cure-real
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 46

Thread: Mark of the Beast: Shepherds Chapel

  1. #1

    Mark of the Beast: Shepherds Chapel

    Hey gang,

    I hope that this topic is posted in the correct area, if it isn't, mods please move.

    As the title says, Mark of the Beast. My dad recently purchased this particular CD from Shepherds Chapel and asked me to give it a listen. The first time I listened to it, I only got about 75% through it. Today, I listened to the whole CD. In reviewing this, a few things were raised that I question.

    The speaker (I don't know his name as my dad has the CD in his car) seems to try and connect in some way the Mark of the Beast back to Cain. I'm not going to touch too much on this subject until I listen to the CD again so that I can make sure I ask the appropriate on this.

    Anyway, one of the claims he makes is that decendants of Cain survived the flood. The scripture he uses is Genesis 6:19

    And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

    Now, in using just this verse, I can see where one could make that arguement. However, the arguement I have against this lies back in Genesis 6:5-7 which states:

    v.5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
    v.6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
    v.7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

    So, my understanding of this verse is that because of mankinds wickedness, God's original plan was to destroy mankind. But, as we all see, in Gen. 6:8, Noah found favor/grace in the eyes of the Lord, and so mankind was carried on through Noah and his sons and their wives. The question I would pose in relation to the CD is: If God told Noah that He would destroy mankind in a flood, and that only Noah, his wife, his sons and his sons wives would survive, why would He change His mind and say to take other humans on the ark with him? To me, this dosen't make any sense and would seem incorrect.

    On the CD, he also refers to the Kenites as decendants of Cain (sons of Cain)
    1 Chronicles 2:55 -And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

    Would this be correct? Again, the only arguement against this would be Gen. 6:5-7.

    There are other questions on this, but again, I will listen to the CD more to get more of an idea of what he is saying and ask more questions.

    In another section of this presentation, he makes note of Ezekiel 28:14-15 that Lucifer was or was supposed to be one of the cherubs that were on the Mercy Seat.

    Ezekiel 28:14-15:
    v.14 Thou art the annointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
    v.15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

    In my limited knowledge in the bible, I would question this. Again, I would have to listen to the CD more to pose a better question on this. Perhaps someone could help on this.

    The last item on this post is that in Revelation 13:16, it states:

    And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

    In the CD, he covered the mark in the forehead, however he made no mention of the mark in the right hand. I would think that if the speaker wanted to cover this topic (Mark of the Beast), that he would have covered this also.

    If I'm wrong in anything in this post, please tell me. Thanks to all who respond to this.
    Last edited by Liquid Tension; Jan 28th 2010 at 12:21 AM. Reason: misspelling

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Liquid Tension View Post
    Anyway, one of the claims he makes is that decendants of Cain survived the flood.
    The whole of the Bible is adamantly clear that only eight human beings survived the flood. Noah, his wife, Shem, his wife, Ham, his wife, Japheth, and his wife. Nowhere does Scripture support the claim that the descendants of Cain survived the flood. If two of the descendants of Cain were included in the pairs of animals taken on the boat, then it would have been more than just eight people who survived the flood. But Scripture says very clearly: only eight humans survived. [1 Peter 3.20] The CD's claim is totally false.

    On the CD, he also refers to the Kenites as decendants of Cain (sons of Cain)
    The verse that means the "Kenites" explicitly says that the were descended from "Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab". Cain is mentioned nowhere as their ancestor, so the CD's claim is totally false.

    In another section of this presentation, he makes note of Ezekiel 28:14-15 that Lucifer was or was supposed to be one of the cherubs that were on the Mercy Seat.
    Ezekiel 28 never mentions "lucifer". The cherub of Ezekiel 28 is symbolic metaphor for the human king of Tyre [Ezekiel 28.2,9,12], who was corrupted by his material wealth [Ezekiel 27, 28.16], and this human king would be defeated by other human nations. [Ezekiel 28.7-8,19] Further, Ezekiel 28 makes no mention of the "mercy seat", nor the "Ark of the Covenant".
    Last edited by Gypsy; Sep 24th 2010 at 12:23 AM. Reason: Corrected typo at member’s request.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    2,321
    Blog Entries
    1
    I can only make a request of you to flee Murray and Shepherd's Chapel as quickly possible.

    One of his false teachings is what you just described. The Kenites being descendants of Cain and carrying the Mark of the Beast.

    His whole assertion of this false teaching is based on the fact that he believes that Cain's father is Satan. Murray believes and teaches the "Serpent Seed" false doctrine. He asserts that Eve has sex with Satan in the garden and that their offspring was Cain. Because this is a lie, the entire Kenite discussion is moot because it cannot be true because Cain's father was not Satan, but Adam.

    His whole philosphy - the entire of the CD that you have listened to is blown out of the water with Genesis 4:1.

    "Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.”


    Eve did not have sex with Satan and bear Cain as a result. The Bible negates that VERY clearly. Ergo, Cain did not carry a "mark" of the devil in his body to genetically and spiritually pass on to his offspring.

    And ...... NO ONE survived the Great Flood except for Noah, his wife, his three sons, and three daughters-in-law as you have already cited.

    The teaching is a classic example of a false teaching. Flee from it.
    ".....it's your nickel"

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kyburz, California, United States
    Posts
    3,574
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Liquid Tension View Post
    ..Anyway, one of the claims he makes is that decendants of Cain survived the flood. The scripture he uses is Genesis 6:19
    He should have used the following:

    And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
    (Gen 7:21-23)

  5. #5
    The guys name is Arnold Murray. Stay away!!! Claims to be an ex Marine, could be but i doubt it!! He has some "students" at other sites.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    944
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Liquid Tension View Post
    ...Shepherds Chapel
    You should not pay any regard to Sheperd's Chapel and Arnold Murray. He is on the TV here every morning in the bible belt and believe it or not he is very popular since a lot of garden variety church goers who claim to be Christians secretly agree with this guy but not publicly.

    To save a lot of typing just look at:

    http://www.watchman.org/profile/murraypro.htm

    ...then scroll down to "Doctrines"

    "Murray teaches numerous doctrines that are contrary to biblical Christianity, such as his denial of the Trinity, advocation of British Israelism, and the Serpent Seed doctrine."

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oceanside, CA
    Posts
    15
    Blog Entries
    1
    I agree that they might have been twins but it's a bit of a strech to say that Eve had sex with Satan. The bible doesn't mention anything of this nature occuring until Gen chapter 6. I just re-ready Matthew 23 and don't see the connection. Can you elaborate?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    14,642
    Blog Entries
    11
    I really think you are reading into scriptures your own ideas.

    lets look at Genesis three again:

    1 And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?”
    12 Then the man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.”
    13 And the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”
    The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”


    Don't you think if more had happened Eve would have mentioned it? Said something like the serpent ravaged her? I think that would an extremely important thing to tell about don't you? If she willingly laid with him though, and wanted to hide it I think God would have brought it up.

    14 So the LORD God said to the serpent:
    “ Because you have done this,
    You are cursed more than all cattle,
    And more than every beast of the field;
    On your belly you shall go,
    And you shall eat dust
    All the days of your life.

    15 And I will put enmity
    Between you and the woman,
    And between your seed and her Seed;
    He shall bruise your head,
    And you shall bruise His heel.”


    The Seed is Christ.

    David Guzik's Commentaries on the Bible

    e. He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel: Finally, God prophesies the doom of Satan, showing that the real battle is between Satan and the Seed of the Woman.

    i. There is no doubt this is a prophecy of Jesus' ultimate defeat of Satan. God announces Satan would wound the Messiah (you shall bruise His heel), but the Messiah would crush Satan with a mortal wound (He shall bruise your head).

    ii. The heel is the part within the serpent's reach; Jesus, in taking on humanity, brought Himself near to Satan's domain so Satan could strike Him.

    iii. This prophecy also gives the first hint of the virgin birth; declaring the Messiah, the Deliverer, would be the Seed of the Woman, but not of the man.

    iv. Genesis 3:15 has been called the protoevangelium, the first gospel. Luther said of this verse: "This text embraces and comprehends within itself everything noble and glorious that is to be found anywhere in the Scriptures." (Leupold)


    Satan is a spirit not a physical being that he can impregnate a human woman. He sows the seeds of deception..not half humans half devils.

    No one on here also doing plain reading of scriptures even got the idea that Cain was the son of satan..that is for sure. Especially when the bible clearly says Adam was the father of Cain in Genesis four:

    1 Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, “I have acquired a man from the LORD.”


    This makes no sense since Adam wasn't listed either. There is nothing in the bible that suggest because someone has no offsprings they won't be listed. Its known that the bible skips listing certain generations for some reason.

    http://www.studylight.org/com/guz/vi...ge&chapter=005
    2. Thoughts on genealogies.

    a. One can arrange the following genealogies in a sequential manner and chart out a time line; however, Biblical genealogies are not always complete, sometimes generations are skipped over.


    The genealogy of Cain was listed too anyway in Genesis 4:16-23.

    Also IF Adam and Cain were twins..so what? There have been other twins listed in the bible..it doesn't mean anything.

    Matthew 13:36-43 (New King James Version)

    The Parable of the Tares Explained

    36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.”
    37 He answered and said to them: “He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. 39 The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels.


    Lets break this down a little..Jesus says this: “He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. We know Jesus is the Son of Man..no one else is referred too that way. We also know Jesus never married let alone gave His physical seed to create a child. He did not conceive many children physically to be the 'sons of the kingdom'..this passage isn't to be taken literally. He sows the seeds of faith in God that anyone can receive.

    Look the bible explains itself...here is another example of what this seed is:

    Matthew 13:19
    When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside.


    Why do you think Christians always use the expression, "I am planting seeds in someone...or I am hoping to plant seeds in their heart"? They are referring to many verses in the bible about planting spiritual seeds, its an expression like 'giving them food for thought'..we don't literally give them food nor do we literally poke a hole in someone and drop a real seed in them. Its giving them informatics and ideas about the gospel. The bible tells us to go out and share the gospel. When people 'hear' it, they have a chance to be saved.

    Romans 10

    4 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written:


    “ How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace,
    Who bring glad tidings of good things!”


    Ephesians 1:12-14

    12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.
    13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.


    Going back to Matthew 13:19..it says: then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart.

    The devil takes what was sown..meaning what was planted, in their heart. Satan who the bible says kills, steals and destroys...likely caused someone to come along and tell them that was all a fairly tale and they shouldn't believe it. Happens all the time.. Now how you saw this as the devil having offsprings in physical form I don't know because nothing of the sort is suggested here. No one reads that passage like that at all.

    God bless
    Last edited by Buck shot; Feb 9th 2010 at 07:32 PM. Reason: cleaning up from deleted posts
    "People do not drift toward holiness. Apart from grace-driven effort, people do not gravitate toward godliness, prayer, obedience to Scripture, faith, and delight in the Lord. We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; We drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; We drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godlessness and convince ourselves we have been liberated?" - D A Carson

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    113
    Blog Entries
    1
    Another verse that disproves the serpent seed theory is: Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. This verse shows that Adam was with Eve when she ate of the fruit so if Eve had sexual relations with the serpent then Adam was right there watching it all. Also the other thing that this verse shows is that Adam and Eve ate of the same fruit. Therefore if Eve had sexual relations with the serpent then so did Adam. This and other verses already quoted, by other posters, show this doctrine to be a lie and nothing more.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The beautiful farm in the center of heaven!
    Posts
    2,949
    Blog Entries
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by zienzieu View Post
    I agree that they might have been twins but it's a bit of a strech to say that Eve had sex with Satan. The bible doesn't mention anything of this nature occuring until Gen chapter 6. I just re-ready Matthew 23 and don't see the connection. Can you elaborate?
    I have read this sort of teaching, and some teach that the way she was impreganated by satan, wasn't a "literal" thing, it was through believing his words over God's words, she was impreganated with sin and somehow she conceived and bare cain through that action....hence her belief that he was from the Lord, it was a miracle to her. At least that's what I gather from the satan seed teaching.....the likes of which I do lean towards, though am not fully convinced of.
    Don't seek too much knowledge. You just may be putting more weight on your shoulders than you're able to bare. Let God be the one to decide how quickly you grow.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    944
    Blog Entries
    2
    Whether or not Cain and Able were twins or not has always been irrelevant to historical Christianity. What has been important is they both have the same parents, Adam and Eve. Whether they were twins or not or born separately has no bearing on anything and most certainly has no effect on salvation whether one believes they were twins or not..

    Only non-Christian interests have ever taught that they were twins as doctrinal fact or that Cain was fathered by the Devil that possessed a creature in the garden known as a serpent not only to demonstrate a serpent seed teaching (people with green eyes are descended from snakes aka the serpent((seems strange though that they believe the snake/serpent was the most beautiful animal in the garden, lol, since that is what they are saying anyway))) but other things as well such as Whites are the Israelites, Whites were a special creation of God in the garden of eden after the fact of other races being created, that Blacks are animals, it goes on and on.

    A long time ago I followed this trail and it leads deeper and deeper into the deepest caverns of racism that can be found in religion so what you guys see on the surface is just the beginning of what is used to draw people into something far more sinister.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    14,642
    Blog Entries
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by napsnsnacks View Post
    Whether or not Cain and Able were twins or not has always been irrelevant to historical Christianity. What has been important is they both have the same parents, Adam and Eve. Whether they were twins or not or born separately has no bearing on anything and most certainly has no effect on salvation whether one believes they were twins or not..

    Only non-Christian interests have ever taught that they were twins as doctrinal fact or that Cain was fathered by the Devil that possessed a creature in the garden known as a serpent not only to demonstrate a serpent seed teaching (people with green eyes are descended from snakes aka the serpent((seems strange though that they believe the snake/serpent was the most beautiful animal in the garden, lol, since that is what they are saying anyway))) but other things as well such as Whites are the Israelites, Whites were a special creation of God in the garden of eden after the fact of other races being created, that Blacks are animals, it goes on and on.

    A long time ago I followed this trail and it leads deeper and deeper into the deepest caverns of racism that can be found in religion so what you guys see on the surface is just the beginning of what is used to draw people into something far more sinister.
    It is indeed racist..

    Serpent seed
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    A sculpture of Adam, Eve and the Serpent at Notre Dame de Paris. In the sculpture, the serpent is depicted as a half human.

    Serpent seed, dual seed or two-seedline is a controversial doctrine according to which the serpent in the Garden of Eden mated with Eve, and the offspring of their union was Cain. This belief is still held by some adherents of the Christian Identity theology, who claim that the Jews, as descendants of Cain, are also descended from the serpent.[1][2] The idea has also existed in several other contexts, and major proponents include Daniel Parker (1781-1844),[3] William M. Branham (1909-1965)[4] and Arnold Murray (1929-).[5]

    The doctrine that Eve mated with the serpent, or with Satan, to produce Cain also appears in early Gnostic writings such as the Gospel of Philip (c. 350); however, this teaching was explicitly rejected as heresy by Irenaeus (c. 180) and later mainstream Christian theologians. A similar doctrine appeared in Jewish midrashic texts in the 9th century and in the Kabalah. It is considered a false doctrine by mainstream Protestant denominations.[6][7] Catholic theologians point to the fact that the Bible states that the original sin is that of Adam and Eve eating a forbidden fruit.[8]


    I guess they needed another reason to hate the Jews...

    Here is another promoting hatred of anyone not white using this idea..I won't post the link though because its a hate filled twisting of scriptures:

    God made Adam a perfect man, and the name God gave to him--"Adam"--is a word which means "the man who blushes" or "the red blushing one."

    "Adam" refers to the rosy wine red mark of God's blood and His love for Adam which was always placed only upon the reddening faces of Adam's true sons to differentiate Adam from all of the other people on Earth--who are the people of Satan.

    The only people in the world who blush are the Northern European People, for they are the only people true to Adam's seedline and to no others.

    The Seduction and Rape of Eve by Satan or Lucifer, the Serpent in the Garden, Birthed Cain and the Serpent Seed People...

    Because the Serpent raped Eve, we now have his vile sons around us, those who are the Mongrelized half-breeds of Godly Adam including Negroes, Asians, Arabs, Indo-Europeans, and false Jews who are immigrants from Mongolia East of Russia who falsely converted but lie about their beliefs. They are all of serpent seed, and so they are forever filled with the serpent's vileness, and they are unredeemable by God. God told all of Adam's Seed Line to stay far, far away from the serpent seed people and to never associate, deal with, buy from, integrate with, let serpent seeds immigrate into Adam's land, nor miscegenate with these evil men in any way whatsoever, lest God leave Adam's seedline forever. For God will not live in a man who lives in close proximity to serpent seed people, for God is good and the serpent seed people are evil, being the sons of the Devil.


    Well actually they don't post scriptures...just say what they think. If they posted actual scriptures it would prove them wrong....

    This is an extremely dangerous idea folks and can lead to hatred and silences towards others..please flee this idea as its not bibical. This site sound like a KKK site ...who did 'use' Christianity to promote the killing and terrorizing of blacks, Jews and many others..anyone not white.

    The “Serpent Seed” Heresy
    If these doctrines were true, it would justify racial hatred toward the Blacks, Jews or any other race which one wished to ascribe to Satan’s origination. However, these ideas are not true, and are easily proven false by Biblical scriptures.

    Let us first examine who is glorified by the adherents of the “serpent seed” doctrine. Even though the believers of this doctrine may not realize it, they are actually exalting Satan to God-rank by attributing to him the power of a creator or lifegiver. The Bible states clearly and emphatically that Jesus Christ made all things. John 1:3 states: “All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.” Hebrews 1:10-11 also reserves to God alone the role of creator and lifegiver. Satan himself, personified as the King of Tyre, is referred to in Ezekiel 28:12-16 as an “anointed cherub that covereth” (apparently he had wings) who was “in Eden the garden of God.” Verses 13 and 16 refer to Satan as having been created by God at a finite point in the ancient past. Satan is one of many millions of angels which were created by God. Christ tells us in Matthew 22:30 that the angels in heaven “neither marry nor are given in marriage.” Angels were created out of spirit essence, and do not have fleshly bodies. As such they do not reproduce themselves, and have no physical sperm in their bodies with which to engender a child via a human woman. The truth is that the serpent seed doctrine gives Satan exactly what he wants. Satan “blew his stack” when he found out God was going to make man in the image of God. Ever since, Satan has been angry and has promulgated a variety of “doctrines of demons” which reverse the truth of God. The serpent seed doctrine is perhaps the most vile of his deceptive doctrines since it relegates various races of men to the status of animals rather than recognizes all men as being made in the image of God.

    Also, since there is an immutable principle given in Genesis 1 that all forms of life reproduce “after their kind,” any seed of Satan would bear Satan’s hereditary traits. Since Satan is referred to as “a serpent,” a “dragon,” and a “covering cherub,” any progeny of his would bear reptilian features. When was the last time you saw a Black or Jew (the groups usually alleged to be “serpent seed”) with scales or wings? See how absurd the serpent seed idea is when it is examined critically?

    The Bible also states in I Corinthians 15:45, “The first man Adam was made a living soul.” If we accept God’s word as our source of truth, we can easily see that Adam is called “the first man.” That excludes the possibility of serpent seed men existing prior to Adam. Since Genesis 3:20 also states Eve “was the mother of all living,” there is no room in the Biblical accounts for some men to have been survivors of the pre-Adamic era either, as any such beings would not have come via Eve’s lineage. Genesis 1:26-27 clearly states that God decided to make man “in His own image” and this applies to both males and females. In discussing the tongue, James 3:9 states: “therewith we bless God, even the Father; and therewith we curse men, which are made after the similitude of God.” The Bible is most consistent in including all men as being made in God’s image.


    Those who teach or believe the serpent seed doctrine ought to take sober warning from God’s word in Mark 3:28-29. This passage states that all blasphemies will be forgiven except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. To declare that the work of God’s Holy Spirit is the work of Satan is perilously close to (if it is not indeed) blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Since Genesis 1:26-27, I Corinthians 15:45, and James 3:9 all attribute all men to be created by God in God’s image, to teach or believe that some men are created or engendered by Satan is blasphemous, heretical and tantamount to calling God a liar. Let all Christians be warned against this heresy which actually glorifies Satan to a kind of co-creator with God powers to give life and recreate in his own image. Ezekiel 28 states Satan is a created being, and as such, he can do nothing which God did not create within him to do. Since Matthew 22:30 shows angelic beings are not made to live in any kind of marital union, there is no basis for any belief that Satan or any other angel can mate with a human woman and produce a child. (read the rest at the link)

    Carm also covers this unbiblical idea:

    http://www.carm.org/religious-moveme...ed-and-kenites
    The serpent seed and the Kenites

    God bless
    "People do not drift toward holiness. Apart from grace-driven effort, people do not gravitate toward godliness, prayer, obedience to Scripture, faith, and delight in the Lord. We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; We drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; We drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godlessness and convince ourselves we have been liberated?" - D A Carson

  13. #13
    Cane being born a human, had the oppertunity to become right with God after a failed sacrifice attempt..Satan has no such opportunity nor does his so called offspring.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    14,642
    Blog Entries
    11
    can you see they are making the same bad choice Cain made?) thats the connection!
    Agreed..its a CHOICE..not being physical born part devil.
    "People do not drift toward holiness. Apart from grace-driven effort, people do not gravitate toward godliness, prayer, obedience to Scripture, faith, and delight in the Lord. We drift toward compromise and call it tolerance; We drift toward disobedience and call it freedom; We drift toward superstition and call it faith. We cherish the indiscipline of lost self-control and call it relaxation; we slouch toward prayerlessness and delude ourselves into thinking we have escaped legalism; we slide toward godlessness and convince ourselves we have been liberated?" - D A Carson

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    In the battle field
    Posts
    11,530
    Maybe this can shed some light on Murray:

    http://www.carm.org/religious-moveme...-arnold-murray

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Shepherds Chapel
    By Jude in forum Prayer
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Nov 24th 2009, 09:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •