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  
Confused
(no login)
98.193.241.39

Trinity?

November 29 2013, 1:28 AM 

If the God of the Old Testament does not change, why would he send Jesus to steal his thunder? I never read in the gospels where Jesus was looking to be worshipped the way the CoC and most Christians do. Would God the Father not get "jealous" that the Holy Spirit and Jesus are elevated to equall status? The God of the OT seemed unwilling to share the spotlight. It also seems the Father and the Son have two different takes on humanity and morals.

Why would God feel the need to reveal himself to Homo sapiens after man had been living on the earth for several hundred thousand years? Only the past 6000 or so years(after the invent of agriculture, which was the first chance we even had to think about a God) has there been a covenant with us. Then it was only 1% of the population that even had a chance to hear the original message. Then around 2000 years ago the message gets flipped on its head. It goes from kill the Gentiles to love them. Stone a guy picking up sticks on the Sabbath to, not that big of a deal to work on Sabbath. I don't get why the Israelites did not fear God in Exodus other than the miracles really did not happen. I do get why they would want to kill Jesus for changing there tradition. I get why they would want to kill the apostles for what they considered blasphemy in claiming Jesus as God from their perspective.

After the death of Jesus, it was about 1400 years before even the first Native American heard the word of God. I don't see how the one that converted at say 1450 would be saved when the one that might have at 1380 did not get the chance. If you drink the Kool aid and accept anything that you read in the Bible it will all be true. That is what Mulslims do, Mormans, Hindu, etc. The girl getting sacrificed to the sun In the Aztec culture probably believed in why she was being killed. Look at North Korea now, they don't know anything about Jesus, only the supreme leader.

My point to all this is, from the first man that realized he was a man, how many people have lived that have never had a chance to hear the word to be saved? Why do people in the church feel the need to argue about the smallest details of worship when it is not the point of salvation.? Is playing an piano during worship worth a split? When I drive down the road and see six churches from one spot, I see a lot of redundant waste.

 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
98.87.120.207

Answer to Confused

November 29 2013, 8:36 AM 

Your first paragraph suggests that the common connector between the Old Testament and the New is the concept of Word.

It is the message that God wants us to accept. That is why He sent His Son--to reveal hidden meanings of the Old Testament, to look beneath the surface and get the real message, or Word. They key to the Old and New Testament was the love of God transcending place, culture, and time so that the incidences of history might be woven together to form a perfect understanding. Law is part of that Word, at least in the beginning (Old Testament), so that it regulated the Israelites so that they might know relations between humans were a great part of being God-like. At the base of these commandments is the respect of God and His worship (the first four commandments), and the second section (the last six commandments). Paul says that these commandments show us how far from God we can wander, and convince us that we are imperfect, and so in need of the favor that He shows us through His salvation.

God does not work independent of humans, so if we devoid ourselves of belief in the absolute sovereignty of God, accepting the partnership of humanity itself, we realize that humanity was not at the stage of development at which the intrusion of God personally in the form of a Savior would make a difference. In other words, humans were not ready to accept the Christ until the fullness of time. This fullness of time occurred in the first century of the Christian era, when tribalism was broken down, and the first universalism of mankind (from a human perspective) arose. This was the time that Christianity could arise, and it suggested that all men were equal in the sight of God, and worthy of His salvation. At first, the first Gnostics did not accept the Old Testament for some of the reasons you suggested, but later on the early Christians realized that the New Testament needed to sit on some foundation earlier than its own time. The Holy Scriptures did endorse the support of the Old Testament, so the early writers went about in their writings (again, the Word) to harmonize the Old with the New Testament. This is where the deeper aspects of the Law and Prophets were revealed, so that for the first time, humanity might realized the hidden message of the Old Testament. The search that began with the Old Testament, with the many unfulfilled prophecies and unrealized conditions, was ending with the revealing of hidden truths (Word) that for centuries had been hidden.

Worship of God did not begin with agriculture, but even with the hunting and gathering societies of proto-history. Religious symbols have been found in the graves of ancient man, indicating religious awareness long before the arising of agricultural societies. Even the hunters of old recognized the existence of a supreme being, and honored the meaning of life.

I detect that the church has not spent enough time on this topic--that of the immaturity of Old Testament point of view--to the extent that its members are very confused about the proper relationship of Old and New. The new church movements relegate any intellect to the waste can and so leave some of the brighter people out in the cold, while their own fantasies consist of pomp and circumstance. Thoughtful people are left with a lot of unanswered questions, and so fall to the wayside. For a moment, the new church movements look successful, then collapse under the weight of their own ignorance.

You do reject the absolute sovereignty of God in a sense, but you have the admirable trait of fairness. This is indeed the reason that there are a number of churches in just a few blocks of one another. Some of them do not as you, question the unfairness of God, but just endorse it. I believe that one can place God in a box, and suggest that in all His plan for the ages, that he cannot in the short run or long run be fair. Remember that Jesus Christ (not separate from His teaching or His Word) is the vehicle by which God instruments His fairness.

God will not destroy or condemn someone for situations beyond that person's control.


 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.245.42

Re: Trinity?

November 29 2013, 9:13 AM 

When Christians argue over whether or not Jesus literally came down from heaven...

When Christians argue over whether or not Jesus was the Word Who was with God and was God in the beginning...

When Christians argue over whether or not the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate "persons"...

When Christians argue over whether or not Jesus is eternal, whether or not Jesus is God...

When Christians denounce as blasphemers and antichrists those who do not believe exactly as they do...

When Christians manifest "selective theology" and "selective faith" by deciding which passages of Scripture to believe and which to reject as "spurious" or unappealing...

No wonder you are so confused!.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Trinity?

November 29 2013, 12:51 PM 

A good summary, Bill, of your personal vendetta for those who are aware of and question your selective ACQUIRED beliefs, popular and well-established they may be.

The author of this thread already had so many profound questions "when I was looking for Madison's website to possibly see about visiting." ... and found this.

Your suggestion that the author of this thread would not be "so confused" if it weren't for this forum's discussion of the Trinity's origin and its blind acceptance characterizes your sophomoric behavior.

Again: If you really want to pursue this issue, I would redirect you to the thread you yourself initiated: "Biblical Proof That Jesus Lived in Heaven Before Coming to Earth." There are NUMEROUS UNANSWERED questions still waiting for you.

 
 Respond to this message   
Confused
(no login)
98.193.241.39

Re: Answer to Confused

November 29 2013, 1:09 PM 

Scripture, so you do not have to be baptized to be saved? If you can't be condemned to hell for things you cannot control, then why teach your child about Jesus at all? You would give him the chance of hell by evening telling him about Jesus and the Bible in the first place.

Secondly, the Old Testament does not read as a book of love to me, I read it as a book of laws and punishment. I keep bringing up the people the Israelites killed in war, not as a fact they should not of fought, but a question to why they would kill the children and why God would tell them to kill the children.

If we get our morals from the Bible, why do we not just totally level a country like Iraq when we go in. We do what the children of Israel under the direction of God did not do. Not only do we at least attempt to not kill children, we try and not kill civilians no matter what the age or sex.

When you are asked what the most evil act in the modern era is, it is usually stated as being Nazi Germany and Hitler. What did Hitler do that the Israelites did not already do in Canaan? If only Hitler had said Jesus had stopped him on the road to Damascus. I say this to illustrate that If you say God tells you to do something you get a free pass for the outcome.

When Jesus said it is finished on the cross, it had just begun. Paul would come and set up most of the rules Jesus had not, that Christians argue about today.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Answer to Confused

November 29 2013, 3:08 PM 

In response to your first paragraph [only], I don't think that was Scripture's implication. It is truth that one outside of Christ still cannot enter God's kingdom or be added to His church without repentance and baptism. But "God will not destroy or condemn someone..." -- not in terms of the coming Judgment and torment in hell for the wicked -- but in the sense that man today is left with options even to reject God and continue to exist [breathe].

 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
98.87.120.207

Answer

November 29 2013, 3:29 PM 

I have to admire you for bringing up the questions that there is nothing but silence about in our assemblies (churches). That silence is the result of churches being within a church--in other words an agreement of silence about some very in-depth types of questions. The failure to address these has led to an unbelieving population. You do bring out some very fundamental topics much in need of discussion. I'm sorry that you don't find someone in a local church to address these issues. (Maybe this is the reason that Concerned Members has been referred to as a "virtual church.)

God does not want individuals to hurt one another, even on this earth. It is in order to tell them of Jesus to right the wrongs that one person does to another person. This is the reason for teaching Jesus. God does not want us to annihilate one another. We have the command to preach the gospel to the whole world, and this we do, for the salvation of the world in a righteous sense, and also for individual salvation. But we are reminded of Jesus' statement that "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." It is not our right to set in God's seat of judgment. I think that many do that, and therefore try to annihilate his Word since they place forgiveness restrictions on His Will (Word).

So many condemn Christianity of a narrow sort. First, we must learn to understand the scriptures, then we are qualified to appraise them, if we can. But we cannot in total confidence, since we were not at the time and place where Old Testament events occurred. You might imagine, for example, that each community has warring tribes--the only way to avoid total annihilation is to strike back. This seemed to be the climate in the days of David. Jesus said "turn the other cheek," and this implies that we are not to continue the cycle of violence, but it would be difficult to disprove that we should defend ourselves, such as the "just war." But we should refrain from trashing the Bible.

When you say that the Old Testament is not a book of love, this is probably because you have failed to "Christianize" it. If you look at the depravity of the citizens of Israel through much of their history, you can see that God has to be a God of love, to continue with them, and to make way for the Savior of the World. All culminates in the great ministry of Jesus and his teaching (Word) here below. Then we can understand rightfully the Old Testament. It is hidden grace and love.

"If the first (covenant) had been perfect, there would have been no place for the other" is the New Testament reference to the need for a new covenant to replace the Mosaic covenant (Law of Moses, OT). For the very reasons you mentioned, we have a new covenant. What you need to do is to replace that old covenant with the new covenant. Then you will be able to "know" God and have Him in your "heart."

When you mention leveling Iraq, you are attributing to the church the actions of the United States Government and its decision makers. The church has no foreign policy other than the love of God. If you say that the church endorsed the Iraq invasion, then you must show that all church members did, and plenty did not. You cannot judge Christ's teaching on the basis of what the US Government has done.

There is a huge difference in what Hitler did and what we read about in the Old Testament. First, Hitler returned violence for violence, and often violence for good will. Second, under the condition of Canaan at Abraham and David's time, the mere survival of the Decalogue (Law of Moses) was under threat, even the extinguishment of all civility and morality, and it is fortunate that the kernel of love survived the hostility and onslaught of a pagan population.

You seem to differentiate the teaching of Jesus with those of Paul. I can go along with this somewhat, but it appears clear that even as people misunderstand the history of the Old Testament (which I have discussed), they also misunderstand the teachings of Paul. Paul is dealing with some very disorganized church members, as well as attacks from conventional Jewish people, and patriarchal Romans. What He did accomplish, was that regardless of what one thinks about Jesus, Paul was able to cogently (intelligently) bring together the teachings of Christ that they be digestible to mixed populations. And he was very successful.

That is our task today, as well.

We can all come to faith in Christ Jesus, if we only understood Him (His Word).

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.203.189

Re: Trinity?

November 29 2013, 3:55 PM 

Let's not make this a "personal vendetta," because these arguments are not unique to this web site. In fact, these and many similar arguments have been raging for centuries. These particular arguments have clustered here and have been festering for a while.

A fair number of the so-called "religious" arguments that consume Christians really have no purpose other than to see who can be "king of the hill," who can top the other person, who gets the proverbial "last word," who is able to argue the longest. In short, many "religious" arguments are really nothing more than I'm-right-and-you're-wrong puerile exercises that go nowhere, because the minds of the people arguing on both sides are not about to change. Those riding the fence often remain on the fence.

If a person believes in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, yet he rejects the Trinity as such, does he get a ticket to heaven? If that person instead embraces the Trinity as such, does he get a ticket to hell? Does it really matter one way or another?

If a person believes that Jesus was not the Word and didn't exist until 2,000 years ago, does he get a ticket to heaven? If that person instead believes Jesus was the Word and is eternal, does he get a ticket to hell? Does it really matter one way or another?

Some people vehemently argue about such topics and as much as consign to hell anyone who disagrees with them, but when specifically asked if this or that belief will lead to paradise or to torment, those same people cop out and say, "Let God be the Judge." If the Scriptures explictly condemn a certain belief or doctrine, then it is wise to avoid that belief/doctrine. If the Scriptures say in so many words, "Do it this way," then it is wise to do as the Scriptures say. If, on the other hand, the Scriptures do not outline specific consequences for believing a certain way, then how we believe is a matter of choice; no one has any scriptural basis for criticism.



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

Bill, you are THAT persistent about your ACQUIRED beliefs!!! (You've presented your arguments repeatedly [NUMEROUS times already--I've lost track of the count]. And you've done it once again in your post above.)

It is your "personal vendetta" because you're involved in this discussion: (1) here with us at ConcernedMembers NOW in this 21st century; (2) NOT with those at other religious fora, to my knowledge; (3) NOT with those in preceding centuries.

I believe the author of this thread would appreciate your willingness to discuss and answer the specific questions and issues brought up ... and be relevant.


    
This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 99.177.250.192 on Nov 29, 2013 4:32 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
98.87.120.207

Answer

November 29 2013, 11:36 PM 

Thanks for the insight, Donnie.

I like your response, Confused, since I think you just admitted that one needs to be baptized to be saved; and you suggest that some will go to hell, and that would imply that some will go to heaven. See your paragraph 1.

You do need to see the love of God in the Old Testament. When you do you will "know" God, and His Will can rest in your heart. So read it carefully, and see how God gives Israel a second chance, then a third, and then. . . . and then the Christ He gives them.

Love so learned from the Old Testament would never make a parking lot of Iraq.

You must reread the Old Testament as in the eyes of Jesus, that He came not to destroy the law and the prophets but to fulfill them (give them real meaning). Then when you come to the same conclusion as He did, you will appreciate the Old Testament. Never do I hear Jesus talk about extinguishing whole tribes and communities of people. The Law was given because of the hardness of their heart. Read the analysis of Paul, particularly in Romans and Galatians.

Paul then delivered us to the light, to free ourselves from misunderstanding the Old Covenant entirely. If people argue about the writings of Paul it shows that even as they misunderstand the Old Covenant, so they misunderstand Paul.

 
 Respond to this message   
Confused
(no login)
74.177.56.90

Re: Answer

November 30 2013, 12:12 AM 

My goal in all this, even if it seems 99% atheist, is to have a set of values I can look my son in the eyes and state without feeling guilt. I am letting it all out so when I am asked by my son, I am not repeating things that are not reasonable or believable. science will do nothing other than chip away at miracles and creation as time passes. If I don't believe 99% the story I am telling my son about life and death, I don't want to tell him anything. So thank you for putting up with questions that may seem like they come with an agenda. Even if I maybe don't get saved, the info I pass along might save someone else.

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.240.211.115

Re: Trinity?

November 30 2013, 9:30 AM 

Donnie, regardless of the thread or its topic, your persistently belligerent attitude toward others who disagree with you is unseemly. I wonder when, or if, you will ever find closure.

 
 Respond to this message   
confused
(no login)
66.87.19.207

Re: Trinity?

December 2 2013, 10:31 AM 

The arguments made on this site are made between members of the church of christ as I see it. I could be wrong. These are people whom seem united against what happened at Madison or other cofc churches recently. Yet even they cant agree on much and the way I see it, the church will continue to divide. Jesus did not dictate many of these rules they argue over. It was mainly Paul or Peter. Both of whom could have been putting words in Jesus's mouth.

I am confused on most things when dealing with the Bible, but what I am not confused about is that if Jesus where the real deal, his main point he made to the religious Jews was that loving God and other men are all salvation is about. Not laws and tradition. I see christians today putting laws above love. The arguements on this forum are examples. I can believe in God without believing in the the bible. I can worship God without going to church. The way I see it is reading the Bible and going to sunday school almost made me atheist.

I am still confused, but I realize we all are to some degree.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: Trinity?

December 3 2013, 12:50 AM 

The Scripture teaches what one must do to become a Christian, including the necessity of being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:37 and 38) in order to receive forgiveness of sins in His blood and to be refreshed (Acts 3:19).

Then begins the walk in newness of life as a Christian (Romans 6:4) and as a disciple of Christ. The Christian must remain faithful to the end in order to receive the crown of life (Rev. 2:10).

In Christian living, I concur: it is about the love of God and neighbor. "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). This is qualified in James 2:8 -- "If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well."

Meanwhile, as a disciple (generally defined as "learner") of Christ, there are numerous passages that warn us of false teachings and doctrines and vain philosophies. We must be careful about human creeds, beliefs and teachings that are often acquired or inherited from various sources.

Overall, doctrinal differences just cannot be avoided, even among "birds of a feather." It is the "nature of the beast," as commonly stated. I have benefited personally by being involved in the discussion here of different religious topics.

 
 Respond to this message   
Coach
(no login)
108.230.197.238

PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

November 30 2013, 10:09 AM 

What's the world coming to? Be proud of how God made you, MAN or WOMAN.!

http://news.yahoo.com/preferred-pronouns-gain-traction-us-colleges-064437446.html


 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
99.177.250.192

Re: PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

December 1 2013, 10:19 AM 

Alright, Coach, it is an interesting article, although it may not be related to the subject of this thread (I think). I didn't read it entirely, but I noted:
"This is not about young people in the U.S. over the last 20 years kind of coming out of the woodwork and making up labels that aren't real," Goodwin said. "This is a real variation among humans, period."
The word "period! That reminds me of the emphasis made by the U.S. president, Barack Hussein Obama, at every "promise" he made regarding ObamaCare -- "if you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan, period." That's a promise [a lie?] in one statement; there are others.

So, what's the U.S. government coming to? happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.107.21

Re: PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

December 1 2013, 5:53 PM 

if you like your Bible-based plan, you will be able to keep your Bible-based plan, period."

First we are going to PASS a new style of music based on a new reading of the Bible-based plan and THEN you are going to READ it. happy.gif

Then you will discover that describes the MARK OF THE BEAST.

But, you said: "If you like your acapella plan you can keep your acappella plan." But, first you have to read the plan which SAID, "We did NOT say that we would not impose instrumental music on you AFTER you have paid for the House of Holy Prostitution."

http://www.piney.com/Jim.Hackney.Instrumental.Music.in.Worship.html

And NOW North Boulevard in Murfreesboro.

 
 Respond to this message   
Coach
(no login)
108.230.197.238

Re: PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

December 1 2013, 6:15 PM 

Ken, call the dogs off. There is NO coon in that tree. Your dogs have lost the scent years ago. happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.107.21

Re: PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

December 1 2013, 6:41 PM 

My daughter and I and 3 dogs went down a long walk along the old county road now my property. As we came over the hill and looked into the next valley we aroused a horse but I remarked that I missed the sounds of the coon dogs who used to come up to greet us: they used to hunt up and down the valley at night. We discussed it and noted that it had been 17 years and the old dogs were long gone. A yesterday of men hunting coons and drinking shine at night and we will never get it back.

I would notice that if you give up the singing and clapping your periods will soon stop.

 
 Respond to this message   
Coach
(no login)
108.230.197.238

Re: PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

December 1 2013, 9:02 PM 

Ken, I am a Coach of Killen. I live near the Killen Drugs and the Killen Park. My Killen IP tells me so.

You my friend are on a COLD TRAIL. I do have a cycle...and it's a Harley Davidson. happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.107.21

Re: PGPs (preferred gender pronouns)

December 1 2013, 9:31 PM 

I live where ever Exede tells me I live.

 
 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