A Concerned Member Of The Church (Rom. 3:24)

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

October 11th, 2010, 6:00 am #11

I am accusing us all of sin, because the Bible does (Rom. 3:23). The reason for specifically mentioning his sin is because of his audacity to post a "wall of shame" based on worship differences.

We all have sin / shame, thus, we all need grace / redemption through Christ.

-Sonny Sinner
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Sonny,

You initially stated:[/color]
I am questioning how this site can speak against instrumental music but not years of [you name it: "sin"] by a gospel preacher.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]It is OK to question "how this site can speak against instrumental music." That's why we are discussing instrumental music. This site is constantly aware and is striving to make readers aware that the operation of mechanical devices in the assembly is not only controversial and unnecessary but is also divisive.

But to bring up "years of [you name it: 'sin'] by a gospel preacher" is gossip -- this site is not the "Inquirer" or any other gossip publication. Is this some story you've been following or keeping up for years now? How can you afford this financially {maybe you are wealthy) and waste your time on this story? Or, was this some story you heard from someone ... who heard it from someone else ... who heard it from someone else, etc.?

Now you are saying, "I am accusing us all of sin.... We all have sin / shame, thus, we all need grace / redemption through Christ." That is a much better message than singling out one individual.

What changed your mind?
[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 14th, 2010, 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

October 11th, 2010, 12:01 pm #12

No real, full name--no credibility whatsoever.
"No real, full name--no credibility whatsoever" ?

Sort of like the anonymously written book of Hebrews.

Credibility comes from the words written, not from the demand for a name.

Like the Democrats of today, challenge credibility when the issues, facts and truth are against you.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

October 11th, 2010, 1:59 pm #13

Hebrews has credibility; a gossipper does not. Comparing Hebrews and a gossipper is like comparing apples and oranges. Internet gossippers not only post hearsay, they often refuse to give their full, real names; hence, they have no credibility.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

October 11th, 2010, 2:19 pm #14

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Sonny,

You initially stated:[/color]
I am questioning how this site can speak against instrumental music but not years of [you name it: "sin"] by a gospel preacher.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]It is OK to question "how this site can speak against instrumental music." That's why we are discussing instrumental music. This site is constantly aware and is striving to make readers aware that the operation of mechanical devices in the assembly is not only controversial and unnecessary but is also divisive.

But to bring up "years of [you name it: 'sin'] by a gospel preacher" is gossip -- this site is not the "Inquirer" or any other gossip publication. Is this some story you've been following or keeping up for years now? How can you afford this financially {maybe you are wealthy) and waste your time on this story? Or, was this some story you heard from someone ... who heard it from someone else ... who heard it from someone else, etc.?

Now you are saying, "I am accusing us all of sin.... We all have sin / shame, thus, we all need grace / redemption through Christ." That is a much better message than singling out one individual.

What changed your mind?
[/color]
Sonny's gossip is like the following: Person A identifies serious problems at a nuclear power plant and blows the whistle. Person B also works at the plant but does not like what Person A has done. In an attempt to discredit Person A, Person B starts a rumor that Person A has his integrity outside the power plant in question and thus cannot be trusted, and the gossip spreads.

The whistle is blown about the unscriptural Change Movement that is taking place in some Church of Christ congregations, one aspect of which is the implementing of instrumental music. Sonny does not like what the messenger he is accusing has done, so in an attempt to discredit him, Sonny starts the rumor.

Pretty cheap shot! Ignore those who spread hearsay and gossip.
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 11th, 2010, 4:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 11th, 2010, 10:30 pm #15

(The following is a reply to both brothers Crump and Cruz).

I guess it is o.k. [...] to follow and report on stories about churches AND MINISTERS related to the sin (?) of instrumental music without being accused of wasting time, nor being wealthy, but it's not for Sonny to [...] report ... sin [of others except his own].

The readers can decide for themselves credibility, and what is fact, what is fiction.

I wanted to give you men time to draw your conclusions and make your typical bullying remarks, which is why I withheld my full name at first. I knew how you guys would play this.

My name is Sonny Elliot. I suppose now I must give my social security number and home address or I am a "coward" in Dr. Crumps eyes

[Remarks not conducive to "Christian" reading here ... ... ... deleted.]

-Sonny
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 12th, 2010, 5:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 11th, 2010, 11:27 pm #16

In the post that Brother Cruz edited (left out), unless he edits this one as well, I reveal my full name, and also more details, which refute Brother Crump's claims of hearsay and gossip.

I should have known.

-Sonny
Quote
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 12th, 2010, 6:30 am #17

(The following is a reply to both brothers Crump and Cruz).

I guess it is o.k. [...] to follow and report on stories about churches AND MINISTERS related to the sin (?) of instrumental music without being accused of wasting time, nor being wealthy, but it's not for Sonny to [...] report ... sin [of others except his own].

The readers can decide for themselves credibility, and what is fact, what is fiction.

I wanted to give you men time to draw your conclusions and make your typical bullying remarks, which is why I withheld my full name at first. I knew how you guys would play this.

My name is Sonny Elliot. I suppose now I must give my social security number and home address or I am a "coward" in Dr. Crumps eyes

[Remarks not conducive to "Christian" reading here ... ... ... deleted.]

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

2. If someone worships God with a piano, yet does not commit adultery, can they be forgiven? (I understand this is assuming/implying that the piano is a sin.)

3. If someone worships acappella, does not commit adultery, but does not show mercy to others, can they be forgiven? (James 2:12 and 4:11-12 warn not to judge without mercy.)

I ended up beginning another post with these questions because it was left out of this one, under "remarks not conducive to 'Christian' reading."

The only other part you left out was information given about someone's history to refute Dr. Crumps claims that I was making stuff up. If he would not have bullied me and said this I would have left that alone (and will do so now).

And the only reason for any of this to begin with was because of the double standard (in my mind) about the "Wall of Shame".

I can quit posting on here if it is going to be controversial, as I assume this site did not begin to be divisive but edifying. Let me know if I need to be disfellowshipped from the dialogue.

-Sonny




Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

October 12th, 2010, 7:25 am #18

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Sonny,

Yes, those are excellent DOCTRINAL questions. They were deleted because they appeared to have been intentionally linked to the personal attack you made in "remarks not conducive to 'Christian' reading."

I believe that those who have been reading your posts sense that you have the potential to contribute greatly to our discussion of doctrinal issues -- only if devoid of personal attacks. (BTW, I have edited some of my own posts that I feel should have conveyed better messages.)

There are other doctrinal issues we can discuss besides instrumental music in the assembly -- certain teachings of change agents and progressive, liberal preachers that have caused division in the church.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

October 12th, 2010, 12:03 pm #19

"They were deleted because they appeared to have been intentionally linked to the personal attack"

This entire website is dedicated to personal attacks. "Brother" Sublett would have nothing to do it were not for his personal attacks. Either remove all personal attacks, including the attacks you think are justified, or allow all of the facts to be presented.

You cannot be a participant making and allowing your allies to personal attacks, and be a referee, too.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

October 12th, 2010, 5:24 pm #20

"Anonymous" accuses this "entire website" of hurling personal attacks, seemingly based solely on Ken Sublett's posts. I believe that's a gross exaggeration, also called hyperbole. BTW, since Sonny finally provided his full, real name, "Anonymous" could learn a lesson and do the same. What does "Anonymous" have to hide?
Quote
Share