God's Word Fellowship / A True Church...

Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post   Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author Message   Admin (Admin) Posted on Sunday, December 01, 2002 - 1:19 pm:        To read previous messages please open the archive above.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 03, 2003 - 9:36 pm:        Hello Saints. Remember this is a new year. Post here instead of the archive.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 12:26 am:        Happy New Year Everyone! Looks like a lot of action going on this post. This lady named Pat puts messages all over, thats how I found you, so whats the deal? Is it true, is this a cult? Estella   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 04, 2003 - 12:31 am:        YES, ESTELLE, ITS A CULT. DARWIN FISH IS A TOTAL NUT. anonymous in california If you want to know more about him and pray for families who have been split apart by him, go to website, Darwin Fish, or A true Church, or Gods Family Church, r Phil Johnson, or read everything on this postsite. Then, you can decide for yourself. If you want to talk to someone, go talk to No Deceit at the first, he will be real nice at first and then tell you are bound for hell, stubborn, fearful, etc, etc, etc...hope you join. Welcome and pray for the cult members, including the leaders to be set free by the Grace and Blood of the Lamb.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, December 29, 2002 - 3:07 pm:        DARWIN FISH IS EVIL, IMO, LOOK INTO THE ARCHIVES FOR GODS FAMILY CHURCH, PLEASE, TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO PRAY FOR FAMILIES WHO HAVE LOST CHLDREN TO THIS JIM JONES TYPE CULT IN BAKERSFIELD, CA....PLEASE, SEND PRAYERS, NO MATTER YOUR RELIGION ON THAT ARCHIEVE PAGE TO PARENTS, JUST SAYING YOU WILL PRAY THEIR CHILDREN WILL COME HOME SAFELY....THANKS PAT   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 2:17 am:        I am posting to the church with Fish as a leader. You have been accused of things and you never answer. It would be interesting to get some answers. Are there men who have left their families and not paying child support? How hard and how young are the children paddled? Are you really thinking of pologamy as a way of life if it were legal? Do you really think that a lot of pastors and churches are going to hell, such as Billy Graham, and others? I have read all the posts and you seem only to answer questions that you feel like answering, which is fine, but you are not putting the best light on your church. Do you really protest churches. How do you apply the verses on child discipine above. Is this your church posting or stranger? Theres a lot of verses in the Bible. Do you take them all literally? A lot of people are reading, not many answer. Kind of like a little journal. To Boswell, please don't go. Just tone down and tune in. A friend of all, anonymous and interested in this website along with my friends. ps, we get these questions between us. How did Moses write about his own death? Did the sun stand still for Joshua, what happened, did the earth stop moving, what happened to gravity. Another really important subject to us is the word hell. Can you tell us anywhere in the Bible that the wicked are going to be punished forever and forever with everlasting burning fire? The only place I find in the Bible about this kind of punishment is in Rev where those who have received the mark of the beast were tormented in the presence of the Lamb and the angels and the smoke of the torment ascended forever and ever. Later in Rev, all the dead and hell and death were cast into the fire which is the second death. Do you think its all literal, so many things to read. Like the rod with the Psalms scripture, we are debating the word paddle, where does it say its a paddle? What is a rod? A rod and the staff compfort me. To me, a rod is for protection and the staff is to pull me closer to God, they both protect me. So if my Father who loves me so much beats me with this paddle when i am young, I dont know as I would want to be protected by God with His rod. Do you get it? Is everything literal? We are mixed at what is literal and what is figurative. That was a big ps, sorry.   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 2:18 am:        I posted on Jan 4, 6:16 am. The tone has not changed for some of you. The person who has asked so many questions has the right to an answer weather the rest of us think he is a member of this group or not. And I have looked more at the website of theres and I did not read that this Darwin character thinks he is the mesiah or anything. This does not necessarily mean he did not say or write it somewhere else, but I personnaly would want to be cautious to throw accusations around. The bible calls this slander. It is bad. And accusations about the Al guy throwing his wife around and stuff. A police report or first hand testimony is one thing, but to repeat it over and over is another matter if you do not have proof. And the (ugly?) Matt guy with CPS reports of abuse. Has someone here seen such a written report or talked to someone who has seen such thing. If not, it can be dangerous heresay. If so, then it is easy to document in a post, even leaving the name of a social service reprasentive or courthouse, etc. Matt, if you are still out there, feel free to write something in your defense. If you have such a report writeen about you, it would be of now harm to share it with all of us. How could it hurt the situation. Just give us your story. We want to hear from you, or Al or David or Casey and others about matters. Child support, mesiah stuff, abuse, polygamy, etc. Let's hear it from ANYONE with FIRST HAND KNOWLEDEG (caps do not mean loud cussing here, only brief emphaisis) I hope my tone has not offended because I do claim to be a Christian and I know Jesus does not want me to cuss, shout uncontrolabbly, slander, or even misquote anyone. He is after all, the Truth. Amen?   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 2:44 am:        I am not Darwin Fish, and I am not here to defend any man, but as I said the Scriptures. Yes, I take the word of God for what it says. If the context dictates a litteral translation I take it for what it says. "Apply your heart to instruction, And your ears to words of knowledge. Do not withhold correction from a child, For if you BEAT him with A ROD, he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod, And deliver his soul from hell. Proverbs 23 The rod and rebuke give wisdom, But a child left to himself brings shame to his mother. Proverbs 13:24 He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly. Proverbs 22:15 Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; The rod of correction will drive it far from him. Proverbs 29:15 The rod and rebuke give wisdom, But a child left to himself brings shame to his mother. Nothing in the verses given above indicate that we do not take it for what it says. Proponents of those who take the Scriptures in a "spirtitual" sense are the ones who create all kinds of divergernt teachings (eg. Women teaching, barking in the spirit etc). If there is a deeper meaning to a verse, fine, prove it, but let's at least take it for what it does says on it's face. On the issue of a rod- you can do a simple word study and see how the word is used. It is not a specific word, but can be translated rod, staff, etc. Either way what is being used in verses above is used to cause pain, blueness of the wound (KJV translation) and with rebuke and correction bring wisdom. You will in fact deliever their soul from hell. Beat, is just that, beat. You can not get around it. Many of the questions you have asked I have asked myself. If we take the verses for what they say (beat and with rod) how do we live this out? No one has attempted to answer the questions. All that has been stated is that it is against the law of the land and have called it child abuse. Do you believe this? If you wish for answers to some of your questions about Billy Graham being a false teacher etc (anything in regards to a true church) you can read their material for yourself at http://www.atruechurch.info I'm sure their papers can stand for themself. I am curently interested in dealing with the points I have brought up so far. Mainly child discipline. I am offended that they are those here suggesting that spanking your kids in self control and love (which is obeying the Scriptures) is being called child abuse. As to your other questions I will just address one for now, enternal punishment. Here is one verse to contemplate. Jude 5 But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; 7as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. The people of Sodom and Gomorroah along with the angels who left their abode are right now in hell suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. The Sodomites have been place there as an example to all....of course there are other vereses to prove eternal punishment. If you can not accept the truth of hell and its eternality you can not believe the gospel and therefore can not be saved. I hope you are not believing contrary to the Scripture on this ponit. It is basic to the gospel. More later. Thank for your post and in the tone it was delivered.   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 3:49 am:        I have posted here before. I don't like the way the people from a True Church speak. They constantly condemn no matter what the subject. Everyone is going to hell except them. But I do believe the bible. I never said I didn't belive it. I generally take the verses literally unless it's obvious that they are not to be taken that way. I know what's in the bible. I know there is a lake of fire for Satan and his demons and for the people who didn't accept Christ. I do believe that anyway. But when a person uses scripture to condemn, as this group does it only makes one turn away. Fire and Brimestone is not the first thing you speak of to a person curious about the gospel. And you want as many people coming to Christ as possible. There is nothing you can prove to me with scripture. I know it's the word of God already. Thank you for posting here in the front.   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 12:53 pm:        Of course no one should condemn anyone. But the Bible does teach us to know a true brother from a false one. How to know if someone is already condemn or not. If someone claims to be a Christian but lives as a homosexual, then we know he is a liar and the truth is not in him.   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 8:08 pm:        Show us where men suffer in Hell eternally everafter by looking in the Greek, Hebrew, and any Bible you want. Just the facts, please, not your opinion. Hell is thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Sodomites were destroyed, but did not say they were in hell. The fire that destroyed them did not last forever, the smoke ascends. Question: Do you believe small children go to hell and burn and how are they willfully sinning and at what age? Theres two of us asking questions, sorry. Where does it say in the Word that to be saved you have to believe in an everlasting burning hell. I thought the Good News was that Christ died for our sins and we accept that. If Hell is really true, why try to hide it? Above, you said, of course, you would try to hide it, but if it is part of the Gospel, you would be shouting it from the rooftop. The Word says, fear not man who can kill you, but destroy both soul and body in hell. Destroy means to end, right? If a God of love in all righteousness, if I was a sinner, could give me death or burn forever in a lake of fire, which would be the most loving and righteous decision?   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 11:10 pm:        Don't say things that have not been posted. I said Fire and Brimstone is not the FIRST thing you speak of to someone curious about the gospel. I never said hide anything. And why do you try and find fault with everything. I am trying to change the way I speak here and it is so hard. You said "If a God of love in all righteousnes, if I was a sinner, could give me death or burn forever in a lake of fire, which would be the most loving and righteous decision" People would have a different opinion of that. But the bible says people will be thrown in the lake of fire. I know God is loving, he is love. But I also know he will render judgement. How he does it is not completely clear. In revelation 20:15 it says Whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. It does not say if the burning is for eternity or people will just burn up just once. So I am asuming it is forever. But I could be wrong. But if that is true although you might think it terrible now. When it happens and you are of Christ, whatever judgement he gives out will be just in your eyes. As far as if a child goes to hell for willfully sinning and at what age, you will have to ask God. I don't know that. There are things that we are not going to know until the end. God knows. To the post dated Jan 8 12:53 You said "The bible teaches us to know a true brother from a false one." That is true but what I object to is someone telling you that you are going to hell in the way a true church does. You never know what will happen in a person's life. You can tell them they are going to hell and they may make it to glory before you. I think people should be concerned for the salvation of others, but don't act as a Pharisee and point fingers and judge as if you never do wrong yourself. That is what I meant.   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 1:48 am:        Good evening to the above post, who seems to have a Godly spirit. We agree theres a lot we dont know about hell. Do you think that if we do not agree on hell that one of us is not saved. I do not believe that. I also have definite beliefs about this Proverbs 23 and many other verses about this rod. We believe a child in a loving and caring home will not need a rod to cause blueness of the wound. A rod is an instrument of instuction, an instrument of God, an instrument of love, a guiding rod of God. It is the eye of the Lord upon the child and the eye and protection in of the Father upon the child. In those days, all it took was an eye upon the child. These days it is different with role models of tv, school, etc. But a parent who claims to beat with love till blue is an angry man. If we took every verse literally we could really have some problems, yes? Pluck out your eye, cut off your hand? We need to pray about the rod. It is an instructive and loving instrument. It is not a board or a paddle. Sherperds used rods to inspect their loved sheep for pestilents and other things, the sheep loved this nuturing time with the sherperd, made them feel safe and they were freed from harmful things they could not tell their sherperds, as would babies be doing if they are crying and are insected by eye, rather than by rod until blueness. We believe that Billy Graham and all men and pastors who bring souls to Jesus Christ will be special in Heaven. There will be a special reward for anyone that brings the Gospel News to the wearyhearted. I cannot, will not believe that God wants his people to preach, teach, profess that God hates most churches, pastors and Christians. This is what we hear from protesters from True Church. We feel that if they did not put such a fear of hell in people that they would not have a church or a protest. We dont serve God because of fear of Hell. We serve God because our livs are enriched and we have a promise of eternal life with Him. And this is the news that we want to travel with our shoes shod with Gospel of peace, not hate. Nice talking to you.   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:31 am:        A True Church, to beat till blue is a crime punishisable by taking a child out of the home and jail time for the assailant. We hope its not a true church posting those scriptues misquided . Back to the post who posted that it would be ok to practice poligomy if they moved to a country where it was legal. It would also be interesting to know if this were A True Church. To a True Church, you have never anwered the questins about Casey Bryant drinking and whatever, yet not paying any child support to his wife. Do you, as leaders feel that is proper behavior for a Christian? Is is true? I am saying by whatever that is said that the group goes camping and fishing, and those protesting trips which would buy food and diapers for that child of his. Is this a good example of how to be a good father, a father nutures and cares and feeds his family. Casey abandoned his family, tell his wife she is going to hell and the baby for not following him. Casey Bryant, can you say ou did not say these things? Do these things? Do you hate the wife you made vows with to God, a committment till death to us part, sickness and health, everything. Were those vows said to God, the same God you serve now, or do you have a different God that would heard those vows. Things may have been different, you were not in a true church, the vows were made to the same God, she has not broke her vows to you. Have you honered, loved and cherished her? Cherish, what a beautiful word. When four men came with uhaul and emtied her home and took all her furnishings, the fridge , food in it and her beloved husband, was that cherishing? You stood there, according to her, let them call her a whore, stubborn, etc, etc. How were your vows to her being done then? She weighs about 90 pounds, 5 ft tall and all those men screaming profound words at her. Christian, Cherish, Honor? Shame on you, Shame on you. You and they left her with thirty dollars to live with her disabled stepfather and nonworking mom in a tiny one bedroom unit where she is waiting for you on a mattress in one corner of the livng room with her baby. She will wait until you come home. She is stronger and more loving and Christian like than you will ever be with all your Bible verses you have memorized from A True Church meetings, tapes played overnight and being with that group so filled with hate for christians that go to church. Casey Bryant, you pack up your gear and go home to your wife. You are in sin and you know it. David, you have to support your family, you lost them by your ignorance of the Word of God. Matt, know you are watching. The rod is not a paddle, what is a paddle, by the way A paddling reminds me of a gentle reprimind to a small or adolescent child with love and not hard at all. The above post talked about blue marks. Is that true.? Darwin Fish, you should answer some of these questions. You want a website to share your version of the Bible but wont answer to anyone. Honestly, I have no idea what you belive about salvation and grace and love. Can you just give us listenters some idea of what you do when you are not protesting or giving your version of the Word, and Hate. Are there good things going on that we dont know about also, is is true you can drink in that group? Or is that a lie? Interested anonymous.   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 1:15 pm:        The verse in Jude states that "to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire" The people of Sodom and Gomorrah have been suffering the vengeance of eternal fire for roughly 4000 years now, and they have absolutely no hope of relief. Pretty clear. ETERNAL FIRE, and as the next verses states this is and will be an eternal torment: And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. (Revelation 20:10). THEY(once again people) are suffering forever and has we know from Jude in an eternal fire. So I have given an example of a present reality of suffering and from Rev a future suffering forever. Hell is a literal place (e.g. Matthew 5:29-30; 10:28). It is a literal place where literal people suffer the torment of a literal fire (e.g. Luke 16:19-31). Its location is down (Proverbs 15:24; Isaiah 14:9; Ezekiel 31:15-17; 2 Peter 2:4). Its temperature is burning hot (Luke 16:24; Revelation 19:20). Its luminance is "outer darkness" (Matthew 8:12; 22:13; 25:30), also called "the blackness of darkness" (2 Peter 2:17; Jude 13). Its size is so massive it is never filled to capacity (Proverbs 27:20), though masses of people are in it and numbers more are added continually (Matthew 7:13-14; Romans 1:18). Its smoke will ascend forever (Revelation 14:11). Its fire will never be quenched, and the worm there will never die (Isaiah 66:24; Mark 9:43-46, 48). The rich man in Hades cried and said, "I am tormented in this flame" (Luke 16:24). Those in hell are tortured by God (Matthew 18:34-35) in an everlasting fire (Matthew 18:8; 25:41). They are being burned continually with a fire that will never be quenched (Mark 9:43-48). Those in hell melt away (Psalm 112:10) at the presence of God (Psalm 68:2), because God is in hell (Psalm 139:8) consuming them with His fire (Hebrews 12:29; Psalm 50:3; 97:3).   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 1:19 pm:        Hell Is Cruel. Yes it is. Hell is horribly cruel. Some may say, "God would not be so cruel so as to torment such a mass of humanity for all eternity," yet those who say such things do not know the God of the Bible. In His wrath, God is cruel. Proverbs 27:4 says, "Wrath is cruel," and the most cruel wrath in all existence is the anger of the Almighty God (e.g. Deuteronomy 28:15-68; 2 Chronicles 21:19; [Job 30:21/2:3] Revelation 16:10). When the Lord moves in His wrath towards the sons of men, He acts very cruelly. As Isaiah 13:9 says, Behold, the day of the Lord comes, cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate; and He will destroy its sinners from it. Solomon described God's wrath as cruel when he said, For man also does not know his time: like fish taken in a cruel net, like birds caught in a snare, so the sons of men are snared in an evil time, when it falls suddenly upon them. (Ecclesiastes 9:12; see also Proverbs 17:11) Death cruelly falls suddenly upon men by the hand of God, and what is more cruel than death (Song of Solomon 8:6)? The second death is eternally worse (Revelation 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8). So, although men may complain against the cruelty of hell, it nonetheless is true.   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 4:50 pm:        Yes there is a judgement coming. What is the point? Does anyone here besides members of a true church enjoy the thought of people burning forever? I hope the above verses are just to prove there is a hell. Not to rejoice in the fact people will suffer for eternity. Don't pull up verses that say you will enjoy it. You are not glorified now and it should not make you happy to know this will happen. What should make you happy is the fact you will escape it and be with the Lord for ever. Hell seems like a favorite topic of Darwin Fish. Don't make it a favorite of yours. Some folks seem to become elated to speak of the wrath to come. Why would anyone want to see their neighbor tormented? Yes, there is a judgement day coming. Yes people will suffer for not accepting the gift of salvation through Jesus and continuing with their sins. But instead of being like Darwin Fish, and getting sick satisfaction by throwing this up in someone's face every chance you gets, make very sure you are not on the receiving end of that wrath yourself. Don't get so cocky about judging someone else that you forget you are not above God's judgement. People are so very quick to judge you but only God can see the heart. (This was just a general statement and not directed at any one post.)   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 8:16 pm:        I am still wanting to talk about the verses quoted about the word beat and that it applys with a rod and that it should leave blueness....is this A True Church Member? You will need to convince me that this scriptues are meant to beat till blue. Also, members of The True Church, you have still to answer if it is you who said they could move to another country and be legally married to more than one wife. If you believe these things, why dont you say its your church, not asking for name. Also, I have asked repeately and have no answer. If, and there was some talk of pologomy aboard, if men of The True Church took other wives, would they, in turn, when their daughters became of age, marry two of them to someone in their church? It may sound gross, but what will be the rule for father and then child? Also, Al Soto, you have never, ever, came on this site and denied that you threw your wife out the back door as you bragged to Caseys wife the day that you went to her home, took all her belongings along with fish and casey and david, called her a whore and stubborn, you have never denied it. Also, Casey Bryant and David, you have never denied that you abondoned your families, do not send child support and you are going to divorce your wives for not joining The True Church, and they married you before you joined. What grounds Casey, would you have to divorce your wife. She has been with you since she was a teen, has loved and adored you, she says and will always wait for you. What grounds for divorce? You are in sin, not paying child support, you are in sin, abondoning your wife and young child. You, Casey Bryant have never come aboard and said, no I did not take my child into the bathroom with a two inch stick and want to beat the child but was stopped by my wife, thats why she did not move with me, one of the reasons. David, you were told by Fish to use comdoms when visitng the wife you deserted, so as not to get her pregnant, boy, seems weird for someone who does not believe in birth control but replentishing the earth. Now, Matt, You were accused of having social services come and put you on warning because of maybe blacking and blueing with the rod your children. You have never come aboard and said, yes, i did it, and I am dealing with it. Darwin Fish, you have never said anything except go to my website, oh go to my website, see me, see me...and you have not come aboard and admitted that you believe you are actually an apostle along with Saint Paul. Also, Also, none of you will talk about love, salvation, grace, forgiveness, anything good. You call others cowards, stubborn, blah, blah, blah as you call me. Do you know why you dont answer, you cant or wont answer because people would quickly discern that your church is not a healthy, loving envioment for people, especially our young men we are losing and families with children like Als and Matts/ Also, Darwin Fish, you have never admitted that you sleep in the same room with all nine of your kids and wife. Is that because you are fearful of the men that live there? You never answered a question we do have firsthand proof of, illegal gun in the house for months, why dont you want to answer these questions. You can off the subject on all kinds of things, now how hot do we burn, is it really necessary for us to learn all this hate and hell and burning rather than the goodness in the Bible? For the new people on the web, you need to go back to square one, the subject matter is Rita Bryants son got captured spiritually by this True Church, brainwashed by tapes every nite all night, taught to hate his wife and tell her she was going to hell and their baby if they did not believe like him. He tried to spank the baby with a two inch stick. This is the subject matter. Someone has got to keep the prayer wheels turning for that woman, she wants her son back. Casey, go home to your wife and child, not with a rod in your hand but with love and cherishing thoughts of living a normal Christian life and being happy and stand firm to the vows you made before God, God has not changed Casey Bryant, you changed. Go home to your wife.   Phil Johnson Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 8:17 pm:        I came across this forum while udating my FAQ on Darwin Fish. The adress of the FAQ is: http://www.gty.org/~phil/articles/dfishfaq.htm I am astonished after reading the replies from Al Soto and the anonymous Fishites who have posted here. How could ANYONE who loves Christ be so undiscerning as to follow Darwin Fish's cult? Al Soto regularly misuses Scripture. So does Darwin, for that matter. Darwin's little screed "proving" that God is "a man" is as inept as it is blasphemous. It is a typical example of how these men are twisting Scripture to their own destruction. Furthermore, both Al and Darwin simply ignore whatever parts of the Bible they don't like. And that seems to be a characteristic of the whole cult. Apparently some or most of the "men" who are following Darwin are living in a state of chronic disobedience to 1 Peter 3:7-11. Darwin and Al are so devoted to walking in darkness that they won't answer simple questions that have been put forth in this forum. I have a couple to add: Do they, or do they not believe men ought to physically "discipline" their wives? Why won't they unashamedly tell the facts and answer the questions that have been raised about their advocacy of _beating_ infants as young as 7 months? Those who may be genuinely confused about whether this group really is or is not "a true church" ought to consider the fact that they hate all other Christians outside their tiny sect (cf. 1 John 3:14-15). Al's posts here are exactly like virtually every communication I have ever received from anyone associated with Darwin Fish: abusive and insulting, in direct disobedience to Luke 6:27-28, Romans 13:14-21; 1 Peter 2:21-23, and lots of other passages. Again, Darwin and Al just ignore whatever they don't like in Scripture. To Mr. Fish and Al Soto: God may hate the wicked with a righteous hatred, but He is not hateful. By extolling hatred over love and modeling your own carnal hatred as if that were how _God_ hates, you are proclaiming a false christ and worshiping a false god. Your god is not the God presented in Scripture whose tender mercies are over all His works. I saw you at the Tournaent of Roses Parade and was embarrassed for you. Your posters ALL misrepresented the true character of God by portraying Him as someone who is filled only with hate, a killer, and the effectual Cause of human atrocity. Someone seated near me saw your signs and thought you were atheists deliberately blaspheming. She wondered aloud, "Why do they hate God so much?" I realized she had correctly heard the message of your hearts: you DO hate the God of Scripture. That explains everything people need to know about your cult. I beseech you once again to repent and beg God's forgivness for the way you have mistreated His people, mishandled His Word, and sullied His reputation before the world. Al, you of all people KNOW that Darwin is not a righteous man. If you had a shred of integrity, you would lead the people who are under his oppressive yoke out from under his sinister influence. You ought to do it for your own family's sake. BTW, Whatever happened to Brian? Is he still "in"? --Phil Johnson   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 9:13 pm:        My Name Will Be Searcher As in searching for the truth. My subject is searching for truth about Hell. Ground Rules, we are taking the Bible literally, is that acceptable? Jude 7 is very good to use. Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about them are set forth as an example suffering the vengence of eternal fire. If a mortal man is thrown into fire, eternal or not, he dies within seconds and yet he has suffered the vengence of the eternal fire which was to kill him, that is the vengence. Jesus said, do not fear man who can destroy your body but fear God who can destroy both soul and body in Hell. Destroy means gone, burned, gone. Do you challenge the fact that God could destroy a mans body, soul and spirit anywhere he wants too? It is appointed once to man to die, and after this the judgement. I believe that these people in Sodom and Gormorrah died and are awaiting the white throne judgement. At that time, death and hell delivers the dead which were in them and they were judged every man according to his works and death and hell were cast into the lake of fire, this is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. (second death) What does death mean? Death does not mean eternal conciousness of some kind. The Bible does not say these people have been suffering, burning in Hell, for four thousand years. It says they suffered the vengence of eternal fire.Just because it says its eternal fire does not mean the people are eternal and the actual fire of that event went out. Rev 20:10 This is not talking about people, mankind, it is talking, number one about the Devil and also it talks about the Beast and the False Prophet, they are also there, to me it reads, the Devil shall be tormented day and night forever and ever, not people. The people are judged later, the great white throne judgment and whosoever is not found written in the book of life is is cast into the lake of fire, the second death. They are burned up, destroyed. Matthew 5:29 and 30 If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, cast it from thee, for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should should perish and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut if off and cast it from thee, for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Question: Where does it say your body is going to live and burn forever in Hell in that scripture? Luke 16: 19-31 The rich man died and in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torments. I am trying to take this verse literally , though I believe it is a parable. Number one, the rich man did nothing wrong except be rich and the beggar did nothing good, except be poor. And that is the theme of the parable, if this is true, then we should all sell all our goods and go live in India and be as poor as possible because the poorest of poor in America are rich, compared to India. Plus, the poor man was not in Heaven, he was in Abrahams bosom. The point was they were supposed to hear Moses and the prophets. We Christians hear the Good news, they had to live by works, we live by Grace, unmerited favor, unearned favor from God. Literally, he was tormented, but it does not say forever and ever. We know that in the end, Hell will deliver up the dead in them and they will be cast into the lake of fire, the second death for mankind. Destroyed, it seems to me. Hell is not eternal, death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire. lets stop for now, willing to listen. Searcher   No Deceit Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:18 pm:        Phil, Thank you for your blessing that you have bestowed on us. I will attempt to answer the questions that were posted. 1st- Yes, we believe God is a Man as Christ is a Man. You can visit our web site for the full article http://www.atruechurch.info for the argument. Phil do us the favor and cast it down Biblically. 2nd- We do not teach nor do we advocate abuse of infants and wives. This is ridiculous. Hey Phil is it true that you like to kill animals on your spare time? Just asking questions like this put the person in a bad light and is unnecessary. Let us deal with issues that are clear, supported and not just based on rumors. This is where Phil Johnson's web site falls. Much of it is based on rumors, instead of doctrinal issues that we clearly believe and advocate. "Furthermore, both Al and Darwin simply ignore whatever parts of the Bible they don't like. And that seems to be a characteristic of the whole cult. Apparently some or most of the "men" who are following Darwin are living in a state of chronic disobedience to 1 Peter 3:7-11. " Examples would be nice. I could give an example of Johnson doing this. Mr Phil, and MacArthur are what we call 5 point Calvinists who believe that Christ only died for God's elect (those who would believe in Christ) and not for the entire world as the Bible does teaches. This is heresy. Talk about ignoring parts of the Bible! "MacArthur writes concerning 1 John 2:2, for the whole world. This is a generic term, referring not to every single individual, but to mankind in general. Christ actually paid the penalty only for those who would repent and believe. A number of Scriptures indicate that Christ died for the world (John 1:29; 3:16; 6:51; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb. 2:9). Most of the world will be eternally condemned to hell to pay for their own sins, so they could not have been paid for by Christ. The passages which speak of Christ?s dying for the whole world must be understood to refer to mankind in general (as in Titus 2:11). "World" indicates the sphere, the beings toward whom God seeks reconciliation and has provided propitiation. God has mitigated His wrath on sinners temporarily, by letting them live and enjoy earthly life ( see note on 1 Tim. 4:10 ). In that sense, Christ has provided a brief, temporal propitiation for the whole world. But He actually satisfied fully the wrath of God eternally only for the elect who believe. Christ's death in itself had unlimited and infinite value because He is Holy God. Thus His sacrifice was sufficient to pay the penalty for all the sins of all whom God brings to faith. But the actual satisfaction and atonement was made only for those who believe (cf. John 10:11, 15; 17:9, 20; Acts 20:28; Rom. 8:32, 37; Eph. 5:25). [p. 1965, bold added]" 4th- If I have been insulting in anything I have written I do repent of that and apologize, but I do not apologize for speaking the truth. 5th- God's hatred. OK, I miss your point here. God hates....right? That's what Scripture teaches. If God hates then.....uh....He is hateful. God is full of hate for the wicked and full of love for them as well. Are we missing the obvious? 6th- We don't based our message on how an unbeliever may respond. Just because people misunderstand or are offended does not in of itself prove the message to be wrong. Even your own man, MacArthur would concur Phil, "Beloved we are an offense, we know that. We are an offense. We are an offense. Every time we get in the newspapers again, I'm reminded, we are an offense. We're a lot more offensive than they know, they are just not around here enough. If they came every week, they could write an article on how offensive we are. We are an offense to all in error .We are an offense to all in rejection of the truth . We are an offense to all those who refuse Jesus Christ. We are an offense to all those who live in sin, and to mitigate that offense is ridiculous. Because it is precisely what the Holy Spirit is intending to produce--want's to convict because conviction and confrontation and conviction leads to salvation. Those offended should be offended. Well, we have a lack of discernment in the church, it's part of what Paul told us in this text, because of our weak theology, our failure to be antithetical, and a preoccupation with a worldly image. This is how it is out there." (Growing a Healthy Flock Part 9, A Call for Discernment Part 1, 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22) 7th- "Al, you of all people KNOW that Darwin is not a righteous man." Do you read minds Phil? Al Soto   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:23 pm:        Q: "Where do you adminsister a spaking?" Dr. Dobson:"It should be confined to the buttocks area, where permanent damage is very unlikely. . .If you spank a child only on the 'behind' or on the upper part of the legs, I think you will be doing it right." Q: "Do you think corporal punishment will eventually be outlawed?" Dr. Dobson:"It is very likely. The tradedy of child abuse has made it difficult for people to understand the difference between viciousness to kids and constructive, positive forms of physical punishment. There are those in the Western world who will not rest until the governmnet interferes with parent-child relationships with all the force of law. It has already happened in Sweden, and the media seems determined to bring that legislation to the United States. IT WILL BE A SAD DAY FOR FAMILIES. Child abuse will increase, not decrease as frustrated parents explode after having no appropriate response to defiant behavior." THE NEW DARE TO DISCIPLINE, Dr James Dobson, 1992, pages 63-64   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:38 pm:        why does Al respond to Phil Johnson, but not to the others? Al has not responded to many questions previously posted. Interesting...could it be that Phil has struck a nerve?   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:50 pm:        to true deceit, i mean deceit church, whatever: did your true church write this in the archives? Proverbs 20:30 The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil, so do stripes the inward parts of the body.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:03 am:        Phil, uses his name, I know who he is. al   No Deceit Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:05 am:        No our church did not post that verse. al   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:34 am:        Al, you write anonymously all the time, everybody knows you. So, i was looking up at some of the posts, you sure don't like to answer any questions but deliver scriptue that you believe but wont answer if you practice. You are a liar if you say do not promote child discipline on the butt with a rod and thats that. Listening to your answer to Phil Johnson was, i realize that you never answer questions, rather attack. Did you write this also Al in defense of your child beaters, not necessarily you, but definitely others. anonymous on January 8 2:44 AM for if you BEAT him with A ROD, he will not die. (your caps, not mine.) and then: Nothing in the above verses given indicate that we do not take it for what it says..... So, you say your sect does not advocate child BEATING WITH A ROD? TO THE BLUENESS OF THE WOUND? If this is not you guys talking then you should say, this is not this church talking, if not, then you are liars. Take your pick. Now, lets talk about pologmy again and again. True or False: Someone from your group said, we could move to another country where it legal to take more wives and where is it said in the Bible you cant have more than wife. Is it you guys? Why not simply say, its not us? Well, we know that Casey Bryant told his wife that if he wanted another wife he could have one if it were legal....so you guys are talking about it. Anyone can go to Rita Bryants first message and she, though being soft spoken, will answer questions for most people, but will not read any of Als posts. You see, he attacks her on her personal website viciously, so why should we other women set ourselves up for that, plus she is fearful for her physical self possibly and family, we dont know where this cult is going. Al, you are a dishonor to your group. Instead of answering Phil Johnson propertly, you just typed in a bunch of jargin from the other guy to get the attention off true church. You always do that, never answer questions, then you are as cunning as a serpent when you do select to anwer, because we know that somehow you figured out how to answer that one thing about abvocating child abuse without willfully lying...still lying. Whats an infant, two months, six months, year, whats a rod, you said a paddle, was that you? Why dont you stand up and be counted. Why dont you see that Fish is using you and those guys. He is using your mind, your hands, your money, your talents that could be used for good, why have you chosen evil over good? Someone also posted in the 300 or so messages that women should submit to men unto death, was that you al or one of your fellas....? Stand up like a man and tell it like it is! Oh, maybe you actually signed that one. And then you take off on a tangent about Johnsons friend MacArthur instead of directing an anwer about his post. At the very least MacArthur lets all those who believes in Jesus go to Heaven, you and four more are the only ones going, or is it eighteen? I cannot keep up, your babies may burn if they willfully sin, i understand. Willfully sinning would be crying, I guess? At 7 months, two months...when is it a willful sin for a child? Then back to poor old casey bryant, child abandoner, is he willfully sinning when he willfully spends his check on booze and weekend trips and his wife and child have received no child support and she is on welfare ? Has he willfully abandon his wedding vows made before God? Does he willfully continue to hate his mother and father and others who wont listen to him? You all will never answer questions about these things. We are here to expose cults. We are not here to talk about MacArthur. This is America, anyone can believe anything they want spirtually speaking.....if it does not harm people physically, mentally, financially, legally, whatever... now say....BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:39 am:        TO PHIL JOHNSON; THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING FOUND THIS WEBSITE. WE THANK GOD FOR YOU AND YOUR STRENGTH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. GOODNITE   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:54 am:        To Al Soto and members group of Darwin Fish. I apologize and repent sincerely if you are not the one with all the child beating scrptues. Why did you not come online and say, this is not us? Why make us think the worst. We know that matt and Casey have this problems and Assumed, sorry, assumed , that this was the groups stand, blueness to the wound, Beat with rod, you did not say that, i am so sorry, i wont go to sleep without saying that again and again. But, other issues and the fact that you are serving another God besides a livng God is still a fact, and you did say about wives submitting unto death, you did that, so you set yourself up to be pretty bad. So, what and what not, did you say, did you tell Caseys wife, that you threw your wife out your back door? No one is going to turn you in for that, its obvious, shes going to take it, as is Caseys wife about abandoning her and waiting for him. Why cant Casey come on this website and say I did start to spank my child , 7 months old, with a two inch stick, but my wife stopped me. I mean, there is a report made in sanger , ca, so its no secret, anybody, everybody can find it. Why are you hiding him? Why isnt he thrown out for sinning willfully? If you would answer some questins, maybe we would get stories straight? Why dont you give us the exact amount of times you have posted , what number and we can have a better discernment of you. You can tell my posts, i write the blah , blah, blah, ones that you hate ....hate...hate... again, i repent before i go to sleep because your group did not write that one scripture. Does Matt belong to your church?   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 1:21 am:        Al Soto writes: > I will attempt to answer the questions that were > posted." I doubt it. Shall we see? > 1st- Yes, we believe God is a Man as Christ is a Man. But that's not an answer to any question I asked. I'm already well aware of your cult's heretical position on this. > Phil do us the favor and cast it down Biblically. OK: Numbers 23:19: "GOD IS NOT A MAN, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent." First Samuel 15:29: "And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for HE IS NOT A MAN, that he should repent." Of course, I am well aware of Darwin's fatuous attempt to explain away the clear meaning of those verses. He fails miserably. The verses don't say "God is not the kind of man who lies." They say HE IS NOT A MAN. He is not beset by any human flaws or limitations (including the non-sinful ones like fatigue or hunger that are intrinsic to true humanity--as seen even in Christ's incarnation). He neither slumbers nor sleeps (Psalm 121:4). Therefore He is perfectly and constantly faithful to His Word. Furthermore, "God is a Spirit" (John 4:24), and "a spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39). Again, Darwin's laughable attempts to explain away the clear meaning of those verses fail, especially in light of Philippians 2:5-9, which say Christ deemed equality with God nothing to be grasped and _took on_ the form of a man. If God were already a man, what was the point of the incarnation? Why did the Father need to "prepare" a human body for Christ (Hebrews 10:5) if He already eternally had one? Darwin's attempt to humanize and materialize God is similar to, and probably worse than, Open Theism's brand of humanist theology. I don't expect you to concede the truth, Al, because you now apparently regard Darwin as magisterial, but that is nonetheless a simple, biblical refutataion of Darwin's error. To argue on the basis of the expression "man of war" that God has a human body is so patently absurd that if you weren't blinded by your slavish devotion to Darwin, you would see instantly that it is a demonic lie that attempts to diminish the glory and majesty of our eternal, immortal, invisible God who alone is wise (1 Tim. 1:17). Is God a literal rock (Ps. 18:31)? If you say no, how do you justify interpreting one expression with wooden literalness and not the other? > 2nd- We do not teach nor do we advocate abuse of infants > and wives. Again, that doesn't answer the question that I asked. I am well aware that you don't regard physical beatings (even when they leave bruises) as "abuse." That is why the question I asked was, "Do [you], or do [you] not believe men ought to physically 'discipline' their wives?" How about an answer to THAT question, without equivocating? > Let us deal with issues that are clear, supported and not > just based on rumors. This is where Phil Johnson's web > site falls. Much of it is based on rumors, instead of > doctrinal issues that we clearly believe and advocate. Eyewitness accounts are not rumors. In the mouth of two or three witnesses, a matter is established (Matthew 18:16). These are therefore legitimate questions. I understand your desire to evade them, but your oblique answers clearly demonstrate that your self-proclaimed love of "truth" is a lie. You are only condemning yourself. The wise who monitor this forum will see that clearly. I'll skip over your diversion about Calvinism and the atonement, except to acknowledge without shame that I am a 5-point Calvinist. I believe in *substitutionary atonement.* Do you? By the way, you could have read about my Calvinism at any time on my Web page since I first posted the site in 1995. I've always been straightforward about what I believe. YOU are the one being evasive, remember? Your lame attempt to shift the subject is just one more example of how you routinely dodge the truth. > 4th- If I have been insulting in anything I have written > I do repent of that and apologize, but I do not > apologize for speaking the truth. "IF?" Is that the way Fishites typically confess their faults to one another? The record of your insults and arrogance is right here in the forum archive. If you want to "apologize," then do it. The pretence of a conditional apology is just another form of truth-evasion. > 5th- God's hatred. OK, I miss your point here. God > hates....right? That's what Scripture teaches. If God > hates then.....uh....He is hateful. God is full of hate > for the wicked and full of love for them as well. Are we > missing the obvious? Yes, you are. Nothing in the Bible EVER says "God is full of hate." And nothing in your Rose-Parade posters and broadsides even tacitly acknowledged that God is love (John 4:8. BTW, He is not merely "full of love" in the same sense you claim He is "full of hate.") Indeed, nothing in any of the public Fishite demonstrations I have ever witnessed even gives lip-service to the truth of God's love, much less any EVIDENCE of it (cf. John 13:35; 1 John 4:8). You are not proclaiming the whole counsel of God. The fact that you love to proclaim hate so loudly (and to the exclusion of any emphasis on love) is just another form of Scripture-twisting, and it clearly reveals what is really in your heart (Matthew 12:34). > 6th- We don't based our message on how an unbeliever may > respond. Just because people misunderstand or are > offended does not in of itself prove the message to be > wrong. Even your own man, MacArthur would concur Phil, So? Where did I state otherwise? On the other hand, love, not MERELY offensiveness, is crucial to the testimony of a TRUE believer (see again John 13:35; 1 John 4:8). Someone who is deliberately and personally offensive all the time--and who makes God's hate the sum and substance of his public message to the world--cannot rightfully claim to represent the Christ of Scripture. Yes, the _gospel_ IS an offense to those who are perishing. But your sect's message of hate is NOT the gospel. Darwin Fish rarely even TRIES to preach the gospel. When I personally challenged him on this, he couldn't produce more than one paragraph in all his sermons where he even made a passing reference to justification by faith. When I have heard him pretend to preach the gospel, he muddles it by placing so much stress on the redeemed person's righteousness and making virtually no mention whatsoever of the perfect righteousness of *Christ,* which is the ONLY ground on which we can be justified before God. In that regard, Darwin has gone further astray than the Council of Trent. His gospel is an abominable different gospel (Galatians 1:7-9). > 7th- "Al, you of all people KNOW that Darwin is not a > righteous man." Do you read minds Phil? No. I was just trying to assume the best. I have heard from people who know you that you have occasionally given evidence of conscience-pangs, and that you seem frustrated at times with your role of having to defend all of Darwin's whims and absurdities while he allows you to take the heat in a forum like this and hasn't the courage to answer direct questions that are put to him. My remark reflected an attempt to assume better of you than you have evidenced. Which reminds me. You BEGAN by promising to answer my direct questions. But I asked only two vital questions, and you tried to circumvent one and ignored the other. What's up with that? Jut to remind you, the other question was this: "Why won't [you] unashamedly tell the facts and answer the questions that have been raised about [Darwin's] advocacy of _beating_ infants as young as 7 months?" To put it in other words, do you think (or does Darwin teach) that it is OK to use an instrument of physical discipline on a child who is not even a year old? Oh, and I also asked you about Brian. Is he still part of your group?   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 2:26 am:        Just a note to all people posting on any website. As you can tell, people are anonymous and I took it for granted that Al Soto posted the child abuse with wounded blue verse. I am not scared of Al Soto. But, see why we should not give our names? It was not him, which will please to no end, but will give me another insight to their thinking. So, I could have been talking to a murderer who was trying to get my website. So beware, women, do not give your names out and do not assume anything. bye   No Deceit Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 2:44 am:        Well, let me try again: We do not advocate beating infants as young as 7 months old nor beating wives. As I said. This is ridiculous. The slander on this site just proves to us how wicked you people are in your evil speaking (Titus 3:1). Here's a good example of Phil's presumptuous character: He writes, "You BEGAN by promising to answer my direct questions . . ." I never promised any such thing. Let me try to put to rest another point about me throwing my wife out the door. Yes, early on in our marriage, my wife and I did not get along at times, nor live above reproach, and to my shame I threw her out the door. That was many years ago, and we do not live like that any more. We have grown tremendously (in our love and in Christ) since those immature days. I told this to Casey's wife as a confession and example that we are not perfect people, but have grown very much. There is no excuse for that, it was not love, and it was sin. Phil states, "Eyewitness accounts are not rumors. In the mouth of two or three witnesses, a matter is established (Matthew 18:16)." Proverbs 21 28 A false witness shall perish, But the man who hears him will speak endlessly. Proverbs 19:5 A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who speaks lies will not escape. You will always believe whom you wish to believe and nothing I say will change whom you believe. I must laugh at how you have swallowed so many half-truths about us, but so be it. Phil states, "Furthermore, "God is a Spirit" (John 4:24), and "a spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39)." 1 Corinthians 15: 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being." [4]The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord [5]from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear [6]the image of the heavenly Man. Christ, the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. Christ is Spirit just as God the father IS spirit, but you and I both know that Christ is also Man who has flesh and bones. Christ is both spirit and a man just as God the father is. Anyhow our article stands for itself. "say Christ deemed equality with God nothing to be grasped and _took on_ the form of a man. " Yes, that is a true statement but we also know that He took on the form of man many times before that, which is also true. Yes I believe God is our Rock (1 Cor 10:4) Yes skip over the Limited Atonement lie, because you HAVE TO IGNORE countless verses. "No. I was just trying to assume the best. I have heard from people who know you that you have occasionally given evidence of conscience-pangs, and that you seem frustrated at times with your role of having to defend all of Darwin's whims and absurdities while he allows you to take the heat in a forum like this and hasn't the courage to answer direct questions that are put to him. My remark reflected an attempt to assume better of you than you have evidenced." Once again you show your folly by putting so much trust in what you "hear". I have responded to hopefully dispel some of the slander. I believe this forum to be a bunch of scoffers, therefore I do not plan to continue to post (Proverbs 9:7). Proverbs 14 7Go from the presence of a foolish man, When you do not perceive in him the lips of knowledge. Al Soto has left the building.........   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 2:56 am:        Searcher, Where does it state that the story of the rich man and Lazarus is a parabale. Look at this statement: Luke 16 "There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate. . . I believe Jesus when He stated that there WAS a rich man. Are you a JW?   No Deceit Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 3:23 am:        PS. One question for your Phil. Do you still like eating blood soup? al   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 5:27 am:        I knew some of those posts were from a true church member. Al Soto was probably posting as anonymous. It sure sounded like him. So Al, how ya been?   Not A. Fishie Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 11:48 am:        Al Soto: "Al Soto has left the building........." Run away! Run Away! LOL   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:00 pm:        Al, why do you decide to admit things when Phil Johnson comes online? Why have you been along so long wih sloffers? God gave me a burden, yes, God, to pray for you and I ask Him why and why not the young men, wives, children and He tells me in my heart, because Al Soto will bring the people out and protect them as much as he can according to the Word of God. I believe this and will keep praying for you, no matter how much I hate what you all stand for. Thank you for saying, I threw my wife out he back door, was that so hard? You did also call Caseys wife a whore, you wouldnt want to publicly apologize, would you? She is a precious, tiny, 90 pd child bride of nineteen or tweny, and has been in love with Casey four years or more. Casey must understand he has to account for her broken heart, the childs broken heart. She is waiting for him, did your group tell him he had to move down there as a rule? If not, he should be able to move to Fresno, work here, come there for meetings and protesting, whatever, but above all, he should return to his wife and child, support and love them as he has been loved and as he promised before God in his wedding vowss. David tried to get his wife back, but that didnt work, why wont you leaders force the issue of marriage till death do us part, sickness or health. Why? Why? This bride is waiting for her husband, she did not marry Casey when he belonged to your church. He was a youth leader and in the worship singing group and he was in love with the Gospel News and tried to lead everyone he met to Christ. Send Casey home to his wife! He is willfully sinning! You can go off this posting board if you like . Phil Johnson must have a very impact on you for you to run. Al, everyone has a freedom to serve God in America as they choose, its one of the reasons America is..why dont you guys go protest something protestable like abortion, war, anything that lets men like Casey and David And all those who have been kicked out, such as the one who did not pay his phone bill by monday and it was Fri night, thats first hand informatin by the way, a tape of Darwins, another tape, we have gobs. This poor chap says , you mean, if I dont pay my phone bill by Monday and this is friday nite I will go to Hell..Fish says, Yes, you will....and he ws gone. Fish, you need to find that young man, thats about the saddest excuse for hell i ever heard. Then the tape about the illegal gun, if I heard it, have it, is it firsthand, guys living in your house with illegal gun for months, no wonder you sleep with all your kids, same room. I hope for your teens sakes that will stop soon, if not already. So, by private investigators and first, seond and third hand news we expose the Fishites on this website . Then they dont answer till Mr. Phil Johnson finds us. I say Al Soto and group enjoy talking to sloffers or whoever and then run for cover when someone comes along they are afraid t tackle online. Again, my goal is for the safety of the children and wives, and for you all to send men home to their wives who are not keeping their wedding vows, Its a shame, a state crime not to support them, and a sin to God, what they are doing, living there, while loves ones go hungry and have no decent place to live. For instance, we know Caseys wife lives on the floor in the corner with her child in her Mothers one bedroom vry tiny unit and a disabled stepfather on disablity. She has welfare, Casey does not pay child support. None. He is now going to divorce her for not movng down there to be browbeat and the child beat with sticks and paddles or whatever. Al Soto, Darwin Fish, send those husbands home. If they sin, you are leaders, you must dismiss them to hell or whatever you do with sinners. Everyone is watching Al, whats it going to be? Sin, no sin? AS SOMEONE NAMED ME, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 12:06 pm:        Run Fishites run! Cowards, all of them, just ike a wife beater or child beater. You go to arrest them and they are screaming, I didnt mean to do it, don't hurt me, ouch, ouch, that hurts, ouch, watch out, be careful, my wrists hurt, please, watch my head, I have a bad back, be careful, my ankle is twisted, you are hurting me, I didnt mean to hit him that hard, let me out, let me out...........ho   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 1:20 pm:        Al Soto "tries" again: > We do not advocate beating infants as young as 7 months > old nor beating wives. As I said. This is ridiculous. > The slander on this site just proves to us how wicked > you people are in your evil speaking (Titus 3:1). Why don't you send me tapes of Darwin's teaching about how to use "the rod" in disciplining children, so I can hear for myself? Because I have talked to former members of your sect, and one thing they invariably bring up is the issue of how brutal Darwin is with his own children, and how that sort of thing seems to be expected of all cult members. Casey Bryant's wife claims Casey was prepared to--and threatened to--beat their infant after sitting at Darwin's feet for a while. Are you saying that absolutely did not happen, and that Darwin absolutely does not bruise his own kids? > Here's a good example of Phil's presumptuous character: > He writes, "You BEGAN by promising to answer my direct > questions . . ." I never promised any such thing. Well, you did begin your first reply by saying: > I will attempt to answer the questions that were > posted." But I forgot: you people are taught that being "wise as serpents" means you can play games with the boundaries of truth. So your yes doesn't really mean yes. Your "I will try" doesn't really mean you will make an _honest_ try. Your word isn't a "promise." Forgive me for my "presumption" in assuming otherwise. > You will always believe whom you wish to believe and > nothing I say will change whom you believe. I must laugh > at how you have swallowed so many half-truths about us, > but so be it. Well, actually, you don't really have any grounds to know if I "swallowed" anything or not, do you? I merely asked you some questions. And by being deliberately evasive with your answers to mine and others' direct questions, you only encourage people to believe the many disturbing reports about what goes on inside your cult. Since your group's public behavior is so deplorable as well, there's really little reason for anyone to give you the benefit of the doubt. I am certainly under no biblical obligation to regard you as true Christians and brethren, because you give every evidence that you are not--with your words, your actions, and the twisted message of hate you proclaim in place of the gospel. Regarding Christ's _taking on_ the form of a man, you say: > Yes, that is a true statement but we also know that He > took on the form of man many times before that, which is > also true. Precisely. Bingo. Why would He need to _take on_ such a form if He exists eternally in human form? > Yes I believe God is our Rock (1 Cor 10:4) Since what I asked was whether you believe He is literally an inanimate stone, I hope no one misses the significance and the utter absurdity of your "yes." > Yes skip over the Limited Atonement lie, because you > HAVE TO IGNORE countless verses. Of yourse, you know that I don't ignore those verses. I have taught at one time or another on virtually all of them. And *I* know, of course, that you would disagree with my interpretation of those verses. So you could easily sidetrack this whole discussion into a long drawn-out debate over those issues. No doubt that is what you were trying to do in the first place. It isn't going to work, and your bringing up such a red herring only further diminishes your own credibility. So let's just skip that and stay with the issues of this forum, OK? > Once again you show your folly by putting so much trust > in what you "hear". As I have shown already, what I have heard directly from YOU is sufficient to dispel your claim that you love the truth. So I don't see where I have any obligation to take your whitewashing of Darwin's errors and idiosyncasies at face value. You're a pretty good spin doctor, Al, but even you cannot cover the cultic nature of "a.t.c." and Darwin Fish. > I have responded to hopefully dispel some of the > slander. I believe this forum to be a bunch of scoffers, > therefore I do not plan to continue to post (Proverbs > 9:7). It kills me how you guys taunt people to refute you, but when someone actually does, you label him a scoffer, make a big show of brushing the dust off your feet, and slink away to regroup until your next blitzkrieg against another public forum or large gathering of people. Some "ministry" you people have! All you are doing is preying on dysfunctional minds.   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 2:13 pm:        Soto pokes his head back in to lob a final challenge: "PS. One question for your Phil. Do you still like eating blood soup?" Should I get all pompous and indignant about how "Here's a good example of Al's presumptuous character"? Because I never said I LIKED eating blood soup. I said I ate it once in the Philippines. It was much too vinegary for my tastes. Of course, you are going to argue that Acts 15:29 makes Kosher-style laws binding on all Christians for all time. But Acts 15:29 ALSO says the Gentiles in the early church were to abstain from "things offered to idols." Those food restrictions were *obviously* a matter of courtesy to the Jews, in harmony with 1 Cor. 10:32. Because Paul later wrote to the Corinthians that they were free to eat things offered to idols if they did it in contexts where no offense would be taken by others, and if their own consciences didn't accuse them for it (1 Cor. 10:25, 27). I'm well aware of the interpretive questions about Acts 15:20, 29, and I realize many fine Christians disagree on whether those restrictions were meant to be binding on all Christians in perpetuity. So we don't need a debate on that issue. (Unlike the Fishites, I realize someone can be a true Christian and yet disagree with me on how this or that verse ought to be interpreted. But I don't think ANY genuine Christian would suggest what you eat determines whether you go to heaven or hell. Jesus certainly taught otherwise. Mark 7:18.) Paul said this specifically about supposedly "unclean" foods: "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean." He wrote, "For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving" (1 Tim. 4:4). So when my hosts in the Philippines offered me pig-blood soup for lunch one day, I thanked God for His provision, then ate, asking no questions for conscience' sake. I do like my steak rare, however. And from the persepctive of OT ceremonial law, that's just as bad as pig-blood soup. I know you would damn a Christian to hell for that. That only further reveals how far you have strayed from the glorious freedom of the gospel to become entangled in Darwin's yoke of bondage (Gal. 5:1).   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 2:27 pm:        By the way, Al, you STILL haven't answered one of my questions: Whatever happened to Brian Young? Is he still part of your group, or is he now among the disenfranchised?   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 4:01 pm:        "I have responded to hopefully dispel some of the slander, I believe this forum to be a bunch of scoffers, therefore I do not plan to continue to post." Well Al you've said that enough times already, is it for real this time? I sure hope so. I think everyone has heard enough from you. Where is Darwin? Can't he speak for himself?   No Deceit Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 4:10 pm:        Phil, You are late to the show. I have been on this forum for a long time. You can read for yourself my posts on the archive section for 2002. Have fun decieving the simple minded. . .they already agree with you. "only further diminishes your own credibility" I am moved Phil, I did not know I had any left.... Point me to a forum where we can debate our position on doctrine great, but I will not continue taking questions that just seek to defame our characters. You have plenty to work with Phil, but you rather feed on rumors, gossip, and half-truths. Aside from our doctrine that you find to be heretical, we are pretty normal people. We love our children, they are happy, we play soccer, we make jokes, drink caffine, don't have plans to sneak a second wife (we do believe this to be sin btw- at least in this country, we do not try to get around the law), and enjoy picketing large Christian events. What's so different? Phil States, "This was my first-ever exposure to Darwin Fish. At the time he resembled Timothy McVeigh with a wispy goatee" Phil, you will fit nicely in this group you share the same agenda.   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 5:08 pm:        Al Soto: "Point me to a forum where we can debate our position on doctrine great, but I will not continue taking questions that just seek to defame our characters." You COULD have debated your "position on doctrine" here, if you hadn't chosen instead to cut and run. The problem for you is that your twisted doctrine is the very thing that defiles and debases your character (Titus 1:15; Jude 8-19; 2 Peter 2:21-22). I realize I came here late. I'm sorry. I did not learn of this forum until yesterday. But I DID read the archives before posting. And I saw that in addition to hurling your typical arrogant insults, you've been taunting people for weeks, daring someone to refute Darwin biblically. But as soon as I did, you cut and run like a cheap schoolyard bully with a black eye. I don't think many here will miss the significance of that.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 5:32 pm:        Phil Johnson: If you decide to debate with Al Soto somewhere else please post. Understand it will be on different subject so will be interesting to watch. He sure cant stand the heat of his kitchen, he did start all this by attacking Rita Bryant on the first post. Now, he knows he can't win his case because they are guilty as charged. Thanks again for the support and God Bless You. The women and men against Darwin Fishes group. A question for Al Soto: Does your group believe that a man should support his children, seperated or not? We have asked this over and over. Of course, the welfare will soon attach his check, we just want to know what spiritual thoughts you have on this, should you leaders not dismiss Casey for this sin, or do you think its not a sin not support abandoned children and wives. And David? Blood Soup? You are really desperate and reaching for material to challenge Phil Johnson. Are you really out the door, you mean the woman got the better of you? I fully intend to go on every cult site on board, every single one, and put a lot of opinions, truths, about the fish group on them. It will take me weeks, but I will do it, why dont you just stay here, you know this is a form of picketing against your group and you sure cant take what you dish out. When the tables turned, you run...we would all like to hear debating from you and Phil and I personally would promise not to interfere with messages. Phil again: Let us know if you are talking to Al Soto on another website, we would be honored to listen. Thank you Phil:   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 6:46 pm:        Phil, A few questions maybe you could answer for me. 1) You are a five-point Calvinist, by your own admission. The topic, you scholars would say, is "soteriology" or the study of salvation. The Arminian position is diametrically opposed to your five points, COMPLETELY OPPOSED IN ALL FIVE POINTS, and yet they are still saved, right? Both of these gospels can be true, you would say. Can there be more than one gospel? You have already made reference to this above. Either one or both is false. They cannot BOTH be true, right? Please explain how someone can be saved, someone like John Wesley, who rejected all five of your points on soteriology (I use this word for your sake, not anybody elses). I am an educated person as well, but that makes no difference as I simply believe the Word of God like a little child, rather than relying on my own understanding. There is no need to use scholarly words like "red herring" (an argument used to distract away from the subject matter) or "disenfranchised" (to take away the right to vote or participate in). Most of the people hear are just ordinary folks and they do not need to be able to use such lofty words to be saved. Just like Abraham, they must be saved by believing the word of God. 2) Regarding the hatred of God, please explain the meaning of Psalm 5:5, 11:5, Romans 9:11-13, etc. which plainly state that God HATES. Amen to the fact that God is love, but you do not seem to acknowledge that God hates as well. You are an educated man. Do NOT change the object of the sentence to the sin when the object of EACH of those sentences is "workers", "wicked", "Esau," etc. Maybe more later, but please answer these questions. Above you stated that you do not believe the fishites are saved. You have judged them, so PLEASE do not be a hypocrit when they judge others by the scripture. Those that do not abide in the doctrine of Christ (Genesis to Revelation) do NOT have God. It would seem that either the Arminians or the Calvinists or (most likely) that NEITHER abides in the doctrine of Christ. It is nonsense to say they both do, when they are completely, 100% OPPOSED on their five points. The point about the heresay also seems pretty valid. Just use the scripture since it would seem you have not spoken with Darwin Fish in many years so you cannot reliably say anything about him nowadays.   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 6:59 pm:        "Anonymous": "since it would seem you have not spoken with Darwin Fish in many years so you cannot reliably say anything about him nowadays." Brian? Is that you? Or Al? You breaking your word AGAIN? Whoever you are, come out from under your veil of anonymity, and I will answer your whole post.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 7:54 pm:        God KillS! The Fishites are right after all! Here's proof: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sns-pod-hindu-jpg,0,6820723.photo   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 7:59 pm:        Here's a better link to the "God Kills" story: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-19hindu.story   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 9:17 pm:        question to Al Soto...are you, or have you posted here anonymously as has been suggested? question to All anonymous posters...are any of you members of a true church? my impression is that some of you are. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thank you for responding to these questions.   No Deceiet Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 9:18 pm:        POST SCRIPT: Phil I never promised not to post. I was not planning to continue. But let me clarifiy myself. I will consider posting if I see the need to defend the word of God in this public venue. Not for your sake or any other false teachers who have no hope, but for those who may come accross this web site and in hopes of helping them see the truth. I will not contend with A fool or A scoffer for their sakes, nor will I entertain foolish questions that seek to defame my character which are just out right lies. So those are my rules and standards. Will I come back...God knows...I may not.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 9:21 pm:        Hey, I smell big old FISH, a catfish, a bottom feeder, eating everything that falls down. So we have no educations but we shore did understand those two words red herring and disenfranchised, those are not major college words, you know.. We do read newspapers, watch a little movies. My Mama told me beware of a man who thinks he is well educated and knows it all, usually he lacks wisdom. How could anyone possibly say people on this website are ordinary, I dont see that many ordianry ones on this one anyway. About the Calvanist and Armenians view of who and who not is going to be saved, this is irrevelant. It is what The Good News says that is revelent. When our finite minds think on infinite things, ideas, we all could be wrong, but God will not hold that against us. So yes, Calvanists, Armenians, Fishites can be saved. JOHN BOY   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 9:39 pm:        i agree with the above posts. people on this web are not ignorant of words, so glad to hear No Deceit is back. He does not have to answer my embarrassing questions about whether they beat their kids or drink or want more wives or dont pay child support or call women whores they dont even know, I will just keep on keepin on till the group disolves, kids and wives get justice. Thats that. Darwin Fish is going down and out or straighten up his group to be a law abiding church instead of a cult. First thing, tell your men not to beat babies or attempt to beat them. Second thing, tell them to pay child support now or the judge will put them in jail. And, we want Al Soto to apologize to Caseys wife for calling her a whore. And, while we are at it, why not apologize to Rita Bryant for calling her a few things on her personal website. Cowards, say them on this website. Stay off hers. Shes back online today, yeah! Write Rita, we need to hear your opinions on the site, you are such a wise and considerate person. Do it! Cause!   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 9:50 pm:        From Searcher to answer question You are right, it does not say it is a parable. Luke 16:19-31 I understand your position. Its just that my heart really aches to think that this could be a plan of God to torture and burn people in Hell for an eternity. Can you think of anything this would accomplish? I cannot. However, I still do believe its a parable, lets talk about that later , remind me when you like.. Lets accept your statement that it is not a parable. It seems to be a fact that the rich man does not stay there for an eternity. In Revelations 20:14 Death and Hell were cast into the lake of fire, this is the second death. Searcher of the truth.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 6:13 am:        To the post dated January 10 6:46 P.M. You said "Most of the people here are just ordinary folks and do not need to be able to use such lofty words to be saved" Well excuse me Mr Educated Person, I am fluent in English. I was born and educated in the U.S. and live in California as a matter of fact. I understand every word that has been posted here including the stupid statement you made. Just let people speak the way they want. We dumb folks understand just fine. I don't know where you self righeous people come from but you need to realize you are not as much as you think you are. Just post without comments on the way people write. Is that the only thing you can attack?   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 12:52 pm:        I'll ask again...I'm still waiting for a reply to a straight-forward question... question to Al Soto...are you, or have you posted here anonymously as has been suggested? question to All anonymous posters...are any of you members of a true church? my impression is that some of you are. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thank you for responding to these questions.   Phil Johnson Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 1:03 pm:        Question for anyone currently in "a true church": Is Darwin Fish or anyone else in the cult keeping concubines? Darwin claims he wouldn't practice _polygamy_ because our civil laws forbid bigamy. However, I'm not aware of anything in the laws of the state of California that would make it illegal for a man to cohabit with multiple concubines. Furthermore, Darwin might argue that if they are concubines, not wives, then 1 Tim. 3:2 and Titus 1:6 don't apply, and he is free to have as many of them as he wishes. Indeed, that is precisely the ramification of his teaching on the subject. So I'm curious. It seems to me that given Darwin's recent championing of polygamy and concubinage, he would see absolutely no BIBLICAL or MORAL reasons not to keep concubines. In fact, at the end of his article on the subject, he blithely suggests that it would be a GOOD thing to find more than one wife. And since the group seems to be increasingly secretive (as Al Soto's refusal to answer questions here demonstrates), it doesn't seem unreasonable to raise the concern.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 1:21 pm:        III. Polygamy Included Concubinage Some today may think that concubinage in the Bible was a form of an immoral sexual relationship similar to having a personal mistress. Webster's Third New International Dictionary gives this kind of a definition for "concubine" as one possible meaning. concubine . . . b: a woman who cohabits with a man without being his wife: MISTRESS (p. 472, copyright 1986, unabridged) The Hebrew word for concubine is (pilegesh), and it is used for an illicit sexual relationship, but only once. For she lusted for her paramours, whose flesh is like the flesh of donkeys, and whose issue is like the issue of horses. (Ezekiel 23:20) Here in Ezekiel 23:20, the Hebrew word for concubine is translated "paramours." A paramour is an illicit sexual lover indeed, and the context of this passage supports this translation. It is speaking of a woman with her male immoral partners (paramours). The "concubines," so to speak, are male here, not female. With Ezekiel 23:20 excluded, every time pilegesh is used it speaks of a female concubine that is married to her male partner. Keturah is called Abraham's concubine in 1 Chronicles 1:32, but in Genesis 25:1 she is called Abraham's wife. David's ten concubines are indeed called concubines, but they are also called his wives by the Lord Himself (2 Samuel 12:11; 16:21-22). In Judges 19 & 20 the Levite's concubine "played the harlot" (Judges 19:2) and left "her husband" (Judges 19:3). She is called a concubine in Judges 19:1, 2, 9, 24, 25, 29; 20:4 and 5, yet at the same time, her male partner, the Levite, is called "her husband" in Judges 19:3 and 20:4. Moreover, the concubine's father is called the "father-in-law" (Judges 19:4, 7, 9), and the Levite is called the "son-in-law" (Judges 19:5). Clearly, concubinage is displayed as a marital commitment. So, what is the difference between a "wife" and a "concubine"? Wives are free, concubines are not. Scripture portrays concubinage as the marriage of a slave girl. Note Leviticus 19:20. Whoever lies carnally with a woman who is betrothed to a man as a concubine, and who has not at all been redeemed nor given her freedom, for this there shall be scourging; but they shall not be put to death, because she was not free. Betrothal depicts marriage (Deuteronomy 28:30), and here in Leviticus 19:20 we have the marriage (betrothal) of a slave girl to a man. Being a slave, she is called a concubine, and for this immoral act she is not killed as a free woman would be (Deuteronomy 22:23-24), "because she was not free." In Judges the concubine's husband is twice called "her master" (Judges 19:26, 27). Other concubines are identified likewise. Bilhah, Jacob's concubine (Genesis 35:22), whom Rachel gave to him for a wife (Genesis 30:3-4), was a slave (Genesis 35:25 "maidservant"). Likewise, Zilpah was a slave-wife (Genesis 35:26; 30:9). Marrying a slave girl was not only practiced; it was legislated in the law of God as well. And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. If he takes another wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. And if he does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying money. (Exodus 21:7-11; see also Deuteronomy 21:10-14) Notice it does not say, "He cannot take another wife." It says, "If he takes another wife." Here we have another law concerning polygyny and it is not forbidden. Although some today may view concubinage as an evil deed, Leah, in the Scriptures, viewed it as part of that which pleased the Lord. And God listened to Leah, and she conceived and bore Jacob a fifth son. Leah said, "God has given me my wages, because I have given my maid to my husband." So she called his name Issachar. (Genesis 30:17-18) Leah had given Zilpah, her maidservant, to Jacob as a wife because she perceived that she had stopped bearing children (Genesis 30:9). Yet, she continued to pray for more sons. God heard her plea ("God listened to Leah"), and Leah understood this to be a reward from the Lord for giving Jacob a concubine.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 1:27 pm:        Should we take that as a YES?   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 1:32 pm:        We know that the women and girls of A True Church are treated as slaves already. How many of them have also been made concubines? Hey Soto, are you going to betroth any of your daughters to Durwin to be his concubines?   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 2:41 pm:        Darwin Fish is narrow minded, self righteous and ignorant of interpretation of scripture. And the people that follow him are blind and foolish. Anyone that tries to reason with someone from that group is fighting a loosing battle. They are so brainwashed they can't hear you. I know this post will be ignored as others I have posted, but it will be read. You all are so busy debating you don't see how hateful this forum sounds. Soto makes himself to look like a fool and a number of you are not far behind. God's Word Fellowship is a cult. That is apparent. Stop fighting and pray for those caught up in it. You people are all trying to prove your points and in the end your points won't be worth anything.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 3:20 pm:        To the "Anonymous" who posted Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 02:41 pm: you are so busy lecturing everyone about how hateful the forum sounds that you don't see how hateful your own post sounds stop fighting and pray for those who are seeking the truth. you are so desperate to stop the discussion that in the end YOUR points won't be worth anything. No truth would be worth anything if it was automatically "hateful" to test truth by the Scriptures whether Darwin Fish's doctrine is true or not will not be decided by how YOU feel about it. let's hear what the Bible has to say and we can evaluate Darwin Fish for ourselves the way the Bereans did meanwhile, seek out a forum called "post-modern religion." you'll feel right at home there .   Al Scroto Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 3:26 pm:        Where does the Bible ever call "narrow-mindedness" a sin?   Meredith Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 3:28 pm:        To the Saturday post at 2:41pm Don't call us fools because we are open minded and want to educate and inform ourselves about other religions. Cults, religions, whatever you want to call them, we have a right to be here and debate all we want. Why do you keep returning and posting if you think it is all so hateful? Theres no harm in debate, whatsoever, and for people who are seeking lost family members or trying to defend their religion, it may be one small thing they can do each day for their cause. It may seem pointless and worthless to you, but you'll never know until you open your mind and consider others. This is not a hateful forum, it's a mature forum. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.   Al Scroto Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 3:30 pm:        P.S. who'se more "narrow minded," those who think it's a sin to keep a concubine, or those of us who think it's okay?   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 3:32 pm:        Hey Al, what is a concubine? (I have no idea)   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 3:52 pm:        Well at least you idiots responded to the post this time. I thought you would. And Meridith are you posting your nitwit opinions on every forum? I'm done with you all. Go and fight among yourselves. You will accomplish nothing. GOOD BYE!!!!!!   Phil Johnson Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 4:45 pm:        To Casey Bryant: "If any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel" (1 Timothy 5:8).   Phil Johnson Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 5:26 pm:        To Al and Darwin: On your list of tapes you no longer distribute: http://www.atruechurch.info/rejecttapes.html you wrote, "Now, the first year (1993) of tapes (and unedited written material) up until the exposure of John MacArthur as a false teacher (February, 1994), have been discarded. Although we were in the process of exposing falsehood within the prevailing false Christian world during that first year (e.g. the evil of Christmas; Dobson as a false teacher), BEST WE CAN TELL [emphasis added], we were still on this broad way (Matthew 7:13-14). Therefore, we decided to discard the first year of tapes." And judging from the number of your own tapes you keep having to censor SINCE 1994, your theology is still in flux. You are reeds shaken with the wind (Matt. 11:7), double-minded men who are unstable in all your ways (James 1:8). There are now 50 tapes on your reject list. That's at least a year's worth of tapes in the past nine years! And if you include the entire 1993 catalog, it means you have had to censor about one in every five of your own tapes over the past decade! That is not a very good percentage for someone who believes EVERY error is damnable. By your own testimony you cannot identify when you were saved. What makes you think you ever found the exit ramp to the narrow way? If you don't know for sure when you left the broad way, you can't really say with certainty that you are not still on it, can you? After all, if every point of truth is equally essential, then you have, by your own admission, been corrupting essential truth and teaching damnable lies about once a month for the past ten years. Therefore you have no ground whatsoever, according to your own twisted perspective of "truth," for any _certainty_ that you are EVEN NOW on the true "narrow way." So on what grounds can you possibly hold yourselves up as teachers other people should follow? I suggest you close up the cult and stop teaching completely until you can resolve this rather glaring dilemma in your theology. You should have heeded the warnings of 1 Timothy 3:6 and James 3:1 years ago, when I pleaded with you on the basis of those verses.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 6:12 pm:        to "Anonymous" who posted the info on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 01:21 pm I'll ask again...I'm still waiting for a reply to a straight-forward question... Are you a member of a true church? I have not gotten a response from Al Soto. I do not believe I will get a response from you either. Is there a reason nobody will answer this question? question to Al Soto...are you, or have you posted here anonymously as has been suggested? question to All anonymous posters...are any of you members of a true church? my impression is that some of you are. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thank you for responding to these questions. Well, this is the third try...will there be a response? straight-forward answer is all I am asking for.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 6:19 pm:        To Al and group: Dont be hard on Meredith, this is blah, blah, blah, and i am not talking at the moment. Phil Johnson is doing fine. To Casey Brant and Group: Getting feedback on where do I get all my information. Caseys wife is innocent, it is true I talk to Rita and glean anything possible from her. Also, I talk to a friend of Caseys and his wife, so Casey, dont blame your wife. She is still sitting there with your child, waiting for that golden moment in life when you come walking in the door. For you who are interested: I am going to contact Rita Bryant and try to get her to give me an interview about Caseys upbringing and discipline and life, etc. I am going to ask for Caseys wifes number and ask for an interview and his former friends numbers. I think we can pull together and try to get him back home. Is there anybody watching on this website that can give me any informatin about David, Matt, Al Soto, or Darwin Fishes upbringing, it would be interesting to post it. We can do it anonymously and you would remain anonymous. You will be given a website to write to. Anyone interested in doing this will be given the opportunity to tell of their loved ones "first life" before Fish. I will now go to Rita Bryants website and see if she will be number one and then she will have to ask Caseys wife for me if I can call her. Get Aboard, lets talk about our loved ones and friends while Phil Johnson takes take of the Fishites.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 6:34 pm:        DEAR RITA BRYANT; WE TALK FROM TIME TO TIME ON E-MAIL. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR A PERSONAL INTERVIEW FOR THE READERS TO KNOW CASEY BRYANT, YOUR SON , BETTER AND TO TRY TO HELP OTHER FAMILIES AND FRIENDS GOING THROUGH WHAT YOU ARE. HOPEFULLY, YOU CAN, ON MY PERSONAL WEBSITE, PROVIDE ME WITH CASEYS WIFES WEBSITE, SOME OF HIS FRIENDS AND FORMER PASTORS WEBSITES SO THAT WE MIGHT GET A LOT OF FEEDBACK ON THIS CHILD YOU HAVE LOST TO DARWIN FISHES GROUP. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION YOU FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH, I KNOW YOU ARE A VERY QUIET, WISE WOMAN. ANY WEBSITE ADDRESSES OF ANY PERSONS TO BE INTERVIEWED WILL BE WELCOME. Anybody on this post can do the same thing with their loved one. Lets do it! Rita, do you prefer to give me some general background information on Casey or do you want direct questions? I specifically would like the readers to know what kind of discipline you used during his upbringing, his personality before he joined Fish, his intelligence level, his talents, etc. Help us get started and we can help others. Friend.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 9:22 pm:        This is searcher. Whatever JW is, no i am not. I am a Christian. I started to church at twenty one yrs old and was taught the doctrine, theory of humans burnng forever and ever and ever. At first I accepted it as fact. It was preached at most meetings. I came to God because of His love and not because of the hell part. Gradually over the years I tried to find in the Word that God would burn eternally human beings in Hell. I looked at man's justice, and the way the death sentence was carried out. In my lifetime it has changed from hanging, firesquad,electic chair, gas chamber, now most states lethal injection, go to sleep. For the most henious crimes, they go to sleep. Why would God create most men to go to hell, the most cruelest death of all? But you never die and you never get out? God always has a purpose, what possible good could come out of hell? On the grounds that all the other methods were cruel and unusual punishment and did not show enough mercy on the condemed one. I tried to apply this to God's one and only punishment, Hell, punished eterally, burning with fire, the worst punishment humans could think of, but one big difference, you would never die, never. Then, I began to apply mind heart and mind to the scriptures more carefully. My question is this: Can you find any scripture in the Bible where it definitely says most of mankind will burn for an eternity? If Hell is down, the direction, where will the direction be when Hell is cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death? If Hell is never full, why does God bother to tell us in his Word that Hell and death will deliver up the dead that are in them. The wages of sin is death. Plain enough statement. What does death mean? An end. Where and who came up with the idea that death does not mean death but means eternal death. Searching and will listen.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 9:27 pm:        TO THE ABOVE POST, HEY, YOU ARE ON THE RIGHT POSTING BOARD. IF THERE WAS NO HELL, FISH WOULD BE BACK IN THE POND. THERE WOULD BE NO MESSAGE, NO SIGNS, NO HANDOUTS, NO NOTHING. WHAT WOULD THEY TALK ABOUT IF NOT ABOUT HELL.....LOL THATS NOT TO SAY I AGREE WITH YOU BUT KIND OF IRONIC ON THIS FISH WEBSITE.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 9:32 pm:        Serious question for Fish group Do you believe that a person who committs sucide will go to hell?   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 9:38 pm:        To the Anonymous poster who posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 at 09:22 pm: This message board is probably not the place for a debate about hell. For the biblical data you are seeking, see: http://www.reformed.com/pub/hell.htm   a true church Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:50 pm:        THOSE WANTING TO KNOW WHAT "A TRUE CHURCH" REALLY BELIEVES PLEASE VISIT OUR WEB SITE http://www.atruechurch.info   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:56 pm:        Hey Soto and Fish! How come you don't have the guts to face the questions Phil Johnson and others have posted here? Why isn't Darwin man enough to answer for his own teaching? If all cowards really do go to hell like Al told us, well......   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 12:01 am:        Yeah, it seems pretty hypocritical after you guys said MacArthur sinned because he wouldn't answer to you for what he taught. How come you don't have to answer to the people on this message board? They've raised a lot of good questions.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 12:39 am:        You guys are catching "hell", I think I would answer a few questions for the poor ignaorant folks that dont know good English. When you go to the Fish website, is it an open forum like this, or is it just your materials, matter of fact? I have personally went to ATC website several times and all I got was that I was fearful, stubborn, wicked and going to Hell for the questions I raised. You sent me off to hell and about 7 billion others on the planet except for you small sect. Why don't you stay here and answer questions, you know we could be wrong about some scripture....but....at least we have the freedom to say it here, not on your website where no one see the rebukes, ugly rebukes but the one writing. Don't be cowards now that Phil Johnson is here. I can't believe it, its this long and you are running because of him, I think we should all go to his website and see what he has to offer if it upsets you so back you have to say, "Al Soto has left the building". You are no Elvis, Al Soto, you only sing one song, hate. Also, is there anyone, anyone of any of the darwin fish group believers that are talking about having more children with other women other than their first wives. We really cant keep up with your cunning as a serpent....lying to anyone outside your group , because they are not part of your group and it is not a sin to lie to unbelievers of your message. I was serious about the suicide question: What if someone from your group failed Darwin Fish and got dispelled. Have you or anyone told them it would be better to committ suicide than to leave? We hear and think a lot of things, you should make these statement public if they are not true. Are we working on another Jim Jones scenerio or Waco fireball? Answer please.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 12:53 am:        Phil can you post your web address please. I am interested in seeing it.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 2:47 am:        Phil's Web site is at http://www.gty.org/~phil/ his material on the Fish cult is at http://www.gty.org/~phil/articles/dfishfaq.htm I agree that Darwin is a classic Jim Jones/David Koresh type person, and his cult is a major disaster in the making   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 3:07 am:        thanks   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 7:49 am:        .... zzzzzzZZZZZZZZzzzzzZZZZZzzzzzzz ........   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 10:01 am:        Wake up, Darwin! You got some 'splainin' to do.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 11:48 am:        What does happen to men that leave ATC. We hear a lot of stuff, is it slander, or true. Are they told they will burn in hell if they leave? Are they harmed? How can we know if not third hand if you wont speak first hand? Anonymous concerned about the truth of leaving ATC. Rita Bryant, I am nagging you. Question: At what age do you think you first displined Casey Bryant? Question: Was he ever displined from you with a rod? Question: Do you have thoughts on discipling children you would like to share. Question: Did you bring blueness to the wound of any of your children? Please answer any or just one question of above questions, Casey Bryant is the reason for this posting board, so lets try to understand his thinking and where he is coming from.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 12:37 pm:        I posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 06:12 pm That was the 3rd time I have asked the same question and not gotten a response from a true church. It is obvious they are posting here ( see post Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:50 pm THOSE WANTING TO KNOW WHAT "A TRUE CHURCH" REALLY BELIEVES PLEASE VISIT OUR WEB SITE http://www.atruechurch.info) Cowardly? I think so. Does that mean that they will not go to heaven? According to Al Soto it does: (see No Deceit Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 03:25 pm "Well, I have said enough. I will not contend further with cowards who will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Read the above verse and tell me you are not being cowards. You can not even give your name? That is sad.") Will his response be...we repent of our sin of cowardliness and so we are saved. You do not believe the bible(according to their INTERPRETATION...) therfore you are not saved and to repent would be fruitless. I guess since they are the only true believers, then repenting only works for them. The rest are out of luck.... I have never gotten a response from a true church, so I can only assume this is their rationale. In their minds it seems pretty logical. But, doesn't it seem like a license for that group to do what they wish. I mean, they don't answer to anyone except Darwin Fish. They won't even answer straight-forward, simple questions I have asked in the past, as well as other questions on this site. It seems pretty cowardly to me. Still waiting for an answer.........   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 2:58 pm:        This is blah blah blah , obviously not a member. Have a Blessed Day.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 5:01 pm:        Lazy chat and extremist beliefs in men-made arguments. The Bible is only a book, perhaps a history book and maybe an interesting chronicle. Nothing more and nothing less.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 7:25 pm:        To the above post: This website is about a Mother and Father and many other mothers and fathers all over the world and friends and wives and children who have lost loved ones to cults. You have absolute right to write what you wroe on any posting board. We can lazy chat all we like, people may have extremist views. If you want to believe that the Bible is a history book, I beseech you to study it from end to end as it is the most read book in the world, am I right? You can gain wisdom and it is a great chronicle, the one Christians choose to live thir life by, a roadmap to happiness. But again, you are welcome to your opinion. God Bless You ps If you ever lose a loved one to a cult, come aboard and try to take down the Jim Jones buzard bate that Darwin Fish is.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 7:41 pm:        Just answer the questions, Al. Don't be such a coward.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 8:12 pm:        As far as I am concerned the leaders of "A TRUE CHURCH" have proven that they are unwilling to be held accountable for their Scripture-twisting. They are the worst kind of hypocrites, because the very thing they condemn others for is what they do. They refuse to submit to the Word of God, and they are arrogant in the extreme against anyone who criticizes them. I just hope some of the MEMBERS of the cult have watched this forum, because it ought to make them lose confidence in these two pathetic hypocrites they have sold their souls to.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 10:04 pm:        I'm sure some of the members have watched this board. Good old Al keeps coming back. He probably goes back and tells the others how he told the heathen off. They probably come to see the show, that is if Dawrin allows them to have computers. To Phil I wanted to see your website and someone was kind enough to give me the address. Although I don't share your taste in foods, I love the site. I will be going back to read the sermons.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 10:30 pm:        We went to the Phil Johnson site posted above: Its very interesting and infomative, once again proving that Darwin Fish has indeed set up a cult and believes he is the only true church... what arrogance, pride, Lucifer thought he could be like God and look what happened. I hope everyone will take a look at Phil Johnsons website and read some of the letters between Fishites and Johnson. We can definitely understand how you cannot disagree with Darwin Fish on anything, how sad. How sad for members of his group. No mind of their own, no thoughts other than Fishes thoughts. I think that one of the best points Phil Johnson makes is that Darwin Fish takes every scripture literally. We just cant see that. If he did, how could he possibly love his neighbor as himself? The Word teaches that unless we become as little children, we cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That is surely telling us a parable, Jesus wants us to be open and innocent and brighteyed for his wisdom and guidance. We must humble our minds, bodies and souls as children do toward their beloved parents, searching and holdlng dear to them truths. We also agree with Johnson that there are indeed first and secondary issues in the Bible. What if i were a dedicated UPC (pentecostal) which I am not, and wanted to argue hair of women should be not cut ever. Is that of primary interest to Darwin Fish. Is it literal? Also, I want to talk about being kind to all people. Jesus loved the harlot at the well, he loved the woman caught in adultry, He welcomed everyone to His "outside" meetings and inside, believers of His and non-believers. They would ask HIm questions but we dont find anywhere where he ran them off. Paul said He became all things to all men, that some might be saved. Darwin Fish, you are too narrow minded and have no compassion and love for all peoples of the world. You are dislussional, you are believing a lie. I am not saying you do not have truths that all Christians believe some of, but why arent more people going to make it heaven. Why is everyting so black and white with your group. Jesus disciples came to him and said, Jesus, these people are casting out demons in your name and our Lord and Savior said, leave them alone, you do not know what spirit you are of. If the are not against us, they are for us. We all agree that the whole world should indeed know Christ, why cant we work together, Al, Darwin, Casey, David, Matt, Brian? IMO , perhaps you will be like the group in heaven with all these other groups and you are all by yourself in a corner, all nineteen of you, praising God by yourself. Someone says, who are those folKs? He was told , SHHHH, they think they are the only ones here! Rev says, I saw a multitude that no man can number, redemmed, washed in the blood, saved. You make God out to be such a loser that He is only able to save your group plus a few more since time began. Was Adam saved? Was Eve? Was Judus? Are these first or secondary questions. I believe first and most important questions are scriptures that save and mold people into righteousness, peace and joy....His love. Dearest Casey and all members: God is Love, He is not marking everything you do, waiting to catch you in the unpardonable, wilful sin, to send you to Hell. His purpose is to save you, not condemn you. His Spirit will draw you to Him if you open your heart as a child according to the Word. Behold all old things will pass away and all things will become new when we find Christ. Christ is pure Love. We do not make occasion for the lust of the flesh, we do not see how far we can go and still be saved..we do not tempt God by seeing how much beer we can drink, etc...how far can I go? Are you guys seeking destruction? Are you seeking how far you can walk away from God and still be saved or how close you can be to him and His unspeakable joy. Guys, go back to the first things: You have forgot to your first love, knock and the door shall be opened, go in and Christ will sup with you all. I am not quoting exact scriptures, just from my heart, but you know them all. There is rest in the heart of Jesus, not all this hate and hell. We pray Casey Bryant that you might see the way clear and all the members down there. We all are praying for a safe return. Darwin Fish, even if he truly believes what he is teaching is not right, his spritual mind is not right. Please, turn around all of you, go back to your first love. Preach the Gospel!   Mitch Brown Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 12:18 am:        Hey Albert, what happened? You've been sneering and daring people on the board to refute you biblically for weeks, but the minute someone does, you curse everyone and leave. It sure doesn't look to me like you are walking in the light. I don't see ANY of the fruit of the Spirit in your cult..   Benny Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 12:44 am:        Did Darwin instruct his cult members to stop posting here? I wouldn't blame him if he did. They have managed to embarrass the cause. Your Jim Jones/David Koresh types HATE when that happens.   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 12:19 pm:        What happened to "a true church"? Their Web site is off line, and all the brainwashed scoundrels are suddenly gone from here. Did they take Phil's advice and close down the cult?   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 10:20 pm:        So, when we went to a true church website which is posted above sevseral posts, there is a site, but you have to sign in. Does that mean we can no longer be anonymous? Someone out there know? Does this mean that a true church is in hiding, it wont help their cause, when we were talking we felt the children were safe, at least Als, Darwin and Matt, we dont know. You would have done better to stay on board, now we are going to have to insist on faster investigative mesasures from the social services. Get back on board, we want to know you have not moved to another state, we want to know you are cooperating about not leaving brusises on your children, start talking please.   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 10:23 pm:        So, when we went to a true church website which is posted above sevseral posts, there is a site, but you have to sign in. Does that mean we can no longer be anonymous? Someone out there know? Does this mean that a true church is in hiding, it wont help their cause, when we were talking we felt the children were safe, at least Als, Darwin and Matt, we dont know. You would have done better to stay on board, now we are going to have to insist on faster investigative mesasures from the social services. Get back on board, we want to know you have not moved to another state, we want to know you are cooperating about not leaving bruises on your children. Come back and talk or argue or whatever.   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 11:59 pm:        IMHO if a church really wants people to know about it's teachings, it would make it easy for anyone to see their website. Darwin wants to know who is looking at a true church's site. He knows some can make a good arguement against what he teaches. Sounds like he might be afraid. So people,...... especially the men and women against Darwin Fish, you have not posted in vain.   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 1:48 am:        thanks to the above post: We think that at Sat nites meeting, the members were told not to come on this website and also they have a new website system. They have progressed in their Jim Jones movement, hiding in the dark places. Men love darkness rather than light. When the light shines in the darkness they do not understand it and flee from the light, somewhat like cochroaches. Whatsoever is hid shall be shouted from the rooftops. The light of Jesus will make it known. We dont see this group growing over ten or fifteen, just enough for Fish to ditate and support him and his children, to be a little dictator. His big ego has a very small influence on nearly every person who hears him and their hateful messages. May God bring them out of the darkness and into the light, one or all. Goodnite.   Phil Johnson Posted on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 2:12 am:        The Fishite Web site is back up. I notice there are now 75 of Darwin's tapes on their "reject" list. Last week there were only 50. Of course, the ONLY truly infallible source of teaching is the inspired text of Scripture. Since Darwin insists on utter perfection, he really OUGHT to censor the whole lot, stop teaching, and disband the cult. But clearly he has no intention of abiding by the standard he holds others to.   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 11:48 am:        Mr Phil Johnson, thank you for letting us know the website is back up. I wonder what tapes were taken off? I pray you helped to see their error of scripture about marriage and child rearing especially. I also wonder if the Fish sect have been told to stay silent. A shame, we wanted the young members of their group to have thoughts from others to try to prick their hearts and go back to their first love of God...and famlily. Bye for now.   Phil Johnson Posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 6:32 pm:        I watched the videos at Al Soto's Web site this afternoon for the first time. It was interesting to observe the Fishites' methods of browbeating casual passersby at these events as they try to taunt people into a war of proof-texts. And it struck me as bitterly ironic that the Fishites routinely condemn people to hell if they are unwilling to stop and listen to or try to refute their handful of favorite proof-texts. I lost count of how many people they condemned to hell for failing to "examine all things" in the forum the Fishites' chose (the sidewalk next to Edison Field). Ironic? yes, because (even though several Fishites on the videos claimed they would "LOVE" to be corrected from Scripture if they are wrong), we have already seen--RIGHT HERE ON THIS FORUM, in a different kind of environment, where people can respond thoughtfully and carefully to the Fishite lies; where people have actually taken time to read and challenge and refute the most cherished Fishite beliefs with the Bible--how THE FISHITES RAN AND HID instead of answering the plethora of questions and biblical challenges that were raised. They are the grossest kind of hypocrites, and it is obvious that a fierce hatred for the truth underlies everything they do, despite their pretense that they are the only ones who really love the truth. It's pretty easy to win a war of proof-texts against a naive Valley Girl when you follow a canned script. But notice that the Fishites will not stay long in ANY forum where they have to go up against people who actually know how to handle the Word of give well-reasoned biblical arguments instead of just slinging proof texts. That's because the tripe the Fishites are peddling is simply not capable of standing up under THAT kind of biblical examination.   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 10:30 pm:        DARFISH , A TRUE CHURCH, BEATS THEIR BABIES UNTIL BLUE. is this gossip or will you take the time to find out all about A True Chruch, Darwin Fish, Al Soto. Also, Phil Johnson has website that will show the group is a cult. He esposes them. If you want more, just go to the above posts, Darwin Fish, A True Chruch,   Mitch Brown Posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 10:57 pm:        I see Phil has expanded the FAQs. This is right on: "Darwin is simply a wolf who takes advantage of those who are unwise, poorly taught, and biblically ignorant, in order to abuse and devour them. He is not a shepherd who is in any way qualified to lead and feed Christ's sheep. Whatever "truth" might be included in his message is so tainted with error, inaccuracy, illogic, vainglory, human speculations, and fleshly distortions that it is a seriously deadly poison. The proof is in the fruit it produces (Matthew 7:16-18): division, hatred, strife, seditions, heresies, contentions, outbursts of wrath, and the like. These are works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21). Meanwhile, the fruit of the Spirit ("love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, [and] self-control"—vv. 22-23) are virtually absent from the visible lives of Darwin's disciples."   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 11:04 pm:        I still don't understand why when one from the Fish group uses a scripture to condemn you, they believe the scripture they use just fine. But when someone uses scripture to challenge what is said, they won't even recognize that it came from the same bible. It's as if only the scriptures they quote are true. They claim to believe the bible. Is it they don't want to address what is said because it would dispute what they said in the first place? Or is it just that they are all brainwashed by Darwin Fish and are programed to respond that way?   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 12:05 am:        I know that Darwin and his group will sneer at this. But in my bible it says to love one another especially other believers. That is the first thing one should notice about Darwin's group. They claim to believe the bible and that it's the word of God but they act otherwise. How many true Christians picket christian churches on Sunday mornings? Followers of Dawrin Fish, leave!!!!! Before your fate is sealed. When the Lord comes back, do you really think he is going to say...... Well let's take a look at this Fish group, You condemned my people. You picketed my churches, You misinterpreted and twisted my scriptures and said I was a mere man. You have been hateful and disrespectful to my saints, You didn't accept correction from your brothers and sisters even when you were wrong. You repeatedly provoked your brothers and sisters to anger. Instead of helping them that were weaker in faith, you made fun of them and insulted them. Oh yes, you are the kind of people I want in my kingdom. Welcome, my children. I honestly don't think the Lord is going to say that. So if any of you Dawrin Fish people are reading this, you better stop and think of how you are going to look when the Lord comes back. To quote from the book you say you love, Be not deceived, God is not be mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Every idle word, every evil thought will not be hidden from him. Listen to what your bible tells you. You know of the judgement to come. If you were to put as much energy into truly serving the Lord, as you do in condemnation, what you could accomplish would be outstanding. How would Jesus do it in today's world? Please look to him before it's too late. He loves you and he is waiting.   Phil Johnson Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 5:00 pm:        Has anyone listened to any tapes featuring Darwin Fish's teaching about giving? Because I read on his Web site where he says, Other ministries "just come right out and beg for your money! This is something we never do." Of course, that was one of the same ploys the Worldwide Church of God once used to attract people. They criticized organizations that taught openly about giving or made specific financial needs known to donors, and they made it a point NEVER to mention money or giving in any of their own on-air teaching or printed literature. But if you joined the group, you would then discover that they REQUIRED their members to give. (I think members were required to give at least two full tithes each year, meaning 20 percent of their annual income went to the cult.) Darwin claims a.t.c has about 35 members. I don't know how many family units that represents, but a lot of them seem to have multiple kids, so I would think there can't be many more than a dozen family units represented by that group of 35. (Maybe fewer if they are practicing what they preach about polygamy.) Yet Darwin is reportedly building a house for his large family; the cult has begin traveling long distances in order to revile people at Christian gatherings with their hate-gospel; they have a fairly classy-looking Web site; they make and edit videos of their incursions, edit them, and post them at the Web site. All of that costs money. I know Darwin teaches a person must literally sell all surplus posessions and join the group in order to be saved. I suppose he also demands that the proceeds of that divestiture go to a.t.c. Does he insist on a percentage of members' income on an ongoing basis? I'd be interested in reliable info about Darwin's teaching on this issue.   Rita Bryant Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 6:26 pm:        I wanted to check back in here and give some general information about my son. He had a typical childhood and was raised with Godly precepts and attitudes. He was a personable, creative, sensitve boy and as a teen, he was seriously studying the bible. He is a quick learner and adults that came in contact with him were impressed with his hunger for the things of God. I am a "stay at home" mom and have had the same, meaning one and only, husband for 30 years. (maybe that part isn't typical according to our society but Darwin Fish has a dismal percentage of his members staying together and they are the only ones with "truth". Go figure.) As parents we tried to pass to all our children knowledge of God. We understand that we were imperfect, falliable, flawed in understanding, carnal, etc. So were my parents, so is Darwin Fish. Everyone! God has promised that His Word would not return void. This is regardles of the "messenger". Our son has a wife, child, and family to come "home" to. Hope they,(atc),let him read this. p.s. Thanks, son, for visiting me while I was in the hospital. Love, mom   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 10:02 pm:        Hello Rita. Don't be surprised your son visited you. He still loves you. He is just caught up in something that's hard to get out of right now. But he is young and he will understand one day that it's not the right thing for him. Just wait on the Lord, he will not dissappoint you.   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 8:42 pm:        Where did everyone go? Isn't anyone from the Fish group EVER going to respond to the questions that have been asked? I think Phil Johnson's argument about the "essentials" from Romans 14 is pretty convincing, and I can't find ANYWHERE where the Fish group has ever tried to answer it. From what I have seen here, "A True Church" looks like a classic cult. For awhile, I thought Al Soto was going to try to answer the critics. But as soon as Phil showed up, Al ran and hid. So now we see you for what you really are, Al. I HOPE Matt and Darwin aren't really abusing their wives and kids, but if they are, I hope they go down hard. To the people on this board who have relatives in Darwin's group, don't give up. Keep the pressure on, because eventually SOMEONE in the group will come out and expose what really goes on on the inside. I just hope it happens before we have another Jonestown or Waco on our hands.   Phil Johnson Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 1:36 am:        I just returned from several days' ministry out of town. When I checked the Fishites' Web site tonight, I noticed that the list of rejected tapes has been changed rather dramatically once more: http://www.atruechurch.info/rejecttapes.html It's now back to the shorter list of 50 censored tapes. Darwin apparently decided to trim the list to include "only those tapes (or written material) that have been discarded because of doctrinal issues." The Fishites' Web site tells this lie: "In an attempt to keep this list as short as possible, tapes that have been discarded for any other reason (e.g. it was replaced with a more recent tape or written source) have not been documented." Actually, those tapes _were_ documented, as were several _more_ tapes that were removed because Darwin was embarrassed by them. (e.g., "Darwin felt this message was poorly prepared and thus poorly delivered"; another tape that "was discarded" "Because of an error regarding someone's dream mentioned on the tape, and the difficulty of editing"; and another tape was removed because it "contained too much discussion and argumentation.") At least two tapes that were removed because of a DOCTRINAL error ("Debt and My Error [11-30-98] & Another Look At Debt [12-18-97]") are now missing from the list. The reason previously given for the removal of these tapes was that "At the time these tapes were taught, Romans 13:8 was not understood." So it is not true that these censored tapes "have not been documented." Rather, documentation was _removed._ Apparently, Darwin was ashamed of his own high flub rate, and he is doing what he can to make his errors seem fewer. For anyone wanting to compare the full 75-tape list with the current one, see: http://www.gty.org/~phil/articles/censored.htm Also gone from the current list is the tape Darwin withdrew because he "felt he could have dealt with the subject of flatulence in a more mature manner." To Darwin and Al: I don't blame you for wanting to obscure the evidence of your frivolous double-mindedness, but my earlier remark still applies: for someone who insists on the kind of doctrinal perfectionism Darwin teaches, your error rate seems a tad high.   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 3:13 am:        Thanks for the links Mr Johnson. It looks like it's going to be an interesting read.   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 12:17 pm:        Yeah, if Darwin Fish interpreted Matthew 5:29-30 as literally as he interprets "the Lord is a man of war," he would have cut his own tongue out long ago.   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 1:19 pm:        BOSWELL POPPIN IN CRIPES! SPIRITUAL TAPES ON FLATULENCE! I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO "LISTEN" TO THAT ONE, PROBABLY A SMELLY OLD FISH TALE.......!   Phil Johnson Posted on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 8:56 pm:        The weak defense offered by Al Soto here (before cult members lapsed into embarrassed silence) and on the Fish cult's Web site reminds me of the "Heaven's Gate" cult, which also maintained a slick-looking Web site, complete with a document in which they _claimed_ to be against suicide: http://www.heavensgatetoo.com/misc/letter.htm Watch out for anyone who thinks Jesus' command to be "wise as serpents" gives us permission to shade the truth with the purpose of deceiving people. Satan, the old serpent, the father of lies, is not our model in any sense. When Jesus taught us to be wise as serpents, He was not advocating dishonesty of any kind. The Fishites have revealed their true character by repeatedly playing fast and loose with the truth. Don't take anything you read from them at face value. Al Soto's insistence that they "do not advocate beating infants as young as 7 months old nor beating wives" contradicts the testimony of several eyewitnesses, including former cult members and several close relatives of current cult members. If it is a fact that Fishite men are guilty of such abuse, I echo the sentiment of whoever expressed hope that they "go down hard" for those crimes. If you have friends or relatives in the cult who have injured their wives or little ones under Darwin Fish's twisted notion of headship, I hope you will report them to the authorities without delay and without compunction. You may help save your loved ones from _worse_ abuse yet to come.   Anonymous Posted on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 12:01 pm:        Good Morning: I am watching everyday and I believe the Fish people have been ordered not to even peek at this website or else they will burn...get roasted by Fish himself. I have been in contact with Rita Bryant and she did give a small interview on the website about her son Casey Bryant. When asked how she punished her son growing up she said she does not remember any specific incident but was sure she disciplined him about four years of age or so and mostly by going to room, etc. When older he was grounded. Also, I have asked Rita to ask Casey Bryants wife for an interview on her thoughts of what has happened to her life and that of her childs since Casey abondoned her. Rita tells me there is a possiblility of that interview and I will post it here on this board. Rita posted her own update several posts above. I studied the "rod" which sherperds make and use in Africa today. They are taught a very early age that this rod is a very important part of their life as a sherperd. They go out and pick a certain wood and shape and carve it to fit their hand...making it an extension of their hand. They use this for protection for their sheep and theirselves, an authorative club to beat off enemies and animals. This rod would also be like the one Moses had. A rod was and is a teaching tool showing us the Word and protecting us from evil. A rod or club should not be used on children with the wrong definition. This is exactly what Casey Bryant did, went outside and got a stick, a rod, to beat his child. His wife stopped him and the authorities were called in Sanger, CA. I believe he was under instruction from Fish to perform this duty as a follower and not because he personally wanted to do it. All indications are that this young man would never, never beat his baby nor wife before he met Fish. He has never hit or tried to hit his wife according to wife. Nor threatened too..lets pray for Casey Bryant that his eyes are opened to the goodness of God. And all he men down there. Surely their hearts are pricked if they do beat their children with clubs. Surely they dont feel a spiritual high from this?   Phil Johnson Posted on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 10:57 pm:        Anonymous wrote: "I believe the Fish people have been ordered not to even peek at this website or else they will burn...get roasted by Fish himself." If that's true, then he is an even more grotesque hypocrite than I thought--and I already thought he was a pretty seriously grotesque hypocrite. So much for being Bereans, huh? I guess everyone is supposed to be a "Berean" except for Darwin's spaniels. They have to nod and agree with whatever Darwin says. If it's true that they are being forbidden to read posts from people who have pointed out where Scripture is against them, they are in a dangerous position indeed.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 24, 2003 - 4:50 am:        Now personally I believe either Darwin Fish or someone from that group reads everything posted, most likely Al Soto. Mr Johnson, I read the information from the link you posted. I read how Darwin Fish labeled John McCarther as a false teacher. Because I listen to him on the radio in the mornings, this was very interesting to me. I really read it with a open mind although the Fish group probably wouldn't agree. I wanted to know if he really was a false teacher, because I would stop listening to him if I found he was. I read and read what the Fish group wrote but I really didn't see a reason for me to stop listening to him. So I'll still be tuning in to hear him. I know Al Soto will say I'll burn in hell for listening to a "false teacher" but I don't see it. Why is it so important to Mr Fish to try and prove everyone is a false teacher but him? What is he getting out of this? It's not like he's gaining a large membership from people leaving other pastors and coming to him.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 24, 2003 - 2:10 pm:        Hi, IMO, Fish has a ministry to destroy Chrsitians who go to church? But the main thing I believe personally is that the Fish group is ashamed of Salvation of God, The Grace of God, The Power of God, The Love of God...why else would he be trying to do his job for Him? To the group of Fish: You dont have to make excuses for God or be ashamed of Him, dont you believe He is big enough and smart enough and powerful enough to take care of all His people? You dont need a mission against Gods people, just jump in to God's glory and abundant living and help others mature and grow in righteousness, peace and joy! There is just so much beauty in the word Grace if you accept it instead of pushing it away from your hearts. Please, study the Glory of the power of Salvation thru Grace and the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.   Anonymous Posted on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 1:31 am:        Grace is the seed of God.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, January 26, 2003 - 3:27 pm:        Phil Johnson: Berean....I am sorry, I am not familiar with that ...help, please. Did Fish, to your knowledge, remove child discipline tapes, and if so, do you have a copy that could be acquired. I believe the group is definitely on the run, Gods power. They will find that no matter where they run, God will be there. Their will will not stand against Gods will. Happy Sunday!   christiane Posted on Sunday, January 26, 2003 - 11:04 pm:        I read this stuff and it makes me sad because my brother, his wife, and his four beautiful children are caught up in this mess. They are my family, and I love them very much, and I know that their involvement in this group has brought much hurt and turmoil to our entire family. We love them all very much, and pray for the day that they will come back to our family. I am not the best "Christian" but I know that others in my family are very devoted to living life as the Bible says they should, and we all believe that God is a loving God. I just hope that some day, my brother and his family come back to us knowing that we love them deeply.   Anonymous Posted on Monday, January 27, 2003 - 4:01 pm:        Christiane: oh, I feel so hurt for you! We will pray everyday for your family as we do the others. Never ever say you are not the best Christian, who is best among us? Who? We are saved by grace, we can stand bold before the Lamb of God. God loves a humble heart and you sound like one. You are needed in this fight against darkness and God will give you the strength to pray for your loved ones and His Holy Spirit that abides in you will continue to help and guide you in all His ways. God did not send His son to die on the Cross for the perfect, rather for the imperfect so that they might see His perfection, His Love, His Care, His Joy, His Salvatin. I dont care who you are, you say it all ....what Christianity is all about, the amazing, saving free gift of grace that will keep us going until we grow...and that will never end till we die this eartly death only and go on to live with Him for an eternity. Keep in touch....you are needed!   Eva Berger Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 4:52 am:        A Story on the United Hypocrisy Committees ** < Off-Topic post removed by the Administrator >   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 5:25 am:        MODERATOR Please remove the above post. It has nothing to do with a True Church.   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 11:56 am:        Chrisitane, you need to write more often, i think the Fish people wanted to pop you out of site...come back onboard, you must have stirred some excitement for good ol Al to have possibly threw that big squash of stuff at us to hide your name....friend   Anonymous Posted on Tuesday, January 28, 2003 - 11:10 pm:        You know no matter what "good old Al" throws on the board, it's not going to change anyone's mind about Darwin Fish and the way he and his church treats people, especially Christians. And anyway I believe the moderator will delete the message as I have asked. It is not on topic. If "good old Al" did this, it is very childish of him. To anyone curious there are some posts above that very long one above. Just scroll up and read what a true church does not want you to see.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 3:49 pm:        MODERATOR thanks for removing the off topic post.   Phil Johnson Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 9:36 pm:        I just returned from 2 weeks in Europe and noticed that in another Web forum, some atc-automaton wrote: "This is a very common ploy amongst evangelical leadership to character assassinate the messenger when you cannot disprove the message, for even Phil admits that Darwin Fish is not wrong about everything...." Apparently somehow in the dysfunctional "thinking" of atc cult members, to say that Darwin Fish is "not wrong about EVERYTHING" is tantamount to admitting that you "cannot disprove the message." More evidence that Fishites are incapable of simple logical deductions. But I HAVE disproved the message, and my refutation of the Fishite heresy now fills more than 50 pages (if you print out the entire "Darwin Fish FAQ" along with the linked documentation). But notice that in the weeks since I first posted here, not one Fishite has stepped up to the challenge and answered with a biblical reply. They have ignored my refutations of their "seven Holy Spirits" error, their "God is a man" blasphemy, and other BIBLICAL issues. These are not "character assassination," but biblical answers to their unbiblical and anti-Christian teachings. The Fishites have not even acknowledged my arguments in any rational fashion, much less attempted to reply to them. Instead, they scattered like cockroaches when the light was turned on. What happened to their swaggering claims about wanting everyone to be Bereans? The same Fishite makes this incredible claim: "Only brainless ones dead zombies belong to their groups. They hate Darwin Fish because he is a free thinker...." Why is "free thinking" supposed to be a virtue in Darwin, but he forbids it in everyone else? The real "zombies" are those who let Darwin Fish tell them what to think--and live in terror that if they depart from his dogma they have departed from Christ.   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 10:15 pm:        The Fish group wanting everyone to be Bereans? Now that is hard to believe. AL Soto never came across as wanting everyone to be Bereans. He shot down everything anyone said. Unless you agree with him 100% and I never did see anyone that did, he would say you were headed for hell's fire. There is one thing I think is fair to say. The Fish group do claim to believe in God, they do know the bible except they translate incorrectly and they do try to idenify false teachers. They only forget to include themselves in the count. It is halarious for me to see someone with the same or more biblical knowledge that challenges this group only to see them run as fast as they can for cover. It really does remind me of coackroaches.   Phil Johnson Posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 11:33 pm:        Is Darwin Fish now teaching that women must bear children in order to go to heaven? Fishites are spamming various discussion forums all over the Web. Mostly they just re-post the same articles you'll find on Al Soto's Web site. They are using names like "Wally Duncaster" and "Josephine Melrose." (Do a search at Google and you'll find Wally and Josephine sometimes use the same e-mail address--and their addresses are uncannily similar to Hotmail accounts Al Soto has used. Could "Josephine" be Al Soto in drag? Is "Wally" another of Al's alter-egos?) In one of "Wally Duncaster"'s posts, titled "Doctrine of Women," he asks, "Is a woman only saved in childbearing?"--and then quotes 1 Tim. 2:11-15 without comment or explanation. (Though he misidentifies it as 2 Tim. 2:11-15). And it struck me that it would be just like Darwin to cite 1 Tim. 2:15 as "proof" that women must earn heaven by having babies. Of course, that's not a proper interpretation of the verse (cf. Isa 54:1; 1 Cor. 7:32-35), but if someone insists that 2 Samuel 22:32 means God is a literal rock, it makes sense that he would also interpret 2 Tim. 2:15 with wooden literalness and declare that childbearing is the means by which women must earn entrance into heaven. So I was wondering if Darwin has put his teaching on that verse in writing or on tape. And if so, I'm wondering how he explains it. Does he think women MUST bear children in order to get into heaven? Is there no hope for single girls or barren women? And is heaven automatic for a woman who has children? I doubt Darwin would say THAT, because he obviously thinks even moms must follow his teaching 100% in order to be worthy of heaven. After all, he has anathematized virtually all the moms of his cult members. So how does childbearing fit into Darwin's soteriology? Just curious. If anyone has info on this, please post it.   Anonymous Posted on Sunday, February 16, 2003 - 12:10 am:        DARWIN IS CERTAINLY BIG ON CHILDBEARING AND WITH NO DRUGS DURING DELIVERY , NO MEDS, NO DOCTORS.....NOW WHEN HIS WIFE HAS THE LAST ONE SHE ALMOST BLED TO DEATH AND OFF TO THE HOSPITAL THEY FLED AND DR PUT HER ON BIRTH CONTROL.....NOW, HE WANTS CONCUMBINE, MY CONSPIRACY THERORY STILL GOING THAT HE WANTS TO REPLENTISH THE EARTH WITH HIS FISHITES... IN ORDER TO DO THIS, I BELIEVE FISH IS GOING TO HAVE ALL THESE YOUNG MEN LEAVE THEIR WIVES UNLESS THEY ARE WILLING TO BE DISPLINED AND LOVE FISH OF COURSE. THEN, HE WILL TRAIN THE YOUNG MEN TO BE READY WHEN HIS DAUGHTERS COME OF AGE TO BEAR CHILDREN AND OR HAVE SEX WITH THEIR WIVES TO SPREAD HIS SEED UPON THE EARTH. WE KNOW THAT WHEN DAVID WAS TRYING TO GET BACK WITH HIS WIFE IN THE GROUP HE WAS TOLD TO USE CONDOMS AND OF COURSE CASEY GOES AND STAYS ALL NIGHT IN THE HOUSE WITH HIS WIFE BUT DOES NOT EVEN KISS HER. I THINK MY CONSPIRACY THEORY IS VALID, THINK ABOUT IT. FISH BELIEVES FIRMLY HIS DAUGHTERS CAN GET MARRIED IF AND WHEN OR IF HE WANTS THEM TOO. AND THEY CAN ONLY MARRY SOMEONE THAT BELONGS TO HIS GROUP. SO HE HAS TO PREPARE THEIR HUSBANDS. ALSO, SINCE HIS WIFE IS NOW BARREN,` SO TO SPEAK, HE MUST MAKE SOME NEW RULES UP TO HAVE SOME MORE BABIES ON HIS OWN..... SO PHIL JOHNSON, AL SOTO IS IN DRAG , HUH, INTERESTING, MUST CHECK THAT OUT... DID YOU KNOW THAT CASEY BRYANT BELIEVES AND WAS TOLD BY FISH THAT HIS LITTLE BABY WOULD GO TO HELL AND THAT ALL BABIES GO TO HELL AND BURN IF THEIR MOTHERS AND FATHERS DO NOT BELONG TO HIS HOUSEHOLD OF QUOTE BELIEVERS? FOR EVERYONE OUT THERE, RITA IS FEELING BETTER TODAY FOR THE FIRST DAY AND BACK ON WEB EVEN THOUGH SHE DOES NOT WRITE, JUST QUIET....SHES THAT WAY.... FISH IS DEFINITELY A COCHROACH, RUNNING IN THE DARK, STRONG MEAT IS SURE POISON FOR THAT GROUP.... ALL THEY NEED IS LOVE!!!! OUCH, THAT HURTS! WE WANT TO HATE, HATE!!!!!!!! IS THAT WHY WHEN WE SEE A COACHROACH IN A RESTAURANT WE NEVER GO BACK ..... THEY JUST ARE SO YUK....SO UNACCEPTABLE.... GO FOR IT PHIL.....SUCH COWARDS.....THEY ARE SPINLESS, MINDLESS....WONT EVEN ANSWER, THEY SAY, OH, WELL WE DONT ANSWER ANONYMOUS, BUT WHEN YOU PUT YOUR NAME THEY WONT ANSWER YOU AND WHEN THEY WANT TO USE SRIPTURE THEY WONT ANSWER YOU.... JUST CHECKING IN.....EVERYDAY....WHOS JOSHUA?   findthetruth.com Posted on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 6:58 pm:        http://www.findthetruth.com http://www.findthetruth.com   TRUTH Posted on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 7:00 pm:        DENOMINATIONS = FALSE DOCTRINES ! ! ! ! ! http://www.findthetruth.com http://www.findthetruth.com   Given up on baptist Denomination Posted on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 7:04 pm:        < Repetititive post deleted by Administrator. Original can be seen at http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/435.html?1045527478#POST3083 >   Anonymous Posted on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 - 9:50 pm:        Hi, everyone - I appreciate being able to read other people's experiences in dealing with ATC. A close friend of mine has now joined this cult..and I worry for his family. Does anyone know the latest status of any legal procedings against these people? My friend has some serious issues with women and I can see him buying into Fish's insane babblings about women. My friend, though I care deeply for him, has always been a follower - and I fear for his well being now that he's fallen in with these people. I posted ANONYMOUS for obvious reasons...you may call me Rolly.   Anonymous Posted on Friday, February 21, 2003 - 2:34 am:        HI ANONYMOUS: This is some of the women and men against Darwin Fish and his group. We are sorry you have lost, hopefully not forever, a friend to the Fish group. It is so sad. Yes, there are legal proceedings at this moment against members of this group. Of course, to tell the nature and extent would not be very smart. Its a hard thing to see parents lose children that we are sure they love in their way. We pray that they change their stand on beating to the bruising of the wound. Also, these are legal matters that have to be proved and that takes time and investigations and paper work. We can say that paperwork is in action and that is all we can say. In my opinion, one day Darwin Fish, Al Soto, Matt and all those men left living with their wives will come home from their protest meeting to find that all their children have been taken while they were gone. Certainly, we would not want another Waco incident where children burned to death while their cowardly father was shot. Everything will be evaulated and things will be done for the safety of the children. Also, Jim Jones was shot while innnocent children were writhing in pain and died from poison. We cant have that happening here. Events that unfold will be all for children. We feel sorry for the women but they are adults and from what we understand, the wives who are still with the husbands stand behind their beliefs. Just pray for the women to have their eyes opened and run with their children. Pray that the followers realize and look back at thier relationship with Darwin Fish and think very carefully and know that he has changed slowly and is slowly going towards a Jim Jones type situation and they are following slowly changing, being a puppet on a string for Fish. Pray they stand up and get out now. Pray they will ask God to give them strength to pray and say, "Am I in a cult, has Fish changed, Have I chanaged, tell me God, have I changed?" Lets pray that these men that follow Fish and Fish have their spirtual eyes opened to hear what Jesus said, to do what Jesus did on this earth. And then lets read John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn (judge) the world but that the world, thru Him, might be saved> God Bless you and I hope your loved ones do all they can to help save the children of the Fish group. We are here. We are praying and legal action is being done at this very time. anonymous also.   Anonymous