---

Let It Be Known...by Mark Smith

Let it be known that for several years now I have been trying to get a Church of Christ minister, ANY Church of Christ minister, to defend their claims in a public debate. This shyness on their part is surprising, given that the Church of Christ has a tradition of debating anyone who would dare challenge them. But after several YEARS now of  SEEKING I have yet to have even one of these "brave" gentlemen be a man about it and step up to the plate. I am left to conclude that they are good for huffing and puffing while behind their pulpits, safe from anyone questioning or criticizing them, but not so good in  public debate, where  their claims can be examined out in the open. IF you reading this are a member of a Church of Christ, PLEASE print this out and bring it to your minister Sunday- and challenge him: why hasn't HE stepped up? So based upon years and years of seeking, 
let me state it now and for the record, that until shown otherwise:
 CHURCH OF CHRIST MINISTERS ARE OFFICIALLY COWARDS.

---

 

Table of Contents

JB Bennet  2-18-03

JB Bennet  2-19-03

Thinking of Leaving the Church of Christ- 2-24-03

Scott Shifferd Jr 5-21-03

          Scott Shifferd 6-20-03
          Scott Shifferd 7-6-03
          Scott Shifferd 7-14-03

Michael Burkitt 5-30-03

Chico 1-7-04

Nameless 2-4-04

Nameless 2-6-04

Quest for Debate- Responses Thus Far

Kevin_Harris__4-14-04

Brian_Henegar-_South_Trail_Church_of_Christ_youth_minister__9-10-04

Terry_Chapman_minister_at_South_Trail_Church_of_Christ__9-14-04

Terry_Chapman_minister_at_South_Trail_Church_of_Christ_8-16-05

T_J_Latham__9-16-04

Clint_Davis_10-4-04

Clint_Davis_10-12-04

Phil__2-1-2005

Chris_Moores_7-25-05

Chris_Moores_8-8-05

Chris_Moores_8-10-05

Chris_Moores_8-11-05

Chad__9-2-05

dspike_9-5-05_

Nameless_from_Tampa_10/21/07

Nameless__10-21-07

RG__12/9/07_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

JB Bennet 

Subj: Church of Christ  Date: 2/18/03 8:48:35 PM Pacific Standard Time From:   To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

I have been attending the Church of Christ for 12 years.  I must admit not
all congregations are the same for good reason.  I agree with you that we
attempt to be like the first century church because this was the church in
it's original and untainted form as intended by Christ.  The modern day CoC
could not possibly be exactly the same simply because we don't believe that
many of the things are possible today (many of the same things that you said
are requirements to be the restored church) as they were at that time.  All
of the CoC's that I have attended contain only 3 of the 7 positions you
stated and you forgot elders.  It isn't possible to have apostles, prophets,
miracle workers, healers, or tongue speakers except through divine
intervention.  Those positions have come and gone and cannot be obtained in
the modern day CoC because they simply are not needed anymore.  I say that
your arguments are pure rubbish. 

Mark Smith here}    My arguments are not the rubbish here;  rather it is the claims your church has been making to the world all these years. I am not the one making these wild claims, I am merely pointing out that they are rubbish- which, by the way, you also pointed out when you admitted your church lacks many things the original New Testament church had (see the areas in your email I yellowed in above)

Listen JB- go back  and RE-read the lead essay}   Restored: Fact or Fiction? on my CofC web page.  You seem to be an intelligent person- what part of these claims BY YOUR OWN DAMN CHURCH don't you understand??? I know darn well, and so do you judging by your email, that your church is NOT the same as the original church- BUT THAT'S MY POINT!!!! You agree with me that your church isn't the same as the original church, then bash me for saying it. HUH???  Do you understand the claim made by Baxter:  "reproduce in contemporary times the church originally established on Pentecost, A.D. 30" ??? What part of "reproduce" or "originally" are you having problems with? Do you understand Delton Haun's claim that the modern Church of Christ is "the original church of the New Testament reproduced in this twentieth century" ???  What part of these arrogant and false claims are you having problems understanding??? And since you admit these claims are false, why are you bashing me for pointing out that they are false???  (And by the way, your comment about my not mentioning Elders: Elders and Pastors are the same thing. But lest anyone else make your same mistake, I now mention Elders.)

 

 I am not an experienced debater (most
likely you are), but only someone intent on accomplishing the devils will
would attack a group that is attempting to accomplish God's will.  Anybody
can throw up contradictory scriptures, but are they in context?

Mark Smith here}    Once again the Christian propensity for trying to create "ex nihlo" (from nothing) is demonstrated. JB makes three accusations here, and ASSUMES that because he is a Christian that making an accusation also creates "ex nihlo" what is being accused. He implies I've taken verses out of context, yet neglects to cite even a single example. Why? Because there ARE no examples. I bend over BACKWARD to NOT take ANYTHING out of context. He also accuses me of doing the "devil's will". Uhhh, JB- I can no more do the "devil's will" than you can do Santa's will: both Santa and De Devil are imaginary- they don't exist. JB also accuses the Church of Christ of "attempting to accomplish God's will" but again, neglects to provide us any evidence to back up that joke, er, accusation.

 

  I believe you attempt to smear God's word in order to justify your shortcomings.  Are
all congregations perfect...no...you'll find problems everywhere and your
miserable attempt to stereotype all CoC's as a massive organization like the
catholics is ludicrous.  You pointed out the CoC's organization (where are
you doing your homework?)...I have not attended any CoC that is organized
the way so emphatically prescribe...at least get your facts straight.

Mark Smith here}    My facts are fine- you just haven't been around, as evidenced (watch JB- I'm going to do something called "backing up what I'm claiming". Maybe you should try it sometime???) by your ignorance of Church of Christ claims, and congregational organizations. Have you considered that maybe not ALL CofC's are organized like your podunk backwoods outhouse of a congregation???

 

  So does this mean God's will cannot be accomplished?  I'm sure that you will
say yes, but I disagree on the simple fact that we don't need these
positions because we have all that we need in the scriptures.

I pray that one day you will open your eyes to find what glorious blessings
God has given you and that you appreciate what sacrifices He has made for
you.  What you are doing is like slinging mud on the bride on her wedding
day.  This is very disappointing, but there are many in the world like
yourself...trust me...there are more of you than there are of me (this is
called "an evidence").

Mark Smith here}    No JB, it's NOT "an evidence", but only one more claim unsupported by any evidence. A mere CLAIM does NOT equal evidence. You ARE confused, aren't you??? I can make the CLAIM that you are a rabbit, and I could even CALL that mere claim "evidence" (like you did), but no, JB, it's still just a mere claim- you have no "ex nihlo" powers to create- sorry.

Love in Christ,

JB Bennett

---

 

 

JB Bennet

Subj: Re: church of christ  Date: 2/19/03 9:16:39 PM Pacific Standard Time From:   To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

Mark Smith here}    I'd like everyone that reads this to notice that JB doesn't respond, refute, or even comment on a single argument I've made. All he does is blow alot of religious hot air- and do alot of ad hominum- in "love" of course!

 

I understand why you want my email address, and you can provide it to those
that request it if you absolutely have to have it.  I am asking you again to
remove it, please.

as far as your other arguments...i've been thinking about them periodically
throughout the day.  I followed the link that you provided.  Pretty
impresive I must say.  You have compiled quite the christian bashing
arsenal.  Initially I thought it was an article that I happened to stumbled
on to, but obviously there is a much larger picture.  Then I realized that I
am the first to comment, at least in my section.  Then i thought...why? 
Then it dawned on me...look at your topics...they are not worth debating
with you.  Not because they are not worth defending, but it is much like
Matthew 7:6

Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and
rend you.

Mark Smith here}    I'd rather be an Atheist swine than an arrogant Christian jackass, which is what you're revealing yourself to be. Rather than "being ready always to give an answer" as your New Testament says, you're going to invoke the "Fifth Amendment" of your religion, and pretend your so much "holier than thou" that you don't need to respond to what I write, any more so than you'd respond to a bug.

 

I don't mean to imply that you are either a dog or a swine, however after
reviewing your website, I have not found any encouraging information, but
only negative hateful thoughts.  This would indicate that your actions are
like thereof.

Another point to make as to why you will not understand the truth if it were
sitting on the end of your nose is found in Matthew 18:2-5

Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, and
said, "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as
little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 
Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in
the kingdom of heaven.  Whoever receives one little child like this in My
name receives Me."

Mark Smith here}    So, only little kids can REALLY know the truth, eh? I suppose you'd rather put a five year old in the white house based on this idiocy? Face it, Jesus screwed up here by admitting he admired gullibility in little kids. Jesus- and all his followers- think it's just peachy to swallow anything somebody says to you.

 

many people and members of the church are knowledgeable, like yourself, but
are still doomed according to Romans 10:2-4

For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to
knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about
to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the
righteousness of God. For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness
to every one that believeth.

Apperently, even stated in your own email address, you are not willing to
submit to Christ.  This is fair, not to you, but fair.  To even begin
explaining meaty subjects that you delight in contradicting, you must
understand what it is based upon.  A foundation must be laid as in 1 Peter
2:6-8

Mark Smith here}    All this religious mumbo-jumbo may impress others at your church, but it doesn't impress anyone else. You are coming off as a religious nutcase- which is fine by me! It make my job easier when you idiots hang yourselfs.

1 Peter 2:6-8  Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture, "Behold, I
lay in Zion A chief cornerstone, elect, precious, And he who believes on Him
will by no means be put to shame." Therefore, to you who believe, He is
precious; but to those who are disobedient, "The stone which the builders
rejected Has become the chief cornerstone," and "A stone of stumbling And a
rock of offense." They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they
also were appointed.

Mark Smith here}    Mumbo jumbo, uga buuga, presto chango, wasabi wabby ya ya. You know what I just realized? There's no way you are a Church of Christer- you are MUCH too incoherent and scatterbrained. If anything, you are a denominationalist who got his theological ass kicked by a CofC'er and now you're trying to get revenge. 

Without such a foundation the bible is worthless.  To lay this foundation
you must have faith.  James says, "Was not Rahab the harlot justified by
works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another
way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is
dead also" (Jas. 2:25-26).

---

Thinking of Leaving the Church of Christ-  2-24-03

Subj: Your transition from CoC to atheism  Date: 2/24/03 3:49:46 PM Pacific Standard Time From: XXX To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet

I was brought up in the Church of Christ, and I have been
reading a lot lately about the history of the Church of
Christ and all the "splintered" groups therein.  I go to
what I thought was a conservative Church of Christ, but
after reading a little bit on the Internet, I think it is
probably middle-of-the-road.  I now realize  how much the
"one true church" (notice the quotes) is splintered. I am
having deep concerns about my beliefs concerning the Church
of Christ and religion in general.

Mark Smith here}    I found out the same thing in my transition out of the C of C- regardless of how "fundamental" your C of C is, there is always another that is even more so. That's the problem with splitting hairs- you can ALWAYS split the one you just split: just get a more powerful microscope and a finer razor. 

 

I was just wondering about your transition into atheism.
Did you leave the Church of Christ and then become an
atheist immediately?  Or did you try out other
'denominations' before eventually becoming an atheist?  It's
ironic that the church of Christ was "founded" on
individual, private interpretation and study of the
scripture--I'd be willing to bet that is exactly how you
decided to become an atheist!

Mark Smith here}    I went to a "mainline" C of C (non-instrumental), called "South Trail Church of Christ" down in Sarasota, Florida. It had broken off of another C of C named "Fruitville Road Church of Christ" (since then renamed "Sarasota C of C") which itself had broken off of "Golf Street Church of Christ" (do you notice a trend here???).  South Trail was the first C of C I went to, and I never even knew about there being any other "brands" out there. I stumbled upon Golf Street Church of Christ (since then renamed 12th Street Church of Christ) as it was only a mile from my house. I found out they didn't believe in having paid preachers- every male was allowed to give a sermon. Having never heard of such a heresy, I set about setting them straight. Instead, I ended up agreeing with their position, and my book "Fire The Clergy" ( Fire The Clergy ) was the result, which resulted in my being excommunicated from South Trail at the "tender" age of 17. As I was debating alot of Mormons at the time, I then did a study on church governments, which resulted in my writing another book ( Authority In Church Government ) which eventually led me out of organized religions all together.

 

I have never encountered an atheist who was a former member
of the church of Christ.  You have a unique perspective--you
have all the "scriptual ammo" of a member of the Church of
Christ yet you don't believe in any God.  That is probably
why no one will debate you.  I wouldn't.  

Mark Smith here}    Thanks for the compliment, and I think you're right. Hell, even back when I was a Christian I could have beat Craig in a debate- denominationalists are no match for a well-skilled Church of Christer. Craig took up debating religion some years after college- I grew UP debating religion!

What got me OUT OF religion altogether was the same thing that had changed my mind on aspects of religion before: intense Bible study. In my 30's I did a study on Matthew 24 (having been putting it off since I was about 14 or so) and found out that Jesus had blown his Second Coming prophecies: Jesus had been a false prophet  ( see Mt 24-34 What The Scholars Say  and others in that section). I drew the line at worshipping a false prophet. 

The Atheism came later. Once I started studying my OWN theological foundations with the same intensity I had always studied everyone else's, it was amazing how quickly I found out I had been standing on sand, not rock, all those years. Christianity folded like a house of cards when a gentle refreshing breeze passes by.

 

Anyway, I know you
aren't a counselor, but I am sitting on the fence about my
religion right now and I am trying to get advice and insight
from all the sources I can.  Thanks for your time.


----

---

 

        Scott Shifferd Jr 5-21-03

 

Subj: Your Site is filled with Misunderstandings  Date: 5/21/03 1:36:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time From:   To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

First, concerning your skepticism of God and the
church of Christ, you have ignorance built upon more
ignorance. You want to debate a Christian of the
church of Christ? First, be an honest person and start
with being honest with yourself. Then take all your
so-called Bible contradictions, your proofs against
the existence of God, and so on to this site:
www.apologeticspress.com . I would like to know your
results. Be sure to send me your leftovers.

Mark Smith here}    Instead of me taking all those things to that location, how about you take your head and remove it from its current location: your asshole.

 

Second, concerning the restoration of the Church, you
think that the church of Christ has not been restored.
Well, you're right that the church of Christ has not
been restored, because the church does not have to be
restored when it has been here since about 30 AD. (And
if you think that the church of Christ came from the
Restoration, then just reply and I can settle that
misunderstanding.) 

Mark Smith here}    And yet another example of a Christian more ignorant of his theological heritage than me, the Atheist. I am not going to take the time here to teach Scott what he should have learned in church.

 

Regarding your logic about today's
church of Christ and the church of Christ of the 1st
century, you point out that today's church is not the
1st century church, and you would be right. The 1st
century church did not drive cars, have websites, and
so on. 

Mark Smith here}    Gee! I never knew that! I'm soooo impressed with your snappy answer!

 But Scott, what about the GOVERNMENT and PRACTICE of the church? It's your own leaders that have claimed that your little CULT is the exact xerox copy of the first century church. No one ever said they drove cars and such.

 

Also you do correctly point out some problems
with the church of Christ today, but then forget that
none of the 1st century churches of Christ were
perfect either. People are not perfect and there will
never be a perfect church filled with imperfect
people, not today nor in the 1st century. Recognizing
the millions of imperfections of the churches of
Christ does not disprove that churches of Christ are
not like the original but actually the opposite.

 

Mark Smith here}    Yes folks, our screwups PROVE we're the true church!!!

Today's church has problems just like the 1st century
church, and today's church has some issues that are
only common to this age. For The church of today to be
the New Testament church, then the church must follow
the eternal pattern of doctrines found in the New
Testament Scriptures.

Third, most of your so-called contradictions can
easily be fixed by looking to the Biblical texts in
their original language. For example, the
contradiction about a jealous God can easily be
refuted. In fact, you could use a more literal Bible
to address this issue like the ASV 1901 or NASV, but
be sure not to switched between versions to get the
reading that you desire to make a point. (If you don't
understand why, then reply.)

Mark Smith here}    Uhhh, genius: I went to the original languages- that is in the essay. Didn't you even READ the damn essay, duffass???

 

Finally, I enjoyed reading your articles. Thanks for
keeping us on our toes. I just ask that you be honest
with yourself and understanding of Christians. I will
also be honest with myself, so keep working and I'll
keep reading.

In Search of the Truth in All Honesty,
                                   Scott Shifferd Jr.

---

 

Scott Shifferd 6-20-03

 

Subj: I sent this about a month ago, and I guess you did not get it.  Date: 6/20/03 7:01:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time From:   To: jcnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

Out of interest, I see that you accept the Big Bang.
Do you have any other essays regarding your full
understanding about the origin of the Universe? If
not, I would like to know about your thinking. Please,
entail certain details like whether before the Big
Bang there was a ylem or a black hole, and whether the
ylem or black hole came from the Big Crunch or
something else.

Mark Smith here}     What does the origin of the universe have to do with the Church of Christ? Are you arrogant men going to take credit for that now, too???

Now regarding your comments to my last e-mail, I will
address these in order.

First, you imply that I should not refer you to
another location (website). Why not? I came to your
location and you will not go to mine? Besides this, in
addressing your so-called contradictions between
Christianity and science or the Scriptures, where
should I start? What do you think your strongest
arguments are?

Mark Smith here}     Dude, the topic is "Church of Christ". Repeat after me: I WILL stay on topic, I WILL stay on topic.

Second, you declare that I am ignorant of my
theological heritage. I guess you think that I do not
know that the common thinking is that the church of
Christ originated from the Restoration. You and many
other individuals believe that “the church of Christ”
is just simply a sect of Christendom, which was a
result of the Campbells who pleaded for a return to
the New Testament pattern in America.

Mark Smith here}     Uhhh, yes. That's called HISTORY. History is a written record of things that happened in the past. Go and read it for yourself- that IS how your church started. For you to pretend otherwise is just arrogant stupidity.

 

 In contradiction
to this thinking, throughout history, there have been
communities and then more communities that held the
doctrine and practice of the church of Christ of the
Scriptures, but I know that this does not stand with
those who think that the church of Christ is just
another denominated cult or sect from the Roman
Catholic Church. To prove that the church of Christ
existed before the Restoration, note a historical
marker placed by the Historical Commission of the
state of Massachusetts, which displays the existence
of a congregation of the church of Christ at Rumney
Marsh established in 1710. This is more than a century
before the Campbell and Stone movements of the
Restoration. 

Mark Smith here}     Would you then like to show the connection between THAT group and the Campbell's??? Please show how that group evolved into the Campbell's group. Can't do it, can you??? 

 

On this same marker, there is mention of
an erected meeting house in 1790. Thomas Cheever was
the first settled minister there who died October 17,
1749, at the age of 91. (West, Search of the Ancient
Order). Apparently, the church of Christ existed long
before the Campbells came to America. Dr. Robinson who
was a principal for Overdale College, Birmingham,
England, affirmed that, “In the Furness District of
Lancanshire in N.W. England, there existed in 1669,
during the reign of Charles II, a group of eight
churches of Christ, most of them now not in existence.
An old minute book had been found dated in 1669 with
evidence that they called themselves by the name
‘church of Christ,’ practiced baptism by immersion,
celebrated the Lord's Supper each Lord's Day and had
elders and deacons.” This is only the beginning of
such evidence.

Mark Smith here}     Heresies tend to repeat themselves. As Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun. It's not surprising that there would be isolated groups popping up here and there with the same unfounded goofy theories.

Third, I pointed out that the church today does differ
from the church of the 1st century by the fact that
today we drive cars, have websites, and so on. I said
this to show that we are not in all respects “a Xerox
copy” of the 1st century church. Whoever told you that
we claim to be a Xerox copy of the 1st century church
is mistaken. You said, “It’s your leaders that have
claimed that your little CULT is the exact Xerox copy
of the first century church.” Whoever you are
referring to, they are not my leaders.

Mark Smith here}     Once again, we see the divisive nature of this hee-haw cult at work. Scott doesn't like what the leaders of his group have written, so rather than submit to their spiritual authority, HE RUNS AWAY FROM "HOME" OFF INTO LEFT FIELD AND DISOWNS HIS SPIRITUAL PARENTS. I wouldn't be surprised if Scott's even started his own C of C, like thousands of other C of C'ers before him. If there's one thing the C of C is good at, it "divide and..." not conquerp, but "divide and disappear".

 

 Trying to
disprove the fact that today’s church of Christ is not
the New Testament church of Christ by the words of
uninspired men is illogical.

Mark Smith here}     Oh, so using the actual published writings of the modern Church of Christ to disprove the modern Church of Christ is illogical. What planet are YOU from, Scott??? I guess if you were trying to disprove the Mormon church you would use maybe the writings of Buddha then, rather than Joseph Smith???

 

 The truth is we are the
church of Christ found in the Scriptures, and you do
not have to have a sign on the church building’s lawn
stating “church of Christ” to be apart of the church
of Christ. All one must do to be apart of the church
of Christ is to soundly follow the Scriptures.

Mark Smith here}     But as I aptly pointed out, you bozo's DON'T "follow the scriptures". And if I'm soooo wrong in this claim, then please tell me why ALL of the Churches of Christ in Southern California fear debating me over this in public??? Why do they all cower in the corner like frightened old ladies whenever I mention the word "debate" to them? 

WHY ARE ALL OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST SO CHICKEN-SHIT WHEN IT COMES TO DEBATE, IF I'M SO WRONG?????

Concerning the Government and Practice of the church,
most of the churches of Christ throughout the world
follow the government for the church given in the
Scriptures (1 Timothy 3, Titus 1), and follow the
practices and doctrines of the Scriptures to the best
of their understanding. Your chart that points out
that we do not have apostles, prophets, miracles
workers, or healers, only helps to prove that we are
the New Testament church. These positions do not exist
today because today’s church is established and has
that which is perfect, the Scriptures.

Mark Smith here}     Scott, have you stopped taking your medication again??? YOUR church claims to have 100% of EVERYTHING the church in the New Testament had. My chart shows this to be a lie. How, therefore, does my chart- which blows your stupid little ass-backwards cult out of the water- how does my chart then "prove" your church??? Are you THAT out of touch with reality???

 

 These positions
existed in the first century only for the
establishment of the church until that which is
perfect has come (1 Corinthians 13 and Ephesians 4).

Mark Smith here}     Well, if that's so, then you'd better tell the bozo's that publish your Church of Christ tracts to stop making their claims that they ARE 100% without anything missing, the "New Testament Church reproduced in this modern age" as one of  YOUR own tracts declare.

Fourth, concerning your statement “Yes folks, our
screwups PROVE we’re the true church!!!”, what is this
statement suppose to prove? Christians mess up today
and in the past and will in the future, just like
everyone else including you. As people, we are prone
to mistakes. If as you think that we evolved from some
primordial slime, then there really is no such thing
as a mistake to you, but just the workings of nature
and one’s subjective interpretation of what a mistake
is. So, how can you even try to disprove a religion by
the fact that they make mistakes by your own
understanding of mistakes which you must think are
subjective? Your statement blatantly lacks logic and
consistency.

Mark Smith here}     Yes, how dare I expose to the world the fuck-ups you guys really are! You are PROUD of screwing up, you wear it as a badge of honor! How DARE I point out flaws in a group that CLAIMS to be perfect!!!!

Fifth, concerning your essay about how the Scriptures
contradict by the fact that God is love, love is not
jealous, but God is a jealous God; you state “I went
to the original languages – that is in the essay”. I
went back and read the essay (Tyrannosaurus Pettius
Rex) four more times and your statement here is
blatantly false. Nowhere in your essay is there any
reference to the original languages. I guess now
you’ll go back and fix that.

Mark Smith here}     What I meant Scott is that I researched the original languages while I was writing that, and saw that there was no place for you weaselly Christians to hide, as you so often do, behind this Greek participle or that Hebrew verb.

 

 Here is the truth about
this so-called contradiction. The Greek word in 1
Corinthians 13:4 is “zeilos”. This word is defined as
eagerness, zeal, and is also translated as envy or
jealousy when the word is used in a negative way (i.e.
sin). The possible meanings for “zeilos” are
determined by the context of the word. Context is
vital. There are words in Hebrew, Greek, and English
that are ambiguous between several possible meanings,
but rely on their context. In Koine Greek, just note a
word that you might know “proskuneo”. Sometimes
proskuneo means “to prostrate” and at other times “to
honor (worship)”, the context decides the definition.
Throughout the Scriptures, “zeilos” is used in
reference to being good sometimes, bad at other times,
and neutral. Again, only the context can decide. Some
of the passages that contain a bad type of “zeilos”
are Romans 13:13, 1 Corinthians 13:4, 2 Corinthians
11:2, 12:20, Galatians 5:20, and James 3:14. Even
reading these verses in English, the truth is blatant
that the context shows that there is a bad kind of
“zeilos”. Just read James 3:14 refers to an act of
“zeilos” as “bitter”. Then there are those passages
that show a good kind of “zeilos”. Some of these
passages are Acts 22:3, Romans 10:2, 1 Corinthians
12:31, 1 Corinthians 14:1, 12, 39, 2 Corinthians
7:7,11, 9:2, 11:2, Galatians 4:18, Titus 2:14, and 1
Peter 3:13. Note, Galatians 4:18 that states, “it is
good always to be eagerly sought in a commendable
manner”. The word “eagerly” is from the word “zeilos”.
Then 1 Peter 3:13 states, “Who is there to harm you if
you prove zealous for what is good?” In this verse,
here “zealous” is “zeilos”. Next, in 2 Corinthians
11:2, Paul states “For I am jealous for you with a
godly jealousy”. Again, “jealous” and “jealousy” are
from “zeilos” and are used to display a good
attribute. This is all said, so that you will
understand that even if you translated this word as
“jealous” then there would be a good type of jealousy
in the Scriptures for which God can have and a bad
kind for which only those of the world have.

Mark Smith here}     WhatEVER definition you end up for the word "jealous", your Bible still says love is NOT jealous. You can define jealous as having green pokadots. Your Bible says therefore that love does NOT have green pokadots. This is called a CON-TRA-DIC-TION, Scott. Sorry I caught your Bible with its pants down.

 

 Next,
what about the word for jealousy in Exodus 20:5? Here,
the Hebrew word for jealousy in Exodus 20:5 is
“qanna”, which can also mean “eager” or “zealous”.
This point is made to demonstrate that even if the
negative form of “zeilos” in 1 Corinthians 13:4 is
jealousy, then clearly this word would not be
synonymous with a positive form of the word “qanna” in
Exodus 20:5. In conclusion, God is love (1 John 4:8),
love is not jealous (in a negative context), and God
is a zealous God (in a positive context). You should
have gone to the original languages.

Sincerely and Honestly,
                            Scott Shifferd Jr.

Mark Smith here}     Like I already said, I did go to the original language. The contradiction stands. IF you disagree with me, why don't you try something called DOCUMENTATION. I noticed you didn't quote even one Greek or Hebrew lexicon, not one commentary or scholar. I'm supposed to buy your arguments just because a hee-haw cultist says so??? I don't think so. That kind of hocus-pocus may fly in your backwater cult, but not out here in the real world. 

And by the way, as long as you brought up that essay of mine, why didn't you deal with one of the MAJOR points of that essay??? Why did you avoid answering my question as to why your Biblegod would get jealous over make-believe gods of other religions??? That's like getting jealous over a cartoon character, and makes your Biblegod look like a lunatic. WHY didn't you deal with THAT point, Scott??? 

Tyrannosaurus Pettius Rex

 

---

 

 Scott Shifferd 7-6-03

Subj: Open  Date: 7/6/03 6:33:17 AM Pacific Daylight Time From:   To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

First, I guess now you will examine the site that I
first presented, since you do not seem to disagree
with examining it now.

 

Mark Smith here}     Uhhh, no I'm not going to take the time to compare every bit of my writings to their entire website and start arguments over every one of the hundreds of disagreements. Don't just refer me to the "Encylopedia Brittanica's" 10 million pages and say "deal with that". Tell you what- YOU deal with inventing an anti-gravity device (no, not a bra) and THEN I'll deal with the web site. Fair?? Fact is, you don't control my time- I do.

 

Next, you said “Dude, the topic is "Church of Christ".
Repeat after me: I WILL stay on topic, I WILL stay on
topic.” In my first letter, I said, “First, concerning
your skepticism of God and the church of Christ, you
have ignorance built upon more ignorance. You want to
debate a Christian of the church of Christ? First, be
an honest person and start with being honest with
yourself. Then take all your so-called Bible
contradictions, your proofs against the existence of
God, and so on to this site: www.apologeticspress.com
. I would like to know your results. Be sure to send
me your leftovers.” From the very first letter, the
topic is clearly the church of Christ and
skepticism/atheism, so you must have forgot. Now, you
can address your understanding of the origin of the
Universe.

 

Mark Smith here}     You REALLY have no concept about staying on topic, do you? This website I'm typing into right now is for responses to my anti Crutch of Christ essays. That is the topic. If you want to comment on any OTHER essays I've written, then send a separate email regarding them. Sorry, but I'm not going to drag the entire Universe into the Church of Christ- it won't fit. For the billionth time: STAY ON TOPIC.

Second, in my reply to your lack of understanding
regarding the church of Christ, I said that the church
of Christ was not restored but that it has always
existed. 

Mark Smith here}     And I'm really Superman, but don't tell anyone. (For all you NON-CofC people laughing your heads off right now about Scott's claim: yes, the CofC REALLY IS that arrogant.)

 

I documented churches of Christ in New
England and England that existed before the
Restoration Movement to show you this point. Now, you
want a connection between the Campbells and the church
of Christ. Even if I could not prove this position,

Mark Smith here}     Yes, this is something called "evidence". It's used in debates to back up one's claims. You should try it sometime. Your statement of "EVEN IF I could prove this position" means you CAN'T prove it, or offer evidence. Lack of evidence never slowed a Christian from making grandiose claims, though, did it???

 

the fact is still true that the church of Christ did
not come from some Restoration Movement. The evidence
has been provided and the choice is yours of whether
to think rationally and believe proven facts or think
irrationally and not believe proven facts. When you do
believe the evidence, then you can go and correct
another part of your essays. In further regards to
your thinking that the church of Christ came from the
Restoration Movement, you also state, “Uhhh, yes.
That's called HISTORY. History is a written record of
things that happened in the past. Go and read it for
yourself- that IS how your church started.” “History”
also claims that Columbus discovered America even
though people already lived in the Americas. This is
just a simple example that parallels to the fact that
the church of Christ has always existed, but it was
not until the Restoration did the known world take
notice of the church of Christ just like when the
known world finally noticed the existence of the
Americas. The truth is that I gave you history and you
ignore it. You think that history affirms that the
church of Christ started with the Restoration, but the
fact is that the church of Christ already existed
(already proven) and the Campbells are connected to
them by their Restoration Movement in which many
people returned to the church of the Scriptures.

Mark Smith here}     Now this is more like it. I've shown and presented evidence in my anti CofC essays that you guys are NOT "the church of the Scriptures". You here claim otherwise, and offer ZERO evidence to back up your claim. Why don't you offer some EVIDENCE that refutes my anti- CofC essays??? Gosh, that would even make you... on topic!!!!

 

 Note
that I provided hard evidence that the church already
existed, and you referred to some historical account
that obviously does not recognize this evidence.
Whatever accounts of history that you are referring to
do not disprove the existence of the church of Christ
before the Restoration Movement, but shows ignorance
thereof.
Next, you say, “Heresies tend to repeat themselves. As
Solomon said, there is nothing new under the sun. It's
not surprising that there would be isolated groups
popping up here and there with the same unfounded
goofy theories.” Now that you have pointed this out,
you have accomplished nothing. So what? Groups of
people appear throughout history saying that they are
apart of the New Testament church whose faith has been
passed down from faith to faith. In fact, this idea
applies to everyone including you and therefore is not
a valid argument but actually goes against you. You
know that atheism also repeats itself throughout
history and so do “goofy theories” like evolution.
Even as far as 600BCE, Anaximander believed in
evolution. It certainly is not new. Atheism is filled
with isolated groups with “the same unfounded goofy
theories”. I guess the community of BigBanggod and the
community of Biblegod have a lot in common. Using your
logic, your statement must prove that you are not 100%
atheist, because you are part of some “isolated groups
popping up here and there with the same unfounded
goofy theories”.

Mark Smith here}     Atheism repeats itself because smart people of every generation in every culture eventually discover their religion of birth is horseshit, be it Paganism, Judaism, or any other ism. What I DON'T claim is that there is some sort of "true" Atheist movement down thru the centuries, of which I am the end result of.

 

Third, you say that the church of Christ is divisive.
You know well that there were some churches in the New
Testament that were also divisive. So what?

Mark Smith here}     So what? Jesus said that the world would know his true disciples by their love for each other and you CoC guys have nothing but hate and scorn for each other and you say "so what"??? You are even out of touch with what your own Jesus taught. You CoC's know very little about love- all you're good for is tearing things down.

 

 Are you
going to hold your ground by the fact that some
churches of Christ divide over doctrine or opinions?
This is nothing new and does not disprove that
churches of Christ have always existed since 33CE.

Mark Smith here}     Excuse me, but you have yet to prove that they always HAVE existed. Where is the evidence, where are the links, where are the documents? Oh, I forgot- you're a Christian- you don't need such mundane things as evidence. We're just suppose to take your word on everything. Yeah, right. On top of that, in your own local Church of Christ there in Bum Fuck Egypt, where the hell are your APOSTLES, your PROPHETS, and your MIRACLE WORKERS which you would have if you really WERE the true church.

 

People are divisive by nature. 

Mark Smith here}     But you guys aren't just "people", you guys are KING'S KIDS, you guys have the "holy spirit", you guys are supposed to be better than the rest. By your own admission, you ain't, and therefore, by your own admission, your religion doesn't work as advertised. You bozos are no more born again than I am.

 

Look at the hundreds of
denominations/divisions among atheists. Either way you
look at it, atheism like the churches of Christ are
united and then some are divided, so I guess since
everyone on this earth cannot be perfectly united in
the same thinking, then your logic would conclude that
we should not be people because people cannot be
perfectly united.

Mark Smith here}     So you're admitting what the Barna research group has documented for years now: that there's not a dime's worth of difference between Atheists and Christians when it comes to morality? Thank you! 

 

 If you did not get that last
statement, this is probably because this is your
logic. All in all, true Christians love everyone and
among the churches of Christ love is the bond of unity
not doctrine or opinions though the church should
strive to be in the same mind and same judgement. Many
of us may be divided in doctrine, but we are united in
love.

Mark Smith here}     Excuse me while I barf (##@%%^((*++). Who the HELL do you think you're writing to??? I used to be a member of your stupid denomination. Go peddle your bullshit with someone who doesn't have first hand experience with your vile bitter little group of malcontents.

Next, does it really matter if you think that I have
left my “spiritual parents”? The fact is that you are
the one who ran away from home and left your spiritual
parents. You already stated this earlier on your site.
The truth about me is that my leaders are not those
sincere and imperfect men who write religious tracts,
but my leader is God who speaks through His inspired
prophets in writing. God is who I follow, and not men.

Mark Smith here}     Like I said, you are not submitting to the authority of the church elders, per what the New Testament demands. Therefore, you aren't a real Christian, and should stop trying to defend what you're not even qualified to be a member of. You aren't good enough to be a real member of the Church of Christ. You're a lone ranger all off by himself charging at windmills.

 

If you knew anything about the churches of Christ, it
is that we are all individuals who seek to follow the
Scriptures rather than what even some men say
especially what some of our own say about the
Scriptures. Even with such individuality, we are still
united. This is a fact to be recognized. If you are
going to say I am in left field, then great. Good for
you. Your statement is just another ignorant
assumption. Is this going to be the extent of your
arguments?
You also affirm that we are not the original church of
Christ in practice. I have refuted this point for
everyone to see, when are you going to address it?
Instead, of proving a point or countering my point,
you keep affirming assumptions.
Next, I am debating you, so why are you fussing about
some other individuals in Southern California. They do
not have to debate you. All they have to do is simply
give you an answer. There are millions of reasons why
they will not debate you and not just because they are
afraid of what you know. Everyone has already seen
that you are unreasonable, illogical, and ignorant.

Mark Smith here}     No, we haven't seen that. We haven't seen you take even one argument of mine and via evidence show the world that my conclusions were skewed. All we've seen are empty hot-air claims.

Most of all, you lack honesty, but of course
Christians are suppose to drop everything to come to
Mark Smith, because he wants attention, revenge, or
something else as long as it is not the truth. Then
there is me who has showed you your errors, but you
continue to lie to yourself and others on these
issues. It is very hard to cover any ground with
someone who does not comprehend what is being written.
Since you have posted these letters on your site, now
the world can decide.

Mark Smith here}     As always, you Christians don't have an argument to attack me with so you attack me instead. Ad Hominum arguments are what you "loving" vipers are best at.

 

Fourth, concerning the church of Christ not being 100%
perfect, you refer back to some so-called leaders of
mine. I say they are not my leaders, and you refuse to
comprehend. You are not getting anywhere with this
junk. Please, use evidence. Besides this, my point has
been made loud and clear. Deny the truth if you want.
Next, you are an atheist and morals do not come from
empirical data, but you still try to point out things
wrong with Christianity. Do you not get it? Your
ethics are subjective and you have no authority for
ethics except for self-justification.

Mark Smith here}     Oh, and YOUR ethics are NOT subjective? You damn liar. I challenge you before the entire world- tell me just ONE thing that is objectively wrong, forever, in any and all circumstances and conditions. You can't do it. Your ethics are just as subjective as mine, even more so. In fact, the morals of religious people are always "subject to change without notice" whenever that little voice inside your head which you think is God (but is really religious schizophrenia) tells you to do something crazy.  Your vaunted "morals" say murder is always and forever wrong? But if that voice told you to kill your son (remember Abraham and Issac?), you'd do it in a heart beat. Your "morals" say stealing is always and forever wrong? What about when Jesus told his apostles to go into a wheat field and steal the grain? Yes- when you take something without the owner's permission, that's called STEALING. You say lying is always and forever wrong, and that as a good Christian you'd never lie? So I suppose if you were hiding Jews in your basement in 1944 that when the Nazi knocked on your door and asked if you were hiding Jews, you'd tell the truth? "Oh sure, I have a whole family. Come on in and kill them- the little baby shouldn't give you much trouble." Face it, your ethics are just as situational and SUBJECTIVE as any others- time and circumstance always affect the "rightness" or "wrongness" of an act, and you religionists who think you got all the answers- an absolute RIGHT and and absolute WRONG- you guys are not playing with a full deck.

 

 I advise you to
just use your empirical data to refute the Scriptures
and the existence of God if you want to make any
progress. On top of all of this, from your worldview
you cannot make mistakes, because there really is no
such thing as a mistake to you, then you want to point
out other people’s mistakes. Be consistent on
something. You continuously contradict yourself.

Fifth, you said, “I went to the original languages –
that is in the essay”, but there is no mention of the
original languages in the essay. Then you do not deny
this but say “What I meant Scott is that I researched
the original languages while I was writing that”. Well
you apparently did not research the original languages
or your essay would not exist.
Next, you requested that I use documentation like a
lexicon, a commentary, or a quote from a scholar. The
method in which I proved to you the meanings of those
words is the same exact method in which those
definitions within lexicons are found, so a lexicon is
not needed. I am also not going to use a weak source
like a commentary. A commentary will just become
another source for you to debate. I did not quote a
scholar because I do not need to.

Mark Smith here}     Oh yeah, you don't need to document any of your arguments with such mundane items as FACTS, do you? After all, you are a Christian, and we know Christians aren't supposed to lie, therefore everything you say will automatically be true. Sorry, I forgot. It's only us evil Atheists that actually need to prove our arguments with lexicons, commentaries, dictionaries, research by scholars and such. You're under no such obligation, are you?   

 

 

 I am a scholar and
this is my field. If you want one of these
documentations, then you can easily go find your
criteria for documentation for yourself. Here are the
ones that I sometimes refer to: (1) Berry, George
Ricker, PH.D. Greek-English Lexicon to the New
Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan (2) Newman, Barclay
M., Jr. A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New
Testament. Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993
(3) Thayer, Joseph Henry, D.D. Thayer’s Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament. 1901. Grand Rapids:
Baker Books, 1977. Check these sources and you will
see that these agree.
Back to the heart the subject, you affirm that the
Scriptures contradict because the Scriptures teach
that God is love, love is not jealous, but God is
jealous. The truth is the Hebrew word for jealousy in
Exodus 20:5 also means eager or zealous. Therefore,
the Scriptures actually teach that God is love, love
is jealous, and God is eager/zealous. There is no
contradiction in the Scriptures, and you have posted a
lie on your site.

Mark Smith here}     Listen, I am tired of you going way the hell off topic. You really have no clue as to what staying on topic means, don't you? I notified you previously about this, and like most Christians, you never listen to a damn thing you're told. Well, too bad. No more off topics allowed. You want to make a response to my Tyrannosaurus Pettius Rex   essay? Then you send a separate email that deals with that topic and that topic ONLY. I can't waste my time chasing a million gnats you let loose.

You also want me to take this so-called contradiction
further in depth. You want me to address your other
points when such is impossible when your essay is
founded on a lie. There is no reason to address any
other points when your whole essay stands on what you
thought was a contradiction. Personally, I can do a
far better job of proving atheism than you can, and
you are supposedly an atheist. This is true because I
used to support your position, and I thoroughly
understand the common atheist’s view. The difference
between you and I is that I am honestly seeking the
truth no matter what is revealed, and you blatantly
are not. On top of all of this, your website is set at
attacking Christianity and other dogmas, but not at
proving your own.

Mark Smith here}     Well Scott, once again if you knew how to read you might be dangerous. For if you knew how to read, you would have seen right at the top of my HomePage the following lines:

Set Free! Dedicated to deprogramming Christians from Christ, Fundies from Fundamentalism, and providing Atheistic Ammo to Freethinkers. Your One-Stop Anti-Christian Shop.

Just what do the words "Anti-Christian" mean to you? Of course, they mean nothing to someone who doesn't slow down long enough to read, so I can understand your statement. You don't really READ something; you just skim thru it as fast as you can looking for ways to tear it apart and criticize it. Try slowing down a bit, with the attitude that you don't already know everything there is to know in the universe- you MIGHT just learn something now and then!

 

 

 

 This looks more like the work of a
desperate skeptic who cannot think things through for
himself, but just asks questions and points his finger
at whatever he cannot comprehend.

Mark Smith here}     No Scott, as I wrote just above, that's you. I dig into subjects. I research the experts in their commentaries, research the Greek lexicons, read the books, check the dictionaries, and most of all I do something you've demonstrated you don't do: I listen.  If you go back thru our last two exchanges, you'll notice that I was actually responding to what you had written. You, on the other hand, just ignored what I wrote and blathered on- the "staying on topic" admonition being one example.

Finally, I know many atheists, agnostics, and skeptics
who at least respect Christianity and support the good
things that Christians do for the betterment of the
world. I also as a Christian respect atheists,
agnostics, and skeptics and the good that comes from
them. I try to “Respect what is right in the sight of
all men” (Romans 12:17). Maybe you will also learn to
respect Christianity like others have or will you hold
to your hatred because you were disciplined by
disfellowship for your false teachings.

Honestly Seeking the Truth,
                       Scott Shifferd Jr.

 

---

 

 

Scott Shifferd  7-14-03

 

Subj: Free Thinking  Date: 7/14/03 6:11:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time From:   To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

This letter’s topic is the church of Christ and your
claims about the church.

I affirmed that the church of Christ existed before
the Restoration and back to 30CE. I gave more than
adequate proof and I am able of giving you 10 times
more. Whether there is a connection between “The
Restoration Movement” and any of the other already
existing churches in the States does not help to prove
or disprove that the church has been in existence for
2000 years or resulted from the “Restoration
Movement”. People claiming to be of the church of
Christ and holding to the same doctrines can be traced
throughout history. This affirms my claims from the
very beginning that the church of Christ has existed
since 30CE and did not come from “the Restoration
Movement”. I have not written you to aggravate you and
stubbornly hold to a point. I seek to continually
examine your essays with all honesty. I was just
trying to make a point that you have unknowing put
some erroneous statements on your site.

Mark Smith here}     For the sake of argument, I'll grant you that point. However, that leads to newer problems for you. Problems such as, IF the C of C did NOT need restoring, and thus did not in fact come from the "Restoration Movement", then why all the claims BY the C of C that they DID come from the "Restoration Movement" and that they are THE "Restored New Testament Church"???? These claims are numerous and even adorn many of their books and tracts. It is they themselves, sir, that make the claim to be the "restored" church, not me. 

 

Jesus did teach that we would be known by our love,
and we are.

Mark Smith here}     Sorry, but you guys are NOT known for anything other than: Your stupid doctrine on Instrumental Music, AND how cantankerous and divisive you are. If you think any thing else, you're not smoking something legal in your pipe at night.  Like I wrote in my last response:

Jesus said that the world would know his true disciples by their love for each other and you CoC guys have nothing but hate and scorn for each other and you say "so what"??? You are even out of touch with what your own Jesus taught. You CoC's know very little about love- all you're good for is tearing things down.

 The fact still remains that both theists
and atheists are divided. Yes, Christians should not
bedivided, because they are to be known by their love
and should agree on the Scriptures. Also, recognize
that atheists are thought to be the intellectuals who
understand the origin of the Universe

Mark Smith here}     What? Unless non-Christians can pretend to have ALL answers to ALL questions in the universe, we are not to listen to them? That IS your implication here. Fact is, just because you religionists PRETEND to have all the answers does NOT by any means make them the RIGHT answers. Maybe the rest of us would just rather be honest and say that sometimes we don't know something yet, rather than be like the religionists and pompously pretend to know everything. 

 

, but even they
are as divisive as Christians are. Do we now deny
Christianity and atheism by the fact that truth and
unity escape both? 

Mark Smith here}     Jesus made no claims that REAL Atheists would be known by their love for each other. That's your man, dude.

 

I can understand how someone who
was disfellowshipped would feel the way that you do.
You were preaching controversial doctrine, and the
congregation that you were apart of did as the
Scriptures instructed them to do with one who they
thought preached false doctrine and misrepresented the
church, and they disfellowshipped you (Rom. 16:17, 1
Cor. 5).

Mark Smith here}     I was preaching what the Bible taught, and like most churches AND Christians, they couldn't handle it. Just doing the same thing nowadays (from the other side of the fence) and you religionists STILL can't handle it. 

 

 After this, many would do as you have done
and denounce God, the church, and spend your life
trying as much as possible to get rid of such
influences. 

Mark Smith here}     To the contrary, rather than leave the fold, I went to an even more strict and conservative split of the C of C. It wasn't until maybe 15 years later that I broke with Christianity, so sorry, your amateur psychology is failing. I became an Atheist because of Bible study and NOT something as shallow as getting my feelings hurt etc.

I know your site is “Dedicated to
deprogramming Christians from Christ, Fundies from
Fundamentalism, and providing Atheistic Ammo to
Freethinkers”. How do you expect to deprogram
Christians with your sarcastic essays and your
inappropriate remarks to responses of your essays?

Mark Smith here}     Gee, I don't know. I've just got this crazy idea that if people are exposed to the truth, that maybe someday they will pay attention. Little did I realize when I started SET FREE what stubborn headed cold hearted heartless folk Christians really are. You guys are actually THE best advertisement AGAINST your own religion!!!!!

Concerning the fact that your essays try to show that
the church of Christ is not what the name declares,
your essays need more work. I will now present the
common thinking of the church of Christ in regards to
not having apostles, prophets, and miracle workers.
The twelve apostles, the apostles of Christ, are gone,
but apostles of churches are alive and well. The word
“apostle” means “one who is sent out”. Any preacher
can be called an apostle like Timothy, but there is a
clear and distinct difference between the twelve who
are apostles of Christ and others who are apostles of
churches. 

Mark Smith here}     Sorry, the facts betray you once again. IF what you are saying were true, then anybody that was just "sent out" by a church would be an apostle- even someone sent out to buy a pizza! On top of that, Paul himself laid down the signs of a TRUE apostle- and your pizza pick-up boy would NOT qualify, nor any other living man today. Paul said in 2nd Corinthians 12:12 that 

"the signs of a TRUE apostle were performed among you... by signs and wonders and miracles."  (NASB)

Therefore, it is obvious that you know not the scriptures, for if you did, you would have already known about the verse I quoted. 

 

The prophets are also gone. We do not need
direct prophecy anymore because we have the written
inspired doctrines of God. In some ways, you can say
that all Christians who proclaim the word of God are
prophets since the Scriptures are by the work of
prophecy. The church and the Scriptures are now
established and we do not need miracle workers
anymore. Miracles are signs to prove to others that an
individual is a prophet of God. 

Mark Smith here}     What you are saying here may be all fine and good, yes, those positions are all gone. I agree with you- they are not in existence today.

HOWEVER

it is your OWN C of C that claims otherwise!!! YOU are the ones I was quoting from that made the bogus claim that you guys are a xerox copy of the New Testament church. To remind you of what you've so convienently forgotten, here's a quote from a C of C tract by Delton Haun, a respected Church of Christ minister, author and publisher, regarding the C of C:

(The Church of Christ) is exactly the same kind of church that began on the day of Pentecost two thousand years ago, that is organized the same way (and) practices the same things. They think of it as the original church of the New Testament reproduced in this twentieth century. The church of Christ today is no more and no less than the New Testament church reproduced in doctrine and practice in this twentieth century.

So what, now you are being haunted by the absurd claims made by your own group? Ha ha ha ha ha. You, Scott, without even knowing it, have just PROVED MY POINT- the point being that you guys are NOT equal to the New Testament church. Ha ha ha and ha. Why don't you go argue with the Delton Haun's of your religion, and then you can write to ME about your OWN disfellowshipping!!!

 

The gifts of the Holy
Spirit have ceased because the apostles who gave these
gifts by the laying on of hands (Acts 8:14-19) are
gone and now we have the Scriptures that are able to
make us complete/perfect (2 Timothy 3:16&17). We do
not need any new revelations. The faith has been once
for all delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3) Yes, we are
not an exact copy in having the gifts of the Spirit,

Mark Smith here}     BINGO!!! And that being the case, you should join with me in exposing the false claims of C of C'ers that DO make claims to being THE xerox copy exact spitting image and replica of the NT church reproduced in these modern times. YOU HAVE JUST CONFIRMED MY ANTI-CHURCH OF CHRIST WEB PAGE.

but we are still the church of Christ because 1
Corinthians 13 shows that the gifts of the Spirit were
for the church to grow into maturity. Thankfully, the
Scriptures are filled with some statements that are
nothing short of signs that prove inspiration. For
example, Isaiah 40:22 states that the earth is a
circle and this statement was written centuries before
this fact was proven. The Hebrew word for circle here
actually means sphere. By such Scriptures, we can
affirm the Scriptures to inspired and resolve doubt
over God’s existence and the church of Christ’s
existence since 30CE.

Mark Smith here}     Off topic and I ain't going to fall for it.

We are God’s people though we are not perfect, and we
are better off than others by the fact that we can
live more fulfilling lives separate from sin with the
hope of peace in eternity. Nowhere did I ever infer
that we are in the same situation as non-Christians
are.

We do have objective morality. Here is one objective
wrong: the intentional killing of an innocent human
being. If you want more examples, then those can be
provided.

Mark Smith here}     I asked you for just ONE example of an objective morality, and THIS is the best you could come up with? Jeesh! You should have seen the retort for this one yourself! Here goes:  Biblegod himself, via Noah's flood, INTENTIONAL killed MILLIONS of cute INNOCENT babies and preborn's. Here's another: According to your own doctrine, Jesus was the most innocent of ANY human being ever to live, yet he was intentionally KILLED by "divine plan and foresight". IF this was objectively WRONG, then it is Biblegod who DID this wrong. 

Come on, you can do better than this! The fact still stands- you can't name me even ONE objective wrong that's wrong in all times and places. So until you can do this, you xtians better stop your bragging of having an "objective morality".

From the beginning, I knew that you were
anti-Christian that is why I wrote you. I never
claimed to know everything in the Universe. I do know
enough to realize that you Anti-Christian Website is
filled with some misunderstandings.

Finally, so you wish to end the debate. You state, “Go
peddle your bull---- with someone who doesn't have
first hand experience with your vile bitter little
group of malcontents.” I am sorry that you wish to end
it this way. I am here to debate you as you requested,
and now I leave this decision to you. I will just
concentrate on atheism and inspiration of the
Scriptures.

Honestly,
Scott Shifferd Jr.

---

 

Michael Burkitt 5-30-03

 

Subj: RE: One minor point...  Date: 5/30/03 12:51:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time From:   To: JCnot4me@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details)

 

---

Chico 1-7-04

Subject:	CoC Crazy stuff
Date:	1/7/04 9:35:34 PM !!!First Boot!!!
From:
Reply To: To: JCnot4m

 

 

Mark Smith here}     Thank YOU for proving that there still ARE people in the C of C with common sense and honesty.

 

 

---

 

Nameless 2-4-04

Subject:	I will debate you!!
Date:	2/4/04 6:21:56 PM !!!First Boot!!!
From:
Reply To: To: JCnot4me@aol.com CC: BCC: Sent on:
Sent from the Internet (Details)

 

Mr. Mark you talk alot of talk I see but you haven't even e-mail me back yet. I am waiting for you to debate me. I believe you been looking at wrong places I know lots of Gospel Preachers(church Of Christ) who will debate you thats a lie talking about for yrs you been looking. Well here I go I am waiting. If not me I have others who will ove to. I know I would So stop waiting and e-mail me back when you get this.

 

Mark Smith here}  Like I said in the email I sent you, 

If you had bothered to actually READ what I was requesting, I was requesting for a  MINISTER of the C of C to debate with. I don't need some layman or local crackpot. PLEASE slow down and R-E-A-D things before spouting off!

but of course, asking a Christian to actually READ something is a bit too much, isn't it? IF you ARE a minister, then why are you being shy about saying WHERE, and of WHAT CHURCH? After all, if you're going to have a public debate with me, IT WILL BE OUT IN PUBLIC. Duhhhhh!

AND, if you ARE a minister, where did you graduate from- cause you should demand a refund judging by the piss-poor way you write English. Jesus Christ- I KNOW the C of C has better schools than that!!!

As for you knowing "lots of Gospel Preachers" who will debate me, maybe you should tell them to contact me, because I ain't seen a single ONE yet. Up to now they have all been as quiet as Jesus' tomb on Easter morning- NOTHING. Nothing but the sound of chicken shit preachers quietly sneaking away from someone who can blow them AND their stupid religion out of the water. Fucking cowards.

 

 

 

 

 

Nameless  2-6-04

I did bother To read I am a Minister Of the Church of Christ. Stop hiding behind thia computer and stand  with me face to face!! What does if it matter If I was just a member or a Minister. I still going to defend the Lord's Church. You nothin but air which I can See. State the postion. If not don't bother e-mailing me back cause I see that you are scared.

 

Mark Smith here}  Again, IF you are a minister (and I doubt it- I think you are lying-) PROVE it. WHAT church do you run? Give me the name of it. I will look it up on the internet, or  in a phone book via the internet, and confirm it. Hell, you haven't even given out a name yet! You're probably some punk-ass 13 year old kid with too much time on your hands!

And "what does it matter"? It matters to me. I want a legit representative from that hee-haw religion, not some lone-ranger off by himself. I want a full time official minister to debate who will TRY TO uphold, in public, on a stage behind a podium, the ASSININE teachings of the Church of Christ. But still I wait....  dozens of C of C ministers in this country, and not ONE man enough to stand up to me in public. What a bunch of fucking cowards!!!!

 

 

 

 

---

 

Quest for Debate- Responses Thus Far

 

 

 

Church:          The Fairview Street Church of Christ
Location:        Garden Grove, California.
Preacher:        Micahel Jones 
Web Site:        http://www.followthebible.com 
Claims from Web Site:

You will notice that there is a strict adherence to the New Testament pattern of worship and church organization. Within the congregation, you will find elders and deacons appointed under new Testament qualifications. We are not a denomination, but rather constitute a local body of Christians within the community.  We're truly Christians only; nothing more, and nothing less.

Response from Pastor Michael Jones:  Feb 8, 2004

In your challenge you only tell half the story. The other half is that I am commanded to not cast pearls before swine (Matt 7:6). You have, in conversations with myself, bragged about being swine.

 

********************************************

 

Subject:	Re: Be ready always to give an answer???
Date:	2/10/04 4:34:22 AM !!!First Boot!!!
Reply To: To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

Hello Mark.
I would love to discuss many things with you, but only on a few conditions. 
1)  We use the Bible only as our source of God's Word, and we believe that it is the Truth.
2)  We share a genuine respectful conversation.  Not a shouting match and not an attempt to make each other look foolish.
3)  The goal is to answer your questions to make us both better servants for Him. 
4)  I am prepared to accept that there are teachings in our group that are not consistent with scripture.  I will acknowledge them as items we need to work on, as long as you will be prepared to do the same.
I will assume that you are in agreement with these and proceed.  If that's not the case, then there's no point in reading further.

Mark Smith here}     Well, I guess you didn't really read any of my essays I hyperlinked for you, for if you did, you wouldn't be trying to make me, an Atheist, a "better servant for Him". Also, you wouldn't be asking me to take the Bible as "gospel truth". I might grant you some of it, for sake of argument, but that's it.

 

Perhaps an email format is best, given the day and age we live in.
I teach my kids that meeting people over the web can be a bit risky.

I'd like to start by saying that I am just a guy.  Not a minister, preacher, or elder.  Actually, I am a deacon, but that has to do with serving physical needs, rather than being a spiritual leader or Biblical scholar.  I speak on my own accord, not in any official church capacity.

 

Mark Smith here}     Why does this not surprise me? I guess the ministers are too busy on the golf course to bother defending their nonsense, so they have to send these volunteers in to do their work for them.

I am looking for someone to debate in public; someone who DOES speak in some "official church capacity" for I am looking to humiliate a Church of Christ minister in public debate by showing how ignorant the claims of the C of C are. Humiliating you in public accomplished nothing. Sorry.

I have been a member of a church of Christ for over 20 years.  I was "raised in the church" for lack of a better term, and I can tell you that the problems that you have with the claims of these pamphlets (or tracts) are quite valid.

Mark Smith here}     Dang! And THAT's why I need a minister to debate, because I get too many laymen that KNOW the C of C claims are a bit too much. How can we have a debate when we already agree??? I need a flaming fundy C of C minister who won't even use a pitch pipe for fear of being struck by lightening.

 

 

The good thing about the churches of Christ is that there is no headquarters here on earth from which we receive our marching orders.  Think about that for a moment...  In order to be a baptist, your group must follow the precepts and doctrines of the Baptist's collective mandate.  These are debated and updated somewhat regularly as times change.  Same is true for all other "denominations" (Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc.)  If your group disagrees with the outcome of the "council", you must still follow their mandate.  Otherwise, you cannot post the sign showing your identity with them, since the very name is trademarked, so to speak.

With the church of Christ, however, it is different.  Unfortunately, any group of fools can gather together under that name.  This can give us a bad reputation, but I think the benefits outweigh the problems.

You see, if one group goes astray, it won't drag every group down with it.  If, for instance, the "council" decides that homosexuals can be priests (as has happened recently with the United Methodists) then every one of their churches must obey the new mandates of "tolerance" when the Bible clearly says otherwise.  (I assume we both agree on 1Cor 6:9-10)

Mark Smith here}     I agree that Biblegod hates gays and has every intention of torturing them for all eternity (at least that's what he says in his book). But I don't think there IS a real Biblegod though. So how much do we agree???

With this background in mind, it is very easy for me to see the wacky words you have uncovered in several of these tracts.  I think most of these are filled with poison and do not help the cause of Christ. 

Please give me a few of your most outrageous examples and I will attempt to answer how I feel about the claims, and what I believe the Bible says about them.

Fair enough?


--Dave Sims
Anaheim, CA

Mark Smith here}     Sorry. I'm looking for a public debate (as stated in my email), which means in front of a group of Christians and Atheists, not a semi-private email exchange. But I do wish you well. You've got more common sense than alot of  C of C authors.

 

 

 

---

 

Subject:	Re: debate???
Date:	2/10/04 4:24:40 PM !!!First Boot!!!
From:
Reply To: To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

My name is Fred Williams and I am a minister in the Chruch of Christ, I would be glad to debate with you in public the things pertaining to the word of GOD. My phone # (310) xxx-xxxx

------------------------------

Mark Smith here}    Here is some information on this church from the web:

Preacher}  Fred Williams
Web Page}  http://thehouseofgod2003.tripod.com/
Address}  2600 S. Hoover Street, Los Angeles, CA 90007
Quotes from Web Page}

CHURCH OF CHRIST: The One True Church
The Lord's church is the first church the one that started in 33 AD. In the Book Acts 2:38 -41. The Lord's church follows the bible to the max when it comes to how we live and teach. We model ourselves after Christ and what he and his Apostles taught in the bible. So if you are looking for the truth please come, join us, and share in the bliss that is being a true Christian.

 

---

Kevin Harris  4-14-04

 

Subj: Church of Christ Syndrome
Date: 4/14/2004 11:01:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: "Kevin Harris"
To: <JCnot4me@aol.com>
Sent from the Internet (Details)




Mark,

Some of the most ardent skeptics and "Ex-Christians" on the net,
including Farrell Till, tend to be former Church of Christ members. I am
not surprised for several reasons.

First, COC has a heritage and spirit of combativeness resulting from
contesting doctrinal issues with other denominations. Contention and
debate are par for the course.
 

Mark Smith here}    As it says in the Bible, Whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap. And as you've pointed out, what they've sown all these years is NOT peace, love, and brotherhood!

Second, COC churches are extreme, legalistic, narrow-minded, and
radical.

Third, COC members have the potential to depend on the church's
baptismal regeneration views, etc. to save them rather than Christ. So
a false conversion is certainly possible.

All of this is a recipe for disaster and burnout. I suspect that of
you.

Mark Smith here}    Actually, what got me out was an intense study of the Second Coming. After gathering all of the evidence and arguments, I was left little choice but to conclude that Jesus had been a false prophet- and I draw the line at worshipping false prophets.

This is not the Genetic Fallacy. A view must stand on it's own
merits despite the background of the one holding the view. So your
essays should be considered despite all the above. I just thought I
would get your thoughts.

Many thanks,

K

Kevin Harris
Morning Host/Creative Services Director
KWRD-FM/KSKY-AM Radio
6400 N. Beltline Rd.
Irving, TX 75063
214-561-9673 ext. 172
Fax 214-561-9662
kharris@thewordfm.com

 

---

Brian Henegar- South Trail Church of Christ youth minister  9-10-04

 

Subject: Be careful
Date: 9/10/2004 7:16:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

 

Mark,
I wasn't at South Trail when you were here, but it is obvious that your anger and bias toward God and Christians has caused you to take Bible passages and other issues way out of context. No one is perfect. I don't claim to be perfect. Jesus is the only perfect man ever to live.

Mark Smith here}    The "out of context" accusation is a knee-jerk response. Let all please notice he didn't actually give any EVIDENCE for anything I've ever written being "out of context", because he can't. But that doesn't stop a good Church of Christ minister from making stuff up, does it???

You may not believe in him and that is your choice. God has given us the greatest gift he could ever give us in giving us free will. He did not make us robots. He lets us choose to follow him. However, if I were you, I would be nervous to enter eternity saying and printing the things about God on your website that you have. Christ will return some day and every knee will bow including yours.

Mark Smith here}    Christians have been threatening non-Christians with this for about 2,000 years now, and STILL no Jesus. As I've more than proven in my website (see links below), the predictions that Jesus made about his Second Coming all turned out false, so please excuse me if I'm not quivering in my boots over the prophecies of a false prophet.

False Prophet- Liar, Fraud!

Matthew 24 Verse by Verse

 Jesus and His Expired Prophecies

I don't say this to anger or enrage you. I say this because I care about you as a person and do not want to see you make bad choices you could be paying for in eternity. If you want to have honest and thoughtful correspondence over e-mail about the issues you have raised in your website, I would be happy to discuss them with you.

Sincerely,
Brian Henegar

 

---

 

 

Terry Chapman minister at South Trail Church of Christ  9-14-04

Subject: South Trail Church of Christ
Date: 9/14/2004 8:39:41 AM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

 

Mark, I feel for your lapse of memory. I would ask you to remember your own actions in 1972. Did you do or say anything to prompt the action taken by the elders? Were you honestly seeking the truth, or were you pushing your own agenda and dogma? Please do not misunderstand me, I would find no greater joy than to see you openly seeking truth. There is nothing to be gained in empty rhetoric, by either of us. If you want to consider afresh the Bible and its teaching, then please contact me. Until then, I am praying for you. Your friend, Terry (Galatians 4:16)

Mark Smith here}    I am glad you "feel" for a supposed "lapse of memory" (whatever THAT means). As to if I did anything to prompt the actions taken by the elders... yes I did. I believed then, as I believe now, that truth is to be relentlessly pursued regardless of the costs, and if the cost of pursuing truth was to end up being excommunicated from the South Trail Church of Christ at the age of 17, so be it. My guess is you wouldn't recognize a new "truth" if it hit you upside the head. My guess is that you are the son of the former minister Arlin Chapman's, i.e. a "preacher's kid", and grew up in the church of Christ and have never changed your mind in anything religious in your entire life. In other words, you are set in stone and care nothing for the truth; just for defending the status quo.

 

*******************************

 

 

 

Terry Chapman minister at South Trail Church of Christ 8-16-05

 

INTRODUCTION by Mark Smith}}}

I recently emailed Terry Chapman, the preacher of the South Trail Church of Christ in Sarasota, Florida, to find out if indeed he were the son of Arlin Chapman (see my response above), who was the minister of that church back when they “excommunicated” me at age 17. The email I received back, while answering my question, served up something even better: it is almost the perfect example of the slanderous nonsense that is spewed forth from the pulpits and tolerated in Churches all across this nation. I have not been "served" such a heaping helping of Christian bullshit in quite some time.  If anybody ever wondered how so many Fundies voted for such a moral scumbag as George W, learning what they’re exposed to on a weekly basis may help explain their mindset.  I present the email here as an opportunity to deal with all this Christian bullshit at one setting.

---Mark Smit 

Subject: Re: Arlin's Son???

Date: 8/16/2005 9:34:59 A.M. Pacific Standard Time

From:

Reply To: 

To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

Yes.  I am proud to say that I am.  I grew up in Sarasota, and was a member here even at the time you were a teenager.  I still remember your motorcycle.  You carried your helmet inside with you.  I thought it was great.  You had a lot going for you.  What I did not understand was your unsettled nature.  Why the truth did not make sense to you.  In reading many of your articles on your web-site, I see that you still are struggling to find truth. 

 

Mark Smith here}     I have to admit that yes, indeed, some of YOUR “truths” do NOT make sense to me, nor even to the vast majority of Christians on this planet. For example, your “truth” that unless a Christian’s baptism gets him dunked all the way under water, then regardless of his repentance, faith, or good deeds he’s still in his sins, he’s somehow not a “real” Christian and he will fry in hell forever. I also don’t understand your “truth” that the Church of Christ is an exact Xerox copy of the early first century church, even though you don’t have its Apostles, miracle workers, or tongue speakers, and you’ve added a paid clergy, song leaders, Sunday school administrators, etc. For more on this, see my essay:  Church of Christ

 

 

 

Strangely, you attack Catholic priests for pedophilia, but condone the homosexual community who unashamedly promote the same.  It just reminds me that apart from God, there is no morality. 

 

Mark Smith here}     And what- you SUPPORT the pedophilia of Catholic priests??? What you SEEM to be suggesting here is that the homosexual community openly promotes pedophilia.  This is presented as an unfounded accusation because it is such utter and complete HORSE SHIT and I can’t believe any man who’s had an education past the sixth grade would believe it, much less teach it. It’s refutation should be obvious to anyone: he who asserts must prove. YOU have asserted that the “homosexual community” openly promotes the raping of little boys. IF they so “openly” support this, then it shouldn’t be hard for you to provide the evidence. You shouldn't have to look very hard, after all, you claimed they're out there in public promoting this. I'll await your findings (though I won't hold my breath while waiting, because there is none.) 

Also, assuming you structure your life upon “do unto others as you’d have others do unto you”, as you have slandered an entire class of men (the gays) without presenting any evidence at all, I’ll go ahead and do likewise to you, to see how YOU like it. Here goes…  The Church of Christ clergy unashamedly promotes having sex with dogs.  There, how did you like that? And how would you like that slander preached from the pulpit of thousands of Baptist and Methodist churches each and every week, till the Christians at those churches call their dogs in from their yards whenever a Church of Christer walking by. How would you feel about THAT slander, Terry? Or have you forgotten... Slander is listed as a SIN in your own New Testament. Maybe you should try reading it sometime.

 

 

Atheists have more faith than Christians.    There is less evidence for their position, and their conclusions run directly counter to true science but they hold out for their view anyway.  I admire their tenacity, but to defend foolishness is illogical. 

 

Mark Smith here}     “Atheists have more faith than Christians”??? What the FUCK exactly IS this supposed to mean anyway? I know, I know, this is “the big talking point” for you Fundies to say right now regarding us Atheists, but really, what does this mean? I will tell you what it means: absolutely NOTHING. It is such a BIG lie (and you xtians are soooo good at that, aren’t you?) you Christians think, like Josef Goebbels did, that you’ll get away with it. You won’t, not here.  All we have to do is translate it. Faith is believing something without any evidence. This is what you Christians do, not Atheists. We demand objective evidence must be presented before we commit to believing something, and the more outrageous the claim, the stronger the evidence must be. You guys, on the other hand, believe the most outlandish things, based upon what? Upon nothing, and you even brag about the fact that it’s based upon nothing: “oh, if we had evidence it wouldn’t be faith then, would it? Like Jesus said, ‘blessed are those who haven’t seen, and believe’”.

 

EVIDENCE     Your other statement that “there is less evidence for their position” just doesn’t make any sense, for our only “position” is that YOU have no evidence for YOUR position! How then is pointing out the FACT that you guys HAVE NO EVIDENCE (to which you admit to and even brag about- see paragraph above) somehow a lack of evidence on our part???  You come into a party empty handed, pretending to be struggling with several six packs of beer while telling everyone how good your “beer” is going to taste to everyone. We point out the fact that, hey, your hands are empty and there IS no beer, and you come back with, “Oh yeah? Well, YOU have no evidence that I have no beer!!!” How retarded IS that? It’s more like you drank all the beer before even coming to the party and your brain is so fried that you don’t know any better. In short, it doesn’t REQUIRE any evidence on our part to point out the fact that YOU have no evidence- your hands are empty; we’re just pointing out the obvious.  If this isn't self-evident to you, then see my essays: 

Connecting The Dots   Evidence Please!    How To Prove The Existence of God   Move A Mountain

TRUE SCIENCE:    Here you seem to be claiming that our asking you for evidence runs counter to “true science”. Again, this is such an enormously STUPID thing to say I almost don’t know where to begin. My guess is you can’t be THAT retarded, so therefore you must be playing me for a fool. If your congregation lets you get away with that level of stupidity in your sermons it must be because they are asleep and therefore didn’t hear you. Anyway, what you are saying here is that “true science” would be to accept anybody’s claim for anything without any evidence whatsoever. “OK Mr. Johnson, you claim to have an anti-gravity machine. Very good. It must be true because you said it’s true. And you, Miss Kim, you’ve discovered the fountain of youth. Excellent…”  True science demands evidence, and repeatability. How is that wrong? You claim some cosmic JuJu Man pulled a rib from a man’s side, said the magic words, and viola! Woman was invented. WE ask you for the scientific evidence for this, and WE’RE the ignorant ones here! Yeah, right.

 

 

 

Here is the bottom line, I would gladly debate you anywhere, anytime, but I do not believe it would accomplish anything.  We could never agree to terms.  Atheists do not define terms/words consistently.

 

Mark Smith here}    That’s news to me. Maybe you could offer up some evidence to support your accusation here? I’ve always bent over backwards to get proper and consistent definitions. In one of my essays  Mt 24:34 What The Scholars Say  over 150 scholars and academic sources are cited in an attempt to define just one word- genea. I don’t know how much more could be done to nail down a definition, and having established said definition I’ve also been 100% consistent on it. Yet you claim otherwise, offering no evidence whatsoever. Maybe you are lying then??? Either way, I'd like to see ANYthing you've written that even comes close to the amount of work and scholarship I put into my essay on Matthew 24:34.

 

They twist and distort everything. 

 

Mark Smith here}    Well, IF we actually DID “twist and distort EVERYTHING” that would indeed be a terrible thing. However, let me point out that you’re not hiding behind your pulpit right now. Out here in the REAL world, when you make accusations and outlandish claims, you’re expected to back them up with… what’s the word I’m looking for? Ah, yes… evidence. Just what is your evidence that ALL Atheists “twist and distort” ALL things? Oh, you HAVE no evidence? You’re just making things up out of thin air??? I thought so. After all, you’re a Christian, and creation ex nihlo is your forte’.

 

 

Their thinking is skewed and dishonest. 

 

Mark Smith here}    It’s easy to make sweeping generalities. It’s harder to back them up. You seem to specialize in throwing stones but have no clue as to how to take said stones and, stone by stone, mortar them up into what’s called a coherent argument. I know it might be more work for you, but maybe you could actually learn how to frame an argument instead of just making empty accusations. There was a guy that lived about 500 years before your Jesus popped into the world. His name was Aristotle. Maybe you should look him up online and learn a little bit, ok???

 

Why do they not see it?  They have no standard.  Without God or the Bible, there is no higher standard.  Only anarchy at every level exists!  Fruitless to debate with no point of reference. 

 

Mark Smith here}    So, no standard existed before about 30 AD, right? Before Jesus did his thing, the entire world consisted of nothing but “anarchy at every level!!!������������� eh? Pardon me for being rude, but where does that leave Moses then? Where does that leave Confucius? Where does that leave the greatest lawgiver that ever lived- Hammurappi?   Are you telling me that in the glory days of Greek philosophy- Aristotle, Archimedes, Plato- are you telling me that because THEY DIDN’T HAVE JESUS, they had “…no standard… only anarchy at every level… no point of reference”??? Maybe if you'd like to educate yourself on the topic for next time so you don't just go spouting off about things you know little of, you can read my essay on:    Morality

 

As for “anarchy at every level” let me point out that the Roman Empire was doing just fine keeping the world organized and free of anarchy, flying on the “autopilot” settings of the ancient PAGAN Greeks. It wasn’t until you CHRISTIANS hijacked the controls that the plane nose-dived into THE DARK AGES for a thousand years. You want to see what REALLY causes “anarchy at every level”??? Hold the New Testament up next to your head and go look in the mirror, Christian.

 

 

Your website does do a good job showing the ridiculous view that Intelligent Design should be left out of public school education. 

 

Mark Smith here}    I would try to offer a response here, but I have no clue what you were trying to communicate here. The other nonsense at least was comprehensible. This nonsense borders on jibberish.

 

 

Why?  Because atheists defend evolution even after it has been shown to be blatantly without support. 

 

Mark Smith here}    Oh, so evolution has shown to be without support? And not just without support, but BLATANTLY so??? So I guess those thousands and thousands of books supporting evolution that I saw in the library of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor- so many books it took up almost the entire floor of that high rise library- all those books don’t really exist? Damn! I must have been seeing them with the “eye of faith” then, eh?

 

I will ask only one question to challenge a believer in the general theory of evolution:  "Can you show me one case of an evolutionary change between 'species'?"  There is none.  Evolution is found within a species, but never between species.  Those lines are hard and fast.  Why?  Read Genesis 1:12. 

 

Mark Smith here}    And I have only “one thing” to point out regarding public debates on evolution: have you ever noticed that the Creationists never- and I mean N-E-V-E-R, take the affirmative? I mean, there has NEVER been a debate between a Creationist and a Scientist where the Creationist tried to scientifically prove the Book of Genesis. Never. All the Creationists seem to be good for is “Monday Morning Quarterbacking” evolution. All they can do is stand back and take pot shots, carp and criticize, without ever offering up anything in the place of evolution. Why do you think that is? I mean, IF the Book of Genesis is so obviously true to you bozos, why don’t you step up to the plate and prove it? Show us the evidence, show us your theories, show us all your reasoning and all the evidence that backs up Genesis. Where is the archeological evidence that an Adam existed? Where is the evidence- the proof- that males existed for who knows how many thousands of years before females were “invented”, and then by a rib? Has this rib been dug up? Is it on display at some Creationist “museum” somewhere? Let us know! Show us your evidence? The fact is, you guys have no evidence for Genesis. That’s why all you’re good for is throwing stones at those who do have the evidence, who have put the hours- the years- and yes, even the centuries- into digging up the evidence and making a case. All the evolutionists have done is to take the evidence which is available to everybody, and connected the dots to show there seems to be a pattern there. They have organized the evidence into something that makes sense. If you guys think you’re so much better, then prove it. Take the same evidence and do a better job of putting it together. Prove the Book of Genesis to be true- or shut the fuck up already. YOU think the Book of Genesis is such "scientific fact" then go ahead and prove it to be true:

The Universe According To The Bible

 

 

I do understand the need for atheists to defend their view.  They do not want to answer to God, so they must eliminate Him from "existence" so evolution is the vehicle to explain the Universe without God.  They want to escape accountability. 

 

Mark Smith here}    Here we go with the instant psycho-analysis as to why someone does or does not believe a certain way. Have you ever considered that maybe, just maybe, the reason Atheists believe the way they do is that you guys have never- NEVER- offered even one sliver of evidence to make us believe anything different? Gee, now THAT’S a heady concept, isn’t it: “evidence.”  Maybe you should go look that up in the dictionary, for you clearly have no concept as to what it is. And while you're in therapy trying to find why you so crave having a big daddy figure in the sky to run your life, you can read my essay regarding instant Christian psycho-analysis:  Answering Christian Stock Arguments

 

As to your accusation we believe in evolution to avoid your make-believe gods, I can throw the same thing right back in your face. The ONLY reason you guys choose to believe in Jesus is to avoid believing in Zeus. I mean, the reality and proof of Zeus is so obvious it can’t be denied! But you evil xtians refuse to submit to his will, so you made up this Jesus crap to hide behind. Psychologically you can’t handle the truth of Zeus and Mount Olympus, you poor poor emotional misfits. I feel soooo sorry for you- who hurt you so much that you had to abandon your Pagan roots? I’ll pray for you.

 

 

 

However, even nature teaches us accountability.  Yet, their doctrine leaves them with no moral presence.  They cannot speak of right or wrong.  They have no basis to appeal for evaluation of anyone's acceptable behavior. 

 

Mark Smith here}    Again, let me point out the historical FACT that morality was here on this planet a long time before your Jesus crapped his first diaper. Morality did not begin, nor will it end, with the existence or non-existence of you Christians. When you Christians make such ignorant claims you sound like the communists of the 1950’s who claimed communists had actually invented everything. You Christians think that Jesus invented morality? Tell you what- take your ignorant ass down to your local synagogue, tell them what you think, and let them tell you about someone named Moses and a little thing called The Ten Commandments, which PRE-DATES (that means existed before) your Jesus by maybe a thousand years.

 

Hitler was not evil.  Hussein was not evil.  Certainly, you can see George Bush is not evil.  Why?  Evil does not exist -- you said so, by eliminating God.  You cannot condemn anyone -- not Dahmer, Son of Sam, etc. period!  You can say let's vote on it.  Let's allow the majority to decide.  Even that is still up to each individual to accept or reject. 

 

Mark Smith here}    You mean, “let’s vote on it” just like you Christians at the council of Nicea voted on which “books of morals” to keep or toss out of your New Testaments??? Yes, you Christians never change your minds as to what defines evil, do you? Why, you guys burned people at the stake just for disagreeing with you- that’s still valid, isn’t it? You guys even burned one guy for saying the Earth goes around the Sun. Have you guys ever changed your minds on that one? Of course not! You have absolutes! You’ll have none of this “wishy-washy” relativistic crap, will you??? Your “absolute morality” (aka The Bible) says to murder witches and by God, that’s just what you’re going to do, isn’t it??? That is, as soon as you’re able to totally take over the government and make The Bible the law of the land. If you'd like to learn more about how your Bible evolved via voting into its present form, then see the essay  Jehovah Unmasked  by my friend Nathaniel, the chapter entitled:  The New Testament Mutates and Evolves.  LEARN your OWN history first, before you ever again attempt to lecture others.

 

No one can prove them "evil", but just individual or personal preferences.  Did you ever read of Nuremburg?  After WWII the Nazi war criminals were tried, but on what basis?  German law?  British law?  No, an appeal was made to a higher standard.  What is higher?  If there is no Creator, then we are the highest!  Do you want to live in a world without God?  Then you consign yourself to a world without rules, morals, or any objective standard.

 

Mark Smith here}    So, you think you have the full scoop as to what is evil and what is not? You think you have an “absolute standard of right and wrong” by which it’s a snap to instantly make such decisions? Tell you what, Mr. Absolute Moral Code, I’ve been challenging xtians to this for years, and haven’t yet met one who can meet my challenge. This is my challenge: name me one, just one “thou shalt not…” that is true in any and all possible cases without exception. For example, when you claim “thou shalt not bear false witness” is ALWAYS the way to go, an absolute moral law with no exceptions, I’ll point out to you an exception: the family that housed Anne Frank LIED to the Nazi’s when they knocked on their door asking if any Jews were there. When you claim “thou shalt not kill” is an absolute moral law with no exceptions, I’ll point out to you an exception:  self-defense. When you claim “thou shalt have no other gods before me” is absolute, I’ll point out to you an exception: you Christians put Jesus before Jehovah, and if you disagree with that, again, take it up with a local rabbi.  When you claim “thou shalt not commit adultery” is an absolute moral law never without an exception, I’ll point out to you an exception: a man breaks into your house and ties up your family and gives you the following choice- he either has sex with your wife then and there OR he kills you AND your wife AND and your eight children.  Tell me, Mr. Absolute Morality, Mr. “Knows Better Than Everybody Else”, what would be THE correct moral choice to pick at that point:  entire family dies  -or-  wife gets fucked?  Are we starting to get the point yet? Are we starting to think that maybe even your “absolute morals” can sometimes be relative, changing depending on the… SITUATION??? Let me give you one more, since you xtians always like to drag “the children” into every argument. Is it ALWAYS wrong for you, Terry Chapman, to kill an innocent child? If nothing else is always and forever wrong, certainly at least THAT is, right? Otherwise, you’d be as morally relativistic as those damned Atheists, eh? Well, let me tell you an exception: Let’s say that you change your name to Abraham and your son’s name is changed to Issac, and let’s say that your Biblegod comes down from above and ORDERS YOU, as a test of your faith, to KILL YOUR SON with a big knife. What’s the right thing to do at that point- what’s the MORAL thing to do? Do you obey your gods (and loose a son), or do you disobey your gods and loose your ���soul”??? Come on if it’s so easy, if morality is so absolute and fixed and never changes, what’s your pick???

 

The FACT is this: morality has ALWAYS been relative, and even you Christians have practiced this fact- or are you forgetting “the law that was nailed to the cross” and became obsolete at the death of Jesus? Jehovah’s “absolute morality” at that point could have contained the following disclaimer:  WARNING: Bible morality is subject to change without notice. Fact is, there have NEVER been absolutes when it comes to morals, but you Christians were just too dumb to realize it. And if you think I’m wrong, just go ahead and take up my challenge: name me just ONE thing that is wrong in any and all circumstances without exception. I have yet to meet any Christian who can prove me wrong, and I’ve gone up against some of the best.

 

 

Please post my response for why it makes no sense to debate you.  You not only need a proposition to defend, but the language must also be defined and that is impossible for atheists who have no morality.

 

Mark Smith here}    People don’t need gods to have a morality. Buddhists don’t believe in ANY gods, and they are some of the most moral people on Earth. Atheists certainly don’t believe in gods, and objective study after objective study of crime statistics have proven over the years that Atheists are by FAR more moral and law abiding than you Christians. I have actual facts and studies to back that up; what have you to back up YOUR claim that without Jesus rammed up my ass I’ll be out in the street “without morality” raping and pillaging and burning down the town??? Germany is 75% ATHEIST- do you see that country out of control? I’ll tell you one thing- if you think Christians are soooo much better than us Atheists, I’ll give you the following choice:  walking downtown alone at midnight in Atheistic Berlin –OR- Christian South Central Los Angeles. That’s your choice. South Central L.A. is just chocked full of churches, in fact, has one of the highest densities of churches per block of the whole nation. Yet for some strange reason… I get the feeling you’d rather be with the German Atheists than the fine Christian African Americans of South Central.  For more on this topic, see my essay:  Christianity Doesn't Work as Advertised 

 

 

For your consideration,

Terry Chapman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

T J Latham  9-16-04

 

Subject: Fwd: I am a member of the Church of Christ
Date: 9/16/2004 5:01:42 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: jcnot4me@aol.com

 

My name is T.J. Latham I am a member of the Church of Christ and Sir I am no coward.

Mark Smith here}     It is not the MEMBERS of the C of C that are refusing to stand and fight; it's their LEADERS, the ministers. The ministers do NOT want to debate me in public. Church of Christ MINISTERS are liars and cowards.

 

 

I feel that is so unfortunate that you do not

understand the the bible or the teachings of the church of christ the church that opperates the same as the 1st Century Church. I

also find it unfortunate that you sir have to use profanity to make yourself clear I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said it best

when he said " Profanity is a proclamation of public stupidity" also I have never known of any religion that agrees with the use of

profanity except mabey Atheist and if indead you are an atheist I am not concerned with how you feel about us, but more

importantley I am concerned for your soul. If you are not certain of the profanity I speek of let me refresh you its words such as

(Getting there asses kicked, and horse shit) yes ass is used in the Bible but you sir are taking it out of context.

Now whithout any more eknowlegement of who I am or what I stand for I will gladly respond to your little remarks about thechurch.
 

Mark Smith here}     Don't you readers just LOVE this man's command of the English language??? No wonder Farrell Till called the Church of Christ a "hee-haw religion".

Restored fact or fiction
In the matter of the restored church no we are not the restored church we are the church that Christ established and paid for with

his own blood though at times through out history we may have been small the church has never ceased to exist.

 

Mark Smith here}     You're not? Then you're not in the C of C, for that is what the C of C has consistently taught for over 150 years now. And seeing how you're not even in the C of C, nor aware of what it teaches, why am I wasting valuable time responding to you???

Did Christ

establish many churches?No. Matt.16:18 "And I say also unto the, that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my

Church;and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Now if you will examin this verse there are two key words Church and It.


these are both singular words if you understand english at all. If Christ was going to found more than one he would have used the

words Churches and Them.


As for the note at the bottom If a man is looking for an official book of doctorines we abide by he need not look any

further because our book of doctorine is the bible. Rev.22:18-19 in short if any man adds to the book of life he will have the plagues

of this book added unto him and if any man take from this book his name will taken out of the book of life. So if any man wants to

write his own book of doctorines I pitty his soul and pray for mercy on the day of judgement. I would also like to say that I know

that are some congregations that have strayed away from the truth but I do not belong to one of those Churches and refer only to

them as congregations and not The Church of Christ. I also do not go to, or take part in corrupt congregations.



Response to Church of Christ Claims
from tracts.


Yes it is true that some things that happened in the 1st Century Church of Christ is impossible to be done today. Why?

Because things that happend then were started and finished in the Bible such as: Miracles,Speaking in tongues, and the ability

to lay on hands to recieve special gifts of the holy spirit by the laying on of hands, but the bible has answer to why we are not able

to perform these things. 1st lets look at 1Cor. 13:11 "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is inpart shall be

done away" verse 8 says prophecies shall fail,tongues shall cease,and the knowledge shall pass away.

Now how do we know what that the word That which is perfect is not Jesus Christ? Simple our Lord is not refered to

anywhere else in the Bible as a that. That is a thing not a person. What is the only thing that we have that is perfect?

James 1:25 says "Whosoever looketh into the perfect law of libertyand abideth there in he being not a forgetful hearer but a doer of

the work this man shall be blessed in his deeds". Is this the only verse that we have that tells us that the bible is the only perfect

thing we have to abide by?No. If you need another verse look at 2Tim. 3:16&17. Going on to the little comment about women need

not apply is that what man says or what Christ said in his inspired word. 1Cor.14:34&35 "Let your women keep silence in the

chuches;for it is not permitted unto them to speak;but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. v35

And if they will learn anything let them ask there husbands at home: for it is a shame for a women to speak in the church." Now

that is not my words but the inspired words of God sent to the church at Corinth through the Apostle Paul.

While we are on the Apostle Paul or the apostles for that matter yes the Bible does say that they appointed Elders in every city

but if you will look at Tit.1&2 We find in study that the disiple Titus was left on the Island of Crete by the Apostle Paul to establish

elders. And in doing this he also lists out the qualifications needed to become an elder or a deacon in the church to day. Today

elders and deacons are decided upon by the men of the church but are decided on by the qualifications given to us in the Bible.

If the church today was not entended to have Elders and Deacons why would he have given us the qualifications ? Also I Know that

in Titus the position qualifications are given for a Bishop not an Elder but like many other words in the Bible they are

interchangeable In Greek the word is Bishop in Hebrew it is Elder or vise versa. Also a preacher in the Church of Christ is not referd

to as a Pastor unless he is an Elder because Pastor is also another word for Elder.In Eph. 4:11 it plainly shows that the position
of

a pastor and preacher are not the same because in that verse it shows that a evangelist and a pastor are the words for preacher

and elder. Something else I would like to make mention of is the lies about the church not debateing over the truth I know for a

fact

that this is a flat out lie due to the fact I attended 2 nights of debates this past weekend and this is not the 1950's I also know

that there will be another debate held in Montegomery. I believe at the end of this month, so please don't spread your petty lies

about the church because we as christians are never affraid to stand up for the truth. Now back to the subject of the positions of

the church organization. Yes we do have Elders which we have already discussed the reasoning behind, yes we do have Deacons

which we have already discussed, yes we do have teachers.Who are the Teachers? Anyone who is a member of the church. Who

ordained this position was it me another member of the church? Was it the preacher? No! It was Jesus Christ Matt. 28:19 "Go ye

therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and of the Holy Ghost. I no your going to say

that it says to teach but they were not called teachers, well for starters common sense should tell someone of sound mind that

someone who teaches is a teacher, but if thats not the answer your looking for please fill free to look back at Eph 4:11 where it

plainley says in recogniton teachers. Now do we have a music minister? No. Why not? Well for starters we do not have Musical

instraments in the church. Not one instance when the diciples came together on the first day of the week to worship do we have

anything saying they used musical instruments in worship. Now the bible doesn't say not to use them but it doesn's say to

either,but lets look at it like this if I were walking around the cliff of a tall mountain where would I rather walk up agains the

mountain where I know I'm safe or out on the edge where I could fall off I don't know about you sir but I do know I don't want to

fall down into the depths of hell because the bible didn't say not to, so I walk safe next to the mountain. Also if you'll look at Eph

5:19 it says to sing and make melody in the heart not on the piano. Now yes we do have song leaders who start the songs but

any man who has become a member of the church through baptism Act 2:38 can lead singing. Even if someone at any church

sings a song someone has to start the song and that is all a song leader does.

Moving on in positions in the church, no we do not have a youth minister or different sections of ministry because that takes away
\
from unity and causes division in the lords church which ultimately causes denomination within the church which is a sin. The

bible stresses the unity of one church. Another thing is how do people get the audasity to ask who preaches to the preacher.

Does the preacher not attend a Sunday school class where someone else in the church teaches? Does he not attend meetings

where someone else preaches ? And yes on certain nights different men in the congregation preach a sermon. But the main

authority speaker is not the man but christs word in the bible that does the speaking?

One thing that I forgot to mention earlier is I know we do not have " Youth Ministers" because I am one of the men who helps plan

things for our youth group and I also teach our young adult class but I am not a "Youth Minister" I do claim to be a teacher but not

a minister. I know this letter does not answer all of your nasty comments about the church and may not respond to all of the

bad things you put on the internet but I am just to anxious to send this to you to see what you have to say and to let you know

that the sound church of christ still exists and that were not affraid to stand up for the truth. Don't forget to email me back at

daniellelatham2003@yahoo.com

 

Mark Smith here}     Well, thank you for your email, and I'm sure that every body who has gotten past the sixth grade will have a good laugh at reading your attempt at communication.

 

---

Clint Davis 10-4-04

 

Subject: Curious...
Date: 10/4/2004 11:45:58 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

Greetings there. My name is Clint Davis and I am the young adults' minister at the Sunrise church of Christ in Chula Vista. I am only 20 years old and would never claim that I know everything there is to know about the answers to all of your questions, which are very good. I am curious as to why you have such a vendetta against the church of christ in particular. Why not attack other denominations or sects of Christianity. Again, just curious. And also, I know a man who, if has the time and financial means to get out to California, would LOVE to debate with you on these points. Perhaps I can set something up.

Mark Smith here}     Thanks for writing Clint. 

QUESTION #1}  My first question is this: why doesn't your church's web page have an email link?

As for your friend who might want to debate, he has to be a minister, which leads me to my second question:

QUESTION #2}   Why won't your OWN ministers face me in a public debate? Why should you have to drag someone half way across the country when you've got ministers right there???

As to why I give special attention to the CofC: because I used to be one of you, and don't want others wasting 20 years of their lives like I did.

I admit that the "church of Christ" in general is not doing everything correctly, and in a lot of cases is flat doing things wrong.

Mark Smith here}     Then what are you going to do about it??? If you remain silent, you are a guilty accomplice. If you speak up, you'll get kicked out, as freedom of speech is not a hallmark of religion. What will you do about it???

 

 

But, I also know that in many cases, they are sincerely trying to do what the word of God says, to the best of their understanding. Just as in ANY institution that is made-up of Human beings, the Lord's church IS NOT perfect, and I know that there are indeed good Christian people who might argue that it is, but I know it certainly is not. The good thing about the Lord's church(and by that I mean acongregation that is genuinely SEEKING to live up to the standards of the New Testament) is that Jesus is working in and through them. I am so sorry for congregations who refuse to allow God and His spirit to move and lead them, and who refuse to work hard to teach, preach, and serve others. I guess what I am trying to say is that, in many regards, you and I probably feel very similarly about "organized religion". Perhaps not. However, I would really like to talk to you further about this. I have Yahoo, AOL and MSN instant Messenger, and if you have any of these I would love to chat with you sometime. If not, it will be fine to email back and forth with you. I'm not trying to prove any point to you or "convert" you. I just want to see where you are coming from.

Msn Messenger screenname:

AIM Screenname: recon130

Yahoo Messenger screenname: slave238

Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you! May you be blessed!
 

Mark Smith here}     It sounds like you have a mind and are not afraid to use it. That means you days in the Fundy branches of the CofC are numbered. Be forewarned!

Striving to serve,

Clint ><>




"Now To Him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power, that is at work within us. To Him be glory in the church, and in Christ Jesus, throughout all generations. Forever and Ever. Amen!" ~Eph. 3:20-21
 

 

---

Clint Davis 10-12-04

Subject: Reply to your reply!
Date: 10/12/2004 3:27:36 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

 

 

---

Phil  2-1-2005

Subject: Thank-you!
Date: 2/1/2005 4:49:54 P.M. Pacific Standard Time
From: americanagrace@yahoo.com
Reply To: To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

Hi, I wanted to know more about the Church of Christ denomination and your web page gave me lots of helpful information. It does sound very much like a cult to me, and a church with lots of erroneous teachings. I am just curious about whether your terrible ordeal with their hypocracy led you to leave your faith in Christ entirely. (It seems that way, based on your web and email addresses .. if I read them correctly.) You don't have to answer. But if that is what happened, I am very sorry that Satan used that as a means to turn you away from the Lord. I do believe that there is a body of Christ on earth .. but it is an invisible church .. indwelt by those who have received Christ's gift of salvation. His presence is with all true believers, and He doesn't live in a temple made with human hands. Thank-you again for your diligent effort in trying to caution people. Phil in Boston

 

Mark Smith here} Hey Phil. What got me to leave had nothing to do with being disappointed in the church. The church is made of people, people screw up. That's to be expected, and mocked- depending on the level of hypocrisy on their part. What made me leave was seeing how Jesus screwed up. That was NOT expected. He predicted his return within the lifetime of his Apostles, and it never happened, therefore he was a false prophet.

and since that table contained practically everything on the page, all of

 

---

 

Chris Moores 7-25-05

Subject: debate
Date: 7/25/2005 6:26:05 P.M. Pacific Standard Time
Fro
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me

 

 

Dear Mark,

    I am a minister for a congregation of the Lord's Church; I just happened onto your website.  What specifically are you wanting to debate?  Of course you know that for a debate to be scheduled or set up, there must be propositions stated.  We can't debate generalities; that could last until eternity. 

    Of course any proposition I would sign would have to include an agreement on your part that the Bible is the word of God.  If we are going to debate a specific doctrine, it must be one found in the Bible.  If you are agreeable to this, pretty much any subject would suffice.  As long as we agree to remain on topic (topicality must be enforced), I don't see why we couldn't have a public discussion.  In my experience, some call for a debate and once it starts, as soon as someone experiences difficulty in negating the affirmative or proving their own proposition, they begin to throw mud or insults.  I hope that is not your intention.  If not, e-mail me with your proposition(s).

Anxiously awaiting your response,

Chris

Mark Smith here} Hey Chris. In case you missed it, I am an Atheist. Therefore, your odd request to agree beforehand that your Bible is everything you claim it is, is stupid. Besides, you are not THE minister of a local congregation. You are "a" minister, which means you are just one of the laity. Did you forget I used to be in the CofC and know your catch phrases???

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chris Moores 8-8-05

 

 I apologize if my e-mail was misunderstood or not well defined. I guess someone would call me "the" minister of a local congregation since I am the only one that speaks from the pulpit. I still consider myself only a Christian that is fortunate enough to preach and be compensated for it. I studied at Brown Trail School of Preaching in Hurst, Texas. I count myself as one of the most blessed people in the world to be allowed to do what I do.

I didn't know you were an atheist; I thought you only denied Jesus Christ. If a Bible doctrine or subject isn't the "debate" subject, then I guess a public discussion would not be very profitable. I am a (the) minister for a congregation in Mississippi and just wanted you to know there are some gospel preachers who would gladly come to California or wherever to defend the truth. I'm sorry if there are no gospel preachers on the West coast who will not stand up; be assured, as you probably know, there are plenty in the Southeast and Southwest that would take up your challenge.

You are correct in some of your writings that there are people in the Lord's Church who aren't what they should be and some are inconsistent. I believe that I'm trying my very best to live by the pattern I see in the New Testament. If I'm shown something inconsistent in what I practice, I will quickly move to the Biblical pattern.
 

It seems that there will be no debate per your statement about the Bible not being what I say it is. Just being curious, what is it you would like to debate? There may still be an opportunity. As I said in my last e-mail, I wouldn't be interested in something involving insults or name calling; I'm not assuming that is what you want, I just want to be clear up front with you.
If you would like to pursue this further, please, contact me. I very much appreciate your courtesy for responding to my earlier message.
Thanks,
Chris

Mark Smith here} I'm glad to here that at least in the South there may be C of C ministers still willing to stand up for what they believe. As to what to debate, I'd like to debate the written claims of the C of C (found in many C of C tracts) that they are a xerox copy point for point of the church that existed in 33 AD.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chris Moores 8-10-05 

Once again, thank you for promptly responding to my e-mail. As for debating, could you send me a proposition that you are willing to affirm? Please understand, I hesitate to label any congregation, but I've not read about a lot of faithful congregations on the West coast or in the Northeast of the United States. What I'm saying is, I am willing to defend the Lord's Church as "I know it." I would never defend congregations that are not living by the doctrine found in the Bible. I'm sure you, being a former member of the church, understand what I'm saying. There are many who wear the name of Christian, but don't actually "walk the walk. There is a minister in my area that is teaching falsely about divorce, marriage and remarriage; he is a minister of the church of Christ. We are trying to set up a debate with him that he might be brought back to the truth or be exposed. Not only would I stand up against those that deny Biblical doctrines but one that I call brother if he is jeopardizing others' souls with false doctrine. (Rom. 16:17-18; 2John 9-10)
"If you're wanting to debate just define precisely what your contention is with today's church of Christ and it's departure with scripture or inconsistency and I will do my best to oblige you. Of course, there's a chance we may agree on certain points and a debate might prove a waste of our time.
Thanks,
Chris

Mark Smith here} What to affirm in a debate? How about my essay "Restored: Fact or Fiction?" on my Church of Christ website:

http://www.jcnot4me.com/Items/cults/church_of_christ.htm

I think the claims made by reputable Church of Christ scholars and leaders that I quote from should be easy enough to blow out of the water. Of course, if you already think those claims are dumb, then we'll have to find something else.

 

 

 

 

 

Chris Moores 8-11-05

Subject: Re: debate
Date: 8/11/2005 5:48:36 P.M. Pacific Standard Time
From
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me

 

Mark,
As I read some of your contentions with many practices of some churches of Christ, some are justified. I agree that there is no Biblical example for: youth ministers, a professional clergy, and music ministers. I am pained by so many departures from what the Bible teaches and that some of the Lord's Churches at times are so "denominational." These that have carried off people into this heresy will have to answer one day, (Rev. 22:18-19; Gal. 1:6-9). I see congregations who now employ praise team leaders, choirs, solo singers, clapping of hands, etc. Some have even dropped the name of Christ, like Max Lucado.

Mark Smith here} "Praise Team Leader"? What the HECK is THAT, a cheerleader for Jesus? Are they young and female and dressed to seduce? Do they have bullhorns to yell louder???

All throughout the Bible, the overwhelming theme is there will be a "remnant" of the faithful. I am trying to live and teach what the Bible says so that I and my family might be a part of those who are on the "narrow" path and not the broad road to destruction. Sadly the majority of people are too wrapped up in themselves and will miss Heaven. I'm chasing rabbits and preaching now......back to business.

From reading 2 Timothy, chapter 4, I do notice that Timothy is called by Paul an evangelist and is told to perform or fulfil his ministry. So, I do think minister can be correctly applied to one who teaches or preaches the gospel. Do you deny that Timothy was a "preacher" or evangelist/ minister? And, according to other scriptures, do you deny that he would have been within his rights to be compensated as such? Would not chapter 9 of 1st Corinthians give by implication the same right to a located preacher? How long can one be "located" with a congregation before you believe it would be unscriptural? This may be a subject we could discuss.

You say you are an atheist; would you affirm this: (Be it resolved that I know there is no God)? A paid located preacher, or affirming the non-existence of God could be viable discussions.

Think about these topics, and let me know. Understand, I look at this as an opportunity to stand for truth and glorification of God. I in no way seek ill will from you, as I hope you feel the same. If we can choose a subject that is mutually agreeable, and agree to keep the discussion on a high plane (no personal insults, cursing, etc.) I believe we can move further down the road to a debate or discussion.

Also think about this: 1. Place; 2. Time; 3. Duration of discussion; 4. Rules of debate (mutually agreeable); 5. Agreement that debate may be published with each disputant having opportunity to read the printed material and giving consent to said material. (Just want to make sure no one is misrepresented.) 6. Moderators?; 7. Neutral moderator; one who can stop debate to make a ruling and that both of us agree to abide by his decision.
If you think of anything I may have left out, please, put it in your next e-mail.

I really hate flying but will; it is a shame that no one closer to you wants to have a discussion or debate. A debate would have to occur in 06', as I have only one week left I can be away from this congregation and I'm looking at preaching a gospel meeting near St. Louis, MO. in October. I don't know that the Lord intended us to fly; I don't know that we have the promise of His protection at 40,000 feet....He said in Matt. 28:20....LO I am with you always. Bad joke....Once again thanks for contacting me and the courtesy you've shown.
Sincerely,
Chris

 

Mark Smith here}    As much as I'd like to debate my "Fire The Clergy" essay (by the way, Timothy was an Apostle) or the non-existence of Biblegod, in a debate with a Church of Christ minister I'd really like to debate the Church of Christ. That might present a problem, though, as you seem to already agree with a big chunk of what I already say about the Church of Christ. Maybe we could team up and knock over the Church of Christ cheer leaders while they are in their human pyramid formation, and watch them do a "splash down" into the baptismal.

 

---

 

Chad  9-2-05

 

Subject: Chris Moores
Date: 9/2/2005 10:15:35 P.M. Pacific Standard Time
From:
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

Hey Snarky Marky remember me? I'm sure you haven't forgotten how I embarrassed you in challenging your presuppositions and how you refused to put my email's on your site. And now we can all see how pathetic this whole thing has become. Here's Chris Moore accepting your challenge for debate and honestly trying to set it up and you go running like a little scaredy marky. Suddenly big man Mark-o-the-beast doesn't want to play no more? One word for you -COWARD.

People are laughing at you Smithers. When it came down to it, you ran away. What a joke.

Chad

p.s. I want you to know that I'm just having a good time with you here. I only speak the way I do because that is the amount of respect you generally give others. Personally I think it's deplorable but you set the bar and I'm just returning the favour. The rhetoric is fun but the little credibility you had just disappeared with you running away from a real debate. Look for the Truth my friend. You never need to be ashamed to follow it where it leads. Put down your weapons and look again, you might be surprised at what you see. The knowledge we have as people is never exhaustive so let's be flexible as we search. You stopped trying a long time ago I'm afraid. So I raise a glass to you Mark Smith - NEVER QUIT SEARCHING, I don't

 

Mark Smith here}    You must be trippin, dude.  I emailed Moores on August 23, 2005 (see above reply) and that's the last I heard of it.  As far as do I remember you, no, I don't. Why- were you an especially offensive Christian ASSHOLE, more so than the average Christian asshole, that you should stick out???

You know, one of the reasons I even try to publish on my web site emails that I get (most CHRISTIAN web sites don't even HAVE an email link- much less allow free speech), is to let the world see you Christian ASSHOLES in all your bigoted offensive glory, without the benefit of P.R.

So please, don't change. You serve as such a good example of what "the love of Jesus" turns people into.

---

 

dspike 9-5-05

 
Subject: Wow! - Terry Chapman
Date: 9/5/2005 3:16:39 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
From: 
Reply To:
To: JCnot4me@aol.com

 

 

 

Mark Smith here}    It would be interesting, but after several years now of trying to get ANY  CofC minister to debate me, I know it ain't going to happen. The CofC is already losing enough members doing nothing; imagine if they started losing debates! 

 

---

 

Nameless from Tampa 10/21/07

 

 

Mark Smith here}    Well, Mr. Nameless, I don't see any emails from any of THEM offering to fly me down to Tampa for a debate. Are they not able to write for themselves? Must they have you do their writing for them??? Are they really THAT afraid of me that, out of "4 Preachers" not even ONE can write me directly???   Your email proves my point:  C of C preachers are scared to debate me.

---

 

Nameless  10-21-07 

 

I, too was raised in the C of C and noticed a lot of things that you bring reference to in which you disagree with them on issues.  I have always had a problem with their myopic points of view and the way in which I see how they tend to operate.  I have long ago taken my life back to search out those things that be of God,,not of man or his "good" intentions in seeking his ways.  Most are traditional and are rooted in tons of tradition when it comes to the C of C.

 

Notwithstanding is that in spite of a lot of those brothers who are ill equipped to determine their own beliefs or able to debate their "beliefs",,,,,I find it pretty hypocritical on your part to become so vulgar in your righteousness on more that one occasion as you rise to a level of a man who has run out of adjectives to describe something you don't believe as "accurate",,,,,I believe the term you phrase,,,"bullshit".  Surely you can rise to a higher standard than that,,,,you espouse to use the Bible in your verses to assault those you disagree with and then turn around and show your,,,,"backside" and use terms that are not only vulgar but pretty much show you to be smaller than the opponent you desire to battle.

Mark Smith here}    Yes, I am so much below the standards of the "good" book, such as where the prophet of Biblegod is mocking the god of a competing religion by saying the reason that god couldn't come and help his followers right then is because maybe he was stuck taking a dump.

 

I started to read your website and thought I had found a person who might hold some level of honor or integrity,,,,,,your comments were pithy and relevant to some point,,but then afterwards it became very apparent that your reason for debate was not for the sake of getting to the truth,,,but rather because you have an axe to grind.  I find that very odd for someone who purports to seek truth to actually subvert themselves and act like the very person they are going after.

 

My question to you,,are you in fact a believer,,,,,I had difficulty reaching a conclusion in this because of your words and nature.  If you are a believer then why would you bring yourself shame in your endeavor to debatte something that you feel is so very wrong?  Your motives are not pure,,,they are not set things right,,,they have a twinge of anger,,of resentment because of you being withdrawn from.  Whoever it was that did that,,,they are wrong,,,,just as the church who withdrew from me was wrong but I don't set a course of destruction because I got my feelings hurt.  Certainly there is more work that you can do than going after the C of C,,,,isn't there something more positive in your life than the revenge nature you seek? 

 

I at one time was where you are,,,except that you have taken this to be a life long adventure.  What is it you seek,,,,you won't gain a thing from the C of C,,,,they will use this as a badge of honor,,,something to wring their hands with so that they become a "victim" of intolerant minds,,,,I would think that with your level of education and thought processes you would find something better to engage in.  Free yourself from this untoward generation,,,,does that phrase ring a bell?

 

---

 

 

RG  12/9/07  

 

MARK
I tried sending this VIA Gmail but it would not go through.  IF You want to repost this, go ahead but please do not use my real name or EMil address as I am already under enough "threats" from these people and I don;t wish to jeopardize my family's safety due to some religious kooks.... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

Contact Information Set Free!  Orange County, CA Email:     JCnot4me@aol.com             Web Page     JCnot4me.com NOTICE:  Any and all emails sent to SET FREE become the property of SET FREE to be used or displayed upon the web site of SET FREE however SET FREE decides, but don't worry,  your email address will probably be deleted.   Views contained in SET FREE represent the views of the authors. No implicit approval by SET FREE is to be assumed.