Arnold Murray

[seekerman]

What a great bible teacher! He teaches book by book, verse by verse, something that 99.99% of the preachers today just don't do.

What is the problem with the preachers today not doing this? Don't know the bible well enough? Don't take the time to study? Why?

[Dordrecht]

Originally Posted by seekerman

What a great bible teacher! He teaches book by book, verse by verse, something that 99.99% of the preachers today just don't do.

What is the problem with the preachers today not doing this? Don't know the bible well enough? Don't take the time to study? Why?

LOLOLOL - You are kidding, right?

Murray denies hell and the rapture, and states that Eve had sexual relations with the devil and that this union produced Cain.

He seems to be a nice guy, but that's where it ends. He's way off track. LOL

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Dordrecht

LOLOLOL - You are kidding, right?

Murray denies hell and the rapture, and states that Eve had sexual relations with the devil and that this union produced Cain.

He seems to be a nice guy, but that's where it ends. He's way off track. LOL

His theology may or may not be off, that's not the question though.

[bbyrd009]

I don't agree with all of Arnold Murray's theology, but I find most of it to be pretty sound. I had questions about Rapture doctrine, saw one too many thin arguments based on stretched definitions, and got Ezekiel 13:18-20 translated by him concisely, and it was not a puzzle. "I (God) am against those who teach men to fly to save their souls" is what you will end up with; or remain in denial.

Murray does not deny hell at all, but does argue that it hasn't even been created yet, and won't be until after the Great White Throne judgement. His serpent seed doctrine strikes me as sound, and he does not overplay it. Adam is not in Cain's geneology, the Bible clearly states "enmity between thy seed and my seed," which is offspring to God, that "seed" part, dress it up however you want, and Adam and Eve notably covered their privates after "eating the fruit," and not their mouths.

I hear people that disagree with him, but their theology just doesn't hold up as well as his. As you note, I am more scared of the "are you kidding?"s, frankly, as while I don't agree with every word Murray says myself--he was a marine, and has nationalistic ideas I don't agree with, and also believes that 1948 is connected to the parable of the fig tree--So what; I don't believe you're supposed to agree with everything anybody says, and I think one runs the risk of tossing a really big baby with a little bathwater since, as you note, you better pack a lunch if you think you are going to cogently argue against him, and "are you serious?" becomes a cop-out, sorry Dord.

How many preachers you know who can correct the KJV with authority as they go? Your preacher inform you yet how "Easter" got in the KJV that one time, in place of Passover? (Christ is our "Passover," and Ishtar [Easter] is just some pagan fertility goddess [eggs, bunnies, etc]). How many know the meanings of every, single name in the Bible, which brings clarity to so many obscure passages?

You can run, but you can't really hide from Murray. What I mostly love about him is the overlay of Grace, he doesn't present any of his what many might call "fringe" doctrine as like "mandatory" or anything, he just lays it out there, keeps Grace first...

It should be noted that he accepts no pay for this work of his, and his ministry is growing hugely, they have their own network now. Thumbs up here, for Murray.

"He's way off track" just has no basis in reality, or by all means bring it and let's find out.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by seekerman

What a great bible teacher! He teaches book by book, verse by verse, something that 99.99% of the preachers today just don't do.

What is the problem with the preachers today not doing this? Don't know the bible well enough? Don't take the time to study? Why?

Expository preaching is common in the crowd I run with......

[citizen]

I watch him for comic relief. He is very funny and some of his stuff is good.
But he's bad for people that dont know the Word of God for themselves. He teaches very strange doctrines- sort of like Brother Branahm and a bit of teachings of the Christian Identity movement.

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by citizen

I watch him for comic relief. He is very funny and some of his stuff is good.
But he's bad for people that dont know the Word of God for themselves. He teaches very strange doctrines- sort of like Brother Branahm and a bit of teachings of the Christian Identity movement.

His humor is a bit pointed, but great.

He is GREAT for people who don't know the word--if you disagree with him, at least you know exactly why and where in Scripture you disagree when his lecture is done. He lays it out there and makes you think about it; this is not baby food, presented with all the thinking done for you. (Compare your current Rapture doctrine, if you dare)

I might point out that his "strange doctrines" will pale in strangeness next to God's truth, whatever that may be in a matter, and again, he never seems pushy about them, doesn't make it like a "believe this, or go to hell" thing like so many do.

I'm not sure which doctrines one might call "very strange," as this is different for everyone, but I suggest that we are in the ideal forum to probe any strangeness, and you'll prolly find that for most of them, strange though they may be at first glance, that your theology, or mythology, what you presently hold to be true in a matter, will fall before his does, and the Grace part is that even if it doesn't, he would not condemn you for it.

So, bring your best against him, enough of this "Lalala" stuff with no basis.
Oh, and you better bring your lunch.

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

Expository preaching is common in the crowd I run with......

Is that what this is called? This "chapter by chapter, verse by verse" thing? I love it, because even though you are getting a particular interpretation, Word becomes revealed whether you agree or disagree with the interpretation.

Are any of your expositors available online or otherwise? I'd love a link or something, ty.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

Is that what this is called? This "chapter by chapter, verse by verse" thing? I love it, because even though you are getting a particular interpretation, Word becomes revealed whether you agree or disagree with the interpretation.

Are any of your expositors available online or otherwise? I'd love a link or something, ty.

I'm not a oneness pentecostal so you are probably not interested in my sources but it is common practice among the Reformed branch of Christianity. My pastor has been preaching thru Genesis in the Sunday morning services and Acts in the evening.

BTW, John MacArthur has made a career of preaching thru the New Testement and most of his stuff is on-line.

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

I'm not a oneness pentecostal so you are probably not interested in my sources but it is common practice among the Reformed branch of Christianity. My pastor has been preaching thru Genesis in the Sunday morning services and Acts in the evening.

BTW, John MacArthur has made a career of preaching thru the New Testement and most of his stuff is on-line.

Um, I don't even know what "oneness pentacostal" is, sorry. Sounds like some kind of exclusive modalism? Brings an unintended double-entendre on "member," imo. I'm anxious to pitch it in the fire, and see if it burns, personally. So yes, I appreciate any sources that might lack exclusivity, particularly, and ty for the ref.

And I don't wish to put down anyone else's mythology; to the extent that "oneness pentecostal" is edifying, I say "Amen!"

And ps, I'm ignorant of this "Reformed Branch," could you expound there a little? Ty again. Are they just called "Reformed Christians?"