Portents, Prophecy and Predictions – What Will Happen at the Primates’ Meeting?

You are currently viewing Portents, Prophecy and Predictions – What Will Happen at the Primates’ Meeting?

As many readers will be aware, next week sees the much-awaited Primates’ Meeting/Gathering called by Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby. The crisis that the Anglican Communion is in has not gone away (who would have thought?!) and the time has perhaps come for a clear decision on the path forward.

As one might expect, the net has been awash with various prognostications (yes, alliteration can’t be avoided) as to what will happen and as the day has approached I’ve had more and more people ask me what’s going to happen. Well, grab a cup of something and sit down because I’m going to give it my best shot.

As I can best see, there have been essentially 2 major dynamics at work in the lead-up to this coming week which can be broadly characterised as the “save the family” party and the “restore Biblical order” party. Now even as I write that I realise that I am potentially characterising one side as not being Biblical – that’s not my intention in the labels but I’m not going to pretend that by the time you get to the end of this piece I won’t have made my best effort to persuade you that the “family” party really don’t get what the Bible has to say about this whole thing.

Mark Harris

But, for now, let’s just spend a bit of time thinking about this “family” approach. The line basically goes like this, “we have much that unites us; a common identity forged from a common history. This is an expression of Christian unity and we would be very foolish to let it go”. Here, for example, Mark Harris – a well-known Episcopal Priest and former member of the TEC’s Executive writes at his blog:

So, why is anything that happens at the Primates Meeting around this important?

Well, dear friends, it is important because in spite of all the hard feelings and anathemas being hurled at various churches, in spite of colonial history, there are residual feelings of real companionship in the Gospel and real hopes for engagement in common mission. We have been a community of considerable depth and mutual respect.In all the wringing of hands and lamenting of this or that deep hurt this fact is likely to get lost.

Now I generally tend to agree with little of what Mark writes but this is still helpful as an expression of much of the liberals’ language. Note carefully that there is an appeal to a shared Gospel and common mission which brings about “companionship” and “community”. What we have in common is more than what will potentially divide us. But almost immediately conservatives will observe that the appeal to a shared Gospel is a futile one. Were Mark and I to sit in a room together and discuss what we actually understand by those words “gospel” and “mission” we would find little or no agreement on the topic. Mark, and others like him, have little time for the wrath of God, the penal substitutionary atonement of Christ on the Cross, the authority God in His church exercised through the inspired Scripture (and we would even differ on what that word “inspired” meant) and a whole host of lesser but not unrelated matters. And there lies the fundamental issue actually at stake here. We may have a common heritage and, to some extent, a common vocabulary, but that is where the partnership stops. If there are “feelings of real companionship” then there is good reason why they are residual. Like the last vapours of mist after the morning fog, any genuine sense of partnership is simply burned away when exposed to the harsh sun of reality. Liberals and their associated institutionalists appeal to this common mission but it’s hard to find the conservatives agreeing with them. And if there is no agreement on mission then it can hardly be called common. And if there is little or no commonality then on what basis is there really any unity anyway?

Now I mention “institutionalists” because this is the next logical step in the dynamic. If you can’t appeal to a common gospel then it is to something else that we must go and so it’s no mistake that so many of those involved in those discussions revert so often to the institution of the Anglican Communion, and particularly the historical and relational ties to Canterbury. It would be wrong to see this in purely pragmatic terms. For some involved this is a theological issue – there is a high view of church relationships and the need for a clear historical succession of the gospel. For those thinking this way, Canterbury provides that link. It is the root and stem of a plant that we must remain branches of. If we are cut off then we are no longer genuinely Anglican – and this not simply relationally but also theologically.

Of course the question that must be then asked is whether this is the genuine definition of Anglicanism or whether others are more consistent. But more of that later.

primates2016That the institutional partnership argument is going to be a big one can be seen in the website produced by the Anglican Communion Office itself for this Primates “Gathering” – “Primates 2016“. The whole thing screams Institution and Common Mission. Mark Harris would be delighted. It is an appeal to our commonality; a brilliantly put-together advert for what is (apparently) at stake were the Communion to crumble this coming week. We are told of

85 million people
165 countries
38 provinces
1 Lord, Jesus Christ

anglican165But it only begs the question. Is there one Lord of the Anglican Communion with one united gospel and therefore common mission? The Primates 2016 blog and stories page are rapidly filling with optimistic stories of partnership across the Communion. The ingenious use of colours communicates a diversity but unity around the globe.  The Anglican Communion Compass Rose now appears with the tagline “in over 165 countries”.

The historical argument is also clearly made, not least in the news from a few days ago that,

The Roman Catholic Church has loaned the head of the pastoral staff associated with Pope Gregory – who sent Augustine on his historic mission to England in the 6th century – to Canterbury where Anglican Primates will gather next week.

The carved ivory head of the crosier will be placed in the Crypt at Canterbury Cathedral, where the Primates will be meeting privately to reflect and pray about the future of the Anglican Communion.

Words fail me. If the institutionalists think the presence of what has even been called a “relic” will sway the gathering then really don’t understand what motivates GAFCON and others. Or maybe they think that they do.

There is even a pretty obvious attempt to lobby for continued meeting, even with those we disagree with profoundly, on the basis of Jesus’ supposed “uninhibited hospitality”. No mention, however, of the clarion call of the New Testament to deal properly with false teachers. That would spoil the carefully constructed institutional narrative. Even the about page skirts around the issue at hand and particularly the depths of tears that already exist in the fabric of the Communion.

To get a sense of how bad the situation actually is we therefore need to turn to conservatives and, in particular, GAFCON/FCA. Here the chairman of their Primates’ Council, Archbishop Wabukala of Kenya, sets out clearly what the issues are:

Eliud Wabukala
Eliud Wabukala

But at the centre of this hope is Jesus, so they also recognise that the church must guard the gospel which alone can bring lasting change to the hearts of men and women. If Jesus is Lord, then he must govern our relationships through his word and the bishops agreed that their Church should break its ties with the Episcopal Church of the Unites States (TEC) following that Church’s decision to change its canons and its liturgy to allow for ‘gender neutral marriage’. For the same reasons, the Anglican Church of Kenya also affirmed that it was no longer in relationship with TEC at our Provincial Synod earlier this year.

The clarity and courage of these brothers is an encouragement to me as we prepare for the meeting of Primates called by the Archbishop of Canterbury next month (www.gafcon.org/crossroads). With many others, I long to see our beloved Communion united and its divisions healed, but this must be in a way that truly honours Jesus as Lord and head of his body, the Church. It is easy to be like parents who by false kindness allow their children to follow destructive patterns of behaviour, but we are called to care for the household of God, to guard the gospel of grace and to preach the word ‘in season and out of season’ (2 Timothy 4:2).

The linked “Crossroads” piece sets out their approach even more clearly:


Will Christ rule our life and witness through His word, or will our life and witness be conformed to the global ambitions of a secular culture? 

This was the reason GAFCON was formed in 2008: to renew a Communion in crisis, drifting from biblical truth. While the presenting issue was human sexuality, this was really just one symptom of a deeper challenge, the emergence of a false gospel which rejects the core Anglican commitment to the truth and authority of the Bible.

GAFCON works to make this fundamental issue of biblical truth clear to Anglicans everywhere so that, equipped by God’s word and empowered by His Spirit, we can live under the lordship of Christ and make him known as Lord and Saviour to a world in desperate need of Him.

The GAFCON Primates will attend the Canterbury meeting, but they are clear that their continued presence will depend upon action by the Archbishop of Canterbury and a majority of the Primates to ensure that participation in the Anglican Communion is governed by robust commitments to biblical teaching and morality.

In recent days the Primate of Uganda, Stanley Ntagali, has written similar words:

Stanley Ntagali

Together with the other GAFCON Primates, we have agreed to be part of a “gathering” of Primates in Canterbury to discuss the future of the Anglican Communion, keeping in mind Paul’s exhortation in Ephesians 4:3, “Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.”

As GAFCON, we have a clear vision of the future of global Anglicanism and have been moving forward with that vision since Jerusalem in 2008. The Archbishop of Canterbury understands that the first topic of conversation in the “gathering” of Primates is the restoration of godly order in the Anglican Communion. This is the unfinished business from the non-implemented, but unanimously agreed, Communique from the 2007 Primates Meeting in Dar es Salaam.

If godly order is restored during the “gathering” of Primates, then I will be free to join any subsequent Primates Meeting that may be convened immediately thereafter in Canterbury. If such godly order is not restored, then I will uphold the Provincial Assembly’s resolution and withdraw from the meeting.

Archbishop Foley Beach of the ACNA, who is invited to the initial meetings, has also confirmed a common approach:

Foley Beach

In 2007 the Primates met in Dar es Salaam and unanimously agreed on a course of action to restore the godly fellowship of the Communion by asking these two provinces to repent and return to the Biblical teaching and practice of the Anglican Communion.  When they did not repent, the previous Archbishop of Canterbury acted against the consensus of the Primates and ignored the consequences which were imposed.  This has made the breach even wider.

I have been asked many times why I am going.  Firstly, as a group the GAFCON Primates all decided together that we would attend in good faith and see if there is a possibility of restoring order to the structures of the Anglican Communion.

See also Peter Jensen’s recent “Why GAFCON truly matters” as an excellent example of how we have arrived here and what GAFCON’s role is.

Statements like these should be read not simply as a clear setting forth of the GAFCON position but also as a last-minute rallying-call to some who might be wavering in their commitment to holding the line at the gathering/meeting. In the past weeks I’ve spoken to a number of people well-placed to be able to comment on the internal conversations amongst the GAFCON leaders. While there is a clear common commitment to Biblical orthodoxy, there is a fear that not everyone will hold the line as solidly. The uncertainty increases slightly when it comes to the overlapping but not identical Global South grouping.

And the concern is real, since some conservatives appear to be buying the institution line. For example, Anglican Pastor tells us why we should still care about Canterbury. Readers will differ on the 10 points put forward but, for my part, I’m unsure why Canterbury is necessary for any of them. Surely the more important component of Anglican identity is a theological heritage? In recent days Vinay Samuel and Chris Sugden’s piece has also caused some disquiet,

The concept of the Anglican Communion makes no sense if it is not integrally linked with the Church of England. What confirms the Anglican identity of any church is its communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. No other suggested options for defining Anglican identity have attracted even majority support.

This might be a big surprise to the framers of GAFCON’s Jerusalem Declaration (which Sugden supported):

While acknowledging the nature of Canterbury as an historic see, we do not accept that Anglican identity is determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Building on the above doctrinal foundation of Anglican identity, we hereby publish the Jerusalem Declaration as the basis of our fellowship.

And in that statement lies the clear boundaries that will define the next few days’ discussions. Despite all the rhetoric and the pretty websites, how important is the link to Canterbury? For TEC and the Canadians it is vital – it is their mark of authenticity. Without it they are nothing. In their own currency of validity any formal rebuke would be a disaster. It would mark then out as not being proper Anglicans.

For GAFCON, to walk away would not (by their own definition) be a disaster. In fact it would be seen as an act of Anglican integrity, prizing the “doctrinal foundation of Anglican identity” over and above the link the Canterbury.

The real question is what the moderates and others will do.

So what will happen? Having put all this together as an attempt to paint out the dynamics at play (and despite it’s length it’s still only a very brief sketch of things) what will actually happen next week? Of course the dream outcome would be that the GAFCON Primates come and present their case, at which point the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, turns to TEC/ACC and says “well? They have a clear case – what are you going to do?” In the face of their intransigence he then asks them to leave the table and repeats his welcome to Foley Beach. Biblical discipline is upheld and the gospel, not to mention the reputation of Jesus, is protected.

But of course that won’t happen. I’ve done my very best over the past month to talk to as many people in the know as I can and I think the very best outline of events I can give you is this:

  1. the GAFCON Primates will hold the line on discipline. I have this from a source very close to senior GAFCON leadership. I would be very surprised if more than a handful of GAFCON Primates don’t join in this very clear stand.
  2. the same source advises me that a number of the non-GAFCON Global South (GS) Primates will also be taking this same stand.
  3. Justin Welby will invite TEC and the ACC to consider their position, acting as mediator not enforcer. This is now my gut speaking. I can’t see Welby execute discipline himself. He is far too rooted into his “reconciliation” scheme to actually take the lead that he needs to. He also has the unity of the Church of England to consider. If it were known that he was the one who clearly told TEC/ACC that if nothing changed they were no longer welcome, nor at the upcoming Lambeth Conference, then he might very well face an open revolt just the other side of the Lambeth Palace walls.
  4. TEC/ACC would ask for more time. Perhaps a night to sleep on it, perhaps another appeal to “not being able to speak on behalf of the General Convention” (which was the way Griswold and then Schori avoided the issue before). They then might come back with a proposal that would be simply unacceptable to GAFCON. They will also effectively be calling Welby’s bluff to do something, daring him to be the one to enforce the will of the majority GAFCON group (and, no doubt, portraying that will as bullying).
  5. Welby tries to broker an agreement rather than taking the lead.
  6. GAFCON/GS partners walk. We never get to the Gathering – the meeting has failed because Welby has failed to lead at the moment where he should. I first made this prediction back in September when the meeting was originally announced.

My well-placed source tells me this will lead to “GAFCON growing” by the inclusion of a number of Global South provinces. The reality is that this gathering/meeting of Primates will not be what splits the Communion. We are already split beyond reconciliation since TEC/ACC simply will not repent of abandoning Jesus and His word. What the meeting will do is crystallise the deep divisions that already exist and demonstrate once more than there is no possibility of reconciliation with false teachers until those teachers clearly repent. It will also, tragically, weaken Welby’s position in the Church of England since on the one hand conservatives will increasingly look to GAFCON for leadership and liberals will seek greater revisionism now that they are freed of the ball and chain of conservative Communion relationships. If Welby’s attempts to broker peace at Lambeth were futile, then what hope holding the Church of England together?

Here in Australia the Primate Philip Freier will return to a national church about to have it’s own Lambeth moment at their March Bishops’ meeting. What happens next week cannot help but have an impact there and for much of the same reasons as the in the Church of England – but more of that in a later piece.

For now davidould.net sees not so much an impending train wreck but a moment of great clarification. Much prayer is needed all around, and not a little dose of Biblical courage and conviction.

Leave a Reply

This Post Has 20 Comments

  1. graemebellministercom

    You are too kind.They are false teachers destined for hell.The Bible is the authority and it says they are to be thrown from the church and anyone that wishes them well on the way out partakes in their punishment.

    1. David Ould

      Hi Graeme. I’m not entirely sure why you think I “wish them well”. I think I’m clearly on the record in that regard.

      1. graemebellministercom

        I never said you wish them well.I said what the Bible says and that is that they are to be thrown from the church and anyone that wishes them well is condemned.I never mentioned you. They dont believe in hell so they do not care.I had a dream one night.In that dream I was taken to hell by satan who grabbed me by the throat.I couldnt breathe..I called out to my God to get me out.Two hands came down.

        One grabbed me and the other grabbed satans hand off my neck and pulled me out and sat me on the end of the bed.I woke up on the end of the bed hholding my throat gasping for breath.I know hell is real but the rod bowers of the world who know the lot and who are NEVER EVER wrong call me deluded etc,

        They are going to hell and soon because the judgment is in the land.They are heretics and a humble whore from the streets of Kings Cross will have a better chance of waliking int the Kingdom of God than those people.

        1. Bruce Lyon

          Graeme, I hear some of your pain, and understand your reactions. Nevertheless, nether you, nor I, not David are God. So none of us can definitively state that someone is ‘going to hell’ without due qualification, and most particularly when someone is still alive.

          God is the author of life, and the sustainer of life. If someone is still alive, God is allowing this to occur, patiently, lovingly, that some will be saved.

          Who is to say, that somehow, just somehow, Fr Rod Bower may not even yet repent his ways, and return to the Lord even despite his wayward liberal progessive teachings? We cannot say with any certainty this may yet not occur.

          Did not the Apostle Paul, formerly Saul the most expert zealot Jew, bow down to the Lord Jesus and completely reform ?

          It may well be that these hopes are very unlikely. It may well be the Lord has indeed abandoned Fr Rod and left him to his futility ?

          On current form, certainly Fr Rod should be removed from active teaching of the Gospel, and at the very least disciplined. But this is a matter for the revelant Bishop to act on.

          It is unhelpful to definitely state someone is going to hell, without qualification. We do not have such authority. Though we can state prohetic warnings from Scripture about false teachers. But these inevitably are cast was warnings, with qualifications, always allowing for repentance to operative.

          1. Bruce Lyon

            Last sentence should read “But these inevitably are cast *as* warnings, thus with some qualification, always allowing for repentance to be operative. ”

            And I add, one of the purposes of prophetic warning, is to allow the possibility to bring about a ‘change of heart’ or repentance. Witness the people of Ninevah of old.

            Having said these things, it remains the case as far as I can see, that there has yet to be a change of heart by the Anglican Archdeacon for the Central Coast of NSW, and I have yet to see any discipline from the relevant Bishop. This raises other questions, naturally.

          2. graemebellministercom

            OK Bruce you are correct and the Bible is wrong because the Bible states that if you bring a Gospel other than that preached in the Bible you are CUT OFF FROM GOD WITH NO CHANCE OF REDEMPTION.
            So saying that they can repent is not true.They can repent but it is of no use.The Bible is CLEAR that they are cut off.Using the old chestnut that “you are not God” takes this issue no where.The Bible states that God does NOTHING unless first He tells His servants the prophets.How do you know He has not told someone His plans in this matter?

            and at any rate it is of no relevance.They brought a false gospel.They are anathema.CUT OFF FROM GOD WITH NO CHANCE OF SALVATION and they were wished well by people who think it is fine to preach that Jesus never died on the Cross for salvation and therefore according to the Bible partake in their deeds and therefore their punishment.
            They were warned in the Bible.They chose to ignore it.They reap what they sowed.

        2. Bruce Lyon

          Hi Graeme, thanks for your reply

          You state “if you bring a Gospel other than that preached in the Bible you are CUT OFF FROM GOD WITH NO CHANCE OF REDEMPTION. So saying that they can repent is not true.They can repent but it is of no use.The Bible is CLEAR that they are cut off.”

          Please can you provide which specific references chapter, which verses, of which books please to back up your assertions.

          If it is clear this should be easy for you to quickly reference.



  2. Bruce Lyon

    Thanks David for your enlightened and considered thoughts about the watershed upcoming Primates meeting. A meeting need prayer, and resolve, and obedience to the Word and revelations from God, not the faulty wisdoms of mere man.

    1. graemebellministercom

      Galatians Chapter 1 :8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

      anathema a thing devoted to God without hope of being redeemed, and if an animal, to be slain; therefore a person or thing doomed to destruction
      a curse STRONGS G331 Vines Dictionary the Apostle declares in the strongest manner that the Gospel he preached was the one and only way of salvation, and that to preach another was to nullify the Death of Christ.

      2 John 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

      Titus 1:10For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake.

      The Scriptures are clear.Those that bring a false gospel are cut off from God.Those that welcome them in their house or wish them well share in their evil deeds.

  3. graemebellministercom

    Galatians Ch 1 verses 8 and 9. Repeated in verse 9 as it is so serious.The word in Greek is ANETHEMA and it means CUT OFF WITH NO CHANCE OF SALVATION.

    1. Bruce Lyon

      Hi Graeme, thanks for your verse and explanation. A far better method of teaching stuff, rather than just using *capitalisation* and stating something without Bible reference. Too many people just say “the bible says” …. we need to be more specific, especially with David Ould looking on.

      I’ll see your bible verse and raise you one.

      “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins. (James 5:19-20)”

      So now, we are at a discussion point to explore a deeper understanding about those who can be ‘turned back’, and who may well be beyond this ‘turning back’, and truly accursed beyond hope. So now we may also be entering into the question of the unforgiveable sin, so as to speak, which is denying the Holy Spirit. ( RefMatthew 12:31-32 “”Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32″Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.)

      This is a BIG topic. And extremely strong teachings and warnings.

      So, I for one, dont think this is the space and place to digress and debate these things at length. A lot of people may be lead into unnecessary doubts and need good spiritual counselling / pastoring depending on the needs and / or concerns.

      And this is David’s space.

      But David, there is a question here to be addressed at some point with appropriate and good teaching.

      Is there any hope for false teachers or are they damned eternally even in this life ? How do we reconcile James 5:19-20, Gal 1:8,9 and Matt 12:31-32 for example ?

      1. David Ould

        Is there any hope for false teachers or are they damned eternally even in this life ? How do we reconcile James 5:19-20, Gal 1:8,9 and Matt 12:31-32 for example ?

        An excellent question. I’ve always thought this was instructive:

        1Tim. 1:18    Timothy, my son, I am giving you this command in keeping with the prophecies once made about you, so that by recalling them you may fight the battle well, 19 holding on to faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and so have suffered shipwreck with regard to the faith. 20 Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.

        I assume the “handed over to Satan” is much the same as

        1Cor. 5:5 hand this [proudly sexually immoral] man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

        So the expulsion is with a view to “saving”. We always hold out the hope of repentance and therefore forgiveness.

        Now, with respect to the specific Primates’ Gathering, I have every sympathy for the view of those who contend that according to 2John 1:9-11 there ought to be no such gathering on the grounds that it is already too late and we ought not to meet with them anymore. I think, on the basis that this “gathering” is not viewed as table fellowship, that it doesn’t quite apply in this case. But for those who think the GAFCON Primates shouldn’t even go to Lambeth tomorrow I can’t say that I have a strong grounds to say they’re wrong. Personally I think turning up is a political move as much as anything else. It shows willing to accept repentance from notorious false teachers even at this late hour. It is a gospel move but not one that denies judgement and necessary division/discipline. As I outline above I fully expect a firm response from GAFCON and others in the face of continued sinful intransigence.

        1. Bruce Lyon

          Thanks Reverent David. Helpful teaching.

      2. graemebellministercom

        So because David is a priest he must automatically know more than a person who is not a priest?
        I have studied it in 3 languages for years day in and day out.
        The word anathema is very clear.
        A false gospel condemns because it gives no hope to people who was otherwise be saved.

        The penalty is clear.
        In the Book of Revelation it speaks of false prophet singular.But because the people decided that the translator is king they reject the idea that it is plural.
        In the OT and the NT it is always false prophets plural and in Revelation it is the same.
        Are they saved?Not according to the Bible.
        If a watcfhman doesnt warn is he or she saved?The Bible says they are not.It is clear that false prophets go to hell.The OT says that every person that enquired of the false prophet goes to hell also.Are they saved?

        A false gospel is blasphemy against the Spirit because it is the Spirit that gives life yet the false gospel says Jesus died and stayed dead or didnt even exist or in the case of islam existed but didnt die to be raised.What greater blasphemy against the Spirit can you think of?

        Revelation 3:11Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. This shows clearly that salvation can be lost.

        Revelation 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Seems like a loss of salvation to me.

        2 Peter 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. 21For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. 22But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

        That seems clear.

        But I have been through for years.I am not a priest so can know nothing.I have not been to theology school so who am I to dare questioning any that has?
        I stood in front of Him.In my town something happened.You know rather than the people and pastors say that I must know God they called me the devil instead.Why?Well they went to theology school and they were pastors and they were close to God.How dare I come along upset the apple cart.One night a filthy lie telling prosperity preacher set on robbing the people with false hope told a tent full of gullible that God was speaking to him right then and there.They gooed and gaaed and toldf him what a great man of God he was.

        Then an event took place.I told the pastors that he told you that God spoke to him and you lapped it up.I showed you and you call me a demon.

        I have had this for years.Nothing changes,
        Go ahead and tell these spreaders of a false gospels what great men they are.Wish them well.Let them stay in the church.Then you can go to hell with them.

        The Bible AND the articles of faith say they must be thrown from the church.
        But you prefer to leave them there and tell them you love them as a brother in Christ.
        You partake in their deeds.

        Once they knew the truth and then turned from it they are castaways destined for the flames with no chance of redemption.If any says otherwise they give nothing but false hope and a skewed teaching of the Holy Bible.

        You will all know soon because the dates of judgment are in the Bible.But now you can tell me that NO ONE CAN KNOW! In that case Amos the Prophet lied.
        The Bible says a lot about the end days.It says to watch for the signs.Well they are here.But again I never went to theology school so what would I know?

        My wife asks me why I am angry all the time.The main reason is putting up with this world and the people in it.Almost every person I have met treats the translator like the greatest in the world and the fact that the Bible says not to is not taken into consideration.

        The Bowers of the world turned from the truth.The Bible says they are condemned to hell.It tells you to stay away from them and throw them from the church.The Primates wont even speak up.Seems to me like hell will be full to the brim.

        1. Bruce Lyon

          More on some of your comments …

          1/ “The Bowers of this world …”

          1R (response from me) Without repentance from denying the Resurrection, and preaching Universalism, and promoting gay marriage, and a host of other complaints … then yes, such false teaching and no repentance at physical death, would seem to be unforgiveable …. aka the ultimate blasphemy against the Holy Spirit … “I know better than you” ….

          But the “Bowers” of this world do not know when they will leave it, so best to repent now, before its too late, if not already ?

          2/ If you are so angry all the time, and even your wife worries about this … it is high time to self-ponder … is the peace of God with you in the Spirit ?

  4. Bruce Lyon

    Graeme, thanks again for your passionate contribution.

    You are covering a lot of ground here.

    I fully respect anyone who deeply reads the Scriptures, and seeks to place them at the high bar of God’s revealed and revered Word. Berean study methods are to be highly applauded.

    An Anglican Priest, or a Presbyterian Minister, or a Baptist Pastor, or a Church Elder, or any teacher or preacher of the Word, have a special responsibility to be true to the Gospel. Most teachers / preachers are ‘sent’. And in fact, will also be judged at a higher level as well (read personal responsibility) to be extra careful and true to the revealed Word.

    Have you been ‘sent’ or ‘commissioned’ ? You seem to be placing yourself as a ‘teacher’.

    It is useful to go to formal theological studies, but this by no means dismisses lay studies. As far as I know, the first Bishop of Rome (aka the Apostle Peter) went to no formal theological school, except to be in the company of the Lord Jesus for 3 years, with on the job training. And then immediately preached powerfully upon the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. A true apprentice. A true miracle.

    I listen to Revd David, and I listen to you. I respect David’s conservative, evangelical position, informed by training, but also distilled by the teachings of the 39 Articles of Religion, pure rolled gold reformation theology. Not to be sneezed at. Holy Spirit inspired.

    Some things you mention.

    The Date of Judgement ? Hmm … indeed we are called to watch the signs, and the seasons, and interpret carefully and wisely. But even Jesus knows not the day nor the hour. Only the Father knows this. We are indeed in the end days. Anyone seeking to say they know the date and the time supposedly knows more than Jesus Himself.

    Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”

    Do you say that you know more the Jesus ?

    If so, then I have severe doubts about your understandings. I hope you are not one who claims to know more than the Christ ? For such a one is a false teacher, and perhaps the truth is not in such a one ???

  5. graemebellministercom

    Have I been sent?I will tell you what.Join the other 10,000 that all know more than me.Forget me.Anything that happened in my life never happened ok.All in my mind.or so I am told.Even when it happened in front of others the good Christians all know better.And by now I know because so many tell me ,that a priest must know more.You quote Matthew 24:36.It does not say no one can know.It says no one knows.The word is PRESENT TENSE! Amos said someone must know.So if you do not believe that someone must know then rip the Book of Amos from your Bible because he will be a false prophet.

    It would not matter what I said.It would be disregarded.Who would care.When I was in Pakistan in 2010 I was asked why Australia never gets big floods.I told them that I would be home early November.Then wait roughly 8 weeks and in the last bit of december and first bit\ of January look to Qld and see the Biblical floods.

    I was asked later by them how I knew.What would it matter?Who would care?

    Or when I walked into Leonies house to preach repentance and her daughter burst into tears because a purple smoke blew up in the house and filled the rooms.Leonie stated that they should listen because truly God sent me to warn them.But you know what?It is simpler to say Leonie and her daughter and me are either deluded or liars.

    I am beyond it all.I have heard it all.Your priests know better.They all know more.

    Dont worry 2016 will be a massive year and soon you will all know the truth.And the ones that insulted me and told me what a bad Christian I was may not like it when they see where I stand with the God they pray to .But then again it is easier to call me deluded.

    I have had enough.Was I sent?NO I WASNT SENT.I was grabbed and thrown in by a force you cannot imagine.But then again I didnt experience it did I?How could I when so many better people of God are there to be chosen in front of me.I cannot wait for ww3.Soon I get to see and then finally the mocking of God will end and I can have some peace.

    1. Bruce Lyon

      Graeme, if you deny Matthew 24:36, that until the right time, only the Father knows, and will not reveal, but rather you or someone else rather than only the Father, this denies and sense and purpose of this teaching of the Christ.

      We are to be watchful.

      We are to be on the alert.

      We are NOT to claim we know what the Christ does not know.

      If we do so, I do not hesitate to suggest such a one has become deluded and deceived.

      Graeme, repent here and now from deception and false teaching, if you still claim you know the hour and the day of Judgement.

      It is the very fact of no one knowing, is the reason for man to repent now, not later. Else, if any one knew the day and the time, sin would greatly abound, and people would repent at the last minute before the known date.

      I think Graeme, you need to get down off you self appointed pedestal a little.

      I don’t doubt God and Spirit and Christ are active in your life experience. Be careful its not Satan in disguise.

      When you say you know the date and the time, I worry the Devil is overtaking you ??

      1. David Ould

        OK Bruce and Graeme, I think this particular discussion needs to finish.

        1. Bruce Lyon


Leave a Comment - but please pay careful attention to the house rules