Place your banner ad here.          See all banner ads

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

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)

RE: "The Comunity Church Movement" (PPB)

September 9 2005, 9:59 AM 


Thanks for your most valuable insight. Your comments about detractors' anger at people who threaten their "internal dialogue and beliefs" (because such beliefs conflict with the New Testament) is right on target.

What we strive to get across to detractors is that if they waltz into this web site with generic criticisms against the New Testament in general, the KJV in particular, or the Church of Christ, they must be prepared to support their accusations with accurately translated Scripture in complete context. Hurling statements like, "The KJV is inaccurate," "The Church of Christ is a false religion," or "You're just holding up your preferences as divine principles" just won't pass muster without biblical support. Likewise proving ineffective here are the sophomoric "weapons" of sarcasm, satire, and character assassination, which detractors so frequently utilize. Cast them upon the playground and school yard before venturing to this web site.

 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)

Refuting SCHOLAR!

September 7 2005, 1:17 PM 

    ChristianScholar:Ahh, We are so good at taking what believe is the translation of biblical text and making it what want it to say. We as Church of Christ members have the audacity to claim we are the only non-denominal church, and we say that all these community churches are just denominations in disguise? Hmm well i would argue that we are nothing more than a denomination in disguise.
SOME people may have said that just as SOME people may use that claim to discredit OTHER THINGS. There is a community church denomination and then there are others which have STOLEN the name. Because you are such a scholar you know that there were about 421 separate denominations formed out of the Great American Awakening. Most of these were Baptists and someone has counted 156 separate Baptist denominations. NONE of that has anything to do with the LUSTED FOR changes.

I know of no major religious group which you can identify which does not have collectivists meetings to thresh out opinions and dogmas. They almost always train men and make sure they get PLACED in the group and most feed funds into a central headquarters. If you know of a specific non-denominational group then let us know. I know that the Jubilee hoped that they would spawn a group which met annually to be fed good stuff about HOW TO RAISE HOLY HANDS or be conditioned to instrumental music. They began with a Sunday school program but that probably got stamped on just as has the whole Jubilee denominational or INCORPORATED movement.
    ChristianScholar:I love the arrogance that you all have to believe that our church is the original church formed at Pentecost as if our ways of thinking are directly from the bible. What you should all do is spend some time studying the path of Christianity from Palestine, to Italy, To Turkey, To England and eventually to the United States and then maybe you would realize that Church of Christ is simply an offshoot of a thought process that has been carried down.
Ignatius who Died C. 110 wrote to the Ephesians spoke of THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. The Apostolic Constitutions identifies the church as THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. ALL of these writers defended the NAME of the church, the organization of the church, the worship of the church including rejecting music and even musicians from membership until they repented. They all rejected the trinity concept and all insisted on Baptism FOR the remission of sins. So CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR, you will never find any evidence to hallucinate Musical Worship Teams until the Pope imported the A Capella who were ALA CASTRATOS to perform in the Sistine Chapel where organs were outlawed.

Not until AFTER the Reformation did the Catholics or anyone ever have congregational singing WITH instrumental accompanied. Organs were signals to mark processionals, recessionals and were more like a pitchpipe for the Precentor but NOT to accompany "singing."
    ChristianScholar:Im sure that many of you would claim that Martin Luther was some sort of Anti-Christ yet without him there would be no Church of Christ.
On the contrary, thou who reads textbooks by Ph.Duhs who have never read Luther, Restoration Scholars who read original documents in original languages speak the same way Luther, Calvin and others spoke. What the lying "scholars" say about "american" invention is NOT TRUE in ANY SINGLE INSTANCE. T. Campbell spoke Luther's Sola Fide absolutely: "Faith must have have an object." Luther's Sola Fide meant Sola Scriptura because you cannot believe something you have not heard. Because the Sola Fide produced by Sola Scripture DEMANDED baptism for the remission of sins, Sola Fide demanded Salvation by Baptism Only. You didn't know that! Huh? Martin would repudiate LUTHERAN and would call himself a member of THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. We could use his description of baptism without change. He even put infant baptism in the cast of "baby dedication."

AD 150-211 Clement of Alexandria 354-430 Augustine of Hippo AND EVERYONE considered itself THE CHURCH OF CHRIST.

Luther defended OUR form of baptism FOR the remission of sins for those old enough to believe. Erasmus and Calvin called it the church of Christ, rejected music, the trinity of three Shellyite "people," and cast out the organs, choirs and restored congregational singing. Calvin rejected that the Spirit operated outside of the Word and called his effort A RESTORATION MOVEMENT.

ALL of the literary evidence proves that THE GOAL of all protestants was to RESTORE the faith and practice of the church to the BIBLICAL STANDARD. So, it is another big lie that Anti-instrumental churches of Christ INVENTED the concept of Commands, Examples and Inferences which is WELL DOCUMENTED in the Bible and all scholarship.

Constantine DID NOT form the canon but included what he wanted collected together to print. The Bible is a LIBRARY and there were MANY cannons based on what books were referred to by individual writers. MAKING A LIST did not include or exclude anything which has stood the test of time. The Old Testament as we have it with the Apocrypha existed and Jesus may have had a BOUND COPY because that is what he quotes. Adding the Apocryphal will only get you MORE association of MUSIC with the Devil and the sacrificial system.

ALL of the non-canonical literature CASTIGATES music as a worship concept and assigns it to Satan as does the Bible and ALL contemporaneous literature. So, the only thing you could ADD would be Babylonian tablets continued as Gnosticism and the Mother Goddess worship under Sophia and ZOE. Even among the Gnostics Zoe is called THE BEAST and the FEMALE INSTRUCTING PRINCIPLE.

Defend what YOU as PROGRESSIVE believe which is CONTRARY to the 2,000 year history of THE CHURCH OF CHRIST and let us see what you are screaming about. Amos, Isaiah, Ezekiel and other identify PROGRESSIVE with INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC.

GIVE US SOME TRUE BLUE TRANSLATION WHICH REFUTES ANYTHING CHURCH OF CHRIST. I can refute professional riders on church widows, the Law of Giving, the Law of Singing and that TRUMPS you.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: Refuting SCHOLAR!

September 9 2005, 5:05 PM 

oh thank you miss ppb for your valuble insight!
What dribble dr bill. your full of $%%^$ as a christmas goose!


I see the usual suspects are still out hear ranting and raving!

Your faithful detractor,

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

RE: Refuting Scholar (Kent)

September 9 2005, 10:37 PM 

"Kent," the epitome of detractor:

1. He cannot respond without using or suggesting profanity/vulgarity (as borne out in the post here and in other threads).

2. He hasn't ever contributed one single, original essay to this site, only responses laced with sarcasm, satire, character assassinations, and, of course, profanity/vulgarity.

3. He cannot even begin to make a rational, legitimate argument against this web site, let alone back it up with any valid Scripture.

Conclusion: We'll waste no more time on detractor Kent, for his future posts will only be sordid variations on what we've just witnessed.

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

Kent Really Needs Our Prayers

September 10 2005, 4:12 AM 

I’m going to retract what I said previously about not wasting any more time on the detractor Kent. It’s quite obvious that any person who repeatedly resorts to profanity and vulgarity in order to communicate, especially to fellow Christians on this web site, is filled, not with the spirit of Christ, but with the spirit of evil. Such a person as Kent is in serious need of spiritual help.

Therefore, I call upon all those who regularly contribute to Concerned Members, supporters and detractors alike, to put away doctrinal disputes momentarily and offer prayer on Kent’s behalf. This guy at least deserves a chance to rid himself of this bane of profanity, vulgarity, and general hatred, and massive prayer from other Christians surely can’t hurt.

Christ warned of severe penalties to those who used abusive language against their brother. The examples He used were “Raca” (“empty head”) and “Thou fool” (Matt 5:22 KJV). Calling the Church of Christ “you racist old bastards! All of you!” and “Print this you jackasses” (both from “RE: Old Book,” April 25, 2005 in the “Change Agents Convince; But Do Not Convict” thread) or implying that someone is filled with excrement from a Christmas goose would certainly fall under the same warning. Another "Kent" quote: “If God is such a mean [S.O.B.] that he will damn to hell someone for saying damn, [excrement], Eff off, etc, i [sic] dont [sic] need that god [sic]” (Ex-Church of Christ web site discussion board).

Therefore, I call upon Kent to examine his life, to repent of the abusive, profane, and vulgar language with which he has addressed other Christians at this web site, and to ask forgiveness not only from those against whom he has trespassed, but from Christ as well. I’ll begin by forgiving Kent. May others do the same.

Now knowing human nature as I do, I would not be surprised to see a blistering response from Kent himself, along with his full vocabulary of profanity and vulgarity. If so, then Kent would definitely be on a downhill slide to oblivion. But if his sure-to-come response bears evidence of contrition and remorse, then his soul just may heal and he become a useful Christian in Christ’s service.

 Respond to this message   
Christian Scholar
(no login)

Re: Kent Really Needs Our Prayers

September 11 2005, 3:53 PM 

I believe that you people are the ones in need of real prayers. As you continue to Alienate Thousands from Christianity because of your closemindedness and your blaten ignorance many are turning to other forms of faith. Maybe we all including myself need to stop worrying so much about what other Valid Churches are doing(Yes they are valid, im sorry "Your" view of scripture is not black and white, Others have valid ways of translating the bible, You are not omnipotant as many of you feel you are) and Look at ourselves and see how our church is damaging the Face of Christianity. Maybe when we all stop this petty quibbling over which church is right than we will in fact be able to bring more believers in christ. Im sorry you do not have some sort of right on Heaven. Heaven is open to many more people than just so called Church of Christ members and i think you will all be in for big surprise when and if we get there(judgement is reserved for Jesus alone so I will not judge who will not go to heaven and im not close to arrogant enough to believe that i know who will enter the kingdom) So, Before you go and claim someone else needs prayers because of thier sin you should examine your own, I believe there is some verse about that in Matthew... it may even be in my TNIV bible as well, even though as well all know my book is the book of the deciever

 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(no login)

Shall we continue discussing?

September 11 2005, 9:50 PM 

Christian Scholar:

Yes, WE ALL are in need of real prayers. But I’m wondering, personally, why you have come to the defense of someone who is full of … um … expletives. I think you have brought up some issues that are worth discussing. OK, you have presented your premises. Rebuttals have been given. Now, it’s your turn to refute the rebuttals. Shall we just continue discussing? This would help determine close-mindedness, blatant ignorance, alienation, arrogance or anything else you mentioned in your post above—wouldn’t you think?

Thanks for your consideration.


 Respond to this message   
This is Tom, Not PBLCOC

back on track

April 30 2006, 2:03 AM 


Thank you for saying that.


 Respond to this message   
Dr Bill Crump
(no login)

RE: Kent Really Needs Our Prayers (Christian Scholar)

September 11 2005, 10:01 PM 

Christian Scholar:

Can't you put aside your obvious hatred for us for a few minutes and offer some heart-felt prayer for a poor soul like Kent/Brad who has an obvious fetish for profanity/vulgarity, as I asked? That's so obvious that it's a no-brainer about whether it's wrong or not. We all need prayer, because we ALL sin. But I'm beginning to think that, because you manifest such intense hostility toward us, you are in need of special prayer to help you rid yourself of such hatred. You mentioned Matthew and sin. There’s also a verse in Matt. about using abusive language toward your brother (Matt. 5:22 KJV). Further, there’s a verse in Matt. which implies that having animosity toward your brother cancels any offering that you could present to God (Matt. 5:23-24 KJV). Scholar, you obviously have animosity toward us and this web site. I admonish you to be reconciled to us and thus fulfill the command of Matt. 23-24.

BTW, you never did respond to the three requests I made of you earlier regarding your false premise that the KJV is inaccurate. So I will restate them:

1. What specific Greek New Testament edition (Traditional Text [Textus Receptus, Received Text], Critical Text, etc.) did you use as a comparison to form such a conclusion?

2. Please produce at least twelve New Testament passages (or many more if desired) which clearly demonstrate the most profound of alleged inaccuracies of the King James translation. Let the proof be so clear that we cannot do anything but discard our KJVs.

3. Since it is obvious that you reject the KJV, please recommend a specific New Testament translation which is allegedly the most accurate and reliable when compared with the Greek, and please cite ample reasons for this recommendation.

You have made certain accusations. Now you must be prepared to back them up with Scripture in complete context; if not, you automatically proclaim yourself a false person.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: RE: Kent Really Needs Our Prayers (Christian Scholar)

September 12 2005, 4:45 PM 

The point of my critisism is not to say that KJV is an invalid version of the Bible. In no way is that bible evil or wrong. I take offense to someone claiming the NIV is some sort of bible from Satin and that it serves no purpose. It was never intended that biblical translations be perfect. Take for example the Septuigent. The Israelites fully accepted that version except for a few radical groups. If we are actually going to claim that there is one true translation then we must go back to the Greek text, the tradtional greek text because there are words that are impossible to translate to english correctly. The greek was translated to English to make it accessable for all. It was actually translated from Latin since that was the text of the Time when the KJV was created. No one on earth speaks old english any longer so we again updated the bible so that it would be accessable to everyone. Its not a matter of accuracy, because it is impossible to be completely accurate in any text. Even the greek texts may not be accurate because of the passing down of the letters over time since the finalized Canon was not astablished until the 4th century. No one is saying that the KJV is invalid, im saying that it is outdated. In respose to your other post, you have provided no rebuttle to my other accusations. I do not understand how you are so sharply critisizing someone who used profane language when your language is just as dangerous. I believe that James said something about the Tongue and how it can lead the entire body astray. You come on this website and write words of slander about members of a congregation and yet you claim that the one who says a few swear words should be prayed over? I think we all need to ccheck our own language before we critisize. I do not hate any of you on this site, I am just afraid. Im afraid that this type of christianity. This closeminded christianity will drive away people from a church that is already dying. Its rather reminicent of the Catholic Churches response to Protestantism. Your thought process is now the minority for church of christ. The common church goer no longer speaks as you do, we have better ideas of the early church than we used to and we understand that many of our preconcieved notions were wrong. If you want more information about the first century church read The Story of Christianity by Justo Gonzales. This portrays a perfect picture of what the early church really was like. It was not a church where women sat in silence and there were no clear established leaders. It was not a church of harmony but a church of many different ideas. You can even continue reading and realize where the thought process for the Church of Christ came from because unfortunatly our church is not the church of the bible or the first century, Many of our ideas come from men and not from text. We read scripture the way we do because of Men who came before us who put forth these ideas. Now if you would like to continue some discussion please be my guest and i will continue to respond. I do not wish to destroy what you do, I only wish to show some that this process of thought is not furthering the Kingdom of God, It is only hindering it.

 Respond to this message   
David Rhoades
(no login)

You are no scholar!

September 12 2005, 7:38 PM 

You state:

"Take for example the Septuigent. The Israelites fully accepted that version except for a few radical groups"

Sorry scholar, you need to go back to school;

" The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament. Remember, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text which Jesus quoted when he walked the earth. And, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text that has been verified.

Yet, some 'modern textual critics' use the Greek Septuagint to determine the wording of 'new versions'. Instead of using the proven Hebrew Massoretic Old Testament Text, some translators admitted they used Origin's Septuagint. For instance; the NIV translators said they used the Old Testament Text that was: "standardized early in the third century by Origin" [S3P537].

"Thus, we see that Origin was a key participant in the corruption of God's Word."

And no, Jesus never quoted from the Septuagint.


You state:

"It was actually translated from Latin since that was the text of the Time when the KJV was created"

Sorry scholar, The King James Bible was never trnaslated from Latin.

The Old Testament came from the Massoretic Old Testament Text, and New Testament came from the Traditional Majority Greek Text.

Sorry scholar, you failed.

Your lies and deceptions will be countered here with your every step you take. You will be seen for who you really are.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: You are no scholar!

September 12 2005, 8:29 PM 

Unfortunatly you are wrong

When The KJV was originally created it used the latin text, for the NT, because that was the bible that was used and they also used the Greek, The issue is not over what bible was used its the fact that they made a translation that could be read by the masses which as you may know the church in rome rejected. Just as you reject all versions but the KJV and your right Jesus did not speak out of the Septuigent thatsa because he spoke Aramaic. It does not make it less valid, The Septuigent was just as valid as the Hebrew OT considering it was translated by the Jews. You being a christian really have no authority over the OT considering the OT we have came from the Jews so you cannot be an expert. But this not the issue. The issue is how you deny the fact that your way is not the only way. When jesus said the way is short and narrow he did not mean that only group of christians would make it, He meant that many would not believe or follow his teachings. He did not mean only CofC would go to heaven. Thats the real issue not some petty argument over Bible Translation

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: RE: Kent Really Needs Our Prayers (Christian Scholar)

September 12 2005, 9:42 PM 

ChristianScholar -

Who has been teaching you this false history? Please do NOT tell me it is a college professor, for he/she should be booted from their job. Your facts are inaccurate and Mr. Gonzales book is NOT the definitive history book. For goodness sakes...History 101 starts here:

You might want to check your history of the first church again. There are plenty of books and reference materials out there with letters from the 1st Church elders and other citizens about the early church and their beliefs/behavior.

Take your comment on women in the early Church. It is extremely inaccurate. It is WELL KNOWN that women in the early church did NOT speak up during the worship time nor did they hold any authority over the Christian men. This has long been established by historians (real ones) and written about in letters passed between the early church Elders. Christians today are very naive about women and religion in the 1st Century. Did you know that majority of new converts were from pagan religions? If so, why don't you study up on the pagan religions of that time. Guess what you will find out? Yep, most of them were ran by FEMALE PRIESTS. In fact, one of the first heretical movements was started by women. GASP!!!!???? So Paul wasn't talking to a bunch of repressed women but women that were used to leading religious ceremonies. SHOCK!!!! So guess what? The old "it wasn't meant for women today" just doesn't work.

And guess what! The Churches were VERY, VERY, VERY concerned with keeping to the ONE TRUTH. Nope, not different styles or thoughts but ONE TRUTH. They wrote letters back and forth to make sure they were on the same page. Christian's travelling to another city carried letters from their church Elders verifying they were a true Christian. They remained steadfast for several hundred years until heretics like Augustine and others began making up their own rules. So, again your facts are very wrong.

I am shocked at your conclusions as I did not realize that our members were so unaware of the history of the Church. Sad...

I beg you to read up on some of the letters from the Church Elders (1st and 2nd centuries). You will find a REMARKABLE likeness to the c of C.

Oh, and guess what else? The early churches had copies of the Apostles' letters that the church Elders read and re-read on Sundays and discussed over and over again. These letters were later found and turned into a book. Can you guess which one? Amazingly enough, the letters of the early elders are WORD FOR WORD translations of the scrolls found in the Dead Sea caves. Hmm..imagine that?

There is so much more I could tell you about the early Church which would make you run far and fast from a group like Madison. But since you seemed to have closed your mind to the truth, why don't you check out some of the early letters from the Elders. David Bercot has a dictionary that will start you on your way to finding out who the early church Elders were and where to look for their letters/apologies/etc.

Good luck and hope you enjoy reading their letters as much as I do.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: You are no scholar!

September 12 2005, 11:04 PM 

ChristianScholar -

Actually, the KJV only relied on some of the prior Latin text but relied more heavily on the Tyndale's translation or the Byzantium text which was Greek. "The New Testament writers wrote in Koine Greek, the language of the common man in the first century A.D. A major step in the development of the English Bible was Tyndale's translation of the New Testament published in 1526 and portions of the Old Testament published later. Tyndale's version was significant because it was translated from a newly published Greek New Testament rather than from the Vulgate."

Tyndale used a Greek text for his translation. The first published Greek New Testament appeared in the year 1516. It was edited by Erasmus, a Dutch scholar. Erasmus had at his disposal no more than six Greek manuscripts (we have thousands at our disposal today). These manuscripts were part of what is called the Byzantine text family.

Erasmus' Greek text was reworked and reprinted by others including Robert Estienne who divided the text into verses. Theodore Beza then built upon Estienne's work, and his Greek text provided one of the major foundations for the King James Bible. The term Textus Receptus, or Received Text, came from a blurb in another Greek text produced in the early seventeenth century by the Elzevir brothers."


Just for the record...Did you read Ephesians 4? I believe it should answer your question on why we believe only a member of Christ's church will enter the Kingdom:

1] I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, [2] With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; [3] Endeavouring to keep the UNITY of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [4] [There is] ONE body, and ONE Spirit, even as ye are called in ONE hope of your calling; [5] ONE Lord, ONE faith, ONE baptism, [6] ONE God and Father of all, ONE [is] above all, and through all, and in you all.

[13] Till we all come in the UNITY of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: [14] That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; [15] But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, [even] Christ: [16] From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

[23] And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; [24] And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. [25] Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. [26] Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: [27] Neither give place to the devil. [28] Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with [his] hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. [29] Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. [30] And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. [31] Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: [32] And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. (Eph 4:1-32 KJV)

What about ALL of the verses? The ones on Unity and One body, One faith, One baptism? That we are not to listen to deception? That we are not to give place to the Devil? As much as he talks about being kind, gentle and peaceful...he also talks about standing fast and in the One faith. Not many faiths, several faiths, etc...ONE.

Unity of faith cannot happen with different beliefs and baptisms. It is not possible. Division is the opposite of Unity.

If we are not to listen to deception or give the Devil a footing, how are we to stop it? By being quiet? Ignoring the false teachings? Allowing division?

Are you asking us to obey only part of Ephesians 4 - the easy, sweet part and ignore the obligations we must bare?

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: RE: Kent Really Needs Our Prayers (Christian Scholar)

September 13 2005, 1:55 AM 

Funny how whenever anyone decided to quote a book that may dispute what you say it becomes wrong or not accurate enough for you liking. Actually Gonzalez is the leading authority on Church History. HIs book is the best selling Church History book, and is used in most collegiate level history classes. First off its interesting you say that Women remained Silent and you have no facts to back that up in the original church. Actually The women were very involved, There were deaconesses in churches and paul thanks women for thier leadership in the church. Thats interesting though if they remain silent and subserviant at all times how do women become leaders?? Hmmm interesting. Unfortunatly again for you your wrong. The churches were very split and i dont even need a history book for this one. Just look at the the epistles of Paul. Every letter is to a church trying to get it back to what Paul taught originally because of the vast differences in teachings. When he speaks of false prophets he is not talking about the 21st century he is talking about Judiazers of the 1st Century, but im sure you knew that huh. Funny again that you say the apostolic fathers were very much like CofC, which again is far from the truth. If they were why were most Bishops of the city the belonged to? Most worried more about being Martyered for thier faith than they did over instruments in the church as we waste our time with. How come we have centered our attention on the sermon when the true focus of service was the Taking of bread and wine? How come we also believe that the Eucherist is only a memorial when the original apostolic fathers believed that Jesus was inherenently present in the bread and wine also known as Transubstantiation which we deny? What fathers do you know that were like CofC because obviously they were not that influential. Im sorry CofC is not the only church that will enter the kingdom of heaven. The one faith you speak of is not one faith in CofC its one faith in Jesus and one church is the church of believers. Not the church of Christ. We are believers of Jesus and that is the one faith. Know what is even better is you claim that the Dead Sea Scrolls have something to do with NT letters when in actuality that is so far from the truth. The Dead Sea Scrolls were written by the Asines that had fled Jeruselem because they did not want to become part of the Roman Culture. The Scrolls contained comentary on that and the Hebrew bible, which is the OT and some of the Apocrypha, Not a single letter of Paul or from a church that Paul had set up. If you want to get on here and tell me how wrong I am you better check your facts i will even link you to a site that has the entire Dead Sea Scrolls If you find a letter from an elder in these let me know. I am very interested to see where you got your information. You can continue to pick and chose which parts of my messages you respond to but when you are ready to get into the real breadth of what im saying you can respond. Stop picking the petty issues and speak about important issues such as how our "church" is corrupting christianity and sending many away from the faith when we are called to welcome those in with open arms. We can debate christian history all day and i can promise you that even though you claim to have some knowledge if you continue with the line of thinking you had in the last post i will have a rebuttle for whatever you say and i promise if anyone in here would be willing to an objective study i would be proven right, But im sure you have some more things to say that are probably not the truth. I am a History/Biblical Studies Scholar. I Have taken basic world history classes and specialized world history classes along with Survey Church History Classes and Specialized Church History Classes. Trust me I know my material and if you want to continue this debate we can, but i think the real issue is why the American Body of believers is dying. It is not the fault of Culture but our own faults and until we examine ourselves and start to deny these arrogant thoughts that we are the only right way and that we have had some devine intervention that has given us the ability to accurately decipher the mysteries of the NT the church will continue to shrink

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

Much Rhetoric

September 13 2005, 10:15 AM 

Christian Scholar has given much rhetoric and cited his/her credentials as being a Bible scholar. S/he started out by saying that the KJV translation of the New Testament is “far from accurate.” Now s/he states, "The point of my critisism is not to say that KJV is an invalid version of the Bible." If a version is "far from accurate," it must be inaccurate, which means that it is invalid and cannot be trusted. If the KJV NT doesn't fall right in line with the Greek, it is invalid and cannot be trusted. So which is it, Scholar?

Through all of Scholar's rhetoric, s/he still hasn't presented 12 or more New Testament verses which prove how blatantly "inaccurate" the KJV NT is when compared with the Greek.

 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)

Hail to the Asines!

September 13 2005, 10:40 AM 

I think that you mean the Essenes: the Asines you refer to mostly claim to be Christians AND scholars. The link you gave us has only a tiny outline of some of the sources from which you learn nothing. I think you are just FAKING the role of scholar as a JOKE?

Here is a link if you want to begin Assines, Fast ones of the Slow Group:

And this is just a small sampler. However, you may not know that Isaiah was found which proves that the scholars kept faithful copies of the text. Most of us know that the Essense mostly wrote before Paul was born. There is no scholar in the early churche Asines enough to NOT agree with the major beliefs of the church of Christ.

You may not know that the synagogue as Qahal existed as "the church in the wilderness." It met only for instructions and that was the meaning of the ekklesia or synagogue or church of Christ established and Paul clearly defined. The Warule which you don't really have except a tiny excerpt defines the ALARM where "playing instruments and making a joyful noise before the Lord" was, like all of the instrumental Psalms, parade songs or PANIC warrior chants which were NOT musical.

You will discover that just as Psalm 41 prophesied, the attack led by Judas would be by the Levitical Warrior noise makers who did not make MUSIC. You will see that the Dead Sea Scrolls show that Jesus would WIN and then would PLAY the instruments of His mouth and spirit.

I have collected some of the Psalm material and have pictures to show why any literate or spiritual or even decent person never wanted to MAKE MUSIC during the assembly.

The PSALM material repeats much of the Old Testament material and the RECORD is complete. You may remember that Jesus lived under the Law and the Essenes--and never the Asines--spoke eloquently of the nature of the Messiah. You cannot possibly even remotely understand Paul without understanding that he makes COMMENTARY on the Old Testament to correct views about the sacrificial system.

Without any of the Bible we could know what it taught: we would NOT believe in the "neo-scholarly" tritheism, we would BELIEVE in the Bible as the basis for restoring the church or planting the seed just as all Scholars such as Luther and Calvin believed, we would believe that the name is the church of Christ, we would believe in baptism FOR the remission of sins, we would believe that the heirarchy existed to GO TEACH and establish churches, we would REPUDIATE instrumental music and we would sing PSALMS as commanded by Paul, women would NOT be deaconesses (which meant NUNS) and preachers would be evangelists as Luther, Calvin, Erasmus etal insisted.

We would be able to understand the GREAT SATANIC LAW about the INCREDIBLE SHRINKING church. People who want to RESTRUCTURE the church to look like that a the Tower of Babbling, always use the HITLER or Hegel LIE that if you don't want to be part of a DYING CROWD then you had BETTER join us. It's a lie, it's a lie, it's a lie. By the tree you can know the musical fruits. When people reject the WORD God pours out his WRATH. In Hebrew this means that He sends BUFFOONS, JESTERS AND "GAY TROUBADOURS."

So, before you begin your rebuttle, you might prove that you are not a CLOWN by using adult uppercase letters.
    HIs book is the best selling Church History book, and is used in most collegiate level history classes. First off its interesting you say that Women remained Silent and you have no facts to back that up in the original church. Actually The women were very involved, There were deaconesses in churches and paul thanks women for thier leadership in the church.
I would back that up by Paul's direct command to be SILENT which means SEDENTARY. The church had no SPEAKING roles which means "a random harangue." The direct command was to speak WITH ONE MIND and ONE MOUTH that which is written." The women SERVED Paul and they were not DEPARTMENT HEADS of a pyramidal "ministry" scam. Any woman who wants to get off her rear and get on her donkey and go serve will find thankful elders.

Phoebe was a SERVANT of the church AT Cenchrea. I know of no REAL TRUE HISTORY which places a church AT Cenchrea. The church at Corinth undoubtedly did much of its MINISTRY between the two seaports. Phoebe was on BUSINESS just as was LYDIA. Phoebe's title marks her as an official and as a patroness probably SELF-SUPPORTED. Here task was to find jobs and housings for the many transients or find them a TICKET on the next boat out of Greece. The church had widows in need and in deed who were momentarily called deaconesses but they were PLEDGED NUNS and served in areas such as keeping the children and women SILENT during the assembly or helping baptize women. The OFFICE was quickly disbanded because the women usurped male roles and caused more trouble than pagans. When you examine the TROUBLERS in the modern church you will find "pagan" women or effeminate males at the CORE.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: RE: Kent Really Needs Our Prayers (Christian Scholar)

September 13 2005, 4:39 PM 

Christian Non-Scholar

Okay, this is getting ridiculous. Would you please, please study some better resources than just Catholic ones. Gonzalez is NOT used by any professor that knows his true church history. He is controversial and writes from a more Catholic perspective about the rise and fall of Christianity. He does NOT understand the differences in the Constantine/Augustine movements and the original followers. Do you not get this?

Do you understand that the position of "Bishop" (Elder) was changed during the mid 2nd century when heretical sects were taking over? There was a large break in the Church that had occurred and the Church YOU are discussing was NOT the original true Church

You think it's interesting that I have ACTUAL biblical/historical knowledge about women in the 1st Century church compared to your biased and poor reference? Amazing. Women did NOT become leaders of the early Church. Have you ACTUALLY read the letters from the Early Church Elders?

Take Tertullian for instance - he discusses how women are to be silent in the Church yet some are trying to teach and even baptize. Tertullian was upset and aghast at these women. They were not to teach men, baptize, offer or to claim any lot in manly nor priestly functions. Cyprian also states the same information. He would not let women teach, be deacons/elders or have authority over men in the Church. Even the early Catholic Church understood the NT in regards to women and positions of authority. They had yet to change that doctrine (as they had so many others).

Irenaeus discusses the pagan women and how they dared to consecrate cup. Tertullian was extremely disgusted with the pagan women as they were wonton. "For they are bold enough to teach, to dispute, to enact exorcisms, to undertake cures - it may be even to baptize" C 197 W, 3.263. Origen discusses this same issue and how the pagan women were allowed to hold prophetic office.

You also have failed to study the original Greek version (and context) of the Bible for the word "deacon" or shepherd if you actually believe that Paul allowed women to be in the position of "Deacon". There are many uses of the word "diakoneo". Also, if you would read Paul's writings, you would find that the OFFICE of Deacon had many requirements, one of which was to be married to one woman. Are you now stating that Lesbian's could hold office?

You answered your own self with the following: "Every letter is to a church trying to get it back to what Paul taught originally because of the vast differences in teachings." Hmmm.. Paul was teaching that we should get back to the original teachings? Wow...Isn't that what this site is about? Do you not see how one-sided your view is? Paul is telling congregations that they are starting to fall away from the Truth and to get back to it. If not, they would be lost. Hence all the lost religions like the Catholics, Lutherans, etc. Do you not get that?

Paul states that everything he writes is inspired by God and meant for all people. Are you saying he was lying or was it God? Paul's corrections are meant for anyone who is NOT doing the same thing that the early Church was doing. What you are trying to imply is that the rules do not matter anymore.

Again, you are so very wrong about what the early Christian church worried about. They were very worried about many things. We know this from both Christian writings and Roman writings. Here are just a few of the issues discussed in letters:

Women allowing male servants to see them naked.
Christian's attending theater and events in the arenas.
Being rich was a sin.
Going to war as a soldier.
Use of instruments in worship (they were considered a form of entertainment/paganism).
This list could go on and on.

You are also wrong about the true reason for gathering on the first day of the week. It was not just for the Eucherist (Lord's Supper). It was a time to read and discuss the Apostles' letters, psalms and hymns. Justin Martyr wrote about a typical Sunday gathering in 160, E. 1.186, in which he discusses how they gathered together to discuss the memoirs of the Apostles or the writings of Church prophets/leaders. Then the preacher would talk to them and instruct them on how to imitate the good things written. They they rose and prayed together. They THEN broke bread and wine/water. Then they would sing and give psalms. Where do you get the the LS was the only reason they met?

You are confusing Heretical leaders with the original Church fathers in regards to to "Transubstantiation". Jesus commanded in 1 Cor 11:23-27 that we take the bread and fruit of the vine as a remembrance of Him and the covenant he made by his death. When we take the LS we are proclaiming that Lord's death till he comes. Didache, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and Clement of Alexander all believed it was in "remembrance" of Christ and was figurative. These are the Early Church Elders. Transubtantiation did not come about for hundreds of years and it is a later addition created by the Catholics. It was NEVER a part of the early Church.

I did NOT say that the Dead Sea Scrolls were made up of Apostle's letters (I assumed you understood that was the NT). I was discussing how amazing it is to find that these illiterate first Christians were studying scriptures and old prophecies from the OT that were word for word the same as that found in the Dead Sea caves. Have you ever read the Early Church elder's letters? They constantly quoted scrpture from the OT which we now know to have been passed down correctly for generations. If they could quote OT so perfectly, then would they not have quoted Apostles they had actually met? Because of these scrolls, we are able to decipher the true Greek context used in the NT and the early church letters. I did not understand that you were Catholic and unaware that the NT and early church elder letters used OT scriptures. Sorry for assuming.

By the way, again your source is not up-to-date on the Dead Sea Scrolls. I always try to stick with the best source. You might want to try the Orion Center. As the actual scholars of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Orion Center states: "The majority of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written in the Hebrew Language (approximately 90-95%) with Assyrian Block script. From this majority there are a few cases in which the scribes used Paleo-Hebrew (see for example 4QPaleoExodus). In addition to the texts found in Hebrew there were also some texts written in Aramaic and Greek. Most scholars agree that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the remains of a library that belonged to an ancient Jewish sect, the Essenes. The site was occupied by the Essenes from the late second century B.C.E. until the appearance of the Romans in the year 68 C.E. The Dead Sea Scrolls were produced by Jews in Judea during a momentous time. They CONTRIBUTE to our understanding of this time period, and represent broad aspects of both ancient Judaism and early Christianity. From these texts, it is possible to trace the development of the Hebrew language, to learn about the different manuscript traditions, including knowledge of scribal practices in use by the community. This data can enable a fairly accurate historical reconstruction of this formative time period. This period was significant in the history of what later developed into Rabbinic Judaism and the Scrolls are concurrent with the origins of Christianity."

The mainstream c of C is not corrupting it's members. Do you not understand that the Devil has taken ahold of some of the Leaders and young members and is causing division in the Church? Jesus tells us to remain steadfast in our knowledge. That means DO NOT CHANGE YOUR TEACHINGS. Hm....What are the new leaders doing? Changing the teachings.

Here's something you might want to learn quickly... Those who start changing things are the Divisionists - not those that remained steadfast. How can one who remains steadfast be causing division? If we change the basic teachings of Christ and the Apostles, we are not following God's commandments. We might be making you happy, but we sure won't be making God happy. Your needs are not His needs. Sorry.

Kid, you have taken a small amount of classes compared to many of us here. You are many, many years behind us. You might want to stop thinking "you're all that" and start appreciating your elders a little more. You should be grateful that we care enough about your soul to try and explain to you how off your knowledge is from fact. The Church colleges have lost a lot of respect with their watered-down version of history and the Bible. I am not impressed with the lack of knowledge kids are graduating with today. Your own comments and lack of facts leave me extremely concerned. I believe we need to know what college you are attending. This is outrageous!

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: Hail to the Asines!

September 14 2005, 1:44 AM 

Again all you do is find everyway to disprove what you claim to be fact. Yes Gonzalez is a Catholic but i hate to tell you this but Catholics are not heretical. I will no longer listen to your false teaching because you continually fail to accept the fact that what you are doing is driving away many from our Jesus. No the greek word used for deacon was actually the masculine word for Deacon when used to describe a women, Read the Koine Greek you are very mistaken, But please again tell me how wrong I am. Its ok though because slowly but surly we will move on and you will become just a radical sect of relgion which you are well on your way toward. You are no better than the Radical Fundementalists in our country. You claim to have the real verion of history and you discredit all objective scholarly resources. Do you want me to start quoting Non Christian Scholarly Articles. Ones that look at the objective fact and deny 90% of the things you believe. Do you realize that everything you claim to be part of the NT church was because of culture. How do you feel about Jewish Culture being the most important aspect of the christian church. You have a poor understanding of Church and what it should be. I think that if you are all so mad about your churches you should leave and let them alone. Form your own churches. No one forces you to go to a church thats the beauty of our country we have relgious freedom. Enjoy your Conservative thought and continue to alienate Believers in another Church. Please try to discredit all of the things that I study and Know to be true. It will not change the ending. God will not choose you over another. I am not part of the Community Church Movement but I thank these people who you claim to know so much about that have tried so hard to further the Faith. You seem to all know these church leaders so well. I think Jesus said something about Judging, and you cannot even claim that this judgement is based on some knowledge of these men. You know nothing about them. You are competely biased and until you are wiling to admit that you will continue to make people run away from true faith which is the belief in Jesus not your rules that you have somehow pulled from the bible. I dont care about facts or history as much as i do care about how you are running away believers in droves. Just leave the people of these churches alone and let them be because they are trying to worship God and not some God that you believe to have some sort of Copyright on.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Re: Hail to the Asines!

September 14 2005, 2:03 PM 


I'm gathering you are starting to realize that your facts are weak and biased. YOur comments on the word Deacon shows you have very little training in Greek. Sorry.

By the way, you didn't address the "most be married to one woman" scripture. Wonder why?

You have clearly explained that you are not a Christian by comments and defining the Catholic faith as non-heretical. No true Christian would EVER agree to that statement as the Catholic faith does NOT follow the Bible. In fact, movements like the Catholic's were discussed in the NT as "heretical" by Paul.

So, what you are saying is that you are smarter than Jesus and the Apostles. You don't care about the truth they presented. You want to do this YOUR way. YOu would rather the Church grow in size without any depth or truth. That is the saddest statement I have ever heard.

By the way, be very careful about stating whether any of us know these false preachers. Many of us do know them personally and have every right to say what we say.

I will continue to pray that you will mature in your knowledge and attitude towards Christ. I pray that you will open that hard heart and see the Glory of God and His Truth. It will not be what You want to hear but it will be the TRUTH as God wants it to be. I pray you will find your path to the One Faith and One Baptism.

I hope you will confront your professors for their lack of knowledge and/or refusal to read ALL the history of the Church and not just the parts they are comfortable with.

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

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

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

What Happened at the Madison Church of Christ?

There are thousands of churches being taken over across America.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here is the list of players;

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

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

Place your banner ad here.           See all banner ads ...About ...Links Library ...Sunday School in Exile ...Help Warn Others

FastCounter by bCentral

CM Visit Counter as of 6/25/2015

Site Visits Since 6/30/2015
page counter