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

September 13th, 2012, 12:31 am #11

Well, that certainly settles it for me! If John Waddey said it, it MUST be true! (Just ask his family back in Tennessee!)
Lucky we don't have to pick marriage counselors.
Quote
Like
Share

Tom Brite
Tom Brite

September 13th, 2012, 1:50 am #12

As I said, I knew that the change agents had taken over Lipscomb and ACU, but what is the third university Waddey mentioned that had been taken over? I thought perhaps Pepperdine. Also, which "small college" had been taken over? Maybe Tom knows.
Dr. Crump, I just wouldn't hitch my wagon to John Waddey. There are many Christians who know why.
Quote
Share

Tom Brite
Tom Brite

September 13th, 2012, 11:01 am #13

Thanks for the list Racnor. With maybe one or two exceptions, each of these have been termed "liberal" by various writers over the years.
Quote
Share

B
B

September 13th, 2012, 2:35 pm #14

Dr. Crump, I just wouldn't hitch my wagon to John Waddey. There are many Christians who know why.
Why don't you lay it all out for us, Tom, with appropriate references? Show us exactly how and why Waddey is scripturally in error. Don't post gossip and hearsay about family disputes or personal vendettas, if there are any. You say "many" Christians know why. Besides yourself, how "many" Christians supposedly believe Waddey is scripturally in error? Be specific. If we should "mark and avoid" Waddey for scriptural reasons, then show us why. If you can't or won't, however, then you are merely smearing Waddey for personal reasons.
Quote
Share

Racnor
Racnor

September 13th, 2012, 2:45 pm #15

Thanks for the list Racnor. With maybe one or two exceptions, each of these have been termed "liberal" by various writers over the years.
"B", you remind me of the great "Johnny Castaway" screen saver. Stuck on an island and nothing to do but a lot of fishing. Have a good day!
Quote
Share

Tom Brite
Tom Brite

September 13th, 2012, 4:45 pm #16

Why don't you lay it all out for us, Tom, with appropriate references? Show us exactly how and why Waddey is scripturally in error. Don't post gossip and hearsay about family disputes or personal vendettas, if there are any. You say "many" Christians know why. Besides yourself, how "many" Christians supposedly believe Waddey is scripturally in error? Be specific. If we should "mark and avoid" Waddey for scriptural reasons, then show us why. If you can't or won't, however, then you are merely smearing Waddey for personal reasons.
B, you seem awfully angry this morning. Several people have attempted to post information on this topic on this page. It has been edited out numerous times. So, I'm finished trying.
Quote
Share

Tom Brite
Tom Brite

September 14th, 2012, 12:39 am #17

Why don't you lay it all out for us, Tom, with appropriate references? Show us exactly how and why Waddey is scripturally in error. Don't post gossip and hearsay about family disputes or personal vendettas, if there are any. You say "many" Christians know why. Besides yourself, how "many" Christians supposedly believe Waddey is scripturally in error? Be specific. If we should "mark and avoid" Waddey for scriptural reasons, then show us why. If you can't or won't, however, then you are merely smearing Waddey for personal reasons.
Dr. Crump, let's just say that any attempt to present information is being blocked on this site. (Donnie, feel free to again edit this in whatever way you want, but I just want Dr. Crump to know that this information regarding Waddey has been attempted to be presented here for several years.)
Quote
Share

Scripture
Scripture

September 14th, 2012, 1:23 am #18

John Waddey said: "When change agents prevail, their congregations will cease to be Churches of Christ, having become in fact, an imitation of the Christian Church/Disciples of Christ who pursued this same course a 125 years ago. "

I could word Tom Brite's statement in another way: Regardless of whether change agents prevail or not, both change agents as well as change retardents both agree that the New Testament church cannot be restored until brothers and sisters, as well especially preachers, are moral and upright in their conduct.

All would also agree, I believe, that as much as one changes his or her thoughts as well as behavior (repents), then that person should be accepted back into the fold dependent on that change of behavior.

The issue of upright living comes before any consideration of whether someone is a "change agent."
Quote
Share

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

September 14th, 2012, 1:36 am #19

True: I would worry a lot more about all of the "change agents" who have to lie to God and About God to tell people that "a" spirit told him to preach that sermon that God Commanded Instrumental Praise and We MUST NOT be disobedient.

Saying that God said something is blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

Since the Spirit of Christ (the only one) warned in Jeremiah.

Jer 23:16 Thus saith the Lord of hosts,
.....Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you;
.....they make you vain:
.....they speak a vision of their own heart,
.....and not out of the mouth of the Lord.

Prphta and prphtes , ae, m., = prophts, I. a foreteller, soothsayer,

Jer 23:17 They say still unto them that despise me,
.....The Lord hath said, Ye shall have peace;
.....and they say unto every one that walketh
.....after the imagination of his own heart,
.....No evil shall come upon you.

Despise tthe Word of God of God and using your own words is:

Blasphm-e , pf.
A. beblasphmka D.18.10:speak profanely of sacred things, eis theous Pl.R.381e; offer rash prayers, Id.Alc.2.149c; b. kata tinosutter imprecations against, Aeschin.1.180.


I believe that charge can be made against anyone who claimed that they had a vision or heard a voice or has the holy spirit tell them to IMPOSE instruments knowing they they were sowing discord.

So, we know that blasphemy cannot be forgiven especially since the "agents" are usually doing it to get out of bad debt.
Quote
Like
Share

Scripture
Scripture

September 14th, 2012, 1:58 am #20

"Imagination" does carry much more "scriptural erosion" than "implantation in the heart."

Imagination would be a emanation from wild personal desires, and that in itself just sounds bad.

Implantation refers more to the seed of the kingdom, which when planted, promises to bring much fruit for the kingdom.

I would distinguish between scriptural change through amending teaching to confront (not to compromise with) a changing culture.

A change agent, on the other hand, is characteristically sinister. It may seek to change to show superiority of intellect (pride), or to show license (rebellion and arrogance). It may show little respect for the past, and its adherents often have little historical horizon.

Scriptural change relates to reviving the Word of God within us, or imitate the Christ such that he lives within us. This is the sure way to save the church, for the teaching of Christ to abide within us.
Quote
Share