John wrote: > You claim to know and understand the > Restoration Movement.
I know them about as well as I know Mormonism now. I'm not sure that is saying much. I learned most of Mormonism through books recommended by DaveH and Blaine and through dialogue with them here, but the Church of Christ stuff was almost entirely off the internet. I was involved with a home church once that actually merged with a church of Christ group. Too many experiences to elaborate here. I don't claim to be an expert. I was just trying to let you know that I was not shooting from the hip, but now you have blown this way out of proportion. John wrote: > When challenged on your claim that you have actually spoken > to individuals and churches of Christ, you give me the Boston > Church of Christ and the names of some individuals associated > with that church and the larger Crossroads movement !!!! > Of all the congregations you could have named - you pick the > single most exclusive group of people claiming to be a part of > the larger movement --- a congregation which has rejected > virtually all other congregations within the movement - a group > who would not allow me to preach there, much less you. > This is a church that has completely lost its way, a prime example > of legalism gone wiild. This is exactly why I mentioned them by name, John. I wanted you to know that I have brushed shoulders with many in the extreme Church of Christ movement. However, you are changing the subject now. I never said that I preached in their churches. I said that I was invited to them, meaning, invited to come and learn from them and to hear what they had to say. I also have been invited to debate some Church of Christ ministers on campus and in home settings. Another time, I met for three months with two Church of Christ evangelists, meeting in the home of one of them. They wanted me to join with their congregation but I told them that might views about Spiritual gifts might make that difficult. John wrote: > I had thought you were making a serious claim at having > disposed of so much false teaching within this denomination > that you could have been a modestly rich man at a nickle > a pop. I must have misunderstood Yes, John. You misunderstood and are now changing the original statement. I said that if I had a nickle every time a Church of Christ person countered a passage in the Old Testament with, "sorry, but that passage is in the Old Testament and we are under the New Testament now" then I would be a wealthy man. This is obviously hyperbole, meant to say that there have been uncountable times that the Church of Christ fall back on this dispensational teaching concerning grace. They might be legalistic, but they are legalistic about being under grace and not under the law. I know, it is ironic, but from my perspective, you operate under this legalistic paradigm also, but you don't see it because you see yourself as under grace. It is noteworthy that Jesus never rebuked legalism or taught against it. He certainly had reason and opportunity to do so. Clearly, Jesus saw through the problems and could understand that it was not legalism that was the problem, but rather sin. This is exactly what I have been trying to teach you. The problem is sin, not legalism. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
