SO MANY FALSE PASTORS TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!

[LightBearer316]

The problem with many modern pastors and teachers is that they aren't leaders who are of biblical stature, meaning that they should get a regular job, shut their mouths and learn from the pews or chairs like all others within churchianity. If they don't ever grow to maturity, like most other pew warmers, then they should keep their mouths shut all the way to the grave like most churchgoers.

MM

I understand the frustration when leadership fails to model maturity, but Scripture calls for correction through grace and truth, not contempt. God indeed warns that not all should become teachers—

“My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.” (James 3:1 KJV)​

Yet He also gifts and appoints pastors and teachers for the building up of His people (Ephesians 4:11-13). Faithful leaders are not self-appointed; they’re called, tested, and proven by character (1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9).
We’re all accountable to grow in humility and discernment, whether in the pulpit or the pew. The goal isn’t silencing others but seeing Christ formed in every believer (Galatians 4:19).

Grace and peace—may we build up, not tear down, the body for whom Christ died.

 

[LightBearer316]

Yes. That's why I specifically pointed out their "profiting" off the gospel. Music, books, etc., that's all fine given that those are means for living off the market rather than peddling falsehoods behind the pulpit and demanding tithes and huge offerings that serve only to enrich them.

MM

I agree that Scripture warns against those who “suppose that gain is godliness” (1 Timothy 6:5) and “make merchandise” of God’s people (2 Peter 2:3). But the answer isn’t to despise all pastors—it’s to discern between faithful shepherds and false ones. Paul reminded that “the laborer is worthy of his hire” (1 Timothy 5:17–18). True servants of Christ don’t exploit the flock; they feed it (John 21:15–17).

Grace and peace.

 

[Karlon]

i asked a local pastor about 20 years ago why there isn't any real teacher-preacher pastors around mid New York State. he said: "if you have a small church, which that's all there is here, the pastor doesn't feel a sense of responsibility to work a more advanced sermon".

 

[Musicmaster]

I understand the frustration when leadership fails to model maturity, but Scripture calls for correction through grace and truth, not contempt. God indeed warns that not all should become teachers—

“My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.” (James 3:1 KJV)​

Yet He also gifts and appoints pastors and teachers for the building up of His people (Ephesians 4:11-13). Faithful leaders are not self-appointed; they’re called, tested, and proven by character (1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9).
We’re all accountable to grow in humility and discernment, whether in the pulpit or the pew. The goal isn’t silencing others but seeing Christ formed in every believer (Galatians 4:19).

Grace and peace—may we build up, not tear down, the body for whom Christ died.

You do indeed fancy yourself allegedly knowing another's emotional state, someone who you have never met face to face. My take on the modern state of the pastorate is sadness, not contempt. Speaking matter-of-factly about the need for so many of them needing to keep their mouths shut is only a logical fix to the problem. My tonal inflections are not expressed through a posting of mere text, so please ask rather than to assume deific powers of discernment when judging me. I would very much appreciate that because I have a heart for the function of pastoring and teaching in the body of Christ those who are in need of some meat diet. We need more spiritual giants walking this earth.

Thank you.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

I agree that Scripture warns against those who “suppose that gain is godliness” (1 Timothy 6:5) and “make merchandise” of God’s people (2 Peter 2:3). But the answer isn’t to despise all pastors—it’s to discern between faithful shepherds and false ones. Paul reminded that “the laborer is worthy of his hire” (1 Timothy 5:17–18). True servants of Christ don’t exploit the flock; they feed it (John 21:15–17).

Grace and peace.

There you did it again, and made it all-inclusive about an alleged despisement of ALL pastors. Please get a grip on yourself. My friend, as you sit there on your throne of judgement against me, please hear this: I absolutely love all the men who are teaching truth as best they can, and I have no regard for those merchandising the gospels they invent from thin air. My heart is for those who are ignorant enough to enrich such men. THEY are those whom I seek to share the true gospel of Christ and to help them recognize the men worthy of their attentions and support, be they few and far between.

There are no pat answers to all this other than to point them to the Bible and prayer. (1 John2:27)

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

You do indeed fancy yourself allegedly knowing another's emotional state, someone who you have never met face to face. My take on the modern state of the pastorate is sadness, not contempt. Speaking matter-of-factly about the need for so many of them needing to keep their mouths shut is only a logical fix to the problem. My tonal inflections are not expressed through a posting of mere text, so please ask rather than to assume deific powers of discernment when judging me. I would very much appreciate that because I have a heart for the function of pastoring and teaching in the body of Christ those who are in need of some meat diet. We need more spiritual giants walking this earth.

Thank you.

MM

What MM is doing here is a classic defensive deflection with a subtle spiritual superiority move.
Let’s break down:

1. Shifting the focus from Scripture to self-defense

Instead of engaging my biblical points (James 3:1; Ephesians 4:11-13; Titus 1), he fixates on my tone—accusing me of assuming his “emotional state.” That’s a diversion. It avoids the issue (spiritual accountability of leaders) and makes me the topic rather than the truth of my post.

2. Victim posture + spiritual posturing

Notice the combination:

“Please ask rather than assume deific powers of discernment when judging me.”
“I have a heart for the function of pastoring and teaching… we need more spiritual giants.”

He’s doing two things at once:

• Victim stance: claiming I've judged him unfairly.
• Authority stance: implying deeper spiritual maturity (“meat diet,” “spiritual giants”).
  That’s a self-elevating contrast meant to undercut my credibility subtly.

3. Semantic reframing

He reframes my phrase “contempt” into “sadness,” as though the only issue was emotion. But my post wasn’t about emotion—it was about biblical correction in attitude and approach.
This is a rhetorical sidestep: redefining my word to make his response look more reasonable.


4. Avoiding the core theological issue

My comment addressed how believers should correct leadership—graciously, not destructively.
He ignores that completely and instead talks about his personal calling and tone, never addressing Scripture’s teaching on humility, patience, or edification.

My point was simply that Scripture calls us to correct even real failures in leadership with humility and grace (Galatians 6:1; 2 Timothy 2:24-25).

Strong convictions are good—so long as they build up the body rather than tear it down (Ephesians 4:29).
I share your desire for mature believers who handle the “meat” of the Word—but maturity is measured not only by knowledge, but by Christ-like gentleness in how we handle disagreement.

Grace and peace in Christ.

 

[Musicmaster]

What MM is doing here is a classic defensive deflection with a subtle spiritual superiority move.
Let’s break down:

1. Shifting the focus from Scripture to self-defense

Instead of engaging my biblical points (James 3:1; Ephesians 4:11-13; Titus 1), he fixates on my tone—accusing me of assuming his “emotional state.” That’s a diversion. It avoids the issue (spiritual accountability of leaders) and makes me the topic rather than the truth of my post.

2. Victim posture + spiritual posturing

Notice the combination:

“Please ask rather than assume deific powers of discernment when judging me.”
“I have a heart for the function of pastoring and teaching… we need more spiritual giants.”

He’s doing two things at once:

• Victim stance: claiming I've judged him unfairly.
• Authority stance: implying deeper spiritual maturity (“meat diet,” “spiritual giants”).
  That’s a self-elevating contrast meant to undercut my credibility subtly.

3. Semantic reframing

He reframes my phrase “contempt” into “sadness,” as though the only issue was emotion. But my post wasn’t about emotion—it was about biblical correction in attitude and approach.
This is a rhetorical sidestep: redefining my word to make his response look more reasonable.


4. Avoiding the core theological issue

My comment addressed how believers should correct leadership—graciously, not destructively.
He ignores that completely and instead talks about his personal calling and tone, never addressing Scripture’s teaching on humility, patience, or edification.

My point was simply that Scripture calls us to correct even real failures in leadership with humility and grace (Galatians 6:1; 2 Timothy 2:24-25).

Strong convictions are good—so long as they build up the body rather than tear it down (Ephesians 4:29).
I share your desire for mature believers who handle the “meat” of the Word—but maturity is measured not only by knowledge, but by Christ-like gentleness in how we handle disagreement.

Grace and peace in Christ.

Your seismic disregard for admitting the error in your posting is indeed itself a deflection. I ceased topical discussion with you on the basis of your own tactics. The sense of self-pride in your words are most telling. No doubt that you will get back-patting from those posters you have influenced in ways that they like who will side with you on all this. Allies are nice to have, and they aid in the fall of the prideful. As sad as this is, go for it. I wish we could speak face to face, but that luxury is not afforded to us at this time.

Grace and peace.

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

Your seismic disregard for admitting the error in your posting is indeed itself a deflection. I ceased topical discussion with you on the basis of your own tactics. The sense of self-pride in your words are most telling. No doubt that you will get back-patting from those posters you have influenced in ways that they like who will side with you on all this. Allies are nice to have, and they aid in the fall of the prideful. As sad as this is, go for it. I wish we could speak face to face, but that luxury is not afforded to us at this time.

Grace and peace.

MM

This reply shows he’s fully abandoned Scripture and shifted to character assassination cloaked in “grace.”
Psychological projection:

“Your seismic disregard… your self-pride… the fall of the prideful.”
He’s projecting what he’s displaying. I stayed on Scripture; he’s reacting emotionally. Accusing me of pride is a way to feel morally superior while sidestepping the text.​

False moral high ground

“I wish we could speak face to face.”
That’s meant to sound humble but carries veiled condescension (“you wouldn’t say this in person”). It’s a subtle power play—asserting moral maturity while refusing real accountability to the Scriptures discussed.​

My concern isn’t winning an argument but standing on the Word that unites us:
“We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” (Acts 15:11)
One Lord, one faith, one baptism. (Eph 4:5)
Grace and peace.

 

[Avery]

i asked a local pastor about 20 years ago why there isn't any real teacher-preacher pastors around mid New York State. he said: "if you have a small church, which that's all there is here, the pastor doesn't feel a sense of responsibility to work a more advanced sermon".

boy that’s unfortunate! Sp if only a few cows show up at the trough to be fed do you withhold the food because it’s a small turnout? No, you feed them! a pastor is responsible to teach and shepherd those given to them, even if it’s only a few. Every life is valuable.

 

[Musicmaster]

This reply shows he’s fully abandoned Scripture and shifted to character assassination cloaked in “grace.”
Psychological projection:

“Your seismic disregard… your self-pride… the fall of the prideful.”​

He’s projecting what he’s displaying. I stayed on Scripture; he’s reacting emotionally. Accusing me of pride is a way to feel morally superior while sidestepping the text.​

False moral high ground

“I wish we could speak face to face.”​

That’s meant to sound humble but carries veiled condescension (“you wouldn’t say this in person”). It’s a subtle power play—asserting moral maturity while refusing real accountability to the Scriptures discussed.​

My concern isn’t winning an argument but standing on the Word that unites us:
“We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” (Acts 15:11)
One Lord, one faith, one baptism. (Eph 4:5)
Grace and peace.

The only thing I have abandoned is you, not Scripture. Your bent upon ignoring the clear differences between the gospel preached by Peter and that of Paul, that's on you. Pointing only at the similar items is missing the forest for the trees, as the old addage goes.

Enjoy your pride fest.

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

The only thing I have abandoned is you, not Scripture. Your bent upon ignoring the clear differences between the gospel preached by Peter and that of Paul, that's on you. Pointing only at the similar items is missing the forest for the trees, as the old addage goes.

Enjoy your pride fest.

MM

Brother, pride has nothing to do with it. The issue is truth, not ego.
Scripture interprets Scripture — and the Word of God never teaches two gospels, one by Peter and another by Paul.

Both proclaimed salvation by grace through faith in Christ’s finished work:

• Peter affirmed, “We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15:11).
• Paul declared, “There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5).

Different audiences, yes — but one message of salvation. The “forest” you refer to is the unity of the gospel, not its division.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Musicmaster]

Brother, pride has nothing to do with it. The issue is truth, not ego.
Scripture interprets Scripture — and the Word of God never teaches two gospels, one by Peter and another by Paul.

Both proclaimed salvation by grace through faith in Christ’s finished work:

• Peter affirmed, “We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they” (Acts 15:11).
• Paul declared, “There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:5).

Different audiences, yes — but one message of salvation. The “forest” you refer to is the unity of the gospel, not its division.

Grace and peace to you.

Well, if you were water baptized and think that cereminially getting wet remitted your sins, then you believe in a falsehood in relation to the body of Christ.

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

Well, if you were water baptized and think that cereminially getting wet remitted your sins, then you believe in a falsehood in relation to the body of Christ.

MM

I completely agree that water itself cannot remit sin — only the blood of Christ can.


Where we differ is in how you often frame Peter’s message as a different gospel from Paul’s.
Scripture never portrays Peter as preaching salvation by works or ritual. In fact, Peter said plainly at the Jerusalem council:

“We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” (Acts 15:11)​

That’s the same message Paul preached:

“By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8)​

So if both apostles agree that salvation is by grace through faith, there is no dual gospel—only one message revealed more fully over time.

Grace and peace to you. May the Lord keep us both humble before His Word and united in the truth of His grace.

 

[Karlon]

boy that’s unfortunate! Sp if only a few cows show up at the trough to be fed do you withhold the food because it’s a small turnout? No, you feed them! a pastor is responsible to teach and shepherd those given to them, even if it’s only a few. Every life is valuable.

there are strongholds in mid N.Y. John Bunyan, a big time preacher a few centuries ago, skipped preaching in mid NY because he sensed them.

 

[Musicmaster]

I completely agree that water itself cannot remit sin — only the blood of Christ can.


Where we differ is in how you often frame Peter’s message as a different gospel from Paul’s.
Scripture never portrays Peter as preaching salvation by works or ritual. In fact, Peter said plainly at the Jerusalem council:

“We believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” (Acts 15:11)​

That’s the same message Paul preached:

“By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8)​

So if both apostles agree that salvation is by grace through faith, there is no dual gospel—only one message revealed more fully over time.

Grace and peace to you. May the Lord keep us both humble before His Word and united in the truth of His grace.

I framed the argument against that one element as any longer being the means by which our sins are remitted. I never nullified faith and change of mine and heart. Come on! Stop with the straw man argumentation and stick to what I actually have stated.

Also, your trying to frame Paul's mention of "another gospel" as being a reference to some corrupt gospel, you have no leg to stand on with that nonsense.

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

I framed the argument against that one element as any longer being the means by which our sins are remitted. I never nullified faith and change of mine and heart. Come on! Stop with the straw man argumentation and stick to what I actually have stated.

Also, your trying to frame Paul's mention of "another gospel" as being a reference to some corrupt gospel, you have no leg to stand on with that nonsense.

MM

No straw man—just Scripture.

 

[Musicmaster]

No straw man—just Scripture.

Yeah, right...

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

Yeah, right...

MM

When someone persists in teaching division under the name of doctrine, Scripture says to mark, avoid, and move on.
Grace and Peace

 

[Musicmaster]

When someone persists in teaching division under the name of doctrine, Scripture says to mark, avoid, and move on.
Grace and Peace

Your arguments from silence, that's called hypocrisy. Paul did NOT preach the exact same gospel as the twelve, and you have yet to prove that he did. All you've done is repeat the claim with no proof whatsoever.

I invented no new doctrine from silence. I only pointed out the falsehood of the belief that Paul preached the exact same gospel as the twelve by pointing out his never having commanded Gentiles to be water baptized. His initial practice of baptizing a small hand full at the beginning of his ministry, and then later stating that he was not sent to baptize but rather to preach his gospel, that silence speaks loud volumes. The silence negates the false claims from people like you.

So, your bent upon hypocritical argumentation is, again, telling.

MM

 

[LightBearer316]

Your arguments from silence, that's called hypocrisy. Paul did NOT preach the exact same gospel as the twelve, and you have yet to prove that he did. All you've done is repeat the claim with no proof whatsoever.

I invented no new doctrine from silence. I only pointed out the falsehood of the belief that Paul preached the exact same gospel as the twelve by pointing out his never having commanded Gentiles to be water baptized. His initial practice of baptizing a small hand full at the beginning of his ministry, and then later stating that he was not sent to baptize but rather to preach his gospel, that silence speaks loud volumes. The silence negates the false claims from people like you.

So, your bent upon hypocritical argumentation is, again, telling.

MM

That response from you is emotional deflection dressed as logic. You are claiming “argument from silence” while building your entire position on silence — the very thing you accuse me of.

Paul’s words aren’t silent at all — they’re explicit.
He summarized the gospel in plain terms:

“Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel… that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day.” (1 Cor 15:1-4)​

That’s not “Paul’s gospel” versus “the twelve’s.” It’s the gospel — the same message Peter preached (Acts 2:32-38; 10:43; 15:11).

Peter commanded baptism after faith; Paul affirmed baptism follows the gospel, not defines it:

“Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” (1 Cor 1:17)​

That’s not silence — that’s distinction between means and message.
The message is Christ crucified and risen; the means of receiving it is faith.

So, far from proving “two gospels,” Paul and Peter both taught one salvation, one Lord, one faith (Eph 4:5).
Silence didn’t create that unity — Scripture did.

Grace and peace.