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  

Don't get BURNED in the Morning: Come Praise God!

April 27 2016 at 1:40 AM
Sarge  (no login)
from IP address 23.127.32.146

(This original post submitted on April 24 2016, 6:40 AM)


The name Jesus used was "the Holy Spirit". Your argument is with Jesus.


Matthew 28:16-20 (NIV)
The Great Commission

16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Re: Don't get BURNED in the Morning: Come Praise God!

April 27 2016, 2:51 AM 

What was/is the name of "the Holy Spirit"?

Shouldn't we take into consideration Matt. 28:19 in its original text? For example, Eusebius (c. 260—c. 340) wrote about Christ saying to his disciples: "Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name."

What Christ said to his disciples who were with him at the time (according to the writings of Eusebius) matches perfectly the same name by which those outside of Christ are to be baptized. Here are a few passages that deal with baptism IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST:

Acts.2[38] ... Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ ...

Acts.8[16] ... only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts.10[48] ... he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Acts.19[5] ... they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.180.96

Re: Don't get BURNED in the Morning: Come Praise God!

April 27 2016, 11:01 AM 

ANTICHRIST is denying the ONE GOD the Father the SINGULAR Deity and ONE LORD Jesus who was filled with that DIVINE NATURE. God does not have three HEADS nor three bodies. That is well explained in many instances. For instance but they INSIST that Jesus did not have the ABILITY to say that He had been given authority REPRESENTING the two other "god" persons. Then, they insist that Peter was deaf and dumb for THINKING that HE HEARD Jesus say "baptize in the NAME (singular) of Jesus whom God MADE TO BE both Lord and Christ. In fact, Donnie notes just a few of the 100% Bible and church history understanding before the Pagan-Catholic "trinity." Even then, it was-is perfectly clear that if you baptize in the NAMES of father, son and spirit YOU must baptize or splash water THREE TIMES.

Eph. 5:20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God [Theos] and the Father
.....in the name of our Lord [Kurios] Jesus Christ;

Col. 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed,
.....do all in the name of the Lord Jesus,
.....giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Doesn't that include baptism? It may not matter if you refute baptism which means to be "Washed with water INTO the Word or INTO the School of Christ."

2Th. 1:12 That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified IN you, and ye in him,
.....according to the grace of our God
.....AND the Lord Jesus Christ.


Why do they claim that Paul was ignorant for putting the AND between God and His Christ? The HIRE Paul spoke about was "a living" which meant FOOD or what you EAT. The Jacob-cursed and God-abandoned Levites served by COURSES: when on duty they got a daily ration of food. They returned home the rest of the year.

Even THIS was authorized when they KEPT THE TRADITIONS or the WORDS of Christ, the LOGOS or regulative principle; opposite to rhetoric, singing or playing instruments.

Those who heap coals of fire on your head with a 20/20 vision aimed at 24/7 BURDEN LADING, cannot have missed this CENI which they claim DOES NOT EXIST. Paul is speaking for ALL civilized religious workers.

2Th. 3:6 Now we command you, brethren,
..... in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
.....that ye WITHDRAW yourselves from every brother
that walketh [while teaching, arguing, living] DISORDERLY,
.....and NOT after the TRADITION which he received of us.

dē-nuntĭo (-cĭo ), DENOUNCE

2Th. 3:7 For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us:
.....For we behaved not ourselves DISORDERLY among you;
2Th. 3:8 Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought;
.....but WROUGHT with LABOR and travail night and day,
.....that we might not be CHARGEABLE to any of you:
2Th. 3:9 Not because we have not power,
.....but to make ourselves an ENSAMPLE unto you to follow us.
2Th. 3:10 For even when we were with you,
.....this we COMMANDED you, that if any would not work,
.....neither should he eat.
2Th. 3:11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly,
.....working not at all, but are busybodies.
2Th. 3:12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ,
.....that with quietness they WORK, and eat their OWN bread.


2Tim. 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal,
.....The Lord knoweth them that are his.
.....And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

James 5:10 Take, my brethren, the prophets,
.....who have spoken in the name of the Lord,
.....for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.

There is only ONE OFFICE: Elders to teach that which HAD been taught. Evangelist to teach what Jesus commanded. Peter defines that holy scripture as the PROPHETS by the Spirit OF Christ and made certain or CERTIFIED by Jesus christ and left for our memory by eye-- and ear-- witnesses. There are NOT 2,000 year old prophets or apostles AS THEY CLAIM.

 
 Respond to this message   
Curly
(no login)
70.193.113.20

Bible shopping?

April 27 2016, 11:33 AM 

Donnie, just out on a whim?

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Re: Bible shopping?

April 28 2016, 2:21 AM 

Curly, I do research a lot when time permits.

We're known to quote Eusebius and other "church fathers" when we try to prove that the early Christians met on the first day weekly to observe the Lord's Supper; etc. So, why not as to why Matt. 28 (and not another passage) mentions a list of 3 entities that Trinity advocates use to defend the God-in-Three-Persons dogma?

There's much more to say about Matt. 28:19 and the writings of Eusebius, who was present at the council of Nicaea and was involved in the debates about Christ being God, etc., when the Trinitarian influence was spreading. (By the way, the Trinity doctrine was unheard of and unknown to God's followers in the O.T. era.)

In a number of his writings, he mentions "in my name" rather than "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit." As an example, in Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2, which is about the Jewish persecution of early Christians, we read:

But the rest of the apostles, who had been incessantly plotted against with a view to their destruction, and had been driven out of the land of Judea, went unto all nations to preach the Gospel, relying upon the power of Christ, who had said to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.”

At this point, I'm open-minded as to what the earliest manuscripts actually read vs. what our modern Bibles say in regard to "the [one] name."

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.15.242

Re: Don't get BURNED in the Morning: Come Praise God!

April 27 2016, 3:35 PM 

I've not heard of anyone who objected to being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, unless perhaps they thought that by doing so, they would be embracing the Trinity. Of course, Jesus did tell us to be baptized in those three "names."

Since the Holy Spirit has no "name" as such but is instead a designation, we must interpret "in the name of" to mean the same as "by the authority of," just as the expression "Stop in the name of the law" means the same as "Stop by the authority of the law." Since the "law" has no name as such, it stands to reason that the expression means "Stop by the authority of the law."

So when we're baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, we're baptized by the authority given through the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

What about those verses in Acts that only mention being baptized in the name of Jesus? Given what Jesus said about Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in Matt. 28:19, those "Jesus-only" verses are examples of synecdoche, a figure of speech in which a part represents the whole; there, Jesus represents the "whole" of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sarge
(no login)
68.74.186.218

Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 27 2016, 6:50 PM 



Baptism in the Name of Jesus Only

Before concluding, we need to address the Oneness Pentecostal idea that only certain words may be spoken during a baptismal ceremony (e.g., “I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ”). Oneness clergymen contend that should the statement be made, “I baptize you into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” it would be a violation of Scripture, and thus negate the validity of the immersion. This exhibits a lack of biblical information on this theme.

First, let us note the illogical consequences of such a doctrine. If a specific set of words is to be pronounced at the time of a baptism, exactly what are those words? A brief look at the New Testament will reveal that a variety of expressions are employed when the terms “baptize” and “name” are connected. Observe the following:

“... baptizing them into (eis) the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).
“... be baptized ... in (epi) the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38).
“... baptized into (eis) the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:16).
“... baptized in (en) the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 10:48).
“... baptized into (eis) the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 19:5).

These passages contain five variant phraseologies. Which one is to be pronounced at the time of the baptism, to the exclusion of the others? The truth of the matter is none of them has reference to any set of words to be pronounced at the time of baptism.

Second, the language is designed to express certain truths, not prescribe a ritualistic set of words. If the phrase “in the name of Christ” implies the saying of those words in connection with the act to which they are enjoined, what would Colossians 3:17 require?—“And whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Accordingly, one would have to preface every word and act with the phrase “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Such highlights the absurdity of the Oneness position.

Wayne Jackson

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.180.96

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 27 2016, 8:21 PM 

Before concluding, we need to address the Oneness Pentecostal idea that only certain words may be spoken during a baptismal ceremony (e.g., “I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ”). Oneness clergymen contend that should the statement be made, “I baptize you into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit,” it would be a violation of Scripture, and thus negate the validity of the immersion. This exhibits a lack of biblical information on this theme.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit are NOT names of people. If you insist then tell us the NAME of the Breath of God.

What would make one so terminally arrogant that a preacher must lay one hand on the candidate and point one into heaven and PRONOUNCE some magical formula.

Acts 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
Acts 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Acts 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.


The enuch made the ONLY confession. Many (mega) are called or invited but few (mikros) are chosen.

THE COMMAND EASILY UNDERSTOOD FROM SIMPLE GRAMMAR.

“... baptizing them into (eis) the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).


The singular MAN Jesus of Nazareth was God's visual aid antithetical to the always pagan trinity. ALL authority was vested in Jesus of Nazareth. NAME is singular and not nameS

NOT A COMMAND BUT THE EXAMPLE of Peter explaining the COMMAND.

“... be baptized ... in (epi) the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38).


The "Demonstrations" OF Aphrahat.

Matthew 28:19. Now thus is faith; when a man believes in God the Lord of all, Who made the heavens and the earth and the seas and all that is in them; and He made Adam in His image; and He gave the Law to Moses; He sent of His Spirit upon the prophets;

He sent moreover His Christ into the world. Furthermore that a man should believe in the resurrection of the dead; and should furthermore also believe in the sacrament of baptism. This is the faith of the Church of God. And (it is necessary) that a man should separate himself from the observance of hours and Sabbaths and moons and seasons, and divinations and sorceries and Chaldaean arts and magic, from fornication and from festive music, from vain doctrines, which are instruments of the Evil One, from the blandishment of honeyed words, from blasphemy and from adultery. And that a man should not bear false witness, and that a man should not speak with double tongue. These then are the works of the faith which is based on the true Stone which is Christ, on Whom the whole building is reared up.







    
This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 184.63.180.96 on Apr 27, 2016 8:23 PM


 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.15.242

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 27 2016, 11:49 PM 

That's why it's best to put any hang-ups about the Trinity aside, do as Jesus said, and be baptized in the name of (meaning by the authority of) the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 28 2016, 12:54 AM 

Better yet: leave the "Trinity" concept out of this. That passage does not prove the validity of the Trinity dogma -- the man-invented God-in-Three-Persons dogma. A mere mention of three entities, with one entity which is not a "person," does not validate TrinitarianISM.

Besides, the passage speaks of a singular name, not a multiplicity of names. "IN THE NAME OF" (singular) is a key factor in understanding the passage. I agree: it is by "the authority of." However, it is clearly stated in the preceding verse when Jesus said: "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." That power was given to Jesus by God the Father.

So, there's no argument against those passages in Acts that clearly state "in the name of Jesus Christ." Remember the authority bestowed upon Jesus the Son by Whom? Of course, by the only true God the Father!!!

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.179.15.242

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 28 2016, 10:08 AM 

Perhaps there are some folks who've become so brainwashed against the "Trinity" that they oppose baptism "in the name of [i.e., by the authority of] the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit," though Jesus commanded it in Matt. 28:19. Seeing those three designations, all that comes to their minds is, "Trinity! Trinity! That abominable ole pagan Trinity! Jesus was wrong to tell us to be baptized in the name of what amounts to be the Trinity! No way! The baptism-in-the-name-of-Jesus-only route is the correct way to go!"

We should not allow narrow-minded prejudice and hate to prevent us from following Jesus' command to be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 29 2016, 3:13 AM 

Bill,

"By the authority of" is not the issue here. No one is disagreeing or denying that. But just make sure you fully understand that God the Father gave Jesus the "authority" (John 5:27); that it was also the Father that gave Jesus "all power" (Matt. 28:18).

Neither is "in the name of" (singular) the issue until someone suggests 3 names -- I think you've done just that.

Either name (one in Matt. 28; the other in Acts) is scriptural -- that is NOT the issue here.

The issue here is that the text in Matt. 28 is being used to defend and promote the Trinity dogma:

1) That the Father is God [the only one that the Scripture supports];
2) That Jesus the Son OF God is God [no scripture supports this belief] and
3) That the "Holy Spirit" OF God is God [no scripture supports this belief].

The brainwashing is not in being against the Trinity dogma which the Scripture does not support. Rather, the brainwashing is in believing the pagan Trinity made into a Christian doctrine. As I've said before, I've been brainwashed into accepting the man-made creed that the Father is God ... that Jesus is God ... that God's holy spirit is God ... and voila! Three Gods as one God for some "mysterious" reason!!!

Now I can say that I've been un-brainwashed.

Please don't tell me that you're accepting Matt. 28 and that you're rejecting the passages in Acts.


 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 28 2016, 1:49 AM 

Thanks, Sarge, for quoting from Wayne Jackson's brief article.

The only variances I've noted are:

(1) Baptism in the name of the Father, Son and holy Spirit
------------------ and ---------------------
(2) Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ

... and that in Matt. 28, it was Jesus' commission to his disciples while he was living on earth with them...
... but that in Acts and thereafter, it was a directive when and after the church was established.

The holy Spirit of God (a.k.a. God's holy Spirit) is not a person, definitely not a separate person from the only true God the Father ... definitely not a separate person from God's Son Jesus Christ. Surprise, surprise!!! Nobody has provided an answer yet to the question: What is the name of God's holy spirit?

Keep in mind that a spirit is never a person. Man's spirit is not a separate person from man. God's Spirit, holy as it is, is not a person separate from God. God's spirit is spoken of as God's power or God's breath or God's mind.

Although the pronouncement of EITHER NAME in baptism is scriptural, the list of three (3) entities mentioned as ONE name in Matt. 28 does not prove the validity of Trinitarian-ISM.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sarge (Sorry It's a Position and A Name)
(no login)
68.74.186.218

Time to Dip Out!

April 28 2016, 9:43 AM 



When you question and tear down the KJV Bible it's time for me to go. That's just the way I was raised.

Goodbye!




 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Re: Time to Dip Out!

April 29 2016, 3:50 AM 

Nothing to worry about, Sarge. I am not tearing down the KJV Bible. In fact, it has remained as my favorite version. (It's a bit noticeable, though, that you've been quoting from the NIV ... a lot. But that's OK.)

You should know by now that I do as much research as possible when time permits. I'd call it studying in depth when I find it worthwhile to try to learn what the early "church fathers" had to say about what the early Christians believed and practiced. Polycarp ... Eusebius ... Tertullian ... Origen ... et al?

We're here to study.

In the 1st century, it was Christ who established His church. The Roman Catholic Church has evolved from there. And when did that segment of the "Christian" Church officially become the "Catholic Church" or "The Roman Catholic Church"? 4th to 6th century?

In the Old Testament, there was not the Trinity concept (of God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit). Actually, there was no Trinity concept in the New Testament church, either. So, we really ought to study the history of the Trinity, its invention, its evolution [just like the evolution of the R.C.C.], and how it's been widely accepted in Christendom. There's such a thing as fact-checking in politics and among politicians. This should be even more so (truth-checking) in what and how "Christians" have been taught.

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.180.96

Re: Thanks Wayne, Again.

April 28 2016, 10:28 AM 

That seems clear but the latter day trinitarians treat Matthew 28 as one of the FORMULATIONS which THEY must speak. Let me repeat your "formula"

Matthew 28 is what Jesus COMMANDED those with a GO button to do after He returned as HOLY SPIRIT and poured out what you see and hear. Jesus used NAME singular.

Peter was a DISCIPLE like 5 year olds because he attended synagogue where the pattern was to PREACH the Word--especially the prophets--by READING the Word. ALL ages can understand that so you don't need a "youther" to replace the "elders" commanded to teach that which has been taught.

Peter understood the DIRECT COMMAND to be TAUGHT as IN THE NAME of Jesus Christ. NAME means NAME SINGULAR. The command is to CALL UPON THE NAME of Jesus and REQUEST that HE give us A holy spirit or A good conscience, consciousness or a CO-PERCEPTION able to READ and HEAR.

1Pet. 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer [request FOR] of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
1Pet. 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.
1Pet. 4:1 Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;
1Pet. 4:2 That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the WILL of God.


We worship IN THE SPIRIT in contrast to IN THE FLESH. The Kingdom does not COME with religious observations: the kingdom is within you. WE SPEAK that which is written for our learning BUT we ODE and PSALLO in the Spirit where YOU cannot see me WORSHIP nor can you LEAD me into worship. What YOU mean is that YOU dogmatically and with ELDERS AUTHORITY force ME to worship YOU or flee from Babylon.

Col. 3:16 Let the WORD of Christ [Spirit] dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
Col. 3:17 And WHATEVER ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.


The WORD OF CHRIST or SPIRIT or WILL OF THE LORD is spelled CENI.

SPEAKING which is opposite to ODE uses THE WORD OF CHRIST: that is SPEAKING in the NAME of Jesus Christ. Jesus commanded TEACHING that which HE commanded to be taught: Peter explains that as the PROPHETS by the Spirit OF Christ and the Prophecies made more certain by supernatural signs and left for OUR memory by the Eye-- and Ear-- witnesses. That record is NOT subject to private interpretation or FURTHER EXPOUNDING. Silly praise songs do not even PRETEND to further exp;ound that which is written.

What's the fuss: the trinitarians have no Purpose Drive to GO and INVITE the lost spirits who will never show up in your mega-million dollar Temple of Doom.




 
 Respond to this message   
Dr. Peter Boghossian
(Login DrPeterBoghossian)
67.140.247.183

What is faith?

May 21 2016, 1:05 PM 

Donnie, What is faith?

Ken, I am looking for an simple plain answer.

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
184.63.180.96

Let the INVENTOR of TRIAS explain it.

April 27 2016, 8:42 PM 

Theophilus to Autolycus who first used the word "trias"

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

[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   
Donnie Cruz
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

God the Father ... Gave Jesus Christ All Authority/Power

May 1 2016, 1:37 AM 

Who gave Jesus Christ the authority/power?

It was God the Father (Matt. 28:18; Ephesians 1:17) who gave Jesus "all power." It is also in Scripture "... that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:36).

These and other passages clearly prove that God was the giver of "all power [or authority]" to Jesus. Clearly: Jesus did not make himself both Lord and Christ -- God the Father did that. Contrary to the confusing assertions that Jesus is [also] the Father and that Jesus is [also] God. Both of these assertions among others are not Scripture-based at all.

Another passage to consider is in Philippians 2:9 -- "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:"

But there are those among us who underestimate or deride "the name of Jesus Christ" -- the name "above every name":

Acts.2[38] ... Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ ...

Acts.8[16] ... only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts.10[48] ... he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Acts.19[5] ... they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
74.240.211.81

Re: God the Father ... Gave Jesus Christ All Authority/Power

May 1 2016, 10:21 AM 

There's certainly nothing wrong with being baptized in the name of Jesus only, since verses in Acts so authorize that. But being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as Jesus so commanded in Matt. 28:19, just seems far more...complete.

But there are those among us who underestimate or deride Jesus' mentioning "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" in regard to baptism because, as prisoners of their own prejudices and biases, they see those designations as the "Trinity" which must be rejected.

 
 Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 3 4 56 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