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  
Sonny
(no login)
99.186.93.107

No answers?

November 3 2010, 1:28 AM 

Here are my thoughts:

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. No. (I would like to think yes here as well and hopefully it is, but Scripture seems to say no.)

-Sonny

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
72.171.0.147

??

November 4 2010, 12:04 AM 

1. If someone worships God acappella, yet commits adultery, can they be forgiven?

No! Jesus didn't command Acappella worship. We are commanded to teach what HE commanded to be Taught. He commanded us to worship IN THE SPIRIT in contrast to IN TEMPLES on MOUNTAINS.

ACappella is a steal word for "a cappella" or in the style of the Pope's castrated French Opry singers where instruments were unlawful in the official mass and the falsetto's were not as "thusing."

I cannot worship "a cappella" singing "organum" or after the pipe organ. I am too old to castrate and too young to be caught dead singing CCM using the alternative "Trouser's Songs" for the WANNABE castratoes.

Before a doctor told me that singing a fair tenor was destroying my vocal cords me, wife and three girls made a pretty good team..

I am told that if you sing falsetto CCM for any extended period you lose your ability to sound like a male and go around squeeking like a mouse. Congregational singing is NOT a cappella but in the words of Paul, fools love to be fooled.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sonny
(no login)
99.186.93.107

Re: ??

November 4 2010, 12:26 AM 

So... you are saying people can be forgiven (if they repent) for adultery, homosexuality, murder, etc. (any sin) but not for worshipping God acappella?

As far as I know, this is NOT what [... (d.c.)] any other Church of Christ preacher or elder in the past 200 years has taught from Scripture.

I thought that SURELY I was misreading Mr. Sublett's comments, but after rereading it, I don't think I am, but maybe I am.

-Sonny


    
This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 99.177.249.211 on Nov 4, 2010 1:26 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
130.127.43.117

Proof Postive

November 4 2010, 11:09 AM 

Donnie.....if you ever ever needed proof positive that you are wrong about Ken not being against singing, then look at the last sentence of Ken's last response.

He said..."Congregational singing is NOT a cappella but in the words of Paul, fools love to be fooled."
Donnie, did Ken say PRAISE TEAM? Donnie, did Ken mention instrumental music?
NO!
He said....."Congregational singing...."

Maybe NOW would be a good time to do some editing.


 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.241.153.233

Re: Proof Postive

November 4 2010, 11:52 AM 

Dave seems so preoccupied with ragging Ken these days that I think Dave has allowed Ken to get under his skin. happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
130.127.43.117

Oh Woah Is He

November 4 2010, 3:05 PM 

William Crump,
Make up your mind.
One minute you say that you are getting under my skin.....the next minute you are saying that you are getting under Sonny's skin......the next minute you are saying that Ken is getting under my skin.......wait a second......perhaps/maybe YOU are the one preoccupied with something here?
Some people are like that. If it aint (sic) doom and gloom, then they just don't want to be a part of it.

Donnie,
You certainly didn't surprise me with your comment about Ken and his take on congregational singing being evil.
You could explain away anything.
If you can make the Holy Spirit complicated, then you can make anything complicated.

Did you say you were a lawyer by trade?

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
67.142.130.34

A cappella (the goat song, a constellation to worship

November 4 2010, 5:58 PM 

You don't know any preacher from the last 50 years who knows WHAT a cappella.

As part of the hireling-changeling Frog Boiling opperation they invented the word ACappella so that the dumblings would not know the code word.

They convinced everying that congregational singing was ACappella (not a cappella, castrato).

Then, they could set up ACapella Worship Teams and tell everyone that WE don't do instruments: we are just like you doing congregational singing.

What not even the ACappella Fellas may have known being STRONGLY DELUDED was that the word they have tried to bury like a dead sunk is SPECIFICIALLY used to define;

A musical worship team or small group
Singing ACappella or pseudo- a cappella and falsetto as wannabe castratos and seen as bisexual
They perform ORGANUM or 'After the pipe organ" because harmony didn't exist until the monks (smile) began to fiddle around with the organ keys

ACappella as 'selling the free water of the word' even does a VOCAL BAND where they make lots of farting noises and gyrate like monkeys on top of a grinding organ.

So, when the INSTRUMENTALISTS were seen to be ABUSED and SILENCED by the Bible Literate (the purple hairs they prayed would die or leave), Pepperdine has become a DYNAMIC PROMOTER OF ACAPPELLA and even brought in the Mennonite team.

But, what they are promoting is MUSICAL PERFORMANCE and not teaching the Word of God.

In the patternism of CONFLICT RESOLUTION they have had to fall back and compromise with ACappella as a legalistic end run around singing as TEACHING what CHIRST commanded to be taught.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(no login)
170.141.177.53

The Roman Catholic Church's Version of the Praise Team

November 4 2010, 12:34 PM 

Dave,

You need to be a little more of a stickler for details. I am. Ken is very detailed; but in the above post, he even attempted to simplify it for you and others like you.

Did you pay any attention at all to the preceding paragraphs, especially the 2nd? Until you come to a fuller understanding of the origin and the original definition of "a cappella," you will just keep repeating your questions and assertions.

OK. I think that your mind needs a little refreshing for now: "A cappella" -- in the style of the Pope's falsetto-sounding CHOIR BOYS:

Castrato
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A castrato (Italian, plural: castrati) is a man with a singing voice equivalent to that of a soprano, mezzo-soprano, or contralto voice produced either by castration of the singer before puberty or one who, because of an endocrinological condition, never reaches sexual maturity.

Castration before puberty (or in its early stages) prevents a boy's larynx from being transformed by the normal physiological events of puberty. As a result, the vocal range of prepubescence (shared by both sexes) is largely retained, and the voice develops into adulthood in a unique way. Prepubescent castration for this purpose diminished greatly in the late 18th century and was made illegal in Italy in 1870.

As the castrato's body grew, his lack of testosterone meant that his epiphyses (bone-joints) did not harden in the normal manner. Thus the limbs of the castrati often grew unusually long, as did the bones of their ribs. This, combined with intensive training, gave them unrivalled lung-power and breath capacity. Operating through small, child-sized vocal cords, their voices were also extraordinarily flexible, and quite different from the equivalent adult female voice, as well as higher vocal ranges of the uncastrated adult male (see soprano, mezzo-soprano, alto, sopranist, countertenor and contralto). Listening to the only surviving recordings of a castrato (see below), one can hear that the lower part of the voice sounds like a "super-high" tenor, with a more falsetto-like upper register above that.


More at this link --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castrato
As you can see, there is more to "a cappella" music than simply non-instrumental.

Ken has clearly demonstrated the distinction between:

(a) The Pope's CHOIR BOYS or the progressive church's PRAISE TEAM [or Baptist CHOIR or Mormon Tabernacle CHOIR]

--------------------- versus ------------------------

(b) Congregational singing.

The PRAISE TEAM of elite singers sing and perform to/for the congregation.

The "Worship Leader's" PRAISE TEAM encourages the congregants to listen to or watch a "religious" performance. Rather than truly understanding "How Excellent Is Thy Name, O Lord," what is effected is the congregation applauding, "How Excellent Is the Performance of the PRAISE TEAM."

On the other hand, congregational singing encourages participation of members to "let the word of Christ dwell in you richly ... teaching and admonishing ONE ANOTHER in ... songs."

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
67.142.130.34

Modern Pseudo-a cappella fellas

November 4 2010, 5:11 PM 

Click on

http://www.acappella.org/

then Click to listen to the "Only God" preview. These people were "congenitally" as described in Donnie's post. If they have HONED the method it is a fact that you can force your range upward and it cannot be toned down. Maybe toasting will help as they are also performing SORCERY as it intends to alter your brain through external means.

See my Reviews on the Tulsa Workshop; I have posted the 2011 in advance. The preacher who made it into an UNITY forum with the NACC has been gone. Has tried to set up his own congregation and his co founders won't invite people so it has been aborted.

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

An e-mail from 2004 Tulsa Workout: "Ashamed October 12 2004, 5:47 PM

I am from the Tulsa area, and attended the workshop for the first time this past year. Mr. Lancaster was leading singing the night I was there. All I can say is I actualy was embarrased by the actions on stage. I can't for the life of me imagine how our leaders seem to think they are more important than they really are. People a Song leader aka worship leader is not there for our amusement (entertainment) If I wanted to be entertained I would go somewhere else. It is a song leaders job to start the song and get the CONGREGATION into an active worship. It seems like some of these guys think we should just sit back and let them perform. The dancing actualy made me blush in embarasment. I actualy thought to myself Man I hope nobody I know sees me here, and Man I'm glad I didn't invite anyone to go with me to this. What a absolute tragedy.

I'll take my small congregation of singers over you and your praise team any day of the week and twice (literally) on Sunday.

As for those of you who have dealt with these problems on a daily basis. I'm sorry for you, and I pray God gives you strength.


The ACappella Fellas (as opposed to congregational singing) but a DECEPTIVE hiding of their Faranella farce, do not sing with the voice-only.

The PERSONA which is universal is why up to half of the OWNERS flee from their own friends and property: if you are an ENABLER then I hope you wear yellow ribbons in your hair. God says they will burn.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
69.59.112.185

The Titatnic is SInking

November 5 2010, 12:25 AM 

Again, the proof is in the pudding......Ken said...."Congregational singing is NOT a cappella but in the words of Paul, fools love to be fooled."

He didn't mean castrato, or praise team, or music or choir directors, he said CONGREGATIONAL SINGING>
There is your detail.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.249.211

Re: The Titanic is Sinking

November 5 2010, 1:35 AM 

Dave,

I'm sorry that you've limited yourself to your narrow definition of "a cappella" without any regard whatsoever for its origin and history.

The "PRAISE TEAM" -- certainly falls in the "a cappella" category based on its true origin and history. The "Baptist CHOIR" falls in that category, too; as well as the "Mormon Tabernacle CHOIR, the Pope's CHOIR BOYS.

NONE of the above is congregational singing.

Seriously: Would you consider the Pope's "a cappella" CHOIR BOYS congregational singing. Yes? No?

Would you consider the "a cappella" Mormon Tabernacle CHOIR congregational singing? Yes? No?

The illustration I showed you earlier was simple (here it is again):
The Pope's a cappella CHOIR BOYS or
The progressive church's a cappella PRAISE TEAM or
The a cappella Baptist CHOIR or
The a cappella Mormon Tabernacle CHOIR

--------------------- versus ------------------------

Congregational singing.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
130.127.43.117

A Bird is A Bird....A FIsh is a FIsh

November 5 2010, 12:10 PM 

Donnie,
What type of singing do you do with the Madison traditional service? I ask even though I know what it is already. It is considered CONGREGATIONAL singing.
Let's go back to Ken's statement again.
He said...."Congregational singing is NOT a cappella but in the words of Paul, fools love to be fooled."

He didn't preface that with praise teams, nor choirs. nor worship directors, etc., etc.

He meant congregational singing, a capella four part harmony, the same type of singing that you took part in Sunday at Madison.
Yes, Donnie, we know that Ken doesn't like praise teams or instrumental music, or whatever. HOWEVER, when he makes a blanket statement like he did, he speaks of ANY singing as sinful. End of story.
I have already responded before with other comments from Ken that showed that Ken is against ALL singing. He believes, and has so stated himself, that singing was no more than 'SPEAKING that which is written.' If it involves actual singing, and words outside the Scriptures, then he has said that it is wrong.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(no login)
170.141.177.53

"Praise Team" Performing Is Not Equal to Congregational Singing

November 5 2010, 1:52 PM 

Dave,

If you really want to know about the types [not "type"] of singing at Madison, here it is:

(1) The "worship services" of the "Traditional" [eldership-designated] division does congregational singing ONLY.

(2) The "worship services" of the "Contemporary" [eldership-designated] division does "Praise Team" singing AND congregational singing BOTH.

I stress "division" because that was the end result of the Change Agents' original attempt to transform the once-peaceful and growing Madison congregation into a mega Community Church. The attempt or the scheme, rather, which was culture-driven, to "grow the church" failed. Although instrumental music might have been a part of the scheme in later stages, the installation of the "PRAISE TEAM" at the time was "the straw that broke the camel's back." The elders were divided. The membership was divided as well: members left in droves to seek fellowship somewhere else.

So, now, you can see that to accommodate the "needs" of the divided membership, the elders designated such labels as "traditional" and "contemporary."

All that division primarily because of the Praise Team controversy?

O.K. I'll be brief on this one: One Sunday recently, there was a female soloist from the Praise Team that did a solo performance in the midst of the observance of the Lord's Supper. (I consider myself focused in dealing with a serious matter at any given moment. But guess what? I wasn't exactly focused this time. I should have prayed: "Lord, forgive me for being distracted at the moment by such a very beautiful singing voice.") Hopefully, you now understand the performance issue involving the unnecessary and extraneous "services" of the Praise Team.

Actually, in the "contemporary" division, in addition to the Praise Team, there is also the non-Praise Team called the "regular" congregation. Unfortunately, congregational singing is dying or at least diminishing as the Praise Team [with their handheld microphones] is dominating and overpowering the singing of the regular guys. [Maybe, each member of the congregation should have an individual microphone as well?????]

You might argue that there is still congregational singing in the contemporary group.

You're partly correct. There is congregational singing in the contemporary group. To complete the confusing puzzle, you must consider, and you know it, that there is also the Praise Team singing. In fact, there are times when only the Praise Team performs while the congregation shuts up.

In essence, the "a cappella" Praise Team is not "the congregation." If the PT members want to be part of the congregation, they should act like regular members of the congregation.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sonny
(no login)
99.186.93.107

While we debate all of this and divide over it

November 8 2010, 1:38 AM 

There are people who are not being loved and helped and taught Christ in our communities. I don't think Scripture says a solo will make a church lose its lampstand anymore than it clarifies one song/worship leader vs. more than one.

-Sonny

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(no login)
170.141.177.53

You missed the point

November 8 2010, 10:45 AM 

You missed the overall point of who or what causes division as what caused the upheaval at Madison -- when the elders themselves were divided and with members leaving in droves.

Perhaps your faith is stronger than mine. But you also missed the specific point that my mind STRAYED from "do this in remembrance of my suffering and death on the cross" because the female soloist had such a very beautiful voice and performed with excellence. This was during the observance of the Lord's Supper!!!

 
 Respond to this message   
Jimmy Joe
(no login)
69.138.47.3

Droves

November 8 2010, 7:38 PM 

Donnie
You continually use the phrase leaving in droves concerning the members that decided to leave back in '01. However, you never mention the members that returned to Madison, the new members that have been baptized or placed membership or the satellite congregation in Hendersonville with new members. I guess for you it is always easier to remain negative about Madison.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.249.211

OK ... What about half of the membership leaving?

November 8 2010, 8:52 PM 

Jimmy Joe,

It's always good to hear from you.

I know and understand how it sounds "stressful" to certain folks to hear the expression "leaving in droves." But at the same time, it's only fair to "stress" the gravity of the situation.

I also realize that new folks have become members since the turmoil or that some have placed membership or that there is now the satellite congregation Northfield Church that has dropped [intentionally or not] the name "of Christ." [And it is now common knowledge that whenever a congregation of the church that supposedly belongs to Jesus Christ drops His name, there is a strong signal that Community Church-ism is the "flavor."]

But so far as baptisms and placing new memberships are concerned, let's not forget that these have been going on for years and years. Such are not new occurrences as the congregation grew especially during the Ira North era. Let's not forget also that while new folks come, still others leave.

When time allows me to do so, I plan to provide statistics compiled from the weekly "worship" guide of the church attendance since 2001. Unless you have them already available.

I'm not being negative. I'm simply providing information that's already available, although not compiled. Overall, we'll just have to face reality or truth even if it hurts.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
70.149.157.29

Re: While we debate all of this and divide over it

November 8 2010, 11:39 AM 

While Christ taught us to love one another and teach His Gospel, I don't recall Christ ever teaching us that solos were a vital, substantial part of worship, that putting one person (or a group) on display to entertain the congregants was a part of first-century worship. Of course, the Change Movement's excuse to "justify" that is to say, "God didn't say not to," which is a man-made phrase that is not found in the New Testament.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
69.59.112.185

Little Help

November 8 2010, 6:07 PM 

God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to
God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to, God didn't say not to

There ya go William Crump.....just thought that I would help you out.
You are so possessed with this statement that no one but you speaks of........just thought that you might get your fill of it this way.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.249.211

Re: Little Help

November 8 2010, 8:55 PM 

Perhaps a good description of someone "speaking in tongues." Now, that one needs no interpreter.

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

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

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

What Happened at the Madison Church of Christ?


There are thousands of churches being taken over across America.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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