Return to "The Shepherd's Chapel and Dr. Arnold Murray" Main Page
Chapel Defender Falsely Accuses Me of Manufacturing Fake Clips of Arnold Murray
Question/Comment:
----- Original Message -----From: Name WithheldTo: Paul StringiniSent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:34 PMSubject: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
----- Original Message -----From: Paul StringiniTo: Name WithheldSent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 1:20 PMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
This is a surprising email. I never dreamed anyone would suggest this. No, that is indeed Arnold Murray, the clip is from over 30 years ago, (recorded on different equipment I suppose, all his older stuff sounds like that) so his voice is a little different, but it is absolutely still him. I would not risk that sort of fraud. For one, I fear God, and for two, the Chapel would have just cause to sue me for slander. Maybe I'll dig up some more old tapes and post them for reference, I guess you, for one, would be surprised at how much his sound has changed in 30 years.Sincerely,Paul Stringini
----- Original Message -----From: akeeper@hughes.netSent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 11:51 PMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
I still say that is NOT Arnold Murray's voice, ones voice does not change to the extent that clip reveals. I am well old enough, and know all of the older ones in my family, friends and acquaintances have never had the voice change that you are eluding to. With my medical background I know ones voice may get a "little" deeper as we age. With that said I stand on this....That is not his voice.You say you fear God, if that is so, why would you stand as judge of anyone? Have you talked with him one on one first, before slandering him on the Internet? In other words have you used the Bible as your guide in this matter?Mat 18:15
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.Mat 18:16
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.Mat 18:17
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.This is not intended as a matter of contention, I always want "HIS" truth to prevail!
----- Original Message -----From: Paul StringiniTo: Name WithheldSent: Friday, March 15, 2013 1:05 PMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
You certainly are not going to convince me, I know where the tapes came from (and who sold them to me, and whose name is written on them), and whatever the reason his voice sounds off to you, it does not matter to me. It is quite obviously him. I did not tamper with the audio, but it did come off a tape, so that can be effected by motor speeds and all that. So now, I have pitch corrected the clip and re-uploaded it for you. I have also updated that page to include your complaint and my remedy http://oraclesofgod.org/1980/1980.htmhttp://oraclesofgod.org/1980/1980clipA_pitch_corrected.mp3
http://oraclesofgod.org/1980/1980clipB_pitch_corrected.mp3
http://oraclesofgod.org/1980/1980clipC_pitch_corrected.mp3Tell me who it sounds like now?I'm glad you wrote me about this, this is a big help, I bet a lot of people who are being misled by the Chapel listened to those clips and thought the same thing as you did, but they did not write me. When I listened to the pitch corrected clip I could really hear the difference, it sounds much more like him. You have really helped make my page more effective. Thanks.Pastor Murray's predictions were made publicly and are well known. I just posted his own words from his own tapes that he sold me back in 1995. The tapes were bought from the Chapel and they have Dr. Arnold Murray's name on them. If you can't accept those facts then maybe you should take it up with the Chapel. Send them my transcript and inform them that someone is impersonating Dr. Murray. Your medical background notwithstanding, you are just wrong, I don't know if the old recording equipment was fast or something, but really that is all irrelevant. By the way, does it even make a difference to you that you know for sure now that it was him?You say you fear God, if that is so, why would you stand as judge of anyone?I do not stand in judge of Arnold Murray, you do. I merely say that his works are the works of a false teacher and false prophet. We must know them by their fruits and beware, must we not? You are the one who makes the leap to assume this means he is condemned. I do not make any such judgments... I condemn no one. The man's works are going to burn, but he himself may yet be saved by fire.If I were to accept your judgment of me, then you would have to accept that Arnold Murray sits in judgment daily of millions of Christians who believe in the rapture (which I do not believe). Why is he free to judge doctrine and the works of others but his works are to be held as unjudgable? You gleefully watch him as he tears into other ministries through the works that he condemns (all the while, he denies that he is doing what he is doing), yet you find no fault with that? And you have the temerity to accuse me of judging the man?Have you talked with him one on one first, before slandering him on the Internet? In other words have you used the Bible as your guide in this matter?I certainly do use the bible as my guide.First of all, Arnold Murray has not sinned against me personally, he is sinning against the gospel of Jesus Christ publicly, so I question whether that passage need be strictly applied in this case. (Matthew 18:15-17). He is ceaselessly broadcasting his errors publicly, and in public is where his teachings ought to be denounced.15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.
Arnold Murray has had numerous warnings both public and private for many years. It is not necessary that each one, in turn, go to him privately for the same offenses. I am not the first person to have a problem with his teachings. He is not at the stage where the first person goes to him privately. He is at the stage where he has demonstrated that he does not listen to the church. Evidence that he has had numerous warnings can be found on his website, the "Answer to critics." He does not make himself available for personal interviews of this nature (give it a try sometime) he does not receive such guests. Furthermore, at this stage, I do not consider the man to be a brother, he is an enemy of the gospel. He does not listen. I go directly to the people he is affecting.Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
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.
There are plenty of examples in the New Testament of how to deal with false teachers. They are to be marked, named, and avoided. That is using the bible as my guide.Earnestly contending for the faith.SincerelyPaul Stringini
----- Original Message -----From: Paul StringiniTo: Name WithheldSent: Friday, March 15, 2013 1:16 PMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
I forgot to mention..."slander" is a very specific term. I have never slandered Pastor Murray. Certainly not through these audio clips.
----- Original Message -----From: Name WithheldTo: Paul StringiniSent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:54 AMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
I admit, it took me a few days, but I now have your admiration,....
"That is one of Pastor Murray's doctrines and it is a lie worthy of refuting. You have said nothing in defense of this LIE. You just keep talking foolish talk and falsely claim that you are a good student who knows what they are talking about. I am going to make you a guarantee, noone is going to read this part of our discussion (and I admire anyone who has kept reading this far) But hardly anyone is going to read this far, they will read your initial email, then they will read my response, then they will start to read your reply and when they see that you did not answer my carefully constructed arguments from scripture, they will write you off as another failure and move on to another email."
That isn't all I read. As I meandered through your website, I found your slant / views / attitude, on so much, very enlightning [misspelling of the common word "enlightening" is here intentional], to say the least.
I am purposeful, fair, and diligent... Isn't it wonderful that each of us gets to choose how we spend our time on this earth, wisely or foolishly.
Oh, one other thing, you have mis-represented me, the only "teacher" I have is the Holy Spirit. You remember John 14:26 ?
Goodbye!
----- Original Message -----From: Paul StringiniTo: Name WithheldSent: Friday, March 22, 2013 12:14 PMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
Hey, thanks for writing again,Misrepresented? You are the one who has misrepresented your teacher. You said that he did not say those words which he most certainly did say. You are the one misrepresenting the truth.But let's take that ridiculous charge seriously. How about something specific? Defend your beliefs, or at least do them the respect of seeing that they are accurately and competently represented. Its easy to make accusations, but when you get specific is when it makes a difference. Imagine if I went around saying "Arnold Murray is a bad teacher!" But I gave no explanation or details. No one would take me seriously. So how can I take you seriously?You falsely accused me and I defended myself. God knows the truth. God knows what Arnold said. I accurately transcribed his words. The new clips clearly show that his voice is the same, they just had bad recording equipment or something back then (probably the recording machine was running slower than modern playback equipment) You questioned me about rebuke and I answered. I regard my former teacher as an heathen. He is far gone.So what have I done now? Be specific, your general flailing at me may please yourself and Chapel buddies, but others will see your lack of detail as evidence that you are just making another wild and false accusation. You quote my writings, good for you, I indeed admire your fortitude in reading all that, but I cannot respect you, because you have nothing more to say about what you read other than to make new "general accusations" against me of "misrepresentation." The only way I know of in which you could say that I have "misrepresented" Arnold Murray would be to say that I say his doctrines are false doctrines and that you think my opinion is incorrect. But that is not misrepresentation, that is disagreement.To the best of my knowledge. I have not misrepresented Arnold Murray's teachings (and I have corrected the one time someone actually specifically told me something I misunderstood about Pastor Murray's teachings, and they were correct). 94.) "You Are the Fraud!" One of My Inaccuracies is Pointed Out by a Sharp Shepherd's Chapel StudentIf anyone has "misrepresented" Arnold Murray it has been his students who are more accustomed to listening to Arnold Murray's flattery than they are to defending their faith. That is partly why they do so poorly defending his doctrines. The other part why being, that the doctrines have such poor scriptural support that they are nearly indefensible. They are the doctrinal equivalent of the "Emperor's New Clothes;" only the "Elect" can see these doctrines, you do want Arnold to think you are one of the elect, don't you? His teachings are nakedly false. Don't believe what you read in the bible, believe what Arnold says it really means.They have poorly represented their teacher and his teachings; and you do not want to engage me in a discussion, because you know that you will not represent any better.very enlightning [misspelling of the common word "enlightening" is here intentional], to say the least.But what is that supposed to mean? It is hard to read intention into people's writing, just as you see something sinister in my writing; I see something insulting in yours: It seems you are insulting my intelligence. Am I wrong?How about picking up the torch from that person who failed to "defend the lies"? Most people won't bother to read all that. Do you think he answered me well? With a mouth and wisdom that the gainsayers could not refuse? Even my enemies occasionally compliment me and acknowledge my gifts. And you would too, but you are angry with me. That is but a small thing to me. I don't do what I do to convince dedicated followers of Arnold Murray. I do what I do to warn off people who are just beginning to study with the Chapel. Those are the people to whom you OWE an explanation. Those people are waiting for some student of Arnold Murray to stop making general accusations and show them the power of God in their mouths.If this is David and Goliath, I'm not Goliath, but sometimes I feel like it because I have to push you all to earnestly contend for your faith. I think it has been over a year since I got a really good email challenging me on the doctrine of the Kenites. And no one has ever bothered to defend what Murray says about the elect having stood against Satan in the world that was and having thus earned their salvation. You must know that he made that up. How can you justify such audacity! I am a defender of God's word and God has given me the wisdom and mouth to make all of you howl. I have no respect for big-time TV teachers like Murray with his legions of minions parroting his speech patterns and making corruption and mockery of the doctrine taught by the bible. I gave specifics just there and I give more on my website, and what have you done but falsely accuse me?How about an apology? You accused me of manufacturing audio clips of Arnold Murray (a serious charge, if I had done such a thing they could absolutely sue me, but since I have the cassettes, that would be very foolish). I thought that you had gone away after hearing the pitch-corrected clips. But here you are again shooting at me with rubber arrows. I do my best not to misrepresent Pastor Murray's teachings. And if you showed me something where I have misrepresented him I would not fail to correct it. I believe that my willingness to publicly admit mistakes will only increase my credibility. Since you read so much of my website you probably saw how that I accepted the correction of a Chapel student who showed me that I was did not correctly understand Pastor Murray's teaching on the unpardonable sin.How about you accept my correction when it comes to those clips and admit your mistake? Show us your great humility, if you have learned any such thing from Arnold Murray. Admit your mistake.I have admitted that I have not listened to Arnold Murray for years. I have a pretty good memory though. I could easily make a mistake and misrepresent something he teaches. I get the feeling you guys don't get specific because you would rather have me making a mistake and misrepresent Murray than allow me to publicly correct myself. That reveals a certain kind of serpentine wisdom, but is not a respectable way to defend what you believe in. You wanted me to have fake clips of Murray up on my website, that was wishful thinking on your part, you were disappointed that they were real, not because Arnold Murray revealed himself to be a false prophet, that does not really matter to you, you were disappointed because your accusation failed. Say it isn't so.Who does "Clip C" sound like now? All I did was slow it down. You can do the same thing at home these days on your computer with free software. Playback speed changes pitch, anyone who ever had a record player knows that (but perhaps you are not as old as me).Sincerely,Paul Stringini
----- Original Message -----From: Name WithheldTo: Paul StringiniSent: Friday, March 22, 2013 4:36 PMSubject: Re: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web site
Jas 4:11 Brothers, do not speak against one another. He that speaks against a brother and judges his brother, speaks against Torah and judges Torah. And if you judge Torah, you are not a doer of Torah but a judge.
Jas 4:12 There is one Lawgiver and Judge, who is able to save and to destroy. Who are you to judge another?
Are any so holy and so righteous that one can even begin to sit in judgement upon another ? While so busy gathering stones to cast at another, instead take a step back and examine ones own life a little more closely, and then decide if any should be casting any stones, or perhaps those stones which one has already gathered should be heaped upon ones self.
----- Original Message -----From: "Paul Stringini"To: <Name Withheld>Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 8:32 PMSubject: Read: Arnold Murray and Clip C on your web siteThis is a receipt for the mail you sent to
<Paul Stringini> at 3/22/2013 4:36 PM
This receipt verifies that the message has been displayed on the recipient's computer at 3/22/2013 8:32 PM
Return to "The Shepherd's Chapel and Dr. Arnold Murray" Main Page