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  

How About You!

July 29 2011 at 11:14 AM
Dave  (no login)
from IP address 130.127.42.205

Which one are you?

Taken from Wikipeidia.....
Three quarters of the congregations and 87% of the membership are described by the *The Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement* as "mainstream", sharing a consensus on practice and theology. The remaining congregations may be grouped into four categories, the largest of which is the churches of Christ (non-institutional). Approximately 2,055 congregations fall in this category. The second group does not use separate Bible classes, and consists of approximately 1,100 congregations. A third group does not use multiple communion cups (approximately 550 congregations; this category overlaps somewhat with those congregations that do not use separate Bible classes for children). The fourth group "emphasize mutual edification by various leaders in the churches and oppose one person doing most of the preaching". This group includes roughly 130 congregations. These groups generally differ from the mainstream consensus in specific practices, rather than in theological perspectives, and tend to have smaller congregations on average.

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

How About You, Dave?

July 29 2011, 9:46 PM 

The good part is that these are all churches of Christ, differing in very minor issues.

It matters not to use one cup or multi-colored cups -- the substance is the same: the fruit of the vine. It matters not to have or not to have separate Bible classes -- the church as a shool of God's truth assembles for that purpose. The church assembles to teach God's Word and not denominational beliefs.

Your question could be a two-part question:

(1) Which one are you as a member?
(2) Which one is the congregation of which you are a member?

Dave, which one are you?

One thing noteworthy is that in the commentary, the group that is not represented consists of the very, very few congregations that indulge in mechanical music. I'm inclined to think either that it's been overlooked or that it's extremely insignificant to be part of the statistics. It is more so when you account for all the churches worldwide -- the instrumental music indulgents are represented only by 20 of 40,000 congregations. So, what percentage is that?

In your case, Dave, here's the dichotomy between you and your congregation. You favor the use of inanimate and lifeless musical objects in the assembly, whereas your congregation DOES NOT.

 
 Respond to this message   
Tom Brite
(no login)
69.91.18.234

Re: How About You, Dave?

July 29 2011, 10:23 PM 

Donnie, I have to strongly disagree with your conclusions about things which matter and don't matter in congregations. To those that hold dearly to the "one cup" or "no classroom" belief, those beliefs are just as important as your belief regarding instruments and they would be glad to tell you that. The reason that those do not matter to you is because you do not have any objection to them. The same could be said for those that hold the belief that instruments are acceptable to God. They find your reasoning regarding instruments just as illogical as you find the divisions over instruments. The perspective is always in the eye of the beholder.

You need only look at the recent article about Bro. Jimmy Wren in the latest issue of "Defender" published by the Bellview Church of Christ. These "Contending for the Faith" "brethren" have labeled Bro. Jimmy as a heretic because of the actions of his congregation in Ft. Worth many years ago. These are the same "brethren" which you have repeatedly defended over the years on this site. The issue involves Elder reaffirmation and they take him to task (marking him to their readers as unfaithful) because of the actions of his congregation. You do the same thing on this site - mark and accuse those with which you do not agree while glossing over the marked differences of belief on those issues which you do not find divisive but which others would find to be as divisive as instruments are to you. This is not a condemnation of you, I understand how this can happen. I have done the same thing in the past.

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

Is It "Apples and Apples" or Is It "Apples and Oranges"?

July 30 2011, 1:24 AM 

First, thanks for your comments.

I understand what you're trying to convey. I am also fully aware of the importance of certain practices in respective congregations that hold them dearly. But I think that comparing the Communion cup issue to that of blowing the trumpet in worship is not analogous to comparing apples and apples.

I know that you are aware of the statistics produced in the directory of churches of Christ published by 21st Century Christian. The directory has shown a marked difference between the more recent statistics and those from only a few years ago. The recent directory ceased to account for congregations that have gone "mechanical music" participating in worship, some of which have completely dropped the name "of Christ" just to be accommodating and compromising. Whereas the directory continued to list all other congregations regardless of their idiosyncrasies.

I'm unable to comment on the reaffirmation of elders issue as I do not have any information regarding the matter. I am not clear on the "recent article [/] latest issue" and the actions of "many years ago."

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.246.67

Re: Is It "Apples and Apples" or Is It "Apples and Oranges"?

July 30 2011, 9:03 PM 

It is apparent that some folks are not able to discern what is doctrinally important in worship. Jesus never gave instructions for the NUMBER of cups to use in the Lord's Supper. Therefore, we are free to choose whether we use one cup or many. It apparently was the custom of the Jewish passover to pass one cup around. But since there is no command to use one cup, to say that it is sinful to use multiple cups is to create a doctrine that does not exist in the New Testament. As far as IM goes, we have explicit instructions to sing and make melody in the heart. Since there is no command to add IM, to say that it is right to use IM in worship is to create a doctrine that does not exist in the New Testament. The same applies to other physical elements of worship, like having carpets on the floors, for example, or having classrooms for Bible study. Jesus never gave any instructions one way or the other about carpets or classrooms, so we have the freedom to implement them. They and hundreds of other non-essentials do not clash with the Gospel message in any way. To say that it is a "sin" to use them is to create a doctrine that does not exist in the New Testament.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.240.211.249

Re: How About You!

July 29 2011, 10:00 PM 

What Dave cites from the Wikipedia article seems to focus primarily on form and physical environment instead of important doctrinal issues. If the article touches on the latter, perhaps Dave would include those.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
69.59.112.185

NO NO NO

July 30 2011, 1:52 AM 

Well.....I can tell you.....I ain't a gonna be in the one cup group. Can you imagine drinking from the same cup as Bill Crump?

Ha!

Oh, and admit it or not Donnie, Tom hit the nail on the head. Yes Donnie, those that believe in the one cup communion would tell you that they believe it is as big an issue as the instrumental music issue. You can't speak for them. You don't have that right. They believe that you are wrong to a sin when you partake of multiple cups......just as you believe that there are those who are wrong that blow the trumpet during worship.
Donnie, when you say that I favor instruments in the assembly, and I have repeated time after time that I do not, [angry, malicious words edited out].

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The message above has been approved because of its contents OTHER THAN "you sin by lying.....again." This is no less disgusting than an "expletive deleted" -- one reason for a post being deleted or rejected. Expressions such as "you sin by lying.....again" [a symbolic punch in the face by an uncivil opponent] are discourse killers. There are many civil ways to express ire. Let this be a lesson: future posts that contain such malicious comments will be subject to rejection or deletion.


    
This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 99.177.249.211 on Jul 30, 2011 7:48 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.246.67

Re: NO NO NO

July 30 2011, 9:45 PM 

Dave wrote: "Donnie, when you say that I favor instruments in the assembly, and I have repeated time after time that I do not,..."

Dave may not favor IM in his particular congregation(?), but I believe he has said he sees nothing wrong with other church of Christ congregations having IM if it is their preference. Dave regards a cappella singing or IM as a "preference" thing; he also believes that congregations choosing to sing a cappella do so out of "preference" rather than because of any biblical command, example, or necessary inference. Mainstream church of Christ congregations constitute the vast majority of such congregations and hence, sing a cappella, not because of "preference," but because of biblical command. Over and over, we have preached that we cannot exceed the limits of a specific command; that is, we cannot go above what is written (1 Cor. 4:6). Yet the progressives continue to promote their premise of "God didn't say not to have IM," a premise that is not found anywhere in the New Testament. Thus the progressives thumb their noses at the explicit command that says to sing and make melody in the heart.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.8.173

Re: How About You!

July 30 2011, 12:07 PM 

Yes, "How [a]bout You[?]" ---> [? ? ? ?]

That IS a very interesting question!

 
 Respond to this message   
Tom Brite
(no login)
69.91.18.234

Re: How About You!

July 30 2011, 9:09 PM 

Mr. Crump has apparently forgotten the "E" of CENI. While admitting that the example is of one cup, he dismisses it because it was not a command. You see the problem Donnie? What is one person's CENI, is another person's opinion. You could not ask for a clearer example! Thanks Mr. Crump!

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.204.147

Re: How About You!

July 30 2011, 11:50 PM 

So maybe Brite can tell us which is "right": one cup or many cups. Does it really matter in the long run? Is God going to damn us to hell for using one cup or many cups? Maybe a question to ask is this: Would God damn us to hell if we substitute soft drinks for the fruit of the vine? Perhaps Brite can expound on that and teach us what we need to know.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sonny
(no login)
99.186.93.107

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 8:37 AM 

Brother Crump,

The same can be said for a piano. Will a piano really damn us to hell? Does a piano really matter in the long run?

Where you do not make a "NECESSARY inference" regarding number of cups, some in our brotherhood do say it is necessary and would condemn you to hell for using multiple cups.

Likewise, you do make a necessary inference regarding instruments, and condemn those to hell who use them. Whereas, some of us are concluding IM is a similar matter of inference. One is not a Christian based on whether or not the use one or multiple cups, or sing with or without a piano.

-Sonny

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
67.142.130.48

Performers CANNOT WORSHIP God in Christ.

July 31 2011, 2:45 PM 

Here are some absolutes in addition to the MANY of examples of writers SHUTTING DOWN the performing mercinaries SO THAT the church can take place. If you DENY that then you ARE NOT YET a disciple of Christ. No pagan temple was so vile that singers and musicians lumped with acrobats, prostitutes and rhetoricians (same thing as Corruppters of the Word). Musical performers based on the definition of words always performed the role of EXORCISM and in the temple and a church near you music MEANT "to make the lambs dumbe before the slaughter." That is what was prophesied as the Judas Attack--which did not work--but the Levites carried out the sacrifice of the TRUE Lamb of God with musical mocking. I don't believe anyone lying and cheating to charge an ADMISSION FEE for THEIR teaching can read BLACK text on BROWN paper.

[linked image]
[linked image]

Only those John called SORCERERS who HAD deceived the whole world in several incarnations, will try to justify their performance role. Sorry but Amos and Revelation 17 says that they are agents of the Babylon Mother of Harlots: her agents are "lusted after fruits"(and so the watching world affirms and runs). They are preachers, singers and instrument players and THEY, according to Christ in Isaiah 30, will be MARKED or IDENTIFIED by the sounds of Wind, String and Percussion instruments SOUNDS of God driving them into Hell. In Revelation John says that they will be cast ALIVE in the Lake of Fire: Incentor is a song starter or IGNIS meaning he LIGHTS THE SACRIFICIAL FIRES.

I KNOW those who are boasting about Lighting the Fires MUST deny everything said about the UNIQUE auuthority of Jesus Christ in the Prophets and Apostles (only). I still have to warn you. Hebrews 12 says of those who do not come before God in reverence and godly fear that He is Still a CONSUMING FIRE. Be careful: Satan's Enlistment Teams are roaming seeking whom they may devour. (a double entendre).

 
 Respond to this message   
Tom Brite
(no login)
69.91.18.234

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 2:45 PM 

Sonny, it could not have been said better! The answer is obvious, it boils down to what one believes and is comfortable with in determining what is a command, example or necessary inference. Mr. Crump asks "What's the big deal?" on an issue that he feels comfortable with, but brings out the guns on issues that he disagrees with.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.242.37

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 4:28 PM 

Brite wrote: "The answer is obvious[;] it boils down to what one believes and is comfortable with in determining what is a command, example or necessary inference."

Brite appears to be saying that, given a passage in the New Testament, one man sees it as CENI and obeys it, another man does not see it as CENI and does not obey it, yet the views of both men are right, because they are "comfortable" with their own views. With Brite's reasoning, members of the mainstream Church of Christ are right to be baptized, because they believe baptism is essential for salvation. Likewise, members of the Southern Baptist church are right if they refuse baptism, because they believe baptism is not essential for salvation (remember, I was once an organist for a Southern Baptist church, so I know their doctrine; some members there had NEVER been baptized). One group of people says baptism is essential for salvation; another says it is not, yet both are supposed to be "right" because they are comfortable with their views? That makes no sense.

With that kind of thinking, there is no absolute right and no absolute wrong; every man is right in his own eyes. That, indeed, is "progressive" thinking.

 
 Respond to this message   
Tom Brite
(no login)
69.91.18.234

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 6:07 PM 

One of the problems that Mr. Crump has is his perception that he is educated enough to speak for others and enlighten us in what each of us believes. He is wrong in his perceptions in general, and wrong as to my beliefs, specifically.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.205.4

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 8:22 PM 

Oh good! Brite seems to imply there is absolute right and absolute wrong, but the progressives won't acknowledge that. Maybe Brite should tell us EXACTLY what his beliefs are, because he hasn't really given us a clear picture here (yes, I've given Brite an excellent opportunity to throw an insult here). Or maybe he'll emulate Dave and say, "I choose not to repeat myself," which is evasive. One minute Brite implies it's OK for people to choose what is CENI and what is not CENI, just as long as they are "comfortable" with their decision. The next minute he's implying that his beliefs are not understood, then he insults people because he doesn't make his beliefs crystal clear. The question is: Does Brite understand what he believes and does he believe what he understands? BTW, Brite never seems to be happy. I wonder why.

 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Bill Crump
(no login)
74.179.9.93

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 2:50 PM 

Pardon me, Sonny, but I have never condemned anyone to hell for using IM. Please do not put words in my mouth that I never used. Perhaps you assume that all those who oppose IM in worship damn all IM-users to hell. If so, then you have made a very poor assumption. You know what is said about those who make assumptions: ass/u/me.

If people would really damn others to hell for using multiple cups, then they put themselves in the place of God.

Since we are forbidden to go above what is written in the New Testament regarding matters of doctrine, and since the New Testament has commanded us to sing and make melody in our hearts, then to ADD a different type of music to the vocal music that has been explicitly commanded is to defy the New Testament. That seems so difficult for progressives to understand. Had Jesus said, "Worship Me with music," then we would have had carte blanche to use whatever kinds of music we wished; to condemn IM under that condition would be wrong. As it stands in reality, however, is a piano really a moot issue? No, it is not. Will God damn those who use a piano or other musical instruments to hell? Only He has the answer. But consider this: Would you really want to gamble your eternity on that issue? I urge people not to put themselves in a position of finding out.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sonny
(no login)
99.186.93.107

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 10:14 PM 

Brother Crump,

First, you have completely misapplied Brother Brite's logic in your first reply (as he has already briefly stated) to say he believes that everyone is o.k. and that interpreting Scripture does not matter. Furthermore, you have also projected a conversation that need not be when you start throwing Brother Dave into the mix on Brother Brite for no reason. You owe both Brother's an apology. Brother Brite is to be commended for being a mature spiritual man and not retaliating with the same juvenile behavior. This petty and childish behavior needs to stop.

Second, it would be polite and respectful to say Tom, Mr. Brite, Brother Brite, etc. instead of Brite...Brite...Brite. The tone is rude, condescending and arrogant. It would be like if he just said Crump this and Crump that intead of Bill, Mr. Crump, Dr. Crump, Brother Crump, etc.

Third, I am surprised, yet glad, to hear your tone is not one of condemnation toward those who use instruments in worship. Furthermore, thank you for correcting me in mistating your position/perspective. I did not intend to do such and will not in the future.

Fourth, your reasoning about better safe than sorry could be (and has been) used for the one cup topic and many other issues. Under this logic, better to use one cup and be safe than multiple ones and be sorry. Better to not eat in the building. Better to not ever say God's name. Better to not risk getting married. Better to not eat with sinners.

In fact, the Jewish rabbis taught under this conservative reasoning the following in the Talmud regarding the Sabbath and not working:
They couldn't wear dentures because it was a burden.
They couldn't look in a mirror for fear they might pluck a gray hair and the law forbids plucking.
Scribes could not write as lifting the pen was a burden.
Chicken eggs were thrown out because the chicken was working.

Basically, they made the Sabbath into something to dread.

In the first Century, Jesus has plenty to say to the Pharisees about their legalism and binding interpretations where God in His Word has not declared such as binding.

This is something for all Christians in all traditions to think about.

-Sonny

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
67.142.130.29

Re: How About You!

July 31 2011, 10:31 PM 

Jesus charged the Scribes and Pharisees (writers and deliverers of prayers or songs) with being hypocrites. Christ in Ezekiel 33 named them as Preachers, singers and instrument players.

In all of the Greek literature a hypocrite is a rhetorician who relies on his own sexy appearance and delivery style, singers and instrument players. These were His comparison to identify NOTHING AT ALL like people who listen to the Word of God for entertainment with no intention of believing or obeying: identical to the sermon and songs you heard this morning working their little heart out to make sure that Jesus is made silent before the slaughter.

[linked image]
[linked image]

Having that NEW preacher who can attract all of the butterlies is a laded burden or legalism.

Forcing people to listen to OTHERS sing and watch their testesteron slowly drain away is a LEGALISTIC BURDEN imposed on godly people.

Forcing people to listen to the lie about tithing or the LAW of laying by in store is a laded burden is legalism and is robbery.

No one would be so uninformed not to know that NOT doing these things is NOT legalism. No one really cares what you do if you have paid the price.

 
 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