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

October 15th, 2010, 8:33 pm #31

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

Your example is not an issue. 24 songs are just fine. Clapping is fine if you don't scare the living daylights out of a living 102-year old saint. I don't think the Lord thinks highly of Praise Team performances. Congregational singing and praise performances don't mix.

So, according to you, Christ changed from ____, ____, ____, etc., to _____, _____, _____, etc.

But I can tell what the change agents' agenda for change are [I think I've already listed some of them]:

[/color]
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Restructuring the church that Christ established;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Incorporating musical idolatry and performance-driven entertainment into worship;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Changing women's role in the church; [/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]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 [some congregations are already doing this];[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Confusing a nice welcome to visitors [as an open fellowship with those outside the body of Christ] with what constitutes membership into the body of Christ [fellowship];[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Changing God's design of baptism toward the remission of sins;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Acquiring modern-day Pentecostal/Charismatic tendencies;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Overemphasizing God's grace to the point of abusing and misusing it;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Discouraging Christians from doing good works as a result of God's abundant grace;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Rewriting the history of the Restoration Movement;[/color]
    </li>
  • [color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]etc.; etc.[/color]
    </li>
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]If you think it's only about the difference in using musical devices in the assembly or not, that would be ignorance on your part.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Tom Brite
Tom Brite

October 16th, 2010, 1:38 am #32

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.
Dr. Crump, since Donnie appears to be one of the moderators of this site, he is free to delete any post which I, or anyone else makes. That is his choice. It would not surprise me that you would be in favor of silencing any who would disagree with your personal beliefs.

Donnie, I tried to warn you years ago via email of [this]. I have not said another word about it since that time on this or any other site. However, now that it has been raised by another person, it seems timely to again point out the danger [...].

Are you asking me if I personally witnessed the act of [sin]? If so, then the answer is "no." However, if you want to know if the knowledge of the [sin] is widespread across congregations in Tennessee (again by people who did not personally witness the [sin]) then the answer is "yes." I do not believe that one must personally witness the [committing of sin] to have valid knowledge of the [sin].

Finally, it is very easy to attempt to paste labels on people. You are free to throw the "liberal" label on me all you want, but it does not make it valid. Do you align yourself with the people who publish Contending for the Faith magazine? Or how about The Defender, published by the Bellview Church of Christ in Pensacola, Florida? If you do, then, in deed, I would be considered a "liberal" by you and those brethren.
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 16th, 2010, 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

October 16th, 2010, 3:40 am #33

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
When a pope returned from France he brought a "Musical Worship Team" to replace the falsetto priestlings.
They were A Castrados: they sang Organum or "after the pipe organ." The pope was so enamoured that they performed in the Sistine Chapel. But Chapel is named after CAPER: a general's goat skin chapel.

Christ denies that animal sacrifices were commanded and that eleminates the use of the Warrior Levite musicians making NOISE only during the burning of the GOATS. The goats began to be sacrificed to Azazel (the devil) after the Nadab and Abihu folly of entering into a holy place. Rick Atchley uses 2 Chronicles 29 where the Warrior's instruments sounded only during the burning of the GOATS: because God had turned them over to worship the starry host, and we know some of the names, the sacrificial system worshipped the Devil when they made instrumental noises. They were worshipping Dionysus or Bacchus, the new wineskin god. Both the "worship team" and instruments claim to "lead you into the presence of God" if you watch and listen and "do what we do." In fact, they are standing in the holy place of church architecture and they are claiming to be God in Christ who thought He was the only mediator with God.

Lying Wonders includes all of the performing arts which claim that they are led by God or are doing holy things.

So, stand clear of anyone who wants to do ACappella as as steal word from the Goat Singers.





ACappella marks ONLY the musical worship teams and is not related to congregational singing. The PERSONA mark is universal and it isn't pretty but it is prophetic.

Quote
Like
Share

Dave
Dave

October 16th, 2010, 3:59 am #34

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.
Restructuring the way that man worshiped God, ending the use of animal sacrifices once and for all, and needing only the One and Only Lamb of God, offering Himself as the Ultimate sacrifice and establishing His church

Incorporating worship not just on Sunday but including a DAILY WORSHIP from the heart and not worrying about what man wants in the way of worship but what God wants. This being a Jesus that would accept praise teams, singing with instruments, singing without instruments, clapping, etc., as long as the Scripture is being adhered to and God is worshiped faithfully. This being a Jesus allowing God to judge whose heart is right.NOT MAN.

Allowing both men and WOMEN to faithfully worship Him, as shown time and time again in Gods Holy Word

Using the Lords Supper to REMEMBER ME and not using the Lords Supper to be the insipid example of what GOD DIDNT SAY NOT TO by saying that ketchup or cocaine could be used to represent the Lords Cup in place of the true examples of wine and the fruit of the vine.

Jesus did not extend the hand of fellowship based on what man constitutes membership into the body of Christ. He did so solely on how man loved Him and how man loved his neighbor. He gave membership to the Kingdom based on man following God instead of what man wanted.

Jesus showed how important baptism was by being baptized Himself, but He wanted ALL men to know that it was HE, HIS BLOOD, and HIS WORDS that savednot water.
Jesus didnt allow other men to add to His Word by adding sins which werent in the Word, including instrumental music.

Jesus was a man of emotion and had great zeal for His Fathers love and work. Jesus believed that if you couldnt show emotion for the True Love of this world, then you shouldnt follow Him. You didnt have to worry about putting on your best clothes for Him or putting on a masquerade. He cared only for how the heart was, not how clean or pressed another mans clothes were.

Jesus didnt want anyone to miss His and God's Grace to the point of thinking that you could actually do enough to pay for the debt of Love that Jesus gave for us all. He wanted men to do His bidding because of ONLY ONE attributeLOVE!

Jesus discouraged others for boasting in any works of man, including a restoration movement that would take away from His Sacrifice of Love for all.

Last edited by Ken.Sublett on October 16th, 2010, 4:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

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

October 16th, 2010, 4:36 am #35

Dr. Crump, since Donnie appears to be one of the moderators of this site, he is free to delete any post which I, or anyone else makes. That is his choice. It would not surprise me that you would be in favor of silencing any who would disagree with your personal beliefs.

Donnie, I tried to warn you years ago via email of [this]. I have not said another word about it since that time on this or any other site. However, now that it has been raised by another person, it seems timely to again point out the danger [...].

Are you asking me if I personally witnessed the act of [sin]? If so, then the answer is "no." However, if you want to know if the knowledge of the [sin] is widespread across congregations in Tennessee (again by people who did not personally witness the [sin]) then the answer is "yes." I do not believe that one must personally witness the [committing of sin] to have valid knowledge of the [sin].

Finally, it is very easy to attempt to paste labels on people. You are free to throw the "liberal" label on me all you want, but it does not make it valid. Do you align yourself with the people who publish Contending for the Faith magazine? Or how about The Defender, published by the Bellview Church of Christ in Pensacola, Florida? If you do, then, in deed, I would be considered a "liberal" by you and those brethren.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Tom,

It was not my intent to prolong this malicious gossip. Evidently, you missed my point that such serves no good purpose.

Yes, Tom, I remember you posting a few years back something similar in content, and removing a portion of that post.

So, you resent being "labeled" as a "liberal"? I don't think I actually mentioned the word "liberal," did I? OK, maybe, I just think it? But what else can I say considering that I "align" myself with publications such as "Contending for the Faith," etc. After all, the Scripture says that we "should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 1:3).

Sorry, Tom, I'll have to disagree with you concerning the "danger." What I consider dangerous and damaging to the church is what the change agents are doing. I agree with Scripture that we are to "mark them who cause divisions ... and avoid them." [/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Dr. Bill Crump
Dr. Bill Crump

October 16th, 2010, 1:20 pm #36

Dr. Crump, since Donnie appears to be one of the moderators of this site, he is free to delete any post which I, or anyone else makes. That is his choice. It would not surprise me that you would be in favor of silencing any who would disagree with your personal beliefs.

Donnie, I tried to warn you years ago via email of [this]. I have not said another word about it since that time on this or any other site. However, now that it has been raised by another person, it seems timely to again point out the danger [...].

Are you asking me if I personally witnessed the act of [sin]? If so, then the answer is "no." However, if you want to know if the knowledge of the [sin] is widespread across congregations in Tennessee (again by people who did not personally witness the [sin]) then the answer is "yes." I do not believe that one must personally witness the [committing of sin] to have valid knowledge of the [sin].

Finally, it is very easy to attempt to paste labels on people. You are free to throw the "liberal" label on me all you want, but it does not make it valid. Do you align yourself with the people who publish Contending for the Faith magazine? Or how about The Defender, published by the Bellview Church of Christ in Pensacola, Florida? If you do, then, in deed, I would be considered a "liberal" by you and those brethren.
Often when a person claims that some story is "widespread" among a certain group, it really means only that person and perhaps a few select others have embraced that story and wish to perpetuate it. In other words, because a few people choose to believe a story, then they think that everyone within that group knows about it and believes it. The same fallacy is seen with instrumental music in the Church of Christ. Because some people on this board see nothing wrong with having IM in Church of Christ congregations, they think that virtually all Church of Christ congregations favor IM in worship, when that is not at all true. Such people erroneously transfer their own personal preferences and biases onto all members of the Church of Christ.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

October 17th, 2010, 12:37 am #37

When a pope returned from France he brought a "Musical Worship Team" to replace the falsetto priestlings.
They were A Castrados: they sang Organum or "after the pipe organ." The pope was so enamoured that they performed in the Sistine Chapel. But Chapel is named after CAPER: a general's goat skin chapel.

Christ denies that animal sacrifices were commanded and that eleminates the use of the Warrior Levite musicians making NOISE only during the burning of the GOATS. The goats began to be sacrificed to Azazel (the devil) after the Nadab and Abihu folly of entering into a holy place. Rick Atchley uses 2 Chronicles 29 where the Warrior's instruments sounded only during the burning of the GOATS: because God had turned them over to worship the starry host, and we know some of the names, the sacrificial system worshipped the Devil when they made instrumental noises. They were worshipping Dionysus or Bacchus, the new wineskin god. Both the "worship team" and instruments claim to "lead you into the presence of God" if you watch and listen and "do what we do." In fact, they are standing in the holy place of church architecture and they are claiming to be God in Christ who thought He was the only mediator with God.

Lying Wonders includes all of the performing arts which claim that they are led by God or are doing holy things.

So, stand clear of anyone who wants to do ACappella as as steal word from the Goat Singers.





ACappella marks ONLY the musical worship teams and is not related to congregational singing. The PERSONA mark is universal and it isn't pretty but it is prophetic.
Does this mean that I can no longer use David as my patternism for worship with instruments and watching girls?
Quote
Like
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 18th, 2010, 6:54 pm #38

Brother Sublett,

With respect, I disagree.

You could use this argument for any matters of "patternism" or "authority" other than Jesus, since he did not sin.

As David is a negative spiritual example in some ways, so is Moses, Paul, Peter, the Laodicean church, Galatian church, the Corinthian church, etc.

In spite of their negative examples, Paul calls the church in Corinth indeed, "the church" (1 Corinthians 1:2) and that God will be faithful to them and present them blameless ( 1 Cor. 1:8-9). Here is a church with unloving attitudes, pride, division, sexual sin, etc., and yet the grace of God and peace of God are available to them (1 Cor. 1:3).

[Do you] equate instrumental worship with [watching girls or worse]?

In a nutshell, I do not believe your statement is consistent interpretating of Scripture.

David did more than look... [...].

So, to be consistent, would you disregard the leadership and teachings of an elder or minister today if they committed murder, sexual sin(s), language sin(s), attitude sin(s), etc.?

My point in this original thread/post is that we should not be so quick to not show mercy to others, when we need mercy ourselves.

If the Corinthian church was called into the fellowship of Christ (1 Cor. 1:9), with all of their misunderstandings of worship, and unloving and braggadocious attititudes toward others, then perhaps churches listed AND NOT LISTED under "wall of shame" are together the body of Christ? Every church and every christian needs grace, as we seek to obey and honor Christ in our lives and worship.

Your brother in Christ,

-Sonny
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 18th, 2010, 7:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Sonny
Sonny

October 18th, 2010, 9:09 pm #39

Brother Sublett and Readers,

I did not ask Brother Sublett a question where it reads, "[Do you] equate instrumental music with [watching girls or worse]?".

I made a statement.

I did put at the end of the statement in parenthesis, (unless I misunderstood?), but this should not have been changed to a direct question.

I was merely acknowledging that I may have misunderstood a portion of Brother Sublett's position.

This hyper-paranoid editing is about to lead me to questioning this site's position and potential compromises on Scriptural matters.

-Sonny
Quote
Share

Donnie
Donnie

October 18th, 2010, 10:31 pm #40

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

Let's put it back as a statement, still edited, though:[/color]
"I find it interesting that you equate instrumental worship with [...] (unless I misunderstood you?)."
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Problem, my brother, is that your mindset is still that of resorting to the malicious gossip -- unfounded or not -- regardless of your noted kinder and gentler approach.

This site hardly edits anyone's post unless it contains expletives or is simply not conducive to "Christian" reading.

This thread has been an exception. No one has been immune to editing, including a number of my own posts.

We do not encourage any personal attacks against anyone -- change agents or not.

We discuss doctrinal issues and matters that have caused division and severe damage to the church that Christ established, especially those that the change agents are imposing upon congregations that they infiltrate.

We also discuss doctrinal issues that we differ with our denominational neighbors for our learning.

In both instances, posts are not likely to be edited.[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on October 18th, 2010, 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share