View Full Version : Arnold Murray

King David
Nov 30th 2007, 06:20 AM
Noah's Ark ! Can the person that said that Arnold Murray is a nut case , Prove it ? Have you ever heard the name of " Charles A. Weisman "? Or the word ERETS ? Read and research before calling people names ! My question seems to be answered ! There were other people on earth ,after the flood , other than Noah and his family !

Nov 30th 2007, 07:56 AM
King David,

It would appear you are accurately informed as to the "mental status" of these folks being very impaired..

You have repeatedly named dropped the gentleman, Charles A Wesiman

The gentleman who made these statements:

Anyone who does not know that the organized Jew is the instigator of World Communism, of International Zionism, and is in a conspiracy to destroy Christian civilization, is too naive and too ignorant to deal with the problems we face. The Christ-hating Jew who conspires against our Christian Heritage, enjoys nothing better than the conservative who protects the Jew and will talk about everything dangerous to our country except the Hidden Hand of the Jew conspirators, the root of all evil which threatens Christian civilization. (While it is "the love of money" which "is the root of all evil" (I Tim. 6:10), the Jew exhibits far above other peoples, a love of money; and have an instinctive and compelling desire for attaining as much wealth as possible regardless of the means or harm it may cause.)

This evil force is the "ANTI-CHRIST," as revealed in the second letter of John, who says: "He is the Anti-Christ, that denies the Father and the Son." These Jew protecting conservative Americans are knowingly or unknowingly helping to destroy their own country. As a result -- JEWS RULE AMERICA -- THEY PLOT TO RULE THE WORLD -- WE ARE IN BONDAGE -- CAN WE ESCAPE? -- YES, BUT ONLY, if the Jew protecting conservatives, who are helping the ANTI-CHRIST ZIONIST to DIVIDE AND CONQUER will learn and accept the TRUTH and be guided by the warnings of OUR SAVIOUR (John 8:44, and Matt. 23:12, etc.), and never think that they know better than He, -- and if they will UNITE with REAL Americans who know the TRUTH, in a battle to save our Country, we can escape from the clutches of CHRIST'S WORST ENEMIES -- THE ANTI-CHRIST JEWS, for this is ONE of several ways in which our Country can be saved.

This means that whosoever forgets or omits the Jewish question, be it through ignorance, or fear, is unfit to be a preacher, teacher or official. This means that every Security risk, ONE WORLDERS ATLANTIC UNION PLOTTER and Alien ANTI-CHRIST ZIONIST, whose loyalty is to another Country, and all of their TRAITOR agents and stooges MUST BE BANISHED BY "REAL" AMERICANS UNITED FROM EVERY POSITION OF POWER AND INFLUENCE IN THIS NATION -- AND INSTEAD -- PUT NONE BUT REAL AMERICANS ON GUARD" -- For this is the way by which our Country started, and thus the way it can be saved.

I strongly urge you to stop pursuing these things, and relying upon these men for your spiritual guidence as an adult who professes to be a Christian..you would learn a great deal more by simply growing in your knowledge provided by the Holy Spirit and steer clear of these men and their "spirits"

or any of the Watchmen Bible Study Doctrine..

As a shield for the elite, this misnomer and false charge (antiSemitism) is thrown up whenever one gets too close to the truth. And it is used simply as a device to discredit and defame any who dare be so belligerent as to expose the factual, provable facts that are unflattering to a special group (Kenites) who lie hidden within a larger unwitting group (Jews).

AntiSemitic? Semitism has absolutely nothing at all to do with these that I refer to as the International Jew. Though they have many names, they are Satanic by every definition of the word: by blood (Cain), by faith (Satanists), by deed (destroyers), by power (ultimate, for a time).
We, as faithful and true Christians, both washed and protected by the Blood of the Lamb: learn, where others willingly remain ignorant; observe, where others close the eye; speak, where others are mute; act, where others slumber; and fight, where others surrender: and all this by the grace of God in our Lord Jesus Christ.
And because of this: we are often at odds with mainstream Christendom; accused by other religions; at enmity with the non-religious; and singled out for attack by the enemy, especially. So be it; for, for us, there is no alternative.http://www.biblestudysite.com/endquote.gif

― N. Goggin: WBSG; www.biblestudysite.com (http://www.biblestudysite.com/)

There is so much wrong here, and I am going to assume you have been tragically misinformed nor would ever knowingly abide by any of this as scriptural , of Christ or "good" on any level:cry:


Nov 30th 2007, 05:45 PM
Noah's Ark ! Can the person that said that Arnold Murray is a nut case , Prove it ? Have you ever heard the name of " Charles A. Weisman "? Or the word ERETS ? Read and research before calling people names ! My question seems to be answered ! There were other people on earth ,after the flood , other than Noah and his family !

So what if other people existed after the flood. Has Murray made you afraid of "Kenites"?:lol:

Arnold Murray is a man who has his own ideas about the bible and what doctrine is. He denies the Trinity, teaching a form of modalism (Murray's being there are 3 'offices') which was condemned by the early church. It is similar to Oneness Pentecostals.

Murray doesn't teach that by God's grace thru faith one is born again, but that man had a pre-mortal existence.

I am familiar with his teachings, and they do not lead one to a greater understanding of Christ. That alone should be a defining factor to a Christian.

Plenty of people have some odd ideas. But that is what happens when we are left to our vain imaginations. On the other hand, in the sense that it takes one to know one, Murray has in his biblical escapades been able to steer out those who once believed in the secret rapture such as the Left Behinders and Dispensationalist. Problem is he only replaced it with another strange concept.

Which only proves that anyone looking for a good conspiracy can conjure one up.:cool:

Nov 30th 2007, 06:56 PM

Is Cain a Biological Descendant of Satan?

I know, silly question. But this is a doctrine that Arnold Murray of The Shepherd's Chapel is teaching. He uses 5 key passages to 'prove' his doctrine. Below is an analysis of his teaching.

Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Murray speculates that the serpents’ seed is Cain and Eve’s seed is Abel.

There is a MAJOR problem here in that Murray’s teaching demands that Eve was already pregnant at this point (he says she got pregnant at the time she took the fruit), but God’s teaching says she didn’t conceive until after her and Adam were kicked out of the Garden of Eden (they are kicked out in 3:24 and she conceived in 4:1).

The New Testament teaches us that Christ is the fulfillment of this passage, it has nothing to do with Cain and Abel (Romans 16:20, Hebrews 2:14, 1 John 3:8).

Genesis 4:1-2a
Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." Later she gave birth to his brother Abel.

Murray tries to dismiss this verse quickly by saying the Hebrew wording indicates they were twins but had different fathers.

This is just absurd. It is no wonder he doesn’t talk at length about this passage considering it destroys his entire argument. He’s wrong about the Hebrew wording. If what he were saying was true, I’d expect at least one translation to support that rendering, but none do. He is the only teacher I’ve ever heard make such a statement and that should raise a red flag. Eve said ‘the LORD’ gave her Cain.

2 Corinthians 11:3
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

He says the Greek word that the KJV renders as ‘beguiled’ means that the Serpent ‘sexually seduced’ Eve

The Greek word in question, “Exapatao”, occurs 4 other times in the Bible.

Romans 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

1Corinthians 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

2Thessalonians 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Clearly, every other time the word is used, it simply indicates deception, not sexual seduction.

John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

He says we must interpret the phrase ‘your father’ in a biological sense

The word ‘father’ in both Greek and English can be understood in 2 different ways depending on context
1. Biological- Most often, the term is used of a biological father. For example, I can state that my father is Jerry Rose.
2. Founder- Often, we call an ‘founder’ of something a father. For example, we call George Washington a Founding Father of our country. That doesn’t mean, of course, that he is a biological ancestor of every U.S. citizen! It simply means we follow the example of what he started.

Our job when interpreting John 8:44 is to decide which meaning is intended based on the context. The question becomes: “In John 8:44, is Jesus discussing the biological father or a founding father?” The answer is simple because Jesus discusses BOTH types of father’s in the context of the passage so that there is no confusion. In John 8:33 the crowd declared “We are Abraham's descendants”. If Murray is right, we should expect Jesus to reply, “No! You are Satan’s descendants.” But Jesus didn’t respond that way. Instead, He said, “I know you are Abraham's descendants.” Either Arnold Murray is wrong or Jesus is wrong.

Since Jesus is right, John 8:33 establishes that the crowd were biological descendants of Abraham (which proves they were not biological descendants of Satan or Cain). Therefore, John 8:44 must be referring to the 2nd type of fathering. This fits the teachings of Scripture perfectly. John 8:44 is simply saying that Satan is their ‘founding father’ because they follow his example just like George Washington is our ‘founding father’ because we follow his.

Matthew 13:37-38
He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one

Even though the term ‘father’ isn’t used here, Murray treats this passage in the same way as John 8:44 and interprets the ‘sons’ as biological sons.

I preached on this text a couple months ago and so I’ve done a lot of research on this passage. Once again, Murray is the ONLY teacher I’ve ever come across that interprets the ‘sons’ as biological sons. The passage is clearly not talking about biological sons. If Murray is right to interpret ‘sons of the evil one’ as biological children then he MUST also interpret ‘sons of the kingdom’ as biological descendants of the ‘Son of Man’ (Jesus). Are we biological ‘sons’ of Jesus? Of course not! The passage isn’t talking about biological descendants. We become God’s children by submitting to His authority. It’s not a biological process, it is a spiritual one. The reverse is also true. We are children of Satan if we follow his example.

I did a little extra research on Arnold Murray. I found an audio clip where he ‘jokes’ about shooting a young man in his congregation because the young man disagreed with Murray’s teaching. Murray also denies the orthodox view of the Trinity. He falsely teaches that America and Britain are lost tribes of Israel. Other issues that you may find troublesome include his denial of the eternality of hell, the rapture & interracial marriage.

Nihil Obstat
Dec 2nd 2007, 12:48 AM
Whoa! What's going on here? We are not to approve of what is false, but where does it say that it's okay to label people? Even Michael the archangel "dared not bring against [the devil] a reviling accusation, but said, 'The Lord rebuke you!' " (Jude 9)... what gives you the boldness to say such things about people? Are you really so deceived as to think that you are doing the work of the kingdom of God by allowing yourself to flesh out against those in need of correction? Are you so hard of heart that you could not feel the Spirit convicting you of such words? Repent, and bless this man! Pray for him! Yes, warn of his teachings, and point us to truth, but don't discredit yourself (before men, but more so, before God) by speaking false doctrine in doing so (doctrine, biblically, is a doing, not a thinking - cp. Titus 2). We're all guilty of doing this, but let's get right with Creator and creation that the glory of the Lord (manifested by us loving ourselves and others) would go forth into all the earth! - Lk.11

Dec 2nd 2007, 02:27 AM
The most effective thing we can do to point out sin in those around us is simply to live the life we are instructed to live in the Word of God. Others will see our light, which will expose their sin. Then there are two possible end results. Either they will run away from the light and try to surround themselves with darkness and ignore their sin, or they will repent from their sin, receive Jesus, and, as the passage indicates, glorify our Father in heaven.

However, there does come a time in any Christian’s life when we need to speak up and be heard. But when is that point? Very simply, when the person's sin is influencing others around them to enter into the same sins. Does this apply in today's society?

Again, let us look to the example of Jesus. The same Jesus who told us to turn the other cheek also called certain groups of people "broods of vipers,” "hypocrites,” and "whitewashed tombstones.” Why did He do this?

To answer that question, we must first ask, to whom did He say this? Jesus was addressing the Pharisees, who were held in very high regard by the Jews of Jesus' time. They were the experts in the Law. Therefore, for most Jews, if the Pharisees said it, it was true.

So when the Pharisees said, for example, that it was by the power of Beelzebub that He drove out demons, many who were listening probably believed them just because of who was saying it.

When it comes down to it, there's nothing worse you can do than to influence someone to reject Jesus as Lord and Savior. Therefore, Jesus took action, calling the Pharisees what they were: hypocrites, vipers, and whitewashed tombstones.

So, if we take this example, it is our responsibility to confront those whose sin influences others to sin. And how do we do that? Just like Jesus did: He didn't mince words or beat around the bush. He called sin "sin.”

He pointed out that sin leads to death, and that for those who cause others to sin, it would be better for them to have a millstone tied around their neck and be cast into the sea.

"THAT"..is what is going on here!:) Staying right with our Creator and helping those who need to do so..who are being influenced by very "bad stuff" being taught as a "false gospel" which is not the work of the Kingdom or for it.

Such "boldness" is not unrighteous at all but commanded and very much taught by Christ.

Nihil Obstat
Dec 2nd 2007, 04:11 AM
So the Bible commands us to call people "loons"... or does the Bible warn those who call people "raca" (empty-headed)...? Everybody's comments have been great and godly until that last one. Comments like that should not be given any room to stand...

Dec 2nd 2007, 05:08 AM
So the Bible commands us to call people "loons"... or does the Bible warn those who call people "raca" (empty-headed)...? Everybody's comments have been great and godly until that last one. Comments like that should not be given any room to stand...

Truthfully, it was very difficult to determine where your concern was and over what..so thank you for the clarification..my concern was for those who might have been confused about that as I was, since you did not specify that others comments were not being called into account as well.and used verses that spoke to why these comments concerns are being addressed

and "no" the bible does not command anyone to call people "loons" or to suggest that those who never said that ,"did" to make some sort of point regarding "their posts" about what Christ does call us to "make calls about"...as I was the last one to post and was directed at me perhaps?

Great reminder about those who do call people "raca", I am grateful to be reminded of it and in full agreement that it is a good reminder!:hug:

Dec 2nd 2007, 01:46 PM
Let's just call this one done.