Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Blameless Bishops

  1. #1
    Señor Member Archivist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Far From Babylon
    Posts
    1,582
    Blog Entries
    24

    Blameless Bishops

    Blameless Bishops – Jeromy Visser @ Covenant People's Ministry

    https://www.covenantpeoplesministry.org/
    https://www.patreon.com/covenantpeople

    Blameless Bishops [2017] is the loosely based sequel to "CI Fixation" and the very sermon many pastors "in name only" used in their attempt to remove Visser from the airwaves. Meant to honestly convict the Bible believer this lecture frankly looks at scripture's requirements to be a preacher of Yahweh's Word while also making no apologies for the quotes provided explaining the prerequisites of being an overseer.



    http://archive.org/download/cpm2017/...ss_bishops.mp3
    https://www.covenantpeoplesministry....ss_bishops.mp3

    MP4 | 2017

  2. #2

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    Rep +1.

  3. #3
    Senior Member frey#89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,359
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    Very edifying. The sermon answers a lot of worldliness concerns about right and wrong. Always that coming up short situation. The requirements of a pastor answers those concerns to me. Like someone not having children, being married, or criminal record makes communicating worldly matters to the masses a issue of familiarity. Not a few hand picked friends in matters of leading the remnant of Jesus Christ.
    Not committing to any ideology that replaces the requirements of Yahweh.
    Very good sermon/

  4. #4
    Señor Member Archivist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Far From Babylon
    Posts
    1,582
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    8/29/2017

    Missive to Pastor Visser,

    Hello, Jeromy. Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you, but I had to work Sat; and Sun I was dealing with the tech problems at EFR, plus the fact that Paypal suspended our account, thus impacting donations.

    I did not want to respond to you without going over the Blameless Bishops broadcast, which seems to have triggered all of the vitriol in the chatrooms, of which there was plenty on both sides. So, I am not going to make any judgement based on a forum in which people are trading insults and innuendos. Infighting can happen with the best of people, no matter how hard we try to avoid it.

    The initial problem began with whether we should have Pierce on the air at EFR. As far as I am concerned, you and I had cleared that matter up after I showed you the EFR Disclaimer.

    Then there was the show in which you claimed that you were the only pastor qualified to preach on Paul. I found the statement amusing, but Pastor Steve was highly offended and so were several others. Our conclusion was that such statements lack tact, but are not enough reason to take you off the air. But such a statement makes you appear to everyone that you know better, when, in fact, there are honest disagreements about how we are to understand his admonitions. At this point I would have to make two observations:

    Paul says we are not to be boastful (Romans 11:18).

    We are to conduct ourselves with humility towards the brethren and give no appearance of offense. (I Thes. 5:22)


    There is also the issue of whether unmarried men are suitable as bishops. Although Paul advises bishops be monogamous, he does not say that an unmarried man cannot be a bishop. It would be ironic that an unmarried man (Paul) should be the one to found the various bishoprics. By the way, Yahshua was also unmarried; and He is the Good Shepherd. In my opinion, Paul is only addressing the office of bishop, not pastor or deacon; so his words do not apply to unmarried pastors. I think Paul’s main intention was to say that bishops shouldn’t have more than one wife at a time…for the obvious distractions that multiple wives cause (although I do not speak from personal experience in this case).

    So, from my perspective, even with the discussion of circumcision, we have several honest disagreements of interpretation. What is new is the airing of these issues in two forums and on internet radio, which led to bickering in the chatrooms. I am not blaming you individually, as it is obvious to me that both David and Steve were also breathing fire; but we have never had such disputation before you began to air your positions very strongly on who qualifies as a pastor.

    The Blameless Bishops Sermon

    First, your description includes the statement: Blameless Bishops [2017] is the loosely based sequel to "CI Fixation" and the very sermon many pastors "in name only" used in their attempt to remove Visser from the airwaves.

    Even if this statement is not directly aimed at the other pastors at EFR, it generally impugns anyone who might want you off the air, for any reason. Thus, it logically includes any such person at EFR. Any general statement logically includes individuals, so I can see why Steve, Andy, David and others feel your statements are aimed at them.

    And your sermon starts out by addressing “in the past week certain pastors who tried to get me off the air” because of their disagreement with you about the airing of shows that contain the material of unbelievers. Who else could this be referring to but those of us at EFR?

    But this statement is a false assumption. The issue of your termination was brought up, but we decided, contrary to your assertion, to keep you aboard and see how things go. We had a discussion about your previous show – points of agreement and disagreement - and we agreed to keep you on and see where this leads. But your follow-up show includes this false accusation that we had already decided to remove you. This is borne out by the fact that your time slots were still active up until David removed them on Friday.

    Whatever disagreements we might have about Scripture, it is bad form to go on the air and impugn other “CI pastors.” I disagree with Dan and David about the flat earth theory, but I dealt with both of them on this issue behind the scenes. I warned Pastor Dan not to advocate this idea on EFR, because his credibility would suffer. He disregarded my warning and ridicule was heaped upon him by the chatters, which caused him to resign.

    Your statement that “I’m not one to ever relent” is also ill-advised, because it assumes you are correct and everyone else is wrong. Paul does not say unmarried men cannot be pastors or even bishops. He simply advises that a bishop not have more than one wife. That is how most theologians see the matter; and I tend to agree with them. Here is a good discussion of what Paul meant to convey: http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Fe...e-1-timothy-3/ But you insist that no single men can be pastors, which I feel is putting words in Paul’s mouth.

    So, the bottom line is this: anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. I know you acted in the heat of the moment, but your words are now public domain. Some humility is in order here.

    All of your previous shows have been excellent theological presentations designed to bring the Caucasian Israelites back into the fold. Your last two shows deviated from that format and highlighted your differences with other pastors. Recently, Dan and Steve had a major disagreement over circumcision, but they agreed to not attack each other publicly over this issue. We have honest disagreements over interpretations of Scripture. This is unavoidable, but your last two shows convey the impression that “I know better than them.” This is bad form in any venue, so, if you keep on bringing up disagreements you have with the other pastors, it can only lead to division. At this point none of the other pastors trust you to hold your tongue.

    Likewise, your statement about certain talk show hosts having black guests can only be taken by Andy as a direct attack upon his person. Even though you do not mention his name, he is included in your generalization. The reason Andy interviewed him was to demonstrate that there are black people who agree with us that the races should be separated. In the same way, we quote Jews who expose Jewish criminality. When remonstrant Jews expose the Jew World Order, this only lends credence to our argument.

    Joshua and the leaders of Israel frequently communicated with non-Israelites, even Canaanites who had not lifted their hands against Israel, so there is biblical reason for us to use any statement by anyone to make a point. This does not remotely approach “pushing” them or their ideology. Your constant assertion that this is unbiblical is patently false. Note also that even Yahshua relented and had discourse with the Canaanite woman who was begging Him to heal her daughter. And when she conceded that He is the Messiah, he healed her daughter. Would you criticize Him talking to a Canannite?

    So, there has been a general disagreement between you and the other show hosts as to whether it is legitimate to broadcast non-Identity opinions or to interview non-White guests. My view is that by allowing anti-establishment ethnics, who agree with us about certain aspects of our theology, to express their point of view, we can only demonstrate that our theology is correct. In the case of David Manning, it also demonstrates that we do not hate blacks, as we are daily accused of being “haters” by the perfidious ones. Neither is it objectionable that someone is on America’s Most Wanted list, a joo-controlled list. Paul and Jesus would qualify today.

    I was kicked off of BlogTalk Radio because I was exposing the lies of the holocaust on a show hosted by a black, Scotty. Those shows were so effective in convincing black people that the holocaust is a lie that BTR cancelled my show, even though these statements were made on someone else’s show. The Jews were so afraid that black people might wake up to Jewish perfidy that they had to get me off the air. William Finck then accused me of “preaching to blacks,” which of course is a complete distortion of why I was on the air with Scotty. At no time have I ever suggested that a non-White could become a biblical Christian.

    This is the William Pierce discussion all over again. Are we to expect denunciations by you whenever we interview someone you disapprove of? Given this general difference of opinion, in which you have always been a minority of one, I must accede to the wishes of the other show hosts that consider your presence here as being divisive.

    It saddens me to have to make this decision, but is best that we part company. I wish you well. May Yahweh guide your future endeavors; but I would strongly advise that you not talk about other CI pastors in any future shows, as this will only continue to antagonize others and ruin your own reputation, which was actually very good until you recorded these last two sermons.

    I suggest that you take “CI Fixation” and “Blameless Bishops” off your playlist, as they can only damage your credibility, once people get EFR’s side of the story. Your arguments contain too many theological and factual flaws that are easily refuted or are not as certain as you suppose.

    We will not bring these two sermons up if you don’t.

    I hope the jooz haven’t deactivated your donate button. They are making it tough on all of us.

    Yahweh bless,

    Eli
    Ps. This missive is personal and private and will not be published. Anyone who asks about why you are no longer with EFR will only be told about some of the salient points I have made herein.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    "Beyond the rivers of Ethiopia."
    Posts
    868

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    By the way, Yahshua was also unmarried; and He is the Good Shepherd.
    By the way, Christ was married - still to the Southern Kingdom tribes He didn't divorce !

    They were widowed !

    The divorced and widowed will legally re-marry the Lamb !

  6. #6

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    Amen. There's a reason He's called the Father and Jerusalem is our mother (Galatians 4:26).

    But try explaining that to those guys, lol.
    Suggested CPM Sermon: An Haughty Spirit (September 14th, 2019)

  7. #7

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    Gee, where do I start with this.

    First, how is David given reigns on who can be on or not? I thought EFR was operated by Paul English and Eli, not David. And this was done before a decision was made.

    From what you said in past shows I thought Eli was a good friend and now he wants to part ways? Some friend he is.....

    I guess everyone else is allowed to have disagreements with each other except you...Sounds fair...

    He says if you don't say anything they won't....I'm guessing they will have people watching what you say in future broadcasts.

    On the interviewing and using quotes from nonwhites and jews....Jews are our mortal enemy and we shouldn't care what they think of us. Yes, some may have useful quotes but looking deeper into it they're trying to fool our people. You have zionist and anti-zionist jews, but what people don't realize is they're two sides of the same coin. The so-called Christian truthers will willingly accept antizionists. I am guilty of in the past using quotes and listening to the likes of Nathanial on Youtube ect, but done with that. We need to stay away from them. As far as waking up blacks and other nonwhites to the jew what's the point? Our people need to be woken up.

    I'm guessing the nonwhite issue stems from the fact that Eli and others believe we will reign over the nonwhites in the future. What's your take on this issue if I may ask?

    The woman at the well is not even a good argument? She came to Jesus, not the other way around. I don't believe all of the sudden Manning had an urge to contact anyone in CI when he teaches blacks are from Ham.

    In my own opinion as an outsider looking in, I think there are other things that have happened between you and these others guys that weren't brought up in the chat.

    Anyway, I thought I'd just give some of my thoughts on it.

    Yahweh Bless!

  8. #8

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    Quote Originally Posted by Erik View Post
    The woman at the well is not even a good argument? She came to Jesus, not the other way around.
    Good point. Scripture says she was clearly a Greek in Mark 7:26.

    Eli claiming she was somehow "nonwhite" is just telling on himself, I think.

  9. #9
    Senior Member frey#89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,359
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    I would like to add a opinion on everyday life as compared to a blameless bishop. Married couples with children want to privileges of being single or without children and then the sin of a house out of order. At the same time single people or childless marriages want the privileges of of being a father, mother, community leader with all the earned respect without the responsibility or risks.
    The sermon explains a lot of disorder in our christian and secular societies. A life of disorder only leads the person and their friends into misery and sin. All men and women are under Yahweh's controls.

  10. #10

    Re: Blameless Bishops

    Friends,

    I've finally finished this sermon (as per Seedliner’s request) and am surprised there was any fallout over this 100% scripurally sound lecture. The teaching that a pastor must be married with children has been Christian history for thousands of years and I suggest anybody “offended” at quotations from the Word Christ Himself will find offense in that person during judgement. Papa Pete used to preach along these lines many times during the nineties so I’m somewhat confused about needless controversy relating to “Blameless Bishops.”

    I’d love to hear a debate between Visser and November on the requirements of being a preacher but somehow feel that’s why you were so quickly silenced and not allowed a right of reply in the first place. For that reason I’ve added my support to the overwhelming positive feedback by giving this video a thumbs up on YouTube. Great sermon, very edifying.

    I’m always listening because it’s refreshing to hear uncompromising preaching, brothers. Anyway, that's my opinion. Take it for what it's worth.

    Jesus bless you all.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •