Did Pastor Carl Stevens clearly differenciate, between "The Bible" and translations?

I noted on another thread how in the 1990's Pastor Paul Stevens clearly differenciated between "The Bible" and "The King James Bible" ,
saying to me:

Was Pastor Carl Stevens just as precise on this issue?

Did the congregation always know that when Pastor Carl Stevens used the expression "The Bible",
while standing in the pulpit with a King James translation of "The Bible" in his hand('s),
he was never referring to the King James Bible?.

Daved

I think if you ask most GGers what they believe about the bible, you will get a response similar to the Paul Stevens quote. Many foreign missionaries use bible translations in the language of those they are trying to reach. I do not know if those bibles are translated from English or the original languages. However, regardless of what reasonable answers the average GGer give you, the reality is that they use the version the pastor uses. I remember when we all bought Amplified Bibles when CHS used it for a time in Lenox.

In my opinion, any preacher who wants to reach a 21st century American in an understandable way will leave the KJV on the shelf and use a more understandable version of the Bible. Being sentimentally or emotionally attached to the KJV does a disservice to those you are trying to reach.

I do wholeheartedly declare that understanding the thoughts of (the un-named god) require nontraditional, unrehearsed methods to reveal truth. . .

(paragraph omitted)

. . .but why TRY to reveal truth?

Leaving the KJV on the shelf may contribute to the already dire economic state of our society.

Imagine all the people...throwing their books away....

Alot of motivational speakers would be fighting for their jobs with so many preachers in the job circuit looking for new ways to sustain an income.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

Guest2, I do not know what your current connections are like with GGers, except that you may be in the recovery state like most of us posting here. After a short and sweet abstinence from almost all activity in GGWO, my experience has recently upgraded to premium access. Although I find the traditions and ideas from GGWO adverse to my progressive development in this walk of life, the subject matter is still quite fascinating. When enough time is freed up in my normal schedule to attend a GG service a couple times a month or to listen to a snippet online totalling an hour a month, my ever hungry monkey of opposition begins picking at food to fuel the fire that burns forever. It is perplexing to enjoy the company of good friends at GG and then fully disagree with the insistent priority of traditional methods instituted for means of propagating "the way".

To anyone out there reading this:

1. If you are a GGWO thinker, how many red flags does it take to get to the center of your cognitive dissonance?
2. If you have stepped out of the boat (ggwo covering), how can truth be reconciled with actions that can be observed as either good or evil depending on perspective?
3. If you dont care, say nothing.

On Nov 7, 2009, @10:03 AM quest2 wrote:

At Exodus 6:3 in my translation of the Amplifed Bible it reads:

guest2,

Did Pastor Carl Stevens ever comment on the name "Yahweh", during the period in Lenox when he read from the Amplified Bible.

It has been my impression that when Pastor Carl Stevens arrived in Baltimore
he was 100% certain that God's name was "Jehovah".

Daved

I don't remember.

Somebody please put a bullet in my head.

It never can be reconciled. Actions of the GGWO leadership such as luring people to depend on their supposed GGWO pastor for life as a crutch or as a go-between to reach Christ through can never be reconciled with God's Word. Neither can the presumption that to leave GGWO is to step out of God's will or the bearing of false witness against those who left GGWO or questioned its leaders under the label of marking those who cause divisions, etc. Many Christians outside GGWO would think of these practices as evil and wrong. Too many in the GGWO fold have been reprogrammed into thinking that these things are perfectly okay. That leaves no room for reconciliation between actions occuring at GGWO with the truth of the Bible. Unless the GGWO leadership acknowledges that these practices are sinful, truly repents and teaches their members to do the same, there never will be reconciliation.

As far as Bible translations go, that was never clearly commented on when I visited Baltimore or even in my affiliate church. One thing that was very clear though, was that the pastor standing behind that GGWO pulpit was presumed to be the one with the correct interpretation of Scripture or the correct doctrine. Disagreeing with the pastor was the unthinkable. So many GGWO pastors had that arrogant, never get ahead of me thinking you know a verse attitude that Carl Stevens had. Anyone who dared disagree with them did so at their own peril. In a sense, the only correct translation of Scripture in GG land was the Carl Stevens translation.

When any ex members make statements indicating they have close personal relationships with people still in gg, I don't understand. Can anyone make sense of it for me?

I have friends who listen to different music than I do. Read different books, prefer different restaurants or vacation destinations, drive different cars, etc. Despite these and many other differences, we remain friends.

In no small part, our friendship can continue because no one has ever dogmatically proclaimed that anyone who does any of those different things is demonic. Neither my friends nor those they look up to and respect has ever decreed that if I once drove a Ford but now drive a Toyota, it proves I have left the one true car. If I do not hand out flyers for concerts by friends' favorite bands, they don't say I'm backslidden and fear confrontation or similar accusations.

As foolish as these examples are, they're all very real.

"The pulpit" at gg seriously condemns anyone who was once a member and has since left.

Their teachings make it clear that members of any other church have inferior doctrines and practices.

I do not recall a single teaching of theirs which allows people with differences to simply "agree to disagree," without needing to be "right" and thus all who disagree are "wrong."

I'm pretty sure that while I had many acquaintances at gg, I had few if any real friends. We both participated in similar church related activities, which brought us together. I'm happy for you if you had more substance in your relationships; things which have survived your departure from gg.

What I don't understand is: if given an opportunity, your gg friends would no doubt make it clear that their church, pastor and their teachings are among the most important and valuable things in their life. That church, pastor and teaching condemns you if you stop attending. How does that person reconcile the church, pastor and teaching with their friendship with you?

If they value your friendship above the church, pastor and teaching of gg (which doesn't sanction friendship with dissidents), then they're not being faithful to that church, pastor and teaching. Since independent thought is so seriously discouraged at gg, those daring to think for themselves don't last very long.

If they value the church, pastor and teaching more than your friendship -- how do they remain your friend?

I am very serious with these questions. Not trying to provoke a fight -- trying to understand things I've heard from Ironman and others for several years, but can't figure out.

Colt 45 slug?

It never can be reconciled. Actions of the GGWO leadership such as luring people to depend on their supposed GGWO pastor for life as a crutch or as a go-between to reach Christ through can never be reconciled with God's Word.

For a well rehearsed GGer, the answer of dependence upon the methods and traditions employed by GGWO would be :



It is a joy and privilege to serve christ in the body whenever possible.

My vertical with god is expressed best in my local church (ggwo)

If I were not able to make some GG event, someone there would be a lost opportuntity for the anointing to be revealed.

The spiritual covering of the local church is an institution of god. Why would I forfeit that?

There are many other things to do in this life. Serving god in GGWO is my calling.


Someone please help here, I have too much on my mind right now. Its like the bulb burned up but wont go out!

When any ex members make statements indicating they have close personal relationships with people still in gg, I don't understand. Can anyone make sense of it for me?

Centsless isn't it?

If it were possible, everything I wrote yesterday responding to your comments would be easily recollected to my feeble memory. As it is, the slow road of reply shall be useful for something in the future as I hope to sift through various scenarios encountered while drifting in and out of the realm that requires the utmost attention.

Are we listening?

heheehehe dont you miss those little chs expressions that rub the wrong way? Which reminds me of a recent (past month) conversation with a true to the clueless, hardcore, servant of humility that pondered the once upon-a-time of being confronted by pastor about an overgrowth of facial hair (not cleanly shaved?).

Nobody at GG has the GUTZ to say stuff like that now. At least not semi-privately. The pulpit is a nice place to reinforce the paying crowd to agree without a challenge that would risk turning many away as christ did in that new testament book called John.

Just because a gg preacher says a thing doesn't make it true. Just because he's standing behind a pulpit doesn't make it true. Nor does throwing out Bible verses make the preacher's statements true. Just because he says it with a lot of "conviction" in his voice doesn't make it true. Even if he makes a face DARING you to question or challenge his assertion (as Stevens liked to do), that doesn't make the statement(s) true.

The truth is never afraid of an honest question.

I disagree with, or at least question, many of those "well rehearsed GGer answers" you listed. But if I was still in gg, the fact that I dare entertain questions about something a preacher in the pulpit claims would be some sort of "proof" that I was... fill-in-the-blank with the accusation of the day.

Ironman, do you still believe that "if a gg preacher in the pulpit said it, it MUST be true and I MUST 'submit' to it"?

The sad truth is that there is a strong following that believes all that is said from that pulpit (even if not agreed with) still carries the weight of perfect truth. It is believed that because a leader portrays a life according to the bible (the current suitable interpretation), then whatever is said comes directly from GOD for the manipulati...oops spiritual growth and maturity of the assembly as a whole and individually.

If a gg preacher (or anyone with a microphone) says something from the pulpit the strength of their position is magnified due to lack of opposition. Its a crafty way to make a living. I find the ggwo website quite fascinating as it gives the appearance of a megachurch (rightly so if counting people that were confronted in public with standard gg-leaflets or propaganda to show the "real truth" were included).

GGWO gives no room for opposition.

Submit or become marked as an evil dissenter.

Perhaps GGers percieve me as one who has come from among the group to pervert the true way. It is interesting while visiting to test the limits of conversation someone is willing to have. If I have any friends in gg I cannot trust them fully. One that has left, one acquainted or one never involved at all will make a far more trusting relationship because instead of feeding the hungry monster of a cult, a personal level of trust can grow between people. My life was stuck until after many years I could begin to trust people outside of ggwo so that an objective viewpoint could be targeted or at least become a hope.

Although ggwo has a form of doctrine, the difficulty comes when cognitive dissonance is brought to the forefront of ones life and the gg-doctrine is percieved as a balance or cure.