A Time to Speak — Christian Chronicle Ad
First, here are my thoughts on instrumental music vs. a cappella music.
But this isn’t about the issue of a cappella music, per se. It’s about the two-page ad in the most recent Christian Chronicle entitled “A Time to Speak.” If you haven’t seen it, you can read a similar version here.
There are some differences. For example, the ad online says, “We, as a group of younger ministers, present this article to the public to affirm that we stand firmly united for a cappella singing.” Then there is a long list of names of people from ages 17 to 77.
In the Chronicle ad, it says, “We, as a group of ministers who are age 55 and younger, present this statement to the public to affirm that we stand firmly united for acappella singing.” The list of names of “preachers already affirming this statement” in the Chronicle has expunged the names online of those who are female and those who are over 55. I counted over 300 names, though I only recognize four or five. (I don’t mean that to downplay the individuals — I just mean that I don’t know them.)
When I first read it, I had serious questions about the Chronicle’s advertising policy. The Chronicle has in recent years been such an effective tool for unity and missions. Why would they accept an ad like this? Does it promote unity or disunity? Does it force ministers to sign or resign from some churches? Would they receive a similar ad from those who also think it’s “time to speak” — but who disagree — complete with their own set of names?
I had a wonderful conversation with Lynn McMillon today, however. He assured me that the Chronicle has a brand new advertising policy. Something like this won’t appear there again. Congratulations to the Chronicle staff and board for reconsidering.
The ad directs people to the www.foracappella.org website. Here is a section from one of the articles the site includes to set us straight:
Some suggest that whether or not one uses instrumental music in worship really doesn’t matter. Since we all are imperfect and stand in the need of the grace of God, whether we use instruments is a moot question. They believe they can continue using the instrument without losing favor with God. Any issue that involves sin is a “salvation issue.” When people persist in sin and do not repent, they put their souls in peril (Heb. 10:26; 2 Pet. 3:9; Luke 13:3,5). The question here, then, is the use of instrumental music in worship sinful. Based upon the Scriptural evidence we have examined, we believe it is sinful to go beyond the authority of the New Testament and use musical instruments to worship. Some might use it for a time and then repent; surely God’s grace will forgive them in response to their repentance. What will happen to those who will not repent?
This is what’s most disturbing. I keep trying to convince young ministers that there aren’t many who think this is a salvation issue — but maybe I’m wrong! Perhaps some of those listed on the planning and advisory committee can assure us that this article is improperly placed on the website.
My dear friends, if the use of instrumental music will send a Christ-follower to hell, then we’re all going to hell. Over something. We’re all wrong about something!!
Those words above show that the deepest need is for us to understand what the gospel is.
Nearly as disturbing are these words from another recommended article:
Should those who oppose the use of instruments, then, extend their fellowship to those who do? Fellowship implies approval. In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul addresses the question of fellowship with the man who has his father’s wife. He says that even the pagans do not approve of such behavior. For the Corinthians to continue to fellowship him would be to send a message of approval for something even pagans condemn. Paul then commands them to withdraw from him. Paul also writes in 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 that “if anyone does not obey our instruction in this epistle, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed.” To associate with those who have strayed, Paul says, is to send the message of approval of what they do. In the same way, John tells Christians that if someone “comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him” (2 John 10). Again the point is clear, to extend fellowship implies approval. This does not mean, of course, that we can have no contact with such people, but does mean that we do not extend to those who are engaging in a practice which is not in harmony with scripture the same fellowship we would to those who are in such harmony.
The world is disoriented, hurting, and lost. God is seeking to restore and repair what’s been broken. And someone is paying for a two-page ad in the Chronicle for this?
One of the most gifted young ministers I know in Churches of Christ sent me a brief email a few days ago. It said, “Yup. I’m out.” I hope he won’t leave. But if he does, I understand. And I know he’ll still be a powerful servant in the kingdom.
In light of the current dialog about salvation by OLD LAW or NEW LAW as the basis of our salvation consider that which follows
THOUGHTS SHARED AT A FRIEND’S FUNERAL
Several years ago I was teaching the auditorium Sunday morning Bible class at (BLANK) Church of Christ. I shared this story:
“There was once a young man, just a couple months more than twelve years of age. He was a boy who unfortunately got into a lot of trouble, some of it of a quite serious nature. With the passing of time, he found himself face-to-face with the Judge in an awesome Courtroom. He waited his turn as other cases were being heard by the Judge. Finally his name was called. The Judge looked the young man straight in the eye and began reading the long list of crimes for which was being charged.
“The Judge asked, ‘How do you plead?’
“The boy asked with much nervousness, ‘What does that mean?’
“The Judge continued, ‘It means, Are you guilty of these things I have read to you?’
“The frightened lad nervously replied, ‘Yes and also for many things not on the list!’
“The Judge then asked, ‘Who is here to defend you?’
“The boy inquired again, ‘What does that mean?’
“The Judge explained, ‘That means, Do you have anyone to stand beside you and defend you?’
“’No,’ the boy responded. ‘Not even my Mom or Dad would come to be here with me with this long list of crimes!’
“The Judge went on, ‘I mean do you have an Attorney to defend you against these charges?’
“’No Sir,’ the boy answered with pockets so empty he could not possibly afford any Attorney.
“The Judge assigned him a Public Defender. The Judge called a kind young attorney from the front row of the court room to come up and stand beside the frightened young man. The Judge handed the kind young attorney the long list of charges leveled against the young criminal. The Attorney must have been Hispanic because the Judge introduced him as (Spanish pronunciation) ‘JESUS.’
“The kind, Court-appointed Defense Attorney took the young man to the hall outside the court room and read over the charges and asked, ‘Are you guilty of this long list of charges against you?’
“The young man answered him, ‘Yes and also for many other things not on the list!’
“When the young criminal and the Court-appointed Public Defender went back into the Courtroom and stood before the Judge again, the Judge asked the Attorney to join him for a “side bar,” to come and talk privately beside the Judge’s Bench.
“Soon the kind Defense Attorney and the young man, charged with many crimes, walked to stand before the Judge’s Bench. Without a word being said, the Judge lifted his gavel and pounded it one time on the Bench with the simple statement, ‘CASE DISMISSED!’”
I was that young man and it took many years to fully understand what took place that day when I stood before the Judge charged with every conceivable offense and heinous crime. The kind Public Defender, I learned, was the SON of the Judge and whenever he stood by to defend any person assigned to him, he never lost a case! I learned that “CASE DISMISSED!” had nothing to do with the seriousness of ones crimes or the iron clad evidence proving ones guilt. The outcome of the trial depends entirely upon whether I have been given the services of the Public Defender who never loses a case because he happens to be the Son of the Judge. They have their own scheme worked out to abort a system of pure justice for those charged but fortunate enough to have the only Public Defender who matters, the Lord Jesus Christ. That is the story of my own accepting Jesus Christ as my Savior and Lord at twelve years of age. This ia alwo the essence of the Gospel of Christ!
My friend (whose funeral I was participating in) became particularly intrigued with my Sunday School class illustration. He wanted to talk about what all was really involved in that modern day parable of guilty sinners coming to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
My friend raised the most challenging of all questions, “How can guilty men be set free in the face of a holy God who cannot tolerate any sin in His presence?” That is a profound question!
This was part of the explanation I shared with my friend one Sunday night about fifteen years ago. Setting guilty people free goes against almost everything we normally know about “LAW AND ORDER, CRIME AND PUNISHMENT.” Because the more profound truth about “GRACE AND MERCY” is so difficult for us to grasp, we often get confused and become involved in what can only be characterized as wrangling about “LAW” (even God’s Law). And this wrangling always has a way of distracting us from the pure gospel of “GRACE AND MERCY”!
“Some have wandered away from these (love from a pure heart, a good conscience and sincere faith) and turned to meaningless talk. They want to be teachers of LAW, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.”
(1 Timothy 1:3-6, NIV)
This confusion about “LAW AND ORDER” coupled with “GRACE AND MERCY” is based on the mistaken notion that our relationship with the Lord is either attained or maintained by a particular level of biblical understanding or a “passing grade” of obedience to the Lord as His will is expressed in Scripture.
God’s faithful people never were “right with Him” on the basis of His Law and their making a passing grade on the Lord’s final test of obedience.
OBEDIENCE IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL! But obedience must be for the right reasons–our means of “showing our appreciation for the gift of His pure and unadulterated GRACE AND MERCY.” Even for Old Covenant saints, James (our Lord’s brother) pointed to the Ten Commandments and insists that to “offend in one point makes us guilty of all.” (James 2:10-13). There it is. Is righteous based on our obedience to God’s Law? No way, at no time, under either the Old or New Covenants!
The New Covenant Scriptures are NOT “the Perfect Law of Liberty.” The letter of JAMES was most likely the first New Covenant piece of Holy Scripture published, even before the four Gospel Accounts. Look carefully at the context (in James) for the expression “Perfect Law of Liberty”:
“For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it… Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the LAW THAT GIVES FREEDOM (THE LAW OF LIBERTY) because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.” (James 2:10, 12-13)
That is THE PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY—“Mercy triumphs over Judgment!” God GRACE is greater and more powerful than His LAW!” Praise God we are saved by the divine act of God’s mercy and pardon, not on the basis of avoiding Judgment by keeping God’s Law perfectly or even keeping the Law more perfectly than others!
In a real sense “THE PERFECT LAW THAT GIVES FREEDOM—THE LAW OF LIBERTY” is not even a NEW LAW and but an Eternal Law (PRINCIPAL)even older than the Covenant of Sinai and certainly much older than the New Covenant which was inaugurated by the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. This eternal principal is the means by which the Lord has always sustained a “right relationship” with His people. Our “right relationship” with the Lord is based solidly and solely on the strength of His love, the power of His grace and mercy; it is not on the merits of our achieving or maintaining a passing grade of obedience.
Envisioning that we are justified (made right with God) in whole or in part on the basis of “RULES & OBEDIENCE” is the most dangerous of all false teachings. One can be mistaken about many things in Scripture and may be seriously flawed in his efforts to offer faithful obedience to the Lord. We absolutely cannot, dare not be wrong on seeing clearly THE ONLY BASIS of our relationship with the Lord.
The Apostle Paul joined James (our Lord’s brother) in further making the truth too clear to miss:
“You who are trying to be justified by LAW (my emphasis, ANY LAW) have been ALIENATED FROM CHRIST; YOU HAVE FALLEN AWAY FROM GRACE. But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.” (Galatians 5:4-6)
Those who are made right with the Lord are those who PLEAD FOR MERCY, not those who PLEAD THEIR CASE on the basis of their obedience.
To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else, Jesus told this parable: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
“But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
“I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
(Luke 18:9-14)
LC poses a very good question. If people want to worship with instruments, then why aren’t they bringing sin offerings, wave offerings, and the like to worship as well?
Joe, here is a question for you: Is there a difference between God’s saving work in your life and your expression of gratitude to Him? We see all kinds of testimony in Scripture that the sacrifices, specifically, pointed to the substitutionary death of Christ. This was fulfilled, and the need and option for the sacrifices was taken away. There is no mention made about strings, winds, etc. being fulfilled. In fact, most of the mention of their use has nothing to do with the Law, but they were part of the world in which the people lived, and the Lord enjoined them through out the story to use them to express joy and gladness, in the beauty of holiness. In other words, “whatever you do, ..do all in the name of Christ!”
Another question: Why are you afraid to take anything the Lord said in the OT at face value? This calls back to another question which nobody has offered to answer: On what do you base this presumption that the OT is only for a time period before Christ when the New is full of passages telling the Church to make full use of it?
Please- study on these questions, ask God to tell you in His word what the truth really is, and then, please, answer.
Robert ,
Some have already said the old is useful. Your question has already been answered.
It really comes back to those who believe there is no authority for the instrument in the new. And it has to do with the nature of worship in the new , that has been explained in detail.
I don’t think we are going to reach an agreement. I dont plan to use instruments and Mr. Easter obviously does not intend to change his ways either.
I have never suggested that the OT is useless. However in my opinion, we should not worship according to the OT ways. If we are going to pick out intruments from the divine authority to DAvid and Moses, then we must also be consistent and start using other forms of OT worship as well.
Christ built the NT church. Would you argue with that? Why go back before his work and say that one form of worship out of a hundred is acceptable? Why can’t we start with where Christ started and appreciate the church that he built, not adding something where he didn’t?
Many member of the churches of Christ have added this to their worship and then called the rest of us (me) divisive. They say that they are breaking down walls in the church.
Listen: Would you say that people who worship with singing is wrong?
If you think that it is not a salvation issue, then why divide churches over it? Am I wrong in how I worship? Some churches have two separate services, one for singing and some for playing. In my opinion that should have with it two sets of Elders. It is two completely different churches.
From the NT:
I sing, Eph 5:19, Col 3:16,17, James and I Cor. and have permission to in worship just as Jesus sang on the mountain.
You play, give me your verses in the NT:
This is not about grace or God accepting any kind of worship. It is about the silence of scripture. I have no permission from the NT and I am not brave enough to reach back to the OT and pick out what I want to give me permission.
Ray. The question is not whether the OT is useful, but on what authority do you downgrade it from the place of being the God-inspired message to the Church and to the world (1), for doctrine, reproof, and correction (2), containing all things pertaining to life and godliness (3), teaching us about the Son (4), to merely “useful” but having no authority for the Church today (5). The first four categories are given it by Christ and the Apostles in the New Testament. The fifth category is what you are advocating. To be a Christian is to know Jesus (6), and His love (7), and the Scriptures of the Old Testament give us true testimony about Him ( 8). The Father, through His Son, the Word, revealed Himself to mankind from Eden to Calvary, teaching us about His love. The Pharisees ignored that message about His love and turned that revelation into a legal code of acceptable religious behavior, and Jesus rebuked them for their voluntary blindness. The early Church made a record of the workings of the Son and of the Holy Ghost in completing that testimony with an even more explicit revelation of that love, and you continue the work of the Pharisees in making it another legal code (9), choosing to follow the traditions of men than the love of God.
One might assume, Ray, that as careful as you are with the particulars of your religious life to conform it in all ways to the New Testament, that you pray without ceasing, everywhere and at all times lifting up holy hands to the Lord, giving Him thanks in and for all things, loving God with your all, loving every one who loves Jesus as being of more worth before God than yourself, loving everyone else as your neighbor as being (at least) as important as yourself. All these things are directly commanded in the New Testament. To quibble over whether or not God allows pianos in church buildings is surely straining at a gnat just in case it’s there, while, if that approach to Scripture is even valid, gobbling down a whole barrel of gnats in the form of doing anything else that the New Testament does not specifically prescribe.
If we take it seriously, we see that the one standard by which we need to judge our obedience to God is love. I John 3:23 says, “And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.” and in Galatians, (6:2) “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.” A decree against pianos, or sheet music, or light bulbs, buttons, mustaches, gas engines, etc., is very clearly “speaking where the Word is silent.” It is casting a stumblingblock before the brethren, and making the traditions of 19th Century men the final voice on what part of the Word of the eternal God we are willing to obey. God has given His whole Word for the whole Church. Those who presume to “rightly divide” according to some heretic’s “private interpretation” are cutting themselves off from the Church, and from God, Whose Word they refuse to hear.
(1)Heb. 3:7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,
(2)II Tim. 3:15 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
(3)II Pet. 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
(4)John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
(5) Your entries.
(6)John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
(7)Eph. 3:19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.
(8) Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
(9)Matt. 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Rollin, Rollin, Rollin,
Though the comments swollen
RAWHIDE.
Rain, wind and weather Hell bent for leather
wishin my proof text by my side
All thing are missing good love, respect and dissin
Waitin at the end of this ride.
RAWHIDE.
The hide is from the dead horse beaten once too mnay times and I am getting carsick. Stop effing commenting. Me too!
Robert ,
Again , no argument. All of scripture is inspired of God.
There is the law of sin and death, which cannot save you. That has been my point in talking about the two covenants And that we cannot go back to the covenant that brings us to Christ and was our tutor to bring us to Him , who is the reality , and use the shadows of the old to fully participate in new testament worship of spirit and truth and written on the heart.
Also , having these discussions does not mean we have lost any measure of love. We an be engaged in both a ministry of compassion and a ministry of the word , which includes doctrinal statements. Actually , we kid ourselves if we think our compassion will ever be very meaningful without a foundation of doctrinal understanding. Paul writes about the mercy of God for 11 chapters in Romans and then concludes the letter writing about being a living sacrifice. Our mercy will become more filled with compassion the more we know about the mercy of God.
This has been a very good blog. Nothing wrong with an open discussion.
Funny song, Leland- I have to remember that one!
The texts I used, you are more than welcome (in fact, begged) to look them up and find the immediate and broader context for what they say. To call, “proof text!” because I refer to Scripture may be a valid answer, but only if you can show that the verses I use are forced into an interpretation that they don’t really support. In this case, I was only delivering the message of the plain sense of the passages, so it is on you to deal with the message of God’s Word, before Him. In other words, it is not this preacher you’re dealing with on these issues, but God. If you insist on taking the opinions of Darby, Larkin, and Campbell as binding on what part of the Bible the Holy Ghost is allowed to use in your life, then as they answer for their heresies, so will you for your choice to obey them, and not Christ.
Our Traditional Hermeneutic is broken inconsistent and leads to erroneous interpretations. To make the case that the NT epistles written to churches 1000’s of years ago provide a detailed orthodoxy for worship service is to ask of the text what was never designed to answer. A restoration of New Testament church the way that is it currently being conducted will have us restoring an institution instead of a spiritual Kingdom. The tragedy is, the moment that we become an “institution” we are left vulnerable to feel the effects of a fallen world, call it a kind of spiritual entropy. Arguments and political positioning around a conclusion supported by a bad hermeneutic only serve as an example of the intuitional tendencies of restoration movement that seeks to restore the wrong thing. I wonder if we were focused on restoring our fellowship to the image of Christ if we would still be having this discussion. John 18:36
The whole silence is ‘prohibitive” is base on making epistles authoritative the “same way” as Levitical law. So the normal silence is prohibitive approach comparing the silence of New Testament Epistles referring to musical instruments (Eph 5:19, Col 3:16,17, James and I Cor)to a passage in Hebrews 7:14 quoted from Levitical law is erroneous. Could it be that God expects man to grow up and make mature “non slippery slope decision based on a good theological understanding of God rather then by legislating every detail of our liturgical life.
Radical Disciple
radical: from L.L. radicalis “of or having roots,” L. radix “root” meaning “going to the origin, essential”
The rational wants to figure out God’s instructions
The radical wants to “see God”
The rational believes everything depends on being “right”
The radical knows everything depends on the Righteousness of Christ
The rational desires to figure out what God wants…so he can do it
The radical desires to be filled with God’s Spirit
Because he knows that’s the only way he can do God’s will
The rational looks for arguments and commands in scripture
The radical looks for the nature of Christ in scripture
The rational wants to “win souls” for God
The radical wants to be used by God to be salt and light
In bland, dark corners of the world
The rational designs better lessons, sermons, tracts,
Workshops and arguments
The radical submits to better relationships with the Father, Jesus, the Spirit,
Brothers and sisters, and fellow human beings
The rational blazes the most effective route to reach a Godly end result
The radical walks as Jesus walked in any given moment,
Knowing that path will lead to the best end result—
An outcome which is completely in God’s hands
The rational comes up with new ideas and programs
Designed to increase the Kingdom
The radical finds the places where God is already doing the work
Of growing his Kingdom…and pitches in
The rational knows that God is counting on us to get the job done!
The radical knows that God will get the job done by using us
In every way that we’ll allow him to!
The rational longs to be a better Leader
The radical longs to be a better Follower
The rational would die before sacrificing her personal beliefs and convictions
The radical would die to self—including her life, desires, possessions,
Even her personal beliefs—to participate in the sacrifice made for her
By the savior she’s following
Until we see clearly the difference between the “pointer” (scripture) and the “POINT” (Jesus) we’ll continue these arguments ad nauseum.
EVERYTHING ON MUSIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Kieth A. Mitchell
The sharing of New Covenant Scripture passages are prepared especailly for those who feel they mnust elimate the Old Covenant Scriptures as authoritative being FOR CHRISTIANS “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for insruction inrighteousness, that he man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
Examine the ways we (in Churches of Christ) have employed or not employed the “music” passages in the NEW COVENANT SCRIPTURES:
Luke 15:22-32–This is a parable of lost sons coming home to the Father’s house (that is the church). This suggests that we worship the Father because of his grace, mercy and salvation. We worship by celebrating the return of the lost. This celebration involves music (from sumphonia which means music from many instruments). How did we miss that passage in our “red letter” editions of the New Testament punctuating the very words of Jesus?
Acts 2:42-47–The earliest Christians gathered daily in both private homes and the Jewish temple. When and wherever they gathered they were praising the Lord. At the temple they obviously were joining their neighbors and praising in the way the Lord commanded for the Temple. It seems very likely that the very first congregation of the Lord’s church regularly (even daily) praised the Lord with instruments. How did we miss that “necessary inference”?
1 Corinthians 10:14-14:40–This is the only detailed discussion of the church assembly in the New Covenant Scriptures. From this exhaustive discussion by Paul, we learn that the earliest disciples used music as part of their assembly time. They may have even understood that psallo most often includes instrumental accompaniment. This conclusion is especially relevant with Paul’s mention of five mechanical instruments in the passage. How did we miss the mention of those instruments and draw the conclusion about some hidden prohibition between the lines of the text? If we really followed our Restoration premise of “being silent where the Bible is silent” we never would have legislated God’s will from the thin air of textual silence. I have the same problem with some modern Supreme Court Justices who handle the Constitution of our nation in such a way that they actually “legislate” in terms our Founding Fathers never had in mind.
Ephesians 5:18-21–Contextually, this is not even a passage about a church assembly but about life. The early disciples’ praise found its source in their being “filled with the Spirit.” They understood that praise, while being addressed primarily to the Lord was sometimes shared with fellow Christians. They recognized three resources sources from which to select their praise music: the Psalms, Hymns of NT Scripture, and later Christian praise songs. They were given TWO verbs for praise and worship instruction. Two different kinds of praise are called for as an offering to the Lord–BOTH sing and make music (ado & psallo).
Colossians 3:15-17–Contextually, this is not a passage about a church assembly but about life. Two concerns are addressed: (1) Let the peace of Christ rule our hearts and pursue the unity of the body of Christ. (2) As to praise ado (not psallo), is used for “speaking and singing.” Part of the singing is to be from the Psalms and many of the Psalms call for instruments to accompany them. By citing Psalms as legitimate (even recommended) praises for Christians, the prohibition against instruments is mute. Note this: if the “human heart” is the EXCLUSIVE INSTRUMENT of the “psallo” in Ephesians 5:19, then the “human heart” is also the EXCLUSIVE AGENT of “ado” in both Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16. Therefore, the hermeneutical “law of silence and exclusion” would consistently eliminate all music, singing or instrument, except silent meditation. In fact, the Reformer Ulrich Zwingli prohibited all audible music in the Zurich church because the “human heart” was revealed as the exclusive agent or instrument of praise, eliminating both voice and mechanical instruments. Zwingli was more consistent that we but he too missed the point.
Revelation 5:6-14–The first 20 chapters of John’s Revelation may be seen as a parabolic narrative TO INSTRUCT AND COMFORT THE CHURCH ON EARTH. The Revelation of John ties together both the earthly and heavenly portions of the Lord’s new sanctuary-the Lord’s church where the curtain between the two rooms has been torn away by the death of Christ.
It is most likely that this is a parabolic picture of the “CHURCH” AGE and not eternity after time has ended. This is most likely true because when time ends, Jesus will not be on the throne but will turn all Kingdom rule back to the Father (1 Corinthians 15). It is clearly a picture of “CHURCH AGE” also because Christ is on the throne/mercy seat in heaven as “the one who was, and is, AND IS TO COME.” Catch this, the picture of Jesus in this passage is prior to His Second Coming. The sacrificial Lamb of God is receiving adoration from the elders of the church “holding golden bowls of incense which are the prayers of the saints” AND each is also praising the Lord with both singing and the music of harps.” Millions of angels join the elders in worship to the Lamb. Heaven and earth become fully “one” in the new Jerusalem where the unshaded brilliance of the Son of God is the temple, because where we are together in the presence of Jesus, there is the true temple in all its fullness. If we are to interpret this as jus the way praise and worship are in heaven, we need to remember the prayer Jesus taught us to pray: “Thy will be done ON EARTH as it is IN HEAVEN!”
Revelation 7:9-17–The spiritual leaders of Revelation 5, who are praising Jesus with singing and instruments, are joined by the great multitude which no one could count from every nation, tribe, people and language. All the angels of the Lord are present. Who makes up the great multitude? All who “have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the lamb.” Their worship is not Sunday-only! Before the throne, they serve him day and night in his temple. The Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd: he will lead them to springs of living water, etc. What would it do to our worship if we saw the assembled multitude like John did? What would it mean if we were to see worship as serving the Lord “day and night” in His temple—24/7?
Maybe this is part of what Jesus meant when He taught us to pray, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” The real church, the body of Christ is not just the congregation at a given location, nor is the church just made up of all the living believers in the here and now.
Hebrews 12:18-29–In light of the “heaven and earth” implications of John’s Revelation passages, if we were to capture the full meaning of the Lord’s church, the grand assembly, we need to vastly enlarge our view of the church to embrace the Lord’s faithful in all ages, the holy angels, the spirits of righteousness men made perfect, and come fully into the presence of Jesus Himself!
Every sectarian system is shaped by its unique use, misuse and ignoring of Scripture. This is equally true when we make our tradition of A Cappella praise a point of Christian doctrine and test of faithfulness and obedience to the Lord.
It the presence of His majesty, our worship wars look like little children playing with noisy toys in church if not much worse!
This is unlikely to be read due to the fact that it is numero 320 or something like that.
The world is in darkness and we play at the feet of Satans distracting issues. Doctrine is important but it was NEVER intended to outweigh the call to love God, love your neighbor and love your enemy. How is it that we love our enemy if not to turn the other cheek, to die to self for there sake. And yet, brothers and sisters now take sides on an issue, accappella vs instrumental and debate as those who wage a war where the side with the biggest verbal bombs and defaming ads wins. If we are brothers and sisters then why do we treat others worse than we are called to treat and love our enemy. If we are enemies then lets at least play by the rules of the cross. For we all made ourselves enemies of Christ and yet he won the war when he died on the cross for those who placed him there. The irony is thick, we play an American game of politics and protesting, when we should shutup and let God work out the weeds and the tares. How arrogant we are, forgive us our gracious and merciful God for raising issues above the lost sheep of your fold.
321
Nice touch
Keith,
Where do you get this stuff? I have not seen so much stuff added to the word in many a year. You just grab stuff out of the sky. You assume way too much. You have added to the word in just about every paragraph.
Jerry, I don’t know the Greek, but wouldn’t it be hypocritical on our part to refuse to see an interpretation merely because we choose to insist that interpretation is not possible? If we believe that every word of Scripture is God-breathed (as it literally says in the Greek) and not just “inspired by God” in a sense that the writers just felt inspired to write stuff because the idea of God gave them a good feeling, then we have to face the fact that “every word” means that God chooses His words very carefully (Ps. 12:6; Prov. 30:5)
By the way- I posed this question a while back, and nobody has come up with an answer yet: Since every mention, but one, of Scripture in the New Testament is talking about the Old Testament, why are so many people afraid to recognise it as God’s word for the Church? Do they think that God changed His mind? I never was advocating pianos, drums, or shaped notes. The point is do we take God at His Word, or do we insist on building an institution around what we like to think He said? If we don’t read the whole Bible, as a whole, then we can not honestly say we understand any of it, because it all fits together as the one, singular, integral, Word of God.
Anyone reading this: If you have been assuming that the Word of God for the churches starts anywhere but Genesis, then why does the New Testament send us to the Old? Remember that all the NT references to the Scripture, the Word, the Law and the Prophets were written before there ever was such a thing as a New Testament, so that very context shows the superstitious notion that the Old Testament is the “law of sin and death” is pure blasphemy. Even if the heavens open and a golden excuse is handed you by an angel, (Gal. 1:8), repent of your presumption and commit before God to take Him at His Word, no matter when He first gave it. Pianos, drums, or CD players are not mentioned in Scripture as a salvation issue. Believing God, rather than merely men, is.
Well here is the fallout of the article and organization of foracapella. Preachers have been fired for refusing to sign the list. People have left and split churches because their elderships would not require their ministers to sign the list, along with several other things. One young minister was a good friend of mine. So like it or not our creeds and denominational ways of trying to set everyone straight and keep all the congregations on the right track are destroying relationships. The whole thing was started because a relative few congregations started using instruments along with some other non-traditional church forms. If you go to the websites the true nature and motive are revealed behind the printing of the article and list of names; fear and control. They go into just about every issue from the Lord’s Supper to praise teams, asking everyone not to change and resist it or leave foe the ICC or the DOC. The more articles that are printed and para-church organizations formed, the more lists to be signed to more of the good stuff that the cofC does will be marginalized and credibility lost with the ever watching un-believing world.
Joe,
That’s why I will never be a preacher, oh and my beliefs.
What is the whole idea of being the Church? To begin with, the word itself speaks of a called-together assembly- Easy! Also, we’re the
Body of Christ, His Bride, His Temple, His chosen ones, and the branches to His Vine. All that is about us being tied together like members of one body, branches to one vine, etc. From the very beginning the Church was marked by some very distinct points, as results of our love for God. First, we worshipped a triune God, and our lives expressed that Trinity: We loved each other in a way the world coulld not understand. We reached out to others, including those who persecuted us, as God had reached out from the splendid glory of self-giving love within that Trinity for us. We celebrated that event in ritual called “Eucharist.” From the very start, the Church had a collection of memorised songs and prayers which we used in our common worship, and we took Christ at His word when He said, “this is My body, and blood.” Not trying to push for the Roman Catholic spin on that picture, but still to ask a question: In everything else in the whole New Testament when Jesus gave a parable or an illustration, He would say so. The Kingdom is like this, or that. If He said something is or was, then we could take it to the bank that it is or was as He said. We don’t read, “On the night He was betrayed, He took bread and said, “Now it’s kinda like this…”
Before the Church had even the Gospels we had a liturgy in which the Eucharist,or Holy Communion, played a key part in teaching our minds and confirming in our spirits the message of the Gospel of Christ. We came together as so many grains of wheat being formed into one loaf, to partake of the Bread that came down from Heaven (John 6) and continue in the tradition first established with Abraham and Melchizedek (in Hebrews). In God’s good time, we also had the New Testament on which to refer the lessons the Spirit had for His people.
About 1500 years later came a priest who preferred his own ideas, and had the political savvy to get them across through local legislation. Ulrich Zwingli started advocating stripping the Church down to the “essentials” and began a trend that is still going on today. The key is to hold on to and believe as little as possible in order to get back to a “pure” church. People throw this and the other out somply because if they don’t understand why something is important, then it must not be that important, and so we re-invent the Church, not according to the plan Christ gave for it but according to our own shrinking understanding of what is really important. This is, at best, a serious mistake known as “atavism.” It assumes that we can suddenly stop seeing things as members of our own culture, and products of a long history of mistakes as well as successes, and simply pick out the “important” parts of how the earliest churches lived and worshiped (assuming in our 21st Century minds that people always made a line between the two), holding on to the “good parts” and throwing the rest away as “catholic.” Brothers and sisters, from the first, the word “catholic” meant all the churches doing the same things as passed down from the first. If we’re not “catholic,” how can we be “church?”
Robert ,
Your question has been answered but you do not agree with the answer. Again , yes , the Old Testament is inspired of God. It is our schoolmaster to lead us to Jesus. And there are so many valuable lessons in the old. The old is often quoted in the new. It , the Old Testament does have in it’s content , the law of sin and death that cannot save you.
Joe,
You’re serious? Some preachers have been FIRED for not signing the Foracappella document?
What is far more disheartening than the fact that many Churches of Christ are now following a Creed (they have been for awhile anyway), is that they still can’t seem to SEE it and ADMIT it.
It’s like a junkie. Until he admits TO HIMSELF that he has a problem with drugs, he has no hope of getting out from under it… no matter who tries to help him.
Lord, open our eyes. Open all of our eyes!
KIETH A. MITCHELL
Jerry,
You asked where I got all this stuff (on MUSIC IN THE NEW TESTAMENT). You further commented that I had added to Scripture more than anyone you had seen. Have I really added to New Testament Scripture or have I just challenged you to really study the full New Testament record on what is written about praise and worship music?
Every sectarian system picks and chooses Scriptures that sound right to support a particular religious position. TRUTH is revealed in the examination of the full record of Scripture on a subject, not isolating proof texts. This is equally true whether we study the New Testament references about believers’ baptism or about believers’ praise to our Father.
What were you exposed to in New Testament Scripture music passages for praising our Father that no one had previously cited to you?
Was it Luke 15:22-32–where Jesus himself taught about celebrating the return of the lost to our Father? Had we missed the fact that Jesus employed the music praise word sumphonia which means music from many instruments? How is it possible that many of us missed those “red letter” (words of Jesus) on praise music?
Was it Acts 2:42-47–where the earliest Christians gathered daily at the Jewish Temple to praise the Lord? If they were at the temple courts, were they not praising the Lord in the way He commanded for the Tabernacle/Temple? How did we miss that necessary inference about the very first congregation of the Lord’s church praising the Lord with the accompaniment of instruments?
Was it 1 Corinthians 10:14-14:40–where we have the only detailed instructions for the church assembly in the New Testament Scriptures? When Paul taught the earliest disciples to use music as part of their assembly time, did he not employ the Greek word PSALLO which inherently includes instrumental accompaniment? How did we also miss that Paul mentioned five different musical instruments in the passage? How did we miss the very mention of those instruments and draw some illogical conclusion that there is some HIDDEN PROHIBITION between the lines of the text against the use of the instruments Paul cites in this worship passage?
Was it Ephesians 5:18-21–which is not even a passage about a church assembly but about life? Didn’t the early disciples’ praise come from being “filled with the Spirit”? How did we miss the three resources from which they could select praise music–Psalms, Hymns of NT Scripture, and later Christian Songs? How did we miss that Paul employed TWO verbs for their praise and worship, BOTH ADO & PSALLO (“sing” and “make music”)?
Was it Colossians 3:15-17–which is also not a passage about a church assembly but about life? How did we miss the two chief concerns Paul addressed: (1) Letting the peace of Christ rule our hearts as we PURSUE THE UNITY in the body of Christ AND (2) SINGING (Greek word ADO)?” How did we miss that part of the singing is to be from the Psalms, many of which specifically call for instruments to accompany the words? How can we take this text seriously and invent a prohibition against instruments which the Lord once commanded? If the “human heart” is the exclusive instrument of the “PSALLO” in Ephesians 5:19, then why is not the “human heart” also the exclusive instrument of “ADO” in both Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16? If the heart is our instrument of praise, how can we avoid calling for the elimination of all audible music (both singing and instrumental), permitting only silent meditation? Wasn’t the Reformer Ulrich Zwingli more consistent than we in prohibiting all audible music in the Zurich church when he concluded that the “human heart” was revealed to be the exclusive instrument of praise, and (because of this) eliminated both vocal and instrumental? Or is it possible that both Zwingli and we missed the whole point and we created our own system of worldly religion with its rules like “Touch not, taste not and handle not”?
Was it Revelation 5:6-14–where John ties together both the earthly and heavenly portions of the Lord’s new sanctuary? Isn’t it in the gathering of Lord’s church where the curtain between the Holy Place and Most Holy Place has been torn away by the death of Christ? Isn’t this passage really about the “church age” (not eternity) since Jesus is still on the throne before he turns all Kingdom rule back to the Father (1 Corinthians 15)? Isn’t this clearly a “church age” passage since Jesus is pictured as “the one who was, and is, and IS TO COME”? Isn’t this about the “church age” since the Lamb of God is receiving adoration from THE ELDERS each “holding golden bowls of incense which are the prayers of the saints” AND yet each is also praising the Lord with both singing and the music of harps”? Isn’t it in the church where heaven and earth become fully “one” in the New Jerusalem where the unshaded brilliance of the Son of God is the Temple? How did we miss all that which is pictured about us while Jesus still said to be “COMING AGAIN”?
Was it Revelation 7:9-17–where the spiritual leaders of Revelation 5, who are praising Jesus with singing and instruments, are joined by the great multitude which no one could count from every nation, tribe, people and language? Who makes up the great multitude? Isn’t it all who “have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the lamb” (the church)? How did we miss that fact that worship is not Sunday-only but calls for serving before the throne, day and night in his temple? What would it mean if we were to see Christian worship as serving the Lord “day and night” in His temple—24/7?
Could this be part of what Jesus meant when He taught us to pray, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”? Isn’t the real church, the body of Christ, more than the congregation at a given location? Isn’t the church made up of all the living believers in the here and now? How did we miss that the body of Christ unites those on earth with those in heaven (as well as the holy angels) who continue their praise and worship?
Was it Hebrews 12:18-29–where the “heaven and earth” implications of John’s Revelation passages, are reiterated to capture the full theme of the Lord’s church being the grand assembly? How might this vastly enlarge our view of the church if we were to see the term (church) as embracing the Lord’s faithful in all ages, the holy angels, the spirits of righteousness men made perfect, where we all come fully into the presence of Jesus Himself!
Honestly, brother if we could see ourselves in the presence of His majesty (as described in Revelation and Hebrews) don’t you see why sectarian worship wars would look like little children playing with noisy toys in church if not much worse?
Some of you asked if I was really serious about the things that have been done to preachers others who did not agree with the creed, I mean article. I would ask; why does this surprise you? It is the truth, very sad, but still the truth. You see our “appointed thinkers” or “priests” Bible professors at the brotherhood universities with PH D. behind their names and instructors schools of preaching get together and do these things ” Tell us what to think” then impressionable church leaders like elders and ministers follow blindly in a crusade to expose and oppose error. Doing whatever they deem required even if it violates other truths in bible about how we are supposed to deal with one another when we disagree on issue of teaching like first going to see the person face to face and so on. You know 21st century Christian just published a “manual” for ministers in the churches of Christ. Appointed thinkers “priests”, statements “creeds”, manuals “catechisms”. The most harmful roots of denominationalism have rooted infestation in our brotherhood, but we are the church of the 1st century the one true undenominational church; that can’t see the forest through the trees.
Mike,
It’s not correct to say that all of us are wrong on something, therefore, it’s OK to be wrong on this issue. Would you agree that being wrong on some things is immaterial and being wrong on other things is crucial?
If I started teaching that Jesus Christ did not get up from the grave, could I defend that teaching by saying, “Well, we’re all wrong on something; therefore, my teaching is not a salvation issue.”? How about my labeling you as one against unity because you opposed my new teaching concerning Jesus and His resurrection? Would that labeling be valid?
The issue is not being right or wrong. The issue is . . . what issues, if believed wrongly, would jeopardize my relationship with Christ. That’s the issue.
Any takers? Who can give me all the issues that, if believed and taught, would cause a Christian to be in disfellowship with Christ?
Ray B.,
I am having a hard time with two questions. Maybe you can help me:
First, if the Old Testament is recommended to Apostolic-era Christians as having all things pertaining to life an godliness, and Paul, who preached from the Old Testament and said in at least two places that the gospel he preached (from the OT) was the power of God unto salvation and necessary for our salvation, how can we today, as we claim to follow the Apostolic believers’ example, not continue to regard it as the life-giving Word of God as they received?
Second, how can that which is God-breathed be the “law of sin and death? Doesn’t that paint God as the author of sin and death? Can the “law of sin and death” be “good,” as Paul called the Law in 1st Timothy, or can it “bring life” as David wrote?
To lay an ax blade down, chopping all the OT away from the NT is not “rightly dividing” anything, but rather passing judgement on what God has said, and finding it somehow lacking. “Rightly dividing” is a picture of carefully cutting by and exact and crucial pattern- more like precise surgery than the drop of an ax. God calls us to understand the differences in the sacrificial laws, the feasts, the moral, civil, federal, spiritual, symbolic, public health, and medical aspects of the Law. To say that they no longer matter is to open the door to antinomianism- an attitude of moral anarchy, overthrowing the basis for all worship, and all right behavior. To say otherwise is like the liberal religion of the 1950′s & 60′s which birthed the whole moral chaos of hippie-dom. All those young people had been taught to “be good,” but did not have a reason given. So they went on to establish their own moral standards based on traditions that they could respect. Not to recommend their answers, but “to a hungry soul, every bitter thing is sweet.
It is past time to turn from the “bitter” rationalistic theories of calling the living Word of God “death” and discover the sweetness of letting Him teach us His whole message, from His whole Word.
KIETH A. MITCHELL
NOT ONE OF US
Discussions about praise music must be seen in a much broader perspective of what constitutes faithfulness to the Lord.
One of the greatest challenges faced by faithful Christians is to seek the Lord’s will as to what should be our posture toward relating with others who believe in Jesus as Savior and Lord but are from different groups and traditions. Faithful Christians must denounce and destroy the divisive, sectarian spirit within ourselves which can so easily take over. The Lord does not want us to view other believers (at best) as inferior competitors or (at worst) caricature them as full enemies to the cause of Christ. Out of zeal to be faithful to biblical truth, sincere believers realize we must take care in deciding when to relate and when to remain separate. This is not a new question for disciples. This has been of concern to the faithful of the Lord in all ages.
The prophet Elijah served the Lord during a time of great discouragement in Israel. Elijah felt that he alone was all who was left of the Lord’s faithful people in Israel. He made this arrogant claim twice to the Lord:
“I have been very zealous for the LORD God Almighty. The Israelites have rejected your covenant, broken down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too.” (1 Kings 19:10, 14, NIV)
The Lord is in a better position than his children to know who is faithful and who is not. The Lord knows the hearts of each person. The Lord rebuked Elijah’s spiritual arrogance with this surprise announcement:
“Yet I reserve seven thousand in Israel—all whose knees have not bowed down to Baal and all whose mouths have not kissed him.” (1 Kings 19:18, NIV)
How to view others who sincerely believe in Jesus but are, by affiliation, “not of us” (of our tradition or our group) has always been of practical concern for the disciples of our Lord Jesus from the very beginning of Jesus’ ministry. Mainline Protestants denominations have wrestled with this question. The Second Vatican Council of the Roman Catholic Church also wrestled long and hard with this question. Every faithful Missionary, Preacher and Elder wrestles with this question as well. There is a little narrative from Jesus which may shed some light on the question of how to relate with others. The narrative is recorded in two gospel records, those prepared by both Mark and Luke:
“Teacher,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”
“Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward.
“Do not stop him,” Jesus said, “for whoever is not against you is for you. And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.”
(Mark 9:38-42 and Luke 9:49, NIV)
This short Gospel narrative exposes the very heart of the separatist, spiritually isolationist, sectarian posture which began to raise its ugly and divisive head even among Jesus’ very first disciples. Jesus personally rebuked his disciples for their self-righteous judgment of this unknown man they met though he was also serving “in the name of Jesus.”
Folks who believe in Jesus, but who may also be less biblically literate or more spiritually immature, are not to be rejected or marginalized. Jesus taught that to deal harshly with those who love him, even if they are “not one of us” is as sinful and shameful as abusing a little child. To reject them is to reject the One whom they are striving to honor and serve. This need to embrace all sincere believers, as Jesus taught, must be part of the deep conviction held by all faithful Christians. Any rigid isolationistic mentality in the body of Christ must be rejected at any and all cost. We dare not give into, perpetuate or display such spiritual ignorance and arrogance even for a moment.
In the Bible there are three solid circles drawn in the sand, by the finger of Jesus Christ. Picture it this way: (1) The first and smallest circle is correctness of doctrine. (2) The second circle drawn around the first is correctness of worship. (3) The third circle drawn around the other two is correctness of motivation and behavior. All who fit within these three concentric circles are our brothers and sisters and we can do nothing about that except love and relate with them as children of the same Father. Any who fall outside of these three circles of doctrine, worship, motivation and lifestyle are not faithful brothers and, if they are unwilling to repent of their ways, faithful believers cannot receive them into fellowship or share Christian fellowship with them. These are not arbitrary or optional circles of faithfulness. These circles define who is and who is not a faithful Christian.
I would welcome opportunity to dialog about these circles of faithfulness.
Maddog,
How about the opposite approach– the bare basic teachings that would put someone in fellowship with Christ…
He died, He rose, He lives. So love.
Any takers?
KIETH A. MITCHELL
Mike & Scott:
Doctrine is important but some of us have missed what the Scriptures define as essential Christian doctrine, that which determines if one is a child of God or not.
Jesus both defined and is the substance of Circle Number One of doctrinal correctness. In the New Covenant Scriptures, there is just one test of doctrinal correctness which defines whether one is a true child of God or not. The beloved Apostle John makes it too clear to miss the dimensions of essential doctrinal understanding:
Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.
(2 John vv. 7-11, NIV)
The Apostle John defines the eternally fatal deceivers and deceit by their doctrinal statements. The deceivers are those who deny the full humanity of Jesus coupled with the full deity of Jesus. To not acknowledge the full humanity of Jesus makes one a deceiver and the antichrist. The essential doctrinal (dogmatic) teaching about Christ also embraces the full deity of Jesus. To deny the full deity of Christ leaves one without the true God at all. If anyone comes to the believers’ congregation, without the true doctrine of Christ (that Jesus Christ was both fully man and is fully God), that person is not to be even so much as welcomed into the believer’s community or into a private believer’s home.
To twist this Scripture to cover a myriad of additional interpretational conclusions or doctrines about the Bible (whether they are correct understandings or misunderstandings) does a gross disservice to the word of the Lord and imposes many ungodly and divisive lines of rejection in the body of Christ. Such abuse of Scripture will forever fracture the one family of God. The flagrant misunderstanding and real sin of binding interpretations about anything other than Jesus (as an essential condition of salvation faith) imposes the notion that salvation is based upon correct understandings about the arbitrary conclusions expressed in man-made creeds (written or unwritten) which have divided the body of Christ over the centuries, now for nearly two millennia.
Biblical Christianity insists that salvation is based entirely upon our understanding of Jesus, as Son of God, Savior and Lord God Almighty. This involves placing all our trust for salvation in Jesus and Jesus alone. There is only one essential question to be answered, “Who is this Jesus?”
How different it was in the earliest church before the believers even had the New Covenant Scriptures to argue and divide over. The centrality of Jesus was all of what their doctrine was about. The unique and only binding creedal statements in the apostolic church were these: “I believe Jesus is the Christ (the Jewish Messiah), the Son of the living God!” and “Jesus is Lord (God Almighty)!”
Scott,
The reason I took the negative approach (What can one be wrong on and still be in fellowship with Christ?) is that Mike, in his initial post, said that we’re all wrong on something. I agreed, but pointed out the issue is deeper than that.
You said, “He died, He rose, He lives. So love.” My only question is if this is the only thing that makes one and keeps one in the Christian fellowship? Do you believe, for instance, that one could reject the “He rose” part of that statement and still be in fellowship with Christ? Or, would you even add to your statement other items that, if believed wrongly, could jeopardize one’s walk with the Lord?
Maddog,
I understand your approach. I was not really trying to contradict you… just making a statement about the “negativity” of our general approach– looking for what could keep us out rather than what draws us in.
I think these are the things ( He died, He rose, He lives. So love )that I can honestly say would be bare essential for me to see someone else as a “believer”. Since I don’t have the capacity to act as judge… nor the permission to act as judge… I’d say that there may be other things that would keep someone out of Heaven. God knows. I don’t.
I would add to that list, for myself at least, “Don’t judge”. I think there is far more “biblical” support for that being a clear “salvation issue” than for most things we argue about on a regular basis. It’s all over Jesus’ teachings.
Thanks Maddog!
KIETH A. MITCHELL
CORRECTNESS OF WORSHIP IS ESSENTIAL TO FAITHFULNESS!
This is true but not from the perspective many of us have thought and taught. We need to hear Jesus and not the editors.
Jesus alone has the authority to define correct worship. Correct worship was NOT defined by Jesus in terms of special places, special times or special rituals. Worship, for Jesus, was measured by the believers worshipping “in Spirit and in truth.”
“Worship in Spirit” calls for believers to become caught up into the experience of spiritual and emotional intimacy with the Lord, loving and serving the Lord with all their heart, soul, mind and strength.
“Worship in truth” calls for believers to come into the presence of the Lord with total openness, honesty and transparency before the Lord. There is not even a need to hide our sin because even our violations of the Lord’s will can all be placed under the atoning sacrifice and blood of Jesus. Jesus used the context of meeting the women at the well of Sycar, with her multiple and sinful relationship to explain both spiritual transparency and correct worship.
Jesus also defined incorrect worship:
“These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.’”
(Matthew 13:8-9, NIV)
Jesus defined unacceptable worship in terms of the eternally fatal error of teaching for doctrine (dogma, rules and regulations) the commandments of men. This was the error of the Pharisees of Jesus’ day and the error of their children and grandchildren in every generation. Every commandment of God is to be embraced with uncompromising obedience. But in the absence of explicit commandments from the Lord, theologians and church leaders have no right to impose their conclusions of understanding or misunderstanding onto the salvation faith and life of other believers.
Jesus defines false worship in these terms and boldly addresses the harm done by spiritual leaders who complicate the simple faith of the gospel with a system of arbitrary rules and regulations:
“They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.”
(Matthew 23:4, NIV)
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.”
(Matthew 23:13-15, NIV)
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.”
(Matthew 23:23-24, NIV)
Our faith must be in the finished work of Jesus on the cross! Our worship must be defined in the simple terms of Jesus which did not address an elaborate Levitical code on worship rules, regulations and rituals!
Robert,
It is the Holy Spirit that teaches us that the old covenant contains the law of sin and death. The law cannot save.It is not that the old law was unholy. It is that no one except Jesus was able to live without being sinful. The old law leads us, points us to Jesus and our need for His sacrifice. This is not a bitter rationalistic theory. Just the plain teaching of the whole will of God.
Ray B,
You have a stranglehold on what God thinks. Man that must be nice, because I have some real hard questions for him. Some who are afraid to ask.
Blessings, Peace, In his name and all that bullshit,
Leland
Great job Ray. I agree. You have proved a great deal about scripture and your use of it in context and not just reaching. I beleive in keeping things simple and it is. BAck to the instrument, it is simply not commanded and there is no arguing that. I still do not understand how they can pick out OT practices but not all of them. If we are to look at the NT in a practical way for worship, it is very clear the example that was left. There is no question in my mind. Yet, we are the ones who are divisive and sticking to tradition. Allow me to introduce incense and then call everyone who does not do it divisive. It’s not right. Especially over some piece of man made trumpet that just “sounds better” than God made voices. Would they say I am wrong to sing? Or is it ok? God allows either? Then I am not wrong. And if I am not wrong, which I am not, I will continue to stand where I stand. I am commanded to sing and have authority to do so in the NT several times. I think we could all agree that the NT is pretty silent on the commands to play. In kindness, lc
Scott,
Thanks for your response.
I think you must be careful about a blanket statement against judging. When you say that someone must accept your statement, “He died, He arose, He lives, So love,” you’re, by necessity, judging those who don’t adhere to that creed. In essence, you’re saying that they’re not “believers,” and that would be judging, right?
You said that there may be “other things” one must believe to be in fellowship with Christ, and I agree. Notice what Paul said in 2 Tim. 2:16-18
“Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly. Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some.”
These two that Paul mentioned by name (quite judgmental by our standards), for all intents and purposes, were right about your creed, but still wrong about the faith. That’s because in Paul’s theology, the faith includes more than the death, burial, resurrection and love of Jesus.
I only make this point because many have made the remark in this thread that all that matters is what one believes about Jesus; that’s the only thing that determines NT fellowship, and that’s simply not true. It seems quite clear if someone teaches or believes error about the future resurrection (or at least the particular error that was mentioned), Paul would have nothing to do with her. Because of Paul’s broader view (compared to the comments on this thread) of the essential Christian doctrine, he had a narrower view of Christian fellowship, because the more teaching that one deems essential to the faith, the more people he excludes from the fellowship of Christ; the two are directly proportional.
This should then lead us to ask, “Are there other issues, then, that are also essential to Christian unity?” It seems to me that there are more issues than we have been lead to believe in this discussion.
Thanks Maddog,
When I say, “he died, he rose, he lives, so love” I don’t mean simple assent that these are true. I believe that Jesus is “The Way” and these things speak of that “Way” of living. The example you give from 2 Tim is an example of not living up to this way.
Now, I don’t live up to this way most of the time. I think our questions have always been things like “How far from the way of Christ is too far to be saved?” or “How far away is too far for me to embrace some one as a brother or sister?” I don’t think these are very good questions for guiding our actions. I think the fact that I have been saved is what gives me the courage to continue to live in “the way” of Christ even when and as I continue falling. I think that fact that I’ve been saved by Christ is what draws me toward that way, no matter how far from it I am right now. I don’t see much in scripture to tell me where the line is for me to cut off someone as an outsider. I know there are a few places in Paul’s writings that speak of “having nothing to do” with a person in a particular situation, but the passage you quote tells us to “avoid godless chatter” not to cut off the people. I still believe that in most situations Paul is usually speaking of the practical business of keeping an evil from spreading, not of judging who is in and who is out of the church.
In certain situation, it only makes sense for me to avoid contact with certain people, even if they still are my brothers and sisters. I’m thinking of physically or emotionally abusive people who are still “family” but who draw us into darkness with the talk or action that they engage us in when we are around them.
I think as we live out the way of Jesus, that way guides us into avoiding the things that are unloving, that pertain to death rather than life, that don’t put self to death, etc… I don’t think I’m ever called to decide who’s in and who’s out–especially based upon worship issues.
Thanks for the interesting side discussion Maddog!
KIETH A. MITCHELL
Ray, Leland, Scott
THE LORD DEMANDS CORRECTIONNESS OF MOTIVATION & LIFESTYLE!
The Didiche of the Apostles was an early Church Manual from the second century. The authors of this book did not claim biblical inspiration for that ancient manuscript. But it is important to understand how the earliest communities of faith helped prepare men and women to become disciples of Jesus Christ. The earliest congregations seems to have employed the familiar text from the Apostle Paul’s Galatian Letter as a way of explaining the motivation and lifestyle expected of everyone who would yield to the Lord Jesus and become a citizen of the Kingdom of God.
“The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.
“Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, for each one should carry his own load. Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.
“Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.” (Galatians 5:19-6:9, NIV)
The First and Second century congregations of Jesus Christ insisted that selfish and sinful motivations and behaviors of ones pre-Christian lifestyle had to be repented of and left outside of the Kingdom of God. The human predicament “outside of Christ” is marked by unacceptable attitudes and behaviors. Repentance centers upon renouncing sin, not excusing it. The Gospel provides for a radical conversion experience because of the work of God, the death and resurrection of Jesus, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit provides the divine power for living the life of holiness with confidence and victory in the middle of a fallen world.
If a Christian brother falls back into his unacceptable motivations and lifestyle, the congregation is encouraged to restore him to repentance. If he will not repent he is not be counted among the disciples:
“If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17, NIV)
“It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife. And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 5:1-5, NIV)
There are clear lines of distinction between faithfulness and unfaithfulness, from the perspective of the Lord Jesus.
(1) There is a Statement of Faith which, if one cannot make in good conscience, he cannot be considered as being part of the family of God in Christ. Christ Jesus is the only creed of the faithful church.
(2) There is a Standard of Worship which, if one does not engage with spiritual openness and honesty, his worship is unacceptable and he is not part of the community of faith. Jesus defines that false worship as dogmatically imposing the rules and regulations of mere men on other believers. This is intolerable in any faithful congregation.
(3) Jesus and his holy Apostles laid out the Heart, Motivation and Lifestyle of faithful believers without which one cannot enter into Kingdom citizenship and if he refuses to repent, he is to be removed from the fellowship of God’s people, both individually and collectively.
When people just follow the Bible it makes Christianity pretty simple. And this is, I am confident, where many sincere Christians want to humbly stand without either apology or compromise.
Keith ,
I agree. Just follow the Bible.
Ray B.,
You said,
I wonder, first, how it is that the whole Church, from Day One, including the Apostles, missed that point. I don’t claim to have read everything written by the Church and its teachers, but as far as I’ve ever seen the idea that the OT is the “law of sin and death” is a very recent idea. The Law does define sin. Romans 7 is very clear about that. The sentence of death on sin is also found throughout the OT. “The law of sin and death,” however, is Paul’s way (as found in the KJV) of saying the reign of sin and death. The confusion comes from expecting the scholars in the early 1600′s to have been using their language according to a 20th Century dictionary. Another example would be in Daniel, speaking of the “law of the Medes and the Persians.” Do we assume there was some specific document with that for a title? Of course not- That phrase just meant “the way things are under the reign of the Medes & Persians!”
Someone says, “So what’s the difference?” If we presume that “the Holy Spirit says so” because that’s what we’ve always believed, then what does that mean in your life? That some kind of god-of-sin-and-death gave the First Covenant and a god-of-grace gave the Second? That there is something in the Second that overrules the First, or that the First is somehow evil and forbidden? All of these messages seem to be parked in that phrase, but none of those messages appear in the New Testament. If we can’t see every part of the Bible in context and agreement wth the rest, then we are going to get a twisted view of the pieces that presume to accept.
Remember, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” was written when all the scripture there was was the Jewish Bible we have today as the Old Testament. If God inspired (breathed!) those words then can they be anything but good?
Robert,
Paul writes about the law of sin and death after chapter 7 where Paul descibes the frustration and futility of trying to live under the burden of the law. It is a first century teaching. He did not use the term reign , however, it is the reign of the law if you try to live under it , only to be frustrated unless there is flawless obedience.
Keith,
“sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like.” I
If I am doing any of these (by the the way style of worship is not mentioned) Then please correct me (being serious. If I am selfish to my neighbor correct me. But don’t try to infer somerhthingg that is not clearly stated. I thought ya’ll were against thus. Clearly stated by saying (….orgies, worship with musical instruments and the like)
KIETH A. MITCHELL
Leland,
Reason “style” of worship is not mentioned in the works of the flesh is because the New Covenant Scriptures never did identify particular styles of worship, or kinds of praise, as either more or less spiritual than others.
The kind of worship specifically prohibited by the Lord is VAIN WORSHIP where conscientious people “teach for doctrines, the commandments of men!” Nothing is farther from the heart of true worship than imposing non-biblical rules, regulations and prohibitions on the community of faith.
In spite of what we may have been taught, the New Testament Scriptures address instruemntal praise more often than a cappella praise. Instruemntal praise is not prohibited in the New Testament and it is not addressed in a negative manner. it is mentioned in positive affirming ways. Did you read the passages cited earlier, along with comments given on Novewmber 7th?
Luke 15:22-32
Acts 2:42-47
1 Corinthians 10:14-14:40
Ephesians 5:18-20
Colossans 3:15-17
Revelation 5:6-14
Revelation 7:9-17
Hebrews 12:18-29
The Greek word SYMPHONIA is used in Luke 15:22-32 where Jesus pictures praise in our Father’s House and that word only and always means the music of many instruments.
The Greek word ADO used in Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3 always means to sing whether with or without assompaniment.
The Greed word PSALLO used in 1 Corinthians, Ephesians and Revelation always means music of instruments whether accompanying singing or not.
The praise of the JEWISH TEMPLE (where the earliest Jerusalem Christians went to praise God daily) was always singing with instrumental accompaniment by commandment of the Lord. TEMPLE was the Lord’s arrangement!
The praise of the JEWISH SYNAGOGUES (which rejected the earliest Christ-followers) was a cappella. BUT remember that the whole synagogue arrangment was not by commandment of God at all but was an historic innovation of the Jewish people from the period of the Babylonian captivity. SYNAGOGUE was man’s arrangement!
Instrumental music is NOT just mentioned in Old Testament Scriptures, is mentioned in numerous New Testament passages. Sectarian “proof texting” always picks and chooses verses that SEEM to say what people ALREADY BELIEVE whether their beliefs are based upon understanding or misunderstanding of the “whole counsel of God!”
Ray,
Nobody said that Paul used the word “reign” He was writing in Greek, and the Greek word he used is “nomos” which, in this context would mean “law” or providence. In the old days the peasants were under the “law” of their feudal lords who demanded obedience and provided them food. In the same way that, I think, the word “chief” (or a similar title- I forget which!) comes from an old word meaning bread keeper.
We all- Jew or Gentile, are bound to sin and death until we are freed from that cycle to be bound to the “Spirit of Life” in Christ. Paul was not addressing the futility of living under the Mosaic system in this letter: He was not even writing to Jews, and the Roman Gentiles would not have that experience to draw from. Romans 7 speaks of the efforts of any of us to live a righteous life apart from God’s grace in Jesus Christ.
To tie this to pianos works for me about as well as reading a B-17 wiring diagram in Genesis 47.
By the way- I’m still waiting for somebody to tell me how we can think that we are following the example of the New Testament church in refusing to apply anything from the Old Testament to our lives when the Old Testament was the Bible they used, and the Apostles told them to use. All scripture is given, says Paul, and last time I looked the Greek for “all” means one very special thing. It means “all.”
Robert,
I have answered your question but will try again. Paul who wrote 2Tim . 3 : 16 and 17 also wrote about the law of sin and death and also wote how the law cannot save. To those who had the old in the early church , they were also reading from the new . The
New Testament was being written and ciculating in the first century as well.
Robert,
Sorry , got in a hurry…meant circulating. Paul did refer to the law of Moses in Romans 7 because he quoted from it in verse 7 . And yes, he sometimes refers to law , a principle of self-sufficient righteousness but also the law , which can only save if obeyed with flawless obedience.
Thus another failed attempt at salvation by self righteousness. Salvation must come through grace. And no, the law was not unholy, sinful as Paul also wrote in Romans 7 : 7. The law could not save. It tells us we have sinned and need Jesus.
This has been and continues to be a good discussion.
Okay, Ray-
Lemme ask this, for the sake of untangling some part of this birds’-nest: How did people come to know the Lord before Christ, and how could they be saved?