Does this sound like a couple people we knew???

[Jim]

In every generation there are those of an officious spirit who aspire to leadership, demanding deference from their fellows. Such men, especially when they are endowed with natural gifts above the average, are the kind who become the founders of new sects and parties, and insist upon unqualified subjection from their followers. Their interpretation of the Scriptures must not be challenged, their dicta are final. They must be owned as “rabbis” and submitted to as “fathers”. Everyone must believe precisely what they teach, and order all details of his life by the rules of conduct which they prescribe, or else be branded as a heretic and denounced as a gratifier of the lusts of the flesh. There have been, and still are, many such self-elevated little popes in Christendom, who deem themselves to be entitled to implicit credence and obedience, whose decisions must be accepted without question. They are nothing but an arrogant usurper, for Christ alone is the Rabbi or Master of Christians; and since all of His disciples are “brethren” they possess equal rights and privileges. No man is to be heeded in spiritual matters any further than he can produce a plain and decisive “thus saith the Lord” as the foundation of his appeal. “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (I Peter 4:11). Rather than conform to the rules of the Pharisees, Christ was willing to be regarded as a Sabbath-breaker! Paul’s work was to instruct and persuade, not to lord it over his converts and compel their belief. The elders are divinely forbidden to abuse their position and to assume any absolute authority or rule imperiously over the saints. They are not to act arbitrarily or in a domineering spirit, nor engage in any conversation that is not seasoned with grace, but instead to speak only the truth in love for the edification of the flock allotted to their charge. The Lord will not long tolerate a tyrannical spirit in His pulpit, nor any who are arrogant, rumormongers, or dictators to the consciences of His children, violating their precious spiritual liberties. —A.W. Pink, from chapter 11 of Practical Christianity

Sorry for no paragraph breaks. This is the way I found it.

[dmiller]

In every generation there are those of an officious spirit who aspire to leadership, demanding deference from their fellows. Such men, especially when they are endowed with natural gifts above the average, are the kind who become the founders of new sects and parties, and insist upon unqualified subjection from their followers.

Their interpretation of the Scriptures must not be challenged, their dicta are final. They must be owned as “rabbis” and submitted to as “fathers”. Everyone must believe precisely what they teach, and order all details of his life by the rules of conduct which they prescribe, or else be branded as a heretic and denounced as a gratifier of the lusts of the flesh.

There have been, and still are, many such self-elevated little popes in Christendom, who deem themselves to be entitled to implicit credence and obedience, whose decisions must be accepted without question. They are nothing but an arrogant usurper, for Christ alone is the Rabbi or Master of Christians; and since all of His disciples are “brethren” they possess equal rights and privileges.

No man is to be heeded in spiritual matters any further than he can produce a plain and decisive “thus saith the Lord” as the foundation of his appeal. “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (I Peter 4:11). Rather than conform to the rules of the Pharisees, Christ was willing to be regarded as a Sabbath-breaker! Paul’s work was to instruct and persuade, not to lord it over his converts and compel their belief.

The elders are divinely forbidden to abuse their position and to assume any absolute authority or rule imperiously over the saints. They are not to act arbitrarily or in a domineering spirit, nor engage in any conversation that is not seasoned with grace, but instead to speak only the truth in love for the edification of the flock allotted to their charge.

The Lord will not long tolerate a tyrannical spirit in His pulpit, nor any who are arrogant, rumormongers, or dictators to the consciences of His children, violating their precious spiritual liberties. —A.W. Pink, from chapter 11 of Practical Christianity [/i]

It's easier to read now. ;)

Edited May 19, 2008 by dmiller

[waysider]

I was thinking something more like this:

Carny — Someone who works in a carnival. The term is also applied to the carnival itself. This by way of Todd Robbins: "As Chris Christ put it, 'Ward [Hall] and I are showmen. Don't call us carnies. Carnies are junky ride jockeys that are here today and gone tomorrow. The difference between a carny and a showman is the difference between chicken dang and chicken salad!' And as someone who has tried at times to emulate them, I [ed.] can tell you that there is a vast difference between framing an attraction and being showman enough to present it effectively to the public.

[Ham]

I thought it went like this:

In every generation there are those of an officious spirit who aspire to (buy their way into) leadership, demanding deference from their fellows. Such (so-called) men, especially when they are (under the self-delusion that they are) endowed with natural gifts above the average (when reality surely dictates otherwise), are the kind who (by chance and dumb luck, by happenstance and perhaps just being at the wrong place at the right time) become the founders of new (though not new, as their "fellows" have been subject to these misbegotten) sects and parties (since the beginning of time), and insist upon unqualified subjection from their followers (as no "members" are allowed).

[Dot Matrix]

Sounds VERY Martindale

[jen-o]

i thought of vpw when i read it...

at least martindale got some judgement in this life... and therefore, has a shot at repentance...

but those who are not judged in this lifetime, must be judged sometime (and one cannot repent after he is gone)...

the judgement that comes after this life is far worse... i don't envy vpw...

[JeffSjo]

Great post Jim,

For me, these things seem as if they were written long ago, judging by style anyway. Do you have any reference at all for this? I think that it might be a nice read.

(a little added for clarity)

Edited May 20, 2008 by JeffSjo

[RumRunner]

That one was so funny I was LOL at the keyboard - Thanks as always waysider

I was thinking something more like this:

Carny — Someone who works in a carnival. The term is also applied to the carnival itself. This by way of Todd Robbins: "As Chris Christ put it, 'Ward [Hall] and I are showmen. Don't call us carnies. Carnies are junky ride jockeys that are here today and gone tomorrow. The difference between a carny and a showman is the difference between chicken dang and chicken salad!' And as someone who has tried at times to emulate them, I [ed.] can tell you that there is a vast difference between framing an attraction and being showman enough to present it effectively to the public.

[JeffSjo]

Oops, I just saw that the reference was included in the post.

[polar bear]

Sounds like the script to a horror film to me.

[JustThinking]

Sounds like the script to a horror film to me.

Potential titles:

A Few (Less) Good men

Dumb And Dumber

The King and I

All The Kings (Wo)Men

I'm just sayin"...