Is Pastor Arnold Murray merely "reading the bible?" on the Shepherd's Chapel broadcast

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

From: Paul Stringini

To: Emailer #251

Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 3:16 PM

Subject: Re: Chump

Arnold Murray is not a bible reader. I did not say anything about "reading the bible," because that is not what Arnold Murray does. Arnold Murray does not merely read the bible. Arnold Murray himself calls himself a teacher, and that is what he does. If you want to have someone read the bible to you, there are many fine readers out there. (Alexander Scourby's reading of the KJV comes to mind). He reads the bible without polluting it with his own heretical opinions.)

When you add false doctrine to your bible reading/teaching, it pollutes the whole thing. Would you consider pasta "fit for consumption" if I added a few lumps of feces? I would think not. Would you just scrape the feces off the top and eat the remaining good pasta? I don't think so. So I don't consider bible readings topped off with heresy to be any different than pasta topped off with feces balls. Unfit for consumption. It ruins the good word by polluting it with abominations.

But does Arnold Murray do this? He sure does. Arnold Murray reads the bible, but then will often immediately proceed to tell you it does not mean what it says. Obviously he doesn't do that on every single verse, but how much feces do you like with your pasta? I like ZERO. So the fact that there is truth mingled in with the fiction does not redeem his teachings.

Example: Arnold Murray could never read Genesis without inserting comments informing the listener that the bible is a bunch of fairy tales which should not be believed. For example:

Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain,

According to the way things were reckoned in the bible, that means that Adam was the father of Cain. That is clear cause and effect. Here is another example from the same context.

Genesis 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch:

That means that Cain had intercourse with his wife which resulted in the conception of Enoch. That is a clear example of cause and effect It is the same formula as Genesis 4:1.

But Murray teaches that Satan was the carnal father of Cain. That is not biblical, Arnold Murray will cherry pick verses all over the bible and abuse your ignorance of Hebrew and Greek in order to convince you of this, but it is not in the bible. Murray's story is the fairy tale, what the bible says is the truth.

(By the way, Genesis 4:1 is Cain's genealogy, and Adam is in it. Cain is not in the genealogy that leads to Noah for the same reason that Reuben is not in Christ's Genealogy.)

Arnold Murray denies the clear teaching of scripture that Adam had intercourse with Eve and the result was Cain.

That is not "reading the bible" That is reading one's own personal opinions into the bible in order to negate what the bible actually says and promote yourself as a teacher who reveals secrets.

I get a lot of mail from people saying I'm trying to ride on Murray's coat tails or something. But noone ever seems to notice how Murray is the one riding on the BIBLE's coat tails. He is the one who tries to discredit what the word of God says in order to promote himself and his personal ideas and opinions. That is who Arnold Murray really is. He is a scripture abuser. And he creates people who are like himself, scripture abusers who abuse and belittle what the scriptures say, and do likewise to other people, just like Arnold Murray does.

I could give more examples if you are interested. In that case, I am at your service.

Sincerely,
Paul Stringini