Johnny’s Last Post

Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.  Colossians 4:6

Since this blog is dedicated to discussing the teachings of Church of Christ TV personalities Johnny Robertson, Norm Fields and James Oldfield, I made the editorial decision to take the following comment made by Mr. Robertson, which was left on my blog earlier today (and has since slipped off the comment column) and make it into a regular posting so that latecomers won’t miss it. 

If you’d like to see the original post and some of the responses that followed (including two from people who would agree doctrinally with Mr. Robertson, but who were pretty disappointed in his comments), you can look here.

Meanwhile, here is the apparent last post to this blog from Johnny Robertson:

“Here is my last post for you guys

Lee wants to fight
Randy wants a drink
Kattie and kathline are so awesomely cut from the same cloth
and Rick and Nathan …that makes what 6 on this blog
Now you may say, “Johnny you are wrong , you don’t know us and you shouldnt say all that!”
Ok little children Matt 11:16
Jesus said on several occasions that if you want to follow him (really be like him) sell all you have and follow him (Mat 8 fox have holes birds nest)
the reason the folks that meet at 823 Starling cannot be bothered by all this child play is they have seen me do this . I moved here with a rocking chair (from the Marshall Islands)and stayed 5 years and sold all i had again and went to the “slum of slums” (Ebeye atoll) and left all the TV and “Lime Light” so I could reach out to the most untouchables in the world. Most likely I will go back after I have trained some men to keep up the “good fight” against all you false teachers.
Now you see how pointless it is for you all to think you will sway folks in the Martinsville congregation. What do you have as fruit?
They dont even know who you are and that is how Satan works (Eph 5:12)
They know me and so do countless others.
People in sound churches who support me know that I had a thriving business before I gave it all up and decided to be trained to answer all the false religions. Oh and and yes thanks to false churches they know I was in jail too. Boy that hurt you all
more than me, bringing up a saved persons past. That was really telling to anyone thinking of becoming a Baptist Kattie

And one last thing I have a son who is named Caleb! What do you suppose Caleb was famous for “little children (all six of you)? A SPY!
I am so thankful my position does not so destroy reason that I end up failing to appreciate two great characters in the Bible TWO SPIES
When you dont have anything to hide spies are not really hurting you now are they.
Rahab got into the line of Christ by helping spies who were determined to overthrow the enemy
You all are enemies of the true church of Christ (Philp 3:18 ) and when you can finally find someone convicted enough to come out of the dark and meet us as other Baptist have tried to do (AC Smith B Edwards Shirley Phelps Johnny Bullins K Johnson D Parker) we will speak again, until then Happy fighting Rick and Lee. Pentecostals and baptis have never gotten along ya know all that jibberish you call tongues huh Rick… Be a man Rick Help your daddy Kattie
Dont bother responding ya’ll Im not coming back it is toooo dark in here for me
johnny (aka Jim Jones)”

Please feel free to post thoughts and comments, but remember to be civil.  Even though Johnny’s Last Post pretty much was not civil.  Remember Colossians 4:6!

 

Advertisements

105 thoughts on “Johnny’s Last Post

  1. I don’t know…
    if you listen to his program ever his thoughts are pretty much that scattered on TV also.

    weird thats what I think about it.
    very weird

  2. Dear Nathan Rick or whomever is in charge,
    I remember seeing Mr. Robertson’s response to Rick of Vandola Baptist
    He told of a donkey saying to a race horse
    I have a tail & so do you
    I have ears and so do you
    I walk on hooves and so do you
    I swat flies with my tail and so do you
    I am like you in so many ways, so why do you insist on being a race horse and refusing to let me be too?
    Did you see this program?
    Does it really make Mr. Rick a Christian in the Church of Christ just because he tried to be like the true church in many ways but not all?

  3. Well,

    That was interesting. Whatever it was.
    a few quick thoughts:

    – That might be someone (Shawn/Heath?) posing as Johnny.
    – If the person that wrote this really thinks Shirley Phelps is a “Baptist”, that explains a lot.
    – If this little “response” is legit, it is just really depressing.

  4. Jo,
    what makes “mr.” Rick a Christian is the salvation that he received through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. THANK GOD that our salvation has nothing to do with whether we agree with Johnny Robertson or not. Because from the looks of things if all of our redemption was dependent on any man, especially “Mr.” Johnny we’d all be in bad shape.

    And riddle me this. How are any of Johnny’s responses representing CHRIST of the church of Christ? Because the Christ that I know and worship does not belittle, degrade, call names, rant and rave, and jibber jabber. Sounds to me like Johnny is the one that is just like the donkey…

  5. Jo,

    What in world are you talking about?

    Are you defending this tirade?

    Please clarify.

  6. Since I really do not watch Johnny on a regular basis I didn’t see that response to my 2006 newspaper post. Interesting that you should remember that rant of Johnny’s from 2 years ago. Sorry that I didn’t see it, it would have been a good laugh.

    I still beleive that if Johnny would use his talents to reach the unchurched in the community instead of depleting his resources in a fruitless attempt to destroy established churches more of those who are really unsaved would be reached for the Lord. Unfortunatley, more and more of the unchurched are being turned away from Gof by the negative and nasty campaign of a seasoned antagonist against area churches.

    I seem to recall our Lord’s last command to His followers was to Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.’.

  7. Mrs. Katie,
    Jesus did call people names! Mr. Robertson gave you the verse!
    Mt 11:16 ¶ But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows,
    Please look at a few more in case you think I am making this stuff up.
    Mt 23:1 ¶ Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
    2 Saying, The scribes
    Mt 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

  8. Dear Mrs. Katie,
    Might I remind you that you said it is not Christ like to call names and then you said Johnny is the one that is like a donkey.
    Is that Christ like?
    I am on this site because I went to ACC in the 70s and I have seen post from people associated with Abilene Christian who are ashamed of Mr. Robertson and that is because the school has been taken over by liberals.
    There are many in the church today like Mr. Maxie who do not have the conviction to stand up to liberals so they join them.
    Please consider that just saying you are a Christian does not make you one. Jehovah’s Witness Mormons, Seventh Day Adventist, yes even the cults in Texas say they are too.
    Please go back and read what Mrs. Katie said about name calling and then note that she did the very thing she said not to do. Jesus says this is childish and this is what this site seems to be.
    Thank you for letting me have a say.

  9. Dear Mr. Rick,
    I wonder how it is that you know so much about how Mr. Robertson is effecting the “unchurched” ?
    Do you have a survey site to which you can refer? Do you have a person contact source within the whole listening area?
    Could you please give us the source of this great and sweeping assessment?
    I believe it is said that Mr. Robertson is covering a two state area and I thought you were in Danville. Do you have stats for all that area?
    Is this grandiosity on your part for affect?
    If so it is also childish and falls into Jesus statement in
    Matthew 11:16 ¶ But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows
    Thank you again for letting me speak.

  10. Jo,

    First, you are welcome here any time with your thoughts and opinions. Tell your friends they are welcome too.

    Second, Katie was referring to the example that Mr. Robertson made about the donkey and the racehorse. If you are upset about that, you should respond to Mr. Robertson.

    Third, riddle me this, Jo, if Mr. Robertson, Mr. Fields and Mr. Oldfield claim each week on TV that they love questions so much – hold the doors to the church open for questioners – don’t see why everyone is so upset at them for asking questions – why is this site “childish” for being a place to discuss (i.e. ask and answer questions) about the things they teach?

    Is it because they don’t have any control over the direction of things here? Does that make it childish? Or is that I request everyone be civil in the way they discuss? Is that childish? Maybe it is that people can come here and vent their frustrations at the secret video ambushes and the juvenile attempts at “Dateline NBC”-style broadcast ministry journalism. I suppose venting can sometimes sound childish.

    But anyway, it’s a very interesting perspective.

  11. Dear Mr. Mrs. DMH,
    Did you say that Mrs. Phelps Roper cannot be a Baptist? Are you the judge of who is and who is not a Baptist? Mrs. Roper says all the Baptist in Danville are going to hell because of the refusal to fight “quires.”
    I think she is specifically talking about Mr. Rick since he is a part of the Baptist who are allowing gays\straight alliances in their newly formed liberal schools.
    Is she any worse than you? You say she is not what she claims she is, and she says Mr. Rick and Mrs. Katie are not what they claim to be.
    Again this goes under childish according to Jesus in
    Matthew 11:16 ¶ “But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, RSV

  12. Dear Readers,
    please excuse my mistake on “queer” in the last post about Mrs.Phelps. I don’t often use the word.

  13. Dear Mr. Answer,
    Your response was not about what I made references to.
    I spoke to specific events that I thought fell into the childish realm, and you came back with why is it wrong to ask questions.
    Is that really what I was talking about?
    Why not address the specific thing to which I refer.
    Mrs. Katie saying not Christ like to call names but doing it in the same post.
    Mr. Rick putting forth his grand stats on the effect of Mr. Robertson on the unchurched.
    Mr. Mrs. DMH saying Mrs Phelps cannot be a Baptist
    Thank you so much

  14. Dear Mr. Answer,
    I am not at all upset.
    Please do not mistake “expressed opinion” that differs from you as upset.
    Why would you feel such?
    Is it possible that you all are actually angered over the truth that the Church of Christ is teaching?
    It is very queer to me that I read Pentecostals joining Baptist to fight against Mr. Robertson.
    In Mr. Robertson post he told how different this was. My life experience is that Holiness faith and baptist faith are in opposing camps.
    What could bring them together in such a way?
    Could it be the same thing that brought sworn enemies together in Jesus day?
    Matthew 22:34 ¶ But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together
    Mr. Robertson sends his DVDs far and wide and for free to let people see how he has answered the doctrines of these groups, and we are not seeing this as you do. We see very divisive religions joining ranks for the moment to try and destroy a common enemy.
    Just my opinion as one getting this from cyber space.
    I will say it is very interesting and exciting!

  15. Mr. Answer,
    I want to make a note to all the readers about my post involving Mr. Rick.
    I am saying what Mr. Robertson said about Mr. Rick and his church being supportive of gay\straight alliances. I have no real knowledge but am checking to see if it is true.
    I hope that was understood.
    Would you please comment on this Mr.Rick? You could save us all some time.

  16. Mr. Rick,
    Mr. Robertson said that Mr. Crawford allowed a group known as “Honesty” to co-publish THAT “GAY” THING at his campus.
    Mr. Robertson said that this all came from a website that published Evangelical Forum Newsletter. http://www.jpbc.org

    It just seems to me that everyone goes for the jugular, and never really answers his argumentation.
    Is this just me.

    Thanks again for the forum

  17. Mr. Answer,
    Is there something wrong with DateLine?
    Mr. Robertson sent out DVDs in which DateLine exposed government abuse and corruption in the spending practices associated with the Island he was on. Is this why you are speaking out against DateLine?
    Are you also opposed to MSNBC sting operation to catch pedophiles?
    Please clarify this as it is a bit hard for me to stay with what you said.
    Is it sinful for Mr. Robertson to have a camera or is it sinful for him to tape what he does not agree with.
    Is it sinful for him to put on air what Mr. Rick does not consent to the public seeing.
    Just what is this issue about?
    We would not know about Mr. Jim Jones if it were not for secret camera work.
    The Texas cult was exposed by an informant. Was that sinful?

  18. Jo,

    I hope you are not serious, but I am afraid you are. Jo, the reason that people from ACU or WHEREVER speak out against Johnny Robertson is not because it “has been taken over by liberals”-it is because his view of Christianity and the way he treats people is nothing like Christ.

    I am a member of the “Church of Christ” but do not agree one bit and will not condone what he and others like him are doing. It is very wrong, and no one needs statistics to show that what he is doing is turning people AWAY from Christ. His fruits are obvious.

    Nathan was not referring to Dateline the show-but the way deceitful and dishonest way that Johnny and others take hidden cameras to take things, then take them out of context to then prove some point to the rest of the viewers. It is not a sin for him to have a camera, what is wrong is what he does with it. He only goes to those churches to prove them wrong and that is not right. That is not even teaching-if that really was his goal, it is only slander-and we all know that is wrong. How would Mr. Rick not consent the public to see what he is doing in a PUBLIC worship service? He is not hiding anything-it is Johnny who is by acting in this manner. Talk about childish.

    I think the problem most of us can agree on is Johnny only seems to want to tear down and annihilate every other “denomination” while building himself up all in the name of “Christ”, and this does no good for the cause of Christ-it only causes more division and that is wrong, too. He is doing nothing better than what he accuses everyone else of-actually he is only making it worse. If he would only preach Christ and Him crucified, and not all of this deceitful and arrogant behavior-most would not have a problem.

  19. “There are many in the church today like Mr. Maxey who do not have the conviction to stand up to liberals so they join them.”

    This is also an untrue statement. I admire Al Maxey, Leroy Garrett, Cecil Hook and others who will take a stand on the Bible instead of toting the “Church of Christ” party line or doctrine. You can label them liberals or say they don’t have a conviction-but I believe they have more conviction for going under such opposition when they could have just stayed where they were. Instead they spoke out for the truth, not the “Church of Christ” version of truth, but the Bible truth.

  20. Jo,

    I am really having a difficult time trying to understand the points you are attempting to express.

    Are you trying to say that Shirley Phelps is a true reflection of the Baptist Church? Maybe you don’t know anything about her or her “Church”. I suggest you do a simple internet search on the subject. Mrs. Phelps leads a group that could best be described as a Christian influenced hate group/cult. You will find that they do not focus their hate solely on homosexuals.

    So, yes she is quite a bit different than me, you, Johnny, or anyone else I have seen post on this site.

    Please attempt to clarify if I misunderstood.

    Mr. DMH.

  21. Jo,

    Did you notice that others who also identify themselves as “hypercon” Churches of Christ (graciously adopting my term – not meant as a derogatory – just acknowledging that there are different doctrinal positions within those churches that refer to themselves as “church of Christ”) who post here semi-regularly also disapproved of Johnny’s comment above?

    Are they wrong for disapproving? Do you understand why they would respond that way? Can you (or would Mr. Robertson) agree to disagree with them, or does their disapproval condemn them?

    I’m not at all opposed to Dateline NBC. They have a very entertaining program. But, it’s normally sensationalism, not true journalism (with exceptions – like the program you mention). Why do you think the pedophile programs are so popular? Cutting journalism? No. Sensationalism? Yes.

    When Mr. Robertson goes out with his spycam, he isn’t exposing crime – he’s exposing that people interpret Scripture differently than he does – and it’s sensationalism – not ministry.

    How does his spycam work help him in his apparent attempt to share the Gospel, other than pumping up his supporters back in Texas and maybe getting him some more funds for the next year? Does it help him win “the lost in denominations”? I’d be interested to know how. Seems to me that it just makes people mad. Like Jerry Springer.

    Thank you, Jo, for your interest in this blog and our topics of discussion.

    Nathan

  22. Jo,

    Also, why do believe Seventh Day Adventists are not Christians?

    Do you believe only certain bodies of the American Restoration Movement Churches of Christ are actual Christians?

  23. Dear Forum,
    I make this broad address because it seems that all of you are agreed that I am hyper Church of Christ.
    I wish you would read some famous Baptist observations of history of the kind of preaching Mr. Robertson is doing.
    A History of the Middle District Baptist Association of Virginia 1784-1984
    Mr. William L,Lumpkin
    Mr. Jeff D. Ray Former President of Baptist Theological Seminary FT. Worth, TX “Set the Church on Fire”

    One alludes to the forthright plain preaching as the reason why Churches of Christ should be used as an example for growth to the Baptist , and the other tells of whole Virginia Baptist associations becoming non-existent as result of conversions from the kind of preaching that Mr. Robertson is doing.

    In fact in the 60s when everyone in the “Hyperchurchofchrist” was preaching like this, it was the fastest growing religion in the United States.

    The Churches where I have been in LA, TX, TN, all told of these writers outside of the Church of Christ who praised our kind of BOLD EXPOSURE of ERROR.

    I don’t want to be in a fight with everyone here. It seems that everyone here has the live and let live bug.

    I hope I am not going to be kicked out?

  24. Jo,

    Why would you be kicked out? We don’t hit the mute button here unless someone acts uncivil. I even let Mr. Robertson get by with some pretty uncivil comments recently because I was glad to have him actually here where I thought we might be able to have some good discussions. But, then he left. I’ve only had one case where someone was being very, very uncivil, and they had to be let go. Otherwise, we welcome different perspectives.

    As I said, Jo, as long as you keep it civil, you are welcome – just like everyone else.

    But, as I was asking before, what are your thoughts on those who would agree with Mr. Robertson doctrinally but disagree with his methods and behaviour?

    And, if you are not a hyper conservative church of Christ person, then let me know and I’ll gladly not refer to you that way. The issue is, on this board we have contributors with different doctrinal positions within the churches of Christ, and it’s the easiest way to keep things straight.

  25. What Johnny is doing is NOT beneficial for the kingdom of God whatsoever. Even some of those on here who agree with his doctrine can see that. He only manipulates and attacks to prove a point-he is not preaching. The point of the Bible is to bring people to Christ-not to our set of beliefs. Christ Himself adds those HE saves to the church. We should not be preaching one church over the other-but simply the Good News of the gospel of Christ. The point has never been to be the “fastest growing church or denomination”, but to share Christ’s love with the world.

    I am not trying to fight with you either but I think you are only looking at this from one angle. Why would you want to be praised for bold exposure of error over preaching Christ only??!! We are to be preaching Christ and Christ ONLY. There is a lost and dying world out there that does not know Christ at all, and our duty is to share that with them-not to be attacking other Christians and telling them they are not saved. That is not a “live and let live bug”. That is what God has called us to.

  26. Jo,

    Explain to me how this point you made earlier has anything to do with the churches of Christ:

    A History of the Middle District Baptist Association of Virginia 1784-1984
    Mr. William L,Lumpkin
    Mr. Jeff D. Ray Former President of Baptist Theological Seminary FT. Worth, TX “Set the Church on Fire”

    You said that “whole Virginia Baptist associations becoming non-existent as result of conversions from the kind of preaching that Mr. Robertson is doing”.”

    Give more details. I didn’t see that in what I read of the History of the Middle District Baptist Associaton.

  27. Dear Mrs. Katherine,
    Do you think that Al Maxie would have been forced into the Christian Church in the 70s if he would have told everyone where he really stood?
    Do you think all of the growth of the 40s and 50s that created ACC’s greatness was done by sinful men? They all with no exception preached like Mr. Robertson. In the 60s everyone in the hyperchurchofchrist preached like Mr. Robertson. Do you think they were all sinful?
    What would you think of Mr. Garrett if you knew he was having “underground” meetings in the 1990s to try and turn ACU toward his understanding?

    Is it really wrong to video a Baptist church current service and point out the error. If so would it be wrong for the Baptist Manual to copy a then current statement of faith from a Presbyterian Confession of Faith and demonstrate the error in 160,000 editions printed in 1951?

    Peace comes from conflict.

  28. Mr. Rick,
    A New Majority 1834-1860
    …”More alarming was a threat from within. The religious movement led by Alexander Campbell and reckoned by him a “Reformation” of the Church made itself felt in a number of churches. Campbellite views appeared to challenge Baptist views of the doctrines of the church, baptism, and even of the purity of the Gospel, as cherished practices of the churches. The doctrinal integrity of the churches was being called into question, and that by active and respected members of the churches. In 1833 the Middle District followed the lead of the neighboring Dover Association of a year earlier when it resolved that “This Association will no longer recognize members continuing in the Painville or Chinquapin Church of Christ attached to our order, neither will we hereafter recognize any church holding in fellowship for any length of time persons maintaining the peculiarities of Alexander Campbell.”’ A majority of the Painville Church was considered withdrawn, and a minority group of that church organized the Union Church, which was received into the Middle District. Three years later, the Chestnut Hill Church in Nottoway County was “cut off” by the Middle District “in consequence of having identified herself with those who have embraced the peculiarities of Alexander Campbell.” The Middle District also declined to seat fraternal delegates from the Meherrin Association “because of prevalence of Campbellism and opposition to benevolent institutions, manifested by churches in that body.” Indeed, the Middle District suffered fewer losses to Campbellism than most of the neighboring associations. Six churches in the Meherrin went over to Campbellism; the Meherrin fell into disorganization and was replaced by the Concord. Two churches of the Dover Association- joined the Campbell movement, and six others were seriously divided over Campbellism. Following the first response of the Middle District to the divisive movement, the Association reassessed the state of its member churches. They were seventeen in number in 1835. For the first time, a detailed report on the “State of the Churches” was given in the Minutes. It revealed that at Grubb Hill all white members except two or three were members of the local temperance society. They and considerable numbers of the colored members were acting on temperance principles. Salem had received 50 men the preceding year by baptism. Chestnut Hill was after a cold and wintry season. In the list of ordained ministers, Eleazar Clay was listed as “superannuated.” Sixteen ministers served the churches, ten of them residing in Chesterfield, five in Powhatan, one in Amelia and one in Dinwiddie.

  29. Dear Forum,
    Is Mr. Rick a kind person? He said he would respond when something worthwhile was said.
    How do you know I am not unchurched?
    Do I deserve such because I am trying to find out what all this about?

    Is this the way you treated Mr. Robertson? He said on one of his DVDs that he invited you over to Danville in 2006. Is this true?
    I saw DVDs where other Baptist came on his show and were treated with great respect. He differed with them but no threats were ever made. The only threats i have heard so far have been from Baptist, Apostolics, and Church of Gods.
    You are not being kind saying this to my statements.
    Would please apologize for that.

  30. It would help us, Jo to know where you are coming from, so we can understand. There is a difference in truly seeking to understand and defending what Johnny is doing. Could you please clarify?

  31. Dear Forum,
    I think I was wrong for coming here.
    I was referred to as hyperchurchofchrist, and I never heard of this until I came in here.
    The Church of Christ was praised by Baptist of old, even Mr. Jeter of Richmond praised Mr. Campbell on many occasions.
    I just read on Mr. Hook’s page that he was secretive in the early days about his views. Is that worse than Mr. Roberts?
    I may have come in late but it seems everyone here is already mad.
    I went to Mr. Randy’s site and he said very nice things about Mr. Robertson. Is it because he knows him personally and everyone else has made up their minds from his show?

  32. Jo, we are not mad, but we do not condone what Johnny is doing. It is obvious to us what he is doing-I don’t know if you are just choosing not to see it.

    What do you mean the Mr. Hook was secretive? Johnny is being deceptive and manipulative, which is very different from secretive.

    What Nathan is referring to is “hyper conservative Church of Christ” is not negative. I hate labels, but because we are varied on beliefs in the spectrum in the Churches of Christ-it helps to know where people are. The terms liberal or conservative will only be negative to the people who want it to be, but like I said I hate the labels. We should be Christians ONLY, but we have thoroughly skewed that with our human titles and beliefs.

    I will let Randy speak for himself-but from what he has said here he is not in agreement at all with what Johnny is doing after knowing him personally-we are not in agreement after seeing his show and the way he has reacted on here. Truly, it makes me sick.

  33. Jo,

    I ask again:

    What are your thoughts on those who would agree with Mr. Robertson doctrinally but disagree with his methods and behaviour?

    As to Rick, I don’t see that he was being uncivil. He stated his opinion, and then when something came up that he felt needed response, he asked for more information.

    We may be sensitive to uncivility here, but not that sensitive. We’re not trying to be politically correct.

  34. “Is it really wrong to video a Baptist church current service and point out the error.”

    Yes, when it is done with the agenda in mind that Johnny and his friends choose-and by doing it deceptively and deceitfully. That does nothing for the cause of Christ. We should be seeking UNITY-not division and not condemnation. We should focus on our common goal: Jesus Christ. If we cannot even agree with that, I don’t know much more that I can say.

    By the way, I am going to plant flowers so if you respond and I don’t, I am not ignore you.

  35. Mr. Rick,
    I found this from Mr. Jeter of Richmond

    I first saw Mr. Campbell at the Dover Association, held at Upper Essex meeting-house, Essex county, Va., in October, 1825. His fame had preceded him. His debate on Baptism with Rev. William L. McCalla, a Presbyterian minister, had been pretty widely circulated, and produced the impression that he was a man of great learning and an invincible defender of Baptist principles. His preaching at several places in the upper counties of the State, as he approached the Association, had increased his reputation and the desire to hear him preach. He was thirty-six years old, above the ordinary height, rather spare, and not particularly attractive in appearance. There was a general desire at the Association to see him and to hear him preach.

    It seems that in the days of Mr. Jeter and the Baptist in his day they had the relations with Mr. Campbell that Mr. Robertson sought with you.
    On his DVD he said he invited you to the place where he preaches in Danville.

  36. Jo wrote:

    “I went to Mr. Randy’s site and he said very nice things about Mr. Robertson. Is it because he knows him personally and everyone else has made up their minds from his show?”

    Jo – the things we discuss here are not about Mr. Robertson personally. Randy has told me the great things that JR has done for folks in the churches where he has been leading. That’s fine and dandy – but it is not what he shows the community on his broadcasts. What he shows us is someone who is interested only in proving his interpretation of Scripture to be correct – and that he’ll go to great lengths to achieve that – including participating in what I call “televised ministry sensationalism” – or the whole hidden camera bit.

    I wouldn’t dream of disparaging JR personally, because I don’t know him personally. But, because he is a public figure, his doctrine and methods are fair game for discussion.

    As to the attitude people express about him, both here and elsewhere, well, this isn’t our doing. He has spent several years building his reputation in this community and I don’t think it shocks him in the least.

    I actually pray regularly for JR – because he reminds me alot of Saul. If he’d have his Damascus Road experience, he could really be a force to be reckoned with for the sake of the Gospel of Grace.

    I’m sure he’d be thrilled to know that I feel that way about him. 😉

  37. Dear Answering,
    I really don’t know what all has been said. I am going through the forum at my own pace. I have seen some persons in here who are not representing the Church of Christ that I grew up in.

    I have family members who are in many churches and none of them seem to get along nor do the families of the in-laws.
    They just agree not to discuss the differing doctrines but they would be glad to teach you that you are incorrect if you were to lean their way.
    It seems that this is the normal behavior I see every where.
    I do know this though, the Church of Christ is no different than every institution. Some have a desire to conserve the institution, and others have the desire to change it. Conserve or be liberal .

    I came in because of men like Mr. Hook and Mr. Maxie being set forth as persons in the mainstream. They are generally known as the persons for change.

    Mr Robertson seems like Fox News and this forum seems like CNN.

  38. Dear Answering,
    I don’t mean anything by that other than it seems that one agency is not at all opposed to investigation while the other seems to say it is not the way of sophisticated people.
    How could Mr. Robertson possible let people know about his “other side”? The post that he made about things he has done were cut to pieces.

  39. Jo,

    I think that if you would check other posts that I have made on this site that you would discover that my greatest difficulty with Johnny is his method of attack on those who disagree with his interpretation of Scripture and the amount of time, energy and money that he puts into attacking established churches in the area. I will repeat it again, I honestly believe that if Johnny would use his talent and zeal to reach out to those who are unchurched he would be more effective in ministry.

    I believe that Johnny’s constant negative, vicious campaign against area established churches does more harm to God’s Kingdom than good. The unsaved are not overwhelmingly drawn to Christ by watching and hearing a “televangelist” rip apart the teaching and personalities of local pastors and churches.

    The few times that I have watched Norm or Johnny (sorry James I don’t usually see your broadcast) on their “chew and spit” show I honestly cannot recall an episode in which time was spent talking about the substitionary death of Christ on the cross for our sins. Instead what I have observed is enormous amount of time spent on how area established churches, (Baptist in particular) are wrong when compared to the churches of Christ and how area pastors are evil people. But my viewing of their programs are limited since I don’t care to hear their rants.

  40. “I do know this though, the Church of Christ is no different than every institution. Some have a desire to conserve the institution, and others have the desire to change it. Conserve or be liberal.”

    Very true, Jo. When that takes the place of following Jesus is where I get frustrated.

    Are you talking about Al MAXEY (as opposed to Maxie)?

  41. I’ve just finished reading all that has been said back and forth
    and have not much to add to what the others (ie. Nathan, my dad “Mr.”Rick, and Katherine) have said.

    But I will clear up my own name.
    I wasn’t calling JR names in my post but responding to your post Jo which basically called Mr.Rick a donkey (as per JR’s tv show). So I was pointing out the irony of Johnny’s statements. Kind of like a “pot calling the kettle black” scenario. I am not a name-caller, however I also will not stand for my father to be called names either. So that’s my peace.

  42. Jo wrote above: Mr. Robertson said that Mr. Crawford allowed a group known as “Honesty” to co-publish THAT “GAY” THING at his campus.
    Mr. Robertson said that this all came from a website that published Evangelical Forum Newsletter. http://www.jpbc.org.

    Might I make some corrections. This event took place in 2001, some 5 years before Mr. Crawford became President of the seminary. The President at the time was Thomas Graves. His rebuttal of this was presented in the May 22, 2001 edition of the Baptist Press. Here is a portion of that Baptist Press article:

    Documents produced by a former student at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond offer support for his statements that BTSR provides a supportive environment for homosexuality. The student, John Ippolito, has provided copies of “That ‘Gay’ Thing” newsletter distributed through BTSR student mailboxes as evidence that a support and advocacy group for lesbian, homosexual, bisexual and transgender Southern Baptists has been promoted on the BTSR campus.

    The Richmond native challenged a defense of BTSR offered by President Thomas Graves in a May 3 open letter in the Religious Herald, the state paper of Baptist General Association of Virginia. BGAV is a major source of funding for the 12-year old seminary established by the Alliance of Baptists, allocating $12,962 in April, for example, in addition to funds BGAV churches send to Cooperative Baptist Fellowship which also support BTSR.

    Graves called the Baptist Banner’s publication of Ippolito’s journal “misleading, false and bordering on libel.” Graves, in his open letter, defended BTSR’s policy on homosexuality, stating that promiscuity of any type is not allowed. John Ippolito’s journal, which he kept as a BTSR class assignment, can be viewed on the Internet at http://www.thebaptistbanner.com.

    Graves insisted in his letter, “Homosexual practice is not affirmed.” He described the school’s commitment to a discussion of the issue of the church’s ministry to the homosexual community as a necessary ingredient in its preparation of ministers. “Our students must be prepared to deal with this and other troublesome issues,” he wrote. “One need not condone a homosexual lifestyle to prepare oneself for servant ministry to the homosexual persons of our society.”

    The issue of homosexuality continues to be addressed at BTSR, such as an April dialogue and discussion on the subject at which all opinions and perspectives were welcomed. “Our only ‘rule’ for this time will be listening with respect to all who care to share,” the campus newsletter stated.

    As far as granting official status to Honesty, that has never happened, according to BTSR student life director Warren Hammonds. Graves commented further, telling Baptist Press that BTSR had disallowed the group from holding meetings on campus. “Folks came and met outside our building, so it wouldn’t be fair to say they’d never met near our building,” Graves said, “but they’ve never been recognized as an official organization. It is an off-campus group.”

  43. Jo wrote: Mr. Rick putting forth his grand stats on the effect of Mr. Robertson on the unchurched.

    Mr. Rick has not put forth any stats on Mr. Robertson’s effect on the unchurched, only an opinion:

    “Unfortunatley, more and more of the unchurched are being turned away from God by the negative and nasty campaign of a seasoned antagonist against area churches.”

    Do you honestly think the unchurched is drawn to God by this publicly televised campaign?

  44. Jo,

    You are deeply confusing me. I have no idea where you are coming from and what you are getting at. Can you clarify…..everything?

  45. I think everyone is trying to be civil. It’s just a bit irritating, isn’t it?

    I don’t think anyone will be offended if we call each other by our names without the “Mr.”, “Mrs.”, “Miss”, “Mstr”, “esquire”, “Ms” titles. But thank you for trying to maintain blog rules.

    Nathan

  46. nathan,
    saul of tarsus?……………………………
    let me know if you see any unusual bright lights.
    he did say its too dark in here.
    lee

  47. You folks won’t let a person be nice
    But I was taught that respect demands Mr. Mrs. and it may occur to you that everyone on this blog is not from your culture.
    I will make this post and move along.
    Mr Rick said

    “I believe that Johnny’s constant negative, vicious campaign against area established churches does more harm to God’s Kingdom than good. The unsaved are not overwhelmingly drawn to Christ by watching and hearing a “televangelist” rip apart the teaching and personalities of local pastors and churches.”

    Mr. Robertson does not believe you all are true but really counterfeit. If he is right then really there is nothing wrong with his attack any more than our treasury attacks upon counterfeiters in money.
    The operative word is “IF” and I think that it is the case that you all are in fact counterfeits. To answer your question about Mr. Robertson and his broadcast we in our area see the DVDs and we are thrilled that he has 4 broadcast now and is headed for the Greensboro market and is training 3 other new men too.
    Thank you for at least letting me in but the attitude is a bit on condescending side.
    I know all you oppose each other too, but you seem to have no problem treating each other with courtesy
    I may try one of the other spots.
    Thank you again to Mr Nathan Answering!

  48. What do you mean “counterfeits”-like you do not believe we are all Christians? If that is what you are implying, I am pretty sure you are not God-so you don’t have that call.

    Why don’t you reveal who you really are?

  49. I posted this comment earlier: The few times that I have watched Norm or Johnny (sorry James I don’t usually see your broadcast) on their “chew and spit” show I honestly cannot recall an episode in which time was spent talking about the substitionary death of Christ on the cross for our sins. Instead what I have observed is enormous amount of time spent on how area established churches, (Baptist in particular) are wrong when compared to the churches of Christ and how area pastors are evil people.

    I am somewhat curious as to why JO, who seems to be greatly knowledgeable of Johnny’s teachings on DVD, didn’t respond to this. I pointed out earlier that I have not watched a great deal of J-N-J’s broadcasts.

    I would like to hear from those who have watched a fair number of these broadcasts and as to whether or not if my assumption is correct or not: that Johnny’s broadcasts (as well as Norm & James) spends more time in attacking area churches than they do in proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ.

  50. Good evening, Jo.

    How do you think you are being mistreated? I’ve reread through the comments, and it seems like for the most part people have been responding thoughtfully and critically. That’s what we do here.

    I wonder if you might just give a little bit of info about your connection with our illustrious TV hosts? You don’t have to say much – not looking for ID cards or anything – just wondering how you have so much “insider information”. Are you willing to serve as an in-between, since Johnny has apparently sworn off this blog?

    As to your comments, I just did a search in the Scriptures for the word “counterfeit”, and that word does not appear in the Bible. So, where does Johnny find the authority to consider us counterfeit?

    But for the sake of argument, how can we tell a counterfeit? In the Televised Ministry Sensationalist clip I posted, you will see Jackie Poe quote Matthew 12:33, “…for the tree is known by [his] fruit.” And what does Paul tell us is the fruit of the spirit? “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.”

    So, then, if you are truly seeking a “counterfeit”, and not just picking fights – one tool at your disposal is to look for the fruit – or the absence of fruit.

    Jo, I wonder if you can ring up Johnny Robertson and ask him what evidence he has that everyone other than the “Martinsville church of Christ”, “Danville church of Christ” and “Reidsville church of Christ” in our area is “counterfeit”?

    Please tell Johnny not to bother with the old “Where can they find their church in the Bible?” argument, because #1, “church of Christ” is not in the Bible, either. And #2, there are churches in the Martinsville and surrounding areas that go by the name “church of Christ” that aren’t a part of the little in-group mentioned above – what about them?

    Next, I would look at the fruit our three hosts exhibit on their TV broadcasts. Rick has made the very good point that they seem to spend an unbalanced amount of time attacking others, rather than proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ. It seems that even when they are getting to that, it is in the context of what others are “doing wrong”. You can look through the clips on youtube to see what I mean – and not just the ones I posted here. In particular, check out the clip Chris Knight uploaded onto youtube for a spot-on example.

    Thank you,
    Nathan

  51. Jo,

    I post with these folks. And I tell you that they know how to debate respectfully with others. We do not all agree certainly we are all individuals. The difference is we respect each others paths of faith. We do not tell each we are wrong about this or that, but only that we don’t see something that way. The problem with debating is not the actual discussion of each other’s honest views, it is when people start telling people only they have the only true way and all others are counterfiet that their way is wrong.

    I have a question for you. You said that previous c of co conservative types were praised by Baptists at the Baptist Convention. This wasn’t the same Baptist convention where Southern Baptists broke away because they felt slavery was right since it was in the Bible is it? See these folks at that convention were change agents too. They knew no matter what was traditionally done or what is mentioned in the Bible that slavery was wrong. I see these “liberals” as the only life line for my heritage.

  52. Dear Gail,
    Are saying that slavery is wrong? Isn’t that just your point of view?
    1Ti 6:1 ¶ Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
    2 And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.
    3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

    This nation has a very strong heritage that include

    Indentured Servants in colonial America were, for the most part, adult white persons who were bound to labor for a period of years. There were three well-known classes: the free-willers, or redemptioners; those who were enticed to leave their home country out of poverty or who were kidnapped for political or religious reasons; and convicts From US HISTORY ENCYC

    Since that is the case are you saying all the above is sinful.

    In actuality are you saying that anyone can say anyone
    else is wrong about anything? You claimed this “path” that you believe we are free to choose?

    No such “path” exist!
    Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
    There is one faith for all people!
    That translates into one doctrine for all people.
    That translates into all believers being one
    Joh 17:20 ¶ Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
    21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

  53. Dear Mr. Answer,
    Everyone that is involved in supporting Mr. Robertson is an “insider.”
    He sends massive amounts of free DVDs to all supporters as well as to any interested Christians. He is in the process of upgrading to be able to send 30,000 a year. One other site sends out one hundred thousand and all for free.

    I have known Mr. Robertson for 38 years including the troubled years.

    Your quick disposal of “don’t come with your church is not in the Bible” is not as easily dismissed as you would like to think.

    Everyone watching and the rest of us using the DVDs know that people are shocked by that argument.

    The plural form of church demands that the single be allowed. It takes a church of Christ in Corinth and a church of Christ in Ephesus to enable Paul to say “churches” in Rome 16:16.
    Ro 16:16 Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.

    Look again Please at
    1Co 4:17 ¶ For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.
    For Him to be able to say “every church” there has to be more than one.

    The problem you have is, you assume just because all your religions are here, that means they are THERE (in the Bible). They are not in the Bible, nor are they in the mind of God, nor are they bought with Jesus Blood!
    Ac 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
    Joh 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
    10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.

    Dear Answer, I learned all these arguments from Mr. Robertson’s DVDs and they are working just as he said they did back in the 1950s when the church of Christ was helping convert more people to the truth than any religion in America.

    You said that fruit of the Spirit are the ones you listed?
    Can we please look at the whole Bible on Peace?
    Ro 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

    Do you suppose that peace is more important a fruit than unity?
    The only way to have unity is to have ONE Body.
    As long as Mr. Poe has introduced another body into the arena we will never have unity. What must happen? We must destroy the offending body!
    Is this what Paul who wrote of the fruit of the Spirit says?
    Yes.
    Tit 3:10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
    11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

    Mr. Robertson has encouraged people to answer this forum and I am trying to do so.

    Is it really satisfying our argument for you to just try and wipe it away with “don’t try that…”

    Thanks so much for your time

  54. Dear Mr. Answer,
    Quickly looking at Mr. Robertson activities with camera…
    Joh 2:13 And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,
    14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:
    15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables;
    16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise.
    17 And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

    My Lord!

  55. Dear Mr, Answer, Is there any application for this today?

    Mt 21:11 And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.
    12 ¶ And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,
    13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.
    My Lord!

    Jesus is the Prince of Peace and able to have a zeal for His Father’s house that allows for this?
    Is Mr. Robertson here yet?

    One of your contributors posted how Mr. Robertson handled Mr. Poe and you did not question them on how they got their information. Do you have anyone spying for you, or will you just take hear say if it makes Mr. Robertson look bad.
    I believe the DVDs stated that Mr. Poe and crew were working at the church and it was Mr. Robertson’s good fortune to come at that time.

    Why doesn’t Mr. Poe just come on Mr. Robertson broadcast and answer him?
    Is debating wrong?
    Did Mr Parker Edwards Smith sin?

    I am so very thankful for you forum! I read with great interest the post about the Baptist of the 1834 days.
    I look forward to getting my DVDs of Mr. Robertson next broadcast in which I am told he will tell of Richmond’s most well known Baptist preacher from those days commenting on the activities of Mr. Alexander Campbell!

  56. Jo,

    I only brought up slavery because I believe this is a good example of where the Bible was used to justify something that was cultural. As it has been used for maybe other wrongs. Yes, I do believe slavery is wrong as is murder. You I take it don’t believe slavery is wrong because it is in the Bible and because it existed in history? I think there is universal good and evil most all agree upon. The disagreement comes in when you and other conservatives like you tell other Christians they are not worshipping correctly and that you and those like you alone have salvation all wrapped up and no one else does. You do not have a direct hot line to God no matter how much you try to convince others of this. This is not mentally healthy for anyone involved.

  57. Hello Jo,

    I’m glad you are here. If Mr. Robertson isn’t interested in participating, at least someone “in the know” from the assembly is interested. I appreciate it.

    I think comparing the activities of Johnny and James and their televised ministry sensationalism to Jesus’ cleansing the temple is a bit too much of a stretch. Look at the context of Matt 21, and you’ll see that it is not actually related in the least. The point of Jesus’ actions (summed up nicely in the passage you gave) was that people had turned the temple into a place of commerce, and this was (and is) inappropriate. I don’t see the connection between that and secret videotaping.

    As to the clip – you’ll see that I wrote that the bit you mentioned was from the perspective of a person watching the clip – taking it at face value. It came from Mitch’s youtube page, not any DVDs, so maybe you should tell Mitch to give more information on youtube.com. Tell Mitch I said hello, too.

    Pastor Poe appeared to be getting out of his truck – as if just arriving, and Johnny and the cameraman approached as if they had been waiting for him. This is why I used the word “appear” in the original posting – to alert the reader that I was supposing. My apologies for misrepresenting the facts. I will edit that portion of the post.

    As to Pastor Poe coming on the broadcast, I’m not Pastor Poe, and so I couldn’t begin to answer that. As to the post about the “Baptist of the 1834 days”, didn’t you make that post? I don’t recall seeing anyone else talk about the 19th century, except in response to your talking about it.

    Kindly,
    Mr. Answer

  58. Dear Mr. Answer,
    Thanks for pointing that out!
    I did mention the 1834 baptist and that is my way of informing folks who read my post that something has been said before that might interest them.
    Notice how I did it again in reference to Mr. Robertson upcoming broadcast. I told of how he would be speaking of the Baptist in Richmond.
    I had already brought up Mr. Jeter once, and hope people will Google this person and see some of the very strong remarks he made toward the hypercoc backn that time frame.
    Here is my post again with even more of Mr Jeter for all to read!
    Post;
    It seems that in the days of Mr. Jeter and the Baptist in his day they had the relations with Mr. Campbell that Mr. Robertson sought with you.
    I first saw Mr. Campbell at the Dover Association, held at Upper Essex meeting-house, Essex county, Va., in October, 1825. His fame had preceded him. His debate on Baptism with Rev. William L. McCalla, a Presbyterian minister, had been pretty widely circulated, and produced the impression that he was a man of great learning and an invincible defender of Baptist principles. His preaching at several places in the upper counties of the State, as he approached the Association, had increased his reputation and the desire to hear him preach. He was thirty-six years old, above the ordinary height, rather spare, and not particularly attractive in appearance. There was a general desire at the Association to see him and to hear him preach.
    John Bryce (if my memory is not at fault), John Kerr, and Alexander Campbell were appointed to occupy the stage on Lords-day. The congregation, as usual on such occasions, was very large. Bryce preached first. Kerr, as was invariably the case, preached last, for the reason that no minister was willing to preach after him. Campbell delivered the second discourse, which, in those days, was generally considered the post of honor. The sermon of Bryce was short, and made but little impression on the audience. Campbell had a favorable opportunity for displaying his powers. On a calm autumnal day a vast crowd was intent to hear the renowned stranger. After the lapse of more than half a century I can furnish but a meagre report of his discourse.
    Mr. Campbell read the twenty-eighth chapter of Matthew, and took for his text the apostolic commission, verses 19, 20: “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” His sermon was not expository, but discursive. It contained nothing on the import of baptism or the subjects of the ordinance, but was a discussion of the methods of evangelizing the world in the apostolic age. He dwelt largely on the fact that the disciples, preaching the world.” He drew a graphic description of the conversations of the wandering disciples concerning the things which they had seen and learned in the city of Jerusalem and the effects produced by them. The promise—“lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world”—he expounded as having exclusive reference to the apostles, and the “end of the world” as meaning the end of the age—that is, the lives of the apostles. The sermon was probably from an hour to an hour and a half in length, and was heard to the close with unflagging attention.
    The impressions made by the discourse were quite diverse. The old and experienced Baptists generally shook their heads in disapprobation of it. It was not the kind of preaching to which they had been accustomed and by which they had been nourished. To them it lacked the marrow and fatness of the gospel. Semple, Broaddus, and the fathers of the Association stood in doubt of Brother Campbell. They saw that he had abilities which might be usefully employed, but his preaching was not distinctively evangelical. It was notable rather for what it concealed than for what it revealed. It might have been delivered by a Unitarian, or a mere formalist, without any incongruity. It was hoped, however, that association with Baptists and a more careful study of the Scriptures would soon correct any errors into which he had fallen. For my own part I was quite captured by the sermon. It contained food for thought, and my mind was so occupied by its speculations that I scarcely paid respectful attention to the preaching of Kerr, which immediately followed it, though I had never heard him before. Some allowance must be made for my inexperience and my imperfect knowledge of the Scriptures. I was but little more than twenty-three years old, and my theological training had been very defective. The discourse was new in its style, fresh in its matter, and well suited to interest the young and speculative.
    The day after the close of the Association Mr. Campbell preached at Bruington meeting-house, King and Queen country. His text was 1 Corinthians xiii:13: “Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” Of the sermon I remember nothing, except that is was of the same indefinite sort as the former. There was nothing to indicate whether he was a Trinitarian or a Unitarian, a Calvinist or an Arminian, a believer in spiritual or baptismal regeneration.
    On the next day I travelled with him and several of the delegates to the Association from the neighborhood of Bruington to the city of Richmond. He rode in a buggy, having a daughter nearly grown with him. As I was on horseback I had a favorable opportunity of cultivating his acquaintance. I can recollect but little that occurred on the route, except a discussion we had on the subject of missions. It was a fresh and stirring theme of conversation and of public discourse. Mr. Campbell was not avowedly opposed to missions, but he condemned all the methods of propagating the knowledge of the gospel then adopted by evangelical Christians. He believed, so far as I could understand and can now remember his views, that the progress of Christianity must be by a natural outgrowth. Men should teach their neighbors the word of God, and they in turn should communicate it to persons nearest to them, and thus it would gradually be spread throughout the world. His method of evangelization had been shadowed forth in his remarks at the Association on the labors of the disciples scattered by the death of Stephen. He maintained that the sending of missionaries to preach the gospel to the heathen was utterly futile. He compared it to an attempt to cut down a majestic oak with a pen-knife. I heartily dissented from his views, and we entered into an earnest discussion on the subject, which ended as most discussions do, without any change of opinion. I know not what judgement he formed of my argument. I certainly received the impression that his were not invincible.
    In Richmond he preached at night in the Second Baptist church. to a small congregation, assembled for the stated service, from Matthew xvi:18: “And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” He maintained that the Church was founded on the doctrine expressed in Peter’s confession: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” The sermon gave no uncertain sound as to his views of the character of Roman Catholicism.
    Here I parted with Mr. Campbell, and saw him no more till he sat in the State Convention for amending the constitution in 1929-‘30. I spent a few days in Richmond during its session, but saw very little of him. He added nothing to his fame by his labors as a statesman. Some persons thought that he did not receive due respect in the convention. because he was a clergyman. It is more probable that his want of influence in the body arose from his lack of training in statesmanship and the speculative character of his mind. I have a vague recollection that in a speech before the convention he laid down a number of propositions, drawn from the Scriptures, which, whether true or false, were of little importance in drafting a State constitution.
    Before I saw Mr. Campbell again great religious changes had taken place. His followers, or those who adopted his views, had been separated from the Baptist churches and organized into an independent denomination. I had written Campbellism Examined and Campbellism Reexamined. The Disciples held a meeting in Richmond some twenty years ago, and Mr. Campbell was present. I expressed to some of his friends my readiness to call on him as a matter of courtesy, if the call would be agreeable to him. Receiving the assurance that the courtesy would be accepted with pleasure, I visited him at his lodgings, in company with Dr. J. L. Burrows. We were received with civility, but with evident restraint. He was greatly changed in appearance since I first saw him. He was increased in flesh, but bore the unmistakable marks of old age and growing infirmities. I had resolved that I would not refer to our past controversies, or to points concerning which we differed, but that, if he should introduce them, I would not plead on the defensive. He very soon alluded to these matters. His views, he said, had been misunderstood and misrepresented; he had been treated with great injustice. To these complaints I made no reply, but proceeded at once to say that he had propagated one doctrine which he owed it to himself, to his friends, and to the Christian world, to correct—it is, that baptism and regeneration in the Scriptures meant the same thing. On this subject our conversation turned. He did not retract the statement, but offered such explanation of it as may be found in his voluminous writings. It is, in substance, that baptism is nor the whole, but the finishing act of regeneration; that there can be no regeneration without baptism. His explanation was as unsatisfactory to me as my criticisms were to him. With this discussion we closed our interview, with due courtesy without cordiality.
    It may, perhaps, be proper for me to give briefly my views of the talents and character of Mr. Campbell. Due allowance should be made for the perversion of my judgment, which may have resulted from our long-continued controversy and sparring. We were earnest and sharp, but not bitter, in our discussions. I was never his enemy, and now that he is incapable of self-defense, I would surely do his memory no known influence, I may speak of him with candor and caution.
    Mr. Campbell was a man of learning, of much miscellaneous information, and of great readiness and fecundity of mind. His learning, as already stated, was various rather than profound, and his imaginative far exceeded his ratiocinative power. There was, in my humble judgement, a screw loose in his mental machinery, which became more obvious as he grew older, and terminated in downright monomania. No writer within my knowledge ever repeated his thoughts so frequently, wrote so much that needed explanation, or so glaringly and often contradicted himself, as he did. This is all explicable on the supposition that he labored under an idiosyncrasy which was gradually developed into mental derangement. This supposition, too, vindicates him in making statements which could hardly have been made by a sound and well-balanced mind without guilt. With this ground of defense, I have no hesitation in expressing the opinion that he was a good man. His Life was devoted to an earnest and fearless advocacy of principles which, in the main, were right. The supreme and exclusive authority of the Scriptures in religion, immersion the only baptism, and believers the only subjects of the ordinance, and church independence, are important doctrines which he held in common with Baptists, and most zealously defended. He wrote, too, many valuable articles on matters of faith and practice, along, we must think, with much that was visionary and erratic. With the exception of statements easily traced to a disordered imagination, his life was pure and in perfect harmony with the principles he espoused and spent his long life in defending.
    (from The Recollections of a Long Life by Jeremiah Bell Jeter Chapter XXVII “Alexander Campbell”)

    Thank you for making it come again in your post.

  59. Dear Mr. Answer,
    Can you explain why I am being asked “who I am”?
    I thought the whole point of the alias was so people could come in and not have any references to identity?
    Do you have different rules for people that agree with Mr. Robertson.
    Can I ask who you are and can I know which church you go to?
    I will also like to know where Mr. Lee attends while we are in this mood?

  60. Dear Mrs. Katherine,
    I do think you are more like the Christian Church than the church that the Baptist speak of in the 1834 article. Sent to Mr. Rick on May 3rd.
    You sound like Max Lucado’s group.

    If that is right we wish you would not put you post out there as if they were really the church.

    The way we tell if you really are the same is in what you recommend from History verse what you reject.

    If you recommend Mr. Garrett then we know you are eventually headed in the direction of North Richland Hills or Quail Springs.

    I really don’t see why people get upset with the distinction being made. Most know they would never tell anyone they are lost outside the church and that is the message of all the churches pre-1960.

  61. Jo,
    You seem very concerned that others here are mean to you or that you are asked to follow different rules. Maybe its just that you don’t have experience in debating outside of your denomination and are used to everyone agreeing? Could you explain further your feelings? I am not trying to find out “who you really are” (I don’t think it would matter if I knew your real name as I doubt I know who you are anyway) nor am I trying to be mean to you. My dog in this fight if you can call it that is that I was raised in the conservative c of c and most of my family still are. I feel that teaching people you are the only ones going to heaven and all other Christians aren’t going is very mentally destructive to people and not at all Christ-like.

  62. Dear Forum,
    May i go back to the slavery issue.
    It is so easy to detect the level of students in this forum.
    Do you think that all those folks in the pre-civil war era were not good students and if you had been there you would have opened the way for abolishment of slavery?
    Slavery is not a condemned practice in the Bible.
    Did any one read the article from US History?
    Slavery defined as “men-stealing” is a sin, but to have control over another is not.
    We have prison full of people that many of you may have even been in the jury the day their rights were taken away.
    These people of days gone by came into the world where men controlled the lives of their fellow man resulting from differing events. One sold himself, and another was put into bond for failure to pay agreed upon terms, and others were prisoners. Along with this came the person kidnapped from far off lands, often in the name of war.

    People knew that being controlled because you were a prisoner was not wrong, and indentured servants were everywhere. It was a difficult time and a person who stood up and said “across the board” all control of humans by other humans is a human rights violation would be met with opposition.
    Do you think that one human has the right to control another?
    Do you think no human has the right to control another?
    Please do not be so harsh please.

  63. I’m sorry I got distracted!
    Mrs. Gail, I just thought it was odd that so many people were being so sensitive when Mr. Robertson was writing. He was considered mean…
    Mostly I have been condemned since I let it be known I disagree with most everyone.
    Very few want to answer the points, but seem to want to get personal.
    That is why I brought up the way I feel.

  64. Jo wrote:

    “Dear Mrs. Katherine,
    I do think you are more like the Christian Church than the church that the Baptist speak of in the 1834 article. Sent to Mr. Rick on May 3rd.
    You sound like Max Lucado’s group.

    If that is right we wish you would not put you post out there as if they were really the church.

    The way we tell if you really are the same is in what you recommend from History verse what you reject.

    If you recommend Mr. Garrett then we know you are eventually headed in the direction of North Richland Hills or Quail Springs.

    I really don’t see why people get upset with the distinction being made. Most know they would never tell anyone they are lost outside the church and that is the message of all the churches pre-1960.”

    While I am not sure what all you are trying to say here, I bet you do wish I would not post here, but unlucky for you-I don’t answer to you. I answer to God. What you are promoting in “fighting the denominations” and condemning everyone who does not believe exactly like you do is not from God-so of course I will speak out against it. Who is “we” anyway?

    Why do you keep going back to the churches pre-1960? We are in the year 2008. People out there do not know Jesus. We live in a post-Christian society. Our churches are not flourishing-which is not even the point in the first place. Why? We just continue to divide and divide, while losing the main focus of Jesus and His message of salvation. We don’t need to be rescuing people from “denominations” (it’s almost like you have made that into a dirty word-although you are in one anyway), but from the darkness of satan and his lies. My loyalties do not and have never been found in an institutional church-they are firmly grounded in Jesus. I admire anyone who follows the same-despite opposition-because it is what God has called us all to. I feel honored to be placed in the same category as Richland Hills or Quail
    Springs, and I think it is terrible the false things that have been written about them.

    I will not stand by and let my brothers and sisters be ripped to shreds by “ministers” who claim they are doing it in the name of Jesus. It is simply not from Him, and those who are doing it have been greatly misled-more so than those they choose to attack. We need to be standing as ONE to deliver the Good News message of the Gospel of Jesus to a world that needs to know Him and His amazing love and grace. Can you not agree to that?

  65. well said Katherine!

    and I want to add that with all this talk about “denominations” and “religion”, we seem to have lost the heart of Christianity which is that personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Denominations aside, religiosity aside… they all mean nothing without that personal relationship.

    The CofC that you seem to be representing Jo appears to me to promote religion and argue denomination more than it promotes a relationship with a living God.

  66. Just a question or two: We know that God allowed it to happen, but did God approve of the slavery of Isreal in Egyptian bondage as a just and fair thing? If God did approve of bondage (slavery) of the people of Isreal as a just and fair thing for the Eqyptians to do to others, why did He send Moses to demand their freedom?

  67. Thank you, Katie-and amen to what you said, too! That relationship is more important than any religious doctrine anyone pushes. Relationship trumps religion any day!!

  68. oh definitely
    I’d take my relationship with Christ over any organized institution/religion any day!

  69. Katherine,
    one of my favorite Christian music quotes is from Big Daddy Weave’s song “Fields of Grace” where is talking about that great day when we are in Heaven… he quote is “there’s a place where religion finally dies!”

  70. Recent post;

    Thank you, Katie-and amen to what you said, too! That relationship is more important than any religious doctrine anyone pushes. Relationship trumps religion any day!!

    answer;
    1Ti 1:3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,

    1Ti 1:4 Neither give heed to FABLES (a denomination is accepted) and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

    You may do as you please today but judgment is coming!

    I just don’t want you to be surprised when Jesus says “you divided my house” (house =church 1Tim 3:15)
    Every one is to speak the same thing
    1Co 1:10 ¶ Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

    Mr. Rick, you do a fine job debating! Any reason why you don’t take up another format, say TV?
    Just wondering.
    Katie you could come on with him. I saw a brother sister debate Mr. Robertson once. Shirley and John Phelps.
    They had the same basic doctrine.

  71. The verses you just posted did nothing to contradict Katherine’s statement about relationship trumping religion. Can you find the BCV that has the word “religion” in it?

    My statement and her statement were in reference to your continued (and others, JR and NF to be included) on denominations and religion, etc. You guys are greatly missing the joy of a relationship with Jesus Christ confining yourself to man made religion.

  72. Jo, what are you trying to say in your last post? Are you honestly saying that religious doctrine is more important than a real relationship with Jesus Christ? Please clarify.

  73. and might I add that in quoting 1 timothy you added your own word “denomination” which was not in that verse… quite bold of you to add words to Scripture when the CofC is so adament that they add nothing to scripture but are instead “silent” where it is “silent’

  74. By the way, it would be good to note what 1 Timothy continues to state:

    The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk. They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm. ~1 Timothy 1:5-7

  75. Indeed, Katie-especially the fact that the CofC is itself a denomination!!

    Oh, and I love that Big Daddy Weave song and always loved that line, too-we really were meant to be sisters!! 😉

    Dancing with my Father God in fields of grace!!!

  76. I would like to take us back to one of the more debated topics that our local coC friends like to address: Baptismal Regeneration. Below are some arguments against baptismal regenration from a fellow by the name of David Hunt:

    “When Paul reminded the Corinthians of the essential ingredients of the gospel which he preached and by which they had been saved, he made no mention of baptism (I Cor 15:1-4). In fact, he distinguished between the gospel and baptism: “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel…” (I Cor 1:17). He hadn’t baptized most of the Corinthians, couldn’t remember whom he had baptized, and was thankful that it had been very few (I Cor 1:14-16) — a strange attitude if baptism is essential to salvation! Yet without baptizing them, Paul declared that he was their father in the faith- “in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel” (I Cor 4:15).

    Scores of verses declare, with no mention of baptism, that salvation comes by believing the gospel: “[I]t pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (I Cor 1:21; see also Jn 3:16,18,36,5:24; Acts 10:43,13:38-39, 16:3 1; Rom 1:16,3:28; 4:24, 5:1; I Cor 15:1-4; Eph 2:8, etc.). Not one of those verses, however, says that baptism saves.

    Numerous verses declare that whosoever does not believe is lost, but not one verse declares that whosoever is not baptized is lost.

    Christ never baptized anyone (Jn 4:2)— very odd if baptism saves. The Savior of the world must have deliberately avoided baptizing to make it clear that baptism has no part in salvation.

    “[The gospel of Christ … is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth [it]” (Rom 1:I6). That gospel, as Paul preached it, required faith in Christ’s blood poured out in death on the cross for the sins of the world and said nothing about baptism

  77. “Dear Mr. Answer,
    Can you explain why I am being asked “who I am”?
    I thought the whole point of the alias was so people could come in and not have any references to identity?
    Do you have different rules for people that agree with Mr. Robertson.
    Can I ask who you are and can I know which church you go to?
    I will also like to know where Mr. Lee attends while we are in this mood?”

    Jo,

    Don’t make a mountain out of a molehill. People are just trying to understand your POV – where you are coming from. Nobody is harassing you about your identity. When you gave more info about your connection with Johnny R, that satisfied me that you know him and have interacted with him personally – which was what you had been implying through some of your posts.

    Kindly,
    Mr. Answer

  78. Dear Mr. Rick,
    you wrote;
    “When Paul reminded the Corinthians of the essential ingredients of the gospel which he preached and by which they had been saved, he made no mention of baptism (I Cor 15:1-4). In fact, he distinguished between the gospel and baptism: “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel…” (I Cor 1:17). He hadn’t baptized most of the Corinthians, couldn’t remember whom he had baptized, and was thankful that it had been very few (I Cor 1:14-16) — a strange attitude if baptism is essential to salvation!

    Since all our readers are not likely to have read 1Co 15:1 ¶ Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
    2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
    3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
    4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

    Now if your reasoning has any value, it will stand up to a little scrutiny.
    You said since no mention of baptism was found, then it must be of little importance (non-essential)!
    Mr. Rick will you kindly tell me where Paul spoke of repentance in this passage.
    While you are searching how about find repent in the whole letter? They had some pretty bad things going on in Corinth.
    While you are searching this how about find repent in the whole of the epistle of John.
    If as you say, “not being mentioned means not essential” then can we conclude that not only do Baptist leave out baptism, but they also leave out repentance when telling people what do to be saved?

    Maybe Mr. Hunt would like to debate Mr. Robertson!

    It is pretty easy to see that Paul did not say “Christ did not send me to PREACH baptism”, he said Christ did not send me to baptize. Paul preached baptism but he didn’t do the baptizing.
    The people often get hung up on who is the greatest amongst them and if the person who baptized you is the greatest well …you figure it out.
    Isn’t that what is going on in the context?
    1Co 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
    12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
    13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
    14 ¶ I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
    15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
    16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
    17 ¶ For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

    Remember Jesus didn’t baptize either, but he baptized more than the GREATEST BAPTIZER John!
    Joh 4:1 ¶ When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
    2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
    Mr. Rick, are we debating?
    Is this wrong?
    On another subject; the person who ask for dvds can email Mr. Norm Fields on his website posted on this forum. I don’t think Mr. Robertson monitors his comments.

  79. Dear Mr. Answer,
    Why are you not posting?
    I saw on saw on a myspace account where someone was saying he ask for dvds of Mr. Robertson on this site and you didn’t post the request.
    I told them them in my last post where to get them dvds myself.
    Also I read a post that was supposed to be a post here and it did not show up either

  80. Dear Mr. Answer,
    what do you think of
    1Ki 20:38 So the prophet departed, and waited for the king by the way, and disguised himself with ashes upon his face.

  81. Dear Jo,

    I didn’t post Chuck’s question, because I’ve already posted the URLs for Johnny’s, James’s and Norm’s blogs, and he can easily go there to get any information about DVDs that he wants to get. I’m not Amazon.com to help people find Johnny. He’s said he’s reaching such a big number of people with his broadcast, why does he possibly need my help spreading his doctrine? After all, he said in his last post that we only have six or so people coming here.

    However, your news that people on a myspace page talking about our blog makes me think that Johnny might have been mistaken in that comment. Seems like word must be getting out. We had a hit count of over 500 yesterday, so I guess so.

    Sorry, Chuck! Next time I’ll respond to comments like yours by redirecting the commenter to the blogroll on the side of the front page.

    Sincerely,
    Mr. Answer

  82. Jo wrote:

    “Dear Mr. Answer,
    what do you think of
    1Ki 20:38 So the prophet departed, and waited for the king by the way, and disguised himself with ashes upon his face”

    I think it’s part of a good Old Testament lesson. What do you think of it?

    Salutations,
    Mr. Answer

  83. johnny (aka Jim Jones)”

    Maybe I shouldnt have compared Johnny to Jim Jones, but he seems to have that kind of control over people. He knows he does too, which makes him more deadly.

  84. Randy your comparison for Johnny is correct. They are a kind of cult. I have never been to his church,but unfortunately my daughter and her family are members.Johnny Robertson is evil.I will tell you how he runs that church. If you and your family are members,and you don’t do as he thinks you should, you will be voted out of the church. Your family will not be allowed to have you in their home, nor can you sit at the same table for a meal, nor can they socialize with you. If you have been married and divorced, married to someone else even tho you have children, love your spouse and a very happy family. At their church, you will have to leave that spouse and go back to the first, IF YOU WANT TO GO TO HEAVEN. Now if you are having a hard time with this. They will hide you from your family and not let them know where you are.This gives time to mind controll or brainwash you.

    Even tho the Bible tells us not to judge. Johnny boy thinks he can do a righteous judge. What I have said is the truth, He is putting my family thru hell with
    my grand daughter. I have tried to talk with him, but he will not answer letter,e-mail or phone call. I really think he feels he has met his match. If I ever do get to talk to him, it will be on my terms, not his. I will not listen to a false prophet twist the scripture.

  85. Um… faithful? Claudine’s post is about two weeks old. Why don’t you come back over to the other discussion which is current, and give evidence to Corey’s being a “turncoat”?

  86. um… i dont monitor this site
    um… i had surgery just 16 days ago…
    it takes me a little bit to catchback up? I broadcast till 10 last nite go on at 10 tonite I am human
    corey who?

  87. I am working on a broadcast tonite randy that should get to even you
    two of the biggest in mville say one another is going to hell
    baptist and apostolic
    well i know that is nothing new they believed this before i came to town
    but i have it own tape now

    finally one of the biggest comes over and admitts that tithing is unscriptural

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s