Place your banner ad here.          See all banner ads

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

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

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


May 30 2010, 10:37 AM 

Dr. Crump, my source of information about Madison is the same as Jimmy Wren's source (The Madison Blog Site).

If it is your desire to compare Madison CoC to the BUBONIC PLAGUE then so be it. I would rather say something positive about them.

Dr. Crump, I would ask that you respect my forum name (Rocnar) as I always respect your name.

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

Re: Believable

May 31 2010, 9:40 AM 

Who said, "What's in a name?" Well, no matter. Notice that my name is not an anagram (although someone trying to be cute on this board did turn it into an anagram for his user "name"), whereas "rocnar" IS an anagram for "rancor." So all "rocnar" has to do is cease his anagram game and give his alias as "rancor," and we'll be on the same "playing field"--well, not quite. To be on the SAME playing field, rancor would have to give his REAL name, just as I give my real name. But I don't think that rancor will ever be up to that. happy.gif

Did I compare Madison to the plague? That's only in rancor's imagination. Notice I said, "Here's a hypothetical scenario about positive-only thinking:" Madison wasn't even mentioned in that scenario. The scenario was an example to show how ridiculous positive-only thinking can become if people take it to the extreme--and many people do so.

BTW, rancor still didn't write anything positive about Madison. All he did was to fret over his user "name" and make an unfounded accusation against me.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Same old rants and raves

June 2 2010, 4:17 PM 

Dr. Crump, my original post.

"Madison CoC must be in great shape if this is all y'all can find to complain about. How about posting something positive about Madison?"

It was a clear statement and a clear question. Apparently you are not going to address it in any meaningful fashion.

Dr. Crump, I see no need to respond to your last post. Obviously you are obsessed with "word games" and yourself.

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

Re: Same old rants and raves

June 4 2010, 9:48 AM 

Talk about word games, rancor DID respond to my last post by saying there is no need to respond. If rancor didn't want to respond, he would have posted nothing at all. And "rocnar" is STILL an anagram for "rancor." But if he wants to deny it, that's his prerogative.

BTW, rancor STILL has not made any positive comments about Madison. He wanted to see positive comments from others, yet he chose not to write them himself. Surely rancor knows the old adage, "If you want something done, do it yourself."

I think we're done here.

 Respond to this message   
(Login Donnie.Cruz)

Phil Barnes: Cautioned Prior to Employment at Madison

June 2 2010, 5:36 PM 

Yes, Barnes had been cautioned prior to joining Madison some 5 years ago that the congregation was in the process of "recovery" from the havoc that had about half of its membership and its eldership leave in 2000-2001. Of course, the departure [firing? or replacement] of the "Worship Leader," Keith Lancaster, who pioneered the "revolutionary concept" of and who installed the controversial and unnecessary "Praise Team," is an accomplishment in itself. [The implementation of the professional services of the "Praise Team" is only part of the entire Community Church's "church growth scheme that didn't work at/for Madison. The fact that the "traditional" assembly does not use the services of the "Praise Team" still leaves us with the impression that having a team continues to be a controversial and divisive issue. It is a long story.]

Phil Barnes' ability to make the congregants laugh at his jokes [many of which are personal in nature] in the sermon and his pretty animated sermon delivery keep them from napping. He is not into the habit of being critical of the "traditional" truth or doctrine, although at times he slips and catches himself doing so and corrects himself. He may slip and say, "Accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior" [a Baptist's teaching that means "saved" by faith (only)]. Then, he follows that with "be baptized." (And baptism: [a] because sins have already been remitted or [b] in order to have sins remitted? He shouldn't be afraid to emphasize the difference and what God's truth really says.)

Attendance has been in the 1700-1800 range -- still a long way from fully recovering, if that's even happening. The congregation still has its designated "traditional worship service" and "contemporary worship service" -- an indication that the church is still divided. Call it "peaceful" division, but division nonetheless.

P.S.: OK, just a quick update.

 Respond to this message   
(Login BrianRasmussen)

Re: Phil Barnes urges 'insanity?'

June 3 2010, 10:18 PM 

"Insanely" is used in the vernacular as a synonym for "extremely".

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

Re: Phil Barnes urges 'insanity?'

June 5 2010, 9:22 AM 

I wonder if Jesus taught His Gospel in the "vernacular." Today, English "vernacular" language commonly includes the "S" word, the "F" word, "damn," "hell" (the latter two words used as expletives), the expression "Oh my G*d!" (which is not an expression of praise) and similar words or phrases. That is, a number of words and phrases in the English "vernacular" are also vulgar or inappropriate. So did Jesus teach His Gospel by using "street" language--the vernacular of His day? Imagine Jesus using the equivalent of the "F" word when He taught against fornication. That would be the "vernacular" would it not? I think the Gospel was and is on a much higher level than that.

When I was an intern in the emergency room, one day an elderly woman came in complaining of abdominal pain. When I asked about her "bowel movements," she didn't understand what I meant. So I asked her about her "stools." Still, she didn't understand. Finally, in order to find out what was wrong with the woman, I asked in the vernacular, "Are you [the 'S' word with 'ing' on the end] OK?" She replied, "Oh, yes, yes, I understand it if you say it RIGHT!" Good grief! I literally had to get down into the proverbial gutter (the lowest vernacular) to talk to that woman! Did Jesus use the equivalent of such vulgarity to get His Gospel across to the people?

This is not to say that the word "insanely" is vulgar. It is a vernacular word that does not impart any dignity whatsoever when talking to people about Christianity. It is a "cool," "hip," worldly word. One need not use the worldly, "hip" or "cool" phraseology of the day to talk about Christianity and the Gospel. Use plain, simple, straightforward, decent language to preach the Gospel. I believe Christ used plain, simple, straightforward, decent language of His day to preach His Gospel.

The bottom line is that "insanely" is a poor choice of words for a minister to use to describe the kind of week that people should have.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Vernacular, Really?

June 6 2010, 10:31 PM 

Looking up the definition of vernacular in the dictionary, and there is NO connotation about it being related to vulgarity or profanity, but simply "the plain variety of language in everyday use by ordinary people." "Insanely" also has no connotation that is vulgar or profane, so I'm have a little trouble accepting your flawed reasoning as proof that Jesus didn't use vernacular words.

In fact, the opposite is true. In Jesus's time, the formal language of the day was Greek (hence why the New Testament was written in Greek), but the masses used Aramaic as their vernacular. Jesus spoke to the masses in Aramaic not Greek. He used vernacular expressions like "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" which was a common Aramaic expression for something difficult to do. So Jesus spoke in the vernacular all the time.

Your whole story about having to use the "s" word speaks volumes about you, not the lady. The Jesus I read about in the Bible would have felt compassion for the lady who didn't know proper names for bodily functions, not be indignant that he had to lower himself to her level...that sounds a whole lot more like the Pharisee praying "God, I thank you that I am not like other men."

Jesus was criticized routinely for associating with the "indecent" people..."Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and 'sinners.'" Matt 11:19. Considering that Jesus was willing to die on the cross for our sins, if he had to use some base (not blasphemous) terms that common people would understand to get his message across, he would without a doubt do it.

 Respond to this message   
(no login)

Life is GOOD!!!!

June 7 2010, 1:46 PM 

William Crump said,"This is not to say that the word "insanely" is vulgar. It is a vernacular word that does not impart any dignity whatsoever when talking to people about Christianity. It is a "cool," "hip," worldly word. One need not use the worldly, "hip" or "cool" phraseology of the day to talk about Christianity and the Gospel. Use plain, simple, straightforward, decent language to preach the Gospel. I believe Christ used plain, simple, straightforward, decent language of His day to preach His Gospel."

William, do you think that Jesus would have told someone that they have bad breath, instead of halitosis, as you did?
Straightforward, as you say?
Perhaps Jesus would not have told them that they had halitosis or bad breath. Jesus had more important things on His mind. He didn't have the time nor the inclination to do so. He wasn't into slander and wise cracks, as some people are.

 Respond to this message   
< Previous Page 1 2 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;

Here is the list of players;

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

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

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

FastCounter by bCentral

CM Visit Counter as of 6/25/2015

Site Visits Since 6/30/2015
page counter