----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Stringini"
To: "Name Withheld
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: I think u have a problem
I do not consider taking time to converse with another well-meaning
human
being to be a waste of my time. Even if you think I have no effect on
you.
Technically, No one is damned to hell, hell itself is to be damned.
Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the
second death.
We are all going to hell, but hell is not damnation, God reigns also in
hell.
Psalm 139:8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed
in hell, behold, thou art there.
I love that verse. One area I agree with Murray on, is that the soul is destroyed in the second death. But we differ in that I believe we all must
go to hell (the grave) first and wait for the resurrection as promised by Christ.
Christ himself went to hell, but his soul was not left in hell.
Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Paul told us to comfort one another with the promise of the resurrection.
Hell is not damnation, because hell is the place where from which we all
shall rise, to the resurrection of life or to the resurrection of
damnation,
as Jesus said, "on the last day." (John 6)
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.
They shall rise from the earth, not come down from heaven. While you may
not believe this, you do know that damnation refers to the lake of fire,
into which death and hell shall be cast. (I recommend my recent work "I
believe in death and in the Resurrection of the Dead,"
http://oraclesofgod.org/doctrine/03_the_resurrection_of_the_dead.htm
If your beliefs cannot withstand the challenge of the scriptures then you
need to abandon your beliefs)
I'm getting to your question...in a round about way.
Arnold Murray teaches that the dead are already with God. That the dead
are "with him." If the dead are walking around in heaven in a spiritual body,
that describes a resurrected state. I show in detail in the work that I
just linked how that view is incorrect, I really recommend it, you owe it
to
the truth to test your faith, if you are of the truth my errors should be
manifest. I do not see how Murray's doctrine differs from the error of
Hymenaeus and Philetus
2 Timothy2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is
Hymenaeus
and Philetus;
2 Timothy2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the
resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
I remember the first time I crossed that verse while studying with Arnold
Murray (and a few other verses in the same spirit) It gave me pause, but
I
figured there must be another explanation, and there always are other
explanations, but when the scriptures keep multiplying... I can't keep
making excuses.
Paul suggested that this belief had the potential to "overthrow the faith
of
some"
Our faith in Christ is not just our trust in him for our personal
well-being. God defines what our faith ought to be. When we do not give
his desires regard, our faith is alien to God. When he condemns certain
things as works of the flesh, and says that those who practice such things
will not inherit the kingdom of God, he is telling us what his judgment
is.
I cannot alter this, neither add to it, nor take away from it.
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 simply means to be of another opinion (false, by implication).
All I can tell such people is that they must "repent."
But what do you do, in your case? In your case, you believe you are not
harboring heresies...
Mark 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the
righteous, but sinners to repentance.
How can someone repent who believes they are doing no wrong?
God must reveal your errors to you. I don't know about you, but I pray
about that all the time.
I prayed to get the holy spirit for most of my life but did not receive it
until I was 31 years old. I prayed to be delivered from drugs and
alcohol,
but was not given victory for 13 years.
Ultimately, God must reveal the truth to us or we will die in our sins.
If he does not help us see the truth then his Grace is not upon us and we
will die in our sins and we will not inherit the kingdom of God.
John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for
if
ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
The Pharisees believed in the Christ, they just didn't believe that the
man
Jesus was the Christ. When our doctrine strays from the teachings he
taught
it is as if we wish that some other man was Christ, so we let men like
Murray and others tell us things that appeal to our fleshly wisdom.
How can God condemn anyone for so small a thing as sin? God does not owe
us
life. Life is a gift and God has every right to give it to whomsoever he
pleases.
God is not fair. That is one of the first bits of human wisdom we ought
to
get ourselves over. God is gracious, he gives salvation to people who do
not deserve it. That is why it is unfair. Man thinks that so long as God is saving us by grace, he ought to distribute salvation to everyone. But that is not how God operates.
Matthew 20:12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast
made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong:
didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
The message of that parable is that what God does by grace is not seen as
fair by man.
God saves some, according to his will, but not all. To those who get
left
out, it will not seem fair. No one who is damned is going to go down
praising God's fairness.
Personally, I would be shocked if God did not eventually open your eyes to
the truth. If he has already put in your heart to seek him, so long as it
is also in your heart to continue to grow, I would be surprised. God does
not give these desires to all men. I believe in the grace of God towards you
on
your behalf, I say, that the truth shall be revealed to you. If not, then
what can I say? If God is not gracious to us to open our eyes, then he is
not likely to give us eternal life either.
It is a pity you have not asked me for explanations of how what you
believe through Murray is not true, because I have spent most of my life testing
the
things I believed, I can defend what I believe, I can give good reasons to
discard the leaven of Arnold Murray.
The truth has nothing to do with reading sexual innuendos into passages that have no sexual context.
You need to ask yourself this, "have I really checked out what Arnold
Murray says?" Or "Did I merely follow the breadcrumb trails that he left me?"
He gives Strong's Concordance definitions, but is either too incompetent
to realize the mistakes he is making, or has faith that the ends justify the
means in establishing his vision of what the bible "really" says. For
example, the word "naga," translated "touch" in the garden: Arnold says
this word means "to lie with a woman" but that is "by euphemism." It is one
of
those words with more than one meaning, like cock (rooster), prick (your
finger) and screw (a primitive machine). I'm not vulgar, Dr. Murray's teaching draws us into vulgarity by asking us to view innocent passages as suggestive of sexual content.
We still use "touch" in the euphemistic sense in English, ("If you touch
my daughter, I'll wring your neck!") It is not a secret that requires use of
the Strong's Concordance.
1Cor 1:1 ... It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
Do you need a concordance to understand that verse? No, you do not. It is
easy to see that "touch" here is being used as a euphemism for sexual contact.
Murray brings out the concordance and it lends his interpretation the air
of
a mystery revealed and established by scholarly research. But what he is
really doing is misusing the Strong's dictionary to convince you to apply
the euphemistic meaning of "touch" to a passage where such an application
is
TOTALLY inappropriate.
Would you apply the euphemism to this passage:
Luke 8 :46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath TOUCHED me: for I perceive that
virtue is gone out of me.
Sex? I think not... but those with dirty minds see sex behind every bush.
The Strong's dictionary often contains several definitions of the same
word but you can't apply them all in every case. The context is the deciding
factor.
The exact same word (naga) is again used (and many other times as well,
did
you research that? did you really "check him out?") In Genesis 32 the
angel
touches (naga) Jacob in the hollow of his thigh. But we do not assume
that
this means "to lie with a woman." Why? Even though touching thighs and
having virtue go out are actually more suggestive than "eating fruit" we cannot see this as sexual because of the context. Euphemisms only exist
in
specific contexts. The phrase, "Prick your finger" is NEVER a vulgarity,
(even if placed in a sexual context, such as, "he pricked his finger in
the midst of sexual contact.") but if you switch the words "prick" and
"finger"
in that example, you will find that it is ALWAYS vulgar. I would rather
not
speak of these things to any man, and much less to a lady, but Murray is
not
at all ashamed to read into the bible sexual overtones which are not
implied
by the text.
The tree grew from the ground, it looked good for food, she ate the fruit,
and eating fruit is no euphemism for sex. Neither is touching fruit.
Believe in the words of the bible, do not believe in the men who would
tell
you not to believe what you are reading, that is a dangerous way to
approach God's holy word, if that is what you believe the bible to be.
In a related matter, "Wholly seduced" in 2Cor 11:3 .is another one where
Murray abuses and misuses the Strong's, either through ignorance or
through
arrogance.
2Cor 11:3 ..as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your
minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
Beguiled means completely deceived. When Dr. Strong said it means "wholly
seduced" he did not mean to say "SEXUALLY seduced," because, believe it
or
not, the English word "seduced" does not automatically imply sex. That is
a
modern use of the word "seduced." The Greek word "exapatao" has nothing
to
do with sex, nothing at all, and it never has been used that way in the
bible.
Romans 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived
(EXAPATAO)
me, and by it slew me.
Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive
(EXAPATAO) the
hearts of the simple.
1 Cor 3:18 Let no man deceive (EXAPATAO) himself. If any man among you
seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be
wise.
2 Cor 11:18 (as the serpent beguiled (Exapatao) Eve)
2 Thess2:3 Let no man deceive (Exapatao) you by any means: for that day
shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of
sin
be revealed, the son of perdition;
If you trace it back to the root, you will see that the word "apatao" #538
means to cheat or delude, and does not imply sexual meaning.
Ephesians 5:6 Let no man deceive (apatao) you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience
1Tim 2:14 And Adam was not deceived (apatao), but the woman being deceived
(apatao) was in the transgression.
Wow, consider that verse, they both "ate the fruit" but only eve was
"seduced" (not sexually) But if "eating the fruit" means having "sex with
Satan" then this verse is contradictory to that idea.
James 1:26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not
his
tongue, but deceiveth (apatao) his own heart, this man's religion is vain.
The Greek prefix "ex" essentially means "out" and in this usage has the same forces as words in English like "outdo," "outlast," or "outmaneuver"
it
is a strengthened form of "deceive" literally to "out-deceive."
The translators were not covering up the sexual nature of the sin in the
garden, the sin in the garden was disobedience.
The serpent beguiled Eve into eating fruit from a tree which God had
planted
which had the power to impart the knowledge of Good and evil. If what
really happened was that they had sex with the serpent then there was no
sin
in the garden, because God gave a commandment concerning the eating of
fruit.
Exapatao means deceit, and the way Arnold Murray handles it either proves
he
is incompetent or arrogant, I cannot tell which but I lean towards
incompetence fueled by arrogance. Check me out, but you will need The New Englishman's Greek Concordance and Lexicon (by Wigram-Green). That is
what
allows me to trace Greek words throughout the bible the way Strong's concordance allows you to trace the English words. You can get one
through
the internet. There is a Hebrew version as well. Very useful.
This is one of my favorite passages, in my bible studies I teach people
who to obtain the things promised in the gospel. I do not focus on useless information such as which angels had sex with whom...
II Peter 1
1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have
obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and
of Jesus our Lord,
3 ACCORDING as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain
unto LIFE and GODLINESS, through the knowledge of him that hath called us
to
GLORY and VIRTUE:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious PROMISES: that BY
THESE ye might be partakers of the DIVINE NATURE, having ESCAPED the corruption that is in the world through lust.
5 And beside this, giving all diligence, ADD TO your faith virtue; and TO
virtue knowledge;
6 And TO knowledge temperance; and TO temperance patience; and TO patience
godliness;
7 And TO godliness brotherly kindness; and TO brotherly kindness charity.
8 For if THESE THINGS be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall
neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus
Christ.
9 But he that LACKETH these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and
hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to MAKE your calling and
election SURE: for if ye DO these things, ye shall NEVER fall:
11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the
everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Do we desire to be assured of an entrance into the everlasting kingdom of
God? Verse 10, that is our assurance. We must add to our faith, continue
in the faith, the just shall live by faith. A single act of faith is dead.
We must be born of him, Christ must be formed in us, that is salvation. It
is not a prerequirement, what man would qualify? It is the result of faith
in the promises of God given us by his grace.
Titus 2:11 For the GRACE of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to
all men, 12 TEACHING us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live
soberly, righteously, and godly, in this PRESENT world;
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from ALL iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no
man despise thee.
We must ask ourselves, are we zealous of good works? or are we merely
zealous for our own personal safety?
Galatians 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until
Christ be formed in you,
Colossians 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be
not
moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was
preached to every creature which is under heaven;
Continuing in the faith does not mean that we just keep thinking we are
saved. We must grow, up into Christ. And that is my prayer for myself,
and
for you.
Sincerely,
Paul Stringini
PS my wife said I should start referring people to part of a bible study I did on Titus,
http://oraclesofgod.org/studies/56_Titus/56_Titus_Chapter_03/56_Titus_Chapter_03_Part_06.mp3
This is one of the very few times I mention Arnold Murray's teachings in
one
of my bible studies.