Declaration. Address.
Richland Hills got voted off the island. Too bad about that both/and philosophy there, Rick. Apparently it’s either/or.
In fairness, note at the bottom of the article that no claim is made that the list in the directory is God’s list of faithful churches. However, it’s outrageous to think of including a list of Churches of Christ without Richland Hills. They still think they’re part of our tribe! They didn’t leave. They just decided to have some a cappella music and some instrumental. The whole autonomous congregation thing, you know.
This would come as a shock to the early leaders of the American Restoration Movement for whom unity was based on a common confession of Christ.
Last night at Highland I heard Doug Foster talk about 1809 (the year of Thomas Campbell’s famous “Declaration and Address”), 1909 (right after a formal split in the movement), and unity plans for 2009.
I look forward to participating in the Great Communion. on October 4.
Here’s a picture from the Great Communion day of 1909:
Mike,
The positive comments you made about Harding back then were immediately preceded by a post expressing your “frustrations” with Harding. It gave the impression that you received some private responses to your first post on Harding, and felt obliged to say something nice about her. Similarly, you described how it was that you came to work at Highland, and therein presented the College Church unflatteringly (Is that I word?)
That aside, this is what I see happen too often on this blog:
You have a rock-star-like following. People take what you say on here to be truth. It is believed that if Mike Cope says something that it gives them license to take it and go further with it. Read through the comments here. People are talking about the bride of Christ – pointing out what is ugly about her. Do you really think that the Father is pleased with what He has seen on here today? One has to wonder if the people making these comments are just as passionate about pointing out the ugliness in their own lives. And, again, this is the bride of Christ being discussed. If someone were to talk about my bride the way people talk about Christ’s bride on here, I’d punch them in the face (not saying that would be right). Is there nothing lovely about (even) the conservative churches amongst us?
You asked, “Are you saying someone shouldn’t be allowed to say something about that? Or that one hates a place for doing so?” No I am not, and you know that I am not.
But, I would ask you: Why did you bring up the issue of the directory? Really, what were you trying to accomplish? Did you call the publishers first? (You know, the “If you have something against your brother thing?”) How was it that you intended this to be uplifting? If one didn’t know better, one might get the impression that you were just trying to be controversial; trying to post something that would be dramatic; or giving people yet another opportunity to be embarrassed about our fellowship.
So I am a “VERY selective reader?” Okay. (Actually, I am much worse than that, but I’m not the issue) I’ll concede that I’m a selective reader if you consider that maybe, just maybe, what I have written is true.
I was at Harding when you were at the College Church. You had a role in opening my eyes to the fact that a life with Christ is more than Acts 2:38. In addition, I am not what most would consider a traditional church-of-Christer. Never-the-less, it pains me to see our more conservative brothers and sisters (Brothers and Sisters!) so harshly spoken of on here. You are at your BEST when you are preaching/teaching the gospel, Mike. THAT is what I would have you to know.
Very Respectfully,
Joey Tilton, Midland, Texas
432 697 0988
P.S. I’d be happy to drive over to Abilene to discuss this with you over a Diet Dr Pepper any time. Or, for that matter, I’d be happy to fly anyone on here out to Midland to have a real conversation between real people, as opposed to a computer screen.
“Jesus is Lord” was not the only relevant matter neither in the 1st century church nor in the development of the Restoration Movement. Paul, in his letters, delivered certain ones to Satan, and his reasoning had nothing to do with whether or not the person accepted Jesus as Lord. I submit that Paul would be categorized by most on this blog as too narrow-mined or exclusive because of his limits on Christian fellowship–limits which go beyond the lordship of Jesus.
Phillip,
You are correct in your comments about the elitist element in the church. It is evident on various fronts, but it may be most evident in how the progressives view the traditionalists (for lack of better terms). Those members of the Church of Christ who reject the instrument are portrayed as country-bumpkin, backwoods hicks. Yet, this is never implied about the millions of others who believe in Jesus, yet they reject the instrument, and these people are not in the Church of Christ.
I think it’s just an outright bias against the traditional church. I say that it’s a bias because the very same belief can be present in other religious groups, yet they are praised by the progressives. Perhaps someone in this blog can help me understand it.
qb,
What are the majors and what are the minors? You’ve placed instrumental music in the minor category, but how did you make this decision?
Traditionalists don’t deny that there are majors and minors; the issue is what differentiates a major from a minor. Thus, the issue is really not instrumental music, but it’s how to arrive at the actual issues of fellowship.
I read this blog often, and the issue of music comes up often (ironically, always introduced by Mike). Yet, I’ve not heard anyone address this question. I am open to listening to someone explain his rationale of making how we worship God a minor.
Andrew,
I appreciate your comments. And as you say, they are appropriate for both sides.
My experience is that most progressives in the church will not allow themselves to be questioned about their positions. I have approached many of them about having public forums (not confrontational debates) to promote diaglouge among the polarizing ends in our brotherhood. The traditionalists always accept; the progressives always tell me they can spend their time in more productive ways. Yet, they always find time to write in their journals and blogs and teach from their pulpits about how backwards the traditional church is.
I find Richland Hills’ (and those who reason like them) rationale faulty, at best. Rick Atchley summarized the Richland Hills leadership’s three-year journey of prayer, fasting and study with this statement: “We didn’t make this decision on a Tuesday and announce it on a Sunday.” While I applaud the apparent sincerity of the Richland Hills church and their leadership, even the most elementary of Bible students knows that sincerity is not a substitute for a right standing with God. Fasting does not, in and of itself, validate a person’s actions in religion. Saul fasted for three days and was still lost. The modern-day Jews and Muslims pray and fast, but they are not on their way to heaven. The decision by the Richland Hills church and others thrown off the island must provide more proof than just prayer or fasting.
Does it matter that there is no biblical precedent for instrumental music in Christian worship? Well, listen to Richland Hills’ teaching concerning infant baptism, which I download from their website: “We believe this (infant baptism)…is without Biblical precedent, and therefore, we do not practice it.” Well, if “biblical precedent” is a sufficient reason to reject infant baptism, why not instrumental music in Christian worship? Must one have biblical authority for how to get saved, but not how to worship? Consistency, thou are indeed a rare jewel!
For those who are trying to pass the removal of Richland Hills out of this publication as innocent are being very naive. “Churches of Christ in the United States” has been around for a long time and is one of a handful of “comprehensive” databases in our tradition. To remove the largest and one of the most respected churches with one of the most respected preachers was a very intentional move. It is extremely symbolic. So, let’s stop with the “Now, let’s all just get along, they didn’t mean anything by it.” This book is embarrassing. How could anyone think the way the body of Christ has been demarcated with symbols about cups and AD 70 has any value to the mission of Christ in this world?
Hello!? Hello!? Is there anyone out there who’d like to talk about the actual post??
I thought the “Great Communion” looked really neat. Anyone else planning to attend?
I too am interested in knowing more about the “Great Communion.”
To me- the entire direction and passion of this discussion is just a continuation of the struggles which led the CoC in the US folks to exclude these churches.
The times (and our churches) they are a changing and we don’t really know what to do about it. We can fight against it. We can complain about it. We can argue over it. In the meantime (as the stats in this book reveal) we are ever shrinking as a fellowship with or without the IM brothers.
After two hundred or so years of fussing and fighting over all kinds of stuff, isn’t it time we learn to love and accept each other- differences and all- and get busy about the father’s business? Maybe the need here is to get over ourselves and rediscover not just the original thrust of the Restoration, but our own heart for ministry and outreach.
If we don’t- IM or not- what will the book be reporting on in 20 years?
Maddog:
To be more precise, qb has placed “getting worked up about being excluded from a directory on account of instrumental music” in the minor category.
There’s a practical limit to the things that are worth our time, and the endless permutations of outrage are beyond that limit.
qb
I really dont think this is that big of a deal. Who really gives credence to this directory anymore. I would bet a small minority.
Has anyone ever wondered what happened to the grand choruses and tribes that were chosen by God to lead worship in the Temple of the Old Testament days? The musicians and their harps and cymbals and lyres who were COMMANDED by God to use their talents (see Chronicles)..? Study of Jewish history reveals that it was “declared” too celebratory after the 2nd fall of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Jewish leadership- so they resorted to the one-voice cantor chanting the scriptures. This persisted and became very much a tradition – and during Christ’s time – where did the church come from? The Jewish traditions…by that time there was even a movement to “praise in the heart” – without a single sound! (thankfully, just a fad)…this “tradition” was then followed by early Christians who believed that only “pagans” used instruments – and to set themselves apart – remained a capella. The tradition continued for years and years, until finally an organ was introduced (to much horror and complaint)….and then voices and harmonies added (read Martin Luther’s views on the “braying” of the chants and how inclusion of voices in harmony allowed the rank and file to join in worship (it was for a long time even “sinful” to have harmony!)…
When “tradition” becomes “gospel” we are then following the edicts of man – not God. The Lord says to worship in your heart….and also says to use our talents for the glory of the Lord…to refuse to allow the talents of musicians to praise God is as much a sin as elevating this “tradition” to law.
Jesus is our common denominator….and our fellowship MUST be defined by HIM.
Thanks Mike for sharing what you want on your own personal blog. Yes, others read it and respect your thoughts but it’s still your blog. Thank you for being you, for being faithful to Jesus and for loving many of us who on certain days are unlovable. I’ve met you more then once and love the fact that you are accessible.
I’m surprised that coC’s have lasted as long as they have in some ways. I thought for sure their would be a mass hemorrhaging over to the doC’s but alas they suffer from the same plight as coC’s.
Thanks again.
The thing I have never understood is why so many who comment here remain with the church of Christ. And this isn’t one of those “if you don’t like it leave” posts. I’m truly curious. I realize some stay because their employment depends on it but for others who show such disdain and disgust for many stances the church of Christ takes it puzzles me. Maybe you enjoy it.
reJoyce – In 1909 the big assembly was in Pittsburgh. This time, while there will be an important gathering in Pittsburgh, the real focus will be in special communion services all over. Next week a group of leaders from Churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, and Independent Christian Churches in and around Abilene will be meeting to talk about a common communion gathering in Abilene on October 4.
gt – This question has been asked so many times here. I hardly understand the question. If someone sees a need for change or revitalization in their school, they don’t have to leave the school. Same with Kiwanis. Or a team. Or one’s family. Certainly one’s religious heritage.
There’s not one answer to the question “why do they stay?” There are hundreds of answers that have to do with convictions, heritage, family, preferences, traditions, deep relationships, and familiarity.
I do find it interesting that the Christian Chronicle has a big article about RH’s omission, and then they have a large article lamenting the continued downturn in membership of the cofC. Anyone else find that a little odd?
I also find it peculiar that if we spent 1/1,000 of the time caring for the disenfranchised as we did discussing “mechanical instruments” there would be no discussion needed for dwindling memberships. Here’s a thought – after 75 years of constant debate – folks are sick of it and moving on.
I find it interesting that many comments indicate that many churches started to use instruments in worship recently. It has to be more churches than one thinks… In our congregation here in Germany we’ve been using instruments for years but also still have acapella singing.
maddog: “I read this blog often, and the issue of music comes up often (ironically, always introduced by Mike).”
Paul W: Isn’t that how it’s supposed to work with a Blog? The author puts out some thoughts and others chime in as they see fit? I don’t see that as ironic.
Mike….thanks for pointing this out. I don’t read the Chronicle (unless Larry S hands it to me) and I certainly wouldn’t buy the book. In fact, it would be interesting to see how my church is labeled. It would take at least 4 extra marks to cover all our “sins”…..and I like it that way! Maybe we should request to be voted off.
gt, I stay because I love the Church of Christ- warts and all. In spite of our failures and tendencies to overstress about certain things (the focus of the discussion of this blog for instance) we have churches full of warm people who really want to just serve and share God.
Of course, we are ever evolving as we grow spiritually and learn more about God’s grace. There are some major growing pains in the process, but I remain convinced that out-of-it the Chruches of Christ- as a whole- will emerge stronger and more relevant.
Not everyone in the church or every congregation will get there, but even with these- they are not bad people.
I am not an apologist for all things Church of Christ, nor do I want to excuse away our problems and limitaions. But neither do I want to leave. First I am not convinced the grass is always going to be greener elsewhere and second, I still bleieve Churches of Christ have much to offer in our witness to God and am committed to hang in and spread this message.
Blessings to you!
Thank you maddog. Great thoughts. Also thanks to Danny . The church of Christ has , is , and will continue to reach out in love to a lost world enslaved by the spiritual darkness. And the church of Christ will also continue to stand for truth. Standing for any point of truth is ok. It does not mean that being specific about obedience is a way without compassion but it is an expression of love for God and His word. I am wondering who , besides what is stated in the directory , is saying that a cappella is the defining mark of the church. And the directory only states those ” which are known for their a capella worship.” It is a directory. I never heard anyone say that a cappella was the most important distinguishing identity for the church of Christ. It seems there is a neo gnostic phariseeism that is moving across the church.Only the recent enlightened have it together and understand what is truth.
Ray B.
I think it becomes unimportant what a church’s “most important distinguishing” mark is when a far lesser mark is the point at which others are seen as “non-brothers” and “non-sisters.” In other words, claiming to have Christ at the center doesn’t mean much if little piddly stuff can cause you to reject others. When that happens, then by a group’s own actions that very “piddle” is its “distinguishing mark.”
A group like that might as well be called a “Church of Piddle.”
Disclaimer: “Church of Piddle” is a purely hypothetical entity and any resemblance it might have to any group, past or present, is entirely coincidental.
Scott ,
You missed my point. I am asking who is it that is saying a cappella is the one most important point. I have not heard it preached or taught that way. Yes , Christ is at the center. It is the church of Christ. It is His church . He died for us. He is our Lord. He is to be glorified. I do not think it is ” piddle ” when some have real convictions about how to worship God. But that does not have to be the one defining nature of the church. It is part of understanding the nature of the church. Some have said it does not matter how you worship , it is Who you worship. Since God is Who we worship , it does matter how we worship.
Of course it matters Ray. I respect those convictions. But when honest, Christ following people who agree on every other point find themselves on the outside because of instruments (or any other thing besides Christ) then they see that the true point of “definition” for a non-instrumental group is not Christ, but the instrument.
I’m almost certain that an instrument is not YOUR personal point of definition for who is in and who is not, but based upon this discussion and the directory’s implication, an instrument IS the defining point for many– not just the choice they conscientiously make for themselves, but also the point at which they no longer consider other followers of Christ to be truely part of the family.
This is the difference between what I choose to practice, and WHOM I choose to sit at Christ’s table with. If I choose not to sit at the table with the “least of these” who are using instruments, MY conscience says I may be choosing not to sit at CHRIST’S table (I don’t have fields to plow, or a new wife, or a father to bury… but I DO have doctrinal exclusions to make…?)
I can no longer do that.
I do miss portions of my 47 years in c of C (thus I am thankful for Mike and his great blog) but discussions such as this cause me to miss it less and less. Once you are out of the c of C “box” long enough to gain perspective from that viewpoint, this discussion is
so silly
such a waste of valuable time
seems so trivial in a dark world that needs more light
I’m giving the Chronicle the benefit of the doubt on this since, as you say, they didn’t claim the list was an all inclusive “Church of Christ List.”
Frankly I was more concerned about the article describing the dwindling numbers in the Church of Christ which had the headline “The Church in America is Shrinking.” That article solely dealt with the Church of Christ. As if the Church of Christ equals “The Church in America.” Ironically, it’s the very exclusive, arrogant language like this that is causing our dwindling numbers.
Since our publication is for and about members of Churches of Christ, that’s why the headlines and stories read as they do. The copy would get pretty redundant otherwise.
But thanks for the benefit of the doubt, that was really nice of you.
Lol Tamie,
Shouldn’t we all just cut each other some slack, open ourselves up to God’s leading and try to work together to stop the erosion in all churches- including the Churches of Christ?
Readers, don’t confuse the CHRISTIAN CHRONICLE with 21ST CENTURY CHRISTIAN. The latter is responsible for the “directory”. The CHRONICLE simple reported the story.
Aren’t we glad for congregational autonomy!! Oh, for the day we can follow Paul’s command to “accept one another” in Romans 15:7! I defy Richard to “psycholigize” me into a certain drawer since I like Rush Limbaugh but encourage everyone to remember what the Elders of Revelation were holding as they “worshipped” the Lamb (Revelation 5:8).
(I think I must be a conservative PROGRESSIVE!)
I find it interesting that those who cricize any discussion like this as useless , have participated in the discussion. Is is alright to have these discussions. It does not mean we have abandoned works of compassion, evangelism and joyful worship.
Of all places to get offered a free plane ticket…it had to be Midland…
qb,
While I appreciate your clarification, you would place worshiping God with instruments in the minor category, would you not? All I’m trying to get you to see is just because you say it’s a minor (and that the church majors in minors) doesn’t make it so; just because I say it’s a major doesn’t make it so. The Church of Christ needs to revisit the issue of what determines a test of fellowship; I think that would give us a least a bit more clarity on the music issue.
Again, it’s my personal experience that the progressives are too dismissive. Look at this blog…many progressives and former members of the Church of Christ saying that this discussion is a waste of time, yet they can’t (don’t have the time to?) explain why how one worships God is a non-issue. But, since the progressive movement among us is one based more on feeling than reason, perhaps this explains it all.
Maddog ,
Amen ! Being precise about doctrine, how you worship, moral purity , etc. is very serious. It cannot be dismissed as unimportant. If it is , then why 66 books and all scripture is inspired and is profitable. All.
Paul W,
My point was that the traditional church is the one described as being obsessed with this issue, yet on this very blog it’s always progressives who bring it up. I don’t see traditionalists on this blog just begging for the music issue to be introduced; it is Mike who always does it (obviously, because he sets the themes for discussion). Please ask yourself: Why is this issue discussed so much on a progressive blog with themes introduced by a progressive? Is it wrong for the traditional church to respond to the faulty arguments in favor of the instrument like OT usage, instruments in Revelation or the using-my-gift-for-God rhetoric?
Look, Mike can write whatever he wants on his blog, but he should know that if he enables the comments feature, those who agree and disagree with him will chime in from time to time. But, we’re only following his lead; we don’t set the topics. You can’t blame the obsession with instruments on this blog on the traditionalists.
Could it be that progressives themselves are obsessed by what they deem as a traditional obsession?
I would like to see Mike’s response to Philip Cunningham III’s post.
md,
Why do you call OT usage and instruments in Revelation faulty arguments? Do you disagree with Ray B. that all scripture is inspired and profitable?
Right on maddog ! That is why I ask who is it that has made instrumental music the core of preaching and identity ? I have not heard it.
Hope said, “Of all places to get offered a free plane ticket…it had to be Midland…”
Now that’s funny! Well, if you’d like, I’m taking the family to Big Sky Montana in a couple of weeks. Would that work better for ya? – Joey
“faulty arguments” about using my talents????what about musical talents that are not used ??? The parable of the talents is pretty clear to me – don’t bury it, don’t save it…but USE it!
Maddog, your first para was pretty sensible. But then you torpedoed it with another little snit of unmitigated garbage:
“But, since the progressive movement among us is one based more on feeling than reason, perhaps this explains it all.”
Utter nonsense, and unworthy of further comment.
qb
I was determined to not participate in this mess, but against my better judgmnet I will. IM is a MINOR issue. The complaint that the CofC has majored in the miniors and minored in the majors comes from our allowing great latitude on relatively significant theological issues and very little lataitude on far less significant theological issues.
For example, who Jesus is has been considered one of the foundational truths of the Christian religion since the beginning. Most affirm he is completly human and also God in the flesh (incarnate) – the completley unique Godman. This is a much more inmportnat issue than IM. Thomas and Alex. Campbell were orthodox on this issue and Barton Stone was not. Another issue was the nature of the atonement. The Campbells were orthodox on this issue too, but Stone was not. Yet they united in fellowship and allowed liberty on other significant issues as well. Thomas Campbell was a Calvinist all his life and Stone rejected Calvinism.
On the other hand, fellowhsip has been broken in the CofC over IM, number or cups, Sunday School, kitchens, support for orphans … These are just a few examples of why the “major in the minors…” criticism has been levied and why it is well deserved.
Is there anyuone out there that would claim IM is anywhere near as important as who Jesus is or the nature of the atonement? Surely not.
And no, I will not respond to anyone that wants to assert IM is really all that important. This is just plain too stupid to carry on this way. We should all be ashamed to have anyone see God’s people behave like this.
maddog,
You asked….”explain why how one worships God is a non-issue.”
I’m not a scholar, but for my simple mind, the place I go to often for many issues like this is Mark 9. If Jesus tells the 12 that they should lighten up and not be so legalistic, that works for me in a lot of cases. These guys were worried about someone casting out demons that wasn’t “one of them”. I firmly believe Jesus would have a similar response to worrying about how different groups choose to worship with our without instruments.
Again, I’m sure you will have many reasons why this approach is theologically weak and not relevant, but you did ask. This is how this Christ-follower sees it. I’m not asking you to buy it, and I can certainly assume where you would go to “argue” the other side. But I don’t want to argue anymore. Let’s just agree to disagree and move on. This I’m sure is true, we do have better things to spend our time on than this!
For those of you who think this discussion is a waste of time , why do you participate ? Confusing .Yes , the church has had its problems and had division. But look around and see that it has been a problem in every religious group. We are not immune. Satan wants to work in our midst as well. A Where I worship we have had people leave other churches in the county, from all kinds of religious backgrounds because they did not agree with what was happening in the church they attended. We have people who attend that at one time attended various protestant denominations, former Catholics , charasmatics , and then those who never had any kind of religious affiliation. But also never forget the huge amount of good works that have been accomplished by the church. All the precious souls that havee been taught the gospel. The great works of benevolence. And also the core teaching about the nature of Jesus and His atonement. As a boy I remember the preachers always preaching about the cross and the blood of Jesus. My mother is 81 and she said that all of her Christian life she has known about salvation through grace. It is not new. Probably all of us have had bad experiences in the church. Goes with being with human beings and battling with sin. All of us have to deal with personal sin.
The discussion isn’t a waste of time, the issue is a waste of time. Ironically, that’s why it isn’t a waste of time to discuss it.
Let’s imagine (just for the sake of discussion) a whole group of people gathered around the belief that Bibles that were bound in any color other than black were not Truth… and those “colored Bible” readers were so misled that we couldn’t really have full assurance that they were real Christians.
These “Black Bible” people made arguments to prove their point out of genuine concern for the “colored bible lost”.
It would not be a waste of time to discuss their real conscientious concerns with them… to help them to unravel themselves from the tangle that is keeping them from recognizing the rest of their family in Christ. It would not be a waste of time BECAUSE it’s important for them to untangle from anything that is not OF Christ but is wrapped up in thier understanding of Christ to the point of separating them from other parts of the body.
Some see the IM issue as being just as baseless.
I think many of the “progressives” who are frustrated with this discussion may be more frustrated that their dear family members are so entangled in a modernist, rationalist, literalist interpretation of “God’s silence” that they can’t hear what he clearly says about having destroyed the barriers between Himself and all his children.
Of course, that’s just a progressive’s viewpoint.
If one sees the “Silence” argument as valid, then there will always be potential issues waiting in that silence to challenge our sense of whom we can and cannot fellowship, based on what God didn’t say.
Also, I’m very willing to give 21st Century Christian the benefit of the doubt. I know many people who follow thier consciences and refuse fellowship to others, fully convinced that they aren’t judging of condemning them to hell. What I don’t understand is how they came to the point of thinking that God would condemn Christians who mistakenly embraced and fellowshipped someone who wasn’t truly following God. God hasn’t called us to maintain those fences– or else!
In the end, any discussion that keeps Christians talking AND listening is probably worthwhile. Both are needed though.
I hope I’m not too late to chime in on the discussion. I am thinking of starting a new list of churches who have added an instrumental service. Not because I have to have an instrument, it’s just I think they would be very interesting to visit.
Since someone asked for an explanation how we might think it is alright to use an instrument, I just found a pretty good sight on the subject:
http://www.glenacres.org/Documents%5CAnti2.htm
where you will find lots of scholarly support for this position. Personally I concluded while getting my Bible degree that there really was not a conclusive Biblical argument against using an instrument while singing praises. What the Bible taught was always the important thing for me and the desire to get at it’s truth was strong enough for me to minor in Biblical Greek. I found I needed to ask God for forgiveness for rejecting my brothers for reasons other than biblical ones.
As to the keeping of lists or memberships, I am glad I am now consider myself just “simply a christian”. Kent
Sorry, I should have sent you to the first page:
http://www.glenacres.org/Documents%5CAnti1.htm
Hopefully one day the only thing we’ll be arguing about is how best to reach lost people.
Scott,
I agree that anything that keeps Christians talking is probably a good thing. I do think (although no one else might) that the different color Bible covers is not the best parallel for instrumental music in worship. Again, it seems that the over-arching assumption is that instruments aren’t a big deal and that our previous arguments are just mistakes based on “shoddy hermeneutics.” I guess that is where I get frustrated, because I like to think of myself as a fairly thoughtful person (not necessarily smart or anything, just thoughtful), and I, like many of you, have thought and studied about this a great deal. I still come to the conclusion that this is a matter of obedience, and yet all I read in this comments section is how short-sighted and judgmental that opinion is (or jokes at the expense of that position).
I’m curious to know that when you say God has broken down the barriers between His children, what specific barriers you have in mind. I read recently the book Rick Atchley and Bob Russell co-authored – Together Again – and they made an interesting statement. In discussing Jesus as the only way, they mentioned a phone number. Just misdialing a single digit of that phone number will result in a wrong number. There is only one way to reach someone with a specific phone number, and in the same way, God has only given us one way to be a part of His family (I don’t have the book in front of me, and I don’t want to misquote anyone, but that is my memory. Please correct me if I have misread anything).
I wonder if that image might hold true when it comes to worship – that if we have a God-given example of how to worship, we should be careful about adding in our own digits to the number. I know that certain examples of God’s concern with the details of how something is carried out (Nadab and Abihu, Uzzah, etc.) have been cited and debated often. We may even be sick of those arguments, yet that doesn’t eliminate them from scripture. How do we deal with them if God’s specificity/silence is not important? How do we deal with the way in which instruments were commanded and specifically directed by the Old Testament, but we have no such New Testament commands? If God wanted us to use instruments, wouldn’t He have given us similar specifics? I know, many are thinking “We have heard this before…” but that still doesn’t answer the question of what we do with those facts.
Just some thoughts – I realize this will probably result in more frustrated posts of those who wish this discussion would end, but I would be interested in feedback. I appreciate the open tone from so many of you, and I would honestly like to hear from you on this. Thank you!
Andrew ,
Thank you and thank you for your tone. And I believe your post is thoughtful. I wonder if we have come to a time when facts, doctrine, truth is now considered unimportant. I read people saying we should center on Jesus. Amen ! But where do we go for our knowledge of Jesus if not in the word, the scriptures. Also , when it comes to worship, is it my opinion verses your opinion or do we have some truth about worship and how to worship ? If not , I guess it is all just a toss- up and whatever you think or I think is all that counts.
Ray B., as to your “where do we go” question, is it possible that the container known to us as “the word of God” contains more than just the written compendium from times long past, including someone’s judgment as to which of those writings qualifies as canonical?
That is, how would you respond to Dr. Dallas Willard, who teaches that the “knowledge of Christ” container includes three major items, including (a) the written canon (suitably defined, and serving for our purposes as “divine revelation”), (b) empirical knowledge that we gain by experience, and (c) our rational faculties brought to bear on revealed and empirical knowledge, so as to “extend that knowledge to indefinite lengths?” He also teaches that relying on any one of those without the correctives of the other two is bound to lead us into a ditch. How does that strike you, Ray?
Curious,
qb
Thank you, Andrew.