An army of younger church members are clamoring for change in the worship, faith and practices of our churches. They have naught but criticism for the efforts of the past and are certain they have discovered a far superior way of "doing church" as they are fond of saying. They leave the impression on immature and gullible disciples that those of us over 50 are stubborn, close-minded and impervious to change, no matter how beneficial it might be. In this they are less than honest. Some ultra-conservative types might well be that intractable, but for the majority of us it is not change that we reject, it is unlawful departure from God's authorized Word and way.

--- We are willing to change such things as the hour, the length or the order of our services, but we are not willing to change the nature and substance of them. God has specified singing, praying, communing, offering and instruction as acceptable aspects of his worship.

--- We are willing to try new songs or new hymnals, but not a new kind of music. Only singing did the Spirt authorize (Eph. 5:19). Instruments, other than the voice and heart, we will not, we cannot accept.

--- We are willing to consider different methods of observing a communion service, but we cannot mix the sacred meal with a common meal (I Cor. 11:20-22). Nor can we observe the feast on a day not ordained by God (Acts 20:7).

--- We are willing to accept any or all Biblical names for the church, but we will not brook those who seek to dismiss or discredit the Biblical name "church of Christ" used by Paul (Rom. 16:16). It is never wrong to give due glory and honor to Christ the founder and head of the church.

--- We are willing to change our methods of evangelism but not the gospel message given by Christ. Methods flourish and grow obsolete but the message is divine, perfect and eternal (Rom. 1:16).

--- We can tolerate those who prefer other reputable translations than the King James Version but not those who reject the authority of the Bible.

--- We can adapt to modern improvements in our meeting houses but we cannot be party to those who would "modernize" the church which Christ built, which is revealed in Scripture.

--- We can admit our failures to measure up to the divine pattern for faith and practice, but we can never admit the church which Christ built is any less than perfect.

--- We can preach salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9), but we will never be able to preach salvation by grace alone or faith alone (Jas. 2:24).

Change in non-essentials, in matters of judgment and expediency our people have been making for the last 200 years. Changes in the God-given faith and practice of Christianity apostates have been engaging in for the same period of time. Sydney Rigdon's changes took him into Mormonism. Dr. John Thomas' changes led him into the Christadelphians. The changes of instrumental music and missionary societies took their promoters into Disciples of Christ/Christian Church denomination Changes regarding the doctrine of the kingdom of Christ and His return lead Robert H. Boll into Premillennialism. Changes in the teaching of the role of miraculous gifts of the Spirit led Don Finto and the Belmont Church of Christ into Pentecostalism. Changes in the government of the church and the doctrine of Christian liberty led Chuck Lucas and Kip McKeen of the Boston church into the International Church of Christ cult. The changes proposed by the "change agents" centered in Abilene, Texas are leading toward a new denominational body with which we want no part.

JHW

The Hebrews in Zephaniah's days were a "nation that (had) no shame" (Zeph. 2:1). Jeremiah rebuked them saying, "they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush" (Jer. 6:15). Today we have working among us a movement of men who are determined to impose their unscriptural changes upon the Lord's church. They are men with no shame. Like all other apostates before them they are not willing to walk away and start their own congregations, build their own buildings, found their own schools and other good works. They have a different plan.

They are not ashamed:

--- To operate under the false pretense that they are faithful members of the Church of Christ when all the while they are working to undermine and destroy her, to lead away disciples after them (Acts 20: 30).

--- To use deceit to snatch away a building from those who built and paid for it. Captured meeting houses are like trophies in war. Possession of them saves years of work and thousands, even millions of dollars. They provide a cloak of respectability to those who are operate out of them. They shrewdly keep their purposes veiled until they have given sufficient power to claim the property. Such is a form of legal theft.

--- To speak disrespectfully of great servants of God who blazed the trail and paved the road before them. Such ingratitude is wicked.

--- To turn their backs on pure Biblical Christianity for a cheap imitation created by men.

--- To publicly teach doctrines contrary to God's Word. The most glaring examples being that salvation is by grace alone (Heb. 5:9) and that baptism is but a declaration of one’s salvation (Acts 22:16), and that women may fill roles of public leadership in the church regardless of Paul's prohibition (I Cor. 14:33-34).

--- To pervert the Word of God to justify their new beliefs and programs. The whole idea of "a new hermeneutic" is to allow them to justify beliefs and practices that are contrary to the divine Word.

--- To sow discord and division among God's people. Before this movement reaches its zenith their will be broken churches throughout the land and a broken brotherhood. Such division God hates (Prov. 6:16-19).

--- To exchange the church Jesus for which died; the one he built and is head of; for an honorable seat among their denominational neighbors. Before they can be accepted in those circles they must renounce the unique and exclusive nature of the church which Christ built. When that is done what they have left is not a church that belongs to Christ.

May those brethren who are acting so shamelessly renounce their schemes for imposing changes on the church and humbly ask the Master for forgiveness before they face Him in judgment and their shameful deeds condemn them.

John Waddey

Johnny. You are the one who is shameless! You rant and rave about how the church should look in your view. It is not God's view. Get over yourself!

That’s correct: “Johnny” believes in Romans 1:16—“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth…”

Now, let’s see if “Maxi Driver” (Max Lucado), a very prominent CHANGE AGENT operating in the brotherhood, passes all the qualifications of the SHAMELESS CHANGE AGENT:

———————————————————————————————————————————
YES — Operates under false pretense and is really a trans-Baptist destroying the church of Christ
YES — Shrewdly kept purposes veiled until sufficiently powerful to claim it as Community Church property
YES — Speaks disrespectfully of great servants of God who blazed the trail—such wicked ingratitude
YES — Turns back on pure biblical Christianity for a cheap imitation created by men
YES — Publicly teaches doctrines contrary to God’s Word—grace/faith alone; saved before baptism
YES — Perverts the Word of God to justify new beliefs and programs—instrumental music, cello in Communion
YES — Sows discord and division among God’s people—should leave the brotherhood alone
YES — Exchanges the church Christ built for another—swaps pulpits with Trinity Baptist and others
YES — Transformed the Oak Hills church of Christ into Oak Hills [Community] Church
———————————————————————————————————————————

Donnie Cruz

I am very unhappy to see such ignorance when it comes to this subject. I am a person that was granted musical talent by God, why else would he grant them to me if I wan't supposed to use them to praise him, right?

Now you used Eph 5:19 in your statement which says towards the end of the verse singing AND making melody in your heart to the lord JESUS CHRIST. Now lets get one thing clear, you can not send anything to the lord unless it's with you heart, and it is important to know that he will only accept things out of LOVE.

LOVE is the key to all of jesus' teachings and will be related on this subject. You mention in you topic that your only allowed to praise God with singing, but when you look at the scriptures it says SINGING AND MAKING MELODIES, NOT JUST SINGING. If the verse said singing BY making melodies then you would have an agruement but it doesn't it specifically states there are two ways to praise God...singing AND melodies (from instruments).

Now the last part of this is the most important, for everyone...Whatever you choose to do, when you praise God make sure that it is from the HEART and with LOVE, or it will be rejected. If you want to look up another script someone tried to tell me it states praising with instruments is wrong, Amos 5:21-23 which in the end states God despises offerings from SOLEMN ASSEMBLIES (churches). In other words if you offer it to him in a ungrateful, unrejoicful, or grave mood then it will be rejected. Please respond back.

I am very unhappy to see such ignorance when it comes to this subject. I am a person that was granted musical talent by God, why else would he grant them to me if I wan't supposed to use them to praise him, right?
Now you used Eph 5:19 in your statement which says towards the end of the verse singing AND making melody in your heart to the lord JESUS CHRIST. Now lets get one thing clear, you can not send anything to the lord unless it's with you heart, and it is important to know that he will only accept things out of LOVE.
------------------------------------------------------------
SORRY ABOUT THAT BUT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR TALENT TRUMPS THE WORD OF GOD SPOKEN IN SONG AND SERMON. WE WILL SHOW AGAIN THAT MUSIC IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST. Paul said to "speak to ONE ANOTHER" and make the melody IN THE HEART. The heart or spirit is the new PLACE where God accepts worship. IN the heart does not speak of "attitude" but of the NEW PLACE.

Scholars note that "THERE IS NO EXCEPTION but that Satan brought wind, string and percussion instruments." Hitler preached that by destroying the Jews in Jerusalem God gave him the permission and gift to finish the work!! Singing and playing instruments is not one of those gifts of the HOLY spirit. Paul said that the outward GIVING-heed would be speaking or singing in the ODE sense but 'melody as tunefulness belongs to the 19th century' so God didn't know about your gift or He would have included it as a "gift." Those with A holy SPIRIT cannot speak other than "what has been taught" so we know that the silly praise songs are not SPIRIT. WRONG spirit: Jesus said that SONS of the devil are those who SPEAK ON THEIR OWN.

Paul said do two things: one a religious activity and the other secular, pagan and polluted activities. The direct command in three places is to use ONE MOUTH and ONE MIND (in the spirit) to glorify God with "that which is written, the Spirit or the Word of Christ." (John 6:63). That EXCLUDES girlish praise songs.

First, to Paul the ASSEMBLY is always a form of the Greek word SYNAGOGUE. The synagogue was a SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE. Paul's UNIQUE worship word means to GIVE HEED to Christ by giving HEED to His word. That pretty well fits with the ABSOLUTE will of God that He SEEKS us only in the place of OUR spirit as it gives heed to the TRUTH. Sorry, but God isn't listening to the external unless it is speaking HIS WORDS. As you cannot pronounce a formula to save yourself you cannot form songs to praise Him unless it is repeating what HE has done. John Calvin agreed with that along with most church history.

The second activity is singing and melody IN THE HEART to God. You see, there are always two arenas: To one another and to God. God doesn't need to be TAUGHT and the error in Corinth was attempting to SPEAK TO GOD who needs no counselors. Paul said that they were just SPEAKING INTO THE AIR.

Paul used the word MELODY which is an APOLLO, Abaddon or Apollyon word. Like the Hebrew words for melody or the use of PSALLO in the Greek, an instrument is NEVER INCLUDED unless it is named. The Greek world Paul knew about ALWAYS added an ending when an instrument is intended.

PsalmIST or PsalmODIA are words for singing with instruments: Paul didn't use ANY MUSICAL terms. He used the word PSALMOS or PSALLO. If you intend to PSALLO in the modern musical sense you must grasp that this is a MARK that Abaddon has unleashed the LOCUSTS (muses, musical PERFORMERS: they have STINGERS in their tails to permanently DISABLE you).

WHY WOULD GOD INSPIRE PAUL TO USE THE CONCEPT OF WARFARE OR SEXUAL POLLUTION AS THE BASE FOR A CHRISTIAN "WORSHIP" WORD?

HE DID NOT: PAUL KNEW THE TEMPTATION OF THE 'UNCOVERED PROPHESIERS (WOMEN OR THE PERVERTED). THEREFORE, HE INSISTED THAT THE MELODY BE INTERNAL RATHER THAN EXTERNAL HATE AGAINST THE WORD OF GOD.

PSALLO (psao, pso means SOP a SIGN to identify JUDAS)

.I. to touch sharply, to pluck, pull, twitch, Aesch.; toxou neuran ps.
....to twang the bow-string, Eur.; belos ek keraos ps.
....to SEND a SHAFT TWANGING from the bow, Anth.; so, schoinos miltophurĂŞs psallomenĂŞ a
....carpenter's red line, which is TWITCH and then suddenly let go, so as to "leave a MARK."

II. to play a stringed instrument with the fingers, NOT with the PLECTRON, Hdt., Ar., Plat.
..2. later, to sing to a harp, SING NTest.

OF THE PHRASE "BELOS EK KERAOS PS" Paul said that the CARNAL WEAPONS or LIFELESS INSTRUMENTS do not help in our TASK of SPIRITUAL WARFARE against those who are identified as the MUSICIANS of Abaddon. First,

1. BELOS [ballĂ´, as Lat. jaculum from jacio a DART, JAVELIN, A NET ]
..1. a missile, esp. an ARROW
..2. like enchos, used of any weapon, as a SWORD
3. the agana belea of APOLLO and Artemis in Hom. always denote the SUDDEN, EASY DEATH of men and women respectively.

KERAS
1. BOW, toxon
2. of MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, horn for BLOWING, "SEMENAI" kerati the Phrygian FLUTE, because it was tipped with horn (aulein or PLAY the FLUTE, kai kerati men aulein [TYRRHENIAN] nomizousi Poll.4.76 , cf. Ath.4.184a.
6. mountain peak, v.l. in h.Hom.1.8; spur, to k. tou orous [Note: the TYRRHENIAN king/queen was a CHANGE AGENT OF LUCIFER and was called "the singing and harp-playing prostitute]

SEMAINO [sĂŞma]
I. to shew by a SIGN, indicate, MAKE KNOWN, point out, Hom., etc.
IV. = SPHRAGIZO, to stamp with a sign or MARK, to seal,

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great SIGNS and WONDERS; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Mt.24:24

And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and TEN HORNS, and seven crowns upon his heads. Re.12:3

And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he DECEIVED them that had RECEIVED the MARK of the beast, and them that worshipped his IMAGE. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. Re.19:20

Not to be personal, but the IMAGE of Pan was the little goat-footed, hill or mountain climing PERVERT who used his PAN PIPES to seduce the KINGS of the hills or mountains.

SEMEION (g4592) say-mi'-on; neut. of a presumed der. of the base of 4591; an indication, espec. cer. or supernat.: - miracle, sign, token, wonder.

.....Note: the NACHASH or MUSICAL ENCHANTER as the SERPENT in the garden of eden speaks directly of a SEMIAN character: not quite human but highly seductive.

I have pictures:

http://www.piney.com/SerpClarkGen3.html

KEROBATES ( [keras] ) HORN-footed, hoofed, kerobatas "PAN" he that GOES with HORNS, i.e. the HORNED GOD; acc. to Sch., he that WALKS the MOUNTAIN-PEAKS (cf. keras v.6).

The BEAST in the Book of Revelation who will dominate in the end-times as the MASCULINE school of the Word turns into A THEATER connects directly to PAN. The HORNS of the BEASTS are MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS given to the various KINGS so that they can take over their MOUNTAINS. Those who had one hour with the KING as keynoters will fit the numbers of the PAN PIPES (or pipers). The Christian Chronicle who TOOTED THE HORNS of the out of control AGENTS now says that only FIVE out of 13,000 congregations have GONE ALL THE WAY with the Babylon whore. They didn't count those who use MUSICAL BANDS or ORGANUM performance singing which is a LEGALISTIC way to FOOL the FOOLS that you are not yet INSTRUMENTAL.

Now to Amos (later). The Israelites were carrying out the captivity and death sentence imposed because of the MUSICAL IDOLATRY at Mount Sinai. It had nothing to do with just A BAD MENTAL ATTITUDE even if the position of Lipscomb is THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG with their worship: a man and his son going into the same TEMPLE PROSTITUTE was just the wrong "spirit."

http://www.piney.com/LipscombLiftedUP.html

"The sacrifices of the UNGODLY are ABOMINATION to the Lord,

The Abomination of Desolation in the temple is prophetic of the Abomination of Desolation which stands in the so-called holy places of the pulpit claiming that "We lead the worshipers into the presence of God." That is, WE have replaced Lord Jesus Christ. It needs NO PROVING: just listen to the garbage of song and sermon using to COLLECT those with the musical MARK of the Beast while those marked by Baptism with A holy Spirit devoted to the WORD FLEE perhaps without knowing that the musical trumpets have ALREADY SOUNDED as the MARK.

Sure, they didn't know when God in Christ came the FIRST TIME: they were looking in all the wrong places. Nevertheless, the hostile stealing of the church houses of widows all around the world man mean that ALL have seen His return signs. I think that while those with the MUSIC mark are applauding the Jacko Wackos of the world, Jesus will be in those tiny groups gathered in HIS name rather than in the names of the show stoppers. Don't ever try to fool people by saying that you are not in it for the GLORY. That is the old lucifer Principle now appearing as ZOE and her daughter TEAMS.

Ken Sublet

Ken,

Reading your response makes me happy I'm a preterist and very happy that you were not a Christian that got to Saul before he became Paul. Luckily Jesus did.

Stop worrying so much about the Devil. He has no power on this earth and not one sin of man isn't now the choice of man. Christ was victorious at the cross and defeated Satan's power and therfore he has no power over me. Am I without sin? No! I still make selfish choices on occassion.

Christians stop fighting yourselves. It is wild to see people quote scripture for their purpose but leave out the greatest commandment in the Bible and one of the last examples Christ gave in the upper room. Serve and Love One Another.

Do any of you really think the Seven Churches of Asia were exactly the same?

There is very little in scripture concerning worship because when the Church started there were very few resources and very high concerns of persecution.

So, I don't think we will find much there but when you look at the Old Testament where the law was in place and God was praised on Harp and with dancing I think you can get a better idea of what is acceptable and what is not.

In Martin Luther's words, If you are not sure just pray to the Lord follow examples and patterns as closely as you can but then if others think you are wrong and you think you are right then "Sin Boldly" for the Grace of our Lord Jesus will cover you.

I'm not saying take the attitude anything goes. I'm just saying that you will NEVER EVER get all of us to agree on one method. The Catholics tried and it didn't work. Thank GOD!

GC

I am glad that I know that Jesus came as Spirit on the day of Pentecost and did not have to wait another 35 or so years.

I know that He came in JUDGMENT in A.D. 70 but I also know that Satan as Abbadon or Apollyon has dug up his sister singers and sorting out those with marks. The problem with date setters is that they don't really know history. If you are REAL and I am REAL then Jesus hasn't returned in the Biblical PATTERN. This Kingism is built almost totally on PROOF TEXTING church historians. They cannot get Luther right so I have found on other topics that they SIFT the scholars until they find just the right quote. But it is bunko.

You state:

In Martin Luther's words, If you are not sure just pray to the Lord follow examples and patterns as closely as you can but then if others think you are wrong and you think you are right then "Sin Boldly" for the Grace of our Lord Jesus will cover you.

Methinks that you just EXPANDED Luther to hit at PATTERNS and EXAMPLES. More later.

What Luther said and you must be ashamed:

"If you are a preacher of mercy, do not preach an imaginary but the true mercy. If the mercy is true, you must therefore bear the true, not an imaginary sin. God does not save those who are only imaginary sinners. Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong (sin boldly), but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides. We, however, says Peter (2. Peter 3:13) are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth where justice will reign.

"But since the devil's bride, Reason, that pretty whore, comes in and thinks she's wise, and what she says, what she thinks, is from the Holy Spirit, who can help us, then? Not judges, not doctors, no king or emperor, because [reason] is the Devil's greatest whore."

Antinomianism (meaning 'against the law' or lawlessness) says: Believe in Christ and you are saved. Obedience to God's law is optional; you are still saved even if you keep on sinning.

Luther did not teach: "Let us sin that grace may abound."

Here is the big lie in Restoration Roots which you MUST be reading

"For Luther insisted...that there is great danger in looking to external forms and patterns, for one is tempted to think that in restoring outward forms alone one has restored the essence. For Luther, the outward forms constitute only an empty shell" (117).

HERE IS THE RESTORATION PATTERN BY LUTHER

" 16. Now, Paul's thought here is that nothing should be taught and practiced in the Church

but what is unquestionably God's Word.

That is a PATTERN which repudiates the doctor's PARADIGM.

It will not do to introduce or perform anything whatever

upon the strength of man's judgment. Man's achievements, man's reasoning and power, are of no avail save in so far as they come from God.

As Peter says in his first epistle (ch. 4:11): "If any man speaketh, speaking as it were oracles of God; if any man ministereth, ministering as of the strength which God supplieth."

Well, that is enough of the TRUTH SQUAD for now. Maybe you need to do some more reading and grasp that when Jesus returns we will rise and meet him in the air.

Ken

Now the last part of this is the most important, for everyone...Whatever you choose to do, when you praise God make sure that it is from the HEART and with LOVE, or it will be rejected. If you want to look up another script someone tried to tell me it states praising with instruments is wrong, Amos 5:21-23 which in the end states God despises offerings from SOLEMN ASSEMBLIES (churches). In other words if you offer it to him in a ungrateful, unrejoicful, or grave mood then it will be rejected. Please respond back.
-------------------------------------------------

When you PRAISE you do not make it a LEGALISTIC praise service: only one worshiper at a time in the Most Holy Place. Sure, some legalists have hired MOURNING MINISTERS to perform the ACT of mourning.

Now, please read Acts 7 without any fill in the blanks preaching, and in total quietness so that you GIVE HEED to the words of God and therefore do the unique WORSHIP task other than falling on your face. Stephen got himself murdered in part for telling the turkeys of the MEGA CHURCH that the musical PLAY or musical idolatry of the Egyptian TRIAD produced the Law and the Temple. God turned them over to worship the STARRY HOST which was primarily S.U.N. worship. Chiun and others worshipped by Israel and approved by our writer, was Saturn whose number is 666. Amos proves that what was happening in Israel (north ten tries) was the wholly perverted worship of the "wandering stars" always represented by human CHANGE AGENTS. Jude speaks of the book of Enoch and others which show that God will come with ten thousand of His saints for those who TURNED TO MUSIC specificially to keep from obeying the WORD.

Israel had restored the GOLDEN CALVES in Samaria so careful, careful, little star worshipers that you are not found fighting agaist God Who is SPIRIT and not worshipped by the works of human hands. No Bible student can dispute the fact that Amos is condemning what Stephen condemned and the prophets condemn as pagan idolatry. This is exactly what they brought from Egypt and to which God abandoned them at Mount Sinai:

"Now, for the first time, they might behold the INCENSE burnt three times every day, and the solemn sacrifice offered once a month to the sacred black calf Mnevis at On (Heliopolis), or to his rival the bull Apis at Memphis. Now they saw, as they could scarcely have seen elswhere,
.....That is where Nadab and Abihu got their unauthorized INCENSE ritual.

.....the adoration of the CREATURE rather than the CREATOR carried to its furthest point, and divine honours paid not only to the mighty Pharaoh, the Child, the representative of the Sun-God, (Shelly's S.U.N. god) but to almost everything in the heaven above, and earth beneith, and the waters under the earth." (MaClear, p. 79).

"Isis: GENDER-VARIANT priestesses, (often self-emasculated males), danced and performed magic rites with the other women devotées. Such a dance can be viewed on a marble relief at Ariccia, near Rome on the Appian Way.
...Ecstatic dancing, lifting of skirts, shaking of buttocks, TOSSING of HEADS and RAISING of ARM reveal the enthusiasm of the dancers. It also reveals that some are clearly MALE-born. Such as these were called cinaedi.

"Common to most Egyptian worship: "A burnt offering was then presented, accompanied by SINGING and MUSIC; and finally the goddess was ceremoniously clothed, adorned, and adored. The second service took place in the afternoon, which consisted chiefly of PRAYER and MEDITATIONS before the images and SYMBOLS of the gods and which closed with MUSIC and ANTIPHONAL SINGING. A third service, quite brief... left Isis unclothed in her quiet temple... The two great autumn and spring festivals featured the death and resurrection of Osiris... and it was expressed with all the symbolism, mystery,
....MUSIC, SINGING, ritual, and PAGENTRY (thos banners)... it was calculated to stimulate the deepest religious emotions, and fan the flames of ecstatic joy." (Fairservice, Walter A., Jr, The Ancient Kingdoms of the Nile, p. 171-172, Mentor

AMOS IDENTIFIED THIS AS THE WORSHIP OF MOLECH, CHIUN AND OR REMPHAN: CHIUN IS SATURN (666). Here is the PUNISHMENT for improvizing like David:

And he said, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A basket of summer fruit. Then said the Lord unto me, The end is come upon my people of Israel; I WILL NOT AGAIN PASS BY THEM ANY MORE. Amos 8:2
....And the songs of the temple shall be HOWLINGS in that day, saith the Lord God: there shall be many dead bodies in every place; they shall cast them forth with silence. Amos 8:3

The 1913 Britannica notes that OUR singing would be heard as SCREAMING and SCREECHING as indeed it still does to the eastern ear. So, our songs have been turned into HOWLINGS for the woes coming upon them.

DON'T TELL ME YOU DON'T SWALLOW UP THE NEEDY TO HIRE MUSICAL MEDIATORS ($90,000.oo West End) and according to reports from Franklin, 50,000.oo to make church into theater:

Hear this, O ye that SWALLOW up the NEEDY, even to make the poor of the land to fail, Amos 8:4

Saying, When will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath, that we may set forth wheat (books, CDs), making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and FALSIFYING the balances by deceit? Amos 8:5

And I will turn your feasts (religious festivals) into MOURNING, and all your SONGS into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day. Amos 8:10

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a FAMINE in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of HEARING the WORDS of the Lord: Amos 8:11

And they shall WANDER from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to SEEK the WORD of the Lord, and SHALL NOT find it. Amos 8:12

In that day shall the fair virgins and young men FAINT for THIRST. Amos 8:13

They that swear by the sin of Samaria, and say, Thy god, O Dan, liveth; and, The manner of Beer-sheba liveth; even they SHALL FALL, and NEVER RISE up again. Amos 8:14

WHY WAS THAT? Notice that instruments and the NEW WINESKIN often go together. Making the Lord's Supper into an Agapae or Marzeah festival with and for the DEAD is another MARK of the perverted times.

WHAT WAS THE CAUSE IN AMOS?
......And the HARP, and the VIOL, the TABRET, and PIPE, and WINE, are in their feasts:
......I HATE, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies. Am.5:21
.....BUT they regard not the work of the Lord, neither consider the operation of his hands. Is.5:12

GOD COULD HAVE SAID, "I ENJOY A FATHER AND SON GOING INTO THE SAME TEMPLE PROSTITUTE--IF THEY WOULD JUST HAVE A GOOD MENTAL ATTITUDE." OR, "I COULD TOLERATE THE WIVES (COWS OF BASHAAN) CONFISCATING THE FOOD OF THE POOR IF THEY WOULD JUST HOLD THEIR HANDS IN A PRAYERFUL ATTITUDE." Improvizing their own songs and using David's TEMPLE-STATE instruments for worship would be ok if they just claimed that MY songs are better than THEIR songs."

THE SACRIFICIAL SYSTEM WAS GOD'S PUNISHMENT WHEN ISRAEL "PRAYED" TO WORSHIP LIKE THE NATIONS AND "FIRED" HIM IN FAVOR OF HUMAN LEADERS.

What Israel was doing was IMPOSED by the Law of Moses "because of transgression" which was MUSICAL WORSHIP of a TRIAD of God's like Rubel Shelly's Family of Gods.

I SAY THAT THE OVERWHELMING "MIRACLE" OF A WORLD-WIDE REPUDIATION OF THE WORD is MARKED by the use of music and is not the primary CAUSE.

The people in Amos were worshiping SATAN uder Saturn, Chaldee 666. Don't tell anyone who has ever read the Old Testament that Israel just had a bad mental attitude and according to Lipsomb's guru, "There was nothing wrong with their worship."

Ken Sublett

The big lie which leads to instruments is that Amos just condemned a "bad mental attitude." Even Phds who can peddle a commentary on Isaiah which also defines Israel, makes the claim "there's nothing wrong with their worship." I am listing just a few quotes out of 55 single spaced evidence that that, like the FAMILY OF GODS is a recent invention of Anti-church of Christ pseudo-scholars:

THE BIBLE AND SCHOLARSHIP KNOWS THAT THE MUSICAL "RITUALS" OF THE JEWS WAS CANAANITE BAALISM AND NOT FROM GOD. MUSIC IS BOTH A PUNISHMENT AND A MARK OF INNOVATION.

"The triumphal hymn of Moses had unquestionably a religious character about it; but the employment of music in religious services, though idolatrous, is more distinctly marked in the festivities which attended the erection of the golden calf." (Smith's Bible Dictionary, Music, p. 589).

Primarily in Israel but also in Judah the Israelites merged with Canaanite Baalism. This was the SENTENCE imposed when Israel rejected the BOOK OF THE COVENANT, rose up in MUSICAL IDOLATRY and God gave them the LAW "which was not good" to worship the STARRY HOST.

"From a religious as well as a cultural point of view the Israelites came under Canaanite influence after their immigration from Palestine: they were attracted by the ancient Canaanite cult of BAAL. Holy places on mountain-tops, sacred stones and stone columns, trees and springs were among the locations in which they sought God.
....Of course, they said that in this way they were serving the God of Israel,
....but their FORMS of worship were indisputably those of the CANANNITE God BAAL... The "God of Moses seemed to have been forgotten." (Jirku, Anton, The World of the Bible, World Publishing, p. 75)

"The effect of this demoralizing religion upon Hebrew society was seen in the corruption of justice, in wanton and luxurious living, and in the decay of social unity." (Living Bible Ency., p. 87).

"Given the Milieu of Canaan, there were bound to be breakdowns, both personal and national. How else could such predicaments be overcome except by recognition of the wrongs committed and a speedy making of amends--not so much the payment of a penalty as the repair of the rupture? It could be done by a complete rededication as provided for in the burnt offering with its symbol indicating the removal of corruption and presence of the salt of friendship, or by the peace offering through which individual and community were reconciled to the Lord. God had indeed provided for his people a way of escape. Only when his gifts of preservation and salvation did the prophets attack them because such attitudes represented a gross misuse of the sacrificial grace of God.
"Israel's sacrificial system provided only for the removal or forgiveness of sins committed UWITTINGLY (Lev. 4:2). There is NO RIGUAL for expiation of sins incurred DEFIANTLY, that is, those committed with a high hand (Num. 15:30-31). Such sins were apparently ineradicable, as was BLAS0HEMY against the HOLY GHOST (Mark 3:29)." (Myers, p. 46-47)

"The ritual observances at the Hebrew and at a Canaanite sanctuary were so similar that to the mass of the people Jehovah worship and Baal worship were not separated by any well-marked line... A sacrifice was a PUBLIC ceremony of a township or clan... Then the crowds streamed into the sanctuary (Courts only_ from all sides, dressed in their gayest attire, marching joyfully to the SOUND OF MUSIC, and bearing with them not only the victims appointed for sacrifice, but store of bread and wine set forth the feast... Universal hilarity prevailed." (Gurney, p. 37).

"See how they sang! 'That chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of music, like David.' Musical sounds gratified their auricular sensibilities, and they chanted to the 'viol.' Here is the lust of the ear... What a description this of a people that lived and wrought entirely for the senses! They were practical materialists. They had no spiritual vision, sensibilities, or experience. Their imperishable souls were submerged in the deep flowing sea of mere animal pleasures... There is, indeed, a reference to intellectual effort, for it is said, 'they invented to themselves instruments of music.' Carnal indulgencies has ever been and is now as much, if not more than ever, the great employer of man's inventive faculties." (Pulpit Commentary, The Book of Amos, p. 131).

"...Scriptures do CONDEMN the use that David made of the instruments in worship--Amos 6:5: 'Woe to them... that chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of music, like David;' and Amos 5:23: 'Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols.' The condemnation of the instruments of music in this passage turns on the phrase LIKE DAVID--it does not say like David's, which could refer only to the instruments, but like David is the use that David made of the instruments. David did not invent the musical instrument--Jubal invented the instruments (Gen. 4:21)--but David invented them for worship--they were David's INNOVATION." (Wallace, p. 177).

Ken Sublett

A PRAYER FOR HELP IN THIS DAY OF DISTRESS


Change agents have much to say about calling us back to the Old Testament. The author happens to be a student of the Old Covenant and finds many valuable lessons therein. In the Psalms he finds many inspirational thoughts for prayers. When the righteous among the Hebrews were confronted with deadly, dangerous enemies, they prayed fervently to God for his help and deliverance and he heard and delivered them. While we must never pray for any physical harm to our enemies, we can properly pray that those who are spiritual enemies of the Cause of Christ will be defeated in their endeavors. You who read this are urged to join the author in daily praying for the safety of the Lord's church from those agents of change who are working to corrupt her faith, worship and practice.

• Pray that God will confound and confuse them in their schemes and plans (Ps. 35:4 KJV); that He will bring their counsels to nought (Ps. 33:10).
  
  
• Pray that they will be scattered (Ps.68:1), that they will turn and flee from God's righteous servants who oppose them (Ps. 129:5).
  
  
• Ask God to turn them one against the other and render them helpless to harm to his church (Ps. 64:8).
  
  
• Pray that their mischief will return on their own heads (Ps. 7:16).
  
  
• Entreat God to blunt their arrows, break their bows and dull their swords (Ps. 49:9; 76:3).
  
  
• Earnestly pray that they will be defeated and overthrown in the day of conflict (Prov. 22:12).
  
  
• Pray that God's people will be strong and valiant in the day of battle and that Christ will be glorified; that those who love him and his holy church will not be put to shame (Ps. 69:6).
  
  
• Ask God to arise and "plead his own cause" (Ps. 74:22); that He will remember "all the evil that the enemy hath done in the sanctuary" (Ps. 74:3).
  
  
• Pray that every brother and sister in Christ will give heed to the Word of God (Ps. 119:34) and "set their hope in God" (Ps. 78:7) rather than in schemes, promotions and worldly enticements.
  
  
• Let us pray that God will revive the spirits of each of us (Is. 57:15), and his church throughout the world; that every man of God will be a good soldier of Christ Jesus and stand boldly against the enemies of the kingdom (II Tim. 2:3-4).
  
  
• Entreat God that the faithful remnant will rejoice and be glad in God's protection and deliverance of his church (Ps. 70:4)
  
  
• Pray that all the churches of Christ will once again flourish and with devotion and zeal go forth with determination and confidence to win the world for Christ (Matt. 28:19).

__________________________________
John Waddey, Editor
Christianity: Then and Now
johnwaddey@aol.com

CHANGES DO MAKE A DIFFERENCE


In a suburb of Nashville, there once was a flourishing congregation of the Lord's people. They had a lovely meeting house and prospered for a season. Because of internal conflicts and poor leadership, the congregation disintegrated and ceased to exist. The building still stands but changes have taken place. The sign identifying it as a church of Christ was taken down. The pews, pulpit and communion table were carted away. The former doors were removed and large garage doors installed. At last report a car repair shop occupied it.

No longer do saints assemble there to worship; the gospel is not proclaimed therein. The Lord's memorial meal is not observed, nor do sinners have their sins washed away in its baptistery. No children fill its classrooms for Bible study. Satan won the victory! The changes were overwhelming and permanent. It is no longer the home of a church of Christ, it is an auto shop.

Across the nation scores of churches of Christ are engaged in a similar process of change. Seduced by skilled promoters of change they have embarked on a project that will significantly alter every aspect of their being.

Consider what their mentors propose:

• Many have already changed their name. They prefer to be known as a "Community Church" or some other cognomen than church of Christ.
  
  
• They have rejected the Bible as the divine pattern for the church (II Tim. 1:13), preferring consensus and the example of various successful denominational bodies.
  
  
• They are changing their doctrine. They have repudiated much of what their fathers taught about grace, baptism, worship, church government, the role of women, the nature of the church.
  
  
• They are changing their worship. The simple worship of the apostolic church is not pleasing to them. To be bound and limited by Scripture is too restrictive. They view our acappella singing, our simple memorial feast, our Biblical preaching to be old-fashioned, boring and ineffective. They long for excitement and the freshness of change. They wish to be like their religious neighbors who acknowledge no such limitations (I Sam. 8:5).
  
  
• They have changed their message of salvation. Salvation by grace (Eph. 2:8-9) has been replace by salvation by "grace alone."' Baptism to wash away sins (Acts 22:16) has been replaced by baptism to declare one's previous salvation by grace. The one church which is God's family of saved souls (Acts 2:47; Col. 1:13), has been replaced with a choice of denominational churches, none of which are really important.
  
  
• They have replaced the Biblical teaching and practice of exclusive male leadership for the church ( I Tim. 2:8-12; 3:1) with a new model, fashioned after the Feminist cult, that allows women to participle in "all aspects of church life" i.e., as preachers teachers, deacons, etc.
  
  
• Preaching the gospel has been replaced by story-telling, dramatic skits and other new means of sharing. God expects faithfulness of his disciples if they hope to be saved in eternity (Rev. 2:10). While faithfulness does not mean perfection (Rom. 3:23), it does mean that we seek to abide in his word in all that we do in our personal and congregational lives (II John 9).
  

More examples could be given, but these suffice to make the point. Congregations that have embraced the above mentioned changes may once have been faithful churches of Christ. But given these major changes in every essential aspect of their nature and being, are we not correct in concluding that somewhere along the way they ceased to be what they once were? Yes, they may still be a church, but they are no longer the church one reads of in Scripture, nor the church they were 25 years ago! They may talk of their spiritual roots in the Restoration Movement, but they have abandoned those roots. Just as that building housing the auto shop in Nashville is no longer the home of a church of Christ, such changed congregations are no longer the church they once were!

Actually it would be a blessing, if all of those who are determined to take this course would take a new name and disassociate themselves from us, lest those seeking salvation and the church of the Bible be misled.

___________________________________
John Waddey, Editor
Christianity: Then and Now
E-Mail: johnwaddey@aol.com

Well, I thought I had found the Holy Grail, but alas I haven't.

This article is supposed to list what the leaders of the Change Agent army propose. The bullets should start with a verb I suspect, or at least use the form: "...propose: Change the name of your congregation." The reader of this article has to infer the proposed action based on the author's description. That ain't good English;)

Well, let's look at the proposals (I've supplied a proposal that I think fits Mr. Waddey's text).

1. Change your congregation's name. This does not seem to be a scriptural issue since God's church is known by several labels in scripture. Changing the name per se, is not a problem.

2. Reject Scripture as normative and make all decisions based on majority vote. This would be a problem if it were the case; I don't know of any congregation of the churches of Christ that has made this change. In fact, all the congregations of which I am aware take Scripture very seriously.

3. Change your doctrine. This is not per se unscriptural either, assuming your current doctrine does not appropriately reflect what Scripture says. Repudiate seems a bit harsh. Perhaps re-examine your fathers' doctrine would be more appropriate. To re-examine our beliefs from generation to generation seems prudent. "We've always done it that way" or "we've always believed that" are not sufficient reasons for continuing an activity. Doctrinal changes have been made many times to get us where we are today. It seems the Jerusalem conference had to make some modifications in their and the church at large's doctrine. Doctrinal modifications were made between the Stone and Campbell movements and yes, doctrinal changes have occured since the first of the 20th century. They will likely continue and if based on better understandings of Scripture, are to be welcomed. Changing of doctrine is not the problem; the basis of that change may be.

4. Change your worship to be more energetic and appealing. I don't suppose there's anything unscriptural about that either. The assemblies of the church are to be appealing to all in attendance whether Christian or not. Hiring a Gospel preacher who can present the Word of God in inspiring and engaging ways would be a good thing.

5. Change the method of salvation. This is perhaps Mr. Waddey's single scriptural point. If someone advocates changing the method of salvation, that is a serious issue. If they have moved from baptism to grace alone, they have likely done so in response to an over zealous emphasis on baptism - of "just get them in the water." Doesn't make changing salvation correct, but it should give us a reason to re-examine the way we teach salvation.

6. Let women fully participate in worship and congregational leadership. There are some who have done this I suspect. I also suspect that they are trying to balance all of what Paul has to say on the subject. If they have come to the wrong conclusion, and yet they are Christian, I suspect that Mr. Waddey's allowance for not being perfect would cover any gaffs they might commit.

7. Do anything but preach the Word of God. I don't know of any congregation that has rejected preaching. Some have added other methods of communicating the Gospel which really is part of what preaching is about. Jesus' command to preach the Gospel as we go into the world is less about the method of proclamation than it is about the fact that we should communicate it. Story telling fits, it seems to me, with Jesus' use of parables to communicate truth. Since preaching involves explication (rather than simply reading scripture straight through), the use of an appropriate illustration seems reasonable. If that illustration is acted out rather than spoken, is that unscriptural? I think not. We confuse ourselves when we use the word preach because we have a narrow definition of what that is. The point of the church is to proclaim and communicate the Word of God. The methods of so doing are debateable.

It is interesting that Waddey believes the above changes would keep a church from being a faithful church of Christ given that, with the exception of point 5, Waddey says being imperfect is O.K.
Reaching incorrect conclusions in this case does not disallow faithfulness.

Waddey's final paragraph - he seems to do so well up to his last paragraphs - is an odd one. He decries changing names and then practically begs them to do so. Isn't that a bit odd? I also think it a bit strange that he would want to be disassociated from baptized (but imperfect) Christians. It seems he would want to embrace them.

H.Roberson

That was a great post - thanks. It makes so much sense, especially # 7. That makes perfect sense and thanks for explaining it in a way that I wouldn't have thought of. I'm anxious to read the rebuttal that's sure to come, though.

Dotty

7. Do anything but preach the Word of God. I don't know of any congregation that has rejected preaching. Some have added other methods of communicating the Gospel which really is part of what preaching is about.

When Paul "preached" until midnight he didn't begin at 9:30 in the morning. The word in the CONGREGATION is called dialog or communing.

The early church read or "sang" the Psalms as worship just as Paul demanded. A few centurys later when men turned heretics they TOLD BIBLE STORYS end to end. This was considered an APOSTASY.

A fundamental part of the GOSPEL is that Jesus died to give us REST. Rest or PAUO in the Greeks has a strong focus on "silencing the speakers" and "silencing the instrumentalists." Jesus stopped them both: he ejected the musical minstrels "like dung." The BURDEN laded on by the clergy was 'anxiety created by religious rituals." Another BIG LIE is the law of tithing and the LAW OF GIVING. Paul repudiated that. Therefore, the synagogue of Christ HAS NO INCOME to pay for what many in the BODY could do better. Rhetoricians, sOPHISts (serpents), singers, musicians and Craftsmen will go back into hell with the Mother Goddess. Craftsman is the Greek TECHNE. It specifically points to those WHO BUILD BUILDING as opposed to the body and human SPIRIT as the only house Jesus builds. You CANNOT worship in houses built by human hands: you CANNOT worship by your human hands.

Jesus' command to preach the Gospel AS WE G0 into the world is less about the method of proclamation than it is about the fact that we should communicate it.

That's the old devious plan best explained by Rubel Shelly in defending the Located Missionary. He misuses the example of Paul to Timothy. Paul worked to the POINT OF TRAVAIL so that the gospel would be without charge. You cannot TRAFFIC in the free water of the Word (Isa 55). The Bible and church history shows that the BISHOPS or elders had a large territory because they feld that their whole "county" was to be taught--free of charge. I know of no history that shows an INCIDENTAL understanding of the COMMISSION.

http://www.piney.com/Located-Missionary.html

There is no version which says OH, SINCE YOUR ARE GOING ANYWAY PREACH THE GOSPEL! When Jesus READ the word in the synagogue the pulpit held up the Scriptures and NOT a preacher.

Kerusso (g2784) kay-roos'-so; of uncert. affin.; to herald (as a public crier), espec. divine truth (the gospel): - preach (-er), proclaim, publish.

Paul, of course, just HAPPENED to preach AS HE WENT? Paul understood that you cannot preach to the saved. He did not want to evangelize (preach) to those who had been taught. Jesus went out preaching and teaching AND preaching:

And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. Mt.4:23

Let's see: Paul Revere was a Located Herald. He stood by his little pulpit in North Church and lit the lamp and after telling a joke to bring applause (very low class) he waves his hands, spits on you and says: I wants you to know-uh that the British-uh are comming-uh. Bow your heads and let spray!

Story telling fits, it seems to me, with Jesus' use of parables to communicate truth.

"Story telling" is the mantra of those who do not believe in commands, examples and inferences. Narrative Theology (feminist theology) tells the story of the wildernes, "takes liberties" and turns it into a PATTERN for Christian worship and COMMUNITY (meaning commune." God in Christ (the Spirit in both testaments) told the story the way HE wanted it told. The preacher is going to tell MORE or LESS in which case people can listen to sermons for 20 years and believe that Noah crossed the Red Sea in the Ark of the Covenant. Keeping them IGNORANT is the intention of those who believe that they must explain Go.

Too bad, too sad: Jesus used Parables to HIDE the truth from the clergy and most UPPER CLASS. When you ignore the Word "as it has been taught" as the only WORSHIP word Paul mentioned, then God sends you strong delusions. Sure, even the incarnate God of the universe now speaks to YOU in parables (storys) lest YOU hear with your ears, turn and be saved. You see, Scripture and all literature proves that when you honor men and fall into music YOU HAVE FALLEN AND YOU WILL NEVER GET UP. You will notice that this thread is ME directed because it cannot face the burning face of a Holy God anymore. Try looking at Matthew 13 and many other notes to prove that "parables" are used (Isaiah 48) to hide the truth from RETAILING merchants who "water the wine."

Since preaching involves explication (rather than simply reading scripture straight through), the use of an appropriate illustration seems reasonable. If that illustration is acted out rather than spoken, is that unscriptural? I think not. We confuse ourselves when we use the word preach because we have a narrow definition of what that is. The point of the church is to proclaim and communicate the Word of God. The methods of so doing are debateable.

Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things alway in remembrance. 1 Pet 2: 15

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 1 Pet 2: 16

For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 1 Pet 2: 17

It is a fact: Jesus will not judge us. He said that the Words which He Spoke will judge us. I would not take a chance on a preacher's word if he has so little respect for God that he makes up his own Scriptures. As Rubel Shelly says, working in partnership with God.

And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 1 Pet 2: 18

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 1 Pet 2: 19

The Zoe Group promoting "musical worship" now promises to bring the light: Zoe is Lucifer.

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 1 Pet 2: 20

Epilusis (g1955) ep-il'-oo-sis; from 1956; explanation, i.e. application: - interpretation.

Epiluo (g1956) ep-ee-loo'-o; from 1909 and 3089; to >SOLVE FURTHER, i.e. (fig.) to explain, decide: - determine, expound.

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 1 Pet 2: 21

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 1 Pet 1:11

Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. 1 Pet 1:12

Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; 1 Pe 1:13

BUT there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 Pet 2:1

And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 2 Pet 2: 2

And through covetousness shall they with feigned words MAKE MERCHANDISE of you: whose JUDGMENT now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 2 Pet 2: 3

If we have TALENT we can SERVE. However, if we SPEAK we must speak as ORACLES of God. We can prophesy by reading the word so that we can say "thus saith the Lord."

The written Word of the Living Word is the "text book" of the Synagogue Christ promised to build. The Jews believed that when they lifted up the Scriptures and READ (no singing) the Word it was GOD who was speaking to them. The only way we can speak as the ORACLES of God is to, as Paul commanded Timothy, "Give attendance to the public reading of the Word, to exhortation (to keep what they had heard) and to doctrine (those teachings included in the STORY line).

The Bible and history and common sense agrees. How can you PAY a reader when ACU's guy promises to train Prophets, Chanellers and Facilitators to go out and CHANGE the churches.

Click here for the 100% rejection of a hireling clergy: God and Paul knew that whatever the motives, those "who lord it over first have to hate you." How much more hate than to tell widows and hard working people that they are under the TITHE and the LAW OF GIVING.

http://www.piney.com/ChMinistry.html

I have an encyclopedia full of PROOF that the preacher as substitute for incompetent elders is anti-Biblical and anti-Christian: that is why fools love to be fooled in the words of Paul just like drinking KoolAid.

Ken Sublett

Ken,

It's nice to see that your glands, while they don't let you attend church, don't keep you from posting your biases on this board. My prayers are for continued good health for you - and Harold.

Everyone else:
O.K., I broke a cardinal rule of mine: NEVER read a post from Ken. Quite frankly, I haven't read all of it...have dipped in a couple places though, during the 30 minutes it took to scroll through it. So, if I've missed the point in a couple areas, just go with it.

What I think I've gleaned is that Ken doesn't think preachers should be paid anything. Interesting concept and one, which if soul damning, will send pert-near every member of every Church of Christ to eternal damnation. I suspect the only reason Ken would accept a congregation contributing to anything would be benevolence - and only if Paul was coming to get it. Or rather, no contribution for anything...just show up on the day Paul arrives and give it to him directly. Makes it hard to pay the light bill, but hey, if you can make it work...

Or perhaps Ken would only allow contributions to pay a missionary of sorts, or elders maybe. Of course only missionaires dispatched by Jesus himself (that's the example we have...before the establishment of the church so this does not authorize Church-era missionary salaries), or elders who do multiple things (as Timothy was told - but only in Crete).

I really don't care if we preach as we go or if we go to preach. The point is that preaching is the proclamation and explication of the Word of God. The method used for that proclamation (whether we read it verbatim from the Authorized version, or explain it in story, or demonstrate it in acting) is pretty much irrelevant.

Jesus and parables: Jesus does say, in Luke that he spoke in parables so that others would not understand. Did he mean everyone else, or just those that don't have ears, as the reference Jesus uses implies? I suspect the latter unless we are to picture our Saviour wasting his breath with every story. Perhaps it was only on the Lukan occasion that He wanted to frustrate understanding. In any event, He told stories people did understand...The Good Samaritan is an example. The Lawyer got the answer correct and Jesus told him to go and do likewise. In another place Jesus uses a story and then explains it to the 'crowd,' far from wanting to keep the secrets from them. Even Jesus' enemies understood his stories - without explanation, take a look at Mark 12.12.

Jesus used stories for a variety of reasons. The reality is that He used stories to make His points. If He wanted to hide something from time to time, so be it. Most times he either explained the story or the audience understood it.

Could elders, rather than the preacher use stories to explain a point? Could they ask two disputing members to act out their argument in order to have them realize how stupid their behavior had become? I suspect yes; if elders, then preachers.

I'm not sure what Ken's reference to music has to do with this discussion.

I am now returning to my cardinal rule. Sorry for the digression.

H.Roberson

-----Original Message-----
From: JOHNWADDEY@aol.com [JOHNWADDEY@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 1:16 PM
To:
Subject: A Lesson to Fortify Your Faith, J. Waddey, Christianity: Then & Now

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

Your help is needed. Please take a few moments to review the thoughts of this lesson and then pass it on to other Christians on your email list. Those who are seeking to change the church into something new and different are working feverishly to achieve their goal. Either we respond or the Cause we love will be swept away. Together we can make a difference. John Waddey
___________________________________


LOST AND MUST BE FOUND


If Churches of Christ are going to survive this period of stress and attack and flourish as in days past, there are things we must recover.

• We must recover and cultivate in the heart of every member a profound respect for God's Word as the final and complete authority in all things relating to our faith and practice. Our brethren must have the spirit of Samuel who said, "Speak Lord, thy servant heareth" (I Sam. 3:9). They must be convinced that the law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul" (Ps. 19:7). Not just the preacher, but all must believe and conduct themselves on the basis that Jesus has all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18), that he is head over all things to the church (Eph.1:22), and that his word will judge us in the last day (John 12:48).
  
  
• We must find and restore a sense of responsibility in the heart of every preacher to proclaim the whole counsel of God, withholding nothing needful for the church (Acts 20:20, 26).
  
  
• Our churches must recover an understanding of our mission, our reason for existing: to preach the gospel to all of humanity (Matt. 28:19). Christ did not die to purchase a church that would serve only affluent Americans.
  
  
• We must recover the urgency of evangelism as the duty of every disciple, every day, publicly and from house to house (Acts 20:20).
  
  
• We must find a lost sense of brotherhood (I Pet. 2:17). We are members of a world-wide family of saved people. We are related in Christ to all who have gone before us in his church and all who will come later. We must be interested and concerned about the welfare of all the congregations of God's people (II Cor. 11:28). When one part of the body suffers we all suffer (I Cor. 12:26).
  
  
• We must discover again an appreciation for the uniqueness of the church which Christ built. He promised to build one church, no more (Matt. 16:18). He purchased but one church with his blood (Acts 20:28). He loves and saved but one church which is his bride (Eph. 5:23-26). Though there be a thousand other religious organizations that call themselves churches, there is but one divine church of Christ (I Cor. 12:20). All others are counterfeits, in competition with the one true and genuine church for the souls of lost humanity.
  
  
• We must recover a sense of outrage when we observe sinful, irreverent men mishandling the Word of Truth and leading souls astray (Phil. 3:18-19; II Tim. 2:17).
  
  
• We must feel that same kind of indignation when we see or hear anyone inflicting harm on the Lord's church and a sense of duty to protect the church from those who would damage her. No one can be a good citizen of the kingdom of Christ who can stand and watch it being destroyed feel no sense of anger!
  

John Waddey

___________________________________
Scores of additional lessons relating to the church and the change movement can be found at http://www.christianity-then-and-now.com. Evangelistic lessons can be seen at http://www.firstcenturychristian.com

CASUAL RELIGION


We live in a casual age. This is reflected in many ways. We see casual dress in public; casual manners while dining; casual grooming when going out in public; casual conduct when in public places. Most would agree that a degree of casualness is harmless, even good. The stiff formality of the past was sometimes oppressive and even pretentious. Yet most mature observers will agree that many people take their casualness too far. Especially is it disturbing and distressing to see some extreme cases of casualness in the life of the church.

• Some are casual about the salvation of sinners. They do not take seriously the conditions God has set for receiving sinners into His family. In no uncertain terms He has told us that confession of faith, repentance and baptism are prerequisites for salvation (Rom. 10:9-10; Acts 2:38). These conditions are stated not once but in many places. Yet casual preachers are leaving the impression that one can be saved before and maybe even without baptism.
  
  
• Some are casual about the purpose of baptism. Many churches immerse, but few immerse for the reasons given by God. For most it is to join a denominational body. One is baptized for remission of sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Casual preachers imply that some might be saved even if they don’t understand the proper reason for their baptism.
  
  
• Some are casual about their worship. The worship of God in many congregations cannot in any way be described as reverent. There is little or no solemnity. Such is manifested in preachers who treat their position in a casual way; with little serious study and preparation; with sermons that are more entertainment than reflections on the sacred things of God. Jokes, earthy stories and entertainment crowd out the study of the Holy Words of heaven.
  
  
• Some preachers are casual in their handling of the Scriptures. In place of “The Bible says,” their sermons ring with, “I believe” or “Dr. So and So says,” or “the majority believe.” None of these have any currency with God, nor should they with Christians.
  
  
• Some are casual in their singing. They confuse fun songs and entertaining songs with worship to God. Others see no problem in replacing congregational singing, which the church from earliest times has practiced, with the performance of soloists, duos, trios, quartets and choirs, all of which have no divine authority.
  
  
• Some are casual in the observance of the Lord’s Supper. It is manifested in the demeanor and conduct of those presiding and serving. It is seen in the behavior of those in the pews. Many commune with little preparation of heart and mind, with an inclination to hurry through the observance; with a lack of somber thought and reflection. All of these reflect a casualness that is not wholesome.
  
  
• Even public prayer can be offered in a casual manner. Men who pray without forethought as to what they will say; men who talk to God of Creation as though He were their next-door neighbor do not reflect the proper reverence for God and His worship.
  
  
• A casual attitude toward worship can be seen in the way some folks dress. If you were invited to visit the president or some notable dignitary you would dress “up” for the occasion. For the funeral of a loved one, you would dress up. How do you dress to when you come to honor your Lord’s death?
  
  
• Many moderns are casual in their daily discipleship. Jesus calls all men to be his disciples (Matt. 11:28-29). Those who accept the call are expected to take up their cross and follow him (Matt. 16:24). He expects us to love him above all others, even our closest kin (Matt. 10:37). We are to let our manner of life be worthy of the gospel (Phil. 1:27). We are to discern the signs of the times (Matt. 16:3). All of these and many other scriptures remind us of the seriousness of our life in Christ. For the forgiveness, the blessings and the salvation he gives us, in return he expects our lives, genuinely committed, not as a casual game of pretense!
  

Casualness is a common mark of those who feel empowered to change the faith, worship and practice of the Lord’s church. Since Christ, our salvation, the church and God’s word are the most important things in the world, let every child of God treat them with the reverence and respect they deserve.

____________________________________
John Waddey, Editor
Christianity: Then and Now
E-Mail: johnwaddey@aol.com

'The Real Test'

Pomp and pageantry and show are not a test of principles, but they do command a big following. What is in style and what is right are often two different things. The real test is the will of God!

Ahab and Jezebel were drunk with power. The nation reeled like a drunken man in the intoxication and revelry of Baal worship. But out on Mount Carmel one day the proud king and his clamoring followers saw Baal's worship go down in defeat (1 Ki. 18). They saw the prophets of Baal — 400 of them — work themselves up in an all-day frenzy of pleading and shouting and bodily mutilation, but no answer came from their idol.

Then in the evening they heard the prayer of faith borne from the heart of Elijah to the throne of God. They saw the answer of Jehovah as the fire fell and consumed the sacrifice, the altar of stone, and even the water in the trenches. Fallen to the earth in penitence and humility, the people acknowledged their wrong. From their hearts went up the cry, "Jehovah, he is God" (1 Ki. 18:39 ASV). - by Batsell Barrett Baxter

Malachi 3:6 "For I the LORD do not change"! - since when has a Perfect God needed to change?

Hebrews 6:17-20 "So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he interposed with an oath, so that through two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible that God should prove false, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to seize the hope set before us. We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain, where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest for ever after the order of Melchiz'edek."- again I remind you brethren, that the only change God tolerates is the one from our disobedience to "complete" obedience!

Galatians 1:6-12 "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel-- not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ." - why must we deceive ourselves brothers?

2 Corinthians 11:3-4 "But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if some one comes and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough." - is this not true today brethren?

2 Thessalonians 1:5-8 "This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be made worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering-- since indeed God deems it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant rest with us to you who are afflicted, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance upon those who do not know God and upon those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus." - is this not warning enough beloved brethren of not obeying the Lord's "complete" gospel?

1 Timothy 4:1-3 "Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth." – for those of you brothers and sisters who believe we should be all inclusive of those with different faiths such as Catholicism, can you not clearly read the warning? We are living in these times now!

2 Timothy 2:24-25 "And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing, correcting his opponents with gentleness." - Friends, can we not reason together the heart of the truth. Must we like the unbelievers ravage each other?

Revelation 22:18-19 "I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." - can you not understand brethren the danger of preaching a different gospel?

2 Timothy 3:16-17 "All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." - who among you can deny the Lord's own words through his inspired writer?

1 Corinthians 1:10-14 "I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chlo'e's people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren. What I mean is that each one of you says, "I belong to Paul," or "I belong to Apol'los," or "I belong to Cephas," or "I belong to Christ." Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"

My fellow brethren, can you not perceive the danger you are creating? We must find common ground, lest we quarrel. Yet that common ground can only be the Lord’s word, not that of men. Some of you say I am of Batsell Barrett Baxter, others claim to belong to Rubel Shelly and still others to be followers of Max Lucado. Can Batsell, or Rubel, or Max save you? Are any of these men’s words more relevant to our salvation than that of Christ? Can you not see that you are all destroying the bride of Christ – his own church?

Luke 6:46-49 "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you? Every one who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep, and laid the foundation upon rock; and when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house, and could not shake it, because it had been well built. But he who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation; against which the stream broke, and immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great." – Can you not see brothers that it is not enough that we but believe, our faith must be active through our obedience to “all” of Christ words!

Ephesians 2:8-10 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God-- not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."
James 2:26 "For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead."

So finally my brothers and sisters, can we not all agree that the Lord offers Grace freely to all who will but accept it, and yet if we do not extend our hand (through faith) and grasp the free gift (a work), how then can we be saved?

May our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ lead you all and he alone. Be at peace with one another.

To tell people that all snakes are the same and imply they are all harmless is a wicked dangerous thing that can cause serious injury or death.

To tell a person that all spiders are the same is a deadly lie that can bring painful consequences.

To teach that all people are the same is an evil and dangerous thing. For a child to assume that all people are as harmless as his mother or father can be disastrous.

To teach that all religions are the same is equally false, destructive and dangerous. This is the lie of pluralism and multiculturalism. Buddhists worship their ancestors. We worship Jehovah the Creator. Buddhism has influenced the civilizations of the Orient. Christianity has produced Western Civilization. Buddhism is a religion of man, Christianity originated with God. Jehovah alone can save (Is. 43:11). Christianity is his one and only religion (John 14:6; Eph.4:4-5). All other religions are false and of no value to man (Jer. 10:14-15).

To teach that all churches (denominations) are the same is a dangerous lie. This too is the offspring of multiculturalism and pluralism. It is the mantra of denominationalism. It is now being preached by the promoters of change in our ranks.

It is equally false to say that one church is as good as another. Christ died for his church (Eph. 5:25). He purchased his church with his life's blood (Acts 20:28). He saved his church (Eph. 5:23). He adds the saved to his church (Acts 2:47 KJV). He established his church (Matt. 16:18). To tell men and women that a church established by men is equal in value to the one built by Christ [is] not only false, it is destructive to the souls of men.

To teach that all changes are equally beneficial is false and destructive. Some are beneficial, some are harmless and some are detrimental. Those that will help us be stronger, better Christians, that will help us be more in compliance with God's will we need. The harmless kind we can tolerate. But any change to the faith, worship and practice of the church that was ordained by Christ in his Word is sinful and must be rejected (Rev. 22:18-19; Deut. 4:2).

All snakes are not the same. Some are harmless, some are deadly. This truth everyone needs to know. People are at great risk who do not know the difference. One is not your enemy if he tries to help you understand which serpent is dangerous and which is harmless. Nor is he your enemy who seeks to help you discern between those who would help the church and those who would harm her (Lev. 10:10-11; Gal. 4:16).

John Waddey

Paul predicted that some would fall from the faith (I Tim. 4:1). In the parable of the sower and the soils, only one of four types proved faithful. (Matt. 13:18-23). There are many reasons why people turn their backs on Christ's church. Among them are:

First of all is the determination of Satan to recapture the soul he has lost to Christ (I Pet. 5:8). Unwary souls are his victims.

Discouragement. This may be in their personal or family life. It may be with difficulties in the church or with poor examples of Christianity.

Weakness of character and purpose. Some folks find it hard to live a disciplined life, to set a goal and pursue it, to be faithful unto death (Rev. 2:10). They started with good intentions but faltered and fell along the way.

False expectations of the church and their fellow-Christians. They expect perfect churches and Christians and are disheartened when they find that all are imperfect like they are.

Poor experiences in worship and instruction in the church cause some to go astray. Lack luster worship, poor quality preaching that lacks a solid Biblical basis, or that is filled with personal opinions and thoughtless assertions leaves folks hungering and thirsting for righteousness and they go elsewhere to find it.

Disillusionment with Christianity in general and the church in particular. This affects many of our contemporaries. The church does not measure up to what they want it to be, so they turn away.

Some are members of the church of Christ by accident of birth rather than by faith and conviction. Their parents were Christians and they grew up "in the Church." They were never truly born again (John 3:3-5).

Some are members by marriage. They "joined" the church to win the favor of the person they loved or perhaps their parents. Having attained their mate, they turned away from that in which they really did not believe.

Worldly influences can draw some away from Christ and his church. Worldly friends, lodges, clubs, recreation. They don't have enough time left in their lives for Christ and the church (Matt. 13:22).

Bad experiences with one or more Christians that hurt them and caused them to wrongly conclude that all Christians were like that. Satan always has one or more counterfeit Christians stationed in most churches.

Lack of encouragement in their early days in Christ or when they went through some trying times. Like babies, most of us need help in learning to walk with Christ (Eph. 4:11-15).

Lack of proper and appropriate teaching and indoctrination that would root and ground them in the faith (II Pet. 3:18).

Some mistakenly conclude that they can enjoy all the privileges of sonship and salvation just by believing in Christ; that the church is optional. Thus for various reasons they lose interest in the church (Matt. 13:19).

Some have not been taught the signal truths that Christ founded but one church (Matt. 16:18; Eph. 4:4) and that denominations are not an acceptable substitute or alternative for his church (I Cor. 1:10-15).

Some are captured by teachers from their former religious connections. Not knowing how to explain their new-found faith or to respond to the false teaching they are ensnared.

By giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils causes many to go astray (I Tim. 4:1). If one fills his mind with false teaching we should not be surprised if he gradually embraces it. Some spend hours before the television watching the theatrical performances of false teachers. They devour books written by authors who are selling something other than pure Christianity. They go to services and activities of religious groups which are not faithfully teaching God's Word. Like the bird lured into the snare they are caught.

A failure to break their ties with influential worldly people who eventfully draw them back into sin. This might include some family members, and especially important social ties (I Cor. 15:33).

A lack of genuine repentance towards their old life and true heart-changing conversion. They never die to sin (Rom. 6:2). In time sin reasserts itself and sweeps them away (Rom. 7:9).

A rebellious heart that was never brought into full subjection to Christ, His Word and His Way (Is. 65:2).

Stubbornness causes some to fall away. They hate to give up cherished beliefs or activities that are detrimental to faithfulness. They resent correction (I Sam. 15:23).

A desire to be like the world about them (I Sam. 8:5). When their spiritual leaders and teachers reprove them for their worldliness they become enraged and refuse to continue in the church.

False pride which makes some feel they should be able to tell the church what to believe, teach and practice. When their ideas are rejected, their pride is wounded and they go elsewhere hoping to be able to assert themselves.

Advanced worldly education and attainments that make some feel too knowledgeable or too important to stay with people who are so simple and old-fashioned that they strictly follow the Bible pattern.

Some lost their faith in the simple gospel while pursing their education. They fell victim to the secular humanism and worldly philosophy that dominates most secular schools. Some wily, unbelieving professor may have destroyed their faith.

Wealth and high social position makes some uncomfortable associating with humble, ordinary Christians. Their desire for association with a higher social set draws them away from the church to some group that offers what they want.

Legalism and self-righteousness on the part of church members will drive those who long for a peaceful, devout spiritual environment.

Some have had their faith in the Bible, in the church, and her Bible-based doctrine and worship undermined by skeptical liberal preachers who lurk among us like wolves around sheep.

Some have been overtaken in transgression and no strong Christian stopped to rescue them and get them back on the straitened and narrow way (Gal. 6:1).

Some do not understand the meaning of God's grace and its role in salvation. They strive to be righteous by their own efforts and fail. They are ashamed and humiliated with their failure. They only conceive of God as their judge who is displeased with them. Not realizing his love, his grace and mercy, which never fails, they eventually give up and cease trying.

Some either were not taught or else did not accept the sacred premise that Christians must be different from the world (Rom. 12:1-2). They did not understand that becoming Christ's disciples would cause some in the world to hate them (John 15:18). Their faith was not sufficient to stand alone with Christ and when the test came they failed.

In our postmodern age many cannot tolerate the idea that a church refuses to change to meet the expectations on 21st century folks. They are offended that a church has an absolute standard that allows of no compromise. They resent a church that judges some things to be unalterably right and some to be unalterably wrong. They are embarrassed with a church that insists it is actually the church of Christ.

John Waddey

Some who abandon the church do so with sorrow and embarrassment. They realize they are wrong and often feel powerless to correct their situation. Like the rich young ruler, they go away sorrowful. For them there is the possibility of a return at some future date.

Some leave, not realizing what they have left behind. They are not bitter. They just think they have found something more appealing to them.

But some, whose false pride caused them to leave, are determined to destroy that which they could not capture or control. They hate those who reproved their sin. They despise that which did not appreciate their "greatness" and importance. They cannot bear to admit they were wrong in leaving the church so they heap all the blame they can create and imagine on the church they have rejected. They are driven to justify themselves and their abandonment of the church of Christ. They attempt to do so by denigrating the church and those who are her faithful members. Being lifted up with pride they fall into the condemnation of the devil (I Tim. 3:6).

John H. Waddey

It is distressing to see men who for years have faithfully preached the gospel, turn their backs on the truths they formerly proclaimed and embrace the errors of the change movement. Some enmeshed in this movement are the sons or grandsons of notable Christians who lived and died in the faith. You may ask how can this be? What makes a man turn away from the old paths of Bible truth? Several factors may cause the corrupting of the faith of a man or woman. Consider the following:

For others it was some influential and dominate preacher under whose influence they fell.

For some it was the school where they got their higher education. Many of our Christian schools employ men who see their mission to be to undermine and change the faith of their students.

Some lost their faith while pursuing higher education in secular or denominational schools. Their faith was not sufficient to resist the pressures of their non-Christian peers.

Some gave up their old faith in order to gain the acceptance and approval of the denominational world. They crave its bigness, glamor and respectability.

Some grew weary of standing alone on the Word of God and elected to go with the current of the culture. They stay among us but they tailor they message to please the worldly folks among us.

Some adjust their faith in order to keep their jobs. When congregations absorb the ways of the world, they want a preacher who will tell them that such is OK. If their preacher will not do so they will find another. Rather than lose their comfortable and well-paying positions such men modify their message.

Some are so deficient in Bible knowledge and in knowledge of our past history that they blindly stray from the path of truth and fall into the ditch of error.

Some are in the church of Christ by accident of birth. By that I mean they were born into a family that were members of the church. As youngsters they were baptized but they never had a deep commitment, love or loyalty to the Lord and his church. After a while they come to despise the church. Yet they stay among us, spreading their personal venom and hated for the church of their youth.

Some of them have had a bad experience in the church. Many a man has been attacked and mauled by some of our ultraconservative guardians for some shibboleth he failed to pronounce correctly. Sometimes such victims assume that all members of the church are of that same cut. Often such an experience turns one against the church.

There are likely other reasons we could suggest but these pretty well cover the field.

John H. Waddey

Where God has led me to work for change within the mission field of the "Church of Christ" is three-fold.

First, as Paul did, I want to model my primary passion of bragging about the glorious knowledge of God through the physical incarnation of Jesus and the revelation of scripture. In my local fellowship, I encourqe the leadership to focus on this goal in all that we do. We often get sidetracked with serving those gathered at the religious food trough but we are in a fallen world. And, I enjoy giving grace to those God has purposed for me to work with on this earth. It reminds me of how much grace God has given me.

I might make a side comment that it appears much of the bible study referenced on this site is purposed to know scripture not our God through scripture. I would underscore that those two things are eternally different. The passage that gives me perspective is always Matt 23.

Second, I want to elevate Baptism to a beautiful and sacred celebration of Christ's justification on the cross. And, the beginning God's resurection power expressed in the sanctification process. As well as, the fellowships' commitment to disciple the new believer. I long for the idolity of the baptistry to be torn down. I pray fervantly that no more spiritual babies will be abondoned to die in the dumpster of the discipe-less church. We cannot step back from someone because we got them dunked. We can not feel like "we're done" because we have checked off our trivialized, Jesus-less and self-serving "steps of salvation". Each of us are purposed by God to humble ourselves to more mature Chritians for admonition, encouragement, spiritual direction, etc and also to accept authority to do the same in those who have not yet journeyed where we have been. We need to take back the Great Omision from the Great Commision. Jesus did not say, "read my rantings on a message board" or "listen to my proofed text doctinal dogmantics". He said, "follow me." As his disciples we much encourge others to follow us. And, we respectfully follow those who have come before...when we can find those with the spirit to do so.

I must say here is that I have been a member of the church of Christ for 27 years and while seeking discipleship from coC leaders, from my best count over 70, only 4 men have been willing to share their failure and sucess, pray through struggles and petition God about His direction for my Christian life. (Two of the four were related to me.) I think if the spiritually mature would stop beating up our young and begin to disciple we would see God's power anew. We would all be blessed. The vibrant and clumsy "change agents" could be redirected from diviseness to what they really want: honest/real relationship with God, loving training and genuine Christian community.

I have to tell you that I thank God daily for the men He put in my life to train my by the power of the Holy Spirit. I am fervantly training others to look to train, purpose to train, live to train. I do believe God is raising up in the church of Christ a new generation that has been trained only by the Spirit. A generation that has seen the miraculous, transformational power of God through Spirit-led meditation and understanding of the Word. God has had to do this beyond our church leaders and teachers because the generation in leadership for the last 30 years has been to distracted by the modern worldliness of the church to serve God through Godly disciplship. I have to repent of my part in that self-centeredness.

Third, I want our fellowship to be known for its self-less love of others. I am purposefully developing Godly relationship with everyone that God leads into my life. I have had to dramatically cut back on "church work" to do so but God has blessed me. I am slowly getting better at saying "no" That is purely the power of the Holy Spirit. My wife and I are opening our home two, three, even four nights a week to others to come in and fellowship with us. I believe that the table and the sharing of bread is so important in the church. Christ gave us the communal breaking of bread to foundationally and regularly share our faith in the gift of Christ but the breaking of bread also reinforces the gift of the church. By frequently sharing my bread I am lovingly sharing my life. A life that comes solely and completely from God. A life that I ache for all children to have with the Father.

That is the church of Christ of which I am a member. It is a church against which Satan is powerless. It is a church that is eternally victorious. I do not lose one nights sleep worrying about it losing it's identity or it's Godly righteousness.



allan

Allan’s post is quite well-worded, but wading through all the romantic phrases and flowery images made it difficult to see the real “meat” of the matter. I came away with the impression that Allan wishes to “change” the Church based more on romantic notions, not because Christ’s Church as such has seriously fallen out of step with New Testament principles. Change must be made to conform to the New Testament, not to conform to personal whims, desires, and preferences. With that in mind, I’ll make just a couple of comments about a couple of troublesome statements that Allan made:

Allan stated: "I might make a side comment that it appears much of the bible study referenced on this site is purposed to know scripture not our God through scripture."

This indeed is merely a "side comment" which really has nothing to do with Allan's "message." It says in essence, "I now pause to bash this web site." Allan implies that those of us who teach the Scriptures at this web site are not teaching anyone to “know God through the Scriptures.” That, of course, is a judgmental assumption based on a lack of perspective. Friends, I submit that in order to “know God through the Scriptures,” we must first be familiar with the Scriptures themselves, and that comes by reading and studying the Scriptures, or by having the Scriptures taught to us. We can present the Truth of the Scriptures here, but no web site can make people obey those Scriptures and live their lives daily by them. Hence, in order to "know God through the Scriptures," we must first know the Scriptures and be obedient to them.

Allan also stated: "Second, I want to elevate Baptism to a beautiful and sacred celebration of Christ's justification on the cross...I long for the idolity [sic] of the baptistry to be torn down."

While I again hope that Allan is not trying to be radical, he implies that we make much ado about baptism, that baptism is perhaps not essential for salvation. According to Allan, baptism is "a beautiful and sacred celebration of Christ’s justification on the cross," yet the baptistry, which further implies baptism itself, is “idolatry.” This is a complete contradiction. Obedience to Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, and 1 Peter 3:21, which link baptism with remission of sins and salvation, can hardly be considered “idolatry.”

Let’s be careful about wanting to “change” the Church so badly that we end up compromising the Scriptures. If we truly "know God through the Scriptures," we won't compromise the Scriptures.

The point I was trying to clarify Dr. Crump was not to diminish Baptism or the study of Holy Scripture. I was poorly trying to say that they are elevated only because of what they point to/reveal. Baptism and Scripture are not the end point. The graceful, loving, merciful, fearful and just God that gave them is the end point.

I daily study the Word with fearful humility seeking the wonderful God revealed there. I passionately teach water baptism as a part of the process of salvation and the receiving of the Holy Spirit. My point was that we cannot stop there. (and do not hear me saying that I think you do but it often happens) When we focus solely on baptism instead of the God who gave us the plan, the savior and the resurection; that equals idolitry. I think your reference of 1 Peter 3:21 says that well.

I would also say that when we are limited in focus to the moment of Baptism that we never move to the life given therein, that is idolitry. Christ didn't die to give us baptism. He died to give us life.

I think Christ is very clear on this subject in the sermon on the mount and in Matt 23.

I apologize if you felt judged by my comment. I just want to encourage others to go to God to know Him and not to see (for example) if His plan for worship style matches up with our own.
whatever that may be.

We study scripture not to obey scripture. That is something that is blinded by pride, personal perspective, bias. I would put any of the message strings on this board as excellent examples of that point. Instead, we study scripture to know God. Then, as we know God we obey God. Those are two different things

I also apologize for being too romantic and flowery. I tend to bubble over a little when I talk about that which I love.

The meat of what I was trying to say:
1. We have to be about glorifying God and calling on His name in all we do.

I breathe because God gave me breath. I work because gave me skills. I study the word and share with others because I have been taught by the Spirit. I know God because His grace reveals Him to me.

2. It is my humble opinion that I don't know much about discipling. I have not been taught much about it. I have not been mentored in how to do it. I do not see much of it at the churches I have fellowshipped. I do see Christ as the master-discipler.

3. Our emphasis as church families has to be about knowing each other. The first chapters of Acts clearly paint this picture. Jesus modeled this so well for us. If we do not share our lives and know each other then suspicion, assuming the worst, not giving each other a break and judging each others comments rule the day. And no one admonishes, encourages or instructs in that splintering fellowship.

Then Dr. Crump peace, love, joy and unity can abound, as you and I discuss what God is teaching us through scripture . And those who read our discussions, sit in our precense, over hear our comments will know we are Christians by our love.

I do appreciate your passion for the Word. Keep it up.

allen

Making it too "spiritual" Allan:

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Mt.28:20 Teaching them to OBSERVE all things whatsoever I have COMMANDED you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

The Holy Spirit has a name: Jesus of Nazareth. He would guide the Apostles into all truth when He returned at Pentecost as pure (holy) Spirit. The Apostles then guided into ALL truth, wrote the Scriptures to MARK those who did not "teach that which has been taught."

That's all, Allan, no Gnosticism of KNOWING through some experience. The church is the ekklesia or synagogue or "school of the Bible." The church has no ability or responsibility to DISCIPLE you beyond that. You are to follow the elders, Allan and not the Discipling Minister, as you OBEY what they teach you through the Word and as you "imitate their style of life."

As the Sabbath was defined in the Old Testament and practiced in the New Testament, the church meets for a short period each week to SPEAK that which is written one to another. You need no priesthood for that. Then the people return to their lives lived without cult control and even "sing and make melody in THEIR heart" in the kitchen or behind the plow. Everything else is a cult.

Now, if you lust for DISCIPLING, you might try to join up with Lynn Anderson who teaches the Promise Keepers DISCIPLING or SHEPHERDING which is the old Crossroads or International Church of Christ cult. Or you might join up with Max Lucado who has hired a DISCIPLING Minister. Then, they would assign you a mentor to grill you about your finances, lustful thoughts about the secretary or other "secret" sexual feelings. He will make you accountable to him even though he is pawned off as a "fellow disciple." Expect that your secret thoughts are going to be filed away to control you in the future.

Yes, Allan, we study the Word of God because God is somewhat LIMITED, you see: he commands through commands, examples and inferences. So, let's give HIM the same power we have. And, no they all lie about it, this is a Biblicall COMMAND intended to DISCIPLE us in obedience because we grow when we are EXERCISED to Godliness. It is also the UNIVERSAL understanding of all of church theologians.

No, Allan, the Holy Spirit is not going to "guide you beyond the sacred pages." Such an aspiration REJECTS God's power to speak through black text on white ink.

I appreciate your point Ken. I have to stand firmly on the biblical text. I can not manipulate others with God's Word to get what we want. I have to stay away from endless quarrels that bring division. There is no "God told me" card that trumps the biblical example or teaching.

I do disagree with your assessment that the church met for a short time on the Sabbath to speak about the scripture and then went back to rest of their lives. I just do not see that as what God intended our what actually happened.

Jesus lived intimately with 12 men for at least 18 months. They were sent on missions where they returned to be critiqued and retrained. They were held accountable for their mistakes, encouraged and given a place to belong. They were shown specific things that were just for their training. They progressed painfully slow at times and it actually took several miricle to bring it all together.

This model of taking others and spending intimate periods together for training was modeled by Ananias and Paul, Barnabus and Paul and Paul and Timothy. In 1 Timothy 4, Paul reminds Timothy of all of the elders who have directed his ministry and encourages him to be faithful in God's plan for his life that was fortold by others.

The Jerusalem elders were very active in sifting what was being done and taught. We see Peter and Paul coming before them in Acts and the group discussing what was happening in individuals lives and ministry.

In response to my first post. Do you feel our fellowship is primarily about bringing glory to God? Does a stranger come into our midst as local churches and see God's Gospel teaching of Christ's commands in all aspects and moments of our lives? Is love of others the main expression of our response to God's love and His grace?

I have to be honest and say no. When we glorify our tradition or opinion or preference or privacy over God that is idolitry. When we do not submit to the biblical example of spiritual training through the Word and the biblical training disciplines of meditation, solitude, rest, prayer, service, fellowship (all modeled by Chrst) but rather submit to a watered down version of religion we are comfortable with that is idolitry. When we would quarrel about disputes, be mean spirited/hateful to make a doctrinal point or fuel Godless "church programs" that anesthetize the Godly longing of man instead of being the selfless, Christ-like, loving servant to those God brings into our lives that is idolitry.

That is where I see a need for change.

allan

An apostasy is taking place within the ranks of churches of Christ. Marching under the banner of change, those pursuing this course are determined to change the faith worship and practice of our brethren so they will be acceptable to the denominational bodies of Protestantism. The most noticeable changes include willingness to accept the use of instrumental music in worship, the placing of women in public leadership roles in the church, denying the absolute essentiality of baptism for salvation, teaching that the church of Christ is only one of many denominations that are pleasing to God.

Those who have been members of the church for any length of time stand in amazement as they see brethren turning their backs on the gospel of Christ and the church he purchased with his blood and rushing to embrace the faulty notions of men. They wonder what in the world would cause folks to make such a foolish choice? The points following seem to be common factors found in those who are looking for changes to the ancient gospel of Christ.

The leading preachers in the change movement are men of much education. Many of them have pursued their advanced degrees in either secular or denominational universities. There their faith was undermined and replaced with a denominational point of view. They have brought that home and are trying to impose it on our people.

The churches that have embraced the change agenda and those currently sampling it are generally our large, wealthy congregations. Jesus observed, "It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:23). Some seem to think that the practice of simple New Testament Christianity is all right for rural folks and the middle and lower classes, but folks of wealth and refinement need something more suitable to their tastes.

Many of those who have opted for change imagine themselves to be quite sophisticated. This flows out of their worldly educational attainments and their wealth. They are embarrassed by our simple meeting houses, a cappella congregational singing, and Bible preaching. They need something new and more challenging for folks of their station.

The major driving force in this movement has been and continues to be some of our Christian Universities. Some of these schools have grown large, wealthy and influential both in the church and in the world. In their early years their leaders saw their role as servants of the church. Today they fancy themselves spokesmen for the church. In their quest for acceptance and recognition in the world of academia they have embraced the current thinking of the worldly denominations and are trying to impose it on the church of Christ. Young preachers coming from those schools are often infected with the virus of change.

Those pushing for change in our churches seem to have concluded that the church is going to die if it continues to follow the ancient paths of the Bible. In their misguided judgment they have concluded that prosperity and survival justify replacing the old faith and worship with a new version.

Evident in the promoters of change is a dearth of Bible knowledge (Hos. 4:6). Even after 4-6 years of study in our universities many of the students know precious little of God's Word. They have studied much about church growth, contemporary religion, ministry, and theology but their accumulation of Bible knowledge has been minimal. Ignorance of the fundamentals of the faith has made them vulnerable to Satan's lies.

Along with the lack of knowledge, we see an evident lack of respect for Bible authority in the champions of change (Matt. 28:20). The demands of society, the will of the people, the theories of the scholars, the pragmatic approach, all take precedence over the ancient teaching of Scripture.

Those pushing for change exhibit a lack of respect and reverence for the church Jesus established. That she cost Christ his life on Calvary, that she was planned from eternity by God himself, that she is his beloved bride, that she is the temple of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 3:16-17) means little to those determined to redesign her. Without blush or shame they lay profane hands on the sacred body of Christ and change her into their own image.

A major factor driving the change movement is the desire to be accepted and admired by worldly neighbors, whether religious or secular (I John 2:15). They frequently write about what our neighbors think of us. They compare us with our denominational neighbors. They bemoan the fact that we are not counted as members of the Evangelical family of churches. They are embarrassed that we insist on immersion as essential to salvation; that we teach that Christ has only one church; that we refuse to interact with denomination bodies. They are willing to sacrifice those distinctive factors that result from taking the Will of Christ seriously...to gain standing with the world.

Those who are rushing to embrace a new kind of faith and worship evidently have little or no understanding of our history as a people. They have lost, or perhaps never had, any sense of identity with those who went before us, who blazed the trail they now travel, who planted the churches and established the schools; who spread the concept of New Testament Christianity around the world. Without that tie to our history, it pains them not to cast away all that was won at so great a cost.

May God deliver us from those who would destroy the church for which his Son died.

John Waddey

Dr Crump,

I really want to encourage and affirm your passion. You heart for the truth is so good. I have to echo the same thoughts about Bro Waddley. I love the deep longing of your good spirit.

Bro Waddley's essay on LOST MUST BE FOUND is so encouraging and right on.

If I may offer some redirection, please thoughtfully consider three points. If not, stop and be encouraged in my appreciation of your study and passion.

1. The call for "lost must be found" is nothing short of a call for change. I believe you are right on in seeking a constant renewal/sifting/purification/return. We as humans in fellowship are a work in progress. So, both of you should enjoy your role as change agents. Christ is the great change agent.

2. I would put forth that your enemy is incorrect. You single out these change agents. Most of those I know that I assume (hate to do that) you would include in your catigorization would full heartedly agree with most of the points you made in LOST MUST BE FOUND. We can not align against any that are calling on Jesus's name. We must be honest and share where we disagree and study with gthe greatest fervor and always pray for insight/wisdom/discernment. We must open the Word and our lives to them. Remember Satan is the enemy.

a. You are allowing assumption to splinter your unity with others. I would suggest that assuming things that other intend/think/feel is always a great allowance to Satan. Most of your frustration and angst is built on asumption of thought and motive and not the result of intimate, Christ-centered relationship gone wrong with other Christians.

b. I whole heartedly agree that many who are immature but very passionate about the church are doing very clumsy and destructive things. It is then imperative that those of us who are gracefully blessed with insight on one issue invest our lives with those who may not be aware of the dangers they are allowing to be present by their action.

c. This means we have to cling to our "no-out" agreement with Christ when we took him on in Bpatism. Their is no "divorce" from our Christian brothers. Christ has not given up so neither can we. God has placed each of us in our specific situations because that is His plan. We are here to sacrifice our position in the church, our control over the congregation, our respect by the conregation and whatever might be asked. We have to know with out a doubt that we are right with God and no one can take that from us. And, this should be eternal joy to us.

No one is going to be open to biblical teaching if we are screaming it at them with one breath and then praying for their destruction with the second breath. Prayers that were voiced earlier in this thread. Our job is to to glorify God, live completely for Him, love to the point of our own death all He puts in our lives - even the know it all/spiritually enlightened/30-something worship leader.

d. Always remember that God's grace covers doctrinal error. If it doesn't we are all damned.

3. There is no place for fear. I say this with all love for you because the next sentence is important. Christ will take all your fear if you will let Him. The most frequent command made by Christ: Do not fear. I feel fear is keeping you from seeing so much of God's truth. It definately clouds areas of your study, doctrinal stance and writing that I have observed in our short relationship.

Again, I am warmed to my core because of your passion for Christ, His sacrifice, His church and His truth. Keep running the race because you are on the right track.

allan

Allan, I am impressed by your constant passion for "change." You stated that Jesus is the "great change agent." Surely you state this because Jesus demands that we must change our lives and hearts to obey His Word; in short, we must throw off the old worldly life of willful sinners and adopt the role as His obedient servants. I would certainly agree with this kind of "change," for it is spiritual.

But let's not allow our passion for godly and spiritual "change" to blind us to the truth about "change agents." The term "change agents" used in connection with the modern church actually implies the antithesis of New Testament Christianity. The modern "change agents" seek to direct the church along philosophies, paths, and directions which are contrary to the simple but strict guidelines as put forth in the New Testament. Change agents, using every imaginable and delightful marketing technique known to man, seek to make the church more acceptable, palatable, and pleasing to the world, but not pleasing to Christ. In order to accomplish this, the church must become pragmatic, become LIKE the world, and deny or soften New Testament principles which may offend or scare off potential "members." Such acts defy Romans 12:2, James 4:4, and Rev. 22:18-19 (KJV). But I gather that you undoubtedly already know this.

You state that "we can not align against any who are calling on Jesus's name." Let's not kid ourselves. Anyone, including Satan himself, can "call on Jesus' name," but the doctrine and gospel that they preach may be different from what Jesus specifically outlined in the New Testament. We are commanded to reject this different doctrine and those who promote it (2 John 9-11 KJV).

Remember, "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21 KJV).

Remember, "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46 KJV).

This entire web site exists to describe in detail the unbiblical agenda that the "change agents" and the so-called Change Movement are spreading, and to warn people not to embrace these elements of "change." We will continue to warn the world of this heresy by the authority given in Romans 16:17 (KJV).

Allen

I would like some clarification on the following statement that you made above: "d. Always remember that God's grace covers doctrinal error. If it doesn't we are all damned." Specifically, what doctrinal error does grace "cover"? While I am in no way saying that one must 100% correct on every point of doctrine, I often hear this statement being used by those advocating various false doctrines - which, by the way, cannot be "covered" by grace. Since virtually every epistle discusses false doctrine/false teachers/deceivers/ etc. it seems to me that one must use God's word to identify what is false and what is not.

Mark Waggoner

Mark,

Sorry I didn't respond quickly but we have been vacationing this last week.

I think you raise an important point of clarification. I would say that no one that I have met would hold to a false doctrine.

I, at all times, believe every one of my doctrinal stands to be 100 percent correct or I would not hold to them. My Christian doctrine is of immense importance because it makes me who I am. It directs my response to my life experience in application of what I know in my heart to be God plan from sciptural revelation.

I have to assume that everyone else believes all of their doctrinal beliefs to be 100 percent correct.

I look back on my growth as a Christian and I see many areas my understanding was imature and has grown. I can list 5-6 passsages on which my understanding has changed in the last 18 months. I am constantly growing, being taught by the Holy Spirit, redirected/corrected by teachers and elders and I am testing my faith through daily life. It has made my very humble in my Bible study. I can not ask those that I think are wrong to listen to me unless I am honestly ready to listen to them.

That, is why I believe the idea of this web site is so important. We need to talk through our doctrine, live through our doctrine, wrestle with scripture and challenge each other. I do think fear clouds this discussion often and robs us of the opportunity to cross generationally, culturally, economically discuss what God has taught us. You can see on this site that open, honest, Godly, Scripture-based and humble discussion of doctrinal challenges is often replaced by judgemental, unGodly, self-centered, fearful and prideful banter. This is only devisive.

Two things to remember.

1. I have come to several points that I think on which aggreement is essential for intimacy as Christian brothers. And, Christian brotherhood is a very intimate position that does not automatically include everyone in my home congregation or exclude everyone outside of it.

I tend to think doctrinally in concentric circles and not in lists. For example, the divinity of Christ, the purpose of all to glorify God and the death and resurection of Christ as the relational bridge to God is right at the center. Although I have fairly strong opinion, pre/post/amillennialism is fairly far out on the circles.

When Paul talks about antichrists, he is talking about center circle stuff. (ie-denying the death and resurection, denying the divinity of Christ, denying the humanity of Christ, denying Christ as the path to God/the perfect high priest, the one way) Now, I can not fellowship as a Christian someone who doesn't believe Christ is the one true way but I am going to live along side them trying to teach until they discontinue our relationship.

2. Like Bro Waddey writes there are those "casual Christians" that manipulate scripture, religion, doctrine to do what they want to do in the first place. I would also argue that those who take that track in life fully believe that is correct for them. Here, our lives have to demonstrate that there is a different way: the right way, the righteous way the Holy way. They will either listen to the Holy Spirit as His light shines from our life, words and love or not.

allan

Allan

I appreciate your response even though you provided no specifics, which is what I expected. Your insights into spiritual maturity are well taken and are somewhat reflective of what Peter was saying in II Peter 1:5ff. All of those things which we are to ADD to our individual character can and often do involve changing our understanding about a particular passage or passages. However, we are talking about doctrine (teaching) here that involves our relationship with Christ - i.e. salvation. Regardless of how someone feels or even believes that their doctrine is correct, they can be wrong. As you stated, a person wouldn't hold to something that they KNEW was wrong.

From your example of concentric circles, it appears that you have been exposed, to some extent by some method, to the so-called "Bulls-Eye" approach to fellowship. The question each person needs to ask is: am I in relationship with Christ? The ONLY way that one can correctly answer "yes" to that question is to see if we have followed the New Testament model. We can KNOW if we have done this, John 8:38, I John 5. Belief in the divinity of Christ and the other things you mentioned does not establish a relationship with Christ. They are foundational to having a relationship with Christ but do not, ALONE, accomplish this because they do not provide for the forgiveness of sin. One cannot be in a relationship with Christ and not stand justified before the Father.

If you more closely examine Paul's warning of the anti-Christs, (Thessalonians and Timothy), you will see that who he is referring to will rise up from within the Church and set themselves up as God. Doesn't it seem logical that these individuals would have accepted that "center circle stuff" that you identified before this fall? I have concluded that Paul is describing what would become the papal system for a true anti-Christ would have to fit all of the characteristics he identified and no other group of people has done this except for the popes. Review the passages concerning the Judaising teachers. They, too, accepted your "center circle stuff" but they were accursed (Galatians 1) because of their doctrine, which would require a gentile to become a Jew before becoming a Christian.

I strongly urge you to re-examine the "Bulls-Eye" approach regarding scriptural fellowship. This doctrine has been used to "expand" the scope of fellowship beyond the lines that the scriptures define. Paul teaches us to maintain the unity of the faith, not to create unity and there are differences between the two. Maintaining unity of the faith involves teaching/following ONE faith (Ephesians 4). The illusion of creating unity means that we are to accept differing and often conflicting beliefs.

Mark Waggoner

Thanks for your interesting points and I don't mind the flowery language at all in the original post. In fact it did not seem flowery to me which may say something about me! Anyway, what do you think about the section of Acts where the early church decided not to bring many burdens on new believers. I think they say that if they just follow a couple of "rules" and not get confused by divisive language they will do well. I think it says, as you did, that if we help people get closer to God through the scripture and prayer that the Holy Spirit will convict them of their sin as opposed to us just telling them not to do certain things. You said these changes would be good. The defensiveness you feel from the others is because when we speak of "changes" they are the specific changes that come from the Purpose Driven Movement. This is a very specific program of change which may have been well meaning on Rick Warren's part but when put in practice has caused all sorts of difficulties. Those involved in these changes justify all sorts of sin by the fact that growth almost certainly occurs as the changes take place (even cancers grow however--growth alone does not mean it is from the Lord). I would encourage you to read Paul Proctors "The People's Church--A Wayward Vessel" which mirrors my own situation exactly. I think it will let you know if your church is instituting these particular changes so you can be prepared. If they are changing in the way that you said--no problem , but if you see some of the things he mentions then beware. Kansas Christian

I received an interesting news clipping about a church in Addison, IL. The congregation had its beginning in 1953. At one time it was a flourishing congregation with plans for growth and expansion. Then came a new preacher with dreams of greatness in his heart. But to achieve his goals, changes would have to be made.

It took their new minister some six years to finish his project. He wanted to reach out to the community. He instituted a program called the Addison Community Days and opened a coffeehouse at the church. While the preacher was able to bring many of the members under his leadership, a small group resisted his changes. They did not like his idea of mixing contemporary styles with their traditional worship. Because of the stubbornness of the few who preferred to worship God as they had for years past, the preacher resigned, taking most of the congregation's members with him. He said he was exhausted from having to deal with such conflicts. He blamed the intransigent members for not wanting "to lose control of what they perceive as theirs." The church secretary, who joined the departing group, agreed that some of the older members had resisted their preacher's leadership and ideas for changes that might attract younger members.

Badly crippled and desperately in need of help if they were to survive, the remnant reached out to the leaders of a sister congregation at Glen Ellen, asking for their help. They forgot to inquire about the direction the sister church was traveling. It too was fully committed to the change agenda but was more than happy to assist the struggling group. Rather than help them restore and rebuild their church, the advisers urged them to change the name of the congregation to Harvest Bible Chapel. They called it their Addison campus. They sold off the parsonage and began a Saturday evening service leaving only
a Bible class for Sunday a.m. Seeing that they had exchanged one bad horse for another, more members left. The 25 remaining members protested that was not what they needed or wanted. They wanted their church back. The leaders of the assisting church responded by sending each member a letter advising them they were trouble makers and no longer in good standing. The "helpful" elders closed the damaged church down. The empty building stands as a memorial to the advancing cause of the change movement.

Oh, I failed to mention, this was formerly an Independent Bible Church. They have the same problem we have. The message and the tactics are virtually identical. The result is the same. An ancient proverb says, "Buyer beware!" In this day of change, church leaders had best wear this reminder like a bracelet on their wrist when considering the employment of any preacher or in accepting help from another congregation. The proponents of the change agenda are a ruthless crew when it comes to imposing their will on a church.

John H. Waddey

Did you know that the change movement of which we continually warn is not unique to churches of Christ? Since we launched our response to the promoters of change I have heard from members of the Southern Baptist Church, Bible Baptist Churches, Independent Bible Churches and Independent Christian Churches who are also concerned about the same kind of movement within their denominational bodies. A small industry of Internet bloggers has blossomed as knowledgeable people share their experiences with and information concerning the change movement. In all these cases the stream flows back to two principal sources: Bill Hybels and his Willow Creek Church Association (Methodist) of Illinois and Rick Warren's Saddleback Community (Southern Baptist) Church of Orange County California. Both of these men and their mega churches found their inspiration in Robert Shuller and his Crystal Cathedral Community (Reformed) Church of California.

Precursors to our current change movement can be traced to the progressive movement that swept through our Restoration brotherhood following the Civil War. The issues today are essentially the same as then: lack of respect for Bible authority, instrumental music in worship, special musical programs such as choirs, singing groups and soloists, open membership, denominationalism, women given leadership roles in the public assemblies of the church, rejection of our back-to-the-Bible platform. Division of our brotherhood was the fruit of that movement. It culminated in 1906. Such will be the certain result of our current change movement. The progressives of last century evolved into the very liberal Disciples of Christ denomination. The same will almost certainly be the sad end of our contemporary promoters of change.

After some 50 years, W. Carl Ketcherside and Leroy Garrett, former champions of the anti-located preacher splinter group underwent a change of conviction and resurrected the progressive agenda of the Disciples of Christ. They devoted the rest of their careers to trying to sell that liberal program to the young preachers of the mainstream of the brotherhood. To the uncritical eye it looked as if they had failed, but after fifty years, it is evident that they in fact succeeded in corrupting the faith of a multitude, especially of young intellectuals associated with our Christian Schools. By the turn of the 21st century, a new progressive movement for change was in full blossom.

Prominent among the current leaders of this movement are Ruble Shelly of Nashville, Max Lucado of San Antonio, Rick Atchley of Ft. Worth, Thomas Olbrecht of New England, Richard Hughes of Pepperdine University, Randy Harris, Carroll Osburn and Douglas Foster of Abilene Christian University, John Mark Hicks and John York of David Lipscomb University, Leonard Allen, Lynn Anderson, Jim Woodroof, Mike Cope and others.

Pockets of change agents are now securely ensconced in several of our brotherhood schools, diligently working to promote their new agenda among their fellow-teachers and students. It is yet to be revealed how many of these schools will be lost but the prospects are not encouraging. Already Abilene Christian, Pepperdine, David Lipscomb and Rochester College are under their control. They were surrendered without a struggle. The annual Lectureships of the Schools mentioned above and their preacher's forums have been primary platforms for promoting their agenda.

The chief organs of communication for the change movement have been Ruel Lemmons' Image magazine, The Wine Skins magazine, and the Christian Chronicle. Of the publishers producing books advocating changes we have the Howard Publishing Company of West Monroe, Louisana, Oak Leaf Press of Arkansas and the Abilene Christian University Press.

At this point (June 2005), several dozen of our largest churches have already been captured and many other congregations are teetering on the brink. Most notable of them are the Madison Church in Madison, Tennessee, the Richland Hills Church of Ft. Worth and the Oak Hills Church in San Antonio. Already promoters of change have penetrated our foreign mission fields and planted their seeds of unrest and desire for change. Now, as 50 years ago, conservative brethren have been slow to recognize the problem, slow to rally their troops for defense and slow to respond in a decisive way. This tardiness does not bode well for our future.

Among those responding to the challenge of the change movement have been:

The Church of Christ in Duluth, Georgia with a widely circulated video presentation entitled “What Is Happening to the Church?”

Darryl Pringle of The Northeast Tarrant County Church of Christ in Ft. Worth who sends out a weekly Newsletter with valuable lessons addressing the change movement.

Bro. Donnie Cruz of Nashville edits the Concerned Members website.

Jimmy Jividen of Abilene has written a number of valuable books setting forth the Biblical basis for several vital and distinctive beliefs and practices of the Lord's church.

Buster Dobbs, editor of the Firm Foundation, Neil Anderson, editor of the Gospel Advocate and Alan Highers, editor of the Spiritual Sword, have given continuous attention to the fundamentals of the faith and the dangers of unscriptural change.

Alvin Jennings of Star Bible Publications has taken a strong stand and written some fine materials addressing the problems of Rick Atchely and the Richland Hills Church in Ft. Worth.

A number of sound men of Oklahoma and border areas of Missouri and Arkansas who have organized and conducted several regional seminars to acquaint brethren with the dangers of the promoters of change.

Dave Miller whose book “Piloting the Straits” was one of the first to give us a detailed analysis of the change movement.

William Woodson who gave us the excellent “Change Agents and Churches of Christ.”

Jim Sheerer and Charles Williams who gave us “Directions for the Road Ahead.”

Russell Dyer, Tommy Haynes and Jeff Jenkins who gave us “Redeeming the Times.”

David Tarbet and the White Rock Church in Dallas who have hosted several one-day seminars that addressed aspects of the change agenda.

Raymond Bailey and the Ogden Ave. Church in Chicago who have organized an area-wide lecture to address the issues.

The West Bell Road Church of Christ in Surprise, AZ which has been active in publishing the “Christianity: Then & Now” journal and hosting a website by the same name.

Others have been faithful in defense of the faith in both large and small ways. For all of these we should be thankful.

Major, brotherhood-wide conflicts, such as this are decades in the making. The end will depend on the aggressiveness of the contending elements. A century ago the progressives were victorious, taking 85 percent of our members and churches, all our Christian Schools and virtually all our mission outposts. Contemporary Churches of Christ are the children of that small, surviving remnant.

Some wise sage noted that “knowledge is power.” Another advised, “Know thine Enemy.” May this information empower readers to resist the destructive push for change.

John H. Waddey

After sifting through most of the above I thank God for His promise: "For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord are God shall call."

Since God "CANNOT LIE" I stand on that "promise" as did those "three thousand souls" at Pentecost. As the Creator and Sustainer of all life His plan of salvation has echoed down through the corridor of time to mere men as I, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." If you have come up with another plan, you are a "Change Agent" and have not been authorized by the Holy Spirit.

Peter made a statement in Acts 2 that needs to be revisited by those today who feel they have all the answers of who is in the body of Christ. Hear again the words of a "eye witness." "You Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men."
Hear again the word of the Lord: "But the Lord said unto Samael, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart."

I wonder how many who heard Jesus' words on the mount: "Judge not, that you be not judged" really took into their heart His commandment? Yes, it is a commandment for those today as we strive to live in an ever changing world.

It is my responsibility as a Christian to tell men and women what they must do to be "added" by the Lord into His kingdom. It is His responsibility to sort the "tares among the wheat" (Ma. 13).
JR

Romans 10:7-12 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


7"or 'Who will descend into the deep?'[a]" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,"[b] that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."[c] 12For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,

This wonderful verse breaks down why we are saved. The change of heart is the requirement for justification, confession before men is necessary unto salvation. But, it isnt the work of a change agent, instead the Word of God.

Yes Acts chapter 2 is clear, but Romans 10 is also clear.
Reducing Baptism to a process, instead of seeing that the change of heart
is why the folks were Baptised leaves so much out of the radical life change that is repentance of sin and heart.

They were lining up to be baptised because they were clearly told the One they had rejected was the one who had been prophesied to be the Messiah.
I'm sure those folks never pointed to their baptism, but by being baptised were pointing to the One who Saves, the Christ.

Maybe the reason some leave is that their Church focus on THEMSELVES and their processes, and how they are the only ones, more an they focus on the risen Savior. Some leave because they actually have been born again, and dont find any spiritual depth where they are.

"Saved" seems to minimize baptism; perhaps s/he implies that it is not essential for salvation. The pseudonym, "Saved by Grace," would imply the same. After all, s/he quotes verses from the NIV which only mention belief and confession, but s/he does mention "change of heart," which implies repentance as well (see Luke 13:3 KJV). "Saved" also briefly mentions Acts 2 (implying the "baptism" passage of Acts 2:38) but appears to discount that for Romans 10.

According to Jesus, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16 KJV). Many have tried to get around this verse by saying that, because Jesus omits "baptism" from the last half of the verse, it's not essential. They completely ignore the fact that Jesus absolutely links belief AND baptism together as two requirements for salvation in the first half of the verse. Jesus did not say, "He that only believeth shall be saved." He said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Jesus does not mention baptism in the last half of the verse because the subject is pointless with unbelievers; that is, an unbeliever simply will not be baptized.

Belief from the heart that Jesus is the Christ is the first prerequisite for salvation, for without it, repentance and confession are worthless. But belief, repentance, and confession are NOT the only prerequisites for salvation - baptism is also an absolute requirement, just because Jesus says it is. Can't we take Jesus at His Word and be satisfied with that?

Furthermore, the NIV considers Mark 16:9-20 as "spurious" by either placing it in brackets, reducing it to a footnote, or omitting it altogether. This is the problem with using a modern translation based principally on the flawed texts of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, as the NIV and most other modern translations are. Research by the 19th-centry English vicar John Burgon absolutely proved not only that Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were monstrously flawed, but that Mark 16:9-20 was completely genuine. Burgon published his work as "The Last Twelve Verses of Mark." People should read this difficult but important book before embracing any of these modern translations.

"Saved" asked in the title of his/her post "Is This Change?" Yes, it is, when anyone or any movement would lead people to discount portions of the New Testament in favor of others. The Change Movement says that baptism is just an outward sign, that it isn't necessary for salvation. Therefore, many people are not even baptized. They just "whisper" a brief prayer of acceptance, and they're supposedly "saved." Jesus would have us do otherwise.

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

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).

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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?

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Kansas, there’s a difference between “attacking” someone (seeks to hurt and destroy) and using stern, strong language in attempt to persuade someone to follow the New Testament to the letter and not stray from it in the least. As I stated before, upbraid someone or call them to task for anything, to account for their actions, and our over reactive society today regards it as “attacking,” as being unkind, vicious, ruthless, uncivil, condescending, mean-spirited, etc., as you just demonstrated. Is it “condescending” to advise someone who seems to be veering away to come back to the New Testament? Is it “mean-spirited” to advise someone who seems to be veering away to return to the New Testament? You're a "Luke" doctor as you say, a physician I gather, as am I (now retired). While you were in training, did not your clinical professors come down on you very hard when you made mistakes, as mine did with me? Were they "condescending and "mean-spirited" for doing so? You know what they say about doctors' mistakes - they BURY them! The same thing happens spiritually for veering away from the New Testament.

You may believe what you wish, but your interpretation of my posts to Allan is completely off target. If someone else read my posts, they would only be second-guessing my intent, just as you did. And believing that there is really nothing to fear about the Change Movement, as Allan seems to imply, is simply naďve. That’s exactly what the Change Movement WANTS Allan to believe! Now did I just “attack” Allan because I stated an obvious fact? Honestly, Kansas, you and Allan must learn to develop thick skins if you have any desire at all to battle the Change Movement, for those who rabidly support it are ruthless themselves.

I gather that you and Allan have already decided on what course you will follow, so it would be futile for me to make further recommendations, except that I hope you both will courageously battle the Change Movement with vigor and cling tenaciously to the New Testament in all things. Perhaps other readers sitting on the fence will take courage to defend the true faith with zest, even if the world scorns your efforts and erroneously brands you as "condescending." After all, defending the true faith does not make us popular folks.

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

Donnie, please call me allan.

I am sorry if I wandered. The post topic was Godly change in the face of apostacy. I was obliquely trying to point to why I think some are vulnerable to some the destructive leading of the church growth movement. I think we, as leaders and teachers, must be humble and let God sift us to better serve His kingdom and deliver His truth. We have to listen and give grace as those charged to our care struggle with growth, new teaching, potentially destructive paths and uncharted territory.

I appreciate the forum to discuss.

allan

Thank you for your review. You are exactly right and that was my point to both Allan and Dr Crump. My point, which you made more clearly, was to Allan that the reason Dr Crump seemed (only to me apparently) to be "hot" about the issue was because we were thinking about very specific change (of the PDC variety)and Allan obviously was not (although, personally I thought he had good points). If you review many of the other threads there have been topics concerning general Church of Christ doctrine which did not really belong on this board so I did not think it necessary to tell him to not post his opinions but I felt that Dr Crump could give Allan some grace since he seemed to be genuinely interested in civil discourse on spiritual matters. Dr Crump felt he was strong but not condescending however his use of quotation marks and certain phrases lends itself to that air, frankly. It is important, Dr Crump, to realize how you come across and usually it is very good but these posts, I believe, were unnecessarily harsh. Since you commented on the quality of Allans language (flowery, I believe was your word) I hope you don't mind me doing the same to you. The reason I entered into the stream here is that I think Dr Crump, Allan and I are in the same arena of thought on most of these matters (at least as much as I can tell from the posts)and I do not like to see disagreement among brothers. And Dr Crump just because I went through the rigorous training of a physician does not mean that I treat others in the manner I was treated by some. KC

You assume I go to a Baptist Church because of my posts of 1 1/2 years ago when I left a PDC Southern Baptist church. It was the first Baptist church I had attended. Although my new church has "Baptist" in it's name (to let people know we adult baptize) it is not affiliated with the Baptist organizations (or any organizations) and considers itself a "New Testament" church (perhaps very much like your church in doctrine but with no PDC issues). I wanted to clarify that...I had just switched churches when I originally posted and may not have completely known the doctrinal stance at the time of the posts when I was just beginning to visit and check it out. I understand Allan goes to a Church of Christ and I agree with your statement that I like many of his points. I also like your points and usually Dr Crumps--KC

Why I read the "concerned members" messages: I keep thinking someday I will read a post that says something like "New people keep getting into positions of leadership in our church--we don't even know who they are--what's up with that?" or "People in leadership at our church have been dressing differently--what is up with that?". I think I will be able, as someone who initially didn't "get it" but has seen the complete spectrum of "changes" to explain and discuss with them. It is the thing that keeps me sneaking back to check and see if these things come up.
What actually happens: A post is started by someone not asking a question but just an essay is listed. As an example this thread we are on now was about what changes are acceptable and which are not. To those of us familiar with the Purpose Driven Movement that is what it is about but Allan, understandably so, thought it was a forum where he could list the areas of change he felt were acceptable and needed.
My comments to Dr Crump: after a review, I think that I felt it was wrong of me to just say "Hey some of your comments make me uncomfortable" and was trying to be more specific using words like "mean-spirited" but really there is just one area which was troublesome to me. When a nice conversation is going on and he then calls the writer a "rebel"--both times (this thread and another) I have felt a real burden for the writer. I would hate for someone to judge my heart in this way--especially as that is not the case. The conversations have gone like this Poster: I think "A" and Dr Crump writes "people who think "A" are rebels and dissenters" and then when the person takes offense at being called that Dr. Crump says "I didn't say you were a rebel just people who think 'A'"...I am not sure if any of the words I used were adequate or proper for how I felt but basically I just thought it was wrong and wanted him to know that even those "on his side" were not happy with the tone of those words. The Bible tells me over and over (New Testament and Old) that God is more concerned with my heart than with the circumstances of my life or my position or anything else so to be told I am a rebel and dissenter against God causes a strong reaction inside me and I am sorry if my reaction seemed too extreme or "thin-skinned".
Question: why hasn't Dr Crump continued his discussion with Allan since Allen gave his name and church--he said those were the qualifiers for continued discourse and then stopped conversing as soon as they were given? Just wondering. KC

Kansas asked: “Question: why hasn’t Dr Crump continued his discussion with Allan since Allen gave his name and church--he said those were the qualifiers for continued discourse and then stopped conversing as soon as they were given?”

Answer: I wanted Allan’s identity in case there was any future exchange on the topic at hand. I should have specified “meaningful exchange.” However, since both sides had made their points, further discussion on that topic would have consisted simply of a rehash of ideas with no further advance. In other words, beating a dead horse. As Donnie Cruz also noted, Allan frequently interjected tangential ideas and concepts that were not germane to discussing the Change Movement. This clearly showed that Allan had difficulty remaining on topic. So to be blunt, why waste more time? Time to move on. I deeply apologize if that seems “condescending,” even with quotation marks, but it’s just the facts.

And speaking of quotation marks, let’s not get bent out of shape and misinterpret them as a sign of condescension, as Kansas does. They are utilized for emphasis when certain electronic media preclude use of italics (at least I've never been able to post with italics here as others have). So should I interpret the word “thin-skinned” that Kansas enclosed in quotation marks as a sign of his condescension to me? Another reason to move on. Even now, the “discussion” (more quotation marks) is going nowhere.

But I will leave Kansas with a parting, general thought, since he has chosen to bring up the word “rebel” again: Some Christians choose to twist, alter, add to, diminish from, or frankly reject portions of the New Testament, if the latter doesn’t suit their preferences, prejudices, and whims. Some are more sly and just hint at embracing any of these atrocities. These people defy Rev. 22:18-19. What words more suitably describe them than “rebels” and also “renegades”? So apply these words accordingly.

Dr. Crump, Thank you for the reply. I understand now why you have not further corresponded with Dr Coffman. Also, if you read my post carefully, I explained once or twice that I wasn't sure I worded things exactly and apologized for it so I wish you and Donnie would please stop bringing back up my words after I explained and revised. Forgiveness for my inabilities would have been kind...continuing to bring them up is not. I am actually quite well educated and understand the common use of quotation marks but again was trying to show that in some circumstances, at least to me, they were used in a different way. But again you and Donnie disagree and I bow out of the discussion. Lastly, I am a woman. Blessings to you and I do hope Allan continues to post because I enjoy his (and yours and Donnie's) posts. KC

I've heard people ask if "those folks in the churches of christ do any worshipping or are they arguing all the time about points and sub points"
Allen is sincere, he's honest, he's trying to offer a viewpoint and without surprise he gets slammed. I'm don't know if we're dealing with a room full of Elders, Preachers, Phd's or Sae's (self appointed experts) but I hope your churches are kind and welcoming and I wished you grasped generally we are all imperfect, some are futher along than others, no one is a lost cause or unimportant. But on discussion after discussion, and maybe this is just a result of the kind of folks attracted to this site, there are times of bluntness,rudeness, scarcasim, mind reading and assumptions that are just unfair. But I guess someone will respond "this truth calls me to speak this way." Really? Could it be more loving or encouraging. I wonder if you speak with your wives this way. Bet you win every argument. That make you feel good? I thought so.

In his post of July 17, John Rebman states of Bro. John Waddey:

"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)."

Rebman has reason to apologize to Bro. Waddey, for indeed, Rebman not only names the wrong man but the wrong instrument, and he is not too sure about the denomination involved. It is I, not Bro. Waddey, who previously played an instrument in a church; that instrument was an organ, not a piano; and the church was Southern Baptist, not Baptist/Methodist. I am surprised that Rebman did not research and verify the facts before making such accusations against Bro. Waddey.

Recently there have been several posts which have dealt with the subject of “attacking” others of opposing views. Such attacks have been mean-spirited and condescending, with the obvious intent to hurt and destroy. The vast majority of these attacks have been made by supporters and sympathizers of the Change Movement against this web site, against those who regularly contribute posts to it, and against the Church of Christ. With that in mind, I consider the first half of Rebman’s statement above as a personal attack on Bro. Waddey’s character, an attack which contributes absolutely nothing to any rebuttal that Rebman could ever muster against Bro. Waddey’s essay of "Scenes in the History of the Church," or any other essay, for that matter. Indeed, resorting to such sophomoric tactics not only tarnishes one’s credibility, it is more indicative that one has no legitimate rebuttal to present, and it is a completely unchristian trait.

Baptism is a fundamental ordinance of the Christian faith. Christ commanded it (Acts 10:48). Salvation is conditioned thereon (Acts 22:16). It is surely a test of ones faith in God for if we love him, we will keep his commandments (John 14:15). However, with all its value and importance, there are some things that baptism cannot do.

Baptism cannot make a baby a Christian. Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:15). Infants are not capable of believing, therefore, they are not proper subjects of baptism. The fact is infants, young children and those who are mentally deficient do not need baptism, for they are not lost. They belong to God by creation. Only when they have sinned do they need baptism to wash their sins away (Acts 22:16). The disciples were called Christians at Antioch (Acts 11:26). A disciple is a student. This then demands a level of growth and maturity before one is capable of being a Christian. Not only is infant baptism contrary to Scripture, it fails to accomplish what its practitioners wish.

Baptism will not allow you to keep what you have illegally taken. Peter said we must repent and be baptized (Acts 2:38). If you had stolen my car and then were baptized, repentance would demand that you return it. If you had swindled a person's money, you should do the same. John the Baptist insisted that the Jews bring forth fruit worthy of repentance (Luke 3:8).

Baptism will not sanctify an ungodly lifestyle. It is not uncommon to see folks who live promiscuous and worldly lives, think that because they have been baptized God will overlook their sins. In baptism a drug abuser or drunkard's sins are forgiven, but they must strive to live "soberly, righteously and godly" if they would be saved (Tit. 2:12).

Baptism will not exempt one from the penalties of civil law. Most preachers have seen the person who is afoul of the law show up, desiring to be baptized. He fondly hopes that the fact of his baptism would convince the judge that no penalty should be assessed. While baptism, sincerely sought, will forgive him in God's sight, he must still answer to the civil laws he has broken, even if that means capital punishment for a capital wrong.

Success in baptizing large numbers of people will not make a false teacher right in God's eyes, nor should it in the eyes of the church. Frequently we see obvious false teachers who assume that their success in conversions should make us tolerate their error, or they vainly hope that God will excuse their vagrant teachings in view of their many converts. Sad to say, some thoughtless brethren will seek to justify keeping or using a preacher who is unsound because of his ability to move people.

Many baptisms will not legitimize and excuse a factious movement that has wreaked havoc upon and divided the body of Christ. Strife, factions, divisions and parties are works of the flesh for which men shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven (Gal. 5:19-21). Conduct that causes division makes void the prayer of Christ for unity (John 17:20-21). Christians are expected to give "diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph. 4:3). A method of evangelism that has disrupted numerous congregations is no less sinful because some of their workers report over 100 baptisms in a year's time.

Baptism is a vital part of the Lord's system. It beautifully typifies the Lord's death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:1-5). It is the appointed time, place and means wherein the blood of Jesus washes sins away (Acts 22:16). It puts us into the body of Christ which is the church (I Cor. 12:13). But there are some things baptism can never do. Don't place your hope in such mistaken notions as we have studied. To do so will only bring disappointment and disaster.

John Waddey

I can see here that we have some differences in doctrine, some that wont be
resolved. But, at least I see a common thread in our opinion's on the
Purpose Driven Church Model.

This is long but so has been my struggle with it.

The Church growth movement "Purpose Driven" church seems to be held in low reguard. I too think it is a destroyer of church's, whether they grow or diminish in size.

My experience with the growth model has brought much disappointment even grief....

For 15 years I attended a grace centered Church of Christ in the metroplex,
grace centered meaning that yes Baptism was emphasised, but it was made very clear the Grace of God was imputed by Christ sacrifice, not by our following the "new law" better than the other church's. John Featherston was the preacher.
After he was relieved of his duty as minister I knew changes were in the air.
I had no idea what they were talking about but a new Vision was emphasised and banner calling us the "Family of God" were placed in various places. The attendance has dropped from 1200 on the average Sunday to now about 540 on average. I had no idea what the growth movement was at the time now over 4 years ago, I left that Church, but now looking back I see that the PDC model and Classes are firmly in place there. I knew many people and was sad to leave, but something wasnt right. Emphasis which once was all Biblical, was now more man centered.

My wife of Fundamental Baptist background and myself now were looking for a place of worship which emphasized essential doctrines, but at the same time emphasised the Grace of God, through faith on Christ perfect work of atonement, not on our performance or following the "New Law".

We started worship at an Independent Christian Church a fairly large church, but one which emphasized docrine "baptism", the Word, and Christ as our perfect sacrifice for sin. Well two years after starting there, they started these classes that had a baseball diamond design, they also started talking about becoming a mega-church and moving to a cental location a 100 acre "campus". The sermons went from very Bible based to "what a great church we will be" based. Within a couple of months we decided that leaving was the only thing to do.
Now we can see everything they do is based on the PDC model. Rich Atchley has been a guest speaker several times. I guess he follows the same model.

Then we visited several church's many of whom follow this model until we started to regularly attend a Baptist Church where the preacher was very Biblical and independent minded, who made it clear he felt Baptism was more than the baptist church had made it, but still emphasized the perfect atonement of Christ as our only means of salvation. This felt like a church home at last. Within 3 months they started a series "40 Day's of Purpose", guest speakers included the preacher at our past Christian Church and a new building program was implemented.
He said they were going to start doing church in a new way to be more relavant with the surrounding neighborhood. Since I had now been very informed about the "Purpose Driven Model" we left immediatly with no
delay. This was a very sad day, I knew I had to leave, my wife was very adament about this too. They had a wonderful teaching program for the children, but I had drawn a line that I couldnt attend a church based on the PDC model.

Now today after vistiting several more Church's I decided on a church which is an Independent non-denominational church. I had known the preacher for a long time and he had been a Church of Christ minister for many years.
His preaching is totally Bible based as he preaches line by line through the Bible. He does emphasis baptism and has described it as "faith in action" however, we believe and it is preached that Grace is through faith in Christ alone". That His atonement is our Salvation. Music is both accappela some and with instruments some. He also believes the growth movement is destructive.
My only worry is that the church is very small, maybe 100 attendance including kids. So the childrens program is very small. Im sure the reason the church is small is that he follows the Bible very to a tee and there is no entertainmentat all. I pray this older man "Mid 60's" isnt replaced with a Purpose Driven youngster any time soon.

Anyway though we may have some doctrinal disagreements nobody here is more adverse to the PDC growth movement as I have seen first hand its many effects.

1) Man centered format. Emphasises human desires and needs.
2) Entertainment driven worship.
3) Growth at all cost message.
4) Hides core doctrines with fluff.
5) makes once humble servants power hungry.
6) makes once Bible based sermons, valid and earthly sermons.
7) emphasises Tithing as a law, even to the point of reading the Maliki curse.
8) Emphasises the "church" more than the Lord.
9) Uses worldly entertainment, types of music, and pride as focuses.
10)Doesnt rely on the calling of the Holy Spirit to service, but instead
has seminars to get "plugged in"
11)Causes once solid preachers to compromise so they will grow.
12)Compromise, compromise, compromise.

Thats what I see in the PDC model, and the Church Growth movement model.

And I would recommend if your church has been taken over by this model to separate yourself and find a Church which worships in "Spirit and Truth",
instead of following a model to attract by human desires and needs.

Yes, we may have some doctrinal disagreement, but on the PDC model in general, we are in agreement.

THE CHURCH UPON WHICH GOD SMILES

Postmodern thinking views the mega church as specially favored of God. With its large clientele, lavish building, flashy preacher, exciting services, huge budget, and many programs and activities, surely God must be smiling on such a church. For those who think in this vein, the following thoughts might be informative.

Of preachers Jehovah says, "he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully" (Jer. 23:28). Many who seek to have mega churches are willing to preach a partial gospel to achieve their goal.

Some who serve mega churches are fond of the recognition and reputation they have achieved. The church in Sardis had gained "a name" among their peers. They were considered a "live" church. But the Master noted that there were only "a few" of them that had not defiled their garments and thus would walk with him in white robes of victory (Rev. 3:1-5).

Some of our huge congregations are quite proud of their income and budget. They operate more like thriving businesses. They manifest little interest in the smaller, weaker congregations around them. The church in Laodicea was like that. They said, "I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing." Blinded by their success they could not see that in reality they were "wretched, miserable, poor, blind and naked." They made the Savior sick (Rev. 3:14-17).

Some who lead mega churches broadcast their many baptisms and large attendance. Paul looked at the large numbers who still clung to the Mosaic system of religion and said, "If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that shall be saved" (Rom. 9:27). Numbers are important only if they represent souls that are being faithfully taught the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27) and those baptized, immersed according the Lord's instruction! (Acts 22:16).

Some who have mega churches are impressed with their lavish and stately church buildings. Stephen observed that "The most high dwelleth not in houses made with hands" (Acts 7:48). When God looks at his church he sees not buildings, but his children. The church of the living God is the "house" or household of God (I Tim. 3:15). It is the members, not the building, that constitute the "temple of God" in which the Holy Spirit dwells (I Cor. 3:16). Magnificent buildings may or may not be pleasing to Him! That will be determined by the conduct of those who assemble in the buildings.

The leaders of many mega churches readily change the faith, worship and practices Christ ordained for his church in order to reach their neighbors and keep their young folks. God, however, wants his people to seek "the old paths, where is the good way; and walk therein" (Jer. 6:16). If neighbors and young adults say "we will not walk therein" we dare not adjust God's standards to pacify them!

Some who lead mega churches tell of the favorable attention and publicity they have received from the media upon casting off their old image as a church of Christ and pursuing a new "Evangelical" image. But the founder of the church said, "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! For in the same manner did their fathers to the false prophets" (Luke 6:26).

Some who are part of mega churches point to the many missionaries they support and the good works they are able to do as proof of God's favor. The Master said, "Not every one that said unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast our demons, and by thy name do many mighty works: And then will I profess unto then, I never knew you..." (Matt. 7:21-23).

John MacArthur has wisely and rightly said of churches, Real success "is not prosperity, power, prominence, popularity, or any other worldly notion of success. Real success is doing the will of God regardless of the consequences." We thank God for our churches, large or small, that have thus grown according to the Master's will. All such He surely smiles upon.

John Waddey

WHO IS TO BLAME?

The First Ave. Church of Christ had existed and flourished for sixty years. Its identity and message had never been in question. It was conservative, thoroughly biblical. It was a church of Christ modeled after the pattern set forth in the New Testament.

Then Bro. I. Wanna Change came into their midst. He introduced new beliefs and practices he had learned in Church Growth Seminars. Some he convinced but others objected. For resisting his proposals, Bro. Change accused them of being divisive.

Russell James III aptly describes the absurdity of this situation: "I have never understood why if two men are standing firm in the same place and one leaves to go somewhere else, that it is the man who remains who is called divisive when he points out the separation, rather than the man who left the original position."

In the years ahead, we will see this scenario played out in scores, perhaps hundreds of congregations. When you see those who protest the innovations branded as factious, divisive, legalists or trouble makers, remember such is ever the tactic of church robbers. Remember that wicked Ahab accused Elijah of being the troubler of Israel, when in fact he was the guilty one (I Kings 18:17).

Those brethren who seek to seduce Christians to think of the church as a denomination and seek the fellowship and approval of denominational bodies are troublers of Israel. Those who would lead our brethren into unauthorized worship such as using instrumental music, using women to lead in public worship, taking liberties with the Lord's Supper, are the troublers of the church. Those who deny the essentiality of immersion to sinners' salvation, who accept as brothers in Christ those not scripturally baptized, are the troublers of God's people.

Be not deceived, just as the caught thief or the liar blames others and excuses himself, so do change agents who seek to capture the souls of our brethren and divide churches.

John Waddey

-----Original Message-----
From: JOHNWADDEY@aol.com [JOHNWADDEY@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 12:45 PM
To: JOHNWADDEY@aol.com
Subject: A Lesson to Fortify Your Faith. John Waddey. Christianity: Then & Now

Dear Reader:

Please take a few minutes to read today's lesson and then forward it to others Christians in your address book. The church is facing serious challenges and needs your help in keeping a steady course, according to God's word.

John Waddey
_______________________________________

CHANGES, CHANGES, CHANGES


Change agents are clamoring for changes in the faith, worship and practice of churches of Christ. The changes they envision are profound and fundamental. Congregations that embrace them will no longer be churches patterned after the New Testament (Heb. 8:5). They would no longer be striving to be Christians only. They will not be churches of Christ such as Paul referred to (Rom. 16:16). Instead, they will become denominational bodies, adrift in a sea of human doctrines, traditions and opinions.

When we warn against the change movement, occasionally a well-intentioned brother will respond, "Since we all are imperfect, don't we need to change?" Such answers suggest that we need to specify just what it is that cannot be changed.

I. Some Changes Are Needed. The heavenly side of the church is perfect and unchangeable. But the church on earth will always be imperfect because of its human membership. At our best, we are imperfect people. Our work of restoration is task that is never-finished. When we fail to measure up to any aspect of the revealed faith, we need to change. The key is the direction in which we are moving. Beneficial changes are those that draw us into closer conformity with God's divine standard. When in any aspect of our worship, faith or practice we fail short of the divine pattern we need to change! Only when we are observing "all things whatsoever (Christ) commanded" (Matt. 28:20), are we immune from change.

II. Some Changes Are Inconsequential. Over the years our congregations have made a multitude of changes that were acceptable because they were in areas that were of no consequence. We changed from plain, simple meeting places on the back streets to fine buildings on main thoroughfares. We changed from hand held fans to air conditioning. We changed from 60 minute sermons to 30 minute lessons. We change from one cup to multiple cups for communion. We have changed our hymnals, our Bible School literature and a hundred other matters. Such changes are harmless because they have nothing to do with the essence of the religion of Christ. We still sing, pray, commune, give and study as the Bible directs, as we always did. These changes are the kind we can take or leave without transgression. Most of these changes are beneficial and should proceed without protest. The only reservation would be, if implementing them should be the occasion of strife in the family of God (I Cor. 8:9-13).

III. Some Changes Are Destructive And Forbidden. If the changes proposed would cause us to go contrary to the expressed will of God, they are wrong and must be rejected and opposed.

• To change the music of the church from singing which the Holy Spirit has authorized (Eph. 5:19), to making a different kind of music with mechanical instruments is wrong.
  
  
• To change the day we commune from the first day to another day of the week violates the example of the early Christians who communed on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).
  
  
• A change that would allow women to teach men in the assemblies or classes of the church would violate Paul's inspired restrictions on them (I Cor. 14:33-34 and I Tim. 2:11-12).
  
  
• To change the message of salvation from faith and obedience to faith alone is wrong for it violates James' statement that faith without works in dead in itself (Jas. 2:26); also the declaration that Christ is the author of salvation to all who obey him (Heb. 5:9)
  
  
• To alter the doctrine of God's grace and claim that He saves us by grace alone violates God's commands that sinners must obey him to receive the promised blessing. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mk. 16:16). The Holy Spirit is given to all them that "obey him" (Acts 5:32).
  
  
• To change our view of Scripture is sinful. God describes it as a "pattern" for us to follow (II Tim. 1:13; Heb. 8:5). To teach men there is not a pattern is wicked arrogance.
  
  
• To change people's thinking about the nature of the church is wrong. The church is Christ's body, his bride, his kingdom, his family. It is sacred, singular and unitary. To change it into a denomination is an evil thing. It is to make the sacred secular and profane. Other examples might be cited but these illustrate the point.
  
  

To beneficial changes that bring us into closer conformity to God's will, we say, Yes! To inconsequential changes we offer no objection! But to changes that lead Christians away from God, that make void the word of God (Matt. 15:9), we not only reject them, we must also object to them with all our strength! We are obligated to contend earnestly for the faith, once delivered (Jude 3). Simply stated, our position is Change? Yes! Apostasy? No!

John Waddey

_______________________________________

• Permission is granted to duplicate and distribute this and all other of these weekly lessons.
  
• More lessons discussing the various aspects of the change movement can be found at Christianity: Then and Now . For evangelistic lessons see http://www.firstcenturychristian.com
  
• If you would like to participate in this project contact the author at johnwaddey@aol.com

THE LAW OF CHRIST


Inspired writers refer to the New Testament as "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8:2); "the perfect law, the law of liberty" (Jas. 1:23) and a "law of faith" (Rom. 3:27). This being the case, how say the change agents among us that we are not under a law of God? They love to say that we should not view the Bible as divine law. Are they so ignorant of the book they claim to teach? Do they not believe what the Scripture says of itself? Do they think they know more about God's Book than the Holy Spirit who gave it? Could it be that in order to sell their agenda to a Bible-believing, Bible-oriented people, they must first convince them that the Scripture is not law, therefore it will be no great thing if its words are ignored?

If the Bible is not divine law, then no man is a sinner. For "where there is no law, neither is there transgression" (Rom. 4:15). If we have no divine law, how can some be called "lawless" in their conduct? (II Thess. 2:7; I Tim. 1:9). If the Scripture is not law, how could some men in the church be desirous of teaching "the law?" (I Tim. 1:7). If there is no law in Christ, we would have no knowledge of sin, or of right and wrong, "for through the law cometh the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20). If the New Covenant is not God's law, then no man need worry about being judged by it in the last day (John 12:48). If it is not law, then we can do anything we desire in the name of religion and not worry about having to give account unto God (II Cor. 5:10; Rev. 20:12). If the Scripture is not law, then James and Paul were mistaken in calling it that. If that is so, how can we have confidence in other things they said? That would mean the New Covenant is not reliable and free from error, would it not? If God had wanted to tell us that His written word is His law to guide and govern us in maters of faith, practice and worship, what do our champions of change feel He should have said, beyond what he has said, to make it clear?

It is true that we are not under the Law of Moses (Heb. 8:6-13; Rom. 7:4). It is true that we are saved by God's grace rather than by law-keeping (Eph. 2:8-9). It is a fact that our response to God must be one of faith rather than an attempt to earn salvation by works of law (Rom. 3:21-22). But it is a flagrant error to teach men that God's Word should not be viewed as law. This lesson our change agents need to take heed to. JHW

In his letter to the Galatians, Paul cites the story of Abraham's two sons, Ishmael and Isaac. He finds in that story a likeness of Christianity and Judaism (Gal. 4:21-31).

Ishmael was a child of the flesh. God had nothing to do with his conception. He was undisciplined. He was like a wild ass (Gen. 16:12). He had no part in the things of God or the promises God had made to his father, Abraham (Gen. 16:18-19). He mocked and persecuted Isaac, the child of promise (Gen. 21:10). God rejected Ishmael.

Isaac, on the other hand, was a child of promise. He grew up to be a man of faith, hope and obedience. He was blessed of God (Gen. 17:21) and carried the sacred promise through his life and passed it to his son Jacob (Gen. 27:27-30).

So in the church today, we see that God has two kinds of children. There are children of faith like Isaac. They love God's Son and honor his Word by compliance thereto (John 15:14). They love and appreciate His holy church. They stand up and defend her from her enemies (Phil. 1:16). They are loyal Christians and labor to keep their heritage and hope alive.

There are children of the flesh. Like Ishmael, they are carnal, worldly souls. Rather than appreciate the church, they despise the way she was when they were born into her family. They blush not to lay profane hands on her doctrine and worship to change them in ways that will please them. They court the favor of the world (I John 2:15-17). They malign and accuse the faithful children of God who seek to honor the will of the Father. They are sometimes known as change agents. If these children of the flesh prevail, Christ's church will become man's church. God's worship will become will-worship. Gospel preaching will become a gospel-pep rally and entertainment session. May God deliver us from Ishmael's kindred.

John Waddey

Chapter 21 actually shows God taking care of Ishmael.

20 God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer.

I don't read that as God turning his back on a profane brother.

I have to say "swing and a miss" on this version of the gospel according to John.

allen

In his attempt to debunk John Waddey, Dr. Coffman would have us believe that Waddey deliberately alters biblical text in order to condemn the change agents. If Waddey did that, then he would be no better than the change agents themselves, who frequently alter, twist, or ignore biblical text to suit their own agenda. Waddey stated that "God rejected Ishmael." Yet Coffman would have us believe that Waddey altered Gen. 21:20 to state that God physically "turned his back on" (abandoned) Ismael. Waddey did nothing of the sort. Friends, Waddey is batting in home runs here. In the passages from Genesis and Galatians that Waddey cites, it is clear that God chose Isaac as the child of promise over Ishmael, which is clear evidence of God's spiritual rejection of Ishmael as the child of promise, and Coffman knows that.

In Gal. 4:21-31 (KJV), Paul uses the Genesis account of Ishmael and Isaac as an allegory (verse 24) to illustrate two covenants which were at odds with each other: the covenant of promise to Abraham through Isaac, ultimately fulfilled in Christ; and the covenant of bondage, the Mosaic Law, which Paul personifies here as Hagar and Ishmael. Paul’s point is that Christians cannot follow two opposing laws or covenants. He says, “Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman, So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free” (Gal. 4:30-31 KJV).

A similar allegory easily applies to the Church today, as John Waddey clearly illustrated. We have two principles at odds with each other: the Change Movement and the New Testament. The Change Movement can be likened to “he that was born after the flesh”; that is, Ishmael. Selectively ignoring or altering portions of the New Testament, this carnal movement makes the Church more like the world in order to fill pews with warm bodies who desire a user-friendly, believe-anything-you-want religion with self-gratification, casual attitudes, and entertainment in their worship. Those who follow the New Testament and Jesus’ commands as written can be likened to the children of promise. As Paul says, “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise” (Gal. 4:28 KJV). The promise that Paul refers to is the resurrection to eternal life in Christ to those who believe on and obey Christ and the New Testament.

Neither John Waddey nor the Bible ever said that God physically "turned his back" on Ishmael. But God spiritually rejected the latter as the child of promise. That's a fact. Therefore, we cannot afford to reject God’s commands in the New Testament by following the Change Movement, lest we, too, find ourselves rejected as the children of promise.

Allen Coffman,

Yes, God kept his promise to take care of Ishmael but that did not mean he was blessing him or his lifestyle. If you go back to chapter 16, you will find that God promised he would be a man against men (turbulent, rude, war like behavior). He is the forefather of the Arabs. The very ones who have been at war with the Jews for generations. I don't think that is exactly a blessing to have created such an angry nation - known in history and the OT for their brutality.

You see, Ishmael was born because Abraham failed to trust in the Lord when he promised that he would have a son. Abraham and Sarah got tired of waiting for God's promise and they used Hagar as a surrogate mother. This was not an uncommon practice but it was not an authorized one, either. If you read about how it took place, it is very uncomfortable for all three participants, and yes, the process included the husband and both wives.

God did make a nation out of Ishmael like he promised both Abraham and Hagar, but it was not the Jewish nation. Eventually, the two nations became the most bitter of enemies. Would you call that a good thing? Do you think that God was with the Arabs and their pagan religions? If he was not with them, was he against them? I believe other books in the OT and NT tell us what happened between the two nations and God was definitely against the Arab nation.

I just think that he took the allegory a little far.

The example of Abraham in Gal 4 is not just a simple doctrinal squabble. It is the basic element of the Gospel. Have we chosen to trust God's plan for our lives in Christ(Isaac through Sarah) or our own plan seperate from Christ(Ishmael through Hagar). Do you trust God with every element of your life? This is the path that leads to freedom, righteousness and fruit of the Spirit. Or, do you hold out parts of your life for your own control? Whether it be religious tradition (circumcision) or refusing God's righteous life. This is the path tht leads to judgement by the Law outside of the justification of Christ.

As we go forward we must challenge all brothers to look to Christ and live a life of faith. Encouraging each other to trust God through Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit in all things.

How can those who are not known to God overtake Christ's church? How can we not be singular about following Christ and pointing others to Him? How can the fragrant aroma of the fruit of God' Spirit be sucombed by any creation of man?

I felt Bro. Waddey's piece was a over extention of an important Biblical example to stab at the ghostly boogie man change agent.

Instead let's be encouraged because I and Bro Waddey and Dr. Crump and PBB have chosen to seek after God's plan in Christ. We have received freedom from sin and are not enslaved to the law. Let's also encourage others.

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery

If we stand firm in Christ, no one will be able to take the focus from Him in our lives, our families, our communities or our churches.

allen

Dr. Coffman: “I felt Bro. Waddey's piece was a over extention [sic] of an important Biblical example to stab at the ghostly boogie man change agent.”

Dr. Crump: Coffman’s statement implies that the “change agent,” like the boogie man, is a figment of an overactive imagination. Or at least the change agent is a most harmless entity and deserves no condemnation. Many would have us believe that the change agent as “bogey” is merely the creation of superstitious, legalistic Christians who read too much into the Bible, who take the Bible much too seriously, and who cannot accept the modern premise that the Gospel and the Bible must be changed and made culturally relevant for the younger generation, lest the latter reject Christianity as being “boring” and “not fun.” That is, we shouldn’t be too concerned about the harmless, “ghostly boogie man change agent.” If I were a change agent, I definitely wouldn’t want folks to pay much attention to me, so I could more easily change the Church behind their backs unimpeded.

It’s been said that the greatest trick Satan ever pulled was to convince the world that he didn’t exist. Thus, many liberal Christians run around espousing that there is no hell, that a loving merciful God could never damn someone to an eternal, fiery hell. Such liberals ignore the New Testament’s promise of hell to the impenitent unbeliever. Likewise, the greatest trick that the change agents ever pulled was to convince Christians that they also don’t exist, that no one would really ever take over a church and change it to satisfy man’s carnal desires, thereby sending that church in a direction opposite to that directed by Christ. Thus regarding change agents as imaginary, gullible and undiscerning Christians cease their vigil for the proverbial wolves in sheep’s clothing, while the all-too-real change agents work under cover unimpeded. Thanks to Christians’ apathy and slothfulness and the work of the supposedly “imaginary” change agents, many churches have become institutions having the look and feel of worldly performing arts centers and amusement theme parks. They are the churches that have fallen away from the New Testament standard by becoming friends with the world and espousing a different, "user-friendly gospel" from that presented in the New Testament (Romans 12:2, James 4:4, and 2 John 9-11 KJV).

As long as folks hide their heads in the sand and fail to combat the unscriptural influences and agenda of very real change agents, churches remain vulnerable targets for unscriptural change.

Again I will reiterate that we can not distract from the gospel by seeking to root out the change agents instead of seeking after Christ. I would state that anyone is an agent of darkness if they distract us from the light.

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery

If we stand firm in Christ, no one will be able to take the focus from Him in our lives, our families, our communities or our churches.

If we truly love, we will recommit ourselves to sacrificially serving those with whom we may disagree. We must allow our "standard" to become Christ and Christ alone. Instead of distant, impersonal, verbal banter we must model in physical form the grace, love and mercy of God's standard: Christ.



allen

And again I will reiterate that Christians must remain vigilant for the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing, i.e. the change agent, who comes with alluring words and smooth talk to steer the undiscerning away from the principles of the New Testament. We may love those with whom we disagree, such as the change agents, but love won't necessarily keep them at bay. Knowledge of what Christ demands of us in the New Testament and recognition of the change agent's false claims are preventives. Satan cannot defeat Christ, yet Satan's influence is ever-present in the world, and Christians must recognize and avoid his wiles, lest they be led astray. Likewise, the change agent is ever-ready to modify the Church into that which Christ has not authorized. The change agent cannot defeat Christ, but his influence can be quite detrimental if Christians do not recognize and reject him.

Dr. Coffman: "We can not distract from the gospel by seeking to root out the change agents instead of seeking after Christ. I would state that anyone is an agent of darkness if they distract us from the light."

Dr. Crump: Coffman implies that rooting out those who would pervert the Gospel, such as the change agents and other false prophets/teachers, is actually distracting from the Gospel. He implies that being on the alert for such folks wastes our time and detracts from following Christ.

Christ expressed a different view in Matt. 7:15 KJV. Is it a "distraction" from the Gospel to maintain constant vigil against the ravening wolves (change agents/false teachers/false prophets) who would pervert the Gospel? Can't Christians follow Christ and be ever-vigilant as well?

Paul was of like sentiment in Romans 16:17-18 and Gal. 1:6-9 KJV. Is it a "distraction" from the Gospel to mark and avoid those who, through good words and fair speeches, espouse a different doctrine from Christ? Can't Christians follow Christ and be able to recognize (mark) and avoid those who would pervert the Gospel?

John was of like sentiment in 2 John 9-11 KJV. Is it a "distraction" from the Gospel to recognize that those who "transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God"? Can't Christians follow Christ and reject the "evil deeds" (John's words) of those who alter Christ's doctrine?

In summary, those who pervert the Gospel today are known by a number of synonymous names. These include "change agent," "false teacher," and "false prophet." The New Testament brands such folks as "ravening wolves," "deceivers," "accursed," and doers of "evil deeds." Pretty strong language against such folks.

Certainly the change agents are "agents of darkness," for they would steer us away from the light of Christ. Yet those who believe that rooting out the change agents distracts from the Gospel (when the New Testament clearly says otherwise) obviously sympathize with the "agents of darkness" and thus are in the same boat.

Is our faith in our ability to devine the "change agent" or is it in the redemptive grace of Jesus Christ?

I agree that we can be led astray by others. But Christ doesn't tell us to set out to better define the wicked or sniff them out or build better defenses around our doctrine. He says latter in Matt 7

24"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash."

His words to be put into practice are direct our heart. Are we willing to let Him change us so that He will be evident in our lives? How is the change agent known? By his fruit.

Why do we have to argue about who the change agents are and how they work and define them better for the poor, innocent, suceptible churches in our brotherhood. Because, 1. we are completely self-reliant instead of Christ centered and 2. we aren't producing much fruit.

allen

Dr. Coffman: "Why do we have to argue about who the change agents are and how they work and define them better for the poor, innocent, suceptible [sic] churches in our brotherhood. Because, 1. we are completely self-reliant instead of Christ centered and 2. we aren't producing much fruit."

Dr. Crump: Coffman’s statement has an interesting implication: If we follow Romans 16:17-18 KJV and expose the change agents and others who would pervert the Gospel, we supposedly become “self-reliant instead of Christ-centered.” It is the very change agents themselves who are self-reliant and not Christ-centered. Their very actions say that the pattern that Christ set up in the New Testament is not good enough for all generations after Him and must be modified for each new generation. Note that Christ never said in Matt. 28:20, “Teaching them to adjust and modify all things whatsoever I have commanded you according to the preferences of each succeeding new generation.” If no one is vigilant, if no one is watchful, then the “poor, innocent, susceptible churches in our brotherhood” are easy game for the change agents. Christians must produce good fruit AND be watchful for the change agents.

Dr. Coffman: “Christ doesn't tell us to set out to better define the wicked or sniff them out or build better defenses around our doctrine.”

Dr. Crump: Did Christ tell us to ignore the Gospel just so we can “sniff” out the wicked and conduct a perpetual witch hunt? Matt. 7:15 KJV commands that we be ever-vigilant. The Christ-centered Christian can follow the Gospel AND be ever-vigilant. We must, or be overtaken by the change agents. Now consider the following:

• Why would a person push the premise that change agents are “ghostly” and imaginary if that person wasn't sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  
• Although change agents cannot defeat God as such, why would a person downplay the fact that change agents can still rip apart and wreak havoc with individual churches, if that person wasn't sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  
• Why would a person believe that rooting out and exposing change agents detracts from following the Gospel, if that person wasn't sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  
• Why would a person argue that by more clearly defining who the change agents are and others who pervert the Gospel, we become self-reliant and not Christ-centered, if that person wasn't sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  
• Why would a person imply that defining change agents weakens our faith in Christ, if that person wasn't sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  
• Why would a person push the premise that a Christian cannot follow Christ AND be watchful for change agents, if that person wasn't sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  
• And why would a person readily argue against anyone who condemned the change agents, if that person wasn't highly sympathetic with the Change Movement?
  
  

Interesting questions for the discerning.

Allen Coffman Again I will reiterate that we can not distract from the gospel by seeking to root out the change agents instead of seeking after Christ. I would state that anyone is an agent of darkness if they distract us from the light.

That's a fact: we want to DISTRACT from the changeling-hirelings SO THAT we can recover the GOSPEL which they CANNOT even define.

The FUNDAMENTAL meaning of GOSPEL for we who CANNOT die for our sins is: "Come to ME all ye that labor and are heavy LADEN, and I will give you REST." And of the twos and threes "Come learn of ME" and ME ain't THEE. If you attend a THEATER FOR HOLY ENTERTAINMENT or a mega-tower of Babbling you CANNOT be a church or Synagogue of Christ. You CANNOT know the meaning of GOSPEL which is more than seven facts ABOUT Jesus.

Jesus DIED to ROOT OUT the change agents: the burden laded on the backs of the people by the clergy used like pack animals is "spiritual anxiety created by religious rituals." If we never let them PLANT their roots in the food bank of widows and hard working honest disciples then WE won't have to ROOT them out. Is that about right? If we deprive them ALL of an unlawful "berth on Good Ship PreacherShip" then we will be SURE to get the vipers.

How in the name of minimal common sense can you PREACH the gospel when the ROTOROOTERS are professional sewage manufacturers? THEY claim the authority and USE universities and churches TAKEN CAPTIVE by infiltrating and diverting peaceable churches. So, don't try the psychological violence the HIRELING-CHANGELINGS have as part of their 12 step program to DISSOCIATE everyone by telling them that the one who hoots: "The KINGS have no clothes" are just sowers of discord.

Allen Coffman It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery

There can be NO slavery without SLAVE MASTERS. That includes ALL staff infection not willing to abandon their CAREER PATH and get rich on selling STRAW -- and GOING out as poor "priests.." If you preach JUST JESUS AND HIM CRUCIFIED then the early historical writings know that you can tell THEM what they don't already know in two or three days. Then, they get you a JOB or get you a TICKET on a working ASS heading to the next town.

What is this SLAVERY you are speaking about? Is it slavery to wake up and grasp that: There is NO law of preaching as an ACT, no Law of Giving other than those who PROSPERED aided the DESTITUTE where POOR parses to "street people." Paul to Timothy to Labor so that HE as a minister (servant) could practice AGAPE which meant that the EVANGELIST fed the POOR.

Is it SLAVERY not to have to PROCURE and tolerate the whiney-piney, sick-sister teatrics knowing that the PREACHER-CREATURE had already ACCEPTED the loss of half of YOUR flock when they DELIBERATELY SOWED DISCORD to steal the church house of widows?

And there assuredly is NO LAW OF SANGING as in making music. The Bible repudiates it from Genesis to Revelation and attributes it to Lucifer who was the Musical Enchanter (snake) in the garden of Eden as the "singing and harp playing prostitute." The hireling-changelings want to STAFF you with the same AGENTS and Alan claims that they want to SET US FREE. If JESUS PAID IT ALL then to WHOM do I owe? Professionals FREE you from knowing the Bible, worshiping in the PLACE of your human spirit, arouse spiritual anxiety which damages before it FEELS GOOD , free you from FREEDOM to be a family without a HIRED "father and husband," and FREE you from ALL of your surplus MONEY and TIME. Did Jesus Die for 'instrumental music" and SLAVERY?

Allen Coffman If we stand firm in Christ, no one will be able to take the focus from Him in our lives, our families, our communities or our churches.

SURE, the hand flanging, finger pointing, finger snapping, slobber spitting, tippy toe, shouting speaker of BLATHER says I WANTS YOU TO SEE JUS JESUS. Garbage.

Sure, the Praise Team claiming to be MEDIATORS to lead you into the presence of God, singing THEIR OWN WORDS and embarrassing all of the Testosterone crowd and sounding like "hens" crowing say: JUS LOOK AT JESUS: JUS WATCH WHAT I DO AND THEN YOU DO WHAT I DO AND YOU WILL BE WORSHIPING JESUS.

No one is going to believe that ALL professionals DO NOT practice the IDOLATRY OF TALENT. Any fool knows that you CANNOT remotely think abut God or worship in the PLACE of your human spirit in "your closet" when these people are CLAIMING to be IN the holy place (church) or Most Holy Place (our closet) when EVERYONE knows that if a Levitical Warrior musician entered into any of the holy precincts EVEN TO CLEAN OUT THE GARBAGE he would be instantly executed.

People SEE Jesus in food packages, cups of cold water and GIVING money to the widows instead of LYING AND FRYING that they need to obey the LAW OF GIVING and now THE LAW OF TITHING which REPUDIATES the cross of Jesus.

Allen Coffman If we truly love, we will recommit ourselves to sacrificially serving those with whom we may disagree. We must allow our "standard" to become Christ and Christ alone. Instead of distant, impersonal, verbal banter we must model in physical form the grace, love and mercy of God's standard: Christ.

No, you must have a PhDuh from that college wheres they train you to be a Prophet, Channeller and Facilitator" to go make changes using Feminist Hermeneutics (meaning magica like exegetice).

Those with whom WE disagree are forcing US to sacrifice so THEY can claim in Shelly's theology to be Located Missionaries. You know the new MISSIONAL CHURCH which means CULT which means COMMUNE while people BELIEVE that "missional" means "missionary."

I don't want to SERVE them WITH Or WITHOUT sacrifice. I want them to just GO AWAY and leave the people of Christ FREE to REST for which HE sacrificed. REST means "whatever YOU are doing just STOP IT.' We don't want you to go away MAD: we just want you to have the common decency and minimal ethics to JUST GO AWAY.

The CHRIST AND CHRIST ALONE is one the new but ancient HERESIES. Sorry, but Christ the Spirit is NOT ego-centric. HE DIDN'T just preach the heresy of SEVEN FACTS ABOUT JESUS. It's a bald face lie which I have refuted by many of the hirelings; Paul DID NOT say JUST PREACH Christ and Him crucified. He said that we should KNOW only a crucified Christ. That means that to NOT be a mortal wounder of souls you MUST NOT pretend to be a "minister" when you KNOW that you want to be worshipped like and paid like a MASTER and rule like a master.

If you cannot grasp that KNOW is not PREACH then back to a two hour endorsement on your PhDuh for summer school.

In Second Corinthians Paul laid down the MARK or BRAND and I don't know a single one of those SUFFERING LIKE CHRIST. You know and they know and WE know that PREACHING just Christ means NOT KNOWING a suffering servant and JUST PREACHING the garbage you learn at theillogical cemetary.

Next, I am going to show you the example and DIRECT COMMAND about how to conduct EKKLESIA or SYNAGOGUE or SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE. When you have "that which HAS been taught and written" then Paul OUTLAWS private interpretation which outlwas FURTHER EXPOUNDING. Sermonizing as in allegorizing was OUTLAWED in the synagogue. Any school boy could stand up and read the text and have the uncommon decency-like Jesus-to SIT DOWN. OVERSEEING was making sure that the kid read the text correctly. THAT was the direct command to TIMOTHY.

Jesus said that if we KNOW when the THIEF is going to invade our FOOD PANTRY then we would not SUFFER our home to be invaded. Just WHAT do you think Jesus Would do with a THIEF?

Any one who DEFENDS a thief IS a thief and Jesus would HURT you real bad.

From the beginning there have been those among Christ's disciples who were not satisfied to abide in the simple system that the Lord inaugurated for this church. Paul mentioned several he had encountered: namely Hymaneaus and Alexander, Phygelus and Hermogenes (I Tim. 1:20; II Tim.15). Jesus cited the Nicolaitans, those who held the teaching of Balaam and that evil woman, Jezebel (Rev. 2:6, 15, 20). Today the church is being troubled by a band of men who have embraced a new and different approach to Christianity. Their faith and practice they borrow from the denominational world. They reject the old standards of the Scripture for new standards that are designed to please 21st century man. They have boldly announced their desire and intent to change the church. The church image they greatly admire is that of Protestant community churches like the Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois or the Saddleback Valley Community Church in California.

The Holy Spirit chose several striking metaphors to describe first century disciples who were not content to abide in the doctrine of Christ (II John 9). Paul called them "enemies of the cross of Christ" (Phil. 3:18). Those who wished to add ordinances of Moses's Law to the message of Christ, he called, "evil workers" (Phil. 3:2). He foresaw disciples who would "fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons" (I Tim. 4:1). They were teachers with seared consciences (I Tim. 4:2). Those who taught a different doctrine than Christ had given, he describes as "puffed up, knowing nothing...men corrupted in mind and bereft of truth" (I Tim. 6:4-5). In his letter to Titus those who disrupted the peace of the church by their teaching and agitations he called "factious" men (Tit. 3:10). Peter called them false prophets and false teachers. They were promoters of "destructive heresies" (II Pet. 2:1). Jude depicts them as hidden rocks in a harbor, lurking beneath the surface, waiting to rip the bottom out of the ship whose steersman thought he had found a safe haven. They are like shepherds, who without fear feed themselves while the flock is torn and scattered. They are like "clouds without water" promising a blessing but delivering nothing (Jude 12). How do you suppose the Spirit views those today who are busy sowing discord throughout the brotherhood and leading disciples away from the simplicity of the gospel?

The Holy Spirit also instructs us how we should deal with those who trouble the family of Christ. We must not allow ourselves to be deceived by them (II Thess. 2:3). We should mark them and turn away from them (Rom. 16:17-18). We should reject them (Tit. 3:10) and refuse their message. We should in no way lend them support or encouragement (II John 9-11). Those who think they can have detente with the agents of change are deceiving themselves. Jesus warned, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees" (Matt. 16:6) We must also beware the leaven of the change agents. Like leaven, their doctrine will work silently and unnoticed until they have permeated a sufficient portion of the entire congregation and then they will be in control of the whole. He that hath an ear...let him hear!

John Waddey