IT HAPPENED ON ACC !

0 views
Skip to first unread message

oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 3:47:46 AM2/5/04
to
google archive: O yes please!

It happened on ACC!

"A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
"A Cult opperates on Usenet"
"A News Group Cult"
"usenet cult"

Griz and his cult had a good thing going. They were making progress in
recruiting members, and the group was growing, they were making progress
toward fulfilling the "Vision." Then problems started to mount. DMPP
would not quit. M&BT arrived and brought the situation to a critical
level. Then CULL arrived, and new members were asking questions.

A new "recruit" suddenly declined membership in the gang, and began to
question Griz. A second person demanded Griz's accountability. Then
others began questioning the "leadership." Griz could not prove himself
innocent, and every effort lead to defeat or embarrassment.

The leadership team met to discuss options. It was decided to fake the
departure of two or three members to win sympathy from a few of the
weaker/non-participating members of the Cult. This brought in some new
solders. This 'fake retreat' also gave ammunition to hurl at those who
did not approve of the Cult's methods. Still, the rebellion against Griz
and his Cult did not abate.

The leadership met and agreed to "surrender" to the demands of their
"attackers." A false surrender was arranged. Then, on January 8, 2004,
when Griz had "retreated from the field," all the gang members attacked
those who thought "they" had won freedom from Griz's dictatorship. The
most visible target was OWD. He had just posted two articles, "Control"
and "Context," which Griz could not answer. All the "Building Crew"
attacked AD HOMINEM! The Building Crew also attacked their old enemies
and reopened all the old wounds.

Then Vera began to attack acting like DMPP and M&BT: Attack, attack, but
reply to none. The Building Crew, of course, protected her: "Leave her
alone, she is hurt and angry, she'll work it out in a couple of days."
Then Vera posts, "No, I'm not angry... I'm exercising my freedom." For
most of the day, there was all this freedom, filled with rampant anger,
freedom used as an opportunity to vent anger and hate.

This Conspiracy by Griz, Vera and the "Building Crew" was two sided:
First, revenge--we will attack them just as they have attacked us, and
prove that freedom makes it impossible to manage the NG. Second, make
them beg Griz to return.

However, this "change" in (or surrender of) leadership was also
something else: "shift of focus." It took everyone's eyes off the
accusations Griz could not disprove. Still, if Griz was wrong before the
"change," then even if he is no longer Leader/moderator of ACC, Griz is
still wrong. There has been no admission of his error; there has been no
statement that he will change his conduct or method. Clearly, Griz and
the Building Crew intend to use the same method of operation "until" or
"unless" there is a statement otherwise. In fact, this is proved by
their conduct in the hours immediately after, and the days since, "the
change."

That phony surrender has been repeated. Griz has (it is claimed)
retreated to Christnet.Christianlife, yahoo.groups and Vera's private
web site. Yet he continues as leader of the "Building Crew" (who now
wishes to be known as "The Fellowship").

Various members of the Griz Cult have faked retreats from ACC, only to
return in a few days and again begin their personal attacks using the
same methods used between Dec. 30, 2003 and Jan. 31, 2004. Various
members of the Cult have assumed false names or identities, or assumed a
NIC to act as a sock puppet and reenter ACC to wage war for the Gang.

These methods of war practiced by the Cult include:

A) False accusations and Ad Hominem attack. A member attacks, then other
members of the Cult Gang Bang (aka "dog pile")the victim. While the
Soldiers attack their victim, the "lovers" begin to preach "peace,
Peace!" And, "Why can't you just let it go?" The casual observer will
notice, however, that this loving request for peace is not made to the
soldiers of the Cult, but to their victim. Of course, as long as the
victim continues to defend him/her self they are guilty of the sin of
stubbornly refusing to end the argument.

B) The use of Slander. One member of the Gang will take something from
the victim's past (this may be a confessed fault, a medical diagnosis or
any perceived weakness) which can be used wrongfully for the purpose of
Slander. Other members will then chime in and say, "Oh, I knew there was
something wrong with [name]." The victim is now left with the option of
attempting to defend their self against slander, or allow the slander to
stand. If the victim attempts to defend, the soldiers will (as above)
gang bang the victim.

C.) When asked to supply evidence for accusations, the gang will refuse
a request for proof; and indeed one member replied, "I don't have to..."
The gang then continues their attack on the victim even though they have
refused to give evidence, since the accusation is proven by the fact
that they made it and the victim denied it.

D.) In the event that one of the Gang is caught in a lie (false
accusation is a lie), and the victim of the lie submits evidence of the
lie, the gang's soldiers will attack saying, "you have judged [name]."
Or, "This is not correction, it is Condemnation." Or, "This is nothing
but "Focus Shifting" to take our eyes off of Jesus." Or, "You are
exhibiting the sin of "the spirit of invalidation of Witness." However,
in no way will the lie, as made by the false accuser, be acknowledged or
an apology offered. In fact, should the affair be forgotten, the gang
will renew their attack on their intended victim.

E.) Gang fights are always about "we" and "you" The members of the Griz
Cult, both acknowledged and secret, will always take the side of the
Cult and defend from, or attack, those who oppose the lies, false
accusations and Gang Bang tactics of the Cult members. The members of
the Cult make it clear that protection of the Cult is more important
than the Truth of God's Word, or unity among Christians.

Please note that the most recent examples of these methods of Gang
Warfare have continued unabated since about January 8, 2004, and can in
fact be shown in practice by this witness back to October 2003. Some
witnesses testify that these tactics have been used by Griz and his Cult
for about 2 years. While the members of the Cult continue to follow
Griz, any visitor, reader or lurker, or poster in
alt.christnet.christianlife, christnet.christianlife, the Cult's home
page or their "group" in yahoo.groups should expect to see this Cult
continue its methods of gang warfare.

Members of the Cult (are; or may or may not) include:
Griz (Craig)
Pablo
Cal (CBrown7281)
Mike Barefield
Ben mitts
Brian Garrison
TBC/Aarons Rod
Frank
Vera
Jeannette/Abby
Joy (JPF)
PureJoyAgain
Delightful (Faith)
Chayil

At any time, Cult members may function as follows:
Warriors
or Peace makers

The Cult, at times, may appear to be organized as follows:
(They will have their own names for their individual office or
'position' in their "on-line church" as based on the "fivefold ministry.")

Minister: Griz
Elders: Cal, Mike
Word of Knowledge: Pablo
Prophet: fervent
The blind: Frank
Recruiter: Vera
Court Jesters: Ben mitts, TBC/Aarons Rod

The members appear to communicate with each other by:
A "Chat room" on their home page,
personal E-mail,
Instant Messenger,
and/or cell phones.

Cult members consider it their right and priviledge to "lie for Jesus."
In fact, "lying for Jesus" seems to be the rite of passage.

-----

Glenn/bagman/owd
--
oldwetdog
-----
"Sophistry is not a system of ideas, but a vicious attitude of the
mind." Jacques Maritain
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/
.

Bernd Nawothnig

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 5:29:51 AM2/5/04
to
Hi Glenn,

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004, oldwetdog <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote:

> google archive: O yes please!

Look into by headers :-)

Bernd

--
Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. [T. Jefferson]

Mike Barefield

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 7:19:12 AM2/5/04
to

"oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
news:10240pe...@corp.supernews.com...

As a mystery novel I would give this a B-. Interesting plot, but not too
plausible, not able to hold a reader's attention.

As a news paper report I would give this a D-. Poor representation of the
facts and the motivations of the people involved.

As an editorial column I would give it a C+. Expresses the views of the
writer who was too personally involved to have a clear perspective.

As a creative writing home work assignment for a 9th grader I would give it
a B. Not all the facts, but for the 9th grader it shows creativity and a
bit of spark.


oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 8:36:53 AM2/5/04
to
Mike Barefield wrote:
> "oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
> news:10240pe...@corp.supernews.com...
>


> a bit of spark.
>
>

Good morning Mike
;-)

David Matthieu P.P.

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 8:45:49 AM2/5/04
to

"Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4xqUb.10755$jH6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...

Rating for the mistery novel by Mike Barefield " The art of Tooshie
Kissing":

> As a mystery novel I would give this a B-. Interesting plot, but not too
> plausible, not able to hold a reader's attention.

Rating of the Article by Mike Barefieldl "Griz's Tooshie kissing is no
Cult":

> As a news paper report I would give this a D-. Poor representation of the
> facts and the motivations of the people involved.

Rating of the Editorial by Mike Barefield " Heavenly Smell and Emanation":

> As an editorial column I would give it a C+. Expresses the views of the
> writer who was too personally involved to have a clear perspective.

Rating by Griz on how Mike Barefield is handling his Tooshie kissing:

David Matthieu P.P.

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 9:08:03 AM2/5/04
to

"oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
news:10240pe...@corp.supernews.com...


Yes Glenn it happened on alt.christnet.christianlife, let us hope it will
not happen now on alt.christnet.evangelical!


oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 9:06:25 AM2/5/04
to
Mike Barefield wrote:

Another example of a Cult member using a 'sock puppet' or a phoney
identity . . . .

Mike Barefield has just begun a new life as "Sower"

(repost)

Subject: Re: Context
From: "Mike Barefield" littlej_...@yahoo.com
Date: 1/9/04 6:01 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: <FhHLb.602$q4....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>


Every believer should follow Christ in water baptism, but salvation
comes when faith comes, not when the water is applied.

(end repost)

Good morning Sower!

Mark and Bev Tindall

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 4:39:06 AM2/5/04
to
"oldwetdog" wrote:

> It happened on ACC!
>
> "A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
> "A Cult opperates on Usenet"
> "A News Group Cult"
> "usenet cult"


That's a keeper!!!!

You have explained it all so well. ;-)


oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 9:43:48 AM2/5/04
to
oldwetdog wrote:
> google archive: O yes please!
>
> It happened on ACC!
>
> "A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
> "A Cult opperates on Usenet"
> "A News Group Cult"
> "usenet cult"
>

<snip>

>
> Cult members consider it their right and priviledge to "lie for Jesus."
> In fact, "lying for Jesus" seems to be the rite of passage.
>
> -----
>
> Glenn/bagman/owd


This is an example of how "gang banging" or the "dog pile" works...

In order to see this example, follow the link below...
or, use the message id to retreve the message in its original thread.
You may also use a phrase
(example: example of Griz taking scripture out of context) and
goto google.groups.advanced search.
use 'oldwetdog' for author,
use alt.christnet.christainlife for the group,
use the date in the header below.

You will need to select "view entire thread"

You will find, if you read these 158 posts in this one thread, that not
one reply relates to the original subject of the post. 157 replies to an
original (almost half are attack) post is an example Gang Warfare.

----------------------------------------
IMHO, the original post is worth reading. :-) owd
----------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------

url into google archive:

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=vvrhnn8ri5lqfd%40corp.supernews.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

(repost)

From: oldwetdog <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet>
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.christianlife
Subject: Context
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:09:11 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <vvrhnn8...@corp.supernews.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5)
Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com
Lines: 130


This is an example of Griz taking scripture out of context, giving his
own private interpretation, then using it in a context other than its
original, and for his own purpose.

This Cult leader, like all others, uses his own private interpretation
of scripture to control his followers, and in an attempt to dictate the
proper subject of discussion in this open, public, un-moderated forum.


<snip>

If you claim to be a student of the Word of God, and you claim to love
Truth, and yet you cannot see how Griz has distorted this Scripture for
his own base purpose, then you deceive yourself, you are beyond my
reach, and may God have mercy on you.

<end repost>
------------------

A simple explanation of what 'dog pile' or "gang bang" is, does not
actually convey the meaning... The most definitive way to understand it
is to be a victim -- but I don't recommend it. Next is to witness it as
a non-participant, and last is to actually study an example, such as
this one. One of the things you may want to do is compare the time-frame
for posts and replies dated 1/8 and see how many posts are made per
hour. Next, examine the posts for hostility and name-calling. Consider
the intent of the attackers, and the intentional misinterpretation of
posted replies.

Those who love Truth search for it, those who hate Truth, lie.

google is your friend

oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 9:48:23 AM2/5/04
to
David Matthieu P.P. wrote:

Brother, the "strong delusion" is here.
(Yes, I know you know it...)

--
oldwetdog
-----
"Sophistry is not a system of ideas, but a vicious attitude of the
mind." Jacques Maritain
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/

.

David Matthieu P.P.

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 10:24:13 AM2/5/04
to

alexiastation

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 11:16:32 AM2/5/04
to

"Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4xqUb.10755$jH6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
Not saying anything against you OWD, but lol Mike. You guys are so funny.
Be blessed, you all!
Beth


alexiastation

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 11:17:34 AM2/5/04
to

"David Matthieu P.P." <johnrev...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bvthej$viqj4$1...@ID-188549.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > Laughter doeth the heart like a medicine aye ;)
Beth
>
>


oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 1:12:38 PM2/5/04
to
oldwetdog wrote:

> google archive: O yes please!
>
> It happened on ACC!
>
> "A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
> "A Cult opperates on Usenet"
> "A News Group Cult"
> "usenet cult"
>

<snip>

---------------------
Examples of ridicule and name calling as used by Cult members:

In looking up these "names" you will (I hope) notice that the Cult uses
names against those they are attacking, and that no member of the Cult
ever corrects their own Gang members for using ridicule or name calling.
The Gang will use ridicule or "names" in order to start a fight, or
during a Gang Bang. I have tried to use names as they have been applied
to me, since I do not want to expose others who may be innocent,
however, there is no way for me to know where this trail of "names" will
lead.

In this example I am not going to give any copies of posts.
I have three reasons for this:

First: I do not want to be accused of taking other's words out of context.

Second: I believe one of the best things I can do for any one is show
them how to find Truth for him/her self. Having the ability to find
Truth for ones self, and taking the responsibility for doing so, is one
of the largest steps toward maturity, and one of the steps denied by
those who intend to make others dependent on them. In the last week
there has been, in fact, an effort by the members of the cult to
ridicule the use of google. Now, why-O-why would someone want to prevent
others from looking in the archive?

Third: Those who love Truth search for it, those who hate Truth, Lie.

-------------------------
The old wet smelly doggy
------------------------
a heretic and a liar
-----------------------
He is a coward
------------------
He is quite manipulative
------------------------
the dog
-----------------------
Cerberus
-----------------------
You are a demon
-----------------------
You are vile
-------------------------
you are a complete idiot
------------------------
You are delusional
-------------------------
the great prophet hunter
------------------------
the stupid mob
------------------------
you fools
------------------------
nobody here is worth a penny
------------------------


You can locate any of the above posts by using a line from the post, and
the author as one of the members of the Cult, or just look for the
phrase to find out if anyone used it.
----
To use google search:
go to google, goto groups, advanced search.
----
or this link should get you there:
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?hl=en
-------------------------------------------------
at google.groups.advanced search:
type in the phrase or word you are searching for-- (use "exact" or you
will get too many results, including all variations),

type in the group to be searched: alt.christnet.christianlife
type in author (a name of the Cult member)(or none for any match)
select 'english'
select 1 month or 3 months
select 100 results

google may eliminate some search results due to similarity, click on
repeat search and include all results


>
> Members of the Cult (are; or may or may not) include:
> Griz (Craig)
> Pablo
> Cal (CBrown7281)
> Mike Barefield
> Ben mitts
> Brian Garrison
> TBC/Aarons Rod
> Frank
> Vera
> Jeannette/Abby
> Joy (JPF)
> PureJoyAgain
> Delightful (Faith)
> Chayil
>

Those who hate Truth, hate those who love Truth.

TheLateGreat_TBC

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 1:28:21 PM2/5/04
to

"oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
news:1024ltm...@corp.supernews.com...

Sounds like you two are off to a good start at a lasting friendship.

Hey, this speaks volumes!!!

OWD and DMPP

oh well

No since in everyone leaving if you guys are going to follow us around
usernet.

Owd you really need help.

Even though you have Lied and slandered I am still willing to help you.

But you must turn from your bitterness.

tbc


Brian Garrison

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 1:37:01 PM2/5/04
to
"Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<4xqUb.10755$jH6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>...

Hello Mike,

I suspect that the intent is to evoke reaction. They're words and
there is no reason to respond.

I continue to pray for Glenn and everybody else on ACC. My suggestion
is that we all do so. I pray for healing on this group and the only
way for that to happen is that we not allow the flesh to exact its
revenge. This thread can become long and terrible if self-control is
not exercised.

I intend to let the negative go and pray that I can be a positive
voice here. It's not *my* newsgroup, nor is it anybody else's for that
matter. While I'm not saying that you're not, we should seek to
glorify God in all things. That is a matter of the heart.

I don't intend for this post to admonish, I'm just trying to convey
how I feel *I'm* being led in terms of my conduct on ACC. Of course,
you are free to respond as you wish, but I would submit that a
reaction is the intended result.

I hope you read my response to you in the spirit in which it was
written, in love to another brother.

Be Encouraged,
-Brian

oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 1:37:58 PM2/5/04
to

;-)

David Vestal

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 1:47:09 PM2/5/04
to
"Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:4xqUb.10755$jH6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:

It was quite plausible. Let's just say that the fame of the members of
this group was "noised abroad," as it were (not in a good way), so I came
to find out if this group really behaved as it was being advertised
elsewhere. It looks like it does, and it looks like the above is pretty
accurate.

oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 2:06:44 PM2/5/04
to
oldwetdog wrote:

> google archive: O yes please!
>
> It happened on ACC!
>
> "A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
> "A Cult opperates on Usenet"
> "A News Group Cult"
> "usenet cult"
>


<snip>


This is an example of outright Slander as used by a member of the Cult.
This Slander was committed using a diagnosis over thirty years old,
which was not verified, and which the Slanderer has no proof of being
correct. All the other slanderous comments and insinuations are pure
conjecture or assumption made with out giving evidence or proof. This is
just one example of the Slander used by the Cult, but I cannot, and will
not, offer an example of Slander which involves other innocent victims.


I offer this example without inserting comments.

To locate the original post in the google archive you can use the link
below, or go to google.groups.advanced search. You can look it using the
author name=Abby, or you can use the Message-ID contained in the header.

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=Ht2dnWtDSdcBRIbdRVn-uw%40bright.net&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

(re-post)

NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 10:36:43 -0600
From: "Abby" <cowabunga@home>
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.christianlife
Subject: Dog
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 11:39:27 -0500
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID: <Ht2dnWtDSdc...@bright.net>
Lines: 42
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.143.34.3
X-Trace:
sv3-qes+erMLy0l9IppS98b5PeHPonKLuAlqDhT88Tx5ub5M0fexKoX91jNiOJ/LUxvnZfh/8y0WLS/zbj3!eDwGZcJn+3r4RXTL5mrCQHvz5LUkRu37mHplRv3MF0/Gp075dPhwND36WnBNtF9m3svRiDE=
X-Complaints-To: ab...@bright.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: ab...@bright.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1


The OWD certainly has a fixation about lying. He
has called many here liars and now he has resorted
to calling the Pope a liar.

It is common for bi-polars (manic depressives) to
become fixated on things during a manic phase of
the illness. He refuses medication to correct the
illness (according to his web site).

I wonder if he collects a government issued check
every month instead of working for a living? This
is common for people with this illness as well and
sometimes it is rightly deserved.

I do have a problem with people who are sucking
the system (working people) and then spending the
money for a computer, internet services and then
proceed to go online and call them (working
people) liars, when in fact it is ~they~ who are
living a lie, collecting the funds because of
their own refusal for medication that keeps the
illness well controlled and could allow them to
work for a living.

I am not saying this is what is happening in the
OWD's case , but one has to wonder. Does he work
for a living or is he collecting a disability
check from us?? Why is he noncompliant about a
medication that could make one a productive
working member of society? Bi-Polar disorder is a
chemical imbalance of the brain. You replace the
missing chemical and you have a normal working
brain.

Abby Jeannette
--
"He is no fool, who gives what he cannot keep,
to gain what he cannot lose." -Jim Elliott

(end repost)

To look up the information offered to the public, and used by
Abby Jeannette in her act of Slander, see the link below,
and follow the links, or use the search tool.

Or, http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/main/about/story.html
and see also, http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/main/personal/Glenn.html

Chayil

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 3:15:36 PM2/5/04
to

"Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4xqUb.10755$jH6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...

As a musical score, I give it a thumbs down. Even though it has a
repetitive baseline, I just can't dance to it. *LOL*
>


oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 4:34:11 PM2/5/04
to
oldwetdog wrote:
> google archive: O yes please!
>
> It happened on ACC!
>
> "A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
> "A Cult opperates on Usenet"
> "A News Group Cult"
> "usenet cult"
>

<snip>


Example of Sophistry and the denial of the Truth of his own conduct by Griz.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A re-post)
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=vvephtorbrp3a8%40corp.supernews.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain


From: oldwetdog <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet>
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.christianlife
Subject: Re: A festering sore
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:02:54 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <vvephto...@corp.supernews.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5)
Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0

References: <41a033e.04010...@posting.google.com>
<vvdmoi6...@corp.supernews.com>
In-Reply-To: <vvdmoi6...@corp.supernews.com>


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com

Lines: 61


Griz wrote:
>>Yes, there is something wrong with this group.
>
>
> Yes, it's called sin.
> And none of us are "immune".
>
> Thank you for this excellent reminder that it is time to return and
rest in
> Him; rather than chasing off on swift horses.
>
> Isa 30:15
>
> I apologize to the group if I have digressed into sin.
> My only intent has been to be on guard for the church of God that He has
> purchased with His own blood, in a particularly contentious and
front-line
> ministry.
>
> I have done things in the past that were more of me than of Christ
and those
> things are under the blood of Christ. So let us put aside the
talking about
> people and how they have failed, and focus upon God and how He has never
> failed.
>
> That should be what we are about.
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> Griz
>
>
Griz,
This is a wonderful beginning!
It is, I believe, "just" a beginning because it is in such general
terms. There are specific wrongs, things you have done or said in
public, of which you have been accused in public, and it would seem
necessary to either acknowledge these wrongs of a specific nature in
public, or deny them.

Confession of wrong doing, and repentance, must be accompanied with a
change of conduct, else it is meaningless.

For my part, you have not wronged me.
However, your public conduct as if you are an ordained leader of the NG,
and some of the statements you have made to others in the last 90 days,
is such that I cannot condone by remaining silent.

Griz, I ask you in public,
Do you renounce any claim to leadership of this public forum?
Do you renounce any right to limit any post, poster or subject?
Do you renounce any right or authority to ask another to leave this
public forum?
Will you make a public apology to those whom you have wronged by this
conduct?


--
oldwetdog
-----
"Sophistry is not a system of ideas, but a vicious attitude of the
mind." Jacques Maritain
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/

(end repost)

------------------------------------------------------------------
Then this exchange....
---------------------------------------------------------------------

(repost)

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=vvhpc9nmskofc8%40corp.supernews.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain


From: oldwetdog <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet>
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.christianlife
Subject: Re: A festering sore
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 20:18:14 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <vvhpc9n...@corp.supernews.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5)
Gecko/20031013 Thunderbird/0.3
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0

References: <41a033e.04010...@posting.google.com>
<vvdmoi6...@corp.supernews.com> <vvephto...@corp.supernews.com>
<vvgb9ko...@corp.supernews.com>
In-Reply-To: <vvgb9ko...@corp.supernews.com>


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com

Lines: 328


Griz wrote:
>>Griz,
>>This is a wonderful beginning!
>>It is, I believe, "just" a beginning because it is in such general
>>terms. There are specific wrongs, things you have done or said in
>>public, of which you have been accused in public, and it would seem
>>necessary to either acknowledge these wrongs of a specific nature in
>>public, or deny them.
>
>
> Hi Glenn.
> Very interesting my friend. I take it you believe that I am the
festering
> sore?

Friend, did I say that? Why would you assume it?

>
>
>>For my part, you have not wronged me.
>>However, your public conduct as if you are an ordained leader of the NG,
>>and some of the statements you have made to others in the last 90 days,
>>is such that I cannot condone by remaining silent.
>
>
>>Griz, I ask you in public,
>
>
> Yes, I notice! Something in Matt 18 comes to mind.
>
>
>>Do you renounce any claim to leadership of this public forum?
>>Do you renounce any right to limit any post, poster or subject?
>>Do you renounce any right or authority to ask another to leave this
>>public forum?
>>Will you make a public apology to those whom you have wronged by this
>>conduct?
>
>
>
> I will answer this list of charges Glenn, but based on the provision
at the
> bottom of this post.

I do not agree to any provision set by you. Nor do you need to reply to
anything I post.

>
> 1. The group is God's Glenn.

"The group" is an un-moderated public forum.

> I have never said or implied otherwise.

You have claimed that ACC is a Church. It is not.

> He sends the
> ones with the gifts He desires - whether prophets or exhorters or
teachers
> or speakers of law -- or leaders. That is also a gift Glenn; and not a
> dirty word.

True, leadership is not a dirty word. However, a leader who lies in the
name of Jesus, or performs other un-Godly acts, is not from God. Hitler
was the leader of Germany, which proves that not all leaders are sent
from God.

> He's the one who grants gifts, and as I said leadership is a gift and
here
> is where I was placed when the group was dead. Would you have me
renounce
> what God has given or the path He has selected? That is not our place
>
> Remember Glenn, that you have heard a lot of repeated playing with
context
> from the past, and false accusations about things I have not said -- and

Do you suggest that I, and/or other visitors to this un-moderated public
forum are not smart enough to use google and verify the truth and
context of your words? It is extremely interesting to me that one who
takes scripture out of context would complain about his own words "being
taken out of context." Well, at least, it would seem to prove you
understand the term.

> something that is repeated often enough can seem to take on the
appearance
> of truth.

> Can you honestly say that your "urge to speak" has not been influenced

<See post at top.>
>>>However, your public conduct as if you are an ordained leader of
the NG,
>>>and some of the statements you have made to others in the last 90 days,
>>>is such that I cannot condone by remaining silent.

> in any way by this persistent warping of truth that comes not from
above?

So, are saying that ALL the posts containing evidence (even your own
posts) of your wrongs are lies?

> There is also the reality of growth.

Let us not sidetrack the issue. Growth, and/or the quality of that
growth, is not the question. And, growth of any kind is not
justification for lies in the name of Jesus.

> Taking a look over the past
> 2 years, can you honestly say that there has been no growth in how I
> administer the gifts I've been given?
> I would ask that if you would use the past against me, that you
provide not
> just the words Glenn, but the full spiritual context of what the
group was
> experiencing at the time. That is fair to ask.

What would be fair, Griz, is for you to request the presence of those
whom you have wronged. Let us consider a way whereby that may be done.

>
> 2. What supernatural power have I ever had to limit any post, poster or
> subject - or to cause them to leave?

Let us allow those who claim wrong submit their own evidence.

> What I have done however is ask that those claiming Christ, act
accordingly,

This would be a good idea if you, and those you profess to lead, did as
you preach.

> and provided contextual Scripture to
> the best of my ability to show where they may not be. My grasp of
Scripture
> is by no means complete, so I listen carefully to how they respond
and what
> they offer. If they don't honor Scripture (the full context of it), I
> will ask in public, the same as you. I experience the same drive to
hold
> them accountable in a Scriptural way. But that is where many would
call me
> criminal; while I'm sure you will be praised.

What is this? Ridicule, or Martyrdom? So you ridicule those who see your
conduct as criminal (sic) and claim martyrdom for yourself? (I never
said your conduct was "criminal" that is your term. But, since you see
it as "criminal" perhaps it would be a good idea to ask the Au and Ca
authorities to examine the evidence?)

> If someone is claiming the name of Christ and is repeatedly acting
as the
> factious or divisive ones against this established fellowship, then I
will
> ask them to consider taking it elsewhere.

"This fellowship..." First, is an un-moderated public forum. If someone
disagrees with you, then they are being "factious or divisive..."

> That is a godly request as Scripture specifically deals with these
things.

You misinterpret scripture. There is no scripture which gives you the
right to ask someone to leave an unmoderated public forum.

> How they respond (and they do have several options that will allow
them to
> remain and still honor God), will determine whether their actions are of
> Christ or of antichrist.

Here you have revealed a truth: "options that will allow them to
remain..." So if they reject Your options, You will not "allow them to
remain..." And, You decide someone is an antichrist if they disagree
with you. Mindful, of course, that you will receive the judgment you give.

> The self may flare Glenn but in the long run, someone in whom the
Spirit of God dwells,

You pass judgment? If someone disagrees with you, then in your judgment
they are without the Spirit of God? Have you actually made this
statement in public?

> who is shown they are actually hurting the body,

We will not sidetrack the issue. We are not talking about "The Body," or
about wrong done by others, we are discussing your misconduct in an
un-moderated public forum.

> will have no choice but follow the examples of Scripture. If the
Spirit proves

So now, having stated your position, you are saying that You "have no
Choice but to follow the examples of Scripture, and if you refuse to do
so, then you are not "someone in whom the Spirit of God dwells?"

> absent, then they are not of the fellowship

This is an un-moderated public forum.

> and Scripture is again clear on our response to them.

There is no scripture dictating that you eject someone (who disagrees
with your private interpretation of Scripture) from an unmoderated
public forum.

> This ministry and fellowship is old, by NG standards Glenn. It is
> established and was bearing fruit until a few came along to set
themselves
> up as the factious and rebellious troublemakers

This is an effort at misdirection: However, for a moment: Let us look at
the statements of "those who came along..." Why did they "come along?"
What did they say was their reason for their posts? Let us consider the
truth of their accusations, if they be true, or not? Still, it is
sidetracking the issue: the issue is your conduct, not the conduct of
others.

> against what already
> existed - contrary to Scripture. Seeing that, and having a gift and a
> burden of leadership, how could I have done anything else? They were
asked
> to leave so there would not be a fractured witness to those who came
along
> wishing to seek Christ. That 'witness' might service personal
pride, but
> not the
> Kingdom of God. Considering there were literally hundreds of other
forums
> they could choose, and a limitless number they themselves could
create to
> worship God as they saw fit, the request was not out of order.
> Please remember, such burdens to service God's Kingdom come not by our
> choice Glenn, but by God's. You feel you have a burden to convict me
> publically on these things. Is that any less "from God"? If you
could back this
> stance from

A very nice distraction! Nevertheless, let us examine its other side:
will you suggest that a Christian, after the model of Paul, does not
have the responsibility to confront one who misinterprets Scripture? And
what of John, or Jude?

> Scripture, how would you respond if someone asked you not to
discharge your
> duty before God, then proceeded to mobilize people against you over
time,
> holding neither truth nor context as any object?

Another effort at misdirection: However, do you claim there is "No
Truth" in the posts of "those who came along?" Still, not being turned
aside, it makes no difference if the conduct of others was in error; you
have already determined their punishment: What we are discussing YOUR
conduct.

>
> Could you please name these people I have wronged Glenn, and how;

This is another effort at misdirection. Still, some names of those who
claim wrong against you are in the posts of "Those who came along..."
However, to remain with the issue: it is not the names of others we
need, it is your name, and your conduct we are considering.

> and maybe we can straighten this out and get this group off it's kick of
> revelling in past mistakes of others and onto a more godly path?
> If there are genuine wrongs, I am willing to make ammends as per
Scripture.

"This group" is an un-moderated public forum. However, if your wrongs
(against individuals?) are not "genuine" then you will continue on your
previous path? That is not the point of my post.

> But before I am judged, I would like to hear more about where you Glenn,
> perceive the trespasses to be and how you suggest they be remedied.
>
> You've already said they are not against you; and you have not done this
> thing privately first,

This is a lie, and you know it. It is, in fact, your first wrong
committed against me.

This is a willful misdirection of the issue: Your wrongs were done in
public and are a matter of public record, and your accusers have posted
their evidence in public, and I made my request in public.

> so Mat 18:15 will not be applying I guess. Neither have you stood
> in as peace-maker while various disagreements were going on.

This is another willful misdirection of the Issue. My conduct is not
related to your public conduct, your public statements or your public
wrongs.

> It also seems that you hold me alone in trespass here, with none
others mentioned.

True, I did not mention the misconduct of others. It would seem fair to
consider the conduct on one individual at a time. However, first, if you
wish, you may name those to whom you wish to shift the blame for your
own conduct. Second, the leader (self-proclaimed, or as acknowledged by
those being lead,) is responsible for the conduct of those he claims to
lead. If you consider that unjustified, then you may claim martyrdom, or
name those you wish to implicate.

>
> So before we go any further with these proceedings, I would ask you
by what
> standards you will be judging me in this trial?

I am not your judge, I am not conducting a trial, nor will I be passing
judgment. The evidence against you has been presented in public, and if
not presented by others, has been presented by yourself.

But, and yet, after your long post and my long reply, I ask again:
Griz,
Do you renounce any claim to leadership of this public forum?
Do you renounce any right to limit any post, poster or subject?
Do you renounce any right or authority to ask another to leave this
public forum?
Will you make a public apology to those whom you have wronged by your
conduct?

And, after your long post and my long reply, I now ask:
Griz, will you stop misquoting Scripture,
Stop taking Scripture out of its context,
Stop giving Scripture meaning not contained within it and its context,
Stop using your private interpretation of Scripture to enforce your
personal opinion,
Stop accusing those who disagree with you (or your personal
interpretation of Scripture) of "being without the Spirit of God?"

--
oldwetdog
-----
"Sophistry is not a system of ideas, but a vicious attitude of the
mind." Jacques Maritain
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/

(end repost)

-----------------------------------

Examples of one lie told by Griz
In the posts above Griz said
> You've already said they are not against you; and you have not done this
> thing privately first,

Then later (two days) Griz was caught in his lie...
----------------------------------------------------
Interested readers can to to google.groups.advanced search to look up
the archived copy. Those who are interested in the Truth will note that
Griz did not reply when presented with the evidence of his lie.
-------------------------------------------
Subject: "Private Discussion" Dated Jan 6. posted by oldwetdog
-------------------------------------------

owd said:
Some time ago I sent Griz (CC Vera) a private email to discuss the
difficulties on this NG... I received no reply.


Gris said:
"The reply was written, and was quite a masterpiece I must say! A work of
the flesh that took an entire day to research and construct. "

owd said:
In an earlier post you wrote:
> "and you have not done this thing privately first,"

Now you acknowledge having received it, and spent "an entire day" to
compose a reply....

Tell me Griz, "Which is the lie?"


--
oldwetdog
-----
"Sophistry is not a system of ideas, but a vicious attitude of the
mind." Jacques Maritain
http://www.xprt.net/~servitum/
.

(end repost)


Griz did not reply.

As I have said before, I say again:


Those who love Truth search for it, those who hate Truth, Lie

google is your friend

Chayil

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 4:40:42 PM2/5/04
to

"oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
news:1025dmn...@corp.supernews.com...
[snip]

> Confession of wrong doing, and repentance, must be accompanied with a
> change of conduct, else it is meaningless.

Now that one's a keeper. Thanks OWD!

[snip]> .


Mike Barefield

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 7:16:22 PM2/5/04
to

"Brian Garrison" <justa...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:f53b61d2.04020...@posting.google.com...

Brian, my post was meant to be funny. That is all.


Mark and Bev Tindall

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 5:54:19 PM2/5/04
to
"Mike Barefield" wrote:

...whatever ...

Fundamentalists Anonymous: by Lee Adams Young

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

All who have chosen to walk away from biblical fundamentalism are welcome to
join Fundamentalists Anonymous, and to consider embracing the following
Twelve Steps:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. I realize that I had turned control of my mind over to another person or
group, who had assumed power over my thinking.

2. That person or group persuaded me of the inerrancy of the Bible, in spite
of its many internal contradictions.

3. I became addicted to the Bible as the supreme focus of my faith, in spite
of the commandment that God should come first.

4. I admit to God, to myself and to another person the shortcomings of my
belief in the unbelievable.

5. I have made an inventory of my false claims about the Bible.

6. I have made a list of those whom I led into confusion about the Bible.

7. I am willing to make amends to all those whom I may have led astray.

8. I realize that I have the inner power to restore sanity to my life and to
search Scripture for the truth.

9. I will reach out to friends who can help me clarify my thinking about the
Bible, God and Jesus.

10. I confess that only with God's help can my mind grasp the truth.

11. I will seek through prayer and meditation to improve my conscious
contact with God, praying for knowledge of God's will for me and the power
to carry that out.

12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these twelve steps, I
will offer these steps to other former biblical fundamentalists.

These 12 steps are adapted from those of Alchoholics Anonymous.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mark and Bev Tindall

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 6:00:18 PM2/5/04
to
"David Vestal" wrote:

> It was quite plausible. Let's just say that the fame of the members of
> this group was "noised abroad," as it were (not in a good way), so I came
> to find out if this group really behaved as it was being advertised
> elsewhere. It looks like it does, and it looks like the above is pretty
> accurate.

Yes, the Griz Shallowship cult is infamous.


Brian Garrison

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 8:09:53 PM2/5/04
to
On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 00:16:22 GMT, "Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

I know, Mike. I'm probably a little gun-shy these days.

How've you been anyhow? Has it been cold in your parts? Dis your team
win the SuperBowl?


Be Encouraged,
-Brian

"Jesus Christ is not valued at all until He is valued above all."
--Augustine.

Mike Barefield

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 8:46:16 PM2/5/04
to

"Brian Garrison" <justabra...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:g7q52099i70irv7aq...@4ax.com...

Well, I am not sure my comments were very well understood, but then I was
not really trying to make a point.

>
> How've you been anyhow?

Pretty well. We have joined a new church, we moved about 4 months ago
across the country. We are really lovin it.

> Has it been cold in your parts?

A couple of weeks ago we had an ice storm here in NC. Not fun at all. And
you?

> Dis your team
> win the SuperBowl?

Nope. But it was a good game. And you?

>
>
> Be Encouraged,
> -Brian

I am Brian. You help in that area. Keep it up brother.

oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 9:01:53 PM2/5/04
to
oldwetdog wrote:
> google archive: O yes please!
>
> It happened on ACC!
>
> "A Cult on alt.christnet.christianlife"
> "A Cult opperates on Usenet"
> "A News Group Cult"
> "usenet cult"
>

<snip>

The Cult and False Prophets

One of the things I noticed early is that Griz and his followers had a
wrong (IMHO) definition of Prophecy, and believed false prophets. This
error is closely tied to the use of 'speaking in tongues' as evidence of
the Gift of the Holy Spirit, and thus Salvation. There is a strong bias
toward speaking in tongues, and in the recent past people have been
ridiculed or told to "get saved" because they did not speak in tongues
or did not agree that speaking in tongues was proof of salvation.

There was a movement in the 60's which I had a little experience with,
and they actually taught their followers that if they would "practiced
uttering nonsensical phrases" they would show themselves willing, and
could and would then receive the Gift of tongues. In other words, if
they would pretend (lie) they would receive the Gift. What they did not
perceive was that a liar does not receive a gift from the Holy Spirit, a
liar receives their gift from the father of lies.

The relationship, then, with the pretending and lying tongues is that a
person can make it up (pretend) as they go, and become a "prophet." In
the Griz following there was/is a strong resistance to any one teaching
about the definition of false prophets, and especially saying anything
about Bennie Hinn, Kim Clement and others.

At first, I could not understand Griz's resistance to discussing "the
great delusion," false prophecy or false prophets. It was, in fact, Griz
who proved the necessity of the thing he resisted. When one of the
others posters said something about false prophets the reaction of Griz
seemed to me to be un-scriptural for a "Leader" who claims to be "sent
by God." So, I began to investigate, and I found the information needed.
-------------------------------

I did three posts on false prophecy: the first covered the definition
and false prophecy in general.
This URL link is to the first:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=vvjcj2h1v91u72%40corp.supernews.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second was a more specific post about false teachers and false prophecy.
This is the second:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=vvhdjuk8ps170c%40corp.supernews.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

The third (reposted below) was an accusation and conviction of a named
false prophet.

-----------------------------------
Fervent, you are a false prophet.
You are as those who "speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of
the mouth of the LORD."

The moment you decide to speak in the name of the Lord, and say what
your own mind conceives, you become a false prophet. The moment the
words depart your lips, or your fingers, those very words convict you.

You are exposed for what you are when the words of your mouth are proved
false. It may be a year, it may be ten, yet the false prophet will find
terror as his reward.

Deuteronomy 18:20-22: But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a
word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall
speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if
thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath
not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the
thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD
hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou
shalt not be afraid of him.

I am not your judge; it is the words of your mouth, which judge you. How
is it, Fervent, that you have no fear of the false prophet's reward?

Rev. 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of
fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall
be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Eze 13:7 Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying
divination, whereas ye say, The LORD saith it; albeit I have not spoken?
8 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have spoken vanity, and
seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord GOD.
9 And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that
divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither
shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither
shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know that I am
the Lord GOD.
10 Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and
there was no peace;

Isa. 30:9 That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children
that will not hear the law of the LORD:
10 Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not
unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:

Jer. 5:30 A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land;
31 The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their
means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end
thereof?

Jer. 14:13 Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, the prophets say unto
them, Ye shall not see the sword, neither shall ye have famine; but I
will give you assured peace in this place.
14 Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I
sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them:
they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of
nought, and the deceit of their heart.
15 Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning the prophets that prophesy
in my name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall
not be in this land; By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed.
16 And the people to whom they prophesy shall be cast out in the
streets of Jerusalem because of the famine and the sword; and they shall
have none to bury them, them, their wives, nor their sons, nor their
daughters: for I will pour their wickedness upon them.

Jer 23:16 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of
the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a
vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.
Jer 23:25 I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my
name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed.
Jer 23:26 How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that
prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart;
Jer 23:32 Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith
the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies,
and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them:
therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.
-----

Those who are interested in knowing the difference between True Prophets
and False Prophets will find the book of Jeremiah extremely interesting,
for at least two reasons. First, people did not want to hear of the
coming destruction of Jerusalem, even if it were true. They preferred to
listen to the false prophets, even if their prophecies were untrue.
Second, the disappointing lesson of Jeremiah is that people choose to
believe what they wish, with little concern about whether it is true or not.

The terrible lesson of Jeremiah is that they rejected the Truth, and
suffered the consequences.

If it is possible to glean a more terrible lesson from scripture, it is
that the people of this generation will make the same wrong choice, and
choose to believe the false prophets.

Mat. 24:24, 2Th 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;

This ACC group is an example. The self-proclaimed leader of the group
does not want his flock to know the difference, or how to determine the
difference, between false and true prophets.

Yet he gives false prophecy himself, and both condones and supports a
false prophet within the group.

Many in this group only want to hear "smooth things," and they care not
at all if these "smooth things" are true or false.

Just as Jeremiah was punished for telling truth to the people of his
day, so will this group reject true prophecy and reward the false prophets.

_________________________________________________________________
This prophecy is false, and proves Fervent to be a false prophet.
The link for the entire text is;
http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=OHUXa.267%24%25T.122%40edtnps84

(watch for word-wrap)
(quote)
"2003 shall bring forth the manifestation of My "perfect order" (true
spiritual authorities in their perfect position within My Church) in the
midst of My people - both individually and corporately. This shall be
"initiated" as "each and every one" of My children throughout the entire
earth truly acknowledge Me in "all" their ways that "I" might direct
their paths!
(end quote)
___________________________________________________________________

The day or two after I (OWD) accused fervent, another poster revealed
proof that fervent was guilty of plagiarism.
-----
The following post by Griz was in in defense of false prophet fervent.

This is an example of the sophistry practiced by the Cult Leader, Griz,
in defense of false prophets in general and fervent in particular.

I will insert my comments in [square] brackets.

(the URL to the original)
http://www.google.com/groups?q=+looking+OR+for+OR+a+OR+false+OR+prophet+group:alt.christnet.christianlife+author:griz&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_qdr=m&selm=vvojicn05u4n14%40corp.supernews.com&rnum=71
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(watch for word wrap)
-----------------------


<snip>

Hi Enigma.

I saw the post.

>It looks like Glenn was right.

Maybe, and maybe not. I'll get to that in a moment.

First off, I would ask:
Did Jesus die for our sins so that we could be "right", or so that we
might be righteous?

[Griz begins with a Red Herring. This first Red Herring is to discredit
the person who exposed the false prophet. Actually, to recognize a false
prophet and protect the Lord's People "is" being righteous.]

As Joy just shared, a person can be "right" but for all the wrong reasons.

[To continue with the red herring, and find fault (sin) with the person
who exposed the false prophet, revealing it was done for "all" (not just
a few) of the wrong reasons.]

Was Glenn seeking righteousness, or simply being "right" and pointing
out the flailings of another.

[Having questioned the motives of the person who did the expose, Griz
ends with the sly conclusion that Glenn must have been acting
unrighteousness.]

Remember the model of Christ.

[The model of Christ referred to is a reference that Christ must not
have done much in the way of exposing or warning about false prophets.]

The reason why Glenn has to be "right" in this is for all the wrong
reasons, because it's whole purpose is to shift the focus off of Christ
and onto a fallable man.

[Here is the conclusion inferred from above. This includes a Logical
Fallacy of "Begging the Question, as he is assuming as true "its whole
purpose it to shift the focus off of Christ and onto a fallable man.
There is no proof given for this assumption.]

And this happens whenever myself, or fervent or anyone else
he decides is a 'false prophet' and fair game. And he will go back many
years to gather data, left incomplete so he might better incrimate and
remove from the playing field not false prophets, but anyone who might
have failed.

[This is a false accusation, of which Griz never offered proof. This is
a favored practice of the Cult--making of an accusation and refusing to
give evidence.]

And even if they have not, he will lie or slander to create the illusion
of such. There is only one spirit that does that Enigma, and he is far
from holy!

[Accusation without evidence.]

You see Enigma, in God's sight we do not answer for what another man has
done.

[Focus Shift/Red Herring.]

We answer for what we have done; and what Glenn has done is succumbed
to the spirit that seeks to shift the focus from Christ at all costs.

[This sin, "focus shift" is one Griz created by using his own private
interpretation of scripture. He uses the "Focus Shift" to prevent others
from discussing a subject he disapproves of, such as false prophecy.]

Now, as per the "charge" of plagarism:
By what Spirit was the original offering of that utterance made?

[Here is the second Red Herring.]

Was it by the spirit of a man, or by the Spirit of God? What was it's
intent? To build up the body? To be a pleasing sacrifice to God? What
inspires that mindset, other than God's own Spirit? And what
accomplishes that, but God's own Word?

{I count six (6) assumptions. If the prophecy were True, then the
prophecy may be shown to have come from God. However, the prophecy was
proved false! Therefore, the answer to Griz first assumption must be the
false prophecy came from man, and the other assumptions are proved False.]

So does God plagerise Himself? Are words that are shared by God for the
edification of His children, the "property" of the instrument He chose
to use? Or are they HIS to use and re-use as He sees fit, with glory
not to the vessels, but unto Him alone!

[Since the prophecy proved false in its original source, and proved
false again when given by fervent, then argument is baseless and false.]

The only trespass that may exist, is in fervent's not sharing that the
source was of another instrument of the same God.

[Because the prophecy proved false, the source is not God, but Satan.]

But when it comes down to it Enigma, when the Spirit of God manifests
through you, do you crave the glory and recongnition? You may have the
"right", but is taking that credit, beneficial to God's kingdom or to
our own souls where pride is waiting to spring?

[Argument meaningless, see above.]

If God has used me to share words that might touch a person's heart for
Christ 2nd, 4th, or 83rd hand, then it matters not one iota to me
whether I receive "official" recognition or not. For since nothing good
comes from my heart but from God alone, if what i shared was good, then
it must be God shining through me.

[Already proved false, see above.]

And again, this all needs to tie back to the deep motive behind Glenn
sharing this and thinking it was for God's greater glory.
Where is Christ in this?

[Christ is glorified in the removal of a false prophet from His People.]

Is He glorified?
Is the name of Christ lifted on high?

[Yes!]

Or is there simply another person fallen at the feet of a ministry that
seeks only to shift focus away from Christ?

[It is Griz and his emphasis on supporting a false prophet which robbed
Christ of His rightful praise and worship.]

Yours in service,

Griz

<snip>
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following is a post showing the basis of the wrong definition of a prophet.
the URL into google archive is:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=101mb7vddbk5pf8%40corp.supernews.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

From: oldwetdog <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet>
Newsgroups: alt.christnet.christianlife
Subject: Re: Prophecy and Prophets
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 20:20:08 -0800
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <101mb7v...@corp.supernews.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b)
Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0

References: <78d11e29.04013...@posting.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <78d11e29.04013...@posting.google.com>


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com

Lines: 109


michael wrote:

> This was posted into the group:
>
> "Now perhaps someone will be able to give me a scripture to show me
> that according to the word of God one may give prophesy without being
> a prophet?"
>
> and here is something to consider:
>
> John 11:51.
>
> "He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year
> prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation." (Note the "He
> did not say this on his own...")
>
> Was Caiaphas a prophet or the high priest?

Are you suggesting that he could not be both? Are you stating your
position that a Prophet may not also heal?

>
>
> As for the title of prophet, take a look at 1 Samuel 9:9:
>
> (Formerly in Israel, if a man went to inquire of God, he would say,
> "Come, let us go to the seer," because the prophet of today used to be
> called a seer.)
>
> and 2 Samuel 24:11:
>
> "Before David got up the next morning, the word of the Lord had come
> to Gad the prophet, David's seer........"
>
> There is a difference in being used prophetically one time (either
> consciously or not as in the case of Caiaphas) by God and consistently
> being prophetic and aware of the call of God in your life for that
> particular service.
>
> Would you put Caiaphas in the same category as Isaiah, Jeremiah, or
> Ezekiel? What other prophecies from Caiaphas are noted in scripture to
> support his title as prophet?
>
> Would you honor him as a prophet?
>
>
>
> In Christ
> Michael21
>
> PS - There is other references in the OT concerning those who
> functioned as prophets once or twice or consistently. Look 'em up.

This is an example of how some men end up with "private interpretations
of Scripture" and many are lead away from Truth.

First, answer a question before the question is asked:

> There is a difference in being used prophetically one time (either
> consciously or not as in the case of Caiaphas) by God and consistently
> being prophetic and aware of the call of God in your life for that
> particular service.
>

That was an answer: Where is the Question "is there a difference?" The
question was not asked. In fact, the correct answer is, "No, there is no
Scripture stating a difference." Therefore, there *is* no difference.
However, the statement was made as if it were already proved.

Having established a un-scriptural basis for the preconceived position,
then proceed to the un-scriptural answer.

> Would you put Caiaphas in the same category as Isaiah, Jeremiah, or
> Ezekiel?

Who established "categories" for prophets? God, or man? Is God a
respecter of persons? Do we now have categories for Saints? A Major or
Minor Prophet is still a Prophet. Shall we continue with this logic: Is
Malachi *not* a prophet because he only gave a few prophecies as
compared to Isaiah? This logic is flawed on its face.

> What other prophecies from Caiaphas are noted in scripture to
> support his title as prophet?

He need none: If he gave one prophecy, he is a Prophet. There is no
Scripture which gives a requirement of a certain number of prophecies,
or prophecies of any significance, in order to qualify for the office,
title or honor of "Prophet." It is God who has determined what and who a
Prophet is, and the logic of man is vain and worthless.

>
> Would you honor him as a prophet?
>
What is the alternative? Is the *only* alternative to "dishonor" a man
who has just given Prophecy by the Word of God?

This post is Sophistry.
Sophistry is a method of misusing logic to arrive at a lie.

Pr 13:5 A righteous man hateth lying: but a wicked man is loathsome,
and cometh to shame.

Some of the error in the Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches (I do not
accuse all Pentecostals or Charismatics, I am Charismatic) is due to the
wrong definitions of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit. The idea that a man
can use his imagination to make up prophecy is as much a lie as lying
tongues.

Mike Barefield

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 10:06:07 PM2/5/04
to

"oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
news:1025tcm...@corp.supernews.com...

As a mystery novel I would give this one a C-. The plot was too rambling
and frankly the plot is just boring.

As news story I would give this a D+. The "news" is old and proof weak.

As a doctrinal expose I would give this one a C. It is not laid out well,
riddled with errors without scriptural basis and frankly, just too
opinionated.

As a comic sketch, I would give it an A. The choice of characters would
have to be good to pull it off though.


oldwetdog

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 10:48:29 PM2/5/04
to
Mike Barefield wrote:

> "oldwetdog" <old*wet*dog@netscapeD0Tnet> wrote in message
> news:1025tcm...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>oldwetdog wrote:
>>
>>>google archive: O yes please!


<snip>


>
> As a mystery novel I would give this one a C-. The plot was too rambling
> and frankly the plot is just boring.
>
> As news story I would give this a D+. The "news" is old and proof weak.
>
> As a doctrinal expose I would give this one a C. It is not laid out well,
> riddled with errors without scriptural basis and frankly, just too
> opinionated.
>
> As a comic sketch, I would give it an A. The choice of characters would
> have to be good to pull it off though.
>
>

;-)

Brian Garrison

unread,
Feb 5, 2004, 11:18:00 PM2/5/04
to
On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:46:16 GMT, "Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Oh, you were understood. It *was* amusing. I'm just concerned about
how easy flame wars are started these days. It wasn't *your* reaction
that I was necessarily concerned about.

>
>>
>> How've you been anyhow?
>
>Pretty well. We have joined a new church, we moved about 4 months ago
>across the country. We are really lovin it.

That's right. I remember now. The family is getting settled in?
Finding a church can be a tough assignment sometimes and requires lots
of prayer, huh?

>
>> Has it been cold in your parts?
>
>A couple of weeks ago we had an ice storm here in NC. Not fun at all. And
>you?

It's actually been a little chilly in the mornings. We did have a
pretty nasty frost before Christmas that took out a few plants in the
yard.

>
>> Dis your team
>> win the SuperBowl?
>
>Nope. But it was a good game. And you?

My wife is from Maine and I used to live in New England, so, yes, I
was rooting for the Pats. But I agree, it was a good game.

>
>>
>>
>> Be Encouraged,
>> -Brian
>
>I am Brian. You help in that area. Keep it up brother.

I think there's plenty of mutual encouragement going on. I appreciate
your presence here as well.

>
>>
>> "Jesus Christ is not valued at all until He is valued above all."
>> --Augustine.
>

Be Encouraged,
-Brian

David Matthieu P.P.

unread,
Feb 6, 2004, 4:54:08 AM2/6/04
to
"Mike Barefield" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4xqUb.10755$jH6....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...

Rating for the mistery novel by Mike Barefield " The art of Tooshie
Kissing":

> As a mystery novel I would give this a B-. Interesting plot, but not too


> plausible, not able to hold a reader's attention.

Rating of the Article by Mike Barefieldl "Griz's Tooshie kissing is no
Cult":

> As a news paper report I would give this a D-. Poor representation of the


> facts and the motivations of the people involved.

Rating of the Editorial by Mike Barefield " Heavenly Smell and Emanation":

> As an editorial column I would give it a C+. Expresses the views of the


> writer who was too personally involved to have a clear perspective.

Rating by Griz on how Mike Barefield is handling his Tooshie kissing:

> As a creative writing home work assignment for a 9th grader I would give

Mike Barefield

unread,
Feb 6, 2004, 6:17:02 AM2/6/04
to

"David Matthieu P.P." <johnrev...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bvvo86$11043h$1...@ID-188549.news.uni-berlin.de...

David you need a little creative punch there. You are not getting many
laughs.


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages