ucmpage.gif (9365 bytes)


Answer to the Sprague Christian Premise

by Wayne Mayfield

In all my writings I constantly warn that we, as mere men, must not rely on supposition or human intellect completely. Nor are we to rely on social agenda for our interpretation to those things both sacred and holy. We must have more than intuition, more than reason, and definitely more than mere human experience to properly know the mysteries of faith. Sprague, on the other hand, has a Job-ian mentality that Job himself was forced to repent from. The same mentality was at the tower of Babel. What was that mentality man has constantly shoved in the face of God-ness? "WE, man," or in our philosophical rhetoric, Modern Man, as though the universe will bow to us instead of God (or at least equally; sounds Satanic, huh?).

In one way Sprague slyly says we can not hold God-ness in the human creature, yet on the other hand he proposes God-ness almost is attainable by the human creature through special knowledge. By what other power than his evidential power would he find self divinity? Jesus, as just another wise man, more endowed to understanding, and having discovered the magic formula to heal at will, why doesn’t Sprague, with his knowledge, relieve us of our social ills? Two drunks have done more for our society with the 12-Step Program than Sprague with his philosophy. These two founders discovered something that heals. On the other hand, Sprague creates division that cuts, slanders the greatest hope for man, and in his slippery evasion of truth (heresy), buries all of us into the realms of self deceit and false hope in our human-ness. Shame!

In reality, what Sprague does with his sly rhetoric is hint at his superior awakening to absolute truths while manipulating and slipping arrogantly past the real issues; true divinity and God‘s true authority to respond as He wisely deems good for all. Obviously, Sprague is not well founded in Hebraic Thought or the methodology of Jesus in addressing the Hebraic issues he never learned. Ron Morrison and Brad Young should be contact points of higher knowledge for Sprague. Of course, being somewhat anti-Semitic while performing semantics (verbal gestures), implies the Jews are not very smart about their language or scripture like him. So let’s look at the lack of superior knowledge of Sprague.

If God was not free to be flesh then surely Sprague can not assert that God can live in flesh as the Holy Spirit. I suppose then, that Sprague would also assert that the life-ness breathed into Adam is metaphorical and God lied to Moses, for the word "Ruah" in Hebrew means "Spirit" as in breath or wind. So, is Sprague then asserting that there is really not a triune God? Is God then not really the boss of the whole of creation and tied His own hands to obey Sprague’s law? That is exactly what he proposes to the needy creature of man who needs life-ness at all levels, especially spiritual. His assertions destroy the Holy Spirit dwelling in man. We, under Sprague’s assertions, can not really be a living temple (tabernacle or dwelling place) for God. He stupidly, as God, tied His own hands to an intimate relationship with us.

Furthermore, Jesus then was a liar when He said the Father would give us His Spirit. This makes the most Holy Prayer ever prayed a rouse in Sprague’s own type of figurative language that lives by metaphor more than by literal meanings. Sounds like Origen to me and his metaphorical interpretations to the Bible. Very much like Montanism when Paul Samota was deposed for his belief that scantily dressed, dancing women of the faith was glorious worship. Being a form of Paganism, Samota’s premise of allegory was very much lacking to the truth like Sprague’s.

But, let us not stop here. Consider that donkey’s can’t talk either. Were God’s hands were tied there too? Was the jackass human then and able to talk? If this be the case, then Jesus could be God. By Sprague’s definition, it must have been a phantom, direct lie, or allegorical? And of course, men don’t walk through fire, that would defy the creative order, and so this too must be allegorical because God’s hands are tied by how He chose to create.

How come the dead aren’t raised in other religions? So, once dead, because of how God created the universe, it was illusion, because He is powerless to use His power to raise Jesus. Guess Sprague might be translated like Enoch. "Oops, that doesn’t jive with the creative order either." Sprague might not see Glory, then. Sad!

Is Sprague nothing more than a Stoic? The Sadducees were, for they believed morality was dictated by interpretation, not for what the law "really" said or the scriptures claimed. For this reason, they had the philosophy that it is better to get what you can now with some morality (better to look good than be good) because even heaven wasn’t guaranteed. I believe this is the greatest charge Jesus asserts against the Sadducees. Maybe Sprague is just a specially endowed Sadducee sprinkled with special grace. So, is heaven a reality, though it is not physical, to Sprague? Perhaps he has some crystals with special power to help him stay so aloof in his hope.

It is not hard to reason a lie. It is not hard to have mental masturbation tickling the fantasies of ones inner ear. It is not hard to use language and sly connotations to lull the ears of the unsuspecting into a non-spiritual reality that appears supernatural. Cults derive this kind of activity into their ritualism. But, Paganism is still Paganism, no matter the form. Self actualization of modern times has stolen Sprague’s spiritual mind (if he ever really had one) and I really believe he just speaks and invents to hear his own mind tickle his ears when he opens his mouth. His thoughts sound so good to him everybody must love it. This is a disgrace to the power and the truth God so loved us with! And, this is a disgrace to the church, of the highest order!

A lot of Sprague’s views really seem to be Zorastorianism in a new form.*  Sprague doesn’t address the true need of the human creature and leaves us ever separate from true God-ness. Rhetoric died in the middle ages, and so did the lack of systematic truth. The Jews are very consistent on most issues, even as Christians are. So, what do we call Sprague’s new religion? I know; Sprague’s Wise Folly, which should make his ego feel right at home. I probably didn’t tickle his ears but there may be a little smoke from the fire emitting itself from the mind that tickles them. We should hope!

* I’m not trying to slander Zorastor, for we know he believed in the actual divinity of God that would triumph over all. He also did not relieve mankind of responsibility for our self imposed ignorance as Sprague surely does in his "rights" of man rhetoric.

Wayne Mayfield, Pastor, Godseed Project; www.godseedproject.com
Copyright Protected:

Click here to email this page to a friend.


<Back to News