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

Dave
Dave

October 12th, 2010, 8:54 pm #21

"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.
Sonny,
They do what they want here. If Donnie doesn't like what you say, then he edits out what he doesn't like.

Sonny, the following statement, from Bill Crump, pretty much sums up this whole site....
"No real, full name--no credibility whatsoever."

And after that statement he puts a smily face. Like a kid saying 'nana nana boo boo,' and sticking out his tongue.

Hey Bill, is it 'smiley,' or 'smily'? Should it be " marks or ' marks?

Basically....men behaving like children.
Quote
Share

Donnie
Donnie

October 12th, 2010, 9:47 pm #22

"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.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]The entire website is dedicated to Roman 16:17,18 --[/color]
"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Who are these "brethren"?[/color]
The change agents.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]What New Testament teachings are these agents changing?[/color]
Restructuring the church that Christ established; incorporating musical idolatry and performance-driven entertainment into worship; changing women's role in the church; making the Lord's Supper originally designed to commemorate His suffering and death on the cross into a fellowship meal of barbecue pork chops and beverages; confusing a nice welcome to visitors [open fellowship] with what constitutes membership into the body of Christ [fellowship]; changing God's design of baptism toward the remission of sins; etc.; etc.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]What are the effects of these changes?[/color]
They are wrong based on the Scripture. They are unnecessary. They cause division in the church.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Sorry, but you're mistaking bro. Sublett's exposure of musical idolatry, entertainment and performances and their "side effects" and his identifying the proponents for attacks. Again, "mark them which cause divisions...."[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 12th, 2010, 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 13th, 2010, 3:32 am #23

[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]
(This did not post from this afternoon, so I am resending it. I apologize if it ends up showing twice.)

Brother Cruz,

Thank you for your explanation and positive reply. I agree with the anonymous person who feels this is duplicity, and you guys can answer or not answer their statement, as I have no "beef" with you guys (Crump, Cruz, Sublett, etc.) because I do not know you.

I obviously know Brother John Waddey from his years at Karns Church of Christ before he left the Bible belt for Arizona, and do not mind him posting on here and sharing his religious views, but struggled to remain silent on the "Wall of Shame" one, which is why I decided to do this "Concerned Members" message. And again, I did not plan to give the details that were edited until the accusations came full force that I was just submitting rumors because I am against this sight exposing "change agents".

And again, I do appreciate receiving this answer, as opposed to no answer or a condescending one, and I will continue to contribute occasionally to the civil discussion on this site about doctrinal issues.

-Sonny
Quote
Share

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

October 13th, 2010, 5:36 am #24

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

Lest I forget, let me know if you would like the duplicate thread removed: "A Concerned Member Of The Church (Part 2) - 3 Questions."

FYI, John Waddey has posted only once or twice upon my request. He has written numerous articles pertaining to the Change Movement. And I am the one who has posted several of those articles.

So, "The Wall of Shame" must have struck a nerve with you as it listed a number of churches "who have begun to use instrumental music in their worship" What about some of our "mega" churches that have been removed from the "Directory of Churches of Christ" -- how do you feel about that?

Readers may be interested in reviewing a few articles written by bro. Waddey as follows:

[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 14th, 2010, 2:52 am #25

I do not have a problem with articles / posts on here about IM vs. Acappella. If I had, I would have responded to the many others on this site. My congregation worships acappella.

A difference between me and some who post on this site is that I am not sectarian or judgmental toward those who do not worship acappella.

[. . .]

I guess I'm just encouraging and reminding the teaching / practice to remove the log from your own eye before the speck in your brothers; of not judging without mercy.

I know you were not implying this, but I am not saying that none of these articles [...] contain any truth or have any content worth reading. I would definitely not disagree with all his points.

-Sonny
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 14th, 2010, 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

October 14th, 2010, 1:17 pm #26

It should be noted that a cappella consists of two, separate, Italian words and is not spelled as "acappella," which implies one word. If a person is going to harp on IM vs. a cappella, he should at least spell the latter word correctly.

BTW, the is for Dave's benefit.
Quote
Share

Tom Brite
Tom Brite

October 14th, 2010, 3:29 pm #27

I do not have a problem with articles / posts on here about IM vs. Acappella. If I had, I would have responded to the many others on this site. My congregation worships acappella.

A difference between me and some who post on this site is that I am not sectarian or judgmental toward those who do not worship acappella.

[. . .]

I guess I'm just encouraging and reminding the teaching / practice to remove the log from your own eye before the speck in your brothers; of not judging without mercy.

I know you were not implying this, but I am not saying that none of these articles [...] contain any truth or have any content worth reading. I would definitely not disagree with all his points.

-Sonny
Sonny, I have not posted on this site in many months, but I had to make a comment in regards to the points that you have made. You have pointed a light at the elephant standing in the room. Certainly, I believe non-instrumental to be the way to go. But, anyone who lives in Tennessee or has relatives or friends in that state that are "Church of Christ" know the reason that why a certain writer used on this site moved from Tennessee to Nevada. It is not a secret. For this site to use this man as one of the main sources for defense of a non-instrumental position is ... well, indefensible. You are correct in pointing out that we are all sinners, I certainly am. It seems that no matter what sin one may be engaging in (and the position of many conservative "Church of Christ" brothers would be that this sin is ongoing) so long as you agree that the use of instruments is a sin, then you are held up as a "man of faith" whose viewpoint should be adhered to. (Yes, Dr. Crump, I know I ended that sentence with a preposition.)
Quote
Share

Dave
Dave

October 15th, 2010, 3:35 am #28

I do not have a problem with articles / posts on here about IM vs. Acappella. If I had, I would have responded to the many others on this site. My congregation worships acappella.

A difference between me and some who post on this site is that I am not sectarian or judgmental toward those who do not worship acappella.

[. . .]

I guess I'm just encouraging and reminding the teaching / practice to remove the log from your own eye before the speck in your brothers; of not judging without mercy.

I know you were not implying this, but I am not saying that none of these articles [...] contain any truth or have any content worth reading. I would definitely not disagree with all his points.

-Sonny
Sonny,
Therein lies the problem. I, like you, worship a capella, but do not condemn those that do. These fine gents here want anything that goes against the norm of their traditional worship (exactly 1 hour......2 songs.....prayer....2 songs.....communion......3 to 4 songs......sermon.....invitation song......closing prayer......to be condemned. It is condemned Sonny, by these men, but not backed by Scripture. So if a congregation uses praise teams, sings new songs, claps, or uses instrumental music, then are change agents. What is really noteworthy is that when calling a lot of brethren 'change agents' they fail to understand that Jesus Christ was one of the biggest change agents of all time.
Quote
Share

Donnie
Donnie

October 15th, 2010, 8:00 pm #29

I am concerned about religious bullies and religious hypocrites. I am concerned about preachers who post rebuking remarks toward "progressive churches", etc. on this site who have a "history" of [a "specific" sin that "I know" about] while teaching and preaching the gospel to others. I am concerned and think the members and readers of this site need to be aware and "concerned" about this, for it is a serious matter.

May we all be grateful for the glory of God and redemption of Christ freely by grace through faith!

Romans 3:22-24 reads, "This righteousness from God comes through faith in Christ Jesus to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

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

This whole scenario reminds me of the narrative in John 8 concerning a woman brought to Jesus by the scribes and Pharisees, caught "in the very act" of sin. Jesus said, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

You and Sonny are indulging in a malicious gossip. I do not know how to say it gently, so I am going to let the Scripture speak it for me:[/color]
[color=#FF0000" size="3" face="times]James 3:[5] Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! [6] And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. [8] But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.[/color]
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Whether or not your accusation is true, it is gossip. It cannot be justified by simply saying that "we are all sinners, I certainly am." Furthermore, for you to say that "it is not a secret" seems to suggest that the gossip is widespread. Have you done a survey? Have you been following the "story" that "this sin is ongoing" or that it is a "history" of sin? Have you actually witnessed the act(s) of sin? This whole matter is sad and unfortunate. I had never heard of it until you and Sonny started the gossip.

So, my admonition to you as a fellow brother in Christ is to stop this gossip, accusation and condemnation. Let God do the condemnation, instead.

Tom, you said:[/color]
It seems that no matter what sin one may be engaging in (and the position of many conservative "Church of Christ" brothers would be that this sin is ongoing) so long as you agree that the use of instruments is a sin, then you are held up as a "man of faith" whose viewpoint should be adhered to.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]That is your opinion, not of "conservative 'Church of Christ' brothers." Your expression "conservative 'Church of Christ' brothers" pretty much sums up your passion against conservative brethren, publications, beliefs, etc.

The writer/author you have condemned has written numerous articles and books about the Change Agents in the brotherhood, their Movement and their divisive activities. "Instrumental music" is only one of the many issues he has written about. [I believe I have listed a sample list of these articles and books above, as well as of their intent to transform the church that Christ established.]

Remember, Scripture says:[/color]
[color=#FF0000" size="3" face="times]"... The churches of Christ salute you. Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. [/color]
Quote
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

October 15th, 2010, 8:24 pm #30

Since Donnie has said that Sonny and Tom are engaging in a malicious gossip, I can only hope that any of their future posts, and anyone else's future posts for that matter, that spread any kind of gossip, be deleted.
Quote
Share