Arnold Murray
 

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?

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

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?"

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Generally speaking, these are churches that follow Calvin and the teachings of the Protestant Reformation- (Presbyterians, Reformed, etc)- and subscribe to the confessions coming out of the Reformation- (The Westminster Confession of Faith and the three Forms of Unity- Belgic Confession, the Canons of Dort, and the Heidelberg Catechism.)

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Hmm, interesting, ty. I'm completely unfamiliar with these! Can you give us a synopsis, maybe what doctrine has come into the mainstream via this? I'll look deeper, but something to whet an appetite, if you would be so kind, to get (me) off on the right foot, an edifying start here? Ty again.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

bump

Re: Arnold Murray
 

I must be of the .01 percent. Have been teaching verse by verse for 37 years when there is opportunity. There is also a place for topical preaching or teaching. Dont care much for the scattered type preaching that usually starts with, "Tonight Im taking for my text...........".

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Way cool. The beauty of this kind of teaching, imo, is that even if you differ with the teacher, at least you can say why at the end.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Imo, you generally discover some truth in either of "opposing" views, and it is just context or premise that inevitably has changed.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Where are all the swords?
The last thing I want to do is alienate someone from posting--an alt pov is the only way we might discover truth here--but this naturally assumes you are posting something.
See that when you post an opinion sans reference, and then run, the other side gains credibility; but I am not interested in this.
You had no basis to make the accusations that you parrot here--and this is now becoming obvious--and you keep truth from yourself, bad enough, but also others who seek truth when you do this.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Seekerperson,

My pastor does through the Bible book by book verse by verse. We were on the book of Genesis most of 2011. This year we started with John. Typically one chapter per Sunday but sometimes longer chapters take two Sundays or more.

I have mixed feelings about it. I like the idea in some ways but a part of me thinks the teaching should be more flexible as to what a church needs at a particular time. We do have several services a year that are different. One where the pastor gives the vision of the church, etc.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

It's great to hear that your pastor teaches verse by verse, that's rare.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Google Oneness Pentecostalism false teacher and see what you get. :)

Re: Arnold Murray
 

I have enjoyed it but am not convinced it is particularly "great". I have been blessed, educated, and discipled for 51 years without doing that and do not feel cheated at all.

Like many things I think people get fixated on a way of doing things and think that is the only or best way.

Now if a person were in a church where the pastor uses actual Bible verses very little then I can see where getting into the actual word like this would be appealing.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Oh, don't get me wrong--I'm not sure yet what I believe in regards to some of Murray's doctrine; but it makes more sense than blind literal adherence to an obviously allegorical story, to me. My assertion stands, and I don't need some internet ***Edited***, Google or whoever they host, to chew my food for me, ty.

Why did you come here at all? To throw a pebble. You remind me of the kids here, "this is bad," without a scrap of anything edifying? I can't even say you are wrong, because you haven't said anything.

And I maintain you won't, because the only time you are really going to disagree with Murray is in some esoteric who cares thing, anyway, assuming you are lined up about Ezekiel 13:18-20, etc.

Yes, by all means, next time you watch him, check his opinions with Scripture, lol--and then see that you, whoever you are, just prolly don't have the grasp of it like he does. But since you have apparently done this already? Let me invite you again to illuminate some inconsistency you may have found.

And Dordt, see that I might even end up agreeing with you-who knows. My point is that these unsupported comments are not only just your opinion, but they are untrue and unedifying. Murray notably makes none of this stuff a contingency for salvation, but understanding; yet you condemn him to hell. Sounds familiar...

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Yes, please do. there is nothing on Murray at the CERM site, the first one, so you might want to narrow it down? Seems like I remember there was something on him there once, but please note at this site that all you get is stones, thrown from one narrow little window, and no edification whatsoever.

You are never going to agree 100% with any preacher, I don't think. I maintain that I don't agree with everything Murray says, but this link is kind of typical of the arguments I hear against him--they never seem to amount to anything, even coming from his worst detractors. No, he is not OP. So that means he is satan?

You cannot back up your disagreements with Murray with Scripture, so you better find a link that can slander him. Here, I'll help; there's some 20-30 year old recording of him prophesying something that didn't come true, forget what, but this is the only thing with any substance that I could find. It's been a couple years ago, and I think I Googled "Arnold Murray" to get to it. Note that it is pretty old, and his teaching has evolved quite a bit since then. I'm pretty sure if given the chance, he would tell you "I was wrong there; but I was never trying to present that as doctrine, either."

Re: Arnold Murray
 

At the end of the day, will it matter if the original sin was eating an apple, or having forbidden sex with a proxy of satan? Not much; but this model sure seems more Scriptural than...anyone else's. "Enmity between thy seed and his seed," and re-iterated in I John, and several other places. What then, is seed?

I'd say that this is possibly his most controversial doctrine?

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Ya, this ends up being the argument? You weren't too busy to come toss an unsupported opinion in the other day. But now your time is so much more valuable than mine, ok. I can't prove a lie, which it seems like you're asking here, but will try to explore the truth here, if you like.

But you have to put something forward other than "That's bad, mmmkay;" this ends up just being an incomplete sentence. "That is difficult to accept as truth because ______," I can work with.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Since I am busy this weekend I let Mr. Murray do the talking for himself, here's one more:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX4n8...eature=related

Is this enough, bbyrd009? You can't argue with the guy himself can you?

Re: Arnold Murray
 

I'll be glad when Murray starts his 24/7 programming next week. I can catch him throughout the day, not just late at night.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Great, 24 hour false teaching!

Re: Arnold Murray
 

I always admired red necks, but they should not preach.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Re: Arnold Murray
 

I reviewed all that stuff years ago. That still doesn't qualify anyone to call him names. I note there isn't a Scripture yet condemning him, just people with fingers. What is that, like 30 years ago? And I'm not sure what you might have him do with someone who is interrupting a broadcast? Which is apparently all this clip is about. There is another, about some prophecy he was expounding on (and like this one, no context provided, just a shot of someone not at their best), again like 30 years ago, that I initially found more damning...don't know if I can find it or not, but I'll look around.

Anyway, I note that you now seem to feel free to call him names? Because you might prove that he isn't perfect in some respect, all his interpretations, that you mostly can't explain any better (and I note, haven't even tried), are now beneath suspicion, but he is the "redneck?" No issues there, huh?

The tone of this attack, notably devoid of any substance, or Scripture, pretty much speaks for itself. I'll say again that I don't agree with everything Murray says; I don't try to. He does seem to have some insight in areas where I do not, and I'm not too worried about zeroing in on what could not possibly edify me, a notable Christian pursuit, but what might, and I note Murray pretty much has gotten away from pointless battles over minor aspects of doctrine.

So, the moment you attempt to judge here, your irrelevancy is pretty much illuminated--the best you can do then is provide your bullet-proof Scriptural argument for what is right, if he is so wrong, or descend into name-calling and denigration in an attempt to achieve what you cannot do justly.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Listen, based on what I see I say he is a "false teacher", you call that name calling? False teachers are mentioned in scripture.

Anyone grabbing a gun while preaching is a "red neck" in my book.

Twist and turn, defend him as much as you want.
His preaching does not line up with scripture.



End of story.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

And yet, I still don't get any Scripture in rebuttal; all I apparently need to defend is "he is a redneck."

"False Prophet" remains just your judgement, which, being judgement, is defective out of the gate. Fools are mentioned in Scripture, too.

"Anyone grabbing a gun while preaching is a "red neck" in my book."

Ah, I didn't see any preaching there, I just heard a studio invasion. But thanks for your opinion here. Duly noted. If you ever dig up any actual Scripture that his preaching doesn't line up with, let me know.

And ps, did it ever occur to you to investigate how much of his preaching lines up with Scripture? I'm guessing you are just choking on meat (that you won't even post here) so twist around all you want, think up some new names to call him; maybe dig up some more clips, lol--as long as you studiously avoid anything like a real reply. I'm frankly at a loss as to how you would even know whether any of his teaching lined up with Scripture, or not?
I might even end up agreeing with you, there, ok? But I have yet to hear any.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Ok you are right!

Hopefully this is now the end of your rambling, but I doubt it.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

Ya ok he's a redneck, I'm a rambler...yikes.

Re: Arnold Murray
 

For what it's worth, Murray does have a "serpent seed" doctrine that apparently causes people some trouble. I'm aware of other "serpent seed" doctrines, and not sure how much his agrees with others--his usually do not.

I can say that Murray would never have this be a condemnation of anyone or group personally, which I think is the gist of some other serpent seed doctrines, but rather an explanation of original sin, Kenites, and, surprise "THY seed and her seed." Repeated quite a bit throughout the Bible, again at I John, etc.

Like most of what many might call his "fringe" theology, I don't think, and Murray certainly doesn't push, that any of this is necessary for salvation, but understanding. I kind of have Matt's attitude now; I don't really care where God takes me in my walk, as long as I'm going, and I trust that God has/will give me discernment for what may lie ahead. And Dordt, I apologize, but I just recently came from your pov, and I understand it, and even respect it, but feel that if one suspends their natural dis-inclination to learn something new that might seem to threaten a cherished "theology," wonderful things will happen.

You are a child of God, and if you are earnestly seeking God you are hedged about with protection. Murray has some other, possibly controversial doctrine, "3 earth ages," etc., but I'd like to get some feedback on the serpent-seed thing first--what is the AP explanation for all the "serpent-seed" references in the Bible? What could "THY seed" mean, if not progeny? What is a Kenite? Is there some alt "serpent seed" doctrine that may not be Biblical, and is intruding here? Ty

This trip is only a couple years old for me, but I can tell you that it has made me aware that my theology, my current one that is, will completely change before I am done here, and that used to be my biggest fear as a Baptist, was that some satanic influence would alter my theology--it just doesn't work like that, imo, you cannot be long deceived more than maybe one step, even as a new Christian, if you are earnest; the fruit will be made plain to you. Ok, that last part is kind of "off the Res," and it's early : )