inappropriate for your husband to turn to his mother.  It almost sounds like you think you would have to change her mind first before he would change his mind.  He needs to cut the apron strings; and you can't do that for him.  If you did it for him, you would just be taking her place. 
General advice:
Pick your battles.  You have to stick to the most easily demonstrable falsehoods that Murray teaches.  When I was a student these were the issues that bugged me.
1) The idea that we are now in the midst of the trumpets of Revelation
2) Murray teaches that in the millennium everyone who has never had a change to hear the gospel is going to be resurrected and be taught.  This verse ate at me Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Murray, said it meant "spiritually live"  but I questioned that, Maybe your husband would be unimpressed by  that verse.  Like I said, either you start questioning what you are being taught or you settle in to being an unquestioning toady.
3) the way Murray made up the story about "standing against Satan in the world that was"  and how the elect earned salvation through that
4) the heresy of Hymenaeus and Philetus, this is the heresy that says that the dead have already risen, like your husband's dead sister.  John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. Verses like that and many others others ate at me. 
5) Corruptions of words like "air" in 1 thess 4 into breath of life body, or "seduced" in 2 Cor 11 into "sexually seduced"  Murray is not a competent Hebrew or Greek scholar, but his students do not "check him out"  they just follow the breadcrumb trail he leaves for them.
there are more but I have to rush.
For you:
I still think the Serpent see is the best place to attack, because there are so many ways to attack it, it has many vulnerabilities.  If you need specifics I could probably help you with that.
I would not attack him based on the rapture.  For one, I don't believe in the rapture either. (Not that I agree with Murray, because I do believe in flying off with Jesus in the air) The rapture is a side-effect of the resurrection, the rapture doctrine is derived from focusing on the transportation aspect of the resurrection instead of the transformation aspect. 1 Thessalonians 4 is about the resurrection, the rapture is an intrusion, much like Murray's doctrine , it requires you to "read between the lines" to see multiple resurrections.
John 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
1Thess 4:16  ....and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1 Cor 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
 Christ raised, the dead in Christ raised, The Living saints raised, this is the order of the resurrection.
The rapture adds all kinds of complicating factors to this simple order
If you want me to talk to your husband on the phone, I'll do it, but I would ask you you read the following first.  It is part of a 67 page document I'm about to publish.  If you could honestly find an area of common ground with your husband, where you could give a little first he might be easier to deal with.  I don't want you to fake it for him or anything, God forbid, but just take a look.  You need to be able to tell me honestly that you read this, you don't have to comment or respond in any way.  I'm not trying to debate you
Paul Stringini
From "I Believe in Death and in the Resurrection of the Dead" (soon to be released)
 There is No Rapture - Resurrection Side-Effects do not Merit Latin Names and Novels

The Rapture doctrine is a splinter and a corruption of the doctrine of the Resurrection.  The rapture is the name given to one aspect of the resurrection which men attempt to spin off as an event separate from the resurrection altogether.

At the coming of Christ those who have been raised from the dead and those who remain alive are "caught up" in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air as part of the resurrection event.  The Greek word for "caught up" is harpazo (to grab or snatch) and from that they go to the Latin derived "rapture" (which has a similar meaning).  I do not use this term "rapture" because the event already has a name (the Resurrection) and this side-effect (the catching up) does not require a special Latin name.

Giving this effect a special name and treating it as a separate event has led to many problems in Christianity.  They split the Rapture off from the Resurrection (they ROB the Resurrection doctrine) and treat it as a separate event, they  move it around in time and add multiple raptures as they see fit.  The Rapture has not only overshadowed the bigger event of which it is merely a side-effect. In the end there is no room for the resurrection, the resurrection is simply replaced by the rapture.  The side-effect become central.  Today, we hear all about the "catching up," but almost nothing about the RESURRECTION, and the resurrection is a central doctrine of Christianity.

I have gotten dozens of questions about the Rapture, but never one about the resurrection, that speaks volumes to me.

Why do people call the Resurrection the Rapture? We had a name for this event for over a thousand years but over the last hundred and fifty years they decided to start focusing on the TRANSPORTATION aspect instead of on the TRANSFORMATION aspect of this event and gave it a name (Rapture).

When I say that "there is no Rapture" what I mean is that the doctrine that Jesus is coming to take us away to heaven (The Rapture as it is commonly taught) is not correct.   We will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord, as the scriptures describe, but we are not leaving the earth, Christ is returning and we will be with him and with those who have died in Christ.

1 Thessalonians 4 (which I will cover in detail in the next section)  is the primary passage used to support the Rapture doctrine, this is where it comes from. But 1 Thessalonians 4:16 describes the resurrection, that is the subject and it does not make sense to interject a new idea about transportation to a passage that is talking about the resurrection of the dead.

1 Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: (shall I mention that this is "on the last day?")

That is the context, the resurrection of the dead, that is the focus. But what verse gets all the attention?

1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

The rapture focuses on the transportation aspect of this passage, but that is not the central idea. 

Also, there is nothing here telling us that the transportation spoken of will take us to heaven as many believe. When Jesus comes we are going to MEET him, he is on his way here, and we meet him in the clouds, to join him for his triumphant return to Jerusalem, immediately.

According to Mark 13 (and other passages such as Revelation 6:16,17) this event will be visible (not secret as the rapture teachers suggest based on their imaginations)

Mark 13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

(The term "they" in this verse must refer to "the world" or "the enemies" or some like thing, because, in the context of Mark 13, the disciples are always referred to as "You" and the enemies as "they" read for yourself)

Mark 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.

Note the parallel reference to the meeting in the clouds. The elect are gathered in the clouds at the same time as Christ is revealed to the world.  We meet him in the clouds; because we have to meet him before he lands, so that we may land with him. We get to share in that. The Kingdom of Heaven is coming to earth. There is no evidence for any secret removal of Christians from the earth, that is pure fiction. Christians are suffering tribulation and persecution this very day, the idea of being saved from suffering is un-Christian and only makes sense to complacent and comfort loving Christians in the west.  God saves us from death by resurrection, God does not save us from pain by rapture.

Phil 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

Instead of assuring themselves that they will not be on earth for tribulation Christians ought to be preparing spiritually to stand in the spiritual battle in the day of the Lord. This is what I live for. I don't despise those who fear the tribulation, I'm not exactly thrilled at the idea of suffering (yet I want to fulfill it) but I would rather encourage them to be strong and trust the Lord, that nothing will be asked of us beyond what we can bear.

Isaiah 48:10 Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction.

I have heard ministers talk how Christ doesn't want his bride "sullied" by tribulation. They say he does not want her bruised and battered. These savor the things which men love and not the things which God loves. What sullies Christ's bride is her love of material possessions and delight in things which God despises. If I were to judge it based on the Church as it appears today, the bride is already dirty and polluted, tribulation will purify and prepare her. So judge nothing before the time.

Daniel 12:10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

For these reasons, I don't like the Rapture doctrine as it is commonly used, and I don't teach it or use that word in my teachings. You can teach Christianity without ever using the word "rapture" and you don't have to know of the small detail of the "catching up," to be caught up. But you cannot be true to Christianity without teaching the hope and truth of the resurrection of the dead.

I  reject the rapture doctrine because it tries to replace the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead in the hearts of Christians. The beliefs inspired by this doctrine cause people to imagine multiple raptures/resurrections prior to the "first resurrection" (Rev 20) The Rapture exalts itself above the knowledge of God. Yes, we will be caught up, but that is just INCIDENTAL to the fact of the Resurrection

Primary Passages Dealing with the Resurrection

We have already brought up many of the shorter passages from the Old and New Testament which have to do with death and resurrection. I now want to address the longer New Testament texts which deal with death and resurrection before we get to the objections. Having established what death is, we will examine the primary passages which teach us about  the resurrection of the dead keeping in mind the scriptural teachings on death and putting from our mind the conditioning and prejudices we have inherited from out religious culture.

1 Thessalonians 4

This passage is often used in reference to the "Rapture," heresy.  But there is no rapture, only resurrection (for details see that section above).

1 Thessalonians 4:13
But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

"Them which are asleep," refers to the dead in Christ.  Others sorrow because they do not have the hope we have that the dead will be raised.

1 Thessalonians 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

When it says he will bring them "with him"  it may tempt some to say, "see they are in heaven!" They have to come 'with him'"  But you can only say that if you presume BEFOREHAND that they are already in heaven. 

The dead in Christ will rise as Christ rose.  And when God brings Christ back, he will also bring back them that sleep (the dead) at the same time.  The word "with" (Greek: sun) does not suggest that they come from the same place. The preposition "with" does not change the established position of the dead from being in their graves.  Christ himself said that when he comes back the dead would hear his voice and come out of their graves, that is how they come back with him. The word "with" refers to the TIMING here not to the starting position.

It is unreasonable to use this verse to validate the conditioned prejudices which induce some to reject the truth.  This verse does not  invalidate the idea that the dead will rise from their graves. 

1 Thessalonians 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

Prevent is being used here in the archaic sense, most modern translations will say something like, "precede" or "go before."  As I said at the beginning, there is a specific order to the resurrection.  Christ, the dead in Christ, they that are Christ's at his coming.  This is why all Rapture doctrines are HERESY, they interfere with this very SPECIFIC order of resurrection.  There is no rapture, the rapture is a corrupt hijacking of the doctrine of the resurrection.

For example, if you believe in the pretribulational rapture point of view, you will have living saints rising before the last martyrs have died.  That is totally out of order.  The living will not precede the dead, that is absolute.  The living will not be changed until after the dead rise, and  these events occur in close chronological proximity, they are sequential. 

Christ returns, the dead in Christ rise, and the living saints are changed.  It is so simply and plainly laid out in the verses that follow.

1 Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Paul repeats the fact that the dead rise first, at that time, at the sound of the trumpet, which according to 1 Corinthians 15 is the Last trumpet. The church I originally came from teaches that the dead have already risen, so they say that the final clause here, "the dead in Christ shall rise first" is added because they have already risen.  I have already made clear my feelings on that.  Not only is it an abuse of this passage, it is the same heresy of Hymenaeus and Philetus. (2 Timothy 2:17)

1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Christ returns, the dead in Christ come back to life and go up to meet him first, then we which are alive and remain go up to meet them.  This is the return of Christ.  Simple. That confirms exactly what I have been saying, that there is a specific order to the resurrection.  After this point, you can't have more saints dying and waiting for resurrection, that would be out of order, this is the "last day." 

We meet the Lord in the air, but it should be noted that we do not "go to heaven,"  because this happens as Jesus Christ is returning to Earth.  I tried to portray this in
my video for Mark Chapter 13, in that video (from about 5:30) we see the dead rise and meet the Lord in the sky, and they return together immediately to Jerusalem.  Since Christ is returning to Jerusalem it makes sense to meet him in the air, Jerusalem is a long was from Illinois and many other places.

The church I originally came from (The Shepherd's Chapel)  teaches that the word "air" here refers to the "breath of life body."  I do not dispute the fact that we are going to be changed into a celestial or glorious body in the resurrection.  What I object to is the manipulation of this text to obscure the fact that the meeting with Christ takes place in the sky.  The only reason they attempt to make this word mean "air-body" is because of the objection to "flying away"  but that is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.  Meeting the Lord in the air makes sense.  If Paul wanted to reference the resurrected body, he would have used terms like he usually would.  He wouldn't suddenly interject the Greek word for "air" for body when he would have used clear terms like  "glorified body" or "spiritual body"  if that was what he wanted to communicate.  It is such an unnecessary manipulation of the text. 

1 Thessalonians 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

The dead sleep but will rise as Jesus rose and we will all be reunited in the resurrection when Jesus comes back.  Those are the words by which we should comfort one another.

But what are the words people USUALLY comfort one another with?  "Don't cry Mabel, Charley is with Jesus now."  "Weep not Fred, Gladys is smiling down on us from heaven, she wouldn't want you to be sad."  "Oh Susan, don't you know that Billy is in a better place?"

Are those the words Paul told us to comfort one another with? Is there any place in the bible where such words are used to comfort those that mourn? No and no!

Emailer's First Reply:

----- Original Message -----
From: Name Withheld 
To: Paul Stringini
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 7:32 AM
Subject: Re: help for marriage

Dear Paul

    Thank you so much for your kind and insightful response.  Your rapture information was interesting.  I do not believe in some "fly away" doctrine, but do believe we will be snatched up like Enoch and Elijah.  I believe there will be a transformation with resurrected bodies.  I do believe there is a reason that the church is not mentioned after chapter three of Revelation, and am familiar with the 70th week arguments, but I do not profess to know the mind of God.  I agree, if this were the only issue with Murray doctrine, I could live with it.  I have an issue with my husband insisting the Kenites got onto the Ark.  He has been unable to show me it in Genesis, yet twists scripture in his mind to believe it.  When I question, my husband gets loud, obnoxious, condescending toward me and looks and sounds like Murray.

     My issue has always been with Murray himself.  The first time my husband sent me some CD's to listen to, I was turned off by his condescending attitude.  I tried to listen several times and it never felt right in my spirit.  When I watched him on TV....he made me sick.  I literally get sick to my stomach to see or hear this man.  So, I began to research him, and that his how I came across your writings.  I also looked up the Arkansas property records to see that his property is indeed owned by Soldiers of the Cross.  His board of directors is his immediate family.  I cannot financially support a ministry like this.  Furthermore, the Serpent Seed doctrine does lend itself to anti semiticism.  I have read that this was the doctrine that Hitler believed in.

     I do not trust anyone who thinks they "know" all the secret answers and puts down other people.  We need to be honest and admit that there is so much we will never know this side of heaven...

    Yes, I would welcome any information you have used regarding the serpent seed doctrine.

In the vine,

Name Withheld

Romans 12:12 "Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer"  <///><

----- Original Message -----
From: Name Withheld
To: Paul Stringini
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 9:26 AM
Subject: help for marriage
PS:  I've come to surmise that so many intellects will argue doctrine so much that they miss the Doctor...I want to focus Matthew 28 and the Great Commission...
Romans 12:12 "Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer"  <///><

My Second Response:

----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Stringini
To: Name Withheld 
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: help for marriage

I never try to engage anyone in a debate who is not interested in one.  Most of my ministry has nothing to do with debate,  it is just that I used to be a student, and there is nothing wrong with contending for the faith in love.  My first priorities are my word for word scripture music and bible studies.   I know that your primary concern is your husband right now.  I don't believe that people who believe in the rapture are going to automatically worship the AntiChrist if their view was proven wrong by events on Earth.  Sincere believers with their mind full of the word will most likely see their error and correct the matter.  There is only one thing I want to leave you with on that matter.  The church does appear later in the book of revelation, in the thick of it.  It has been suggested to you that it does not, and that is what you have been conditioned to see, but that is sort of like saying that Christ does not appear in chapter 5 because in Chapter 5 he is referred to as "the Lamb"  a symbolic name.  The church also has a symbolic name, and in chapter one it is mentioned clearly, yet overlooked by many.
Rev 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.
The symbolic name for the churches in Revelation is "candlesticks"  The candlesticks appear in chapter 11.  We are the light of the world and my life's ambition is to live and die in th last days.
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.  
5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.
These are not "two stars" (individual leaders or spokesmen, "angels") but two candlesticks (or trees, i.e. multi-branched).  The remaining churches are the two witnesses, the symbolic name is "candlestick".  It is one of the simplest symbolic relationships in the book of Revelation.  Just for you to think about, I do not wish to distress you, but being myself persuaded I am obliged for the sake of my own conscience to offer what I can when opportunity presents itself.  I do not expect an answer to this.
The matter of the Kenites, I have been considering pooling everything I have learned about the Kenites into a single organized document, but that is some way off.  I do have a page where I have collected all the email debates I have had over the Kenites,  You may find this to be of some help.  The critical argument is who the bible says the children of the devil really are (1John 3)  You have to be able to argue this point with conviction and understanding, I also recommend my bible study on 1John 3 for help on that, you may have problems using much of my material on certain subjects because I rely on arguments from points of doctrine I expect your church also rejects.
 I just finished a 67 page book on the subject of Death and Resurrection and I'm about to publish is on my website,
I mention that because, if you can receive it, Murray is much more vulnerable on the point of death and resurrection.
2Tim2:17 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.
Murray teaches that the dead have already risen.  As do many others...
I pray that the Spirit of God will guide you and help you, because your husband lives in thick darkness and you will need some divine assistance to win him out of it.
Paul Stringini

Emailer's Second Reply:

----- Original Message -----
From: Name Withheld 
To: Paul Stringini
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: help for marriage

Dear Paul

   Thank you again for your reply.  I was not directing toward you for being in a debate.  I was making a comment based on observation of others, including my intellectual husband, that so many who choose to overthink the doctrine....miss the doctor.  My husband is missing it all because of overthinking....he has been a bachelor for a long time and has read every self-help book and listens to every self-help message and every scripture sermon he can get.  He is so busy trying to be the perfect person, that he misses the chance to live.....Our only arguments is when he brings up Murray doctrine and I don't want to discuss it.....He then says "all couples have these fights"......ugh!!!!  I don't want to fight, that's why I don't want to talk about it......He will never get it from me anyway....Our children are all grown, we have no ex-spouse issues, we make good incomes....yet he seems to want to try and make an argument.  I think he listens to so many talk radio New Life with Townsend and McCloud that he thinks all couples need to fight everyday...I work 12-14 hr days and am exhausted to get in my bible study and dinner and he insists that I need to listen to Townsend and McCloud.  Yet, he has never done a day of counseling in his life.  I went for several years when I needed to.....He needs something.....yet thinks he has all the answers in Murray.....

Romans 12:12 "Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer"  <///><

Return to "The Shepherd's Chapel and Dr. Arnold Murray" Main Page