Place your banner ad here.          See all banner ads

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

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

The Jesus Proposal: Shelly and York

March 8 2004 at 8:25 PM
Kenneth Sublett  (no login)
from IP address 63.84.81.66

THE JESUS PROPOSAL: RUBEL SHELLY AND JOHN YORK

Rubel Shelly and John York claim that as Jesus Christ was the First Incarnation of God as WORD, CULTURAL CHANGES mean that the CHURCH is to be a Second Incarnation of the Word.

Individuals cause division and therefore have NO RIGHT to read and understand the Word for themselves. The true meaning of MODERNISM which they hate seems to be that EVERYONE HAD A RIGHT TO READ THE BIBLE FOR THEMSELVES.
Claiming to be scientists they think that the post-modern era demands that interpreting the Bible must be yanked back under the hands of SCHOLARS or the commune. Only the COMMUNITY (commune) has the right to interpret using the GROUP MIND. But, we have looked at enough SELF-PROMOTED scholars to understand what Jesus meant when He accused them of TAKING AWAY the key to knowledge. Quoting from their book:
    Rubel Shelly and John York: Our proposal to focus on Jesus means that Scripture is NO LONGER a set of proof-texts or a collection of facts or God's rulebook for human behavior. Scripture is the unfolding story of God acting both to create and to re-create. It is not an easy book to understand. It was NEVER intended as a document to [115] be INDIVIDUALLY read and interpreted--a sort~of correspondence course in salvation.
Isn't it a bit childish to keep on repudiating God's right to regulate our faith and practice? Certainly there are rules: thou shalt not "steal the church house of widows." Thou shalt not call God a liar by rejecting His Living presence as the Word.
    Rubel Shelly and John York: Prior to the invention of the printing press, access to the content of Scripture was oral. For thousands of years it could only be heard and interpreted in the context of community. Yes, INDIVIDUALS could comment on Scripture, but those comments were always for the LARGER hearing of the community. Only after there was INDIVIDUAL access did there become an opportunity for an individual, isolated reading and interpretation that had no need or use for community.
On the contrary, before movable type most of the great church theologians had written and published their works. Many men such as Heredotus hand copied his text and attended trade fairs and sold copies. Others continued to copy so that there was no lack of access. The church chained the Bible to the pulpit to keep it from getting stolen. The Gutenberg bible was completed in about 1455.
    Rubel Shelly and John York: Just as identity in Christ is always COMMUNITY identity, our reading of Scripture becomes a COMMUNITY READING as well. , While we still have access to reading as individuals, we stop asking, "What does this mean to me?"--as though there is such an isolated meaning. Instead we have a GROUP MENTALITY that asks, "What does this mean to US?" More importantly, we lay aside INDIVIDUAL interpretations precisely because they are inevitably argumentative and divisive. We GIVE UP the right of individual interpretation and take on the accountability of SHARED READING. This is not a pooling of collective ignorance. The Bible is full of stories from ancient and often quite alien cultural settings and belief systems, and we cannot ignore those differences. So we listen to the voices of scholarship just as we listen to the child who intuitively hears what God is saying in a particular story.
When Jesus went out to preach He did not call the "community." When He spoke of GIVING He insisted that the "community" had nothing to do with it. When He spoke of prayer He insisted that worship in the NEW PLACE of the HUMAN SPIRIT must be done totally alone just as only ONE priest could enter into the Most Holy Place. Paul never promised CUMMUNING but of SCATTERING and persecution. Jesus died to remove the COMMUNITY from off our backs so that we can come to Him and REST from "anxiety producing religious rituals." Jesus defined His presence in the ekklesia, synagogue or SCHOOL OF CHRIST as involving two or three gathered in HIS name and not in the name of a performing preacher or MUSICA team used to HURT people and call it the Holy Spirit.

Peter outlawed such interpretation just as Jesus repudiated the Doctors of the Law. Peter was an EYE-WITNESS and therefore Shelly and York cannot be latter day apostles to deliver the Word in the form of a COMMUNE taxing people Jesus died to free.

Burden as CEREMONY and extra TAXES is guaranteed when the CHURCH takes on the tasks which belong to Caesar:
    Phoros (g5411) for'-os; from 5342; a load (as borne,) i.e. (fig.) a tax (prop. an individ. assessment on persons or property; whereas 5056 is usually a gen. toll on goods or travel): - tribute.

    Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth. 2 Pet 1:12
    Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance; 2 Pet 1:13
    Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me. 2 Pet 1:14
    Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things alway in remembrance. 2 Pet 1:15

WHY REJECTING THE TEXT BLASPHEMES GOD
    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. 2 Pet 1:16

    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. 2 Pet 1:17

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

    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: 2 Pet 1:19

We WORSHIP whatever we GIVE ATTENTION TO. People hate the Bible and warn of idolatry for trusting the ONCE DELIVERED WORD. However, to give heed to God we must give heed to His Word:
    Proserchomai (g4334) pros-er'-khom-ahee; from 4314 and 2064 (includ. its alt.); to approach, i.e. (lit.) come near, visit, or (fig.) worship, assent to: - (as soon as he) come (unto), come thereunto, consent, draw near, go (near, to, unto).
WHY IS IT THAT WE SHOULD REJOICE IN SOLA SCRIPTURA? It is either the words of Lord Jesus Christ through an inspired Apostle or it is through a SELF-PROCLAIMED LATTER DAY APOSTLE. Peter speaking for Lord Jesus Christ gave NO ONE the right to INTERPRET the Word. The command of the Word is to "teach the Word as it has been taught" without trying to INJECT false dogma by claiming to be the SECOND INCARNATION. What happened the FIRST TIME?
    Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. 2 Pet 1:20
Because Peter said
    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 Peter 1:11
INTERPRETATION IS
    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.

What was Paul saying when he DEMANDED that the elders (as the pastor teachers) "teach that which has been taught" and "refute those who contradict it?" Do we need a COMMUNE with a GROUP MIND to explain what Peter meant?

Peter made it very clear but the Phds for which there was no "certificate of need" have to turn the Bible upside down or go down in history as taking from the poor. There is NO community which can with a straight face claim that THE AUDIENCE is incompetent and the GROUP MIND--led by the GROUP LEADER--must INTERPRET the Bible which needs little interpretation unless you INTEND to repudiate Jesus as the Living Word who supplied the Written Word.

Jesus outlawed the Doctors of the Law because they "took away the key to knowledge." Peter was given the keys but HE rejected the idea of continuing revelation. All of the rhetoricians, sOPHISts (serpents), singers, musicians and technikrats in the church fulfilled self-selected roles as SORCERERS. Revelation 18 reveals the fact that the harlot church will be LOADED DOWN with "ministers" pretending to fulfill these functions. Because they performed no useful role they were deemed PARASITES. Pharisees (false preachers), Scribe (false book writers) and Hypocrites (actors, musicians).

The deviant musicians tried to "make a place for themselves in the mainstreem" even though the CHARISMATICS both repulsed and attracted people like a TRAIN WRECK.
    And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee; Rev 18:22

    Mousikos (g3451) moo-sik-os'; from Moåusa , (a Muse); "musical", i.e. (as noun) a minstrel: - musician

The "muses" were the "worship team" of Apollo, Abaddon or Apollyon . The LOCUSTS or "musical performers" in Legend had the power to PUT YOU TO SLEEP but they had the STING of a Scorpion. History is agreed that MUSIC stings you before you begin to FEEL SPIRITUAL.
    musica , ae, and musice- , e-s, f., = mousikê, the ART of music, music; acc. to the notions of the ancients, also every higher kind of artistic or scientific culture or pursuit: musicam Damone aut Aristoxeno tractante?

    Similar meaning: exegetice , es, f., = exêgêtikê, the art of interpretation, exegesis
    magice- , e-s, f., = magikê (sc. technê), the magic art, magic, SORCERY , medicinam magices factio

    Music has always produced FACTIONS or SECTARIANS:

    factio , o-nis, f. [id.] II. (Acc. to facio, II. B.; lit., a taking part or SIDING with any one; hence concr.) A company of persons associated or acting together, a class, order, SECT, faction, party (syn.: pars, partes, causa, rebellio, perduellio, seditio).

    B. In partic., a company of political adherents or partisans, a party, side, faction

    magia , ae, f., = mageia, the science of the MAGI, magic, sorcery

    mageia , hê, theology of the Magians, m. hê Zôroastrou Pl.Alc.1.122a .

FURTHER REASONS FOR NOT CHANGING SAVIOURS:
    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. 2 Pet 1:21

    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 Peter 2:1

Prively means leads in aside, introduce surreptitiously. That means INFILTRATE and DIVERT.
The meaning of the GOSPEL is FREE WATER OF THE WORD. Jesus bought us all. Therefore, anyone who peddles the free Word and denies its power DENIES the Lord that bought them. The Postmodern "scholars" totally deny that the Lord Jesus Christ had the POWER to purchase them with a PRICE and a MESSAGE of good news which could survive OUR culture. The Biblical facts can be perverted but they cannot be HAMMERED out of the Bible.

Paul and peter laid down the MARK: you can tell FALSE TEACHERS if they refuse to teach the word "as it has been taught." Any modern sermonizing opens the door for the false teachers to come in: trained as PROPHETS, CHANELLERS and FACILITATORS.

You say, Whoa! This cannot be happening among OUR scholars. Sure, you just read any of the stuff and it is like a game to see who can pervert the Bible and history the most: the winner gets to be SCHOLAR OF THE YEAR and all of the little scholarettes WILL NOT get their degrees unless they join in the circle. Don't let them take you captive. Read the Word.

Ken Sublett


    
This message has been edited by ConcernedMembers from IP address 67.32.223.10 on Mar 9, 2004 7:51 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Kenneth Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.78

Jesus Proposal: Scholars failed!

March 9 2004, 11:58 AM 

Shelly and York want us to abandon our personal right to read the Bible for ourselve and put INTERPRETATION into the hands of SCHOLARS. But we cannot trust scholarship when it says that the Bible existed only in ORAL form prior to Gutenberg. But, there was TYPE long before there was movable type. So, scholarship flunks out. They also blame all division on the LAITY's access to the Bible. But, we know that ALL division flowed out of pseudo scholarship where "scholars" were made so by people who know nothing.
    Rubel Shelly and John York: Just as identity in Christ is always COMMUNITY identity, our reading of Scripture becomes a COMMUNITY READING as well. , While we still have access to reading as individuals, we stop asking, "What does this mean to me?"--as though there is such an isolated meaning. Instead we have a GROUP MENTALITY that asks, "What does this mean to US?" More importantly, we lay aside INDIVIDUAL interpretations precisely because they are inevitably argumentative and divisive. We GIVE UP the right of individual interpretation and take on the accountability of SHARED READING. This is not a pooling of collective ignorance. The Bible is full of stories from ancient and often quite alien cultural settings and belief systems, and we cannot ignore those differences. So we listen to the voices of scholarship just as we listen to the child who intuitively hears what God is saying in a particular story.

The Gutenberg bible was completed in about 1455. But, "priests" were actually evangelists going out into all the world to teach. Schools were set up and the mass of church literature was well known. When there is no printing press individuals swarmed around the Scriptoriums to purchase parts of the Bible or even hand copy the.

However, Shelly and York see the divisive evil created when the "common people" were able to buy cheap copies. Versions were produced so that "even the plowman" could read and understand the Bible.

Chrysostom:
b. AD 347, Antioch, Syria
d. Sept. 14, 407, Comana, Helenopontus;


http://www.piney.com/FatChrysHomIXCol.html
    Tarry not, I entreat, for another to teach thee; thou hast the oracles of God. No man teacheth thee as they; for he indeed oft grudgeth much for vainglory's sake and envy. Hearken,

    I entreat you, all ye that are careful for this life, and PROCURE BOOKS that will be medicines for the soul. If ye will not any other, yet get you at least the New Testament, the Apostolic Epistles, the Acts, the Gospels, for your constant teachers.

Christ the Living Word (fully God) as the Spirit of Christ made sure that the Bible was preserved. They are the SOLE teaching resources. Peter and Paul made sure that we understand that we must "teach the Word as it has been taught" because this is the only way to MARK false teachers. We noted that Peter outlawed "exegesis" and the Greek world would outlaw "hermeneutics." Only when left alone are they Christ's way of defining THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM. Anyone who wants to tamper for pay is a false teacher by all standards.
    If grief befall thee, dive into them as into a chest of medicines; take thence comfort of thy trouble, be it loss, or death, or bereavement of relations; or rather dive not into them merely, but take them wholly to thee; keep them in thy mind.

    This is the cause of all evils, the NOT knowing the Scriptures. We go into battle without arms, and how ought we to come off safe? Well contented should we be if we can be safe with them, let alone without them. Throw not the whole upon us! Sheep ye are, still not without reason, but rational; Paul committeth much to you also.

    They that are under instruction, are not for ever learning; for then they are not taught. If thou art for ever learning, thou wilt never learn. Do not so come as meaning to be always learning; (for so thou wilt never know;) but so as to finish learning, and to teach others.

    In the arts do not all persons continue for set times, in the sciences, and in a word, in all the arts? Thus we all fix definitely a certain known time; but if ye are ever learning, it is a certain proof that ye have learned nothing.


William Tyndale, (1490-1536) in his desire to get the Bible into the hands of the plowboy, defied the Church, and translated the Scriptures into the common tongue. Tyndale acted as an INDIVIDUAL before God--responsible to Him--personally sensitive to His Word. Though unauthorized by humans, much of his work laid the basis for the later humanly authorized King James Version.

Martin Luther, in his stand against false teachings refused to be persuaded by Pope, human counsel or creed. Rather, he insisted that he would be convinced only by the Sacred Scriptures. Luther acted as an individual at odds with the prevailing--and really then, the only--Christian religious system of his day.

The apostle John wrote:

"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life--the life was made manifest, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us--that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you may have fellowship with us; and our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. And we are writing this that our joy may be complete." (1 John 1:1-4; Revised Standard Version)

The GROUP MENTALITY has much in common with witchcraft. Be sure to read the Faith-Centered writer to prove that the OCCULT has taken over.

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

Ken Sublett


    
This message has been edited by ConcernedMembers from IP address 67.32.223.10 on Mar 9, 2004 1:50 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Kenneth Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.139

Calvin speaks to Shelly

March 11 2004, 1:56 PM 

John Calvin wrote:

1. Before proceeding farther, it seems proper to make some observations on the authority of Scripture, in order that our minds may not only be prepared to receive it with reverence, but be divested of all doubt.

When that which professes to be the Word of God is acknowledged to be so, no person, unless devoid of common sense and the feelings of a man, will have the desperate hardihood to refuse credit to the speaker.

But since no daily responses are given from heaven,

and the Scriptures are the only records in which God has been pleased to consign his truth to perpetual remembrance,

the full authority which they ought to possess with the faithful is not recognised,

unless they are believed to have come from heaven, as directly as if God had been heard giving utterance to them.

This subject well deserves to be treated more at large, and pondered more accurately. But my readers will pardon me for having more regard to what my plan admits than to what the extent of this topic requires.

A most pernicious error has very generally prevailed; viz., that Scripture is of importance only in so far as conceded to it by the suffrage of the Church; as if the eternal and inviolable truth of God could depend on the will of men.

With great insult to the Holy Spirit, it is asked, who can assure us that the Scriptures proceeded from God;

who guarantee that they have come down safe and unimpaired to our times;

who persuade us that this book is to be received with reverence, and that one expunged from the list, did not the Church regulate all these things with certainty?

On the determination of the Church, therefore, it is said, depend both the reverence which is due to Scripture, and the books which are to be admitted into the canon.

Thus profane men, seeking, under the pretext of the Church, to introduce unbridled tyranny, care not in what absurdities they entangle themselves and others,

provided they extort from the simple this one acknowledgement, viz., that there is nothing which the Church cannot do.

But what is to become of miserable consciences in quest of some solid assurance of eternal life, if all the promises with regard to it have no better support than man's judgement? On being told so, will they cease to doubt and tremble? On the other hand, to what jeers of the wicked is our faith subjected - into how great suspicion is it brought with all, if believed to have only a precarious authority lent to it by the good will of men?

2. These ravings are admirably refuted by a single expression of an apostle. Paul testifies that the Church is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets," (Eph. 2: 20.)

If the doctrine of the apostles and prophets is the foundation of the Church, the former must have had its certainty before the latter began to exist.

Nor is there any room for the cavil, that though the Church derives her first beginning from thence, it still remains doubtful what writings are to be attributed to the apostles and prophets, until her judgement is interposed.

For if the Christian Church was founded at first on the writings of the prophets, and the preaching of the apostles, that doctrine, wheresoever it may be found, was certainly ascertained and sanctioned antecedently to the Church, since, but for this, the Church herself never could have existed.

Nothings therefore can be more absurd than the fiction, that the power of judging Scripture is in the Church, and that on her nod its certainty depends.

http://www.piney.com/CalvinInstci1000007.html

Ken Sublett


    
This message has been edited by ConcernedMembers from IP address 67.32.199.67 on Mar 11, 2004 2:39 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Kenneth Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.68

Jesus Proposal

March 13 2004, 2:41 PM 

I have fleshed out an article showing more of the Shelly Proposal which is NOT the Jesus Proposal.

Denying individuals the right to INTERPRET Scripture and SPEAK it "outside of the commune" is truly a dangerous movement afoot. This is slipping in while we are still just waking up to the earlier false teachings.

http://www.piney.com/Jesus.Proposal.Book.html

Because the DISCIPLES DENOMINATION fuels many of the churches which lurched toward instrumental music but largely failed, we should see what the "pope" of the denomination says about authority.

http://www.piney.com/Hamm-Disciples.html

The Smith's Spring or Engedi.org claims the same "authority" to reject the Bible and trust in CHURCH COUNCILS. However, John Calvin uses as many TOUGH words as possible to identify such people as fanatics.

http://www.piney.com/Lawrence-Councils.html

See the bottom of the Smith Springs Forum:

http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/thread?forumid=187120&messageid=1058464535&lp=1079195951

Because the Purpose Driven Cult "shepherds" those who will become INSIDERS, we should not be surprised that the new SNEAK ATTACK is an attempt to intimidate everyone from being personal evangelists and depending ONLY On the communes and whatever METHOD they have for getting a NEW VISION for the NEW CHURCH.

Christianity is not GROUP MENTALITY. Note our small sample of the BIBLE'S focus on the EACH as having the unique teaching role while there was no STANDING ARMY called the CHURCH other than individuals who WORKED in order to MINISTER to the poor and community teaching elders.

Ken Sublett


    
This message has been edited by ConcernedMembers from IP address 67.32.220.93 on Mar 13, 2004 3:21 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Kenneth Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.7

Re: The Jesus Proposal: Shelly and York

March 17 2004, 2:08 PM 

John York and Rubel Shelly believe that our minds have EVOLVED and we cannot read the OLDEN Bible texts at ANY level. However, they grant that the first COMMUNITY "worked out their SCRIPTURE" by partnering with God. Since we have evolved and our culture has changed WE must now "partner" with God and work out a new Narrative or story line with US rather than Moses or Jesus being the heros.

http://www.piney.com/Shelly-York-Narrative.html
    Empedocles His consequence in the State became at length so great that he ventured to assume several of the distinctions of royalty, particularly a purple robe, a golden girdle, a Delphic crown, and a train of attendants. The skill which he possessed in medicine and natural philosophy enabled him to perform many wonders, which he passed upon the superstitious and credulous multitude for miracles.

    He pretended to drive away noxious winds from his country and thereby put a stop to epidemic diseases. [Get it? Navigating the Winds of Change?]

    He is said to have checked, by the power of music, the madness of a young man who was threatening his enemy with instant death;

    to have restored a woman to life who had lain breathless thirty days; and to have done many other things, equally astonishing, after the manner of Pythagoras. On account of all this he was an object of universal admiration. Besides medical skill Empedocles possessed poetical talents.

    Rubel Shelly and John York: Just as identity in Christ is always COMMUNITY identity,
    our reading of Scripture becomes a COMMUNITY READING as well.
    While we still have access to reading as individuals,
    we stop asking, "What does this mean to me?"--as though there is such an isolated meaning. Instead we have a GROUP MENTALITY that asks, "What does this mean to US?"

"'The League of Nations', said the Archbishop of Canterbury, at Geneva, 'may go far to make the Kingdom of God a reality in our lifetime'... 'The League of Nations', says Dr. Jowett, has for its aim 'the transformation of the kingdom of this world into the Kingdom of God…'" (1)
    At the heart of this new "group-think" mentality were well-funded occult and illuminist organizations such as the Theosophical Society, Lucis Trust, and the Fabian Society, who ultimately promoted the concepts of Socialism into mainstream thought. In 1925, the Scopes Trial added the element of Darwinism into public consciousness, and the concept of "species survival" augmented the 19th Century notion of "Social Darwinism".

    These philosophies, when blended into the attitudes and values of the masses of humanity, diminish the importance of the individual and elevate the virtues of the group.

    Biblically, this flies in the face of the doctrinal teachings of the New Testament, God's love and concern for the individual, and ultimately individual salvation.

    At the same time, a group-think mentality promotes the false concepts of the "brotherhood of man", ecclesiastical unity, political globalism, and the sacrifice of individuals in order to insure "species survival" -even to the extent of mass genocide to eliminate the "feeble-minded" and other undesirable elements of society that may ultimately prove to be a threat to the species as a whole. 1. "Modernist Millennium", Perilous Times Newsletter, Vol. 2 #16
The THOUGHT process of the NEW AGE RELIGION inherited from hell is that they are in a WAR against the OLD and ROTTEN theology based on the Bible. The Shepherding of PK and adopted by once-churches of Christ speak in terms of WARRIORS and WARFARE. Don't believe that those who would eject the old grey hairs will do you bodily harm if the threat is raised high enough.

They see themselves as warriors handing our rewards and killing off the unfit. Those who would steal the church house of widows will do anything because they are convinced that madness is inspiration.

One priest at Jubilee 2000 was told by the virgin of Guadalupe that Jesus was going to return and KILL all of the pagans and Masons. Those who defend the non-instrumental music cause have been called worse and many peacable churches have been deliberately discorded to take over their property.

Ken


    
This message has been edited by ConcernedMembers from IP address 67.32.206.24 on Mar 17, 2004 6:00 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Jimmy Wren
(no login)
66.169.126.183

Wes Crawford

May 18 2005, 10:20 PM 

Ken S. in his March 13 post wrote: "Denying individuals the right to INTERPRET Scripture and SPEAK it "outside of the commune" is truly a dangerous movement afoot. This is slipping in while we are still just waking up to the earlier false teachings."

Jimmy writes: Ken I cannot believe the influence of this, i.e., denying individuals the right to INTERPRET Scripture, is spreading through the ranks of the PROFESSORS of higher learning and into churches that wish to be the CENTER of the community; that wish to be seen of all men; that love the praise of all men; and that wishes to be liked by all men; and that has become a man made; man controlled religion.

One would think that an educated person would need to be convinced from evidences contained in the written Word of God in order to ascribe to this view.

But York, shelly, and Wes are lock step in this thought as are some others that I have looked at.

I was reading the Broadway Church of Christ, Lubbock, TX, web page yesterday and came across a lot of recorded sermons there. I begin listening to one of Wes.

Wes began the sermon with a long lead in about a poor divorced woman who came to Woodmont to place membership. (A side note: Divorced and singles are the churches' perferred to the widows and orphans.) He said at the last place she had tried to place membership, she was told that they did not want her! Wes said that the lady called the preacher one night and ask him what he thought about her joining his church. She said that after she hung up the phone that three elder came to her house thirty minutes later to tell her that she was not wanted!

Can you believe that! In Nashville you can get three elders together in thirty minutes! But not only get them together, but get them to the home of a lady who is not even a member! How did the elders even know where the lady lived?

Wes did a bad misrepresentation of elders. I think he told a "fishie" story.

After Wes tells this story he says "What do we do?" Of course his question was rhetorical. And then he says let's pray! After Wes gets through praying, he says, don't use your Bible, leave them, just ask yourself the question What would Jesus do?"

I know that the Bible teaches us to have "..this mind in you.." But we cannot approach all situations by asking the question "What would Jesus do?"

When your child needs to be punished, maybe with a spanking, do you first ask yourself "What would Jesus do?"

When the offering plate is passed do you ask yourself "What would Jesus do?"

When it is time to go fishing, do you ask yourself, "What would Jesus do?"

When tempted with sin, do you ask yourself "What would Jesus do?"

When the preacher preaches something that is not in scripture, do you ask the question "What would Jesus do?"

Does one not realize that when one ask the question "What would Jesus do" one is only asking himself for approval of what one is about to do! The ones who use this approach to Christian living are living a self approved religion! If you ask yourself that question, only you, yourself, can give the answer!

We cannot, must not, trust ourselves!

I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps. (Jeremiah 10:23)

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)


Wes and Rubel and et al should bring glory and honor to God and themselves by teaching only that which is written.

What would Jesus do? What Wes and Rubel and et al are saying is that they know the mind of God and therfore they speak for God!

In Christian Love,

Jimmy


 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.149

Wes Crawford

May 19 2005, 12:15 AM 

Wes began the sermon with a long lead in about a poor divorced woman who came to Woodmont to place membership. (A side note: Divorced and singles are the churches' perferred to the widows and orphans.) He said at the last place she had tried to place membership, she was told that they did not want her! Wes said that the lady called the preacher one night and ask him what he thought about her joining his church. She said that after she hung up the phone that three elder came to her house thirty minutes later to tell her that she was not wanted!

This is the postmodern garbage: it is NOT a lie if you make your point. However, Wes has to be branded a liar if he cannot produce any facts. Can you believe that anyone would be hired who is such a fictionalizer. Shucks, I could make up a story which would be believed.

John and Rubel believe in NARRATIVE THEOLOGY: you just take the shredded tidbits of the olden Bible and make up your own story. Why, you can narrate yourself into being a MOSES or the JESUS for your church. I can bet old Jeffy Day is having a gay old time as a "musical performer."

Can you BELIEVE that anyone would call a preacher and ask to JOIN his church pfCjrost? In my long years if people want to attend they just march in, sit down and make themselves at home with the OTHER sinners.

I like my paraphrase of Paul in Second Corinthians: "Fools love to be fooled." Hey, Jimmy, I will fabricate horror stories about the OLD LEGALISTIC SECTARIAN FRATRICIDES for half the PROCURING PRICE. Setting it to polyrhthymic "clap, clap, clapede clap" so Jeffy can clapp along might cost extra.

Ken

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave James
(Login DaveJames1)
64.233.146.2

Interesting

May 19 2005, 3:43 PM 

Kenneth,

I find it interesting that you claim that Rubel and John "Claim to be scientists". I'd love for you to show me that claim. I really am confused because I read that book and I didn;t see that claim even once. And I am also interested in seeing where in the book they desire biblical interpretation to "be yanked back under the hands of Scholars". I was simply wondering whether these claims you make are true, because I remember no such claim. But then again I am subject to mistake. Please be supportive in your claims. I'd hate to think that you make up stuff about these guy's. That would be boarderline slanderous and malicious. Help me out with finding the truth about these two claims, could you?

Sincerely,

Dave

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.3

Scientists: all postmoderns are science experts!

May 19 2005, 11:06 PM 

Because most have never read the entire Bible for meaning, it is easy to claim that God had no purpose of revealing divine doctrine without which mankind cannot have a relationship with God. We do not participate in the unfolding of the Constitution. However, we participle in enjoying the rights procured by the writing, blood and tears of the founders.

You may need to brush up on the meaning of posmodernism which declares that certain knowledge left us when Heisenberg proposed his Uncertainty principle. That oozzing into the mind of philosophers came almost 70 years after science knew that some things can be known.

For Rubel and John to question inspiration because of the Uncertainty Principle makes the claim that they understand the scientific implications SO WELL that they can apply them to the Bible.

Rather than charge me with slander maybe I should charge you with being afflicted with something which allows you to read books and listen to sermons and NOT get the point:

Furthermore, remember that the Jesus Proposal was preached and developed as sermons on company time before they were made available for prime time. Look back on page 30:
    Rubel Shelly John York: Every scene in that story has been set in some historical human context. [Is that profound or what?]

    Those cultural settings always have been changing and changeable.

    The age of technology, with its notion of our universe as one giant well-oiled machine, has been confronted with some new realities. One writer puts it this way:

Rubel and John claim that "work out your own salvation" means that the church worked out their church and Bible problems. Because OUR culture changes, we GOTTA PARTNER WITH GOD to work out something for OUR CULTURE.

Not even the Babylonians thought of the world as a well-oiled machine. The planets or Wandering Stars upset that view of an unchanging universe. This is why STARS are still worshiped because they WANDER as false prophets and most of the world would sacrifice their lives to be able to her FALSEHOOD.

In the contemporaneous literature, Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees and the Books of Adam and Even show that the FALLEN STARS were the angels led astray by Lucifer who came to earth as the HARP-PLAYING PROSTITUTE. Because they upset the equilibrium
    Rubel Shelly John York: With the development of quantum physics, we discovered a world that did not behave the way Newton said it should. It was impossible to pin down, with waves turning into particles and particles into waves. Which had mass one moment was pure energy the next, and none of it was predictable. p 30
It is a fact that PHILOSOPHERS have changed the way we see facts or hallucinate that we see facts or MANUFACTURE the facts in our minds and then PROJECT them on our observations. I say that we can read the total history of the DOCTRINES Rubel would like to evaporate and know for certain what the Bible and all literature before OUR TIME makes clear about the changes intented to sow discord.

Rubel and John undoubtedly do not know that a group of youngsters blew up a rocket, whipped it around the earth a few times, shot it out into space, met Mars just on time, landed the little Rover, roved over the planet, took pictures and microscopic pictures, did chemical analysis and sent it all back to out dazzled eyes. What they may have missed is that they did it all with NEWTON and didn't even think about quantum physics which would apply ONLY if you are trying to pin down an electron or traveling at the speed of Light. Therefore, Rubel and John are pretending to be scientists to gain credibility for saying, as they often do, there there is nothing certain. You may remember Rubel's seven ones?
    Steven Hawkins acknowledges two unavoidable limitations on man's quest for more scientific knowledge:

    1) the limitation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics (the impossibility for the human observer to measure exactly both the position and the momentum of any quantum entity).

This has NOTHING to do with anything Rubel Shelly and John York can OBSERVE or even have a minimal grasp of. This works at the sub-atomic level and has NOTHING to do with Newtonian laws. Things still fall DOWN and smoke still RISES from the their own consuming breath. A word written on paper will never dodge and weave. It will never become pure energy and will never wave unless it is wavering false prophets.
    Rubel Shelly John York: The very act of observing a particle CHANGED its behavior, which destroyed the whole notion of scientific OBJECTIVE. A scientist could not stand outside the world to watch it.

    The Same particles that were busy responding to each other responded to the watcher as well, revealing a world that was not made up of manageable things but of constantly changing relationships. It is no longer possible to think of the world as a machine.

No. That is an untruth. It simply means that you cannot measure the position of a bowling ball by trying to find it in a dark room by throwing another bowling ball. When you hear the echo from the strike the old ball has MOVED on you. However, the bowling ball is still a bowling ball. Now, if you try that with sub-atomic particles you have the same problem. You can stack about a million atoms across a pin head. The electron is so tiny compared to the whole atom that it is beyond my ability to count.

This has NOTHING to do above the sub-atomic particle level. A two thousand year old parchment has been ATTACKED by outside particles which changed the electrons in the ink. However, we can still read the document to say what it said to an Esssene. It is presumptious SCIENCE to use what happens in the almost infinitesimally small world of the atoms and MAKE IT SEEM that not even GOD can deliver His Word to us: just by LOOKING at the page we make it change.

Only Doctors of the Law care about "further expounding" for a living and Paul outlawed further expounding by the term "private interpretation." The task of the pastor-teachers or vocational elders is to READ and "teach the Word as it has been taught" and leave the theology to religionists Doctors of the Law whom Jesus said "take away the key to knowledge."
    Consciousness and Reality

    Postmodern thought also dovetails neatly another feature of New Age Consciousness: The way consciousness can create or alter reality. In New Age religion, mental imaging can create new realities, not unlike the way affirmative postmodernists hope to create new realities.

    Although New Age thinkers have not thus far demonstrated the fascination with political power seen in postmodern circles, they also favor oppressed tribal peoples as more pure than western culture.

    Ross: Attacks by physicists and other scientists on the God of the Bible are not new. The Bible seems an affront to their intellectual prowess. This ancient "religious" document makes many pointed and challenging statements about cosmic origins. As Britain's Sir Fred Hoyle points out, "There is a good deal of cosmology in the Bible."

Lynn Anderson and his old SHEPHERDING scheme promotes this IMAGING. John and Rubel have a take on that too. We are to give up thinking in a linear sequence as in reading the Word and focus on manufacturing IMAGES and VISIONS.
    Rubel Shelly John York: What does any of that say about the future of denominations and hair-splitting divisions in the church In the world of institutional church--where the church was viewed as a giant machine--the pursuit of a "better machine" seemed to make sense.

    Page 31: But what if the church is not a machine? What if objective truth isn't so scientifically objective at all? What if the goal is not to have all of the right answers to the Bible trivia questions? What if the goal is NOT to be doctrinally sound? What if, in a relational model, people once again focus on the Christ instead of each group's particular set of proof texts and practices? What if all that looks so random actually is relational?

I say they played SCIENTISTS, got their facts all wrong and then APPLIED their proof text to question whether we should worry about doctrine? I hear you threatening rather than seeking.

I will try to read you some more Rubel about keeping the questioning and discussion in the COMMUNITY which really means COMMUNE.

Ken

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave James
(Login DaveJames1)
64.233.146.2

Postmodern

May 20 2005, 2:54 PM 

Kenneth,

You did not have to be so hateful toward my reply. I simply noted that I did not see these claims in the book. I also did not agree with the book. If you would have read my post carefully you would have noted that I did not accuse you of slander. I merely said that if you failed to back up your claim that it would be "boraderline slanderous". Anyways, I appreciated the reply and the study... however I did not appreciate the arrogance and the directive comments about my ability to discern. It is amazing how much you know about me after a one paragraph request.

Beyond my discomfort with your attitude - I was thankful for your reply. I still struggle coming to terms with your thoughts on the whole scientist issue though. I don't think that postmoderns all claim that by their words and actions. If anything I think moderns may be slightly more guilty of being scientists than any thing else. But God seeks to redeem them based upon His truth I guess.

Again please be easy on people. If I were in search of the truth I may have turned away from your attacking comments. God's truth is scandalous enough to outsiders. It doesn;t need your arrogance attatched to it.

Sincerely,

Joe James

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.125

postmodern

May 20 2005, 4:38 PM 

Yes, yes: I know about the man who shoots you and blames you for squirting blood. People who listen to Rubel's sermons come home and read my direct quotes and review by lunch time and then call me a liar!

I looked like I was quoting from a book and just left out the page numbers. Perhaps you could have asked for page numbers without bringing up the question of whether I was just making the stuff up. I don't HAVE to make stuff up: fiction in the religious novels is stranger than truth and twice as bizarre as black holes they SAY sucked up all of the truth.

Rubel just did a three lesson series on postmodernism somewhere but I don't INTEND to buy the CDs.

http://www.tulsaworkshop.org/speakers/

I will do some abstracts about the other thing you missed and thought maybe I just made up. Wow! That is truly kinder and gentler. I begin on page 114.

I don't believe that you can read the depth of Rubel's stuff without grasping the code words. You have to crack them open and parse them into thoughts and then look up his always-misquoted authorities. Ken

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)
63.84.81.19

FOOLS LOVE TO BE FOOLED. Paul.

May 21 2005, 1:08 PM 

Rubel, who does NOT believe that the Bible is useful for faith and practice BEYOND seven facts ABOUT Jesus, intends to destroy Bible-based churches which his Christian Church friends call SECTS. Rubel and John etal are in a new PARTNERSHIP with God like the first believers "Worked out their SCRIPTURES with fear and trembling." NO LONGER means that pre-Rubel and the Book Circle of self-annointed apostles and prophets the Bible USED to be the source of faith and practice. "But, WE, gotta new set of glasses and we get visions and hear words."
    Rubel Shelly and John York: [p. 114] Our proposal to focus on Jesus means that Scripture is NO LONGER a set of proof-texts or a collection of facts or God's rulebook for human behavior. Scripture is the unfolding story of God acting both to create and to re-create. It is not an easy book to understand.
      It was NEVER intended as a document to [p. 115] be INDIVIDUALLY read and interpreted--a sort~of correspondence course in salvation.
But, that is exactly what the OLD BIBLE claims for itself from beginning to the end.
    For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand. And I hope that, 2Co.1:13

    as you have understood us in part, you will come to understand fully that you can boast of us just as we will boast of you in the day of the Lord Jesus. 2 Cor 1:14

But, you whine: "That is from the Epistles of The Apostles and NOT from the Apostates of the Profits." YOU don't have AUTHORITY to do that. Why, Layton will threaten you witl a LAWSUIT. YOU have to grasp that Rubel and John and Wes and ALL the band have given THEMSELVES the right to TAKE LIBERTIES and write THEMSELVES In as Moses or Christ. What they MEAN is that if THEY had partnered with God THEY would not have included what everyone admits is STILL there in black ink on white paper.

In a box on page 114 Rubel "quotes?"
    As we go to the cradle only in order to find the baby, so we go to the Scriptures only to find Christ. Martin Luther.
Of course, you cannot be a Phd and ever have let your sponsor catch you reading ORIGINAL LUTHER. Of course, if YOU gonna get your still-bleeding sheep skin then YOU gonna quote from MY book which I quote from from YOUR book which YOU quote from MAX who--low and behold FICTIONALIZES FACTS.

Rubel thinks that to KNOW ONLY CHRIST AND HIM CRUCIFIED means to PREACH only Jesus and Him crucified. That is the FALSE DOGMA which underlies the most destructive heresy--counting numbers--in church history. What Paul said that he would LIVE LIKE JESUS CHRIST Who--even as God--abandoned Himself to let mankind SLAUGHTER Him along with the MOCKING music as the ONLY way to draw people to the SACRIFICIAL LIFE.

The JUST JESUS is JUST a lie to live like AGRIPPA with his own musical Seeker Center. He, too, was consumed with maggots while he lived.

But, we are not a PROFIT so we goona risk threats from Layton and we gonna quote you some of the OLDEN stuff before it got SHOT AWAY with postmodern eyeballs:

THE SPIRITUAL INTERPRETATION OF THIS GOSPEL.

A sermon by Martin Luther from his Wartburg Church Postil, 1521-1522


Now, Rubel and John and Wes are just JOKING. Ha, Ha! WE gonna write YOU into poverty and write US into living on the BACKS of widows and orphans because WE figured out that YOU will not know when we are lying or dying.

25. But what IS IT to find Christ in such POVERTY, and what his swaddling clothes and manger signify, are explained in the previous Gospel;
    that his poverty teaches how we should find him in our neighbors, the lowliest and the most needy; and his swaddling clothes are the holy Scriptures; that in actual life we should incline to the needy;

    and in our studies and contemplative life ONLY to the Scriptures;

    in order that Christ alone may become the man of both lives and that he may everywhere stand before us.

    We should shun the books of Aristotle, of the pope, and of ALL MEN, or read them in a way that we do not seek the edification of the soul in them; but with them make use of the time and this life, as one teaches a trade or civil law.

    However it is not in vain that St. Luke places Mary before Joseph, and both of them before the child and says: "And they found both Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in the manger."
In Martin Luther's words, just as a mother goes to the cradle only to find the baby, we go to the Bible only to find Christ.


But, Rubel quotes but does not tell you the REST OF THE STORY. So, Layton, I gonna STEAL some more words from the OLDEN LUTHER. Ok?

It is the Bible's primary purpose to bring men to their Savior by arousing the beginnings of faith.

But this is not the only practical function it aims to fulfil.
Peter and the author of the letter to the Hebrews use the analogy of birth and growth to illustrate a further purpose of Scripture. Those who have put their trust in Jesus as Saviour 'have been born anew… through the living and abiding word of God' : but, like all new-born babes, they must ' long for the pure spiritual milk' of the word if they are to survive and grow; and once beyond babyhood they need solid food - which is the meat of God's word.( 1Peter1 :23/1 Peter 2:2/Hebrews5 :12 -14).

This growth process is above all, a growing up in relationship with God.
    It is the Bible's function to FEED the personal knowledge of the Father which the Christian child enjoys.

    And enjoy is exactly the right word, because as the believer learns more about of his delight becomes more intense.

    That is why Bible study should never be dull for a Christian. 'Your words' cries out Jeremiah , ' became to me a joy and the delight of my heart; for I am called by your name, O, Lord, God of hosts. '

    Any personal relationship is fostered by words, and through the pages of the Bible the Christian hears God speaking to him; an experience, says the Psalmist, that is 'sweeter than honey' .
Martin who invented SOLA SCRIPTURA says that "faith alone comes from the BIBLE ALONG and because the Bible teaches BAPTISM our salvation is by Baptism Alone" because He says, Christ put the power in the WATER. Furthermore, we know that God put His Full Deity in a man made up mostly of Water. If God cannot put the power in HIS WORDS and in baptism they YOU HAVE DENIED that Christ came fully in the flesh.

What about them cow chips, Layton?

More to follow, Ken

 
 Respond to this message   
Jimmy Wren
(no login)
199.227.205.202

He's still at it!

May 15 2006, 2:37 AM 

Twickenham Church of Christ:
7500 Whitesburg Dr.
Huntsville, AL 35802
256.881.7373

Rubel Shelly will be our guest speaker Sunday May 14th and 28th.
Jerome Williams will lead singing on May 14th.
Please join us to worship the Almighty God together at 9:00.

This could be the same church that watches the Andy Griffith show during Bible class.

In Christ,

Jimmy

 
 Respond to this message   
B
(no login)
70.232.50.211

Re: He's still at it!

May 16 2006, 3:49 PM 

There are plenty of Biblical principles in the Andy Griffith Show. There is a study centered around it which uses scripture. It's not just 25 minutes of Andy then everyone leaves. Hmmm, an earthly story with a scriptural principle...sounds a little like the parables.

Are there any other visual aids that help people learn about scripture that we should do away with?

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(no login)
4.152.183.195

Bed Fellows

May 17 2006, 12:35 AM 

Rubel and the Twickingham fella were key bedfellows in the JUBILEE which has more end-time symbolism than anyone wants to read about.

The problem is that Jesus commanded even for the "church in the wilderness" the assembly WITHOUT loud instruments or "making a joyful noise" because that meant WARFARE consistent with the end time apollo prophecy. He exampled and Paul commanded in many places that we "speak that which is written" with ONE MIND and ONE MOUTH as the only way to EDUCATE, glorify God and keep the unity.

The ekklesia was quite identical to the synagogue which "had no praise service" because if your IQ is as long as your shoe lace and you have an ounce of common decency and reverence you will not replace Jesus with Andy (whose gender I never figured) or with Jerome selling CDs and bookings.

There was a LAW against allegorical preaching and Peter outlawed "private interpretation" which means FURTHER EXPOUNDING. Singing as an ACT was not added for almost four centuries and about the time PREACHING was added as a heresy other than reading and dialoging the Word "as it has been taught." That is the direct command to Timothy for "holding services."

All of the PANIC as MARKED by music expresses a TOTAL LOSS of faith and a desperate effort to destroy INDIVIDUAL rights and cluster in a COMMUNE (community). That may mean "calling for the Rocks and rolls" to fall on them. See the Jesus Proposal

http://www.piney.com/Jesus.Proposal.Book.html

Like the Aztez Jubilee (one of Rubel's PATTERNISMS), the exhibition of the SECTARIAN Hypocrites (rhetoricians, sOPHISts (serpents), singers, musicians and CRAFTSMEN (theater builders and stage managers), is a CONFESSED effort to COME TO THE AID of Jesus who didn't quite establish His Kingdom. ALL praise singing is a superstitious fertility practice (real and virtual) intending to replace God to GIVE THE INCREASE.

Andy is a CRUTCH for someone who has NOTHING to say and gets TOO MUCH unlawful money to say it, say it, say it, say it....

It all fits the PATTERNISM laid out in intimate detail by John in Revelation defining the harlot church whose MUSIC and MUSICIANS were SORCERERS. ZOE is called the "beast and female instructing principle" and from hordes of data MUSIC is the MARK of the beast: it unlawfully molests the human mind to force the hands to hang slack (slack, slack, slack, limp).

I lived there: it was NEVER like Mayberry and NEVER like the Waltons. Barney was ok but his charter was QUEER and that fits the eternal patternism of music.

 
 Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)
70.232.104.132

Re: Bed Fellows

May 17 2006, 11:55 AM 

"Andy is a CRUTCH for someone who has NOTHING to say and gets TOO MUCH unlawful money to say it, say it, say it, say it...."

Andy is a method of illustrating BIBLICAL truths. They are modern-day parables. No one is suggesting replacing Jesus with Andy. People are using Andy (who they have seen) to help people understand Jesus (who they have not seen). It's no different than any other illustration that preachers and Bible class teachers use.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.19.65.178

Re: Bed Fellows

May 18 2006, 12:56 AM 

The Andy Griffith Show, a situation comedy of all things, occasionally shows the principal characters sitting in church or standing and singing a few traditional hymns with instrumental accompaniment. I remember one episode in which the regular pastor gave up his pulpit to a visiting pastor, who spoke of nothing but "relaxing" and slowing down in life from the hustle and bustle. In other words, the sermon was nothing more than a motivational speech. There was neither exposition of Scripture nor teaching of New Testament doctrine. The show couldn't do that, because TV executives would not have tolerated it. But they would accept subtle references to "religion" as long as the show didn't get dogmatic and "preachy."

As far as the rest of the AGS goes, examples like Opie learning responsibility by taking care of baby birds, whose mother he had accidentally killed with a slingshot, are nice human-interest stories with a moral lesson, but Christians have no monopoly on morality. Anyone can be a moral, upstanding citizen who would give you the shirt off his back and still be the biggest atheist, agnostic, and skeptic in the world. The AGS portrays decency and morality, but it does not teach Christianity. I don't recall ever hearing the words "Jesus," "salvation," "remission of sins," "Son of God," "repentance," "forgiveness," "Lord's Supper," "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved," and so forth on the AGS. Barney Fife did once mention the word "sin" upon exiting the church, but he had fallen asleep during the sermon and tried to cover his bumble when the pastor asked his opinion of the sermon, which had been about a subject other than sin. The line was intended to elicit a laugh from the viewers. So much for "Christianity" from the the AGS.

It is a mistake to use sitcoms and similar TV programs as Sunday school lessons, because they do not present didactic, in-depth biblical teaching and study. The Scriptures themselves must be studied first-hand. The AGS and similar G-rated sitcoms are nothing more than light family entertainment and should serve no other purpose. But if folks are bent on utilizing TV programming for Sunday school, why stop with the AGS? Surely someone could find something "decent" and "loving" in a show like Sex and the City to present as a teaching topic.

 
 Respond to this message   
PPB
(no login)
70.116.84.97

Re: He's still at it!

May 17 2006, 1:36 PM 

Are you guys telling me that a church studies the Andy Griffith show for "Christian lessons"? Please tell me that's just a joke. Please...


 
 Respond to this message   
B
(no login)
70.232.103.126

Re: He's still at it!

May 18 2006, 12:02 PM 

Here's the description from the ChristianBook.com website.

"A fishin' pole-totin' sheriff, a bumbling deputy, and a cherub-faced little boy are your guides through this unique examination of the popular '60s TV show in light of biblical teaching. Return to simpler days when values like honesty, caring, integrity, and responsibility were truly appreciated. Provides a synopsis of 30 episodes, including photographs."


Yeah, that sounds awful. We should definitely stand against those principles.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
66.19.66.96

Re: He's still at it!

May 18 2006, 11:23 PM 

"B," quoting from a review of The Andy Griffith Show: "honesty, caring, integrity, and responsibility."

So what? "B" knows quite well that these attributes are fine and admirable, but that Christians have no monopoly on them. Having them does not stick a label of "Christian" on anyone, for atheists, agnostics, and even ax murderers can manifest them.

People need to realize that The Andy Griffith Show and other classic sitcoms teach clean living, but they do not teach Christianity. Instead of being Christian Gentiles in a small Southern town, suppose all the characters on the AGS were devout Buddhists, Muslims, or Jews who manifested the same "honesty, caring, integrity, and responsibility" that Andy and the gang did. Would that suddenly turn the Buddhists, Muslims, and Jews into Christians? Of course not, and "B" knows that as well.

I reiterate that the AGS and other classic sitcoms are not suitable for Sunday school teaching, not because they are evil or lewd. Far from it. They are first and foremost light sitcoms specifically designed to entertain and produce laughs, not to teach biblical doctrine. If people are to become mature Christians, they need mature study in the Word from people who are far more knowledgeable in the Word than from what Hollywood sitcoms can deliver.

It's bad enough that many worship assemblies in the Change Movement today have chosen the entertainment route through comedy, light stories, anecdotes, and motivational speeches over expository preaching from the Word. Now Sunday schools are going "light" with entertainment as well by utilizing TV sitcoms as "study aids."

 
 Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 3 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

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

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

What Happened at the Madison Church of Christ?


There are thousands of churches being taken over across America.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here is the list of players;

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

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

Place your banner ad here.           See all banner ads

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


FastCounter by bCentral

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

Site Visits Since 6/30/2015
page counter