Reason enough to leave?

[RandyWayne]

Over the past couple of years, I have posted both here and on another board the bizarre "happenings" that started at the church my wife grew up in. A new pastor had just started a few months prior and taught a short class for married couples.

This is the actual handout we were given that morning..... And we never returned. Two years later, most of the people who thought he was nutz then have no come around to his (the pastors) way of thinking.

Question is, how many would have done the same thing we did? Would you have given him a chance? Does anyone here actually agree with this nonsense being taught?

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w113/RandyWayneD/Misc%20pics%20for%20posting%20on%20other%20sites/IntimacyInMarriage1.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w113/RandyWayneD/Misc%20pics%20for%20posting%20on%20other%20sites/IntimacyInMarriage2.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w113/RandyWayneD/Misc%20pics%20for%20posting%20on%20other%20sites/IntimacyInMarriage3.jpg

[Ronzo]

Later gator...

[RandyWayne]

Thats what we said. Left before the service even started!
(The class was held an hour before the service.)

[Ronzo]

Blows my mind how nutso some folks are...


I'd be screaming as I left, "RUN! RUN AWAY! FAR FAR FAR AWAY!!! JONESTOWN AND WACO COMETH!" :runhills:runhills:runhills

[nahkoe]

There are so many errors.....so much misinformation.... I'd have laughed out loud and left. There's just no way. Not a chance.

[Neck]

This kind of teaching reminds me of Rev Jim Jones.

Crazy!

[seguidordejesus]

nuts

[RandyWayne]

And like I mentioned. Almost everyone else thought it was off the wall.... but we, and another couple, were the only ones to leave. Now two years later, everyone else who remains has "seen the light" and support (his) teaching.

[RevDWW]

Here is an easy answer to this Old testament teaching:

Heb 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

[A_PoMo]

Sounds Docetic.

[Trouvere]

wow I did not know people went that deep into other peoples lives from the pulpit.I have read this teaching among the Messianics.

[tv1a]

It is unclear if the preacher made this a heaven or hell issue. Maybe one should have stayed to find that out.

I've heard about scientific evidence which promotes abstainence during the purification process for health reasons...

The apostle Paul gives admonition if husband and wife agree, there could be a time of physical separation for a season. For the most part, that would come into the picture for spiritual reasons.

[RevDWW]

It is unclear if the preacher made this a heaven or hell issue. Maybe one should have stayed to find that out.

I've heard about scientific evidence which promotes abstainence during the purification process for health reasons...

The apostle Paul gives admonition if husband and wife agree, there could be a time of physical separation for a season. For the most part, that would come into the picture for spiritual reasons.

Wasn't that during a period of fasting?

[scotty]

Can someone give me a brief rundown ? What ever he posted is just showing up as little boxes with a red x.....(work computer)

[RandyWayne]

If you hit refresh, it should pop up. I scanned three pages from the original handout we received because I didn't feel like typing it all in.

[Cindy]

Well I guess that would stop people from having babies 10 months apart.

[RandyWayne]

Well I guess that would stop people from having babies 10 months apart.

Crazy thing is is that it has the exact opposite effect. The whole reason for this stuff is to HAVE as many babies as possible. My wifes cousins wife is on her 4th kid and has become pregnant an average of 8-9 weeks after having the last one. They follow this teaching religiously and do not plan on stopping.

[Digging4Truth]

Crazy thing is is that it has the exact opposite effect. The whole reason for this stuff is to HAVE as many babies as possible. My wifes cousins wife is on her 4th kid and has become pregnant an average of 8-9 weeks after having the last one. They follow this teaching religiously and do not plan on stopping.

They should consider breast feeding.

That might help space them out a little farther.

As to your question...

This alone wouldn't be enough for me to leave... maybe... I'm not sure.

But it would be enough for me to be very wary of what is going on and would, in all probability, end up with the same result.

[Joelel]

Did he teach you were to fast these two weeks ? This is the only time you are to seperate.

1Cor.7
[5] Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

[RandyWayne]

No fasting, just "withholding".

[RandyWayne]

They should consider breast feeding.

That might help space them out a little farther.

As to your question...

This alone wouldn't be enough for me to leave... maybe... I'm not sure.

But it would be enough for me to be very wary of what is going on and would, in all probability, end up with the same result.

Breastfeeding is taught as the ONLY way to feed the wee ones..... No need to stop at one (or two) years either!

But.... if there was ever a worse means of natural birth control, the "breast feeding" method has to rank up there as the number one worst. About as effective as the "I sure hope this doesn't happen!" method.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

Oh please... the preaching get too hard?! A ton of other religions have standards concerning sexual relations... even within marriage. Plus, the Israelites, ALL 3 million of them (so a few hundred thousand) married couples did this and they were fine. Now, as for it being binding on NT believers, well I don't know about that, but I surely wouldn't have left. I would have listened dilligently, and studied like the Bereans did. I would have consulted with the pastor(s) and others. Who knows, maybe I'd be one who would "see the light" in this teaching. I haven't come across any of these people, and am not married and neither do I pastor married people (or anyone for that matter), so I have no need of this teaching, but that doesn't mean I'd just discard it. Proverbs 18:13 says, "He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." I'm not all for sticking with a church for anything, obviously, I'd leave for bad doctrine, but this is a standard, taught in sincerity and through study, deserves the consideration of those who are present at the study, and it can be studied, debated, ect...

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[RandyWayne]

I only posted three pages of the standard handout. There was also a multi page study guide with even more ludicrous positions in it.
In other posts I told the story of a young lady who had just gotten married and was sitting in this class. She is "cursed" with a very irregular period which can last from 3 to 14 days and seems to come at random times. She was told point blank that nothing can "happen" during this period AND during the 7 days following due to the Levitical cleansing period. Throw into the mix that "nothing was to happen" on Sunday or Sat night (because it is of course proceeded by Sunday -in a Monty Pythonisque sort of way), and their sex life was reduced down to a couple of days a month.
A few months after we left, she called my wife in tears because her AND HER HUSBAND got to "fooling around" on a... <gasp>.... Sunday afternoon and she was racked with guilt because she had gone against the pastors teachings on marital sex.
In this case there are THREE people at fault: The pastor for throwing this ridiculas doctrine at people and denying to them everything that God has granted, and 2) This lady for LISTENING to him and 3) her husband for not putting his foot down.

But yes, when strange doctrine rears its ugly head, I very much feel like you need to run as fast as your chubby little legs will carry you.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

But yes, when strange doctrine rears its ugly head, I very much feel like you need to run as fast as your chubby little legs will carry you.

Now don't get me started on gluttony brother! :lol
If it's bad teaching, sure, get out of that assembly if GOD gives you the release... BUT to leave a study just because it looks too strict/difficult whatever, I don't believe is wise and it is not hearing out a matter.
I do think, again to the Israelites concerning this, and they did it and were ok. It is not IMPOSSIBLE, the question is whether it is necessary. I think the preacher I got "saved" (really convinced of the Apostolic message, he didn't baptize me) under preached a separation of the women when they were in their "unclean time." His church also had segregated seating between the men and women. They later added some bad doctrines, so much so they are no longer brethren :depressed... Anyways, I hope all works out with your wife's old church.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[Bro-Larry]

Now don't get me started on gluttony brother! :lol
If it's bad teaching, sure, get out of that assembly if GOD gives you the release... BUT to leave a study just because it looks too strict/difficult whatever, I don't believe is wise and it is not hearing out a matter.
I do think, again to the Israelites concerning this, and they did it and were ok. It is not IMPOSSIBLE, the question is whether it is necessary. I think the preacher I got "saved" (really convinced of the Apostolic message, he didn't baptize me) under preached a separation of the women when they were in their "unclean time." His church also had segregated seating between the men and women. They later added some bad doctrines, so much so they are no longer brethren :depressed... Anyways, I hope all works out with your wife's old church.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

God love ya, Bro Alex, but you seem to be very wise beyond your years. Never stop learing.

You are right, anytime you see self-indulgence in any form, you will always find that it is only the tip of the iceberg. Beneath is a large chunk of Pharaseeism, legalism, bondage, and other sins as well. Anything associated with the law brings a curse. Bro-Larry

[Sept5SavedTeen]

Anything associated with the law brings a curse.

I found this last sentence to be interesting... Is this true brethren? Isn't the law good, as Paul said? Isn't it a schoolmaster? Isn't the Law of the Lord perfect, converting the soul? Or did I take all those phrases out of context, and maybe make up a few phrases? I'm not trying to be critical (in a bad sense), I just want to get a better understanding of this sentence given to us by Bro. Larry.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[RandyWayne]

Because when you choose to follow the law you are judged by the law. A very scary proposition.

[Ronzo]

Anything associated with the law brings a curse.

If by 'the law' you mean the law of sin and death, then yes you're right.

If by 'the law' you mean God's Law, the Mitzvah given to Moses and the Children of Israel, you have absolutely no idea of what you speak.

[Ronzo]

Because when you choose to follow the law you are judged by the law. A very scary proposition.

No... not so much...

[Ron]

:blink


That is what's being taught?

[Ronzo]

I found this last sentence to be interesting... Is this true brethren? Isn't the law good, as Paul said? Isn't it a schoolmaster? Isn't the Law of the Lord perfect, converting the soul? Or did I take all those phrases out of context, and maybe make up a few phrases? I'm not trying to be critical (in a bad sense), I just want to get a better understanding of this sentence given to us by Bro. Larry.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

Alex, it's not true.

It's a misconception that was started in the second century by a heretic named Marcion, who Polycarp, John's disciple, called the spawn of satan himself due to his heresies like that.

Yet today we see it all over the church world.

The Law does not bring curses on people. Breaking the Law does.

Which part of the Law is evil? Which part of the Law is the part folks don't want to live by?

I'm not talking about the ceremonial laws, so I hope no one comes here and starts throwing out "don't wear polyesther and rayon" or whatever...

I'm talking about "Love God with all your heart and Love your neighbor as yourself". That's the synopsis of the entire Law... Jesus himself said it. So... how does living under that bring a curse?

[tv1a]

A little more context. That preacher is gone overboard. I bet there are a lot of frustrated marriages in that church. Anyone want to speculate what's going on in that church if he allows the internet?

I only posted three pages of the standard handout. There was also a multi page study guide with even more ludicrous positions in it.
In other posts I told the story of a young lady who had just gotten married and was sitting in this class. She is "cursed" with a very irregular period which can last from 3 to 14 days and seems to come at random times. She was told point blank that nothing can "happen" during this period AND during the 7 days following due to the Levitical cleansing period. Throw into the mix that "nothing was to happen" on Sunday or Sat night (because it is of course proceeded by Sunday -in a Monty Pythonisque sort of way), and their sex life was reduced down to a couple of days a month.
A few months after we left, she called my wife in tears because her AND HER HUSBAND got to "fooling around" on a... <gasp>.... Sunday afternoon and she was racked with guilt because she had gone against the pastors teachings on marital sex.
In this case there are THREE people at fault: The pastor for throwing this ridiculas doctrine at people and denying to them everything that God has granted, and 2) This lady for LISTENING to him and 3) her husband for not putting his foot down.

But yes, when strange doctrine rears its ugly head, I very much feel like you need to run as fast as your chubby little legs will carry you.

[Cindy]

Crazy thing is is that it has the exact opposite effect. The whole reason for this stuff is to HAVE as many babies as possible. My wifes cousins wife is on her 4th kid and has become pregnant an average of 8-9 weeks after having the last one. They follow this teaching religiously and do not plan on stopping.

Good grief, that sounds weird to me. I don't think that is very sound teaching.

[Bro-Larry]

God love ya, Bro Alex, but you seem to be very wise beyond your years. Never stop learing.

You are right, anytime you see self-indulgence in any form, you will always find that it is only the tip of the iceberg. Beneath is a large chunk of Pharaseeism, legalism, bondage, and other sins as well. Anything associated with the law brings a curse. Bro-Larry

I have seen all kinds of spin on this issue, but Deut 28:15-68 lists fifty-eight verses of curses. That's part of the Mitzvah. Everything changed after the cross. Now, (after the cross) if you try to be saved by the works of the law (Mitzvah), and then you offend in one point, you place yourself under
the curse of the law (Gal 3:10) "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them."

Some spin it as the Mitzvah, some spin it as God's moral law, or ceremonial law but unless you are trusting in the finished work of Jesus, you are under the curse. The curse of the law is threefold: poverty, sickness and spiritual death.

There are lots and lots of good Apostolic people in our churches, but many are trying to be good enough in the own self efforts. Show me one person, except Jesus, who has ever been good enough to make it by their own self efforts, and I'll recant my position on this issue.

[Bro-Larry]

Alex, it's not true.

It's a misconception that was started in the second century by a heretic named Marcion, who Polycarp, John's disciple, called the spawn of satan himself due to his heresies like that.

Yet today we see it all over the church world.

The Law does not bring curses on people. Breaking the Law does.

Which part of the Law is evil? Which part of the Law is the part folks don't want to live by?

I'm not talking about the ceremonial laws, so I hope no one comes here and starts throwing out "don't wear polyesther and rayon" or whatever...

I'm talking about "Love God with all your heart and Love your neighbor as yourself". That's the synopsis of the entire Law... Jesus himself said it. So... how does living under that bring a curse?

Bro. Ronzo, With all due respect, You show me one person who has never broken the law, except Jesus. All men have fallen under the curse of the law.

You yourself don't love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, neither do you love your neighbor as yourself. It's impossible. That's why the law was given: to show man that he could not please God by his own efforts. The law was our tutor who said, " you can't do it, look to Jesus".

[Ronzo]

Bro. Ronzo, With all due respect, You show me one person who has never broken the law, except Jesus. All men have fallen under the curse of the law.

The CURSE of the law is the curse of the law of sin and death, not the Law of God.

[Bro-Larry]

God love ya, Bro Alex, but you seem to be very wise beyond your years. Never stop learing.

You are right, anytime you see self-indulgence in any form, you will always find that it is only the tip of the iceberg. Beneath is a large chunk of Pharaseeism, legalism, bondage, and other sins as well. Anything associated with the law brings a curse. Bro-Larry

Correction: "learning" LOL

[Bro-Larry]

No disagreement here on this.

"Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." (Gal 3:13)

[TRFrance]

Oh please... the preaching get too hard?! A ton of other religions have standards concerning sexual relations... even within marriage. Plus, the Israelites, ALL 3 million of them (so a few hundred thousand) married couples did this and they were fine. Now, as for it being binding on NT believers, well I don't know about that, but I surely wouldn't have left. I would have listened dilligently, and studied like the Bereans did. I would have consulted with the pastor(s) and others. Who knows, maybe I'd be one who would "see the light" in this teaching. I haven't come across any of these people, and am not married and neither do I pastor married people (or anyone for that matter), so I have no need of this teaching, but that doesn't mean I'd just discard it. Proverbs 18:13 says, "He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him." I'm not all for sticking with a church for anything, obviously, I'd leave for bad doctrine, but this is a standard, taught in sincerity and through study, deserves the consideration of those who are present at the study, and it can be studied, debated, ect...

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

Fist of all Alex, your condescending tone is unnecessary.

Second.. you claim that a ton of other religions have standards for sexual relations within marriage. Please tell me... what in the world do "other religions" marriaage & sexual standards have to with us Apostolic Christians? (The answer would be: "absolutely nothing")

Furthermore ... You said you wouldn't have left, and that Randy & Wife should have studied like the Bereans before leaving? OK.. Well how long does it take for you to recognize erroneous teaching? 2 hours?. 2 days? 2 weeks of "consultations" with the person teaching it ? Whats your time limit before it would have been okay for them to leave? As for me, it took me only 5 minutes to confirm that what what this man is teaching is an unscriptural application of old Testament law, being applied to Christians who are not under the law to begin with. If you recognize false doctrine, you have the right to leave that church environment as you see fit, when you see fit. Plain and simple.

The bigger issue here is control, and bondage. Too many pastors make up man-man rules for their church to follow, based on their personal convictions -- teachings often created by a misreading or misapplication of scripture. They put unscriptural burdens on their people, and expect folks to walk in lockstep. Pastors too often apply their "house rules", and personal preferences, and try to make it sound like biblically based doctrine.

Personally, I might have sat down with my pastor at least once to get further clarification before leaving. But I don't criticize those who left immediately in this case. The pastor's reasoning was already pretty clear. He clearly spelled out his reasoning on paper, with his scripture references and his explanations. At the end of the day, his teaching/revelation or whatever he considers it does not stand up to scripture. I would have left myself. At the end of the day, my loyalty is to the word of God, not to any pastor and his teaching.

PS...

When you get married one day, and you and your spouse find yourselves having to decide and choose whether to conduct your sexual relations based on the Word of God, or based on some handout your pastor typed up... lets see if you 'll be okay with having your bedroom rules set by your pastor.

[RandyWayne]

There is so much wrong with this teaching that it is hard to actually pick out specifics. One thing that made my wife irate was the claim that not following certain abstinence periods can cause a 20% increase in Down's Syndrome -which is a blatant lie!
So much of this ties future problems with the "sin" of not following these 'rules'. Problems with a pregnancy or the baby? Must be the mothers fault for allowing sin into her life! (Incidentally this is also why I disagree so much with the idea on other threads that sickness is caused by sin....)

[mfblume]

The CURSE of the law is the curse of the law of sin and death, not the Law of God.

That is not entirely accurate, brother.

Galatians 3:10 KJV For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written,Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Paul was speaking of the Law of God under the old covenant.

[A_PoMo]

Bro. Ronzo, With all due respect, You show me one person who has never broken the law, except Jesus. All men have fallen under the curse of the law.

You yourself don't love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, neither do you love your neighbor as yourself. It's impossible. That's why the law was given: to show man that he could not please God by his own efforts. The law was our tutor who said, " you can't do it, look to Jesus".

The law was given to point us to Christ, the fulfillment of the law who demonstrated to us how to live the Law of Christ which is to love God and love others. Love is the point of the law and the law pointed us to a life of love.

[mfblume]

Bro Larry was correct in saying Law came to show us we needed Christ, by showing us how failing we are in ourselves to keep law and to urge us toward grace.

All these verses show this to be true:

Romans 3:19-22 KJV Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. (20) Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. (21) But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; (22) Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Romans 4:15 KJV Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Romans 7:12-13 KJV Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. (13) Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Galatians 3:19 KJV Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Galatians 3:24-25 KJV Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (25) But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Acts 15:10 KJV Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

2 Corinthians 3:6-9 KJV (6) Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (7) But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: (8) How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? (9) For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
.

[Sept5SavedTeen]

TRFrance,

He asked the opinions of others on AFF if what he did would be reason enough to leave. I gave my opinion. I didn't condemn anyone. I said, I would have studied it like a Berean, but regardless of what he or others do is cool, they go by how they feel led. I also said I would stay for the lesson, rather than leave, it is wise to hear a matter before dismissing it. And once again, this was at one time, commanded by GOD for HIS people, HIS people did it, and they were ok. Also, I stated a bit of my own bias by having partaken of the ministry of a minister who preached this when I was first getting saved. The assembly I attend now doesn't preach it, and I haven't studied this out, and I probably wouldn't teach it to my future assembly, but if my pastor wanted to do a study on this topic, I would consider his point, and not just storm out.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

[A_PoMo]

We're saying the same thing except we disagree on 'purpose'. The law pointed us to Christ through showing us our sin. The purpose of the law is not to show us sin, but to take us past that to Christ and salvation by grace through faith. I think you stop and stick the 'purpose' label too soon in the process and on the wrong thing.

[mfblume]

We're saying the same thing except we disagree on 'purpose'. The law pointed us to Christ through showing us our sin. The purpose of the law is not to show us sin, but to take us past that to Christ and salvation by grace through faith. I think you stop and stick the 'purpose' label too soon in the process and on the wrong thing.

Paul distinctly said it was to show us our sin.

In Romans 3:20b, Paul wrote:

...for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

Paul repeats this idea in Romans 7:7:

...Yet, if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet."

[A_PoMo]

Paul distinctly said it was to show us our sin.

In Romans 3:20b, Paul wrote:

...for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

Paul repeats this idea in Romans 7:7:

...Yet, if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet."

But WHY? What's the purpose of that? I think you're stopping too soon. There's a reason it showed us sin. It doesn't show us sin just for the sake of showing us sin. Yes, it does show us sin. But why? It's to point us to faith in Christ.

To say simply that the law's purpose is to show us sin misses the point of the scriptural observation. That's the same as saying "I discipline my kids so that they will know how bad they are." We don't do that. We discipline our kids in order to shape them and point them to something larger than simply their wrong actions. THAT'S the purpose.

In our case the law was to point us to Christ. The point of the law wasn't to illustrate sin as much as it was to show how to live lives of holiness to God and love to each other. Ex 34 says it's about righteousness and justice which Christ clarified as "love God and love your neighbor". By pointing out sin the law pointed toward holiness, which points to Christ.

You focus too much on the negative and not enough on the positive. The positive is the purpose, not the negative.

JMO.

[mfblume]

But WHY? What's the purpose of that? I think you're stopping too soon.

Of course I am stopping too soon. Showing sinfulness was a means to an end. But you cannot say it was not involved as it seems you are saying.

There's a reason it showed us sin. It doesn't show us sin just for the sake of showing us sin. Yes, it does show us sin. But why? It's to point us to faith in Christ.

Of course. That is a given. I thought everyone knew that. Why even mention it?

To say simply that the law's purpose is to show us sin misses the point of the scriptural observation.

You missed my point.

You focus too much on the negative and not enough on the positive. The positive is the purpose, not the negative.

JMO.

You cannot say what I focus upon until you have heard all I have to say on the issue. :)

[RandyWayne]

TRFrance,

He asked the opinions of others on AFF if what he did would be reason enough to leave. I gave my opinion. I didn't condemn anyone. I said, I would have studied it like a Berean, but regardless of what he or others do is cool, they go by how they feel led. I also said I would stay for the lesson, rather than leave, it is wise to hear a matter before dismissing it. And once again, this was at one time, commanded by GOD for HIS people, HIS people did it, and they were ok. Also, I stated a bit of my own bias by having partaken of the ministry of a minister who preached this when I was first getting saved. The assembly I attend now doesn't preach it, and I haven't studied this out, and I probably wouldn't teach it to my future assembly, but if my pastor wanted to do a study on this topic, I would consider his point, and not just storm out.

GOD BLESS!
Bro. Alex

You see, this wasn't about a knee-jerk reaction. It was about reacting to blatant falsehood and lies. Your church (at one time) actually taught this as well? How was it received by and large?

Here is an analogy: What if you were in a Church that taught the TRUTH to the best of your knowledge and understanding. Now, out of the blue the pastor started teaching about Santa Clause and how he visits every good little boy and girl in the world to give them presents. The ones who DIDN'T receive presents didn't receive them because they were not "good" (sin). Would you think this guy lost his mind? Would you try to study the Word and understand why he was teaching what he was teaching?