Place your banner ad here.          See all banner ads

|| ConcernedMembers.com || About || Links Library || Help Warn Others ||
|| Madison Church of Christ || Richland Hills Church of Christ || Hillcrest Church of Christ || More Churches || Sunday School in Exile ||

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
John Rebman
(no login)
66.42.219.73

Re: Is this Change.

July 15 2005, 2:11 PM 

Romans 10: 7-12 is a wonderful text, but it is not the core of the doctrine of "Justification."
The question must be asked:
Does biblical justification make us righteous or does it declare us righteous when we, in fact, are not?

The Bible teaches that there are two possible ways to be just. Romans 10:1-3; Philippans 3:9.
a. By law. To be declared righteous when and because one actually is righteous. This was the righteousness of Christ.
b. By grace. To be declared righteous even though we are not and can never hope to be. Romans 4:5.

The Bible teaches that the GROUND of justification, the DEATH of Jesus (Romans 5:9; 3:21-26). The righteousness of Christ was not only His perfectly sinless life, it culminates in His perfect obedience to the Father in voluntary submission to the cross on our behalf.

The announcement of this way of justification is the heart or foundation of the Gospel (Romans 1:16,17; 1 Cor. 1:18-25). In this plan He takes our sins (on the cross) and we take His righteousness (2 Cor 5:21).

The righteousness of Jesus is imputed to the obedient sinner (James 2:23,24). This righteousness that has been attributed to us in Christ must be understood as the way God see us in Christ, not as what we actually are.
To this I might add to the finger pointers in the church of Christ who have become so self righteous, that in their own mind have seated themselves at the Lord's right hand: take note of the term "imputed righteousness!"

Acts 22:16 must be understood in the light of Old Testament ceremonial purification. When ceremonial sprinkling was done, it did not miraculously change the person, only his standing before God and the people.

The Bible teaches: the MEANS of our justification, FAITH, (Romans 3:28; 4:3).
Faith is the sinner's response. The act of faith does not contribute to the righteousness that makes us acceptable to a righteous God.
That is Christ's alone. The reception of the free gift does not detract from its gracious character.

The ESSENCE of our justification, GRACE (Romans 3:24,25;5:2).
GRACE is a state we are in (in the mind of God).
The Christian life is an expression of FAITH. and is a means of expressing gratitude to God for His gift.

We need to keep in mind: Salvation is ever by grace!
If we live the most consistant Christian life possible, God would still not owe us a thing.
We are made free from not only the Old Testament Law, but we are free from salvation by law in general.
We are free from self-centeredness.
We are moved, in the principle, from the realm of "having to" to that of "get to."
Salvation is free to us, but not free to God (1 Peter 1:18,19).
JR

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.217.125.125

Salvation Does Not Come with "Pick-and-Choose" Options

July 17 2005, 11:12 AM 

Ours is a “pick-and-choose” society. On a restaurant menu, we may choose between Combo #1, Combo #2, and Combo #3. When purchasing insurance, we may select Plan A, Plan B, or Plan C. Even the tests in our schools often are of the multiple-choice type: from four or five possibilities, “Choose the single best answer.” Likewise, society demands to choose which portions of the New Testament it will embrace and which portions it will reject. A typical “pick-and-choose” biblical subject is salvation.

Certain New Testament verses stipulate that we are saved by faith and God’s grace; nothing else is mentioned. So people reason that all we need do is “believe,” and God’s grace will save us; we need do nothing more. But then other problematic verses mention only that repentance is necessary for salvation. Then other stubborn verses demand that we make a public confession of Jesus as Lord in order to be saved. And still really annoying verses link baptism with salvation. So many different verses related to salvation, and all with different requirements for salvation! So what shall we do? Should we follow ALL of these “legalistic” requirements, or should we take a survey (a popular church pastime these days), decide which ones are the most important, and only follow them?

It seems that many folks play numbers games with the New Testament and take the so-called “majority of verses” route or “majority rules” route. It’s a fact that the overwhelming majority of “salvation” verses in the New Testament mention only faith or grace and nothing else. Reasoning that faith and grace must be the most important aspects of salvation, people take it upon themselves to minimize repentance, confession, and baptism. And since baptism seems to be the most offensive requirement, baptism is frequently dumped entirely. What many people refuse to acknowledge is that each and every verse in the New Testament carries equal weight, whether it occurs only once or a million times.

In the Gospels, Jesus demands a minimum of four things from us before He will save us (representative KJV verses provided):

1. That we believe (have faith) in Him (John 11:25-26).
2. That we repent (Luke 13:3).
3. That we make public confession of Him as Lord (Matt. 10:32-33).
4. That we are baptized (Mark 16:16).

Jesus never gave us an option to “pick and choose” which of these requirements for salvation we may embrace and which we may dump. Jesus also never said that He would first save us, then we could follow the above commands. They are ALL mandatory from the very outset, simply by virtue of the fact that Jesus says they are. Some will say, “Baptism is a work, and works of themselves cannot save; being dunked in a pool of water cannot save.” True, no physical act of itself can save, but if Jesus says that we must be baptized to be saved, why rebel against Him? Don't scream, don't wail, don't beat your fists together, and don't try to make ridiculous excuses. Just trust Him to be right, accept His commands as given, obey them, and rejoice! It is the submission, the obedience, the willingness to follow His commands, whatever they are, that Jesus desires from us. Jesus is willing to save us by His grace, but only if we are willing to obey Him completely; not only in the four commands above, but in all things whatsoever He has commanded us (Matt 28:20 KJV).

So whenever people come on this web site or anywhere else and imply that only faith and nothing else is necessary to receive Christ’s grace, they speak falsely and would lead us away from Christ’s true doctrine. Mark and avoid those in the Change Movement who would soften or discount portions of the New Testament to make it more attractive and acceptable to the world (Romans 16:17-18 KJV).

 
 Respond to this message   
Paul Schroder
(no login)
24.242.8.160

reasons preachers leave

August 28 2006, 12:39 AM 


I must say that your reasons for preachers "leaving" the "true" faith are arbitrary and one sided. There are so many reasons for people to change their beliefs, and to "pretty much cover it" in a few paragraphs is very pretentious and arbitrary.

It is possible to change your mind concerning the way you view the scriptures in an honest, truthful way. To you, this is compromise. To the individual making the choice to change, it is growth.

Whose to say you are right? What you view as error, they may view as a truer representation of the meanings of the bible, rather than getting caught up in what they've been told.

What usually happens to people who truly study hebrew, greek, and church history? I'm not talking getting out the strongs to look up a word, but truly learn the origional languages, culture, and history of bible times? I can tell you what happens. They usually become more liberal, or as you put it, they "Abandon the old path".

Why is this? Well I have heard many explanations from fundamentalist christians, and frankly they scare me. One is that they were "puffed up" with knowlege and forgot the heart of the matter.....

If that were really the case, then how can we list the complex doctrines that one MUST believe to be right on doctrinally, then expect people to "feel" them? If a person is honestly searching for what he believes to be the truth about the scriptures, and comes up with a different interpretation than the "old Path", it is arrogant to say that that person is somehow choosing to leave because of a bad influence or experience.

All the arguments you give for a pastor leaving the old paths can be used on you for clinging to them. Maybe YOU were influenced in an "old paths" church, or you had a "bad experience" with the world out there, or with liberal christianity. This is just bad logic.

I really think you need to be more honest intellectually. There are millions of people who are just as well meaning as you, study like you, and still come to different conclusions about these issues. I am not being relativistic about truth, but I am saying that "absolute certainty" about the Bible is much more complex than you are portraying it. If it were as easy to be certain about the bible as it is to be certain about gravity, then no one would disagree with you. But since this is apparently not the case, why don't you just say that you tend to thing that these are the reasons, rather than telling us that the ones you give "pretty much cover it"...?

I am offended by your post because I am a former Fundamentalist Christian Pastor who has left the "Old Paths" because I believe they resemble a cult. That is my view, you have yours. It's that simple. If you want to know why Pastors leave, why don't you contact a group of them and do a survey? Ask them to explain directly, or write a paper about it, then publish it for your church members to read?

I know you wont do this, because regardless of what someone like me may say, you read your own reasons on to me, and think that there must be some underlying reason that I'm not saying for leaving' maybe I wasnt chosen, I never believed truly, or I have a moral defect.....believe me, I have heard them all.

There is a word for this kind of thinking. It's called Bigotry. I hate to see the Church of Jesus Christ reduced to an institute of religious racism.

there has to be a more gracious way to handle people who scare you because they dont think like you. We deal with this in every other way of life, but religious bigotry seems to be the hardest to rid ourselves of.

Please give this some more thought. You don't know everything, I don't know everything, the ancients didn't know everything, and the people who wrote the bible don't either....and I know that you will want to use the "trump card" and tell me God knows everything, but obviously by that you probably mean he's told you and a handful of "faithful" men, and the rest of us just don't get His message.

There are thousands of different ways to see the "main and plain" things of scripture, not just yours or your churches.

Mark Twain said it best... "We have tremendous trouble solving the mysteries of Man....It is only when we set out to solve the mysteries of God that our trouble disappears"

so there's my two cents, and I'm one of those you were talking about. I would love to dialogue further on this subject, or talk to others via e mail at ppaul31@yahoo.com

Blue Skies
Paul

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(no login)
65.1.194.223

"SCENES IN THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH" (by John Waddey)

July 16 2005, 5:54 PM 

SCENES IN THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH


To help readers understand what is currently happening to our brotherhood, we offer a bit of historical review. A. W. Fortune, preacher, historian and professor of the liberal wing of the restoration movement, published a small book in 1924. It was entitled, The Origin and Development of the Disciples. From this book (pp. 158-168), we have gleaned the following important information. Keep in mind that these quotations are from a spokesman for the liberal point of view.

Scene One looks back to the beginning and early days of our "Back to the Bible movement."

  • "Their slogan–‘where the Scriptures speak, we speak' led them to criticize those practices which seemed to them unscriptural."
  • "They did not regard themselves as a new denomination; they considered themselves to be a movement for the restoration of the New Testament Church..."
  • "They were convinced that union could only come by the restoration of the New Testament church..."
  • "They felt they had in a measure restored the apostate church and they regarded themselves as a peculiar people."
  • "They refused to co-operate with the denominations and their call to the individual was to come out from among them."
  • "At first there was a period of comparative uniformity in doctrine."
  • "For a long time the music of the churches consisted entirely of congregational singing."
  • "Instrumental music was not thought of in connection with the worship of the church."
  • "A characteristic feature fo the worship of the Disciples for many years was simplicity and lack of formality. The service was spontaneous and free from all ritualistic elements.”

Scene Two looks at how progressive changes resulted in apostasy and abandonment of the restoration concept:

  • "During the last fifty years the spirit of co-operation with other communions has been growing among Disciples."
  • A "growing spirit of toleration has been very pronounced..."
  • "They have co-operated wit the other communions in religious gatherings and evangelistic campaigns."
  • "Union cannot come until the churches abandon the traditional elements that divide."
  • "Disciples have had no creed which...has made it comparatively easy for them to change."
  • "Congregations were divided over this (the organ) question, and it was an important contributing factor to the final division of the church."
  • "The controversies over missionary societies and the use of the organ in worship were manifestations of a different attitude of mind"
  • "Those who insisted on a ‘thus saith the Lord' for the missionary society and the organ were literalists in all their doctrinal interpretations. Those who favored these expedients in worship and in the management of the affairs of the church had a more liberal attitude in their interpretation of doctrine generally."
  • "The tendency of the Disciples at the present time to towards a greater liberality In the interpretation of religion."
  • "The Bible is emphasized as the spiritual guide of the race rather than as a code of laws."
  • "Gradually the churches adopted instrumental music."
  • "With the introduction of special music, trained singers were sought for the choir."

Scene Three: Readers are urged to take a careful look at the congregation of which they are a part. Into which of these two categories does you congregation fit? Until the last 25 years all churches of Christ were very similar to those in Scene One. With the emergence of the change movement, more and more of our churches are more like those in Scene Two. In the early days faithful brethren would have said to those in worldly, apostate churches, "Wherefore come ye out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord" (II Cor. 6:17). So do we.


___________________________________
John Waddey, Editor
Christianity: Then and Now

E-Mail: johnwaddey@aol.com

 
 Respond to this message   
John Rebman
(no login)
66.42.219.73

Re: "SCENES IN THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH" (by John Waddey)

July 17 2005, 1:45 PM 

John, you keep hammering "law," to those who have obeyed Peter's words at Pentecost: man is "justified," in the mind of God, not in your mind!
You are "saved" John Waddey by the grace of God from His "wrath." You do not have to sit around in sackcloth and throw ashes on yourself. You have been declared a "new creature" in the eyes of God. Why don't you enjoy it? Live the Christian life. When was the last time you took a poor kid out to dinner, buy him a pair of shoes, teach him how to throw a baseball, football, play the piano? (I think it is you who used to play the piano in the Baptist/Methodist church: sorry if I have the wrong man).

Become a changed man John, enjoy the "Character" (that's "glory" to all my Baptist friends) of Jesus Christ. Live as if you were not promised tomorrow. A Christian can actually enjoy life here on earth. "Woe is me," "woe is me," is the cry of my Anti brothers.....
JR


 
 Respond to this message   
Saved by Grace aka David Keys
(no login)
205.188.116.200

John

July 18 2005, 12:15 AM 

I'm sorry if I implied we are justified by anything other than Christ perfect sinless sacrifice for our sins.

Our "imputed" righteousness comes from Him and Him alone.

There is no "His part" and "my part", its all His doing.

We simply cannot add anything to His righteousness.

If I implied "we" have any part in our salvation or
justification I was wrong, wrong, wrong.

Sincerely, David

 
 Respond to this message   
allan
(no login)
68.59.255.103

A Pretty Heavy Yoke

July 18 2005, 10:19 PM 

I read your last post Dr Crump with the feeling that you are trying to put more on folks than the gospel intends. A faith in my ability to manipulate and negotiate the correct legal fullness of the gospel will not lead to eternal salvation.

I felt you were puting alot of faith in your understanding of the breath and specifics of Jesus commands when you closed with:

Jesus is willing to save us by His grace, but only if we are willing to obey Him completely; not only in the four commands above, but in all things whatsoever He has commanded us (Matt 28:20 KJV).

That doesn't sound to graceful. Are you saying that the only key to heaven is my sifting correctly every direct or inferred command from the gospels, the early church history, pastoral epitles and the NT prophesy and then keeping them perfectly?

My faith is not in my ability to discern the minutia of a new legal code but of the mercy and grace of God through Jesus Christ and accepted in Baptism.

Ephesians 3:12

In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

2 Timothy 1:12

For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.

I have hope in God's grace also covering my doctrinal mistakes. And Mark, I believe that all of them are correct. I am living in the Word and with God and reliant on the Holy Spirit to continue to teach me if any are in error. And, the minute, my eyes see or my ears hear I repent and continue on. I praise God for the grace to know Him better.

I think alot of confusion tends to be a failure to discern between justification and sanctification: between salvation and spiritual formation. Salvation is simple. Believe who Christ is. Believe what he says. Believe who you were created to be. Believe God's way is right. Believe you can be reborn by God into Christ likeness through water baptism and the Holy Spirit. Then, follow Him.

Then we are to continue to grow in Him. 2 Corinthians 5 paints the picture of our "groaning" as we are reconciled to God. This is the race Paul talks about. This is weaning off milk and taking meat. 1 Corinthians 3:13 talks about the refining process

Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

We must vigorously seek after God through the Word, prayer, Christian service, quiet time with God, daily living and worship. But, we must be eternally humble in spirit. Chaper 3 and verse 18 continues with a stern reminder:

18Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

19For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

20And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.

21Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are your's;

22Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are your's;

23And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.

I just want to be Christ's and I am assured that I am.

... do not put anything else upon me.

allan



 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.217.125.44

RE: A Pretty Heavy Yoke

July 19 2005, 12:51 PM 

We’re quite used to seeing the following recurring phenomenon on this site: Whenever we state what the New Testament specifically says about anything, others with alternative views and ideas object with typical responses such as, “You put forth YOUR preferences as divine principles”; “You take the New Testament too literally”; “You read too much into Scripture”; and so on and so forth ad infinitum. In like manner, but more eloquently worded, Allan states that I am putting on folks more than what the Gospel intends, that this is a “pretty heavy yoke.” Once again, it is not I who “puts” anything on people or demands anything of people, but Christ Himself. I simply summarized the four salvation commandments that Christ laid out. You may have seen or heard about them under a different appellation as the “steps to salvation.” To be complete, there is a further preliminary “step,” which is to hear the Gospel preached. So we hear, believe, repent, confess, and be baptized. After one hears the Gospel, a person must then decide whether to follow through with the remaining commandments as Christ stipulated, or be unfaithful as a “picker and chooser.”

Whatever Christ “puts” on us or demands of us as clearly outlined in the Gospels should not be taken with grumblings and mutterings, but joyfully and with cheerfulness. We should not attempt to “justify” getting around them by saying, “Christ really didn't mean this; He really wouldn't have us do that; what He specifies is not popular today.” Why not just take Christ at His Word and do exactly as He says? After all, the First Epistle of John reminds us that if we love God, we will keep His commandments, for His commandments are not grievous (1 John 5:1-5 KJV). That is, His commandments are not grievous to those who trust Him and obey Him faithfully. But the renegade and rebel will always find the commands of Christ as odious and offensive. Desiring “liberty” with the lust to do as they please, the renegade and rebel will always see Christ's commands as too “restrictive,” as too “legalistic,” and they will spurn them.

Christ demands that we strive the very best we can to obey His Word as He commanded without deliberately deviating from it. But woe unto those who deliberately deviate (2 John 9-11 KJV). Is obeying not only Christ’s commandments for salvation but all things whatsoever He commanded us (Matt. 28:20 KJV) that burdensome, that much of a “yoke”? Perhaps to the rebel and the renegade. The life of the faithful Christian is governed by the Authority of Christ; therefore, s/he does not have the spiritual “freedom” to do as s/he pleases, but gladly submits totally and completely to that Authority. That is truly being humble and obedient in spirit, and it is to the obedient that Christ extends His grace.

What is Christ’s grace but salvation from Him? Shall Christ extend His grace (give salvation) to those who call upon Him but who heed not what He commands? Christ emphatically counters this false assumption in Matt. 7:21-27 and in Luke 6:46-49 (all KJV). The New Testament is more than clear: there must be submission and obedience before there can be grace/salvation.




 
 Respond to this message   
allan
(no login)
68.59.255.103

I love being talked to in the third person

July 20 2005, 12:15 AM 

Dr Crump in reading your post I hear you assumming that I am a rebel that seeks to manipulate the loop holes in the legal code to not have to follow Christ but still gain something( I am not sure what). If I do not want to follow Christ, I believe that makes me not a Christian.

I know that my greatest desire is to follow Christ with eavery breath. Christ is the source of all truth(John 1:17). I seek to test all and, by His grace ,my eyes will be open to the complete truth. The reason I come to you for fellowship through this site is seeking the truth. I listen to you, I take your words to the Bible, I pray about it and I share what I have experienced with you.

The goal of our discourse is not for me to convince you, it is not for you to convince me but, together as brothers, we are convinced of a third thing- the truth.

As you discuss with others, you have to keep them talking. If you talk down, patronize, do not listen to what others have learned and experience you will never have Christian fellowship. If you quickly pull out the pieces of what others share for which you think you have a banner retort, you will fail to share much of your Christian adventure with anyone else. Except, for those few that have the same experience as you. You view of God will remain what it is. You will not continue to grow in all fullness(Eph 4:7-16).

Also, you fail to address my point of the post. Do you believe that we must discern all of Christ's commands and then keep them perfectly before I can receive salvation through grace?

I agree following Christ is a tall order. It is one that I fail but get back up and keep on going. Again, my point is that I have faith in Christ that He is not giving up on me.

I you are telling me that as soon as I believe a wrong doctrine He is going to quit on me. In honest seeking after God, if my own fallable humaness leads me astay on one point, I am toast. That is no gospel of hope. That is self-suficient modern legalism. It is the idolitry of the worldly, logical mind.

Is that what you believe? Do you believe that God will give you no grace on doctrinal mistakes? Do you believe that if by some unseeable reason you have pieced the pauline epistles together incorrectly there is no hope. What if... The spirit of the young adult who led "Nearer to the Cross" during the passing of the bread that you crushed and failed to gently disciple was more important that your doctrine of orderly worship.

My point is that we have to humbly give grace as we discuss to find God's truth. Do you really believe that you are right on all points and all I need to do is openly agree with you? If you do then you are saying you are with out sin because only one without sin can fully understand the ways of God. The only person I converse with like that is the Christ. I blindly follow Him in my own feeble, peculiar and eternally loved by God way.


allen

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.19.67.69

RE: I Love Being Talked to...etc.

July 20 2005, 10:15 AM 

Allan assumes, because I mentioned "rebel" and "renegade" in my previous post, that I was talking specifically about him. Allan presumes/assumes far too much and takes posts much too personally. That's why I generally write in the third person. I only mentioned Allan's name in terms of his presumptuous claim that I put on people more than what (Allan thinks) the Gospel intends. The rest of my post expounded on New Testament passages about salvation and also reminded folks that it is the rebel and renegade who reject or seek a way around Christ's teachings.

But then maybe Allan's subconscious is bothering him. After reading what the New Testament requires for salvation, maybe his subconscious is conflicting with his current views. If so, then maybe he should reconsider his current position and restudy the New Testament's stance on salvation, what Christ specifically requires before He will bestow grace. That's all I can recommend.

Allan said: "Also, you fail to address my point of the post. Do you believe that we must discern all of Christ's commands and then keep them perfectly before I can receive salvation through grace?"

Allan needs to reread my post, for I said: "Christ demands that we strive the very best we can to obey His Word as He commanded without deliberately deviating from it. But woe unto those who deliberately deviate (2 John 9-11 KJV). Is obeying not only Christ’s commandments for salvation but all things whatsoever He commanded us (Matt. 28:20 KJV) that burdensome, that much of a 'yoke'? Perhaps to the rebel and the renegade."

There is a decided difference between deviating unwittingly and deviating deliberately. But I submit that Christ's commands are not that grievous (even He said they were not grievous), such that the faithful should be able to conform to them. (But did I ever say that the faithful were always perfect?) It's those who willingly choose to alter and deviate from Christ's commands who fall from grace. It can't be any clearer than that.

Allan also said: "Do you really believe that you are right on all points and all I need to do is openly agree with you?"

Still not getting it, Allan clearly resorts to the classic you-put-forth-your-preferences-as-divine-principles defense. It's neither my doctrine nor my commands that are at issue, but those of Christ. Accept what Christ has specifically written in the New Testament, not only about salvation, but everything else as well.

I've said enough on this subject, and since Allan has quoted a lot of Scripture in previous posts, he sounds like a person who would be able to get the pure facts about salvation from the New Testament. All he or anyone else need do is put away personal prejudices, preferences, and any denominational biases and let the pure words of the New Testament do the talking. If the New Testament says "do," then do; if it says "don't," then don't; if it mentions nothing at all, then leave it at that.

To summarize again: Christ demands submission and obedience before He will bestow grace/salvation.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.19.69.91

Let's Make a Deal

July 20 2005, 11:23 AM 

Since Allan has manifested a less-than-convivial attitude to my responding to him in the third person, I'm willing to strike a deal. First of all, I look with much disfavor upon anonymity, either partial or total. So if Allan is willing to reveal not only his full name but also the faith which he embraces, I will respond in the first person in any future exchanges that we may have.

Allan need not reveal the specific name of his church, such as Saddleback Valley Community Church, Willow Creek Community Church, Lakewood Community Church, etc. All he need do is reveal the faith: Southern Baptist, Methodist, Roman Catholic, Church of Christ (he should know what the latter represents, so we don't need to go round and round about terminology), etc.

Full name and faith embraced. Otherwise, I must continue in the third person. Fair enough?

 
 Respond to this message   
allan
(no login)
68.59.255.103

Re: Let's Make a Deal

July 21 2005, 12:28 AM 

Dr. Crump, professionally I go by Dr. R. A. Coffman. I am a member of a Church of Christ.

 
 Respond to this message   
John
(no login)
167.219.0.144

Allan

July 21 2005, 2:40 PM 

Allan, did you used to be in the music business?

 
 Respond to this message   
John Rebman
(no login)
66.42.219.73

Re: Let's Make a Deal

July 21 2005, 6:16 PM 

Woah.....! Dr. Crump meet Dr. Coffman....
My old puter liked to have blown a circuit board.
"Let's Make a Deal." Sounds like card playing in the Church of Christ...Repent, Repent.... Sounds like "Change!"
What next? A piano in the Bible school class????

Dr. Coffman...I doubt very seriously if you will receive the same recognization as our resident Doctor...Bill Crump.
You see, Dr. Crump "looks with much disfavor upon anonymity," and sees you and me as "manifesting a less than convivial attitude." We are to remain in the "third person." Sounds a whole lot like Doctor Phil...

I have read and enjoyed your posts (many have), but on this board you will be seen as a "Changer." You see, your baptism for remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (in water) is not valid among our righteous brothers of the pitch pipe.

They have washed their robes in the Jordan and have seated themselves at the "righ hand" of the Lord. With stoic faces they sit in the honored seats with the scribes and Pharisees (hypocrites) for they shut up the kingdom of heaven agains men." Grace has been removed from their descriptive hand book. "Woe is me, woe is me," is their battle cry.

I have asked Dr. Crump to exegesis John 3:3-8, or John 20:21-23 for the enlightment of the Board (many times), but all I ever get is a lecture on "Change."

So, be not discouraged when the resident Doctor talks down to you: just look at it as stripes earned. Stay under his skin and love the old boy anyway....Jesus commands us to do so!
JR


 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.217.125.34

RE: Let's Make a Deal (Rebman)

July 22 2005, 7:04 PM 

I enjoy reading Rebman's posts, especially when they are laced with insults, sarcasm, and/or character assassinations against proponents of this web site - typical change agent tactics. They provide much comic relief. So I take them, not with a grain of salt, but with several Mack truckloads (LOL).

Perhaps you've heard of the old TV show "Let's Make a Deal" with Monty Hall. Perhaps not. No matter.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.19.66.130

RE: Let's Make a Deal (Rebman, July 21) - A Clarification

July 24 2005, 10:19 AM 

In his post of July 21 in this thread, Rebman stated:

"I have asked Dr. Crump to exegesis [sic] John 3:3-8, or John 20:21-23 for the enlightment of the Board (many times), but all I ever get is a lecture on 'Change.'" [This web site has moderators, but does it have a "Board"?]

I thought that this statement made as such sounded inaccurate, so I did some backtracking. It is true that Rebman requested my exegesis of John 20:22-23 (he omitted verse 21) in his post of May 11 titled "RE: Study of the Word Alien to Detractors" in the thread "Change Agents Big Obstacle - The Written Word of God." I find that he made that request just once, not "many times." So I complied and gave an exegesis of John 20:22-23 on May 11 in a post titled "The Holy Spirit Manifested." Since Rebman had also initially mentioned John 14:26 and Matt 3 in the May 11 post, I covered them in my response as well.

Then Rebman came back with a response on May 12 titled "RE: The Holy Spirit Manifested," in which he attempted (as expected) to discredit my exegesis. He also expounded on John 3:11, but not John 3:3-8. As far as I can determine, Rebman never previously asked that I exegete John 3:3-8. But even if I had, it would have provided, not enlightenment to the "Board," but material for Rebman to burn and spurn.

Just several distortions that needed clarification.



 
 Respond to this message   
kansas christian
(Login kansaschristian)
69.240.243.90

to Allen

July 23 2005, 4:45 PM 

I choose to remain anonymous but I am a Dr. as well. I would like to encourage you because I really enjoy hearing your thoughts. I am frankly rather embarrassed by the manner of speech (writing) which has been condescending to you. I have left a "Purpose Driven Church" because I saw what happened as the church became less a church and more of a business enterprise. I understand why people are nervous when they hear words that sound like those espoused by the people of Willow Creek and Saddleback churches but there is no reason to be vile toward you when your posts have been nothing but good and civil. Keep it up--you have many good, scripturally sound points.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.19.66.120

Vile Treatment

July 23 2005, 9:31 PM 

The last thing that people want to hear in our “feel-good” society today is for someone to oppose them on any point, no matter what. So it’s understandable for people who embrace the unbiblical Change Movement and the fallacious Purpose Driven philosophy, in whole or in part, to feel “victimized” by Bible-believing Christians who are diligently working to stamp out this malignancy in the Church. To the change agents and supporters of the Change Movement, calling attention to their unscriptural agenda and warning the public at large is “unfair, slanderous, judgmental, unloving, vile treatment, unkind, unchristian, bad, awful, no-good,” etc., etc., you get the picture. Many are blinded to the fact that the Change Movement is literally ruining the New Testament Church, and it is politically correct to do so to make the Church more acceptable to a completely godless society; it’s not politically correct to chastise and reprimand ANYONE for even remotely spreading this garbage which is polluting and corrupting the Church.

Let’s talk about “vile treatment.” Supporters of the Change Movement seem to have a monopoly on posting some of the most unchristian responses on this web site against anyone, including myself, who has stood up for God’s Truth and the sanctity of the Church. When we say “Thus saith the Lord” and present Scriptures that show how the Change Movement fails to meet New Testament standards, oh how the insults, sarcasm, and character assassinations pour in! A sample of typical responses includes the following:

“Gnat strainer…self-righteous…you think you’re the only folks going to heaven…you’re just lifting up your preferences as divine principles…so if I don’t agree with YOU then I’m going to hell, is that right?…why don’t you do more for the needy?…how many have you lead to Christ?…have you EVER lead anyone to Christ?…so you think you’ve got it all figured out…who made YOU the judge of me?” And the phrase that takes the cake: “You judgmental asshole!”

Most, but not all, of those phrases made by so-called “Christians” were made by people who also hid in anonymity.

So “Kansas” implies that it’s “vile treatment” to upbraid someone and try to steer them back to the pure Word of the New Testament, when they even remotely sound like they’re veering away and soft-soaping the Gospel and New Testament in the name of “change.” According to that philosophy, then Jesus was guilty of “vile treatment” when He upbraided His apostles when they veered from the Truth, when He used a whip to drive out the moneychangers who had polluted the Temple, and when He sternly chastised the Scribes and Pharisees for their outward show of piety. Yeah, it’s “vile treatment” to stand up for the Truth; self-esteem must forever be preserved.

Well, we have news for you. Widespread malignancies must be battled with aggressive therapy (as Dr. “Kansas” should know), not with mild potions and weak poultices. The Change Movement is a vile cancer that has spread throughout the Church, and this web site will aggressively battle it with the New Testament, especially with Romans 12:2, Romans 16:17-18, James 4:4, and 2 John 9-11. There is absolutely no place in this very real battle for romantic falderal, and we will expose and root out unbiblical practices for what they are, until the Change Movement is just a rancid memory.


 
 Respond to this message   
kansas christian
(no login)
69.240.243.90

To Dr Crump

July 24 2005, 9:45 AM 

I realize that those on the "side" of the Purpose Driven changes had often made very childish and mean-spirited posts and I was very pleased that those associated with Concerned Members wrote back and made their points with love and Scripture and turned the other cheek rather than slapping back. Several of your recent posts (re-read them if you wish, or have a trusted friend read them and comment) have been condescending and mean-spirited and I have felt that you have "attacked" the writer (in this case Allan) even when the writer was not writing in a mean spirited mode. While I do not feel we need to back down from our position, I do not feel that our posts will be taken to heart if they are written in this manner. I am a Dr.of the Luke variety and so I do not claim the Bible knowledge of you or Dr. Coffman but I do know that the fruits of the Spirit do not manifest themselves by condescending or snide remarks. I apologize if I mis-read your remarks--email is hard to read a tone into the remarks and perhaps I am mistaken but that is why I asked if you would have a friend read your last few remarks and see if they find them kind or unkind (and I believe you can be civil to a person with whom you disagree). Thank you for your time. KC

 
 Respond to this message   
allan
(no login)
68.59.255.103

seeking truth

July 24 2005, 4:10 PM 

Dr. Crump, so how do we battle the loss of truth? I think you hit it right on the head with Romans 12. We have to continue to be humbly transformed by giving all of ourselves to God.

The battle cry of "here come the change agents" is a self serving one. I would also say that "here come the conservatives" is equally so. The movement of satan to destroy through those in our fellowship is not new. The battle is with satan. The weapons are the fruits of the Spirit and the power is the grace of God through Christ.

The change agents of the New Testament church brought one message: "there is no Christ." They did this by denying the fleshly incarnation of Christ, the death and resurection, the new life(God's perfect way and therefore the name "The Way" of the early church in Acts 9) available to everyone.

My humble assessment is that we have allowed several generations in the Chrurch of Christ to lose the Way because we have not taught the fullness of Christ in favor of arguing our personal appetite in disputable matters. I also believe that many are struggling with this fact. Consequently, many are immaturely and blindly seeking after things that may not be Godly trying to find the truth.

This should not scare us but it should motivate us to take a hard look at ourselves. We have to be encouraged at the vigor many are now seeking God. We also must be humbled at the lack of maturity, humility, discipline, Godliness and unity that has gotten us here.

I think Romans is the perfect text to make this point. You have a church that was predominantly Jewish Christians. Then, Claudius banishes Jews from Rome. The Romans church becomes a gentile church. The edict is later lifted and Jews return setting up the conflict the letter is written to address. Is Jew or Gentile a better Christian? Paul clearly answers in Romans 3:23, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

He, then, gloriously reveals the path to relationship with God through faith in Christ Jesus. He is also very clear about the response of that faith: obedience. Dr. Crump you are right on the we have to live, model and teach obedience. This is a long, hard, impossible persuit by ourselves. Praise God, He has given us the example of Christ,

John 14:7
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

His Holy Word,

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

the indwelling of the Holy Spirit

John 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

and big brothers and sisters to humbly guide us.

2 Cor 5:20
Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

I love Paul's joy. Paul gets so excited about God and His grace filled message of deliverance from whatever sin is in our lives that he breaks into spontaneous praise at the end of chapter 11.

What does this obedience to faith look like? Is it doing whatever you please? Is it is a life of loop-hole finding to avoid any cost to the prize of salvation? No! It is the glorious life of truth with God. Seeing what He sees and understanding what He understands. It is a life long process that Paul is glad to see the finish line coming for his race.

In Romans 12-15, he describes the obedience as:
we give all of our life to God - He is allowed to transform it all, we learn to love as God loves, we respect earthly authority, and we love each other through doctrinal disagreement.

Specifically, as Paul looks at the doctrinal issue, He says(Romans 15)," We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification...Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God."

If anyone is teaching against the identity of Christ and salvation through Him, then they are not Christian they are anti-Christian. They have set themselves up against my God. That is what Paul is saying in Rom 16:17-18, 2 John 9-11. But, we have to be gracious and not give up on them(1 Timothy 1:20). I do not see this response of drawing the battle line and unlovingly attacking over the doctrinal issue that was splitting the Roman church. Paul does not describe the meat issue as a vile cancer. It is a teaching point and a place to bring those that love Christ together. Isn't the grace of God amazing!

One final comment.

Dr. Crump I love James because it is such an imperative letter. It feeds my need to "just do" what Godly authority tells me to do. I appreciate you using that passage.

Chapter 3 gives the wonderful picture of humble Godly wisdom. The verification of that wisdom is "good life" free from ambition, envy and pride. 17 and 18 say it the best:

17But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. 18And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

These peacemakers are the friends of God. Those who fight and quarrel are not. In fact, God calls them adulterers.

The church needs Godly, Word founded, humble, ready to self-sacrifice, peacemaking teachers. We do not need more fights and qarrels. I have sacrificed my life to teaching Christ and Him crucified. My greatest hunger is to know God and His truth. I long for others to know Him as well.

This is the change in our churches that I feel the God is calling us. And, the change through which He seeks to bless us.

Dr. Crump please be encouraged. You love God and I applaud your desire to know His truth. Your writing has encouraged my study and I am growing in Him because of it even if you didn't address me in a few posts.

allan



 
 Respond to this message   
 
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

This web site is not part of or approved by any Church!

...........................THE BOOK

What Happened at the Madison Church of Christ?


There are thousands of churches being taken over across America.

This book is only about one of those churches. It's about the Madison Church Of Christ. By studying the methods used here along with the resource references you might be able to inoculate your church. At the very least you will recognize the signs early on.

Many of the current members of the Madison Church of Christ still don't know what happened.
Some never will know! This book is for them as well.

Madison Church of Christ was a 60 year old church. At one time it was one of the largest churches in the US, and the largest Church of Christ.

It thrived for many years on the vision of it's elders and those of it's ministers. Those visions undoubtably came from the the inspired word of Jesus Christ.

At sometime in the last 10 years there was a deliberate plan by a majority of the elders to take the Madison Church of Christ into a more worldly realm.

They used secrecy, covert planning, and outside sources to scheme and to change the format and direction of the Madison Church of Christ.

The Elders knew that the membership would never approve such a plan. Using the tools of the "Community Church Movement"(consultants, books, seminars, meetings,planters,seeders) they slowly started initiating change so it was never noticed by the members until it was too late.....

At the heart of the plan was the fact that old members were going to be driven off so new techniques could be used to go out and reach the unchurched through new "Contemporary Holy Entertainment" methods developed by the "Community Church Movement"

Old members had to be kept on board long enough to get their plans ready, or the funds would not be there to pay for the new building. So by the plans very nature, it had to be secret.

The church had no plan in effect to renew or approve elders. There was never any need. The elders had always been "as approved by God". 10 of the last 15 elders would begin to shed some doubt on that.

The Elders did not even need a majority at first, because some of the elders went along unwittingly.

This edition starts shortly after some of the members begin to smell something strange in January 2001. Later editions may go back and fill in some of the timeline.

To even start to understand whats happening here, you must read the background materials in the first of the book.

This is only the first edition, and not the end. New editions will be printed as needed. To keep abreast of current changes, please visit our web site; http://www.concernedmembers.com/madison

Here is the list of players;

5 Godly Elders
10 Not so Godly Elders
120 "Deacons" (allegiance unknown)
2,800 - 4,000 church "members"
2 "teners" (people who have publicly confessed to have broken all ten commandments)
Unknown number of "sinners" (This is what the 10 elders call us.)
Unknown number of "demons" (Flying everywhere, to many to count)
 

Click Here......The Book is Available Now FREE

Place your banner ad here.           See all banner ads

...ConcernedMembers.com ...About ...Links Library ...Sunday School in Exile ...Help Warn Others


FastCounter by bCentral

CM Visit Counter as of 6/25/2015
2,101,394

Site Visits Since 6/30/2015
page counter