Forum for ex-members of Revival Churches
Revival_Centres_Discussion_Forums > Revival Churches > The Revival Fellowship (TRF) Discussion Go to subcategory:
Author Content
Didaktikon
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Date Posted:15/01/2011 3:40 AMCopy HTML

Good afternoon, all.

Life often proves to be much stranger than fiction. It would appear that the serial pest formerly known as Luke 7:35/God's Word Matters/Mothman's Ghost/Demetrius/Demetrius Diotrophes; more properly our good friend and recently erstwhile Revivalist Anthony Barton of Shell Harbour, has been a party to yet another Revivalist schism.

Those of us who've been active on this forum for a while will remember Tony Barton's much publicised on-again-off-again love/hate affair with the RF. The one minute he was in, the next minute he was out, all the while he was assuring us that he wasn't a Revivalist. Matters were eventually such that Tony teamed up with former RCI Illawarra 'pastor' Ron Frost in establishing of their own brand of Revivalism on the NSW south coast, which they called 'His Way'. The URL to their website being
http://www.hiswayfamilyfellowship.websyte.com.au/site.cfm?/hiswayfamilyfellowship/4/. Moving forward a year or two and it appears that Tony can't abide Ron any longer; the two have experienced a 'falling out' in recent times. Not surprisingly Mr Barton viewed this disagreement as being tantamount to Mr Frost 'falling away' from the faith, and so he felt compelled to demonise the latter online. 'Pastor' Barton had the following to say about his one-time 'ministry' partner at http://moderndayhereticwatchdog.aimoo.com:

Ronald Frost is a former Revival Centres International (RCI) Pastor. Please Note: The Revival Centre is classified as a Cult. (See http://rc.cultweb.net) for an overview of their abuses. He is now a (self proclaimed) Pastor of a small group (mostly family members) in Kiama Downs in the Illawarra. He is a professional salesman and this accounts for most of his converts. However due to his general lack of understanding of scripture and judgemental nature any converts usually leave shortly after joining his group. The name of his church is "hisway church" which would be better termed "Ron's way" given that the doctrines he espouses are totally his own creation and not supported by any other group or the Bible for that matter . His views can be seen on his website "hisway.net.au" they are similar to views held by white suppremists in the 1950s in the Southern United Stated and this makes his group particularly dangerous.

[update: the above statement was removed from the website when 'Pastor' Barton became aware that it had been replicated on this site]

I find it ironic and distasteful that Mr Barton classifies the RCI as a 'cult', and now Mr Frost's efforts, but ignores his own. It's distasteful because the Barton/Frost approach is thoroughly Revivalist in both form and function. Ironcically, Mr Barton chastised his partner-in-'ministry' as being a self-proclaimed pastor. This in spite of readily acknowledging that Frost was formerly a credentialed minister in the RCI. Such doesn't apply to Tony Barton, however. Prior to starting his own 'church' Tony Barton was never recognised or credentialled as a 'minister' in any organisation. So just who actually is the self-proclaimed 'pastor'?

But what of Mr Barton's assessment that Mr Ron Frost is an unreliable guide to Scripture, and that he's overly judgmental by nature? Well, neutrality compels me to point out that such a statement very clearly becomes a case of the 'pot' calling the 'kettle', 'black'. There are scores of posts on this forum from Tony's keyboard (under a wealth of pseudonyms), which paints a very clear portrait of his incapacity to rightly divide the Word of Truth, as well as his penchant for directing scathing personal attacks against those who disagree with him. There's also the fact of the timing of the breaking of fellowship to consider. Mr Barton was apparently quite happy being teamed up with Frost in joint Revivalist 'ministry' for several years, but with the dissolution of association comes the inevitable criticism of his former pal's skills. Finally, my take on Barton's quip that 'His Way' should  better be thought of as 'Ron's Way', is that it seems much more appropriate to view things as 'Tony's Way or the 'Highway!'

Hypocrite about sums it up.

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
MothandRust Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:41380
  • Posts:1877
  • From:Australia
  • Register:27/02/2004 11:21 PM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:15/01/2011 12:08 PMCopy HTML

Oh wow.

Beware anyone ally themselves with Barton Fink lest ye fall into the trap of disagreeing with his BYO doctrines (build your own) and getting either a hate forum (or two) dedicated to you, or your 'picture' and a childish lambasting on one of said boards.

What a twit.
[LINK SiteName=Mothrust: Movies and Modern Myth Target=_blank]http://aintchristian.blogspot.com.au/[/LINK] Be nice, for everyone that you meet is fighting a harder battle - Anita Roddick
Pastor_Tony Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Australia
  • Register:02/04/2010 7:27 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:17/07/2011 9:40 PMCopy HTML

Hi Ian: I do understand that you may have some critisisms concerning my dealings Mr Frost. For the record I tried for several months to remedy Ron's wayward beliefs but this became increasingly impossible. You stated in your post "Barton was apparently quite happy being teamed up with Frost in joint Revivalist 'ministry' for several years, but with the dissolution of association comes the inevitable criticism of his former pal's skills". This statement is untrue. Our association only lasted a bit over a year of which much of the time was spent trying to correct the many RCI indoctrinations. You yourself have spent much time in opposition to the RCI the difference being that my approach is to deal with individuals personally rather than mud throwing from the keyboard. You simply are not coming from a position of having sufficient knowledge of the detail of event to speak intelligently. I would suggest you read Acts 5:38 and follow the Bible directive. Blessings Pastor Tony
Wisdom is Justified by all her children Luke 7:35
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #3
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:17/07/2011 10:11 PMCopy HTML

Tony,

You're naught but a pretentious hypocrite. The invective about your former partner-in-heresy that you smeared over at your vanity site is reproduced here, so please, don't waste our time attempting another revisionist re-writing of history on this forum (we all know how you respond to those with whom you have a falling out).

How long will it be before you start three or four 'counter-Frost' sites, eh? (per Acts 5:38?) And then having done so, how long will it take before you engage in your long-standing habit of using multiple aliases to lend apparent support your baseless opinions? And what of your hollow claim to dealing with people personally, rather than via your keyboard? Well, it seems to me that you used the latter rather effectively to do a hatchet job on your former bud Ron. Obviously you took the offending post down only after I referred to it here, so it seems that you're still playing fast-and-loose with the truth. I'm not surprised.

In conclusion, 'Pastor' Tony? No, I don't think so. 'Passed-over' Tony is more truthful. You're an embarassment to the office and title of 'pastor', even by Revivalist standards. Still, you admirably serve as a text-book warning to all who'd follow self-appointed religious 'ministers', so it's not all bad I suppose.

Goose.

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Mr_Jingles Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #4
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:USA
  • Register:29/09/2010 2:43 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:18/07/2011 1:31 AMCopy HTML


Again your response to Pastor Tony shows your wayward motivations.

It seems to me that Pastor Tony was simply holding one of his Pastors accountable for their actions. Had he not done so would he not have been guilty of the same errors of the RCI, RF and GRC?

Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't huh?

I also searched for the reference to the comments made and could not find them. I can only assume that they have been removed, retracted or your link is wrong.

Further, If the behaviour of Ron Frost was such as requiring discharge from his pastoral position would it not warrant such a warning on a "heretic watchdog" website?

To me, upon reading the material on Ron's website a warning of sorts was necessary. Whacko stuff!

mj

Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #5
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:18/07/2011 1:55 AMCopy HTML

Jingles,

Again your response to Pastor Tony shows your wayward motivations. A little free advice: given that you're obviously not particularly well informed about this matter, perhaps you should suspend judgment until you're more fully appraised of the facts.

It seems to me that Pastor Tony was simply holding one of his Pastors accountable for their actions. Had he not done so would he not have been guilty of the same errors of the RCI, RF and GRC? 'Pastor' Tony? I don't believe you properly understand the situation. Ron Frost wasn't Tony's subordinate 'pastor', but his superior. The two of them made a 'pigeon pair' as it were, the only difference between them being that Ron Frost actually was a credentialled RCI pastor (Tony apparently arrogated to himself the title). Now given that Mr Barton is a Revival 'clone' in both form and function, I suppose he is guilty of precisely the same errors propagated by the RCI, the RF and the GRC that you worried yourself about (hence the marvellous irony of your statement).

I also searched for the reference to the comments made and could not find them. I can only assume that they have been removed, retracted or your link is wrong. 'Yes'. I indicated why the offending material was removed; didn't you notice? Further, If the behaviour of Ron Frost was such as requiring discharge from his pastoral position would it not warrant such a warning on a "heretic watchdog" website? Shouldn't that read, "... the behavour of 'Pastor' Ron Frost"? Surely what's good for the goose should be just as good for the other goose? But really, 'discharged' from his 'pastoral' position? Ron Frost wasn't 'discharged', Jingles. Tony, the man whom you would apparently support and defend, simply broke fellowship (and faith) with Frost, and then set about publicly pillorying him at one of his many vanity forae (i.e. the 'heretics-are-us' one).

To me, upon reading the material on Ron's website a warning of sorts was necessary. Whacko stuff! Indeed it is. But don't you find it even remotely intriguing that said 'whacko' material was actually supported by 'pastor' Tony Barton? In fact there's ample evidence of Mr Barton's equally ridiculous beliefs in various of the threads of this forum, as well as on his own. Are you suggesting that there's a difference between the two men of kind, rather than degree? If you are, I think you'd have a difficult time substantiating as much.

Goose.

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #6
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:18/07/2011 2:27 AMCopy HTML


Tony,why are you now posting as pastor tony? what happened to your old nickname?
Are you enjoying the prestige of your title?
Who gave you the title?
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #7
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:18/07/2011 1:12 PMCopy HTML

Tony,

I just couldn’t let these comments go through to the keeper Ian. I would suggest you take your own advice here big-fella. As we will see you have once again missed the mark by the proverbial mile. Let's test your claim, shall we?

'Pastor' Tony? I don't believe you properly understand the situation. Ron Frost wasn't Tony's subordinate 'pastor', but his superior. This was never the case from day one; Ron approached me with his misgivings about the RCI morals doctrine and asked to fellowship UNDER ME as HIS Pastor. He had all but decided to resign from pastoring. I requested he remain a pastor in order to assist me in the establishment of a "middle of the road" family church where Orthodox Christians could feel comfortable to come and worship and where the church leadership actually preached the “FULL GOSPEL” and not the “lukewarm” version you so fondly espouse. It seems that your recollection of Ron's role runs contrary to what I've heard from other sources. Coincidently, perhaps you might explain why Ron's name and contact details were always listed first on your website(s)? Why he, as 'pastor', was always listed first on the promotional material of your sect? And perhaps you can explain why a former RCI pastor would willingly submit to someone who was largely unknown, and who had never exercised a pastoral ministry? And while you're at it you might want to take a moment to check what's inferred by the term 'Orthodox' (i.e. capital 'O' rather than lower case 'o').

The two of them made a 'pigeon pair' as it were, the only difference between them being that Ron Frost actually was a credentialed RCI pastor (Tony apparently arrogated to himself the title). Yes indeed, credentialed a RCI Pastor, something to highlight in one’s resume huh! The fact of the matter is that in 1995 when Lloyd Longfield introduced that UNSCRIPTURAL” doctrine any RCI person worth their salt should have left. The fact that Ron was so long a RCI pastor was more a hindrance than a help to his cause. The fact of the matter is that any RCI person worth their salt owning a Bible should've left long before 1995. In any case, can I take it that your 'yes indeed' admission extends to the second fact that I pointed out, too?

Now given that Mr Barton is a Revival 'clone' in both form and function, I suppose he is guilty of precisely the same errors propagated by the RCI, the RF and the GRC that you worried yourself about (hence the marvellous irony of your statement). Sigh…Ian you continually cite wrong behaviour by individual pastors and assert that any who hold to the Acts 2:38 salvation message as being carbon copies. But who mentioned behaviour? I was inferring a common Revivalist 'doctrine' by my comments. The two are mutually exclusive and you know it. 'Mutually exclusive'?! Are they? And why? Light and darkness are mutually exclusive concepts. Day and night, life and death, spiritual and carnal and the catgeories of truth and falsehood are 'mutually exclusive' propositions. But I altogether fail to see why, or how, the promotion of heresy and the inevitably poor behaviour evidenced in Revivalism must NECESSARILY invoke a claim to being 'mutually exclusive'. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning? Your equating me with the GRC for example is like someone saying ALL Police are corrupt because there are many corrupt ones out there. Would it though? Why? My reasoning is simple enough, even you could follow it, and it goes thus: (1) bad theology leads to bad beliefs. (2) Bad beliefs lead to bad ethics. (3) Bad ethics lead to bad behaviours. EVERY SINGLE Revivalist sect has demonstrated the truth of this general premise over the years. Your own sect has too, if your personally deceitful, double-minded and schismatic behaviour is any indication.
 
Almost 99% of the complaints about Revivalism are behavioural. You use this and the victims hurt to further your doctrines. THIS FACT IS OBVIOUS TO ALL BUT YOU & YOUR DISCIPLES HERE. Working backwards from outcome to first principles: (1) bad behaviours result from bad ethics. (2) Bad ethics result from bad beliefs. (3) Bad beliefs are consequent upon bad theology. Ipso facto, your untested claim to '99% of the complaints about Revivalism' have, as their originating basis, bad theology outworked practically. You might wish to ruminate on another of my premises: 'Revivalist exclusivism inevitably leads to Revivalist exclusionism'. Apparently this fact isn't lost on those countless numbers of former members who've been on the receiving end of so-called Revivalist 'grace' put into practice. I'd suggest, therefore, that a change of one's perspective can be enlightening with respect to making sense of one's circumstances. Your perspective is simply much too narrow.

'Yes'. I indicated why the offending material was removed; didn't you notice? Further, If the behaviour of Ron Frost was such as requiring discharge from his pastoral position would it not warrant such a warning on a "heretic watchdog" website? Shouldn't that read, "... the behavour of 'Pastor' Ron Frost"? Surely what's good for the goose should be just as good for the other goose? But really, 'discharged' from his 'pastoral' position? Ron Frost wasn't 'discharged', Jingles. Tony, the man whom you would apparently support and defend, simply broke fellowship (and faith) with Frost, and then set about publicly pillorying him at one of his many vanity forae (i.e. the 'heretics-are-us' one). Where do I start with that jumbled mess of nonsense??? Well if it is nonsense as you've claimed, then proving as much shouldn't be too hard for you to do. History conclusively demonstrates that you like to make verbose, multicoloured responses, so have at it. Prove the statement wrong.

“To me, upon reading the material on Ron's website a warning of sorts was necessary. Whacko stuff!” Firstly Jingles, I agree but you don’t know the half of it. Good that you don’t! (And it's probably just as good that I do) Indeed it is. But don't you find it even remotely intriguing that said 'whacko' material was actually supported by 'pastor' Tony Barton? Nope! If you read Ron’s website (http://hisway.net.au) you will find that none of what he stated is or has ever been supported by me. In fact Ron came up with this heresy as a result of what he calls a special revelation from God in the early hours of the morning. He alone has been given this revelation and one need only read his website for the red flags to be waving high and loud! Bloke, one only needs to read your missives scattered across the internet for those very same red flags to be waving furiously. And what of your 'special revelations'? You claim to being biblically astute and informed, and yet you've not been able to successfully rebut any of the scriptural and theological challenges to your beliefs that I, and several others, have made. If what you believe is true, then why have you not been able to establish this?

In fact there's ample evidence of Mr Barton's equally ridiculous beliefs in various of the threads of this forum, as well as on his own. Are you suggesting that there's a difference between the two men of kind, rather than degree? If you are, I think you'd have a difficult time substantiating as much. I beg to differ. Don't simply 'beg', demonstrate. BTW The people in our fellowship came out of Orthodox religion and have never been happier. Just ask them. May I? As I'd really love to. Perhaps you can get all six of them together in one place, at the one time and invite me along as guest speaker? But might I ask, which Orthodox religion did your followers come out of? The Greek? The Russian? The Armenian? The Coptic? The Syrian?

Oh that’s right; you only prey on the week don’t you…oops! (Oops alright) You would apparently number yourself among the weak whom I supposedly prey upon! Some admissions are clearly in order. I'll admit that I pray during the week, and I'll admit that I pray for the weak, but the principle sticking point seems to be the fact that I target those whose theological positions are weak: those who think more highly of themselves and their silly heretical beliefs than the facts warrant. Those very much like you, it seems :)

Goose.

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #8
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:'Loopy Lukie' Tony Barton's latest schism

Date Posted:19/07/2011 7:09 AMCopy HTML

Tony,

I have a little time so I will attend to your quiries a little at a time. It seems that your recollection of Ron's role runs contrary to what I've heard from other sources. What sources are these? 2nd hand?, third hand? Biased? RCI what?? Sources well acquainted with you, Ron and the events as they transpired. Whether or not they're biased is an open question.

Cards on the table, Ron is generally a good guy who found himself in a pastoral role in the RCI basically in the absence of a viable alternative some 12-13 years ago. This continued for the most part in isolation from the main body of the RCI and allowed an otherwise troubled individual to maintain a handfull (less than a dozen) people in consistant fellowship. Subordination was and is NOT a strength of Ron's and our relationship was contingent on Ron's subordination to myselt. (take it or leave it). This is how I presented our relationship to him. I wonder though. Given what you've shared thus far, do you think that subordination to others is a particular strength of yours? By the way, successful relationships, whether marital or ministerial, aren't based on one party being subordinate to the other. For such relationships to work effectively all parties need to be equally and mutually accountable. If you understood Scripture half as well as you claimed, then you would have recognised that the New Testament model of the Christian congregation doesn't involve one man calling the shots; neither Christian fellowship nor leadership is contingent on 'take-it-or-leave-it' obedience, you twit.

He was in a state of wanting to hang up the boots anyway when he made contact with me through a mutual friend. 'Yes', and I'd wager he rues that day. The troubling aspect from my perspective was the measure to which he felt at ease to judge people, this had all the earmarks of RCI dogma and was not compatable with what we were trying to present to the lost in our community. And you think the way that you judge others is materially different?! Sorry, but it's very hard for me to read your hypocritical assessment of Ron without chuckling ;)

Coincidently, perhaps you might explain why Ron's name and contact details were always listed first on your website(s)? Why he, as 'pastor', was always listed first on the promotional material of your sect? Such things matter little in my mind, in fact I hadn't even noticed such a thing until you raise it. I will just have to take your word for it Ian. No you don't. You can actually check. Anyway I designed the website and I wrote ALL of the content. I placed the contact details and not one letter of any of our literature eminated from any source by my keyboard. 'Yes', I'm fully aware of that. It's for precisely this reason that you're in my sights rather than Ron. The proverbial "Buck" stops with me and me alone. As far a subliminal messages that you read into this or that, I cannot comment on these constructs of your imagination. So, 'pastor Buck', who has been reading 'subliminal messages' into 'this' or 'that'? Me? Or you?

And perhaps you can explain why a former RCI pastor would willingly submit to someone who was largely unknown, and who had never exercised a pastoral ministry? Without wanting to blow my own trumpet and with all due humility it was because he believed my handle on scripture to be exeptionally high. (Perhaps I should say my handle on Revivalist salvation doctrine was high) We both know what you think about that. Indeed we do. Your understanding of Scripture is particularly poor, and your capacity to handle the same legitimately, even poorer. As for your supposed 'humility', well ...

Either way this proved to be a major stumbling block for him because for 12 years the fellowship generally revolved around Ron and this loss of attention and agolation was ultimately too much for him to cope with. By 'agolation' did you mean 'adulation'? If so, how are you coping with the 'adulation' that the self-designated title of 'pastor' brings you? How are you coping with the 'adulation' that comes from being the 'main man' of your own 'brand' of heretical sect? ... And while you're at it you might want to take a moment to check what's inferred by the term 'Orthodox' (i.e. capital 'O' rather than lower case 'o'). Whether "O" or "o" they are just two different shades of grey. What the two words describe are remarkably different entitites, and your ignorance of the distinction speaks volumes. They are both as lukewarm as each other. This is about as accurately as I can present it. I don't think 'accurate' appropriately describes such woefully ignorant commentary. I pray that Ron's walk gets back on track and that he might find the peace that he once knew. But at the moment at least he is a danger to himself and all who would hear him. Have a read of his website and you will see (and make this determination) for yourself. To be perfectly frank I see no difference in the risk to others between the nonsense that he promotes, and the nonsense that you promote. People will end up just as dead spiritually from either source.

I do not think it is fair to Ron and to go into any great detail in such a forum as this; however I did feel that some clarification of my earlier comments were necessary. Given your penchant for creating forae for no other reason than to target individuals with whom you disagree, I'm impressed! However, I believe a wholesale revision of your beliefs is more necessary than you claifying certain of your former comments.

Pastor Tony. Oh, yes ... 'pastor'. Clearly you've failed to comprehend the term 'pastor' describes a role and not a title. Please, if you're not prepared to be informed and sensible, at least make an effort to be humble.

Goose.

Ian
email: didaktikon@gmail.com
RCI prophesies
Copyright © 2000-2019 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.