Here’s the latest news on the ecumenical move to “unite” churches of Christ with the Christian Church. Now we know for sure where Jeff Walling of the Providence Road Church of Christ in Charlotte, N.C., really stands on instrumental music. We’ve posted articles regarding this change agent before.

Remember—history repeats itself. If this merger attempt succeeds, time will come that the church will split again just because certain church leaders are around to please others instead of God. Yeah, right, unity with the Christian Church on their terms?

News - Instrumental, a cappella church leaders exchange Bibles in show of acceptance By Bobby Ross Jr. The Christian Chronicle LOUISVILLE, KY. – In an emotional display of love and acceptance, several prominent leaders of a cappella Churches of Christ and instrumental Christian Churches exchanged personal Bibles at the North American Christian Convention on Thursday night. Keynote speaker Jeff Walling, pulpit minister of the Providence Road Church of Christ in Charlotte, N.C., challenged the roughly 7,000 people who packed the Kentucky International Convention Center to go home and do the same. “Are you willing to go home and shape the future of our brotherhood for our children by reaching out because of grace to say, ‘I love you in the name of Jesus Christ, brother?’” Walling asked the crowd. “And if somebody says, ‘Well, he’s a brother in error,’ you tell him, ‘Do we have any other kind?’ “We are all in error,” Walling added. “That’s why we come every Sunday to say, ‘God, forgive us.” Almost everyone in the audience – which convention organizers said included as many as 1,000 members of a cappella congregations – stood and accepted the challenge. The dramatic exchange of Bibles capped the third, and final, night of the North American Christian Convention, an annual meeting of instrumental Christian Churches. With the theme “Together in Christ,” the convention has focused this week on fostering better relations between the instrumental and a cappella fellowships after a century of division. 2006 marks the 100th anniversary of a 1906 federal census that first reported the two Restoration Movement groups as separate bodies. Today, the a cappella churches report about 1.3 million baptized members in the U.S., slightly more than the instrumental churches’ 1.2 million. Both groups believe that Jesus is Lord, baptize for remission of sins and offer the Lord’s Supper each Sunday. But instrumental music remains a deeply divisive topic, as some members of Churches of Christ consider it a salvation issue. Thursday night’s session mixed instrumental and a cappella hymns as praise teams from the Richland Hills Church of Christ in North Richland Hills, Texas, and the Southside Christian Church in Orlando, Fla, performed together. Keith Lancaster from the group Acappella led a non-instrumental rendition of “Awesome God,” followed by both praise teams singing a modern-day “Rock of Ages,” accompanied by a piano, drums, electric guitars, a trombone, a trumpet and tambourines. In a message titled “Together in God’s Grace,” Walling said that he, too, once believed that a cappella singing was the only way to worship. But he said God helped him grow to understand that grace, not perfect doctrine, saves Christians. Members of both fellowships have suffered, he said, from “we’ve got it right” disease and “legalism deep in our veins.” Walling recalled that his mother always taught him to be nice to strangers. “So, for years, that’s what I’ve done with folks in the independent Christian Churches,” he joked. But he declared, “The time for being nice is over. It’s time to be family. … Nice is easy. Family is a mess. Family is loving and sacrificing. Family is trying to compromise without being compromised.” Walling presented his worn personal Bible – which his 89-year-old mother, Mildred, gave him in memory of his deceased “earthly father,” T.J. Walling – to Dave Stone, minister of the Southeast Christian Church in Louisville and Wednesday night’s keynote speaker. “I want to tell you tonight, you are my brother,” Walling, wiping tears from his eyes, said to Stone. Stone handed Walling his own Bible and told him, “The great thing about these Bibles is that they are exactly the same. They are the same translation. They are God’s word.” Among a cappella church members who participated in the Bible exchange were ministers Marvin Phillips and Jerry Taylor as well as Abilene Christian University President Royce Money and Rochester College President Mike Westerfield. Also exchanging Bibles were the praise teams from the Richland Hills Church of Christ and the Southside Christian Church. Dave Faust, president of the North American Christian Convention, said he hopes the gesture will be repeated by members of both fellowships across the nation. “This is a gesture of friendship and kinship, a way of saying, ‘I’m trying the best I can to teach God’s word with all my heart and I know that’s what you’re trying to do, too,’” Faust told The Christian Chronicle. “I just think it’ll be something that could be replicated in local communities one on one – no coercion, nobody merging things or trying to force anything on anyone.” COMING IN THE AUGUST PRINT ISSUE OF THE CHRISTIAN CHRONICLE: Complete coverage of the North American Christian Convention and a Dialogue interview with Alan Highers on the instrumental music issue.

John Waddey says: “It says in words that cannot be gainsaid what we have been speaking of for the last 5 years [ed: on the change movement]. Read it and weep.

“Now you know what Jeff Walling really believes. Now you know where Royce Money of Abilene Christian University is trying to lead us. Now you know the inclination of the staff of the Christian Chronicle which is owned and operated by Oklahoma Christian University. Is this what you wish for the church of Christ, of which you are a member? Will you sit silent while this apostasy sweeps over our brotherhood or will you stand up for Jesus and his church?”

"Religion Today"

by Murray Evans (AP, March 30, 2006)

New York, USA - The turning point for Jeff Walling came two decades ago at a church youth conference. Sitting with arms folded, he listened to 3,000 teenagers singing and praising God with a guitar accompaniment - and felt ashamed.

It is a fact well known by the "serpent" or NACHASH in the garden of Eden that music ENCHANTS or is SORCERY. The Nachash means a Musical Enchanter. He/she is identified as the king/queen of Trye who is said to have been in EDEN and is called the "singing and harp playing prostitute." PRAISE singing is the world's oldest, most ignorant and superstitious legalism: they BELIEVE that they can influence the gods because they perform something magical like sorcery on humans willing to pay them so they don't have to work.

Lucifer came into the garden with wind, string and percussion instruments.

Therefore, the truth is OUTED: they instrumentalis did a NUMBER on Jeff Walling who as a "theatrical type" was more susceptible. Jesus called all of the religious performers HYPOCRITES and so the Greek language demands.

Speaking directly to the "mantic" behaviour of music and speaking in tongues in Corinth, it is noted from the Classical writers that:

"The spirits were thought to speak in murmurings or piping sounds (Isa 8:19), which could be imitated by the medium (witch or ventriloquist)...Most spiritual and popular was the interpretation of dreams.

It also was the case that mediums intentionally would convert themselves into a semi-waking trance. In this way the suitable mediums attained to a certain kind of clarvoyance, found among various peoples.

This approaches the condition of an ecstatically aroused pseudo-prophet.. In Greece, too, oracles were pronounced by the Phythian prophetess who by vapors and the like was aroused to a practice of the mantic art. (Int Std Bible Ency, p. 2466)

Plato Symposium 215c

"For I say that he is likest to the Silenus-figures that sit in the statuaries' shops; those, I mean, which our craftsmen make with pipes or flutes in their hands: when their two halves are pulled open, they are found to contain images of GODS.

And I further suggest that he resembles the SATYR Marsyas.

"Now, as to your likeness, Socrates, to these in figure, I do not suppose even you yourself will dispute it; but I have next to tell you that you are like them in every other respect.

"You are a fleering fellow, eh? If you will not confess it, I have witnesses at hand. Are you not a PIPER?

Why, yes, and a far more marvellous one than the satyr. His lips indeed had power to ENTRANCE mankind by means of instruments; a thing still possible today for anyone who can PIPE his tunes: or the music of Olympus' flute belonged, I may tell you, to Marsyas his teacher.

"So that if anyone, whether a fine flute-player or paltry flute-girl, can but flute his tunes, they have no equal for exciting a RAVISHMENT, and will indicate (prophesy) by the divinity that is in them who are apt recipients of the deities and their sanctifications.

You differ from him in one point only--that you produce the same effect with simple prose unaided by instruments.

The story of The Book of Enoch is that when you are SEDUCED into connecting MUSIC with God you have fallen and you will never get up. That is Satan's business and like Crack Cocain, he can HOOK you with one sting.

Remember that the MUSES in the book of Revelation are the LOCUSTS: they lull you to sleep and have SCORPION'S STINGERS in their tail and they can STING YOU TO DEATH in one shot. Jeff has fallen and cannot get up.

Forgive my ignorance, but other than instrumental music, what differences do we have with the mainstream Christian Church? If I understand correctly, they still immerse for the forgiveness of sins, each congregation is pretty much autonomys. They still have Pastors and Deacons. What are our issues with them?

You know, I was speaking with a friend today and he pointed out that there are more "differences" between various flavors of the church of Christ than there are with the mainstream CoC and the Christian Church. Dunno, I was hoping someone here could list all of the differnces (outside of public worship) that we have with them.

On another note, there are two congregations in the DFW metroplex (Dallas/Ft.Worth for y'all yankees) that have led to some of the divisions that we now face. You already mentioned Richland Hills, and while I have not come to a conclusion on everything that they do, I do know that they have pushed the boundries despite the misgivings of other christians in the area. On the otherhand, there is another church in the area that prides itself in shunning as many other churches as they can. They have let thier pride in "having it right" (although I doubt they do) push the love for fellow christians struggling to mature in Christ out the door and turned into hate mongering as seen on some of the posts on this site.

You see, the pendulum swings both ways, and on both sides (legalistic versus liberal for lack of a better word) there is error. I belive that the legalisic drives the liberal to be more liberal and vise versa. We are so afraid of "looking" like the other that we throw the baby out with the bathwater.


In Christ,

Mark F.

I agree. Having grown up CofC there are more differences between flavors of churches of Christ than there are between the churches of Christ and the Christian Church (or some Community Churches).

The funny thing is that the things that divide the churches of Christ, the great "debates of faith" that I grew up with all seem so silly now. Here are some of the things that we debated (and divided the church) when I was young:

- whether it was biblical to use a pitch-pipe to start a song.

- the age women had to stop teaching boys (the "age of accountability")

- whether women could wear pants to church (usually it was determined to be okay on Sunday night....)

- whether or not the building could have a kitchen in the fellowship area.

- whether or not a filmstrip projector was okay (it was, as this was determined to be an "expediency"....)

- whether Christ came back before or after the rapture, of if there was a rapture.

- whether you went to hell if you had a glass of wine (yes, I think; somehow the wine in the Bible was always determined to be "non-alchoholic" even though folks in the Bible got drunk off of it - ha!).

- etc, etc, etc.

As I said, this all seems so silly now. We got tired of these debates and the modern day version of them (the dreaded instrumental music issue), and have been at a Community Church for the past year. The Community Church we attend grew out of a church of Christ six years ago, and is now 4,000 people. The worship is wonderful (yes, we have a band), the teaching is great, folks are being saved, we are absolutely Bible based, and the spirit is moving.

I think the unity movement is great, and this is a sign that Christ is moving a great awakening among His people.

May He who we all serve be praised, and may those in Him be added to daily!

- Robert.

It is not possible to generalize, but in general, here are some hints.

The Disciples or Christian churches had almost nothing in common with churches of Christ in the beginning: Ordained clergy, rejecting weekly communion, rejecting baptism, te adoption of the SHOUTING METHODISTS as an act of worship.

Thy mounted a carpetbagging effort after the civii war to force everyone into the society and children to become "life menbers," use the organ, buy song books and Sunday school material from Standard. As part of the Sunday School movement the effort was to make BIBLE CLASSES controlled by someone other than the elders. Those who rejected divided classes were trying to presever local autonomy.

When they tried to count churches of Christ (some called christian churches) in the 1906 census the authorities knew that churches of Christ were NEVER part of their movement and a separate count was taken. However, the Society was already for an ORGANIZED denomination with a huge budget before the separate count: I have pictures of their proposed denomination.

A few decades later the group became more radical and the more conservatives became independant. There was another major RESTRUCTURE in the 60 which further fractured the group.

The Christian church appropriated "churches of Christ" to denote those groups called The Church of Christ instrumental. That has added great confusion and they are now trying to insinuate a UNITY movement by using a few DUPES who have already made their groups into defacto "christian churches."

The group which emerged out of the major split ADOPTED many of the views held by the church of Christ including the view of baptism and many others. They held on to instrumental music, the use of WOMEN, an organizational structure where you JOIN and subscribe to the bylaws to be a voting member and many more subtle differences.

The major difference which is still labeled by the major misteachers on instrumental music is the VIEW OF SCRIPTURE. Probably the most conservative Christian churches subscribe to a LOOSE CONSTRUCTION of the Bible. They speak of the LIVING CHURCH which has the authority to make changes to fit the culture. Music and women were major CULTURAL shifts and they made no attempt to justify the massive discord by recourse to the Bible. They INVENTED for the first time in recorded history in 1878 the idea that PSALLO means to sing AND play an instrument.

Of course that is utter nonsense: in all of Paul's "singing" instructionss he BEGINS by repudiating the CHILDREN'S PLAY or the use of INSTRUMENTS and arousal singing by BOTH of the Sects in Romans 14.

He then specificially COMMANDS the "synagogue" which had no praise service and was a SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE. Thomas Campbell defined CHURCH as "a school of Christ" and WORSHIP as "reading and musing the inspired text." That is what Jesus exampled, Paul commanded and churches practiced for hundreds of years. It is a historical fact that SINGING as an ACT of the assembly was not added until the year 373. Even then, there would have been almost nothing we would define as MUSICAL or the forms which were INVENTED around the year 1200 to add the pauses, umms and aahes and other FILL IN words which are NECESSARY to turn the Biblical text into a SINGING activity.

Repeat: the fundamental difference is the FUNDAMENTAL meaning of Christianity which MARKS false teachers who cease to "teach that which has been taught."

The Christian church calls themselves a CHURCH because they go with the flow and grow.

They define churches of Christ as a SECT (cult) for using the ORIGINAL Scripture for faith and practice.

You can say and I will: a RARE church of Christ is a school of the Bible. Any form of MUSICAL performance practices RELIGION which as THRESKIA was invented by "that Thracian" and the Lesbian women who perverted Homer by adding a tune and musical instruments.

Hello Donnie. I agree with your point - it is funny looking back 30 years later how important everyone thought those debates were. In hindsight, they don't matter at all.

As far as the question, the church we attend is the Cross Timbers Commmunity Church. Several families left a church of Christ in the area six years ago to form this church. It did not "take over" the existing church. As far as the church of Christ is concerned, I don't know where it stands as we have never attended there.

To answer your last comment ("We know about those Community Churches that use band-aids really well. What’s the matter?"), I don't know what you mean. We have a band (actually several), and I love it. I don't know what your "what's the matter" comment refers to, as there is nothing the matter. If you clarify, I will give you an answer.

Grace and peace to you, and may God bless His body of believers.

-Robert.

Hello Donnie. Thanks for the clarification and reply. Also, you are correct, my wording was bad. The folks did not "leave the church" (as in the body of Christ). I believe that both churches (the church of Christ and the Community Church) are both part of the body of Christ. By the way, the Cross Timbers we attend is in Argyle, Texas.

As far as the "band-aid" goes, I still don't agree. I suspect that we will never agree, but that is okay. In my mind, the use of a praise band is no different than other "aids" that make the church different than what you would have seen in the first century, such as:

- the preacher using a microphone
- a tray for communion cups
- many little cups versus one big one
- church buildings
- song books
- websites and e-mail
- and many, many more.

I think the fundamental point of disagreement is not in the use of "aids" generally, but in the use of instrumental music (or a praise band) specifically. I don't believe that the Bible commands the use of non-instrumental music.

Like I said, I don't think we will agree, but I appreciate the open dialogue. I wish you and your church all the best, and may God be glorified in all things, and may His numbers be added to daily!

God Bless.

-Robert.

Robert,

Based on what the scriptures teach, I will have to disagree with your premise concerning what comprises the body of Christ. If someone—who knows nothing about the church spoken of in the New Testament—were to hear the expression “Community Church,” he would more likely be confused. “Oh, who is the founder of that church? Or, is that where all the religions of the world in a particular community, including Muslims, Buddhists, Jewish, Mormons, Adventists, Christian Scientists, Catholics, Atheists, and many others—merge as one big family of ‘Christians’? Is that the religion based on Rick Warren’s ‘church growth’ scam where it acquires its members from various denominations in the area?”

Know what? There’s only one body of Christ, and that body bears His name. The church is the kingdom prophesied in the Old Testament and in Matt. 16:18 and fulfilled in Acts 1,2ff. It is the same kingdom or body of Christ mentioned in Acts 8:12—“But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Yes, the name of Christ is important. Dropping the name “of Christ” and substituting something else for it but still claims it to be His … is enough proof that someone is ashamed of Christ. Baptism is in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:16; 2:38)—not in the name of Rick Warren or the name of the community. There’s much more to say about this. But one thing for sure is that we are to teach in the name of Jesus—and not resort to using gimmicks such as the emphasis on “community-ism” just to appeal to the masses.

Robert, I see … you just couldn’t resist it, could you? More added to your list of silly non-essentials. I think the list is really getting old. The one-cup argument or another has not led to another church being called “Church of the One-Cup Christ” … or “Church of Little Cups in Christ” … or “Church of Songbooks for Christ.”

The command to commemorate the Lord’s suffering and death must be obeyed. The command to do so with one big cup or multi-colored little cups is not there—so the inference is that it is not being disobedient that a congregation uses a 2056-ounce cup. It is not disobedience by using multiple cups for expediency or health-and-sanitation reasons.

It is also worthy of note that the New Testament is VERY SPECIFIC about what we do with the songs: “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19). The “law of silence” is being misapplied in your type of argument. Silence never equates to approval—specificity does, as the preceding passage indicates.

I have a challenge for you, Robert. I know I could give you a long list of items that congregants in your assembly would not do simply because the Holy Scripture is silent about them. But instead of me doing so, I would ask you to make that list—in this way, it will be beneficial to your understanding of why the law of silence [or the absence of a “thou shalt not”] does not constitute permission.

By the way, Robert, do you use trumpets in your “musical worship”? Do you realize that trumpets have other uses as well?

Numbers 10:10—“Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I am the LORD your God.”

Do your musical bands oblige to these specifications from the Old Testament?

Donnie

Donnie -

Okay, this is getting boring. I responded on this site to have a real debate. So far there is no response to debate, only posts that boil everything down to "instrumental music is wrong...." On that topic, as I said before, you are not going to convince me, and I am not going to convince you - we can at least agree on that.

Your responses always follow the same pattern:

- make a few snide remarks
- make up a few outrageous statements (we baptize in the name of Rick Warren???)
- redirect away from the real questions by changing topics
- make more snide remarks
- tell me instrumental music is wrong
- tell me you don't have to answer my questions, so there
- the end

My son is a national level debater, and this is not debate, or even a real exchange of views.

But, to answer your point about "adding to" and "taking away," you are very inconsistent. There are so many examples in the church of both. How about:

Adding to:
- microphones
- buildings
- song books
- etc, etc, etc.
- Bible classes
- Wednesday night class

Taking away:
- do you greet one another with a holy kiss?
- do you raise holy hands in prayer?
- do your women attend worship without jewelry (unadorned)?
- are your women completely silent (ie, no singing)?
- do you share a meal, not just the bread and juice?
- do you use wine, not juice?
- do you speak in tongues and translate?
- do you prophesy?
- etc, etc, etc

I really would like to have a debate, and stay on topic. If your response is the same (ie, instrument are bad and ramblings about "change agents" and community churches), I am done with the thread.

I really do wish you and the body of believers that you meet with well, and hope that the Lord blesses and adds to the body weekly as he is at our church.

In him,

-Robert

Let me add one more to the list. I remember
in the early 1980s a church of Christ in rural
Kentucky received a large sum of money from an
Atlantian insurance executive after he passed away.
Believe it or not the elders decided against
putting indoor plumbing in because first century
christians didn't have indoor plumbing . I still
had to use the "outhouse" between sunday school
and Sunday service.

Wordkeeper

O.K., once again, barring Ken and his vitriolic overgeneralized anwsers that always end in music is evil, I can't get a real answer about the differences between the mainstream churches of Christ and the mainstream Christian Church (not the Disciples of Christ).

Here's what I do understand

church of Chirst Christian Church

Jesus is son of God Jesus is son of God
Lived in the flesh Lived in the flesh
Was without sin Was without sin
Died for our sins Died for our sins
Was raised from the dead Was raised from the dead
Ascended to heaven Ascended to heaven
Sin separates us from God Sin seperates us from God
We're baptized for the remision of sins We're baptized for the remision of sins

Based on this, in the matter of the Gospel, both are preaching the Good News. In the matter of salvation, both are leading people to Christ.

So, our differences must about things beyond salvation. Thanks for any insight.

In Christ,

Mark

Mark,

Sorry … I haven’t ignored your question.

I think, right off, I’m coming up with the same list as yours—the reason why I haven’t responded to you yet. In reality—with the exception (hopefully regarding the purpose) of baptism, the items you listed are commonalities among most of the Protestant religions. So, it would seem pointless for me to even mention them relative to your inquiry about the “specific” differences in doctrinal matters between the Christian Church and the church of Christ.

I can think of a few specific differences right now, but I prefer to do some more research. [Lack of time has been my main constraint. } ] So, please bear with me.

Thanks for asking a great question! Also, thanks for reminding me.

Donnie

Donnie,

Thanks! I really appreciate your effort. Having grown up in the CoC, I can tell you about Mormonism, Calvanism, etc... etc... but there was never a big discussion about the differences that have grown (?so I am told?) between us and the Christian Church since our split. Again, thanks!

In Christ,

Mark F.

Jesus is son of God Jesus is son of God

Lived in the flesh Lived in the flesh

Jesus CHRIST is God in the flesh: full Deity dwelled in Jesus. There was no TWO OTHERS in heaven when the Stoneites came into existence.
No one in history had at that time pictured God as three PERSONS.

The view of the Atonement and the Incarnation were major differences: if the Christian church has rectified some of those views good for them.

Was without sin Was without sin
Died for our sins Died for our sins
Was raised from the dead Was raised from the dead
Ascended to heaven Ascended to heaven
Sin separates us from God Sin seperates us from God
We're baptized for the remision of sins We're baptized for the remision of sins

When the Stoneites came out of Cane Ridge they did not beleive that. They continued in the same group until some in the 20s and some in the 60s.

'Some of the dupes who feel obligated to AFFIRM the use of instrumental music and get paid by those who do not believe that baptism is FOR the remission of sins.

Based on this, in the matter of the Gospel, both are preaching the Good News. In the matter of salvation, both are leading people to Christ.

That is the CORE GOSPEL or what Paul called the PROTOS gospel. However, some of the BEST good news was articulated by Jesus without speaking of the CORE. He said, "come to me all ye that labor and are heavy laden." The word laded burden is exactly what is piled on to create "spiritual anxiety through religious rituals."

The REST, like it or not, is the Greek PAUO which is pointed to STOPPING the singing, playing, and ALL of the RELIGIONISM rituals NOT part of the EKKLESIA, synagogue or school of the bible. "Music" was excluded for the "church in the wilderness" and no one was dumb enough to add that to the Jewish Synagogue until the year 1815 by the same German-trained liberalism.

The views of Thomas and Alexander Campbell was diametrically opposed to the Stoneite Christian churches which were charismatic musically and adopted the SHOUTING METHODISTS as an act of worship. Baptists placed the blame on the "christian churches" for not participating in the Restoration Movement: many were repelled.

None of the churches of Christ ever fell into the charismatic madness.

So, our differences must about things beyond salvation. Thanks for any insight.

Any knowledge of how SATAN brought musical worship into the garden of Eden and how music is universally identified with the HYPOCRITES even by Jesus Who quoted Isaiah about mouth religion and the identical concept in Ezekiel 33 which identifies slick singers and instrumentalists. The words point to the ORGAN and HANDLED which had Jubal HANDLING musical istruments WITHOUT AUTHORITY.

People are baptized into Christ to become DISCIPLES. A Disciple is a Christian is a student and that excludes the charismatic, mind altering music.

If king Solomon's MUSIC GROVE came to represent TOPHETH or hell itself; if the king/queen of Babylon went into Sheol with his/her harps and still-breathing harpists to be consumed on a bed of Maggots. If Jesus CAST OUT the musical minstrels as Lucifer was CAST AS PROFANE and as DUNG is ejected. If John says that the Babylon Whore's singers, instrumentalists and all of the HYPOCRITE (performers) will be removed and identifies their work as SORCERY by which they deceived the world. If all of church history repudiated music as polluting the SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE, then SOME OF US consider it a SALVATION ISSUE.

Going with the flow to RELIEVE the REPROACHES would have everyone musicating IF the didn't believe it was a SALVATION issue. You never test TRUTH by asking the sillyism: "Is that a salvation issue?" Wow!

Paul never said that he had determined to PREACH ONLY CHRIST AND HIM CRUCIFIED. Didn't know that because that is what ALL of the "Just Jesus and Him crucified" preach. What Paul said was that he determined to KNOW only Christ and Him crucified. Paul MARKED the faithful "church worker" in 2 Corinthians as being a SUFFERING SERVANT. Watching people sing and play music and sing secular songs is not something a Bible Believer, Christ Owner can participate in.

So, why are you so hep on UNITING groups when NO preacher can take care of his OWN church and still have time to travel over the world trying to get MASSES of people united. If you accept your CORE GOSPEL then I am sure that you will not be hindered if people who do NOT believe that be given the FREEDOM to preach and practice their own SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE.

If life was so simple there would only be FORDS on the Road.

I am sure that you do not grasp the depravity of people who would sow massive discord by adding PERFORMANCE MUSIC to people who grasped Thomas Campbell's Biblical grasp of church as A SCHOOL OF CHRIST. You might as well spit in people's face: in Job, one word tabret means to play the tambourine or SPIT IN THE FACE.

People are not obligated to sing WITHOUT INSTRUMENTS so who is IMPOSING legalism?

IF ALL of the Bible and church history is WRONG and music is NOT a salvation then you would be home free--except that SOWING DISCORD and offedning people will get you burned.

I guess I have to reveal a little about
myself and my background. I was in fact
raised in the churches of Christ in my
youth through my early 20s. There were
several incidents from those in the church
that had me soured on the ideas the church
wanted to represent from the realitites
of the legalism that is tied into the churches
of Christ. The straw that broke the camels
back was when I participated in an evangelical
campaign to work in the community one summer
and do street witnessing to the unchurched.
I thought that I was doing someting good for
the cause of Christ. When it was discovered
that not all participants were members of the
c of c but also of other denominations there
was an uproar of many people in my church.
One elder told me that I should "go upfront
for prayer". I asked my minister his opinion
and he remained silent. When the summer was
over I asked several members to attend the
post-evangelism picnic with me and no one
would go with me.

Now for my current feelings I have for the
churches of Christ. It still hurts to some
degree but I am over the incident. Actually,
it was a blessing because I studied on my own
several faith issues. Many of my co-workers
are members of the c of c and I quite often
visit them in their churches. What is deep in
my heart is that the churches of Christ grow
and thrive and lead many people to the Lord.
It is still a denomination that preaches Jesus
is Lord and for that I desire the churches of
Christ to grow.

Unfortunately, I doubt that it will. You see
the churches of Christ is so headstrong on
many issues that are based on preference and
not doctrine. I have read Dr. Bill Crump's
link to the web site against Rick Warren.
It is nothing more that character assasination,
quotes taken out of context, and mudslinging.
It is the fanactical section of the churches
of Christ that I have a problem with, but for
the most part many of the churches of Christ
are open to change and grow for the glory of God.

By the way, do I have all of the answers to biblical
questions ? No, I do not. Am I capable of being wrong ?
Certainly yes. Is my current denomination of Charismatics
have all of their doctrines correct ? No. But, guess what
you are in the same boat. You are not perfect in all
doctrinal matters, and I have demonstrated that the
churches of Christ are incorrect on many doctrinal issues.
At least I am humble in recogizing such. Many people on
this board who will defend the churches of Christ to
the death are less that honest if they say they are
correct in the discussed matters.

Thank you,

Wordkeeper

Wordkeeper,

I have appreciated your comments over the last couple of months. It is interesting to see someone debate the trinity (the Crump, the Cruz, and the Sublett) without stooping to their level of name calling, condescension, and random babbling. (Of course, saying that will probably start a new frenzy.) I have found your comments thoughtful and insightful. You and Mark F. have given this site a refreshing outlook lately.

Donnie, I can't imagine the lack of humility to be able to state "It is obvious that you detest the church whose head and founder is Christ. If I were you, I would be ashamed of myself by not recognizing the fact that while the church is comprised of imperfect Christians, as a result, place the blame on the church established by Christ." I thought his comments where actually quite tameand heartfelt, but how do you know what is going on in Wordkeepers heart. (If he detested the church of Christ so much, would he ever place his foot in one now?)

The whole idea of claiming that the sum total of true Christians following the Lord being limited to ones who attend a church with the name "church of Christ" on the outside is such arrogance on our part. It reminds me of Jeremiah claiming he was the only one faithful, and God telling him of the thousands that are faithful. (1 Kings 19) Why can't we just say, we are trying to follow Christ as best we can? If given the opportunity, we should share, like Aquilla and Pricilla, where we believe we see others following error. Who are we to claim we represent "the church whose head and founder is Christ" but even though you claim you are a Christian, you are sadly mistaken.

Of course, someone entrenched in Rick Warren's propaganda would find anything that exposes the fallacies of the Purpose-Driven paradigm as "character assassination" and "mud slinging." It's no longer PC to rebuke anyone today for preaching "heresies" and "false doctrine," for all doctrines are acceptable today. Even Jesus' branding of the Pharisees as "hypocrites" would be considered as "character assassination" and "mud slinging" today.

As a former member of a Southern Baptist church and former organist thereof, I know what the Baptists are all about, I have read Warren's books, and I know what Warren is all about as well. Even though Baptist doctrine is not all scripturally correct (for example, they embrace instrumental music, believe that one is "saved" prior to baptism, and reject the commands to be baptized for remission of sins and salvation--Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21), and even though I have left that denomination, I don't go around continually bashing and trashing that denomination as such or any other denomination as a whole, as some former members of the c of C do who conduct perpetual smear campaigns against that faith. It's more important to nail the false teachers in the denominations like Warren and expose their heresies as the Kjos Ministries site and others well do.

Yet it seems that many of those who leave the church of Christ feel compelled to come to sites like this and bash and trash us. Instead, why not go to a whole web site devoted to nurturing the wounded hearts of those who have left the c of C. That web site is www.ex-churchofchrist.com, the whole purpose of which allows people to express their catharsis by slamming and bashing the c of C. It's kinda like an "AA" for former members of the c of C. If former members of the c of C have nothing better to do than to revile their former faith, perhaps it's better that they hang out at the Ex-c of C site and commiserate together with others whose hearts are also in total misery.

Although I do have a copy of purpose driven life, I have read all of about two chapters...didn't find it that interesting. And although I am sure Dr. Crump would classify the church I go to as a model purpose driven church, I know the preacher likes the book about as much as the good doctor. But it is always much easier to make yet another wrong assumption that I am "entrenched in Rick Warren's propaganda." I wonder how many more of his assumptions are wrong?

I find it more than ironic that D.C. mentions the ex church of christ site. "Perhaps it's better that they hang out at the Ex-c of C site and commiserate together with others whose hearts are also in total misery." Sounds a whole lot like this site.

Look. I think that I have been totally
misrepresented. I stated in my earlier postings
that in my deep heart I wish for the
churches of Christ to lead droves of the
unchurched to a saving knowledge of Jesus
Christ. I am all for you. I may have
had some bad experiences in the past but
I am over it now. My only wish is for
the people in the churches of Christ to
confess up and say they are not correct
in ALL doctinal matter and that puts them
in the same boat as everybody else, fallable
human beings.

There is a role and purpose for the churches
of Christ as there are many people who wouldn't
even think of attending anywhere else. God bless
these people (some of whom are future adherents
that are now in the status of the unchurched).
As also a role and purpose for Episcopalians,
Baptists, and all the other denominations.
The Lord's church has many of each of these
there is room for all of God's believers.
I just make the decision to not judge and let
God be the one who judges. I only open the Bible
and my mind to discuss spiritual topics with other
people and say, "This is what I believe and the
scriptures that back my positions, I put this upon
myself; but, you my friend must form your own beliefs
and be held accountable to God for your beliefs." At
that point I accept that person as brother/sister and
let God Judge.

Please don't misconstrue my postings as ani-churches
of Christ. I am honest enough to say that is not
what is in my heart.

Now to address one misunderstading. I did marry a
woman who is charismatic and I do currently attend
a charismatic church. But, she is not the one
brought me to my current beliefs of charismatic
gifts. At the same evangelical campaign I mentioned
earlier I met up with some charismatic brothers and
I thought I had all of the answers to why they were
wrong. For all of the arguments that I had they
wouldn't get into a debate with me. They only stated
that I should find out for myself what the truth is
and go by it and not church traditions. From 1985 through
1989 I spent 5 years reading over 300 books, scholarly
articles, and sermon tapes and probably over 1,500 hours
on this issue studying both sides . Of the
1,500 hours I'd say at least 700-800 hours were directly
in the Bible only. My conclusion is that both sides have
very good arguments. It boils down to I Corinthians 1:4-9
where Paul states that the gifts are operational until
Jesus Christ returns to earth. I didn't marry my wife until
1995. I didn't really start attending a charismatic church
until I married her. Up until then I worshiped at several
churches including the churches of Christ.

Thank you,

Wordkeeper

Mark F.,

I think that we will see a lot more of
the combined fellowships between Christian
churches and c of c. I can remember reading
Carl Ketcherside's books on how the two groups
have so many similarities. I, for one, believe
that the talks and discussions are healthy and
a lot of good will come from them.

I also wouldn't mind seeing bridges built with
all the other evangelical groups and the c of c.

Wordkeeper

Before accepting Ketcherside, you should understand that SIMILAR is not necessarily RIGHT.

He rejected institutional religion: was originally a Sommerite.

He rejected a LOCATED PREACHER along with the Bible and most history.

He repudiated instrumental music and saw it as divisive.

Many other things would not be seen good if INSTITUTIONAL A merged with INSTITUTIONAL B when neither are "schols of the Bible.

Ken

There is an article along the same lines as the Christian Chronicle article in the Louisville Courier Journal.

"Reconciling Christians mix their music"

To view this article on The Courier-Journal Web site, go to:

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2006606300388

The problem with the gatherings is that ALL of those represented "churches of Christ" either use or APPROVE of the use of instrumental music. The "Musical Worship Team" is a legalistic end run by using an ORGANI "pipe organ" using the syle of ORGANUM developed after about 1200.

Other than being SELL OUTS and many wanting to sell books and CDs, they also must deliberately misstate the Biblical and Historical facts or are too ignorant to be taken seriously. For instance, one of the big lies is that:

In the 1906 split, some Churches of Christ, mainly in the South, concluded that they shouldn't use musical instruments because the New Testament never calls for them.

First, it is a historical fact that NONE of the groups which streamed into the church of Christ had ever used instruments. Not even the Catholics or Anglicans "worshipped with congregational singing and instrumental accompaniment." The organs were used before or after mass and later used for preludes, interludes and recessionals. The congregation DID NOT sing except offering amens.

Second, one of the major splits occured in Sand Creek, Ill which at last count was not in the South. People who wanted to INTRODUCE instruments left the building and sued to get control: they lost their effort to STEAL the property from people always known as THE CHURCH OF CHRIST in all ages and NEVER approved of instruments.

Third, NOT using instruments was not a late conclusion any more than NOT adding dirty dancing was a late development. They grasped that the Bible universally denounced isntruments which were used to silence the Word of God. ALL of church theologians made them literate about the negative impact created by any mind altering ritual. Therefore, rejecting instruments based on SILENCE was not the case. In fact, instrumentalists USED the legalistic law of silence: "The Law DOES NOT SAY, 'DO NOT USE INSTRUMENTS,' so we conclude that there is NO LAW AGAINST IT.

The Stoneite churches later to become the Christian Church flowed out of Cane Ridge which was quite identical to witchcraft. The "reformers" or "restorers" did not participate and never approved of the charismatic mental breakdowns. The Stoneites had little in common with the Reformers which grew up elsewhere.

Churches of Christ rejected being INCLUDED WITHOUT PERMISSION in the Disciples version of the census of 1906. By 1908 the Centennial edition of Campbell's Declaration and Address was published and the goals were stated. Churches of Christ did not "abandon" the historic church of Christ but made the choice NOT to be counted in what is shown here as a denominational structure.



The Christian Churches ALSO abandoned this denomination so why not PICK on them?

Thank God, that after 100 years, the family of God is getting back together. You need to read the Bible about what God feels about people trying to divide that family up.

Palm Beach Lakes Church of Christ
West Palm Beach, Florida



========================

Reminder from Poster:

“My name is Tom, I do not represent Palm Beach Lakes Church of Christ and the elders and preachers at Palm Beach Lakes Church of Christ are not in agreement with me. I am sorry about the screen name. ... To let you know where I am coming from. I am coming from the other side of the Church of Christ. ... I am concerned about the legalistic patternism in PBLCOC." [April 30 2006, 1:35 AM]