Monday, March 23, 2015

The apostasy of of the Bicester Brethren

"Due to His essential deity it is true that even when He was a tiny baby Christ upheld the universe while Mary upheld Him. Are we suggesting that as a 6 month old, Jesus could have debated with the scribes in the temple? Clearly not. In submitting to the Father’s will and becoming fully human Christ accepted the limitations of a developing human brain which as He grew into manhood opened up daily to give full expression to His eternal essential omniscience" –  Hebron Hall website, Bicester

This is a gobbledegook statement. If there is essential omniscience, there must be non-essential omniscience .this would have to be defined as partial full knowledge.  How can one be omniscient without knowing it- and therefore drawing upon it? 

If not possessed of full omniscience at birth, when did Jesus realise He was omniscient? If the Lord’s brain was undeveloped  in infancy His omnipotence was also impeded.

The Bicester assembly bible Class has been taught that the deity of Christ was ineffective. The infant Jesus could not have been God manifest in the flesh. Or do the Bicester folk believe God was manifest in the flesh without any manifestation?

The article appears to be a plagiarised representation of Nelson Pike’s work. He was a Philosopher. This stuff is found on the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philsophy website.
The Bicester Assembly is teaching that Christ could not access His omniscience because as a child His brain was not up to it. 
There are those in the Bicester Assembly who drool over Man's Wisdom, aka Philospphy.
The result is heresy promoted.

Monday, February 23, 2015

Alan Dawson and others

Alan Dawson’s  trial is now set for July 2015. He is charged with several sexual offences including the rape of a child.
Mr Dawson was an elder and Bible Class leader in the Mauldeth Road Assembly, Manchester.
Those entering this Gospel Hall would see on the wall behind the platform the text “Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness.”

or click on link below
Crime and Justice

 I do not believe that sexual offences are endemic among Brethren. But attitudes must change.
More pity is being shown to the abusers than to the victims and maybe this is endemic among us.
We can recall several occasions where victims have been punished by their church leaders because they complained about their abuse.
We heard of a case where several years ago a young girl in the Mansfield Assembly told the elders she had been abused by a young man in the Assembly. The young man denied it and the victim was accused of lying and was put out of fellowship. The young man was the son of an elder.
We know of similar cases.
If there is genuine repentance shown by the abuser, and true repentance can be seen, there can be forgiveness and restoration, but justice may still have to run its course.

There is a case involving the Riverside Gosepl Hall, Bandon, R o I, where justice has been carried out, and a prison sentence completed in N.I.,but complaints have been made regarding a lack of repentance being shown by the convicted man.
 It is alleged that the man having served his sentence, now is permiited by the Assembly Overseer to hold childrens meetings in his own home.

Friday, January 16, 2015

Allan Cundick

Allan Cundick, 78 years old, of Woking, Surrey, was yesterday at Guildford Crown Court,  sentenced to four years and six months imprisonment. Full details of his offences may be read online by googling his name. They were category one offences.
  • 15 Jan 2015    
    20:40pm Thu       Click on paragraph below for further information
The final paragraph in this article has been amended (20th January)

Woking man sentenced for multiple non-recent sexual offences

Ian Jackson, a preacher, and an elder at Marine Hall, Eastbourne, appeared in court as a defence witness. Mr Jackson, who had refused assistance to Lina Barnes, a victim of Cundick, knew Cundick was a serial sex offender. Defence was an attempt to smear the character of the victims.  

Cundick has throughout shown no remorse; no repentance; no attempts to make amends.
He has a Sexual Offences Prevention Order made against him which will stand for the rest of his life. It is considered he is highly likely to re-offend,

Cundick grew up in Luton, with his younger sister and cousin who had lost her parents while she was still a child. They attended Onslow Road Gospel Hall. A Cundick was “highly principled” and refused to do National Service. He went Glasgow uni where, in Glasgow, he met his wife, Mary. She died of Altzheimer’s disease when she was in her sixties. Cundick had a career as a schoolteacher in Surrey. 
Allan's father, Fred, was a full-time preacher. He was tyrannical in the local church (I was there), and alleged to be tyrannical in the home. He was a large tadpole in a very small (somewhat muddied) puddle.

We are disappointed with Ian Jackson’s behaviour. He, like Cundick, is a victim of the religious system to which he adheres. We expect Jackson’s commendation to full time preaching to be withdrawn. He appears to have set out to thwart the course of justice.

There will be Brethren who are determined still to cover up offences in their local church. 
They must be exposed. This is “for the sake of the testimony”, that the world at large may know that we do not tolerate such men in our midst.

We strongly advise any who have been assaulted by persons in their church, NOT to approach church leaders for help, but to report the matter directly to the police. This done, inform the elders of the church. We do appreciate that many dedicated, faithful, church leaders may wish to give genuine assistance, but such assaults are criminal and must be dealt with accordingly.The local church has no jurisdiction to deal with criminal acts and  The victim, by reporting to the police, is not taking the abuser to court. The Crown is responsible for that.
The verses in 1 Corinthians ch.6 do not apply in these cases. If I have been personally wronged, I bear it. I do not take CIVIL action. Criminal acts are against the state. We must obey magistrates.
If the local church deals with the paedophile, he is free to move elsewhere and continue in his crimes.

Monday, January 05, 2015

Carnal Commentaries for Dead Souls.

Most bible studies are written by unconverted men. A few Bible studies are written by Bible Believers.
If the born again Bible student studies his own Bible first he will be able to recognise the nonsense served up in the confusion of modern error.
We have an example of confusion in how 1 Samuel 25: 27 is interpreted by our modern bible teachers.
Regarding Nabal, we read and his heart (mooth) died within him, and he became as a stone.

“he had a heart attack”, Bible Knowledge Commentary informs us
“he was probably seized with paralysis, a stroke, or a heart attack” states the more cagey Believers Bible Commentary.
Tom Wilson, in 1 & 2 Samuel: What the Bible Teaches affirms it to have been a stroke that Nabal suffered.
This is all very strange if his blood pumping organ failed totally, requiring God to step in about ten days later to kill him. 

The fact is the Hebrew word mooth which occurs 598 times in the Old Testament is ALWAYS used in a figurative sense. Consider Genesis 6: 5, his heart was only evil continually (first mention)
Our modern medics might regard Nabal as falling into a deep depression. He lay in this condition for about ten days and had plenty of time to think upon his ways. Then God killed him. Sometimes the Scripture tell us how this is done, as when the Lord smote Benjamin before Israel (Judges 20: 35), but not with regards to Nabal. 

Bible students do not speculate. Beware  the commentators and teachers, who cannot be bothered to study their own bible but simply regurgitate past blunders

Monday, December 29, 2014

Why Waymarks exposes error.

The following is reprinted from Lifting Up the Standard by Bob Kirkland, Issue 43, November 14, 2014, --

In Paul Chappell's Blog of November 8, 2014, he referred to, "spiritual leaders who become angry birds" (

He said, "They are restless and frustrated ... divisive ... sarcastic ... angry people ... always stirring an issue or picking a fight."

Who Is He Writing about and What Have They Done Wrong?

Brother Chappell's blog does not tell us who he is referring to or what they are guilty of. When the Holy Spirit inspired people to expose others for some error, they always made it plain who they were talking about and what they did that was wrong.

In Matthew 3:7, when John the Baptist called some spiritual leaders "a generation of vipers," we were not left to wonder who he was talking about or what they were doing.

In Matthew 12:24, when Jesus referred to some spiritual leaders as a "generation of vipers" we do not have to guess who He was talking about or what they were guilty of.

In Matthew 23:23-24, when Jesus called some spiritual leaders "hypocrites," "blind guides," "blind," "whited sepulchres," "serpents," and "ye generation of vipers" we were not left to guess who He was talking about or what they were guilty of.

In Galatians 2:11-14, Paul exposed Peter because he "walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel." Paul named him publicly, and God made sure it was recorded in His Word, like He did when Jesus rebuked Peter for caring about the things of this world. 

Paul named Demas, Hymenaeus, Alexander and revealed the reason why. 

John named Diotrephes; Jude exposed Balaam; and in both cases the reason for exposing them was made plain.

Brother Chappell's Dangerous Generalities

We are left to decide for ourselves who Brother Chappell's "angry birds" might be. It is a very dangerous thing to influence thousands of young followers with generalities about some unnamed "spiritual leaders" who are "frustrated ... divisive, sarcastic ... angry people who are always stirring an issue or picking a fight."

Do We Get on the Angry Birds List for Simply Getting Angry?

Psalm 7:11, "God is angry with the wicked every day."
Mark 3:5, "He (Christ) had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts."
Ephesians 4:26, "Be ye angry, and sin not."

What Does One Do to Be Considered Frustrated?

Was Jesus "frustrated" when He took the whip into the temple? 

Was Moses frustrated when he exposed Balaam? 

Was Paul frustrated when he said, "Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person"? (1 Corinthians 5:15).

What Does One Do to Gender Strife?

Was Jesus "gendering strife" when He warned people?

Matthew 7:15, "Beware of false prophets."
Matthew 10:17, "But beware of men."
Matthew 16:6, "Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees."
Matthew 16:6, "How is it that ye do not understand ... ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?"

Was Peter "gendering strife" in Second Peter 3:17 when He warned, "beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness."

I can't imagine Brother Chappell would have been referring to any of the above mentioned situations, so I am left to assume he was aiming to destroy the credibility and reputation of some unnamed "spiritual leaders" by associating them with his "angry birds."

My guess is that he is referring to Brother David Cloud of Way of Life Ministries, and those who would publicly support his ministry. For the record, I support Brother Cloud and his ministry, and I'm not an "angry bird."

I can also support Brother Chappell's ministry with the exception of some separation issues, especially concerning Contemporary Christian Music. 

However, the difference is, when Brother Cloud has something to say we are not left to guess who or what he is talking about. I wish Brother Chappell would take the same Biblical stand.

Note: Brother Chappell started his blog about "angry birds" comparing them to "some spiritual leaders" who "become like those birds." He said, "they hurl themselves into any situation that they perceive to be threatening or to be being handled differently than they would."

However, the Angry Bird app describes the game saying, "The survival of the Angry Birds is at stake and they dish out revenge on the greedy pigs who stole their eggs."

So the birds weren't angry because the pigs were just "handling things differently than they would." The destruction of their offsprings was the reason for their anger.

Reprinted from Lifting Up the Standard by Bob Kirkland, Issue 43, November 14, 2014, --

 The article above has been downloaded from where I first read it. -R S