After a few days of Johnny Robertson badgering Chris Knight on this blog regarding this post on Chris’s blog, Chris decided to take Johnny at his word and debate. He loaded up his video camera and drove down to the TV studio where “What Does the Bible Say?” is broadcast, and issued Johnny an impromptu challenge. You can read more about that incident here. Chris is going to post excerpts from that encounter on youtube.
I have to say, I am really surprised. I had pictured Johnny to be the living embodiment of 1 Peter 3:15, but it seems that he wasn’t ready to engage Chris – claiming that it was because his program already had an agenda from which he didn’t want to deviate.
This is exactly the thing we’ve discussed here before, that JR seems to have this interesting need for control, and if a situation presents itself out of his control, he’s apparently not interested. That’s one of the reasons I’ve been so surprised that he had actually been commenting on this blog, although every time he comes he tries to take control and lead the conversation where he wants it to go.
Well, I must say that Chris has impressed me mightily with his chutzpa, and we cheer him on for his not letting himself be bullied by JR. Bravo, Chris!
Answering the Church of Christ 
From Chris: My offer to debate on live television still stands though: he won’t take it. In my sincere opinion, he’s too genuinely afraid to take me up on it
From Randy: I think youre wrong about this Chris. Johnny will debate you, he most likey turned you. Not taking his side, but trust me, he will be glad to debate you. The way he acted was tactical…he knows what he is doing…its called baiting
Chris I’m glad to see you posting this. I really shows your need to control and that you will report dishonestly. Go ahaed and tell the truth you were not scheduled to on last night. Who is trying to control here. Again another backfire for you. Don’t you get tired of looking foolish?
Johnny, it’s easy to see you are only mentioning my name, becauase you wish to create confusion and distrust. Everyone here already knows that you and I email each other, and they also know that I do not agree with your tactics. And I do not agree with every point you make regarding baptism, such as one must understand it before God can work. I also see the church as a group of people from variuos sects/denominations, including yours.
Far as you stating I said Nathan is Jeff Black. You obviusly didn’t read the email correctly. I simply stated that Nathan and Jason had talked viw the net at this time. I also ask you “ who is Nathan” and ask you to put the puzzle togther. Why, because I have no idea who Nathan is and maybe that’s for the best….but for the record, Nathan is NOT Jeff Black…..try again Johnny.
“that you will report dishonestly.”
I’m only going to show the video of what happened. Others can make their own judgment.
“Go ahaed and tell the truth you were not scheduled to on last night.”
Actually, Johnny Robertson already announced he was going to talk about me on his show… so I suppose that I *was* scheduled. He scheduled me himself. He just didn’t want to take me up on my offer of having a debate, after he originally seemed to want to. Curious, that…
“Don’t you get tired of looking foolish?”
But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.
— 1st Corinthians 1:27
Before everyone goes and holds Chris up as Sir Galahad, I don’t think we should forget that he posted the story of a deceased woman as an example that baptism is not necessary. We later see that the same woman, against her doctor’s recommendation, WAS immersed as God commanded, for the remission of sins.
Just as Johnny questioned the obedience of the boy who died in the car wreck, Chris scoffed at the idea that the woman could have been baptized, only to be proven wrong later. I don’t think either were handled appropriately.
I think she serves as a shining example of obedience to God and shows just how silly most of the “what-if” and “what-about” examples that are constantly thrown out here are.
Chris, what Johnny done last night was just their normal tactics. Trust me, he would love to get you on air – when I lined up the debate with Jeff Black and former church of Christ preacher, Jason Hairston, I was told then to not be so aggressive as they feared this would run Jeff away. Johnny too said this regarding A.C. Smith debate, “ that he went easy on him, so he would come back to finish the debate”. What Johnny done was bait you in hopes that you “think” he is afraid of debating you – this way he lures you in for a debate. Plus, he had already spent a great deal of time preparing for last nights show, so he wasn’t about to have it kicked aside. If the question you Johnny about baptism is what you plan to debate, I would go check out some other debates on the net on the same subject…it will not be an easy debate. Everything you will say has already been covered by the church of Christ on many, many, debates. I ask Jason after he left “if this could be refuted” he said not by their methods. However, some preachers who once believed like Johnny have exposed the weakness of their arguments, mainly the fact that they cant prove one must understand baptism before it’s valid. You can throw this right back at them, and ask how many church of Christ people understood that they received the gift of the Holy Sprit at baptism when they were baptized? If part of the verse ( Acts 2:38 ) must be understood to make baptism valid, so does the rest. BTW, there are at least three positions that the church of Christ holds on the ending of Acts 2:38, so it seems they lack some understanding – guess that means some have invalid baptisms….per their hermeneutics
Corey: Just as Johnny questioned the obedience of the boy who died in the car wreck, Chris scoffed at the idea that the woman could have been baptized, only to be proven wrong later. I don’t think either were handled appropriately.
Randy: Corey is right, so the story Chris had doesnt hold water…means nothing.
Chris , Johnny did mention you on the show. Maybe if you would have answered where you or if you attend worship anywhere you may have gotten on , but who knows since you never answered. If you’ll notice all the men that have come on didn’t keep thier church a secretand have had an appointment to do so. I think you are the one trying to control Johnny . You say he controls but you clearly demonstrate that what botthers you is don’t get to dictate his actions
“Maybe if you would have answered where you or if you attend worship anywhere you may have gotten on , but who knows since you never answered.”
Johnny does not want to debate with people unless he believes he knows where they’re coming from. All the better so he can be prepared to attack them.
That is the gist of it, that I got from him last night while talking with him after the show (and yes, we did talk for quite a bit outside the WGSR studio).
faithful, WHY is it so important to you that I must have a denomination, or a church building even apparently?
Johnny and his so-called “Church of Christ” like to brag that they are the ORIGINAL church that Christ established.
But he does not know his biblical history very well at all, if he still claims that while demanding to know what denomination I am.
As I told him last night, I worship with fellow believers. I believe it is written…
For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.
— Matthew 18:20
If Johnny, or you for that matter, are insisting that I belong to a denomination, or that I worship in a church building in order to be counted among the believers, then you are CERTAINLY adding on to the commandments of Christ… and that is something I thought that Robertson and his peculiar group NEVER did!
In fact, I would say that is a far worse thing than demanding that one be baptized to have salvation. Because it really does indicate that it is about “you” and not Christ!
If you are such an astute Bible scholar yourself Chris then you would recognize the context of that passage isn’t worship.
Joey
faithful, it seems like Chris did answer. And he makes a very valid point – why do you folks, who claim that denominations are so irrelevant, go to such lengths to try and pigeonhole people into denominations? The man says that he is a Christian, and that he worships with other Christians. Why isn’t that enough for you?
Of course, the answer is obvious – because without that information, you don’t have the ability to tear someone down from the POV of their faith tradition. And that is the whole reason that JR has a television program – to tear people down. That’s what we see week after week, episode after episode.
And Corey – on his blog, Chris has already admitted that the situation with the lady in the iron lung was answered. That was his whole point – to ask what if?
I know that you dislike the what if questions, because they tend to be the exception to the rule, and you have already admitted that you don’t know what would happen to someone in that situation, because you rightly admit that you are not God.
JR, NF and JO have said that they do know in that situation. The person would be lost if they died without being baptized, regardless of their situation.
Joey,
I’m sorry, my version of Scripture doesn’t include the words “except in worship” in Matt 18:20. Maybe you could tell us which version you are using?
“why do you folks, who claim that denominations are so irrelevant, go to such lengths to try and pigeonhole people into denominations? The man says that he is a Christian, and that he worships with other Christians. Why isn’t that enough for you? Of course, the answer is obvious – because without that information, you don’t have the ability to tear someone down from the POV of their faith tradition.”
I would have to say, after talking with Johnny in person last night, that this is ABSOLUTELY the case.
He was focused like a finely-tuned laser on me, trying to pick me apart, wanting to know about MY background. Looking for information about me… and the only reason I can assume that is so, is so he could use it as a weapon against me.
You ever watch “Lost”? You know how manipulative Benjamin Linus is on that show? Well, last night it was like talking to Ben Linus in a fancy suit and hat.
I would recommend to ANYONE dealing with Johnny and the other Church of Christ in Name Only people, but especially Johnny, to be VERY guarded against disclosing information about yourself to them.
The man has no authority to demand an answer anyway.
Chris, my husband recently felt the same way… that disclosing information to JR in particular might be a bad idea because of that manipulative characteristic.
done with your video yet??
I’m waiting very impatiently.. LOL
just kidding
Bravo Sir Knight!
Nathan,
I’m sorry, my version of Scripture doesn’t include the words “worship” in Matt 18:20. Maybe you could tell us which version you are using?
21Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? – Mt 15:21
If the discussion was about worship, then Peter missed it. The first thing Peter asked Jesus after His discourse was about forgiving his brother. The context is about the authority given to handle a brother who has tresspassed and will not repent:
15Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. – Mt 15:15-17
I suppose you have more insight than Peter in this instance.
Joey
Chris wrote on his blog:
I’m fairly certain that given her condition, that Dianne was never baptized. There’s no way it could have been done without killing her, most likely. At least she was never baptized by immersion, which is what you guys claim all the time is an absolute obligation in order to have salvation I’ve even heard you claim, on numerous occasions, that if a person comes to believe in Christ but is not baptized before death, that such a person is damned forever.
Johnny, James, and Norm: Are you really prepared to go on live television and say that it is with 100% conviction that you believe that God did not allow Dianne Odell into His kingdom yesterday morning, all because it was impossible for her to be water baptized? Or might you possibly even argue, per your logic, that Dianne Odell should have left her iron lung and risked water baptism if she wanted salvation? Because that is what you are claiming, whether you want to admit it or not.
That is more than just asking an honest question, it is jumping to conclusions to try and discredit the scriptural role of baptism (especially that in bold). Chris wasn’t just trying to ask a question, he was trying to make J, N & J look bad for their insistence upon baptism.
You know I’ve criticized Johnny for his abrasive tone before. That is pretty much the same tone that Chris was using in that blog post and that he’s used here on a couple of occasions. He said there:
At least she was never baptized by immersion, which is what you guys claim all the time is an absolute obligation in order to have salvation
and that was proven to be false.
For Chris Knight to appear unannounced at the lion’s den to confront the beast amuses me to no end. Johnny is not accustomed to being engaged defiantly on his home turf. Again I say bravo Sir Knight!
The video is uploading now! Well Part 1 anyway. I still haven’t gotten to Part 2 yet.
It’s NOT taking anything that Johnny said out of context. Please bear that in mind. I’m too much of a historian to tamper with ANYTHING like that.
But I am also too much of the guy that God made me to be, to not have some fun with it either 😉
It should be ready in a few minutes. I’ll post the link when it is 🙂
All I can say to Joey’s response to Nathan’s question about worship in Matt. 18:20 is “huh?”
That’s a shame Rick. Aren’t you a preacher?
Joey
The passage in context from Matthew 18:
15″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. 16But 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.’ 17If 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.
18″I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will bebound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
19″Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. 20For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.”
So, Jesus is saying that if 2 or 3 go to correct an person who has sinned against another, Jesus is there with them as they confront him.
How difficult was that to see Rick?
Correction – I did mistype 15 instead of 18 if that is what you were referring to Rick.
simple typo.
Joey, actually ..maybe because it’s monday and my brain isn’t fully engaged yet..I usually don’t accept anyone’s posting of Scripture without looking into the Bible to see the Scripture for myself..you typed Matt 15:15-17 instead of Matt. 18:15-17, so when I looked at Matt. 15:15-17 it didn’t make sense at all..
However, regardless of the context of Matt. 18:15-21, I beleive that I can take Jesus at His Word and when he says that God is present when two or three are gathered together in His name He is there that it doesn’t matter for what purpose whether it be in admonishing a brother or in worship.
And by the way, just because I am a preacher doesn’t mean I have been magically embedded with perfect knowledge of God’s Word.. I discern it the same way you do..through reading, studying, searching, researching, and by being open to the illumination of the Holy Spirit.
So, Joey, just to clarify, are you really saying Jesus is not with us when two or more of us gather together to worship him?
By the way, loyal commenters, please feel free to report how your day of prayer for Johnny, Norm and James went. I put a report up before the Chris Knight news broke. You can add to it there or here.
Had to re-start the upload. YouTube is being a bit funny this morning, so I’m doing it another way. Will come back with the link as soon as it’s done.
On June 2, 2008 at 9:32 am answeringchurchofchrist Said:
Joey,
I’m sorry, my version of Scripture doesn’t include the words “except in worship” in Matt 18:20. Maybe you could tell us which version you are using?
Randy: Yes, I agree too Nathan.
On June 2, 2008 at 9:46 am Rick Said:
For Chris Knight to appear unannounced at the lion’s den to confront the beast amuses me to no end. Johnny is not accustomed to being engaged defiantly on his home turf. Again I say bravo Sir Knight!
I would have to say that Christ caught Johnny by suprise…never seen that done before…
Depends. You think Jesus is in with the polygamist sect during worship? They probably claim as much. Just because you invoke His name doesnt mean anything. Mt 7:21
I’m just saying Chris misused that passage. Thats not the context of the passage.
Joey
On June 2, 2008 at 11:00 am Joey Said:
I’m just saying Chris misused that passage. Thats not the context of the passage.
Randy: thats calling the pot black, seeing you guys ( JR and other coC preachers ) do this quite a bit. So much so, that one church of Christ preacher wrote a book http://www.unity-in-diversity.org/Books/tdotc/ exposing the verses he once used out of context.
wrong link above, but still another good book. Here is the correct link http://www.freedomsring.org/PDF/Twisted.pdf
oops. thats funky. dont know how that happened
Joey said “Ill go downstairs and shovel ‘reason’ and ‘common sense’ off the pavement since you just threw them out the window.”
I actually like this quote… quite expressive.
It made me giggle.
be sure to shovel it into my wheel barrow please
Joey: So you don’t agree that Nathan is inserting ‘worship’ into the context? You show me the version that has ‘worship’ and I’ll show you the version with ‘except in worship’.
Randy: do you really want me to follow this logic to other passages that also do NOT have the word worship in the context? Are you suggesting two or three gathered together could not be worshiping God. Matter of fact, shouldnt worship be a 24/7 thing, or is it only from 8:30 – noon on Sunday mornings.
On June 2, 2008 at 9:46 am Chris Knight Said:
The video is uploading now! Well Part 1 anyway. I still haven’t gotten to Part 2 yet.
It’s NOT taking anything that Johnny said out of context. Please bear that in mind. I’m too much of a historian to tamper with ANYTHING like that.
Question: Why would have to clarify that? Seems like you know you are.
But I am also too much of the guy that God made me to be, to not have some fun with it either
It should be ready in a few minutes. I’ll post the link when it is
8:30 to noon on Sunday..isn’t that the only time that preachers work?
I agree Randy… we should be in a state of worship all day long and per the verse, with Christ in our midst, what else would be doing but worshipping Him?
no worries Faithful, I’m sure your leader, JR will get on and will validate whether or not Chris included all of his words or not. I’m sure he’ll be honest about his and Chris’ conversation!
Randy: do you really want me to follow this logic to other passages that also do NOT have the word worship in the context? Are you suggesting two or three gathered together could not be worshiping God. Matter of fact, shouldnt worship be a 24/7 thing, or is it only from 8:30 – noon on Sunday mornings.
Can you not follow my logic? I didn’t say God is not in worship. I said that is not the topic of this passage! You all are doing the same thing you accuse me of doing. You are leveled to using context to prove your position just like I do. Only you aren’t even using context.
Ugh!
Joey
I agree Randy… we should be in a state of worship all day long and per the verse, with Christ in our midst, what else would be doing but worshipping Him?
Man. Are you really going to affirm that? You could easily be embarrassed with that statement.
Joey
Joey.. how would I be embarassed with that statement?
Embarassed that I agree we should be in a constant state of worship and that if Jesus were to be in my midst I would want to be worshipping Him… hmmm.. do tell what could be embarassing about those statements?
Ha…careful what you wish
I appeal to you therefore, brothers,by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship ( on Sunday mornings only ) – Paul forgot that part.
just answer the question
I would likely be ‘scolded’ by you all if I did. You would just make fun of it.
Good to see you Katie , what did you think of the program last night exposing the lies of the baptist churh?
Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.”
A life of visible, lived-out, physical actions of mercy might result in the death of a believer. But that is not mainly what Paul has in mind here. Here he has in mind a lifestyle.( not just when you attend Church ) Present your bodies a living sacrifice. It is your living that is the act of worship.
Let every act of your body in living be an act of worship. That is, let every act of your living body be a demonstration that God is your treasure. Let every act of your living body show that Christ is more precious to you than anything else. Let every act of your living body be a death to all that dishonors Christ…
so you can make accusations that I would likely be embarassed by a statement but cannot back it up Joey?
I thought it was comical faithful, good entertainment after a busy weekend.
The view that all of life is worship is based, in part, upon a misunderstanding of the text of Romans 12:1: I urge you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.
The last phrase, “which is your spiritual service of worship” is an unfortunate translation of the Greek. The word “worship” is nowhere to be found in the text of this verse, and was supplied by the NAS translators (and others). Their reason for adding this word was because of the Greek word (latreian), which simply means “service” and more often means “spiritual service.”
Jesus separates the idea of “service” (latruo) and “worship” (proskuneo) in Matthew 4:10: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
This demonstrates a distinction between worship and spiritual service or religious duty. Such is also illustrated in passages such as Phil. 2:17 and Heb. 12:28, both of which use “latreian”.
What points should be considered when deciding whether all of life is worship?
The Greek word for worship (proskunew) literally means “to kiss toward.” It is a verb of action. This means that worship is a purposeful, intended act. One is making a conscious effort to kiss toward God. If a person is not attempting to offer something to God, it is NOT WORSHIP. It may have a religious flavor to it, but that alone does not constitute worship.
Jesus said that worship must be “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). The phrase “in spirit” indicated a mental, conscious, thought-out effort to offer something to God. If a person is not thinking about what is being done, that is, is NOT intending to offer this to God, then it is not in spirit and is not worship.
Jesus did not consider spiritual service to be the same as worship (Matt. 4:10). These are two distinct acts, and one is not engaged in one while doing the other.
The Ethiopian Eunuch “had come to Jerusalem to worship” (Acts 8:27). If all of life is worship, wasn’t he already worshiping? Someone would say “but that means he was going to worship God formally.” Where does the Bible make such a distinction between “formal” and “informal” worship?
And, by extension, what divine rules govern “informal” worship? Is it acceptable, in “informal” worship to use instruments? To have women pray? To take the Lord’s supper with different elements besides unleavened bread and fruit of the vine – or on a different day besides Sunday? The fact is, God doesn’t make such a distinction. Therefore, the Ethiopian was not worshiping while on the road to Jerusalem. He was going to begin worshiping once he arrived. This interpretation fits with the basic definition of worship: “to kiss toward.” While on the road, he was not intending to worship. He clearly was intending on worshiping once he go there.
If all of life is worship, is it necessary to assemble with the saints (Hebrews 10:25)? Would it be just as acceptable to go to the lake or mountains and “worship” God while fishing, hunting or hiking?
Can anyone logically and truthfully maintain that they are genuinely worshiping God while changing a dirty diaper or watching a movie? If so, then Jesus would probably make the following assessment of their “worship”: “they worship in vain, their heart is far from me” (cf. Matt. 15:8, 9). Note again: true worship is where the person is intentionally offering something to God (“in spirit”) and it is being done according to the divine standards set by God (“in truth”).
Of course it is understood by all, I assume, that Christ would not be in the midst of those who are engaged in activity that dishonors His name.
“Let every act of your body in living be an act of worship”
You really mean that?..I mean what I emphasized?
Joey
“Question: Why would have to clarify that?”
Wait and see.
What if it’s and act that God condones?
“On June 2, 2008 at 11:26 am Rick Said:
Of course it is understood by all, I assume, that Christ would not be in the midst of those who are engaged in activity that dishonors His name.”
Don’t you miss Him then Rick? You know the baptist church does not give honor to Him. You won’t even wear the name
On June 2, 2008 at 11:26 am Joey Said:
“Let every act of your body in living be an act of worship”
You really mean that?..I mean what I emphasized?
Joey
I understand what youre saying Joey, I am just saying a Christain is a to live the life 24/7. I think Corey best explained everything above…
I understand what you are saying Corey in your post regarding worship and thought it would be largely debateable that changing a dirty diaper would be an act of “worship”. I would argue that it is our purpose to strive to DAILY to live our life in such a way that is pleasing to God, even if our live is consumed with daily chores. You betcha I can mop a floor for Jesus if that is what my day consists of… to claim that we are not to worship God or not able to worship God day in and day out is ludacris.
ahh faithful you really amuse me
faithful IS amusing… lol
Randy:I understand what youre saying Joey, I am just saying a Christain is a to live the life 24/7. I think Corey best explained everything above…
So now you are correcting your statement?
“every act”
Joey
Man. and people say WE are confusing?
If by emphasizing “every act” you are presuming that one could worship by commiting a sinful act, that would be fault. To be in sin would be to be apart from God and to be apart from God would make on unable to worship Him because they are away from Him.
But a person who is not sinning, but rather striving to please God with any daily act and desiring to fellowship with God and worship with Him throughout his/her given day…. the fact that such a concept would be foreign to you is beyond my understanding to be quite honest and I cannot comprehend how much in bondage that must feel to not feel the freedom to worship God at any moment of any day.
Katie:If by emphasizing “every act” you are presuming that one could worship by commiting a sinful act, that would be fault
Nevermind. I’ll just keep shoveling reason and common sense.
Joey
why “nevermind”
if you don’t explain your self and your statements, how do you expect people to follow your train of thought?
Katie wrote:
I would argue that it is our purpose to strive to DAILY to live our life in such a way that is pleasing to God, even if our live is consumed with daily chores. You betcha I can mop a floor for Jesus if that is what my day consists of
I completely agree with this part of what you said. But, as to this:
to claim that we are not to worship God or not able to worship God day in and day out is ludacris.
I disagree, based upon what I just posted. You can serve God day in and day out, but that clearly is NOT worship. That is service. Both are commanded, yet that doesn’t mean they are the same thing.
Corey (and everyone else), please give references when quoting another source.
http://www.scripturessay.com/article.php?cat=&id=302
Thanks,
Nathan
Rick and Katie, you don’t amuse me. I think it would be funny if it weren’t for the fact your on your way to hell and taking others with you. I would have you obey the gospel and repent from your false religion
Katie:why “nevermind”
if you don’t explain your self and your statements, how do you expect people to follow your train of thought?
You havent read all of my statements. I said what if it’s an act God would and has ordained as good. You think based on that premise that its worship?
Joey
Folks, really… it wasn’t hard at all to go down to the station and meet Johnny head on. It’s not hard at all to do ANYTHING without fear.
You wanna know why?
Go to my blog. You can just go to http://theknightshift.com if you like.
There’s a quote by C.S. Lewis on it. Right now it’s toward the top but that might change soon because I’m redesigning the blog.
There is a reason why it’s displayed so prominently.
It sums up the life we have in Christ more succinctly, and better than any other writer I’ve found outside scripture itself.
Die a little to yourself each day, so that you might know the full and abundant and joyful *life* that can only come from faith in Jesus Christ.
If you want a life without bitterness, and regret, and with the freedom to be the person that God made you to be… there it is.
That is why I am not afraid of Johnny Robertson or anyone else.
You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.
-– 1st John 4:4
And I guess I disagree Corey based on what my understanding of what “worship” is. I understand however that there is an obvious difference between service and worship, but when I’m caring for my own children I’m not necessarily ‘serving’ God, however over the course of my day I can and do spend time ‘worshipping’ Him. So I guess though I see there’s a difference, I’m not following your distinction or definition of worship.
Joey—
if it’s an act that God has ordained as good, and one engages in such an act… are you saying that he/she would not or could not be worshipping God while performing said act?
Katie:
So you think intercourse between a husband and wife is worship?
Joey
Ok. im ready…here it comes…
Katie wrote:
but when I’m caring for my own children I’m not necessarily ’serving’ God,
When a Christian woman cares for her children she IS serving God since that is one of His commandments for Christian mothers.
I guess I disagree Corey based on what my understanding of what “worship” is
I think you might want to re-think your understanding of worship. I’m not saying that in a condescending way, but I once felt the same as you do and I had to change my views when I realized that the scriptures do not teach that all of a Christian’s life is worship. I think the article I posted presents the differences about as clearly as possible.
that’s an interesting question Joey
and I’m not sure I have a perfect answer for that one.
I do believe that God sanctions marriage and I do believe that sex is a good and perfect gift from God to married couples.
I believe that a married man and woman who are engaging in that intimate act are engaging in an act that is pleasing to God and per my understanding of worship, I would say that an act which is pleasing in the sight of God would be in effect worshipping.
Now it would not be like a worship service, with preaching, hymns, and prayer… but it would be honoring God with one’s body and expressing the greatest level of love that God has given to man and woman thorugh the beauty of marriage and sex.
I mean..
I don’t know how else to answer that.
well that is very true Corey… you are right and I had not thought of it that way, that caring for my children was also serving God. I appreciate that thought, because obviously as a mother caring for my children brings me great joy.
Maybe I’m not following what it is that we are in disagreement on.
When do you feel that it is scriptural or authorized that a person is or is to worship?
*smacks forhead*
To me this demonstrates one of the fundamental problems in ‘christianity’. Someone is taught a concept with no Biblical foundation (worship is 24/7) without enough forthought to reason through it. Thats what my schpiel about ‘shoveling reason’ means. The first thing chucked out the window in religion is common sense.
I’m not calling you dumb Katie. Im just saying this is to me a good demonstration of how the masses operate in christianity. Accept just about anything, trust that it’s right, make distinctions about nothing…and it’s all pleasing to God in the process.
Joey
It seems that this might be the old diversionary tactic in which JR usually takes part. This all started because Chris quoted Matt 18 to explain that he worships with other believers, and that that should be enough of an answer for JR.
Suddenly we are onto the subject of sex as worship? Joey, you’ve taken us in a strange direction today. Sounds like someone is fishing for some more quotes for Wednesday’s broadcast.
well Joey
okay let me try and run with you on this one
per your understanding of scripture..
1. is sex God allowed between a married couple
2. is sex sinful between a married couple
Suddenly we are onto the subject of sex as worship? Joey, you’ve taken us in a strange direction today. Sounds like someone is fishing for some more quotes for Wednesday’s broadcast.
There it is. i knew it was coming. I was just answering Katie. She asked what I meant.
Joey
“So you think intercourse between a husband and wife is worship?”
Absolutely!
In fact, although we invariably fail at the task, EVERYTHING we are supposed to be doing, should be an act of worship to the Lord!
Zechariah, chapter 20, tell us that a day will come when HOLY TO THE LORD, once reserved for the priestly class in the temple, will be inscribed on everything from the horses bridles to cooking pots.
If objects so mundane are to be consecrated to God, how much more so would the ultimate act of intimacy between husband and wife be?
I don’t feel like you’re calling me dumb Joey but don’t assume that I haven’t studied the scripture for myself.. I’m not a follower of people or ideas, I read scripture for myself.
You all show indescretion between common and Holy. Where will you draw the line Chris?
I think I’m in another reality. I can’t believe someone said what you did.
Joey…
please answer my questions.
because I honestly want to understand where it is that you are coming from.
is sex sinful between a married couple?
“I can’t believe someone said what you did.”
Dude, I made a schoolhouse explode just so I could run for board of education…
Why should it bother me if anyone doesn’t believe something I do or say? I’ve been hearing that for YEARS! 😛
No. I said it was put in place by God and is a good thing. That of itself doesnt make it worship. I think you were already beginning to reason right when you said you didnt think raising your kids is ‘worship’. Its doing what you know is your duty.
Joey
“Dude, I made a schoolhouse explode just so I could run for board of education…”
*twilight zone theme*
Okay I’m following you with that.
I agree… loving my husband is part of my duty as wife.
I guess my question is this…
if it’s not sinful
if it’s God ordained or authorized as “OK”
if we have no scriptural reference that it’s “bad” or “wrong”
would it be incorrect to say according to those 3 criteria (and not just referring to sex) but if weighed any actions according to those 3 criterion.. would it be incorrect to say that an act that meets those three criterion is pleasing to God?
does that make sense?
Suddenly we are onto the subject of sex as worship?
Apparently Nathan thinks the concept is rediculous but you say “yessireebob” to it.
Now what?
Joey
Katie wrote:
When do you feel that it is scriptural or authorized that a person is or is to worship?
We worship on Sunday. We see that the first Christians came together on Sundays to worship in Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2. There are five things that God expects in worship; preaching/teaching, partaking of the Lord’s Supper, giving, praying and singing. Coming together and doing those things constitutes worship.
There are also many things that we can do that are service – helping the needy, caring for our families, visiting widows and orphans in their times of distress. I could never give an exhaustive list, but all of those things are spiritual service and pleasing to God. None of them are worship.
Sex between married Christians is a good thing, as God gave us that gift, but it is in no way worship. As the article said, there are two distinct words used by Jesus Himself to differentiate between worship and service and they should not be confused.
Also, there is no difference between “formal” worship and “informal” worship. There is worship, service and you could also see other things that are allowed, but really aren’t either, like eating, working and even sex between married Christians. If sex is “worship” then it could be done within the assembly of the saints and I don’t know of anyone practicing that.
Oops. Too much bold. It should have ended after “spiritual service”. Sorry.
fixed it. Nathan
*twilight zone theme*
Actually I much more prefer the classic “Farm Film Report” sketches starring John Candy and Joe Flaherty, from Second City Television…
“Blow’d up good! Blow’d up REAL good!”
oh yeh… heck no, I agree with that corey… definitely sex as part of a worship service among an assembly of believers would be disgusting
and I understand completely what you are saying… I do feel again (much like I feel with the baptism debate) that all of the scriptures are not treated the same. It seems to me that some scriptures are quoted in their context and given due credit while others are quote by themselves to substantiate the argument. I read the Word for myself and I feel that if all of the Word was treated the same way… exegetically speaking.. then there would be no room for debate because the Word would speak for itself.
I know that was probably just a ramble.
But what I’m trying to say is that if i were to read what you just wrote and only read the verses that you quoted, that your argument would make sense. But the bible is meant to be taken in its entirity and when we take one verse literally but another verse we have to justify it’s cultural relevance or whatever, I feel we are doing a disservice to the entirity of the Word.
“would it be incorrect to say according to those 3 criteria (and not just referring to sex) but if weighed any actions according to those 3 criterion.. would it be incorrect to say that an act that meets those three criterion is pleasing to God?”
I think the end all answer to ask is what can you find that has been determined as worship from the Bible. Patterns such as 1 Cor 14 for example. An Order to worship definitely should be in place. Or 1 Cor 11 for the Lord’s supper. And others. Thats all I am saying. That there are patterns that the scripture has shown that allow us to determine what God wants for worship.
Yes I said ‘pattern’ Randy. That abominable word!
Joey
I am not saying those certain ordinances or patterns are not present in scripture but I’m saying weigh all scripture against itself and don’t isolate one portion of scripture to obtain a doctine.
I know that scripture tells us to worship God in spirit and in truth… well when I know that someone I am doing is not a sin, is not unauthorized by God, and is therefore pleasing to Him… I am weighing my actions according to the truth of Word and said action could essentially be considered worship because of that truth.
wow… not “someonne I am doing”..supposed to be someTHING that I am doing is not a sin
but in all honestly I think we digress…
because though I commune with God daily in prayer and read His word… I don’t go around telling people that I spent time worshipping Him while I was changing the diapers and fixing the meals. So I’m not claiming this a life of domesticated housewife worship…
the premise that I could potentially worship God from my own home however I do not believe to be false thinking and I cherish the opportunities that I DO get to exalt His name and spend time with Him from the comfort of my daily life.
Chhhhrisss….
We’re all standing here, with our tickets in hand, waiting for the moving picture show to begin… I’ve got my popcorn and junior mints in hand. I’ll pour my Coke when it’s ready, so that it’ll be nice and cold.
Can you give us an update on when the talkie will begin?
Thanks,
Nathan
I’m anxiously waiting also for the sunday evening presentation
*beats head against brick wall*
Katie wrote:
well when I know that someone I am doing is not a sin, is not unauthorized by God, and is therefore pleasing to Him… I am weighing my actions according to the truth of Word and said action could essentially be considered worship because of that truth.
But that isn’t the Biblical definition or pattern of worship. If you feel there are some scriptures that show that all acceptable things are worship I’d like to see them. Otherwise all we’re left with is fallible human logic.
It finished uploading and YouTube is processing it now. It just showed up in my “My Videos” thingy.
So another few minutes and you’ll be able to… something 😛
Corey I cannot throw out scripture off the top of my head but I will certainly pull out the Word and do some studying and I will get back to you on this topic.
Is that acceptable?
Sure. I’ve tried to back up what I said with scriptures that I hope you’ll consider. If you do the same for me, I will also consider them. If I’m wrong, I’ll gladly admit it.
In case anyone ever wondered how this works…
In my instance, the video I shoot is captured from the camera to the hard drive with Premiere Pro, and then I do what needs to be done (which you’ll soon see). The edited video file is WAY bigger than YouTube allows in its raw form. So that has to be converted to a smaller format (I use H.264 encoding, which is pretty much the fancier Quicktime codec) and *that* file gets uploaded to YouTube. It’s still rather large though. In this case, over 200 MB and I’m using a broadband connection. That YouTube even on its best days has a bottleneck from all the uploads going on constantly doesn’t help matters either.
Then once YouTube has the complete file, its system processes it to Flash Video. And that’s what you get to watch on your end. YouTube can handle just about all the major video formats, but I prefer Quicktime for a number of reasons.
Then after YouTube finishes converting it, you’ll get to see it.
Which should be any moment now…
Have at it…
Alright… cranking it up… will report back thoughts in a few minutes.
my first thought
directed to Johnny—-
I’m not a member NOR do I attend Vandola Baptist Church 🙂
I offered Johnny an invitation to my church but I do not attend Vandola 🙂
man… leaving us with a cliffhanger!! LOL
waiting for part 2 now! 🙂
and ps… the holy grail excerpts were cracking me up
Working on Part 2 now. Might not be up ’til tomorrow ‘cuz I’m about to head off in a little while.
But yeah Part 2 is coming. Dunno if I’ll use Monty Python clips in that one but there’s already funny stuff in it 🙂
I will say this…
I understand that Johnny already had this preperations for that evenings telecast. I think I would have felt similar, in that I would want to follow the agenda that I had already prepared.
However because he publically said he would be quoting you, I think it would have been only fair for him to offer you the opportunity to defend your comments or offer clarification to the things he wished to put on air. He would not have had to change his whole agenda, just given you air time when he decided to address you and your comments specifically.
I’m certainly not defending JR here but just saying that I would have probably wanted to follow through with my prepared material as well… but I think JR in particular wanted to do just that w/o your interruptions because you would have contradicted him and his statements and that would have made him look “bad”.
Of course, he talked a lot about me at the beginning of the program and wouldn’t allow people to call in. (wonder if that wasn’t a fear also that someone might call in and contradict him on his comments regarding me and my blog statements).
so basically what we can learn from this is simple
JR likes to have the controversy of us on this tv show but he doesn’t like nor want us to be able to defend ourselves because it would shed some light on his manipulative tactics and make him look false. If he has nothing to hide and is doing nothing wrong he should have no problems allowing people to call in or you to make an appearance on his show to defend your own statements the planned on liberally using.
LOL..
“help help, im being repressed”
That must be what Chris was screaming off camera because he couldn’t get a debate in the street. Why would you show up knowing that an agenda of topics had already been prepared and expect it just to be trashed. Now this will be your crutch Chris to exclain you were denied a debate when you knew you wouldn’t have time in the first place.
Thats funny.
Joey
exclain=exclaim
I see that point Joey
maybe if Johnny hadn’t already announced on here that he would be discussing Chris’ comments it would be different but I should think it would be anyone’s desire that instead of just a quote, but to have the actual person to discuss with… it just makes me think that Johnny didn’t want Chris on for more than just that he already had his telecast planned out but because he didn’t want Chris there to publically defend himself and contradict Johnny on air regarding Chris’ own statements.
I would feel differently if JR had never even said he was planning on quoting Chris but he made no secret of the fact that he would be using Chris’ and my own words on his show.
“Why would you show up knowing that an agenda of topics had already been prepared and expect it just to be trashed.”
Well, he already said that he was going to talk about me on his show. And he thought that I wouldn’t debate him.
If Johnny DIDN’T think that I wouldn’t take him at his word, that’s not my problem…
To paraphrase something that C.S. Lewis once wrote: You should not summon people if you do not mean to do serious business with them.
I agree Chris.
I think it was very unprofessional of him also to tell people he wasn’t going to speak with them unless they were calling about certain things throughout the show. Definitely leads me to believe that he wanted no one to contradict his words, thoughts, or opinions about the statements that he posted of mine on air.
Just as it become public domain to post things online… he should no better than to bring up a person’s name and words and then not allow those words to be defended or clarified. That’s unprofessional television production. He’s not the end all be all.. by any means and he gives himself too much authority and power.
“C.S. Lewis once wrote…”
I’m sorry, C.S. Lewis wrote which book of the Bible?
And what you are doing Chris demonstrates the Love of Christ in what way?
Katie,
This unwillingness to confront situations in which he has no absolute control demonstrates in my mind, more than anything else, that Johnny Robertson does NOT have faith in God at all!
He puts more faith in himself and his own abilities.
He is terrified of an unknown quantity!
This is why he spent 3+ hours (at least) visiting my blog over the weekend. He was looking for something he could use against me.
(Yah right Johnny… like I’m going to post my DARKEST secrets on my blog? Well, I might have hinted at some things here and there just for the thrill of tantalizing.)
But like I told him last night: he’s not ready for what’s really out there.
Maybe this “Church of Christ” thing is just an act that he does. Perhaps he has no confidence at all in either himself or God, so he does what he can to cover up his feelings of inadequacy.
It’s the classic schoolyard bully mentality: he’s so afraid of being “picked on” that he has to puff himself up and swagger, and make himself out to be the toughest kid on the block.
But when you cut away everything there is about Johnny Robertson, he’s just left a scared little boy who can’t fight with his fists, so he fights with his Bible.
And he is afraid of the unknown. He just doesn’t want anyone else to know it.
The other alternative… well, you don’t want to know about that one. So I defer to the relatively happier notion.
“Why would you show up knowing that an agenda of topics had already been prepared and expect it just to be trashed. ”
Chris was a part of that agenda, Joey. The bigger question is, why didn’t JR put him on the air when he was planning on talking about him anyway?
If Jackie Poe went and announced in some public forum that he was going to be talking about JR the following Sunday, and JR showed up with his video camera, you pro-JR folks would be calling “FOUL!” if Poe told JR what JR told Chris in this video. Everything from the condescending “Bible knowledge” bit to the “renegade” crack.
While JR was surprisingly well-composed, he still goofed by not agreeing to give Chris some air time, IMO.
The only thing which would have made it 100% complete would have been if Katie had been there with Chris.
I liked the Python bits, too. Especially that tag at the end.
“He is terrified of an unknown quantity!”
You should do the little bubble quotes for action comics. That’s pretty good.
Joey
“And what you are doing Chris demonstrates the Love of Christ in what way?”
1st John would be a good rationale. Pretty much the whole book.
Chris, brings up a good point… we could tag team! LOL… j/k
I mean “Nathan” brings up a good point
And what precedent do you have to base this on. Same old game: imaginary scenarios.
Joey
and Chris… your comments about the schoolyard bully… I have had the same thoughts regarding JR’s behavior
“I’m sorry, C.S. Lewis wrote which book of the Bible?”
What does this have to do with anything, Joey? Do you think the only place we can find words of wisdom is in Scripture? If that’s the case – why did you bother going to school? To university? Why study Shakespeare or Plato or read books of history or even the Encyclopedia?
Nathan is pointing out the double standard Joey.
Because the point is that JR and his crew.. NF and JO DO show up at church services were an order is already present and the expect (if not demand) that their questions are heard. How is that any different??
but when someone pulls their same stunt on them, all of a suddent they don’t have time to work it into their agenda? It’s a double standard.
“And what precedent do you have to base this on. Same old game: imaginary scenarios.”
Yes. You are right. You would rise up and call Jackie Poe blessed. I’m sorry for misjudging you.
as usual you guys are going to press with half the story
tune in to ch 18 I had my camera running too
Good afternoon Johnny buddy 🙂
Johnny, feel free to post your side of the story on youtube, and link it here. We’ll be glad to hear both sides.
“Because the point is that JR and his crew.. NF and JO DO show up at church services were an order is already present and the expect (if not demand) that their questions are heard.”
You need to qualify that. It is either before or after service. Their ‘pre-planned’ event is never interrupted. So no. There is no double standard.
Joey
Did Chris interrupt the broadcast?
It looked “pre” to me.
He tried. Are you going to feign ignorance?
Actually not true Joey because my father has been questioned before why his visitors were not allowed to publicaly address him during the worship service and my father was very clear that they wouldn’t be doing a question/answer time during the service.
How did he try to interrupt the broadcast? He was standing outside, and didn’t follow JR into the studio. Yes, he was trying to get JR to follow through and give him the debate he was teasing with, but he didn’t come close to interrupting the show.
Chris wrote:
1st John would be a good rationale. Pretty much the whole book.
What an incredibly vague answer. You call out Johnny for doing the exact same thing you just did. Sounds like hypocrisy to me.
This is true… like Nathan said Chris was there prior to the show and also there again.. JR was very open that he would be discussing both my own and Chris’ comments on his show. Is he so bold to make those declarations but not bold enough to allow people to speak on their own behalf? That sort of behavior perpetuates his deception and manipulation.
Yeah. 1st John..the whole book. Theres a specific defense.
Nathan,
If you can’t see how rediculous and unreasonable (on purpose) it was of Chris to expect a debate without arrangement then fine.
An orderly debate is different from an informal Q&A session.
Joey
Here’s the thing for me – Chris wants to do a televised debate, on Johnny’s dime, but it has to be when Chris wants it.
Also, Chris won’t even say who he worships with. Is he ashamed? I can’t imagine not being willing to admit who I worship with. I love my congregation and I’m proud of them. Chris knows where Johnny stands on Biblical issues (since he’s on TV, proudly declaring his stances), so Chris can prepare for Johnny. Johnny isn’t afforded this since Chris won’t even say where or with whom he worships. Maybe if Chris would be more forthcoming it would help to get the debate scheduled.
rick said
# On June 2, 2008 at 9:46 am Rick Said:
For Chris Knight to appear unannounced at the lion’s den to confront the beast amuses me to no end. Johnny is not accustomed to being engaged defiantly on his home turf. Again I say bravo Sir Knight!
do you know me rick?
how would you know what i am used to?
my first police scuffle was in 1986 in memphis arean with pentecostal claiming we had been???? 10 oclock memphis news carreid it. you think chris really bothered me
Corey,
You too want to have me marked as a member of a denomination, don’t you?
Is it fair to say, at all, that it HURTS you to try to conceive of a follower of Christ without a denomination?
I mean, that’s what a lot of this keeps going back to: “Where does Chris worship at?” “What is his doctrine?”
Last night, from Johnny, I heard no real defense of his so-called “doctrine”… but I heard plenty of attempts to try to find out more about me.
Have to wonder why that is. I mean, it’s not like Peter kept pestering Simon Magus about how many years he might have spent in Crete, is it?!
“His position is obscure…
“His congregation is formless…
“His doctrine…nonexistent…
Its…Christ Knight…GHOST DEBATER!”
But Johnny has been surfing on Chris’ blog so it’s not like he knows nothing about Chris
Johnny wants to be able to pigeon hold Chris into a specific denomination
For instance.. no matter what I say or what scripture I quote… I’m still just a Baptist to Johnny and so he assumes things and takes thingsfor granted, at his own liberties because of my denomination affiliation, that doesn’t make for approrpriate debating either.
Joey,
JR was practically begging Chris to call in and debate the issue. Chris did him one better and showed up to do it live, in person. Check out Johnny’s comments from the last few days:
“Happy hunting obe one
you will have to try harder than this
are you still going to call in?
If not Corey will get you (he lied Corey)”
“chris are you still calling in and debating on Sunday nite?
or did your little plan back fire”
“Chris
you may won’t to go back and reread your comments
it was much stronger than this
and when I show it on TV it will be in quotes”
“Oh what has changed?
You don’t have a an emotional story to try and use to subvert people into taking your position?
Ok I am moving on. There is no truth here today.
Nice try Chris
I am still posting you tomorrow night.
Your comments are good to show how desperate folks are to defeat us.”
—-
Now tell me, do you still think that Chris was in the wrong for taking JR up on his offer? Really?
“you still calling in”
Nathan,
When you call your wife from work, I guess you drive home to talk to her.
First time visiting this site. seems that with the exceptions of Katie, Joey, and Coreydavis most
posters are interested in personal scuabbles rather than rightly dividing GOD’S word. “line upon line’
precept upon precept….. I’ll try back another day.
jbb
sometimes my hubby does 🙂
You know what i mean Katie.
jbb,
You have no idea, my friend. You picked an interesting day to visit. Come back any time, and maybe we’ll actually be having a regular discussion.
Nathan
On June 2, 2008 at 1:37 pm Joey Said:
Nathan,
If you can’t see how rediculous and unreasonable (on purpose) it was of Chris to expect a debate without arrangement then fine.
An orderly debate is different from an informal Q&A session.
Joey
-Joey does make a good point – but again Johnny does say always be ready to answer anyone…
I know what you meant Joey… just trying to be lighthearted 🙂
very true Randy
maybe JR only means that when it’s not prior to a telecast?
From Johnny: do you know me rick?
how would you know what i am used to?
my first police scuffle was in 1986 in memphis arean with pentecostal claiming we had been???? 10 oclock memphis news carreid it. you think chris really bothered me
Randy: Johnny is not bothered by this – in fact he welcomes this stuff, everyone by now should know this.
Thanks (partly) Randy. Im just trying to be objective.
Joey
You know, I was thinking about this habit JR and the others have when they encounter someone like Chris – to ask the question about church affiliation. Now, I understand the desire to get a point of reference – to understand where the person is coming from – but these days, where denominations are coming closer and closer, wouldn’t it be better to ask a doctrinal question right off the bat? The real obvious question would be something about Scripture – “What is your opinion about Scripture? Inspired Word of God or good book of rules and sayings?” Or something like that.
But, I’ve attended several different denominational and non-denominational churches in my time, some for extended periods of time. This is why even though my heritage is Presbyterian, I’ll always tell people that I am a Christian if they ask. Because as much as it must pain the CofC here to hear this, I don’t follow the doctrines of the Presbyterian church first. I follow Scripture first.
Rambling a bit.
I was too.. and I think I would completely agree that JR had every right to say “no” to a debate at the time but the fact remains that he was very public about the fact that he was going to be talking about Chris. To think that a person wouldn’t want to defend themselves and to not give them the opportunity to discuss it publically, is really a cop out.
Honestly guys, Johnny enjoys this and this will help his cause – he is not bothered by Chris at all – dont fall for the cat and mouse ganmes. This is nothing for Johnny, he feeds on this and his supporters eat it up too.
Nathan I completely agree!!
I attend a baptist church but I’m a Christ-follower, plain and simple. Whether I’m at a Baptist church or not. Im not a follower of “baptist doctrine” but of the Word.
On a side note…
That rascal Katherine is sitting on a beach right now in Cancun. I think I don’t like her anymore. 😉
You think she’s missing us?
oh yeh right… missing nothing!
Nathan wrote:
You know, I was thinking about this habit JR and the others have when they encounter someone like Chris – to ask the question about church affiliation. Now, I understand the desire to get a point of reference – to understand where the person is coming from – but these days, where denominations are coming closer and closer, wouldn’t it be better to ask a doctrinal question right off the bat? The real obvious question would be something about Scripture – “What is your opinion about Scripture? Inspired Word of God or good book of rules and sayings?” Or something like that.
I see what you’re saying Nathan, but if you’re going to have a televised debate, it makes more sense to say, “today we have a debate on Baptist doctrine” rather than “today we have a debate on some dude and his personal views”. If you were to do that you’d open the doors for every guy on the street with a Bible and an opinion. That doesn’t make for very orderly debates.
I am glad he came down and did that
I thought it was very tatesful of me to let him talk for 5 minutes when I arrived 9 minutes till air time. I had exactly 4 minutes to set up after giving him time out side.
No comments on my nice handling of a person who “ambushed” me?
class is anyone listening?
Thanks Chris
Yes how very tasteful of you to discuss with him for 5 minutes and then proceed to talk about him on local television without giving him the opportunity to answer for himself… yep, that’s tasteful
Johnny, why didn’t you give Chris time, since he was obviously on your agenda? Yes, it would have been a scramble, but it’s not like we’re talking about the NBC Nightly News or something… I think people would have understood a bit of scramble if you had explained the situation.
Seems to me that you would have jumped at the chance to have someone you were planning on discussing there to give their viewpoint. Just like we are glad to have you commenting here, and would love to have Norm and James join you sometime.
katie said
I attend a baptist church but I’m a Christ-follower, plain and simple. Whether I’m at a Baptist church or not. Im not a follower of “baptist doctrine” but of the Word.
now I know we are getting some where
Katie I challenge you to tell the pastor that.
I hear this brave statement all the time
and when they start saying that to the pator they are out.
this is what Ergun Caner is saying. he is saying that the honest Baptist must honestly admitt that the Sandy Creek “baptist” not really calling themselves were not baptist in doctrine of today but were “dissenters” pur and simple
And answer this also JR…
why is that after reading my personal comments for the first portin of the show that you said you weren’t answering callers but for certain reasons. Were you afraid that I would call in or that someone defending me would call in?
what do you mean JR?
my pastor would agree with me that we aren’t baptists but Christians.
Don’t act as if you know my pastor at all, your assumptions are way off base pal.
Folks chris knight has no bible knowledge and I m not going to subject my viewers to such a display.
he is a home worshipper and has NOOOOOO doctrine but :love” and rejects Jesus definition of loves display
love me keep my commandments
Katie tell me you r pastors name and I will prove you are off
I never heard Chris say he was a home worshipper, he said he worshipped with other believers.
I am sure we are going to hear all kinds of excuses
🙂
how would you prove I am off… do you presume to know any and every pastor in this area?
just tell me
I believe I have a contradiction between you and him by days end on this item
move it
have you heard the 2nd half of the video?
what?
Johnny you are so full of yourself that it is comical
So you are telling me that by giving you my pastor’s name that you would be able to tell me how he would/would not feel or what he would/would not say regarding particular situations?
that’s funny
Johnny, I’m not sure what you mean by “chris knight has no bible knowledge”. Would you care to unpack that phrase a bit?
may I say to chris
I left his website on my task bar for ever yesterday does that mean i was on site?
no he has not been able to post Part 2 yet
And as to the “home worshipper” crack, where do you think many of the first century Christians met?
Katie
I will be able to see if someone is being hypocrite or not. You pastor teaches baptist doctrine and that is why you all are baptist unless you are name only baptist and worship like michael penn (pentecoastalas)
why not just give out the info
“Aquila and Prisca greet you heartily in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.” (1 Cor. 16:19; see also Acts 20:20, Romans 16:5, Colossians 4:15, Philemon 1:2).
nathan did your debate with jason not go well
is that why you have this little site
but to answer mr black
i can tell if a person is a barber cant you
how
Nathan,
Is ‘sex is worship’ not enough for you? You even seemed to think that was preposterous.
Joey
nathan
are you dumb or what?
chris is a home worshipper because no one agrees with him nor will they put up with him
are you sure chris knight is to be a champion you all want to cling to?
Johnny you completely miss the point, that or you pretend to miss the point. Either way you are wrong.
My pastor does not preach “baptist doctrine”. He preaches from the Bible, ie. The Word of God.
And as I mentioned last week, any person who chooses to take a look at the Baptist Faith and Message can see the scriptural basis for each pillar of the faith regarded in that message… which clearly establishes that the Baptist Faith and Message was not created based on imagination or on the writings/teachings of some random individual but on the Word of God itself. Do you need me to post the link for you again with the scripture references?
he sure led you foolish children down the road on diane odell
Johnny, Randy already told you…. but, that’s okay, if you want to think I’m Jeff Black, go right ahead. But here’s the funny little secret… I’m not Jeff Black.
Anyway, Joey – what are you talking about?
And back to JR – I’m still trying to figure out what you have against house churches.
And since you bring up Jason again – why don’t you take this opportunity to tell us what happened to him again? Was he so impacted by his debate with Mr. Black that he had to jump ship? Why don’t you just come out and spill the beans?
Katie:
where do you assemble,and what are the times?
I would like to visit.
under what pretenses T.D.
katie
this our point
how did you get into a baptist church
what do you mean, how did I get “into” a baptist church…
I walked in the front door.
this is ergun caners point too
read the history
these folks in the early baptist books were not baptist and they did not name themselves this
they were people who left the church of england and then false teachers divied them up by bringing in the Phili confession
you have your BF&M
I will debate that it is false too
bF&M contradicts itself
Johnny… I asked you a question… don’t be rude. Tell the community the tale of Jason Hairston’s departure from the airwaves. Did he see himself on TV and decide he didn’t like the way he looked on screen? Did he realize that he was being watched by dozens of people and suddenly develop stage fright? Or was it something doctrinal?
The community has the right to know. And the best thing? Once you tell us, we won’t ask again! Wouldn’t that be nice?
What was Caner’s point?
I’m not following the relevance to what Caner said or didn’t say to myself and my statement.
nathan you think you are the community here?
mr Zblack
what part of Jason do you think you missed out when we explained it
We’re part of the community, yes. And since you won’t tell the TV community, you can tell us. We’ll make sure the word gets around.
Come on, you know you want to tell us.
katie
did you watch last night
Mr Black
you sound like a gossippee woman
go watch lost
or some soap
The last part I did.
But I happened to call my dad at the same time that you were discussing me so I “listened” to it on our way home from church.
Nathan
I am trying to have substantive dscussion with KAtie would you back out
“mr Zblack
what part of Jason do you think you missed out when we explained it”
Zblack? That sounds like one of Chris’s Star Wars characters.
Why don’t you tell us how you explained it. The only thing I ever heard from you guys was that he was away, and that you hoped he was doing okay. That’s basically a lot of nothing. Would you care to fill in the blanks?
well you didnt watch tthen did you
Nathan: Anyway, Joey – what are you talking about?
Do you not read your own site?
You asked “Johnny, I’m not sure what you mean by “chris knight has no bible knowledge”. Would you care to unpack that phrase a bit?”
My response was isnt what Christ said about sex is worship not enough for you to see he has no knowledge. See below:
Christ=Chris
Johnny,
I did listen to it on the phone. I was unable to watch the first portion of the program (thats the part I listened to), but did catch the last 45 minutes of it.
ok katie
E Caner said and so do I .
Baptist have tried to hijack history
the people they claim were Baptist were not\
I showed that
was it in large enough pics for it be seen
Katie wrote:
under what pretenses T.D.
Why would you ask that Katie? Are we to question the motives of people who say they’d like to visit where we worship?
If someone asked me that, and I mean anyone, I’d give them the name, times and directions if they wanted them. I don’t understand why you would ask that.
Sorry, JR, you don’t have a mute button on this blog. I do… but you don’t.
But, I’ll make a deal with you. I’d really like for you to explain Jason’s leaving. And you know why I want you to, as well. If you would like to tell the story of Jason’s leaving, then I’ll consider backing out.
okay
back up
Alright, we’re talking about the history of the Baptist church now? I’m not trying to be trite here but I have been trying to piece together your rather jumbled comments about the historical stuff on here.
So let me make sure I’m following you.
You are saying that you and Caner are in agreement regarding the history of the Baptist church?
katis
do you want me to wait each time for you r post?
is it ok if I keep posting?
would you like to go to google talk
we could post it all when we finish?
If you are so fixated on Jason, what have you done to ‘help him’?
I am sorry I try to go tooo fast
Corey I wasn’t trying to be nasty with T.D. and I apologize if that sounded such but I’m sure anyone could understand the hesitation with giving out personal information on the internet when a vast majority of the commenters on here are in my area. That could pose a potential threat if the wrong information was given to the wrong people and a a mother of 3 children, I have more than myself to consider.
I am not trying to be nasty nor say that T.D. would be such a person but I have no idea who is reading and not posting.
look out JR, you made an apology. Everyone probably fainted or will say they did like you are inhuman.
katie
I am saying that all agree that Robert Semple is the first History in VA
when quoting from him people say
Baptist did this and that
but when yu read it yourself they were not Baptist
you did not come from baptist
Go ahead Johnny, post what it is that you are referring to, don’t wait on my response, I’ll read all that you have to post before I respond or comment.
What sort of help does he need, Joey? You see? This is the problem. We, in the community, just don’t know. Now, if JR has addressed this already in a public forum, that’s fine, but I wasn’t fortunate enough to hear the explanation. So, if you or he would like to give a concise summary of the situation, and it’s a good accurate summary, then I’ll consider dropping the subject.
well to be quite honest JR, I have never done a heck of a lot of research about the beginnings of the baptist church
honestly I have never deemed it necessary to the understanding of my faith because I have really never based my faith on the history of the church but truly on the Bible.
but I am more than willing to hear what it is that you have to say regarding the history just understand that I am not studied in the history.
Ok
thanks
now Ergun Caner is saying that the Sandy Creek “Baptist” were not baptist at all
they were “dissenter” from the Church of England
now he wants to go back to that
we do too
we say that we share that history with you all and where we all split is when the “dissent” (really just Christians)
had the fight over “confessions” like BF&M
okay I’m following you
Katie
we are saying that if we all would just drop the manuals creeds BF&M and go back to the Bible as “Baptist” not so-called in 1771 did then we could have fellowship again
Nathan I’m saying if you were genuinely concerned about Jason you would have searched him out to ‘help’ him in whatever tragedy you have determined he has suffered. But you dont’ care about him, you just want dirt.
How do you know I haven’t, Joey?
KAtie
first thing we have to do is set down and understand the elements that we differ on and see if there is a “right” and wrong
I believe that I have heard plenty of people of you fellowship say things are wrong if not done as you do them
I have no problem agreeing with that if yo are right as say on immersion is baptism & not sprinkling
Katie
how are we doing so far
Johnny said “Katie
we are saying that if we all would just drop the manuals creeds BF&M and go back to the Bible as “Baptist” not so-called in 1771 did then we could have fellowship again”
Johnny I would dare say then that I’m in complete agreement with you on that last comment.
I think all the pretenses of denominations do nothing bu serve us all an injustice. Which is what I am trying get you to understand about me personally. I may attend a Baptist church but I have no allegiance to any BF&M, my only allegiance is to God Himself and His Word.
yeh I’m following you completely JR
It really bothers me when I see Baptist scholars misquoting the records to demonstrate that they existed all along
why would they do this?
Have you ever heard of Fleatly
I m sorry Featly
If you have, why do you need more info? As if there is any?
I don’t believe so
And as to my “wanting dirt”, it has nothing to do with wanting dirt. It has everything to do with the fact that Jason was on the air each week, telling the community that everyone else was wrong, and he (and the rest of you) were right. If his thoughts on that have changed, then the community has a right to know.
If he left because of other reasons, we have a right to know that as well.
You see, Joey, he was a public figure. If he had been a preacher in a church that wasn’t broadcasting, I would still insist his audience would have a right to know why he left – even though that audience would be just the congregation. But he was an on-air personality, and his program went out over the airwaves, and then just stopped with no explanation.
His audience deserves to know why it stopped – why he left.
Now, if there is dirt involved, then so be it. If he just got tired of broadcasting, then so be it. My point? To my knowledge it was never explained by anybody.
Now, JR seems to be implying that it was explained. I didn’t hear that explanation, and would like to very much.
Nathan,
We can discuss later. We are butting in on a discusson.
There is a big debate about were their Baptist as far back say as 1500?
People in the history business (I spoke to your dad about the historian in your association on this)
are saying that Featly proves it.
My information is that Featly proves to the contrary.
i am trying to get my own copy to prove this
what difference does it make?
lots
if yo are trying to use a source that really disagrees with you/
this is Caner’s point too
No, Joey, let’s talk about it now. This is what has been happening any time I have brought up this subject. It always gets swept away.
Why not go ahead and give the concise summary and get it out of the way?
I see what you are saying
but I’m not sure that I am using a source that disagrees with me.
I mean I am following you on the history of the baptist church and the potential that there are faults in the history that is being claimed.
However, it doesn’t change for me that I firmly hold to the scriptural principles in the BF&M. Now anything above and beyond what is found in scripture would be above and beyond what I would feel comfortable saying is my “faith” so to speak….
Am I still on the same track as you?
I believe whole of religion has had some scholar write a handbook if you will and folks then surround that and it is the means by which they continue to perpetuate their faith.
We are saying drop the BF&M and let us just go to the Bible
The Methodist will not gt to sprinkle the presbyterians either, we will begin to unify on the book of God not our manuals creeds confession and so on
that is what was going on in 1771 and it swept VA and they were so strong that they revolted against the whole of england and defeated the not nly the King but the church of the king of E
We can unite and revolt against Satan
yes you are on track
our disagreement is that the BF&M is scriptural
I believe I can show you where it is not
are you game
at this point I would like to meet you and your husband
we are not enemies
we are now doing what Joh 17:20-21 says
I see what you are saying completely and by those words I would say I am on your side man, I completely agree that we should put aside man made documents.
And I have seen first hand some baptist church folks who did cling to that BF&M as if it were God’s word and most definitely is not. It has scriptural reference but that is what we should uphold, is the scripture itself.
I agree man.
so how does this fit into my conversations with you?
I promise to be a gentleman
I would be interested to hear you out.
I am sure my husband would not be game for it though, to be quite honest. He’s not a debator but can be very abrasive (not physically violent, just abrasive).
I’m really not backing out of anything though, I want that to be understood. I respect your position to not discuss with me alone.
It fits in as to what next
Mat 12:25 Jesus said no city will prevail if divided
do you want to mend repair and set the example
Johnny,
you wrote:
“we will begin to unify on the book of God not our manuals creeds confession and so on”
Whose interpretation of the “book of God” will you unify on?
I actually believe you Johnny that you would be willing to discuss it.
I would have to speak with my husband on this issue but I know him well and I think the answer will be no.
Stop dissenting Nathan. You dont like it because there is progress being made on your blog?
this would nt be a debating in sense of the word
this is just be “hear it out”
have you ever had a person come over to show you a policy
I am showing you a policy and in the doing of it I have to point out flaws in the current policy you hold
if at that point you still disagree send me on my way with a handshake and no harm done
ok you have my email
I will wait to hear
I believe that JR
and I would be more than willing to hear you out
I will have to discuss it with him later this evening.
Joey, how is my asking a question on my own blog “dissenting”?
sure thing
I will email you later
You’re right. Its your site. You can do as you please.
Joey
You know what . There is no one who can agree 100% with everything another person says not even their pastor and if they say they do, well they are a liar. God doesn’t want people to put barriers up for other people to come to him. To teach his Word to other people He wants us to find common grounds with them to start with.
On June 2, 2008 at 2:16 pm Katie Said:
And answer this also JR…
why is that after reading my personal comments for the first portin of the show that you said you weren’t answering callers but for certain reasons. Were you afraid that I would call in or that someone defending me would call in?
I thought Katie said she could not get the show and was going to remain Lost, I mean watch Lost.
Johnny,
I apologize for picking up after some discussions but I am in and out doing things while trying to peek in on the blog. At any rate a quick question if you are still here,
You are aware that there were at one time churches called the Baptist Church of Christ? I believe they were organized in Tennessee in the early 1800’s. They were rooted in the Calvinistic tradtiion. So when you speak of baptist origins you have to be aware that there a large number of groups that called themselves baptists, each one with their own brand of practices.
God said that there is no man that is righteous, not one. Each of us walks in our own sins every day of our lives. It is a debt that none of us could ever pay. But God sent Jesus to die for our sins, pay our debt for us, so that we can be forgiven. It is sad to know that there are people who think we have to earn our way to heaven when Jesus already paid that price for us. True christians through their faith in God and by the grace of God will want to do good works not to look good to others or to buy our way to heaven but because Christ is living in us.
Katie:
under the pretense of sitting down across from your preacher with open Bible and discussing our differences.
I’ll even tie one hand behind my back.
1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
Rick:
Who authorized all these different practices?
TD I guess the same ones who authorized the different practices among the churches of Christ..the congregational leaders.
The Bible uses the word strange in the sense of not acceptable. Le 10:1 ¶ And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not.
2 And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
King Solomon married “strange women” as was also a problem in the days of Nehemiah.Ne 13:27 Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?
Likewise we are warned about being “carried about with strange doctrines”
Heb 13:9 Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.
Ga 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Salvation is not something I want to guess at. Biblical Faith is not just a leap in the dark.
T.D.
I’m not sure what you are debating or attempting to discuss
Lost comes on Thursday evenings and yesterday was Sunday.
since so many of you men so desire to meet my preacher, I suppose I will give him the link to this blog and he can decide for himself whether or not to engage you in discussion 🙂
On June 2, 2008 at 4:17 pm Rick Said:
TD I guess the same ones who authorized the different practices among the churches of Christ..the congregational leaders.
– Great comment Rick. If TD is honest, he knows they are just as broken as the others they condemn.
– far as Jason goes, Joey was close to Jason, and Jason and I have talked, so I know Joey knows the facts, and its not dirt. I really find that funny seeing you guys are the kings of “dirt” – meaning you are always talking about others and even call them names. Honestly, you may be ashamed to let the viewers know the truth ( the entire truth ). Jey, you know what Jason told you and you know how he has tried to make you see things…know what I mean Joey?
Johnny showed me video of Chris and his , well for a better word , episode. Chris , I would be ashamed of such a display. No basis for discussion , no doctrine, no bible knowlege. Just repeating the same thing over and over. That would get quite old very quick to watch an hour of that. We could record you for one minute and replay it 60 times. It looked to me like one of these people that just wants to be on tv. If Johny let him the tv it would be no better than the folks on Monday night live that made fun of the mentally handicapped that time.
katie,
evil communication corrupts good manners.
how many times do i have to tell you hes not your
brother? well anyway dont get your gloves dirty.
wheres my money faithless?
lee
LEE , when you fullfill the verses that support the challange you will be paid. Can you say alien sinner?
One like you
All I see coming from this site is hate. And you all say we’re condeming
Having a day of prayer for you was hateful?
It’s all good Lee 🙂
and Johnny, check your email
faithless,
it just the hate colored glasses your looking through.
now how bout those lies your leader told?
lee
Charles Roark has offered me 25 minutes of airtime on WGSR this coming Sunday night. And I have tentatively agreed to take him up on his offer.
faithful and lee, let’s cut out the hate talk. If anyone hates anyone else here, I’d ask you stop posting, and start praying for yourself, as well as those persons who are causing you so much worry.
Notice that Scripture tells us how to respond to hate – not to actually do the hating. We are to hate sin (Hebrews 1:9)- not each other.
Thanks,
Mr. Answer
On June 3, 2008 at 5:21 am Chris Knight Said:
Charles Roark has offered me 25 minutes of airtime on WGSR this coming Sunday night. And I have tentatively agreed to take him up on his offer.
-What time ?
8 o’clock, I believe.
tentatively?
“tentatively?”
Finishing projects for clients, being on call as a consultant, taking part in a community theatre production of a musical, working on two films and a number of other things that I don’t care to mention at the moment. In addition to everything else that comes with being a husband and Lord willing a father someday in the not-too-distant future.
So when I say tentatively, I do indeed mean “I intend to do it, if it is the Lord’s will that I can.”
So Chris that’s all you have and you can’y understand why you can’t just jump into Johnnys schedule at a whim?
“So Chris that’s all you have and you can’y understand why you can’t just jump into Johnnys schedule at a whim?”
Johnny Robertson already announced that he was going to talk about me extensively on his program. And he practically invited me to debate him, he was making so much fuss about how I supposedly wouldn’t anyway…
So Johnny Robertson had already fit me into his schedule. Had declared it to the world.
Why should Johnny Robertson be willing to talk ABOUT me on live television but not TO me on live television?
What is he so afraid of, that he would not give me a chance to respond (WITHOUT him cutting in or his finger on the “mute” button at all times)?
Heck, the way I figure it, Robertson should be THANKFUL that I showed up when I did, with the opportunity that I gave him! He should have taken it, if he was so confident in himself. Here was the biggest chance of all to show everyone, whatever it is that Johnny Robertson is trying to show people on his program. And he DROPPED the ball!
Johnny Robertson called for me. And I came.
You should not call for someone unless you really mean what you say.
yes Chris.
I find it interesting that now that you have control of airtime you do not seem as gung ho about using it.
Where’s the chutzpah now?
1Ki 20:11 Let not him that girdeth on his harness boast himself as he that putteth it off.
James,
Could you defend that comment? How exactly is Chris not showing chutzpah? He just said that he spoke with Roark, and tentatively has taken him up on the offer.
Chris – did Roark approach you?
Nathan
Nathan,
Charles Roark said live on his show yesterday that he would let me have 25 minutes on Sunday night, to present another perspective. So I’m going to use it. Charles never said that it would be time spent debating Johnny Robertson, only that it would be 25 minutes for me to do with what I want.
I gave Johnny Robertson a chance to debate on Sunday, since he was going to discuss me anyway.
That’s 25 minutes that I’ll have, compared to an entire hour and a half that Johnny Robertson will have following me.
And James: after my appearance on Sunday night, Johnny should have more than enough material to last him the rest of the year. Not that it really bothers me.
I think James is hinting that you could use your 25 minutes and the 1.5 hour Johnny has to have a debate….
Chris wrote:
“Charles Roark said live on his show yesterday that he would let me have 25 minutes on Sunday night, to present another perspective.”
That’s what I thought probably happened. Let me go ahead and surmise (the popular word) what could possibly be going on. Again, it’s only hypothetical. But, let me start with fact.
Fact: JR and Roark have a good professional relationship, as evidenced by the fact that Roark has had JR on his program a number of times, and JR’s one of his best paying customers for buying air time with four hours each week.
Hypothetical: After the little episode on Sunday night, either Roark approaches JR or JR approaches Roark about giving you the 25 minutes. You show up on Sunday and, lo and behold, JR is there, camera in hand, ready to try and trip you up, the way you tripped him up on Sunday. He demands equal time or some other such thing. Boom! We’ve got us a good ol’ fashioned ambush!
Again, that’s just a hypothetical. Just me thinking out loud. We’ll just have to wait and see if I called it or not.
If it doesn’t go down that way, then I was wrong. Not the first time, won’t be the last. But if it does happen that way, then just remember folks, you read it here first!
Of course, Roark could just be going Barnum on the whole thing, and looking for a good local controversy to milk.
Either way, Sunday will be interesting, to say the least.
First Baptist Church of Christ, 511 High Place, Macon Georgia (www.fbcmacon.com)… what an interesting combination (or contradiction–you take your pick)that in the grand scheme of identity tags that I find amusing.
Personally, I would like to see them come on here and defend their doctrine a bit more, instead of trying to conform others to their supposed unity. There is much that could be debated /discussed on here about doctrine – you have answered the church of Christ ( Johnny, James, and Norm ) on about everything they teach, so maybe they should attempt to “refute the supposed error” – oops that reminded me of Jason’s old email. Speaking of that, let me ask Johnny, James, and Norm if they done as “the bible speaks” – did any one of you guys go to Jason and try to restore him to the faith, seeing we have a command ( not an example ) to do so. If not, you have disobeyed the gospel and doctrine of Christ per your “pattern theology”. Does this mean you lost your salvation, seeing you failed to properly follow the pattern? Or, do get to bend the rules on “pattern theology”? Please do explain why you have the right to neglect such commands and condemn others for not following an example that you bind on others as law ( LS Sunday Only ) – can you bend and make the rules ?
Chris it seems as though you’re awful busy ALL of SUDDEN
I have not had the opportunity to chime in on this yet, but I did see the video confrontation.
Like most bullies, JR simply backed down when someone stood up to him.
– Johnny, I hope you see now that no one looks good when they are caught off guard with a camera in their face.
Chris was utilizing the same tactics JR (and other religious bullies do, asking “simple” questions like “Where in the Bible does it say that someone not baptized will go to Hell?” And demanding a black and white answer.
Of course the Bible does not directly say this anywhere, and Johnny did not have the time or proper format to explain his reasoning behind this idea.
JR should recognize this type of badgering, since he is outstanding at it:
“Where is the Baptist Denomination found in the Bible?” or “Where is infant baptism found in the Bible?” Of course it is not, in simple balck and white terms at least, and this type of badgering does not allow people to explain their points of view and interpretations on the subjects.
Also, I would love for someone to finally address this Issue:
Must someone possess perfect scripture interpretation to be saved?
If not, how much do you need?
If so, do you have infallible scripture interpretation on all issues?
nathan,
you have to be kidding, me cut out the hate talk?
i simply call it like it is. someone has to keep faithless and john in reality. very few of the others on this site do. do you really believe that these guys love you? if you believe that you are all going to come together on some common ground and sing the coke song you are kidding yourself. its not going to happen,no matter how often john tells his audience that he bears us no ill will. ill say it ….what they do is not from god. stiffen your spines , gird your loins and dont be afraid to tell the people who look at this site that john and co are scattering the ones who are not rooted and grounded in faith.
now blessing and honour and power and might and dominion be unto god…………..not john
amen? lee
Oh, I don’t think JR loves me, in fact he may dislike me (or at least the “me” here on this blog) – but I certainly don’t think he hates me.
Given, they may “hate” this blog, or they may genuinely “hate” denominations, but I don’t think that hate us individually and personally.
And I know I don’t “hate” any of them.
As to the question of common ground… maybe I’m a cockeyed optimist, but I think that it is possible that God can change someone’s mind. I still see JR as a modern Saul, and could imagine God doing a miraculous work of grace in his life, and his becoming a Paul. Not that JR would be come a denominationalist, but that he would give God the credit for being God, and recognize that while the way may be narrow, God’s grace is not.
I do understand where your passion comes from – why you feel so strongly as you do. I really do.
Thank God I am a Catholic, this fighting over doctrine is absurd. Chris, I respect your willingness to take on the Church of Christ watchdog but what you all are doing now is “not showing the love of Christ”. This bickering means nothing to those who do not know the Lord. This bickering is why many can not take us seriously.
…and what is this term “bible knowlege”? According to the ultra-conservatives NOBODY besides them have “bible knowledge”
To those who believe the CoC is the Church mentioned in the bible. Can you name one individual, one document (besides your interpretation of the bible), one church father before, lets say, the year 1900 that can back your claim?
“Chris it seems as though you’re awful busy ALL of SUDDEN”
Ummmm… “All of a sudden”?
Honeychile, I’m awful busy all the time! 😛
JP wrote – “To those who believe the CoC is the Church mentioned in the bible. Can you name one individual, one document (besides your interpretation of the bible), one church father before, lets say, the year 1900 that can back your claim?”
No, not really. At least from any credible historical source.
Similar questions have been asked, and pretty much ignored. (although I do give credit to Corey for at least touching base on the issue)
Dear JP Manzi,
Please understand something. And I absolutely mean this from the bottom of my heart…
I have seriously wondered, and have wrestled with it, and even admitted to some of it in the video, that what I am doing might not be showing the full love of Christ that I should be doing. I have very literally struggled with this situation. Even cried out to God to send someone else.
Not for a moment have I enjoyed doing this!
Believe me, there are things that I’d much rather be doing with my time, than being involved in something like this. Things that I want to do for my own personal edification, education, and entertainment.
I’m not going to say fully why I wound up getting involved, for reasons which for now will remain known only to myself and a few others. I can only say this: it was something that I was led to do, and it would be better to suffer ridicule and humiliation and Lord only knows what else right now than to choose to not do anything.
But whatever happens, I am not fearful. As I tried to explain to Johnny Robertson the other night (though he sought to twist it into something different entirely), the will of God can not be defeated. No matter what WE do, His will… will be done. If in the eyes of the world Johnny Robertson slaughters me and my reputation, even that is no reason to be afraid. Because in the end, the Lord will prove without question both His mercy and His justice, and not as a respecter of persons as is man’s nature.
And that is an encouraging thought 🙂
“but I think that it is possible that God can change someone’s mind. I still see JR as a modern Saul, and could imagine God doing a miraculous work of grace in his life, and his becoming a Paul. Not that JR would be come a denominationalist, but that he would give God the credit for being God, and recognize that while the way may be narrow, God’s grace is not.”
To amend my previous comment: the will of God cannot be defeated. And it is His will that none might be lost… but it is WE in the first place who must choose whether we put our faith in Him or not, and be saved by His grace, which is given freely.
That said, and without any other reason for saying as much, I would have to agree that should Johnny Robertson accept God’s grace as Saul did, that this would certainly be among the greatest miracles of this region.
” On June 3, 2008 at 9:33 pm DMH Said:
JP wrote – “To those who believe the CoC is the Church mentioned in the bible. Can you name one individual, one document (besides your interpretation of the bible), one church father before, lets say, the year 1900 that can back your claim?”
No, not really. At least from any credible historical source.
Similar questions have been asked, and pretty much ignored. (although I do give credit to Corey for at least touching base on the issue)”
So now we know you didn’t watch the program Sunday night . Johnny showed the book by Semple that stated the church of Christ . It was published in 1810
I have mixed feeling regarding the clip from Chris. On one hand I hear people condemn Johnny for this and then I hear Chris praised for the same actions. I dont see anything wrong with Christ or Johnny doing this, but if we are honest with oursleves, the real reason we dont like Johnny doing it is because he often ask questions that either cant be answered and most preachers dont know enough about their own doctrine nor the church of Christ to make a good case, so they get angry with Johnny – Im not taking sides, but at least be fair and honest about this…can we really say Johnny is bad for such actions and then praise Christ for the same thing…
oops, typo above…I did it again…………I type Christ so much, I keep typing it instead of Chris…..sorry
“So now we know you didn’t watch the program Sunday night .”
DMH doesn’t live in our community, faithful. Would you like to explain in a bit more detail what Semple said in 1810?
I think it’s interesting that everyone keeps making the same typo… 😉
“the real reason we dont like Johnny doing it is because he often ask questions that either cant be answered and most preachers dont know enough about their own doctrine nor the church of Christ to make a good case, so they get angry with Johnny”
I disagree that “most preachers don’t know enough about their own doctrine”. Most of them know their own doctrine really, really well. What they don’t know is the hyperconservative church of Christ doctrine, and so they don’t know where Johnny’s coming from.
For example, in the clip from James at the church in Greensboro(?), the preacher honestly had no clue where James was coming from with regards to James’s criticism of instruments being used in worship. Why? Because most Christians don’t take issue with instruments in worship (probably because Scripture doesn’t take issue with it – in fact, Scripture supports their usage). Not to mention the rather sneaky way James went about it. It seemed like he was asking those questions in a very leading way so as to make the preacher look foolish to his viewing audience.
Again – back to the Chris clip – Chris was openly challenged by JR and he openly answered that challenge. It’s apples and oranges, IMO.
Nthan – ok, you make some valid points. I agree.
Faithful, you still havent showed me in scrpiture why you guys call some men false teachers.
By the frequency of the church of Christ use of “false teachers,” one might get the idea that it is a favorite term of inspired writers. However, it is used only one time (2 Peter 2:1). And all those “false teachings” – well, my concordance lists not one reference to that term which you guys have thrown about so loosely. Talk about speaking where the Bible speaks!
The Scriptures offer numerous cautions about those who would intentionally teach error in order to build their cases, but those persons were people of evil intentions, not sincere people desiring to follow Christ… now again Mr. “faithful” show me a sincere person in the bible referred to as a false teacher, or will you continue believing what others tell you?
The Scriptures speak of false prophets, false brethren, false Christs, and false apostles. They were not false because of what they were teaching but because of the role or capacity they were claiming or usurping. These were false men! Their intentions were to deceive – unlike the people you guys so often label as “false teachers”
“but those persons were people of evil intentions…”
Randy,
You think there aren’t a host of religious leaders like that in our area?
Joey
Randy,
You think there aren’t a host of religious leaders like that in our area?
Joey
No, Joey I do not. I suppose you do, and please explain why
I guess you haven’t heard some of the stories Johnny has presented. We have a member now who left an apostolic church and he was ridin her for all she had and trying to take some land she owned as well.
he being the pastor
Randy,
If Apollos (Acts 18) had continued to teach the wrong baptism after it was fully explained to him by Aquilla and Priscilla, would he not be considered a false teacher at that point?
If he said, “you know, I don’t think a ‘perfect’ understanding of baptism is necessary” and continued to teach John’s baptism, don’t you think that would have made him a false teacher?
Randy,
I’m not saying everyone is like that. But to pretend they dont exist is willful ignorance.
That is Acts 18, not Acts 1 8)
Joey, how are the men/preachers you guys so often condemn in the same category as the men labeled “false teachers” in the bible? How are they purposely with intent deceiving people? Does teaching error equate to false teaching? Are there any persons on earth perfectly able to teach everything without ever being wrong? The Scriptures speak of false prophets, false brethren, false Christ’s, and false apostles. They were not false necessarily because of what they were teaching but because of the role or capacity they were claiming or usurping. These were false men! Their intentions were to deceive.. ( prove that the men you guys condemn fit the bill )
I agree with you somewhat Joey
Randy,
You are talking about false teachers being people who were intentionally misleading, not people who were teaching the wrong thing. Is this right?
Randy,
I understand your distinction between an incorrect understanding and someone with malicious intent.
How about Tim Whitehart? for example. Elwood Gallimore? The pastor that Johnny recorded who is supposedly teaching that Acts 5 says you have to tithe or die. Even though he denied it, someone is lying, ether him or one of his members.
I have a few others, but I dont want to mention because of other reasons. It’s not a cop out. I just know some other associated details that might affect innocent parties
Joey, I will be a little more direct with my question: Who are the false teachers (per the biblical description) in our area? Name them and why (per scripture) are they “false teachers”?
looks like you beat me to this 🙂
How about the lady we helped from Jackie Poe’s church who Jackie wouldnt help
And I’m not saying you can’t deny some people help. Some people are just advantage takers. But this woman was legit
On June 4, 2008 at 8:23 am answeringchurchofchrist Said:
Randy,
You are talking about false teachers being people who were intentionally misleading, not people who were teaching the wrong thing. Is this right?
–Right !!
Far as Tim goes, he backslid just as David . Far as Galimore, I thinks he is lost based upon him refusing to repent from his adultery. Do I write off the entire congregation? Not sure, I’m not God. But anyone living in the sin (adultery )he is living in is clearly not saved,
On June 4, 2008 at 8:27 am Joey Said:
How about the lady we helped from Jackie Poe’s church who Jackie wouldnt help
– that makes Jackie a false teacher? You lost me a bit there, please explain
Randy,
Now if we refused to help a truly needy person, you’d be all over us.
“For example, in the clip from James at the church in Greensboro(?), the preacher honestly had no clue where James was coming from with regards to James’s criticism of instruments being used in worship. Why?
Nathan, what that “pastor” did not understand was “authority” (why you do what you do), just as you do not.
You said: “Because most Christians don’t take issue with instruments in worship (probably because Scripture doesn’t take issue with it – in fact, Scripture supports their usage).”
Where is the support for the usage of mechanical instruments of music in NT worship? It is not there. yet b/c it is not condemned explicitly (thou shalt not use m.i.o.m. in worship to God) you seem to think it is ok. Is that a correct sysnopsis of your position?
On June 4, 2008 at 8:14 am Joey Said:
Randy,
I’m not saying everyone is like that. But to pretend they dont exist is willful ignorance.
– are you saying everyone but “you guys”? Is Johhny perfect? I know he and Norm didnt agree upon something, so which one was the fasle teacher?
well my break is over…
I will check back at noon
are you saying everyone but “you guys”(is perfect -jn)?
Randy,
Are you going to acknowledge that false teachers are a reality or make excuses? That is the same tag line everyone uses.
Catch you later.
Joey
ONe last point…
You ever heard of a ‘resolution’ to a problem before? Whatever it is that you are talking about, how do you know it hasnt been agreed on? That’s the whole point of what we are trying to accomplish.
Joey
Faithful wrote- “So now we know you didn’t watch the program Sunday night . Johnny showed the book by Semple that stated the church of Christ . It was published in 1810.”
– I don’t live in your area. My only exposure to Johnny is from what he has written on this site and the show clips he has posted on youtube.
– As previously stated, I am not aware of Semple or his book. Feel free to share more info on it.
James wrote:
“Nathan, what that “pastor” did not understand was “authority” (why you do what you do), just as you do not.”
I understand authority perfectly. I disagree with you on the issue of musical instruments in worship. Apparently, so did the pastor of that church.
James wrote:
“Where is the support for the usage of mechanical instruments of music in NT worship? It is not there. yet b/c it is not condemned explicitly (thou shalt not use m.i.o.m. in worship to God) you seem to think it is ok. Is that a correct sysnopsis of your position?”
Don’t misquote me – I said that Scripture supports their usage. Psalm 150 for example.
Consider this conversation I had with Corey a while back:
coreydavis wrote:
“Here are some facts that really can’t be debated:
*Christians are never told to use instruments of music in worship to God.”
Nathan responded:
Actually, it can be debated.
1) First century Christians had, as their Scripture, the Old Testament.
2) In the Old Testament, the use of instruments in worshipping God was permitted, even encouraged (Ps 150, for example).
3) The animal sacrifice issue is moot, because the NT tells us that Christ was the ultimate sacrifice, and because of His death on the cross, no other animal sacrifices are required. (Hebrews 10: 11-18). Nowhere in the NT do we read that anything has rendered the use of musical instruments moot.
4) The example (is this printed up somewhere? I’ve heard it so often) of using Cheezwhiz in the Lord’s Supper is an inappropriate strawman argument, because we don’t have that example anywhere. We have the OT example for instruments in worship.
And I am really quite sad for you (and I don’t mean that in a mean way, but in an authentic way) – that you live on such a tenuous position of fearing making the wrong decision in something like this. On the one hand, I appreciate your desire to please God. On the other, I know that our attempts to please God are pretty worthless.
“All our righteousnesses are like filthy rags.”
Isaiah 64:6
“As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.” Romans 3:10-12
Does this mean we don’t try? No, of course not. That’s one of the main points we find in James (2:20). But, we are also free in Christ – and that includes in doing something that we’ve been instructed to do, and never had the right revoked – such as using musical instruments in worship. That’s just one small issue which helps us to find our joy in Christ (the book of Philippians).
I will take the silence on naming one person before the 20th century who can support the claim that the CoC is the church mentioned in the bible as a “there is none”. Its a denomination amongst many which most in the Churches of Christ already recognize. Not one document, individual, group or church father exist from this tribe.
I have no issue, per se, with the CoC. But, silencing those ultra-conservatives who believe their church IS THE church will put things in the proper perspective.
“I will take the silence on naming one person before the 20th century who can support the claim that the CoC is the church mentioned in the bible as a “there is none”. Its a denomination amongst many which most in the Churches of Christ already recognize. Not one document, individual, group or church father exist from this tribe.”
What in the WORLD are you talking about? You must have recited that from a dream you had.
Tribe?…okay. We never claimed to be Hebrews.
Nathan wrote:
1) First century Christians had, as their Scripture, the Old Testament.
2) In the Old Testament, the use of instruments in worshipping God was permitted, even encouraged (Ps 150, for example).
The first century Christians ALSO had as their scriptures Paul and other apostles writings.
1 Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Interestingly these inspired men never mentioned any mech instruments of music when giving these commands.
Even when they quoted a Psalm (s) they never used ones that mentioned these instruments
Ro 15:9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.
10 And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.
11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people. (Psa 18:49; 117:1)
Heb 2:12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. (psa 22:22)
Corey is right – Christians are never told to use mech instruments. Christians were following the NEW law that was being given by NEW testemant writers
Nathan wrote:
3) The animal sacrifice issue is moot, because the NT tells us that Christ was the ultimate sacrifice, and because of His death on the cross, no other animal sacrifices are required. (Hebrews 10: 11-18). Nowhere in the NT do we read that anything has rendered the use of musical instruments moot.”
nowhere in the NT do we read of wave offerings being rendered moot; or heave offerings; burning incense; drink offerings… are these in your worship Nathan? If not why not?
I will check back in later.
Gotta go try and ambush a “false teacher”
History also bears out that the first Christians did NOT use instrumental music in worship and that it was first introduced by the Catholic church. Here are some quotes:
AMERICAN “Pope Vitalian is related to have first introduced organs into some of the churches of Western Europe about 670 but the earliest trustworthy account is that of one sent as a present by the Greek emperor Constantine Copronymus to Pepin, king of Franks in 755” (American Encyclopedia, Volume 12, p. 688).
BINGHAM “Music in churches is as ancient as the apostles, but instrumental music not so . . . The use of the instrumental, indeed, is much ancienter, but not in church service. . . In the Western parts, the instrument, as not so much as known till the eighth century; for the first organ that was ever seen in France was one sent as a present to King Pepin by Constantinus Copronymus, the Greek emperor. . . . But, now, it was only, used in princes courts, and not yet brought into churches; nor was it ever received into the Greek churches, there being no mention of an organ in all their liturgies ancient or modern.” (Joseph Bingham, Works, London Edition. Vol. 11, p. 482-484)
CHAMBERS “The organ is said to have been first introduced into church music by Pop Vitalian in 666. In 757, a great organ was sent as a present to Pepin by the Byzantine Emperor, Constantine, and placed in the church St. Corneille as Compiegne.” (Chambers Encyclopedia, Vol 7, p. 112)
NAUMAN “There can be no doubt that originally the music of the divine service was every where entirely of a vocal nature.” (Emil Nauman, The History of Music. Vol. I, p. 177)
I could go on and on with historical evidence that backs this up. Many more quotes can be found here:
http://www.bible.ca/H-music.htm
James,
When you return, you can answer this: In the times of the temple, who performed the wave offerings? The heave offerings? The drink offerings?
Once you’ve answered that question, refer once more to the passage of scripture I cited – Hebrews 10:11-18.
Then, you can tell me if those offerings are still necessary, or if they were done away with.
whoaaa James…where did you get the idea that the letters of Paul were considered as Scripture (ie God’s Word) by the first century Christians?
Rick,
2 Peter 3: 15and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
And, as James already quoted:
1 Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Does anyone think if we went to a Christian Church service in Palestine or Greece in the 1st or 2nd Centuries we would recognize what was going on? If so do you think their practices would be similar to what modern American Churches of Christ participate in today? This is very hard for me to swallow from a historical or cultural background.
Where in the Bible does it say that all congregations should model themselves after 1st century Christian practices? If you believe it does, which ones should be used as a measuring tool? The Jewish influenced churches in Jerusalem? The Greek churches in Corinth? The churches in Italy or North Africa?
yes corey but what my dad is saying is that the 1st century Christians didn’t all have copies of this. The bible as we know it was not officially put together in it’s format until long past the 1st Christian church.
Excellent points DMH.
Thanks Corey, you are indeed correct. I had forgotten that good ole Peter had put Paul’s writings on the same level with the Old Testament. I had the cannonization of the Scriptures in mind. My apologies to James.
I am, however, not convienced totally that all of the first century Christians were on the same wave length with Peter in regards to thinking of Paul’s letters as Scripture (ie God’s Word)
Katie wrote:
yes corey but what my dad is saying is that the 1st century Christians didn’t all have copies of this.
That doesn’t appear to be what he was saying. He asked where the idea comes from that the first Christians would have believed Paul’s letters to be scriptures and I showed him.
The fact remains that they didn’t need every letter of Paul or Peter to know that those who had delivered the gospel to them were inspired. Both passages I quoted served as reminders that Paul was inspired, not as first-time info. It is also to be noted that the 1st Christians were imparted spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands of the apostles. These gifts (like prophecy – the most desirable according to Paul) helped them to “fill-in the gaps” that would have occurred by not having all of the New Testament.
DMH wrote:
Where in the Bible does it say that all congregations should model themselves after 1st century Christian practices?
It doesn’t. It says that we’re to follow the apostles doctrines. Since those people were given the doctrine directly from the apostles, we can know that they are to be imitated.
DMH wrote:
Does anyone think if we went to a Christian Church service in Palestine or Greece in the 1st or 2nd Centuries we would recognize what was going on? If so do you think their practices would be similar to what modern American Churches of Christ participate in today? This is very hard for me to swallow from a historical or cultural background.
I have no doubt that it would probably look somewhat different, but the practices would be the same – teaching/preaching, giving, partaking of the Lord’s Supper, singing and praying. I can swallow that much easier than today’s mega-churches with rock bands, interpretive dance and “dramatic presentations”.
Yes, I have Joey. Have you heard of “Vagueness” and “Rejecting facts or logic as opinion” or maybe “Citing irrelevant facts or logic” – all tactical maneuvers to avoid the subject. The bottom line is that you can not show me in scripture that the men you so often condemn are “false teachers” per what the bible calls false teachers. If teaching error or being mistaken makes one a false teacher, then we are all false teachers. The bible is so clear that the men called “false teachers” were not men seeking to win people to Christ, were not even men interested in being saved by Christ. I am perplexed at your willfulness to ignorantly ignore this. To make one a false teacher upon your definition also makes you a false teacher as well, not unless you have the boldness to claim perfection. I could have your assembly or any assembly read the book of Romans and then ask them questions, and guess what, I will get all sorts of answers – I guess the ones who answer incorrectly per my understanding would be false brethren – come on, cant you even see this Joey? Sure, there are men here teaching things that I find to be wrong and in error, but am I right about everything I understand – are you right about everything? Can we not grow in the word? The new born babe in Christ doesn’t know much at all about Gods word, will you condemn him for his ignorance/lack of understanding? Would he be called “false” because he failed to meet the level of your supposed understanding? Do I think Jackie and others are wrong on certain points, yes, I do. I also think that of Johnny, James, and Norm. Do any of these men have perfect knowledge/understanding ? If perfect knowledge/understanding is what it means to be a “true teacher” ….then everybody is a “false teacher”
Questions Joey:
Have you ever been wrong on something in the bible? If so, were you a “false brethren” because you failed to understand?
How much of the bible did you understand when you were first saved?
Do people arrive at understanding at different levels/times?
Could someone study their life time and never understand everything in the bible?
Must one have perfect understanding on everything in the bible to be saved?
”
I guess you totally read over what I said before. Difference between mistaken and malicious.
Chip at Freedom Baptist: “you are either a tipper, tither, or theif. – Abused teaching —> 2 Cor 9:7
The pastor that JR recorded allegedly (I admit) said Acts 5 – if you dont tithe, God might strike you down like Annanias/Saphira – Abused teaching —-> Acts 5:4
Jackie Poe not helping a sister in need – Abused teaching —-> 1 Jn 3:17
If that’s not a start, then we need to just move on because you will never see a false teaching in your own eyes.
Joey
you still arent getting it Joey – these men are wrong at times, but that does not make them “false teachers” PER THE BIBLE !
kEEP TRYN
Corey wrote- “I have no doubt that it would probably look somewhat different, but the practices would be the same – teaching/preaching, giving, partaking of the Lord’s Supper, singing and praying. I can swallow that much easier than today’s mega-churches with rock bands, interpretive dance and “dramatic presentations”.
I agree with you that mega church ideas would be pretty foreign (especially the rock bands and TV evangelists). I just think the ideas you have about the five acts of worship would be just as alien. If not more so, depending on what part of the known world you where visiting at the time.
Corey wrote “It doesn’t. It says that we’re to follow the apostle’s doctrines. Since those people were given the doctrine directly from the apostles, we can know that they are to be imitated.”
To what extent? Should we honor historical apostolic succession as well? Many early church fathers were championing ideas many Coc members would view as apostate.
Read Ignatius Bishop of Antioch’s writings on Church Hierarchy, baptism, the Eucharist, etc. He was student of the apostle John.
Also, see the Didache (accepted as scripture by many early churches, still a part of some Orthodox Canon) the writing of Polycarp, and Clement of Rome.
I am aware that these are not viewed as scripture (at least by anyone here I know of), but they do give us the best glimpse of early Christian practices in the late 1st and 2nd century that I can think of right now. These practices seem very different in many aspects to the modern CoC.
Have you ever been wrong on something in the bible? If so, were you a “false brethren” because you failed to understand?
already answered. see above post
you still arent getting it Joey – these men are wrong at times, but that does not make them “false teachers” PER THE BIBLE !
If you can’t see the plainness of 1 Jn 3:17, then I can’t help you. Just move on.
Nathan wrote:
James,
When you return, you can answer this: In the times of the temple, who performed the wave offerings? The heave offerings? The drink offerings?
Once you’ve answered that question, refer once more to the passage of scripture I cited – Hebrews 10:11-18.
Then, you can tell me if those offerings are still necessary, or if they were done away with.
The Levitical priest did these things. No they are not necessary. They have been done away with.
What does it mean, Nathan?
Perhaps you will tell me who it was, in the times of the temple, that was tooting the horns and playing the psaltry? No wait.. let me help you …. The Levites!
1Ch 15:14 So the priests and the Levites sanctified themselves to bring up the ark of the LORD God of Israel. 15 And the children of the Levites bare the ark of God upon their shoulders with the staves thereon, as Moses commanded according to the word of the LORD. 16 And David spake to the chief of the Levites to appoint their brethren to be the singers with instruments of musick, psalteries and harps and cymbals, sounding, by lifting up the voice with joy. 17 So the Levites appointed Heman the son of Joel; and of his brethren, Asaph the son of Berechiah; and of the sons of Merari their brethren, Ethan the son of Kushaiah; 18 And with them their brethren of the second degree, Zechariah, Ben, and Jaaziel, and Shemiramoth, and Jehiel, and Unni, Eliab, and Benaiah, and Maaseiah, and Mattithiah, and Elipheleh, and Mikneiah, and Obededom, and Jeiel, the porters.19 So the singers, Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, were appointed to sound with cymbals of brass; 20 And Zechariah, and Aziel, and Shemiramoth, and Jehiel, and Unni, and Eliab, and Maaseiah, and Benaiah, with psalteries on Alamoth; 21 And Mattithiah, and Elipheleh, and Mikneiah, and Obededom, and Jeiel, and Azaziah, with harps on the Sheminith to excel. 22 And Chenaniah, chief of the Levites, was for song: he instructed about the song, because he was skilful. 23 And Berechiah and Elkanah were doorkeepers for the ark. 24 And Shebaniah, and Jehoshaphat, and Nethaneel, and Amasai, and Zechariah, and Benaiah, and Eliezer, the priests, did blow with the trumpets before the ark of God: and Obededom and Jehiah were doorkeepers for the ark.
Soooo, let me see… Sacrifices are *moot* b/c the priests who offered them are no longer in place (priesthood changed – Heb 7:12)
But instrumental music which was offered by the SAME Levites is still acceptable….oooo kaaaaay???
Please be careful how you respond Nathan. I’d hate for you to get hurt.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) –
fals·e teach·er [fawls][tee-cher]
-noun – An entity which is made reference to in the Bible but does not really exist according to Randy.
Since I can’t discern a false teacher, then you show me what one looks like Randy?
DMH wrote:
To what extent?
1 Corinthians 11:2
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.
That is the extent. To follow only what was delivered by the inspired apostles. Which leads to your second question:
Should we honor historical apostolic succession as well?
Simply put – no. There is no “apostolic succession”. There is the apostles and the doctrine they taught and then there are people, no matter how close in time they lived to the apostles, who brought in new doctrines which are not to be followed. Jude 3 tells us that the faith has been delivered “once for all”. There is no need to go beyond what has already been delivered.
The writers you referred to may give us a glimpse into early practices, and in many instances those practices show how the church was lead into apostasy. I reject all teachings that go beyond what was already given by those who were inspired.
On June 4, 2008 at 10:59 am Joey Said:
Since I can’t discern a false teacher, then you show me what one looks like Randy?
As I pointed out, use the bible. You show me one per the bible. You have avoided this…
That is the extent. To follow only what was delivered by the inspired apostles. Which leads to your second question:
That is what everyone is trying and some do not understand as you and other. Btw, Johnny who is also church of Christ says youre liberal, meanbing he most likely see’s you not following these as he…so which of you are the “false teacher”
Thats what I thought. I don’t know what a false teacher is and you wont tell me. That’s progess right there.
Joey
Chip at Freedom Baptist: “you are either a tipper, tither, or theif. – Abused teaching —> 2 Cor 9:7
The pastor that JR recorded allegedly (I admit) said Acts 5 – if you dont tithe, God might strike you down like Annanias/Saphira – Abused teaching —-> Acts 5:4
Jackie Poe not helping a sister in need – Abused teaching —-> 1 Jn 3:17
Again, the bible does not call this “false teachers” you do! Are you perfect Joey?
So who do you think a false teacher is? The Pope? Benny Hinn? Mormons? Gallimore?
On June 4, 2008 at 11:11 am Joey Said:
Thats what I thought. I don’t know what a false teacher is and you wont tell me. That’s progess right there.
Joey
-If you read everything I wrote, you would know. Find the one verse that states “false teacher” in the bible and then you will know. If its people who lack perfect understanding, then look in the mirror for your false teacher, because you do not understand everything perfectly. False teachers are men who have no desire for Christ and seek to decieve….they are not just mere men who are worng on issues…anyway, nuff for now. You have your convictions and I have mine, and we are both getting nowhere with each other…
Does Joey, or anyone for that matter, have to be perfect in order to point out a false teaching or teacher?
By the way, if those 3 examples that Joey pointed out aren’t false teachers I have no idea what would be considered a false teacher.
“If its people who lack perfect understanding, then look in the mirror for your false teacher.”
Finally it comes out. But im not “INTENTIONALLY” a false teacher!
Joey
http://churchesofchrist.wordpress.com/
Katie wrote:
yes corey but what my dad is saying is that the 1st century Christians didn’t all have copies of this. The bible as we know it was not officially put together in it’s format until long past the 1st Christian church.
True they did not have all the written word but they had teh inspired writers and as time went on they had more of the written and less of the writers until all was written down.
Notice:
2Cor 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. (“this treasure” is the gospel – v3)
2Thess 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
Jude 1:3 ¶ Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
As the inspired word was being written, it was passed around as well.
Col 4:16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
Hope this helps
Rick writes:
I am, however, not convienced totally that all of the first century Christians were on the same wave length with Peter in regards to thinking of Paul’s letters as Scripture (ie God’s Word)
Why are you not convinced? Peter said they were. If a person accepted Peter as inspired why not accpet his affirmation about Paul?
He’s not going to take a stand on anything Corey. He just wants to nay say.
On June 4, 2008 at 11:20 am Joey Said:
“If its people who lack perfect understanding, then look in the mirror for your false teacher.”
Finally it comes out. But im not “INTENTIONALLY” a false teacher!
Are you perfect Joey? Do you know all and are you ever wrong? If so, you are a false teacher per your views. Anyways, I really wish I could chatt more, but my lunch is over.
On June 4, 2008 at 11:22 am Joey Said:
He’s not going to take a stand on anything Corey. He just wants to nay say.
You ignored most of what I stated Joey, so I will do the same. I am amazed at how you guys are playing Corey too, when Johnny thinks him to be “false” ….
I like what John McArthur writes about the difference between a true spiritual leader and a false spiritual leader: “The marks of a true spiritual leader are opposite from those that characterize a false one. A true spiritual leader possesses divine authority, which he obtains from the Word of God. He has integrity; His life matches his message. He does not lack sympathy but is filled with grace, mercy, pity and concern. He possesses genuine spirituality, for his religion is not all for show. And he is humble, manifesting the heart of a servant.”
I think I will get some lunch too.
That false teacher I ambushed this AM did not fill me up…
Got stuck between my teeth (sucks teeth)… (too scrawny)
well stated Rick !
you guys have fun, I am out for rest of the day.
Nathan, are you around…dont see much from you on here.
“Are you perfect Joey?”
Is that the only question all of you can come up with?
I have already stated 3 times that I know the difference between being mistaken and being malicious. A person who has been told the truth, rejects it and still teaches false is a…what’s the word?…false teacher.
I know, I know. I think I’m perfect. O wait…Heb 10:14
Joey, you mean rejecting “your idea of truth” or what you understand. You label them false based upon your understanding, which you admit isn’t perfect
nope. quoting me from your notes again
1 Cor 1:10 – but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
That’s impossible according to y’all (yeah i was raised in the south)
Far as the Jw’s, Mormons, the Pope goes – maybe you should read and listen to more debates other than cofC debates. There are many Christian people ( other than cofC ) who have debated these folks on the very issues we have discussed
On June 4, 2008 at 11:38 am Joey Said:
1 Cor 1:10 – but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
Ask Johnny and Norm if they were…lol. Come on now.
On June 4, 2008 at 11:36 am Joey Said:
nope. quoting me from your notes again
Not sure I follow, but no notes here…
Randy,
Joey has given you his definition of a false teacher:
A person who has been told the truth, rejects it and still teaches false
“Ask Johnny and Norm if they were…lol. Come on now”
I just love how you comment on stuff as if you were here. I don’t get that. I couldn’t get away with that.
You mean, a person who has been told the truth “as he see’s it “.
Johnny and Norn had a heated meeting over a particular passage, one was not stating truth, I guess that means one was a “false teacher” or will you say he was just mistaken on the verse? And guess who the one mistaken was ??
Nathan, why do you not comment much on your blog with these cofC people? It seems everyone else does the “answering church of Christ” and you just pop in for a comment or two and then bail out while the show goes on….something isn’t adding up……..I’m out for now…
Maybe he doesnt have all day to spend on here.
Maybe there are other reasons 🙂
Anyways, I read your threat above loud and clear…..bye
Threat?…huh?
Randy wrote:
“Nathan, why do you not comment much on your blog with these cofC people?”
Why do I not comment much? Are you serious? I feel sometimes like all I do is this blog. I actually do need to step away from my computer from time to time.
Randy,
You must be short on sleep or somethin’
Randy,
Do you think maybe Nathan is really James since James has never posted until recently?
Joey
…AND James sort of dropped working on his blog alot
at his A Word From the Lord web site.
James wrote:
“Soooo, let me see… Sacrifices are *moot* b/c the priests who offered them are no longer in place (priesthood changed – Heb 7:12)
But instrumental music which was offered by the SAME Levites is still acceptable….oooo kaaaaay???
Please be careful how you respond Nathan. I’d hate for you to get hurt.”
All you need to do is add a little *snap* there, and you’ll be complete.
But, that dog doesn’t hunt.
2 Sam 6:5 “Then David and all the house of Israel played music before the LORD on all kinds of instruments of fir wood, on harps, on stringed instruments, on tambourines, on sistrums, and on cymbals.”
It wasn’t just the Levites.
2 Samuel 6:5 wasn’t worship, it was a celebration. God never commanded what they did in that instance.
The Bible never categorizes anyone a false teacher who practices congregational worship services incorrectly, or has different view on baptism, the Lord’s Supper, or congregational autonomy.
Here is what the Paul has to say on false teachers: (that I can find anyway)
– They are selfish and exploitive (see 2 Cor. chapter 11)
– They rely on secrets and myths for salvation instead of Grace (1 Tim)
– They love to use the gospel to confuse and make financial gain. (1 Tim)
– They are selfish gluttons. (Titus)
– They put up man made obstacles to salvation. (Rom.)
– He uses Hymenaeus and Philetus as models of false teachers who deny the power of the resurrection. (2 Tim. 2:16)
The author of Jude warns that false teachers:
– Are godless, and use our freedom in Christ as a license to sin. They deny Christ. (Jude 1:4)
John writes: (II John)
– “I ask that we love one another. 6And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.”
To those that do not teach this he states:
“10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work.”
Jesus describes false prophets as bearers of bad fruit & wolves and sheep’s clothing. (Matt. 7:15).
“15″Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.”
Someone is not a false teacher simply because they do not adhere to the scripture interpretations of whatever historical religious movement you happen to be a part of.
Dear Randy
Why would we believe you about not knowing Nathan
You have claimed to talk with Jason and we know where Jason is and you arent talking
Is nt it funny Norm is teaching class right now in the building where i am putting to silence these “little children”
Joey says,
“What in the WORLD are you talking about? You must have recited that from a dream you had.”
Are you going to answer the question?
As far as early documents talking about musical instruments, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Where is todays Church of Christ talked about in any reputable document? Anything.
Look how much you changed the Eucharist. You ignore direct statments as to what the Eucharist is in scripture. The Orthodox, Catholic and to an extend Lutheran Church (LCMS) are the only ones to believe in the historic, biblical concept.
Johnny, with all due respect. Stop fighting with you fellow brother and sister in Christ and go out to the hurting world.
JR wrote:
“Is nt it funny Norm is teaching class right now in the building where i am putting to silence these “little children””
Not sure (1) why that’s funny and (2) who you are putting to silence.
And since you brought up Jason again, JR – are you coming back online to finally answer that question I asked you the other day?
He’s talking to Randy who keeps referring to a supposed “rift” between Johnny & Norm.
Nathan writes:
All you need to do is add a little *snap* there, and you’ll be complete.
But, that dog doesn’t hunt.
2 Sam 6:5 “Then David and all the house of Israel played music before the LORD on all kinds of instruments of fir wood, on harps, on stringed instruments, on tambourines, on sistrums, and on cymbals.”
It wasn’t just the Levites.
Nathan, I told you to be careful but alas….
The same context you just quoted has David also offering sacrifices. Here is the *SNAP* (trap closes)
2Sa 6:17 And they brought in the ark of the LORD, and set it in his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched for it: and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD.
Soooo, now we see where Nathan is stuck.
Mechanical Instru of music ARE allowed today because David AND Levites played them
BUT Burnt offerings ARE NOT allowed today because the Levites AND David offered them
Yes.. that is clear.
Now Nathan, which dog won’t hunt?
Dear Randy
Why would we believe you about not knowing Nathan
You have claimed to talk with Jason and we know where Jason is and you arent talking
I know Jason moved out of state to another job Johnny. And yes we talked……..later
I never said Nathan is James, Norm, or anyone….why would you even state that 🙂
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakhstan
from 65.54.246.155 (EHLO bay0-omc2-s19.bay0.hotmail.com) (65.54.246.155) by mta170.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:39:29 -0800
from 65.54.246.169 (EHLO bay0-omc2-s33.bay0.hotmail.com) (65.54.246.169) by mta551.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:13:52 -0800
[75.75.58.112]
[75.75.56.193]
So you like email headers huh Randy?…mmmkay.
James wrote:
“Soooo, now we see where Nathan is stuck.
Mechanical Instru of music ARE allowed today because David AND Levites played them
BUT Burnt offerings ARE NOT allowed today because the Levites AND David offered them
Yes.. that is clear.
Now Nathan, which dog won’t hunt?”
Burnt offerings are not performed today, not “because the Levites and David offered them”, but because they are no longer necessary. The ultimate sacrifice was paid on the cross, rendering temple sacrifices obsolete.
Hebrews 10 doesn’t mention that the use of instruments in worship is no longer necessary. In fact, no verse in the NT says anything of the sort.
Actually, it’s quite the opposite. We are even given a picture of their use when we get into the eternal presence of the Father in Revelation 5:8, 9; 14:2, 3.
So, let’s summarize. In the Old Testament, we find that worship with instruments is pleasing to God. In the New Testament, at the end of the book – when we’re getting a picture of heaven – we find that worship with instruments is pleasing to God. But somehow, in the middle, it becomes displeasing, but God never says that it is displeasing.
That just doesn’t add up, James. It still don’t hunt.
You aren’t even sticking to your own logic Nathan
The fact remains that in worship only the Levites were to use the instruments. The instance in 2 Samuel you pointed out was a celebration, not worship. No one is telling you that you can’t have instrumental music at a wedding or party. The fact also remains that we’re not in heaven.
Joey said:
You aren’t even sticking to your own logic Nathan
Did you really expect that he would??
The instance in 2 Samuel says that they were playing “before the LORD”. The Hebrew word there for ‘before’ (paniym) means (among things) “in the presence of”.
Worship isn’t celebrating being in the presence of God? If not, then what about the context of Rev 14:2?
Worship is “toward” God, not just “in the presence of”. That instance was not commanded by God – it was just spontaneous celebration. When they worshiped they followed the regulations given by God through David – which meant the instruments were used only by Levites.
Revelation 14:2 says it was a sound “like” rushing waters and “like” harpists playing. It doesn’t say it “was” rushing waters or harpists playing.
Also, in Revelations 5 there is also present:
*the Lamb
*the elders
*4 living creatures
*a throne
*a golden bowl of incense
Either you’re going to have to have those things present in your worship also or you’re going to have to admit that they are all symbolic and not to be taken literally.
Joey wrote, and James underscored:
“You aren’t even sticking to your own logic Nathan”
“Did you really expect that he would?”
See, fellas, here’s the deal. Take a peek over at Paul’s words in Romans 14:3-5. It’s very clear that we are to have grace with each other over disputable issues. You cannot find one single solitary verse that forbids musical instruments in worship, or takes away the right for them, or says that God is displeased with them. You can’t do it.
Instead, you resort to CENI – a hermeneutic that is a creation of man.
My point? Instruments in worship is a disputable issue. I’ve already demonstrated this.
But, rather than obeying Paul’s admonition to “let every man be persuaded in his own mind”, you condemn me to hell for playing a musical instrument in worship. I will never say that it is a mortal sin to sing acapella in worship, that you are wrong for not playing musical instruments, because it is your conviction, and I respect that.
I will, however, argue against your condemnation of others who do – in the spirit of Paul’s command in Romans 14.
Romans 14 is dealing with matters of the individual and their conscience, not worship. It is a huge leap to apply those things to worship.
Rev. 5:7-9: “He came and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne. And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song:”
Rev 15:2-3: “And I saw what looked like a sea of glass mixed with fire and, standing beside the sea, those who had been victorious over the beast and his image and over the number of his name. They held harps given them by God and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb: “Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the ages.”
Sounds pretty specific to me.
Corey, we’ll pick this up later. I have to scoot for now. See ya.
As I had already posted:
…in Revelations 5 there is also present:
*the Lamb
*the elders
*4 living creatures
*a throne
*a golden bowl of incense
Either you’re going to have to have those things present in your worship also or you’re going to have to admit that they are all symbolic and not to be taken literally.
This is why we are so opposed to you Nathan. You present an argument that is shown to be invalid. Then instead of trying to reason through it, you ditch your own logic, try to make it a non-issue and then bail.
Joey
I noticed you dropped your original argument about the Levites pretty fast, Nathan.
If Rom 14 is what you are going to use then why do you even have a website designed to “answer” us? Do not we get the same protection under the Rom 14 umbrella that you use? Is Rom 14 only big enough to cover those who want to do whatever they want but not those who oppose them? No I guess not, at least in your mind.
Nathan wrote: “You cannot find one single solitary verse that forbids musical instruments in worship, or takes away the right for them, or says that God is displeased with them. You can’t do it.”
Is that really the way you determine what is acceptable to God, Nathan? Really?? You really want me to believe that you think there has to be something explicitly stated as being forbidden before it is forbidden?
I guess if Chris wants to have sex with his wife (he says it is worship) in the assembly, you would not be opposed since “You cannot find one single solitary verse that forbids (a man having sex with his wife) in worship, or takes away the right for them, or says that God is displeased with them. You can’t do it.”
Nathan – what Joey said seems true.
First you say that God commanded musical instruments…
James shows you that the instruments were only to be used by the Levites.
…then you point to 2 Samuel…
I show you that instance was not commanded and was a spontaneous celebration, not worship.
…then you go to Romans 14…
As I stated, Romans 14 has nothing to do with worship. It has everything to do with matters of personal conscience. To apply things like what we can eat and what days we set aside as special to worship is an incredible leap.
…then you say “you can’t find a verse saying that they’re forbidden”…
Can you show me a verse in the New Testament that says “thou shall not have more than one wife”? Polygamy isn’t specifically denounced, so is it alright to have more than one wife today?
…now you’re going to Revelations.
As I’ve pointed out, there are many other things pictured in those passages that you don’t have/use. Either you use all of the other elements / have them present, or you admit that they are all symbolic and not to be taken literally.
As each argument collapses you just rush on to another. Can you see that you’re doing that? You wrote:
Well, you can’t say that because we have BCV to support singing alone. It is more than a conviction, it is simply all we see Christians commanded to do in the New Testament.
I have noticed multiple statements in this blog
where people accuse others of condeming. You do all realize that only God has the power to condem eternally, right ? I am unclear how anyone can condem anyone else by simply disagreeing with their position or stating an opposing belief, can anyone clarify?
Corey wrote “As I stated, Romans 14 has nothing to do with worship. It has everything to do with matters of personal conscience. To apply things like what we can eat and what days we set aside as special to worship is an incredible leap”
How is it an incredible leap to apply Romans 14 to Worship, when holy days of worship are expressly mentioned?
“Can you show me a verse in the New Testament that says “thou shall not have more than one wife”? Polygamy isn’t specifically denounced, so is it alright to have more than one wife today?”
It is not specifically addressed, but there are many NT verses that equate marriage between one man and one woman.
Also, Polygamy is illegal in this country, as is snorting coke, lighting buildings on fire, and running naked in the street. God expects us to respect the laws of the land. These situations are much, much different than debatable worship practices. God gave us brain and a sense of reason, we should use it.
“As I’ve pointed out, there are many other things pictured in those passages that you don’t have/use. Either you use all of the other elements / have them present, or you admit that they are all symbolic and not to be taken literally.”
I understand that Revelation is symbolic. The harps in Revelation appear as a positive symbol of giving honor to the majesty of God. I think that should be taken into account. Why would John’s vision contain negative worship symbols?
Eph 5:19
19 addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart
Col 3:16
16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.
The word Psalm originally referred to a song sung with an instrument.
The adjective psilos, on the other hand, is used to indicate singing without instrumental accompaniment. This word is not found anywhere in the New Testament.
Keep in mind I am not a Greek scholar, but as far as I can tell, the New Testament nowhere either orders or prohibits instruments in worship. It is kind of strange that it is even an issue.
They are selfish and exploitive (see 2 Cor. chapter 11)
::: Teaching tithing from the OT for financial gain
– They rely on secrets and myths for salvation instead of Grace (1 Tim)
::::Teaching the sinners prayer for a false plan of salvation
– They love to use the gospel to confuse and make financial gain. (1 Tim)
:::: Back to the tithing again…
– They are selfish gluttons. (Titus)
::::teaching falsely to recieve $$ .. Sounds like baptist to me
– They put up man made obstacles to salvation. (Rom.)
::: BAck to sinners prayer again…
Thought provoking exchange re: musical insturments.
I now find myself asking (myself) would I prefer to go to a worship service with musical insturments and even a certain type/genre of music because it is what I like or am I inclined to do so because I “feel”
Our Heavenly Father does? If God desires insturment
worship did he ever request it or command it? If not
am I immplamenting it because I want it? Can anyone shed light on my questions with Bible verses please.
psalms 118:8
jbb said:
“I have noticed multiple statements in this blog
where people accuse others of condemning. You do all realize that only God has the power to condemn eternally, right ? I am unclear how anyone can condemn anyone else by simply disagreeing with their position or stating an opposing belief, can anyone clarify?”
Preach it! He speaks the truth-we would do well to listen!!
Welcome, jbb-hope you stick around 🙂
Nathan wrote:
“On a side note…
That rascal Katherine is sitting on a beach right now in Cancun. I think I don’t like her anymore. 😉
You think she’s missing us?”
Ha ha-you know you love me! 😉 I am incredibly sunburned if it makes you feel any better! It was definitely a whirlwind trip, but awesome!!
I see I “missed” a lot of excitement around here!!
On June 4, 2008 at 4:37 pm Katherine Said:
jbb said:
“I have noticed multiple statements in this blog
where people accuse others of condemning. You do all realize that only God has the power to condemn eternally, right ? I am unclear how anyone can condemn anyone else by simply disagreeing with their position or stating an opposing belief, can anyone clarify?”
-so true-so sad.
hey faithless,
speaking of that prayer, you and your leader owe me
a grand. if you dont pay up you’ll appear to be less than honest. btw the god of the bible dosent care one bit about your arguements over music in worship. hes probably sick of hearing it. either heat up or cool off
somebody getting spewed out. you will be on this computer till jesus raptures the church. {sorry norm,james,john……they are not waiting on that}and who knows what other ridiculous doctrines they will be “debating” next. the next thing youll tell me is theres no such thing as original sin……………
lee
“the next thing youll tell me is theres no such thing as original sin”
Oh Lee, don’t get them started. They have to deny it even though its historical and biblical. Denying it is the only way their stance on baptism works.
he dont know me vewee well do he?
lee
On June 4, 2008 at 8:55 am DMH Said:
Faithful wrote- “So now we know you didn’t watch the program Sunday night . Johnny showed the book by Semple that stated the church of Christ . It was published in 1810.”
– I don’t live in your area. My only exposure to Johnny is from what he has written on this site and the show clips he has posted on youtube.
– As previously stated, I am not aware of Semple or his book. Feel free to share more info on it.”
We would be glad to send a copy of the dvd . Just email Johnny and request a copy .It’s called” who rewrote history”? biblesays81@hotmail.com
Lee , write Johnny with your answer biblesays81@hotmail.com
You are the one being dishonet . You know jews were born into a relationship with God. You should know that anyway.
what are you talking about? are you really saying that being born a jew gave them a pass to heaven? man you have been in the sun too long.
faithless,why are you wanting me to write john,im sure you can handle the light work.
now tell us about all of your other mixed up doctrine.
and while your having breakfast with john this morning,
get my money…….small bills please.
lee
James wrote:
“I noticed you dropped your original argument about the Levites pretty fast, Nathan.”
I didn’t bring up the Levites, James – you did. My original argument stands.
James wrote:
“If Rom 14 is what you are going to use then why do you even have a website designed to “answer” us? Do not we get the same protection under the Rom 14 umbrella that you use? Is Rom 14 only big enough to cover those who want to do whatever they want but not those who oppose them? No I guess not, at least in your mind.”
Of course you get the same protection. That’s why I said that I support your right to acapella worship and don’t dispute that acapella worship can be pleasing to God.
As to why I have this website, disputing is authorized (I thought you knew that). We can read that Paul engaged in disputing and persuading in Acts 19:8:
James wrote:
“Is that really the way you determine what is acceptable to God, Nathan? Really?? You really want me to believe that you think there has to be something explicitly stated as being forbidden before it is forbidden?”
James, we’re going about in circles here. Read carefully.
1) In the Old Testament, the use of musical instruments in worship is approved.
2) In the Book of Revelations, John tells us that, either symbolically or literally, musical instruments are a part of worship in heaven, and that it is therefore approved.
3) In the New Testament, from Matthew to Jude, we never find the approval from the Old Testament revoked.
What does logic dictate, then? Logic dictates that approval was never revoked, and so it still stands.
Let’s do this by example.
There was a father whose daughter was learning how to play piano. In the morning, the father told the daughter he loved to hear her play the piano, and encouraged her to practice. In the evening he talked to her about how one day she would be a wonderful concert pianist and on that day he would be sitting in the front row enjoying her displaying her abilities. What kind of father would he be if he disowned the girl for practicing during the afternoon?
It seems like he wouldn’t be a very good father.
James wrote:
“I guess if Chris wants to have sex with his wife (he says it is worship) in the assembly, you would not be opposed since “You cannot find one single solitary verse that forbids (a man having sex with his wife) in worship, or takes away the right for them, or says that God is displeased with them. You can’t do it.”
What an obtuse thing to say, James. It is a ridiculous argument with no Scriptural justification anywhere. I am offended and irritated that you would even be so immature as to try and reason with such an unreasonable argument.
Please don’t waste any more of our time with nonsense like this.
I brought up the various other offerings.
YOU, Nathan brought up the Levites. Or did you blissfully forget?
Nathan wrote:
James,
When you return, you can answer this: In the times of the temple, who performed the wave offerings? The heave offerings? The drink offerings?”
(emphasis mine – JO)
Nathan, your original argument falls and you wont even stand beside it to try and hold it up. You wont even admit that it was yours! Talk about disowning something. ha ha I would run from your “reasoning” too if I were you.
Nathan: “3) In the New Testament, from Matthew to Jude, we never find the approval from the Old Testament revoked.
What does logic dictate, then? Logic dictates that approval was never revoked, and so it still stands.”
“Have ye not read?”
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. (which interestingly enough is TWO VERSES above the ones you cited originally)
Heb 8:6 ¶ But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; (i.e. the OLD Testament – JO) because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Heb 9:15 ¶ And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
Is this enough New Testament proof that the Old Testamant is no long in force as the governing law today? What part of new and old, better, first and second do you refuse to understand, Nathan? I know you are smart enough to see this, unless your brand of logic will not allow it.
Nathan: James wrote:
“I guess if Chris wants…”
What an obtuse thing to say, James. It is a ridiculous argument with no Scriptural justification anywhere. I am offended and irritated that you would even be so immature as to try and reason with such an unreasonable argument.
Please don’t waste any more of our time with nonsense like this.”
Nathan why is this obtuse? Your brave knight stated this was worship (are you denying or affirming Chris’ statement)?
And as far as “scriptural justification” for something, it does not seem like you are very concerned about that in regard to other things “in worship”
I did not hear you chastise Chris for this “nonsense” and “waste of time” when he affirmed it.
I cant help it that you are offended. You are offended at the Truth “seeing but see not and hearing but hear not, neither do you understand… For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted,and I{Christ}should heal you” (Matt 13:13-15)
On June 5, 2008 at 4:56 am lee Said:
what are you talking about? are you really saying that being born a jew gave them a pass to heaven? man you have been in the sun too long.
faithless,why are you wanting me to write john,im sure you can handle the light work.
now tell us about all of your other mixed up doctrine.
and while your having breakfast with john this morning,
get my money…….small bills please.
lee”
So you don’t know that the jews had a relationship with God?
DMH wrote:
How is it an incredible leap to apply Romans 14 to Worship, when holy days of worship are expressly mentioned?
No, those aren’t holy days of “worship”. They are days of devotion, set aside by the individual. Notice that it is the individual that sets these days apart, not God or the assembly.
DMH wrote:
It is not specifically addressed, but there are many NT verses that equate marriage between one man and one woman.
Also, Polygamy is illegal in this country, as is snorting coke, lighting buildings on fire, and running naked in the street. God expects us to respect the laws of the land. These situations are much, much different than debatable worship practices. God gave us brain and a sense of reason, we should use it.
Neither are instruments mentioned, but singing is. The same principle applies here. I’m just proving that you don’t need a “thou shall not” to know something is wrong. You proved that when you said that there are many verses stating that marriage is between a man and a woman. By stating that, all else is excluded.
Polygamy is illegal here, but not everywhere. Could you practice it where it is legal? What if homosexual marriage becomes legal here? Could a Christian practice it then? We are to obey God rather than man. If God has to specifically prohibit something, which He never did with polygamy, then we could still do it by Nathan’s rationale.
DMH wrote:
The word Psalm originally referred to a song sung with an instrument.
The adjective psilos, on the other hand, is used to indicate singing without instrumental accompaniment. This word is not found anywhere in the New Testament.
The very verse you gave kills this argument:
Eph 5:19
19 addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart
A musical instrument is not one of us, so it can’t address anyone. Also, the melody is made “with your heart”, not with an instrument that has no heart. Since everyone is to speak to one another in singing, if that also includes instruments, then everyone would have to play an instrument.
Lee wrote:
the next thing youll tell me is theres no such thing as original sin
I would be happy to tell you there is no such thing. Any of the so called “proof texts” for such a concept are easily refuted.
Lee wrote:
are you really saying that being born a jew gave them a pass to heaven?
It didn’t give them a pass to heaven, but there were born into a covenant relationship with God. This is why many were boasting that they had Abraham as their father in the days of John the Baptist. John told them that the day had arrived where that birthright would be rendered meaningless.
I messed up with too much bold again. Sorry.
Lee, Did the jews have a relationship with God ? Did you have a realationship with God before you said the “sinners prayer”? or were you this:
Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
Remeber the $1000 is for a sinners prayer for folks that were alien sinners
where did everybody go?? 🙂
“Polygamy is illegal here, but not everywhere. Could you practice it where it is legal? What if homosexual marriage becomes legal here? Could a Christian practice it then? We are to obey God rather than man. If God has to specifically prohibit something, which He never did with polygamy, then we could still do it by Nathan’s rationale.”
Corey I understand what you are saying, I really do. But, if we really follow this principle of silence every single detail regarding life and worship would have to be closely monitored, and every NT verse would have to be followed to the T (if the “T” could even be agreed upon). All CoCs would have to eliminate practices like: Wed. night services, men’s business meetings, song leaders, youth ministers, pitch pipes, song books, salaried professional preachers, VBS, 4 part harmony singing, singing songs written by “denominational” writers, and much much more. I am sure that you have been taught that these things are mere expedients and do not change the form of worship, but the fact remains that none of them are expressly authorized in the NT. People might have good intentions behind them, (like using an organ to worship for the last 1400 years), but they are still unauthorized and would have to be struck down.
Then you would still have the problem of what the NT is actually authorizing. You know as well as I do that even all CoCs cannot agree on that. (See one cuppers, no kitchens, no bible class, no praise teams, etc.)
That is why we have grace. Man is fallible in his practices. There is nowhere in the Bible were God ruthlessly punishes someone who makes a mistake while trying to serve him with a sincere heart.
Le 10:1 ¶ And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not.
2 And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
2Sa 6:7 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.
1Ch 13:10 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him, because he put his hand to the ark: and there he died before God.
(KJV)
DMH,
I also understand your points. I’ve shown you before, in scriptures, where some of the things you’ve mentioned are actually addressed and acceptable. The fact remains that none of those things change the commandments of God. I also realize that Christians have some freedom and those things you mentioned fall within those areas. Instrumental music changes a command from “sing” to “sing and play”. It’s apples and oranges. And yes, anything that changes the commands of God would have to be struck down. That is a good thing – to remove man-made additions that alter the word of God.
The groups you mentioned, with the exception of those with “praise teams”, have every Biblical right to believe and practice what they do. The problem comes when they bind a freedom on others. If they want to use one cup, have no kitchens or Bible classes – all of that is fine. It all works within the authority of the scriptures, so does the opposites of those. Again, none of it changes God’s commands.
Man is fallible, but I see no reason or authority to just do whatever is pleasing in the eyes of men and shout “GRACE! GRACE!” every time someone points out that those things have no place in Christian worship. Grace is not there to cover disobedience or disregard for God’s commandments.
DMH wrote: “Corey I understand what you are saying, I really do. But, if we really follow this principle of silence every single detail regarding life and worship”
It is not a principle of silence.
It is the principle of what is stated. God says waht he wants (singing) why tehn does man think that he can add what he (man) wants when God has stated what He wants?
Silence is not the authority – what is stated is
– Faithful, you need to re-read those stories again, because I think you have missed the point entirely. Uzziah, Nadab, Abihu, Cain, etc. were not attempting to please God and made a mere mistake. They were proud and arrogant and disobeyed direct commands from God, and some cases even attempted to lie about it. It really has nothing to do with modern IM scripture interpretation.
– Corey, what you have shown before are verses you interpret that give authority for those practices, I do not believe you are wrong for doing so, but there is no direct authorization for them. I could make the same argument that you are adding to the word of God by doing so.
“Instrumental music changes a command from “sing” to “sing and play”. It’s apples and oranges.”
– With all due respect to your beliefs (I want to stress again that I do not feel you are “WRONG” here) this is simply your opinion. There is not a single verse that stipulates that playing instruments “changes” or alters the form of worship in anyway. If is does, the same exact thing could be said about singing 4 part harmonies, instead of using ancient chants.
“were not attempting to please God and made a mere mistake. They were proud and arrogant and disobeyed direct commands from God, and some cases even attempted to lie about it.”
And what you’re doing is different how?
“And what you’re doing is different how?”
Have you become so jaded that you think anyone that disagrees with your interpretations of scripture is automatically lying and deceitful? If so, then there is no reason to even discuss it.
Here is you IM in the NT
Ac 10:1 ¶ There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
(KJV
LOL!
Where was Uzzah’s arrogance? What he did was probably more instinct than anything. If you see something valuable falling you’d probably try to catch it. Granted, there was a commandment not to touch it, but he was just trying to protect something holy. That seems sincere to me, but God wasn’t pleased. That is really the whole point.
Also, what I stated about IM is not just an opinion. If I told you to sing and you picked up a guitar and played while you sang, any sane person would agree that you are singing AND playing. That would be what I asked you to do plus something else. Singing a 4 part harmony = singing.
Who first mentioned the Levites? Let me remind you:
You can scroll back up and see for yourself.
James, I haven’t detracted anything from my “original argument”. I wrote in my “original argument” the following:
You responded correctly:
I responded (also correctly):
I’d like for you to explain further how I have run away from my “original argument’. It’s all right up there, in black and white.
More coming…
I figured the obscure and totally irrelevant (to the discussion of IM) examples of Nadab and Abihu, Uzzah, etc. would make an appearance…it is like those have been placed in some manual somewhere so that those who want to condemn others for using IM can whip out these verses. The problem is they do not even fit into the conversation whatsoever and have been ripped out of their context to TRY and prove a point that cannot be made through these examples.
Yet, at the same time-they will say the OT is done away with and we are no longer under it. Anyone see the contradiction here?!
They were told what to do . They did differently.
You are told what to do . You do differently.
irrelevant?
Romans 15:4For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
The law of Moses was done away with, but the Old Testament still serves as a tool that we are to learn from. Without the OT we have none of the shadows and prophecies that point to the Christ of the NT. Is there nothing to be learned from Nadab, Abihu, Uzzah, etc.? Is there no principle or lesson to take from what happened to those people?
Corey said:
Romans 15:4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
The law of Moses was done away with, but the Old Testament still serves as a tool that we are to learn from. Without the OT we have none of the shadows and prophecies that point to the Christ of the NT. Is there nothing to be learned from Nadab, Abihu, Uzzah, etc.? Is there no principle or lesson to take from what happened to those people?”
Absolutely, the OT is something to learn from-I have never declared otherwise. Yes, there are things to be learned from these stories-I am not denying that, but they have to be looked at WITHIN their contexts.
The God of the OT does not act in the same way as the God of the NT-He is not ready at any moment to strike you down if you step outside of the box or do not follow every rule to a perfect “t”. You know I don’t mean we should go around screaming “grace! grace!”, but we should also not make commandments where God has not-that is the same thing as going beyond the Word of God or speaking where He does not speak. I am not willing to do that, and I am certainly not willing to play God by condemning people where God has not even condemned.
I would also take into account Uzzaiah’s family history with ark (1 Sam. 7:1-2), how he might have contempt towards the calamities it had caused. (1 Sam. 5-6)
Was his “irreverence” trying to save the ark, or an attitude that had been developing for years? Plus, I would also keep these stories in there OT context. I think we all can agree that the Lord’s handling of certain situations was somewhat different in the NT and OT.
“Also, what I stated about IM is not just an opinion. If I told you to sing and you picked up a guitar and played while you sang, any sane person would agree that you are singing AND playing. That would be what I asked you to do plus something else. Singing a 4 part harmony = singing.”
– Sure. But, to arrive to this conclusion there would have to be a direct command to sing and only sing equal to the specific Levitical worship commands. The Lord is very very effective at stressing these details in the OT. It seems that the text to “command” singing in Ephesians: mentions singing and, religious Psalms that traditionally included IM, but the root is the melody in the heart. True devotion to worship is not concerned with outward appearances, but man’s inward devotion and nature.
“The God of the OT does not act in the same way as the God of the NT”
2 different Gods?
” but the root is the melody in the heart”
That’s right, not melody in the piano
No-two different covenants.
Quit looking for things that are not even there, “faithful”.
What lessons then do you learn from those people? What is the context that we need to understand to grasp God’s actions?
You said:
The God of the OT does not act in the same way as the God of the NT-He is not ready at any moment to strike you down if you step outside of the box or do not follow every rule to a perfect “t”.
Ask Ananias and Saphira how He acts. They told a “half-truth” and fell dead. To say God went from a God of rule and order to a God of “anything goes” is not to be found in scriptures. You’ll probably say that isn’t what you believe, but I’m not sure what you believe. You accept denominational baptism, you accept women as teachers, you accept instrumental music…I’m just not sure what you DON’T accept.
“2 different Gods?”
-Really, that is your response?
Of course not.
“That’s right, not melody in the piano”
Correct. Or mere lip service from the mouth.
“No-two different covenants.”
Yes.
DMH wrote:
I would also take into account Uzzaiah’s family history with ark (1 Sam. 7:1-2), how he might have contempt towards the calamities it had caused. (1 Sam. 5-6)
Was his “irreverence” trying to save the ark, or an attitude that had been developing for years? Plus, I would also keep these stories in there OT context. I think we all can agree that the Lord’s handling of certain situations was somewhat different in the NT and OT.
What his attitude may have been is purely conjecture. Again I point to Ananias & Saphira to show that the Lord didn’t undergo some radical change between covenants. Keep in mind there is much more historical info in the OT than the NT. We only have 5 books of “history” in the NT.
You also wrote:
Sure. But, to arrive to this conclusion there would have to be a direct command to sing and only sing equal to the specific Levitical worship commands. The Lord is very very effective at stressing these details in the OT. It seems that the text to “command” singing in Ephesians: mentions singing and, religious Psalms that traditionally included IM, but the root is the melody in the heart. True devotion to worship is not concerned with outward appearances, but man’s inward devotion and nature.
You seem to like history, so you can go back through my posts here on this topic and read the page I linked about the history of instrumental music in the Christian age. It is accepted historical fact that the nature of singing was purely vocal for almost 800 years until instruments were introduced by the Catholic church. The first Christians were not singing psalms with instrumental accompaniment.
True devotion is about the heart and not outward appearances. That is what instruments are all about – outward appearances. They’re there to “set the mood” or to please the ears of men. The melody Christians are to make is in the heart, not with instruments which have no hearts.
Corey said:
“To say God went from a God of rule and order to a God of “anything goes” is not to be found in scriptures. You’ll probably say that isn’t what you believe, but I’m not sure what you believe. You accept denominational baptism, you accept women as teachers, you accept instrumental music…I’m just not sure what you DON’T accept.”
You are right-I don’t believe “anything goes”, and what I DO believe is based on His Word. It is not the fact that I accept them, but that God has not condemned most of the things you and others have chosen to. There is no such thing as “denominational baptism”-that is only a term men have attached to divide and draw lines. You are either baptized into Christ or not-we don’t need to put more labels on it. I have studied these things for myself through the Bible, not through other people’s beliefs. I don’t believe what I believe based on my membership within the “church of Christ”, but based on what my God has said. If that does not completely line up, I will always go with the Word of God. I cannot help it if you cannot see that. Believe it or not, I don’t “accept” everything-but that really is not important when we compare it to what God accepts or desires. I stand firm in my beliefs, and also continue to study and attempt to understand what God is trying to tell us.
I don’t put God in a box because that is not where He belongs.
Katherine wrote:
You are either baptized into Christ or not-we don’t need to put more labels on it.
I’ll agree with that. Now, what about the people that put a label on it “as an outward showing of an inner grace”? What about those who say they are “in” Christ without having been “baptized into Christ” as you said and the scriptures teach? Are those not unscriptural practices and labels?
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
“It is accepted historical fact that the nature of singing was purely vocal for almost 800 years until instruments were introduced by the Catholic church. The first Christians were not singing psalms with instrumental accompaniment.”
– I do find it a bit strange that you would: 1. look to the quotes of “denominational” leaders of the past to justify this point and 2. the early church fathers I referenced yesterday, who have much closer ties to Biblical Christianity were all but ignored.
“True devotion is about the heart and not outward appearances. That is what instruments are all about – outward appearances.”
– I think it would be more accurate to say this you take instruments to be all about. However, it takes living breathing people to play them, not unlike accapela singing.
Corey, I do think you for expressing your ideas in a clear and polite manner (especially compared to some others). I think anyone reading this exchange could get a lot out of it. I know I have. It does seem like we are starting to go in circles now. I’ll check back in later.
Here we again with the “you must understand it perfectly before God can act in baptsim”….wonder why we never say that about confession and repentance and “the gift of the Holy Spirit”, but anywho,I am headed to lunch….yall have fun
On June 4, 2008 at 12:48 pm Joey Said:
Randy,
Do you think maybe Nathan is really James since James has never posted until recently?
Joey
no, because his IP was the same and wasnt “covered”. Why would you even make such a statement Joey 🙂
How is Norm doing? When will he join in? Or is this just the Martinsville boys
DMH,
Just as I would agree with a Baptist that baptism is only by immersion, I would agree with a “denominational leader” if what they say is in agreement with the scriptures. I disagree with them when they disagree with God’s word.
If Christians sang without instruments for nearly 800 years then what point to instruments serve other than outward appearances and to please the ears of men?
I thank you as well for the polite exchange. I hope that everyone can get something out of it as they compare it to the word of God. I also agree that we’re running in circles. It seems I’m just having the same old arguments about baptism and instrumental music and nothing is accomplished, no minds are changed. I am thinking that may days here are numbered. Perhaps the time is soon coming where I just have to “shake the dust from my feet” and move on.
Corey
James wrote:
“Is this enough New Testament proof that the Old Testamant is no long in force as the governing law today? What part of new and old, better, first and second do you refuse to understand, Nathan? I know you are smart enough to see this, unless your brand of logic will not allow it.”
James, I’ve admitted as much. I’ve even referenced how the New Testament trumps the Old Testament. This doesn’t undo the reality of my argument.
You mention logic. Please explain logically why God would authorize something (instrumental worship in the OT), dis-authorize something (which he didn’t do), and then authorize something again (in eternity, ala John’s Revelation).
What would be the point?
Logic tells me that there is something else at work here.
nathan: “Who first mentioned the Levites? Let me remind you:…”
Ok nathan, I was wrong *sighs, rolls eyes*… I did write the word “Levites” before you did but YOU asked ME who offered the offerings etc… and then cited Heb 10 which states “priests”…
So who really mentioned the priests first, Nathan? (In case you did not know it, all priests were Levites.
Come on, that is not so hard is it?
The priesthood changed (Heb 7:12) because the LAW changed (can you say “NEW LAW” Nathan?)
The Law Changed because Christ “abolished it” Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
What does abolish mean, nathan? Do you still want to say there is nowhere in the NT that says the OT was revoked?
Slavery was abolished. Nathan must still want slaves.
When a law is abolished it is no longer in effect. Powerless.
Was the mech instr of Music you referenced used by David in the OLD abolished, taken away, waxed old, and first Covenant or the NEW one?
Be honest, Nathan.
Corey, what is it you want to change minds about concerning baptism or instrumental music?
I think on baptism we are closer in agreement than you might think.
Katherine, closer just dont cut it with these men, if you dont see it their way totally, you will not be saved. Ask Corey and these guys….if someone doesnt see it just as they do, will they be saved…and Corey be honest.
Corey said “I am thinking that may days here are numbered.”
– That’s a shame. I was planning on taking a break for a couple of days (mainly so I don’t get fired). There are still a lot of interesting topics to cover.
I would love to see a discussion on spiritual gifts here. I am kind of surprised no one has ever brought it up. It is such a large part of the NT and it is simply brushed off by a few somewhat shaky verses by most Christian Churches (something I am guilty of as well. I would love to hear everyone’s opinion on them, as I am pretty undecided on the matter.
Corey, before you think I am saying you are dishonest ( Im not ) I am saying you are beating around the bush, least Johnny and these others will come out and tell people flaty that they are lost if they dont understand baptism as they do…or as they understand the bible to say
I’m not really interested in debating the IM or not right now.
But I do want to just throw this out there.
First of all.. do we have any musicians in the house? I mean anyone who has studied musical theory?
Second of all.. where do the songs that the CofC sing come from? Who wrote them? And what sort of “song book” are they found in? Are the written down just as words or are there musical notes found on the page?
great point Katie – something esle Jason shed some light on with me.
Hi Katie – It’s been a while, but I’ve studied music theory.
Katerine wrote:
Corey, what is it you want to change minds about concerning baptism or instrumental music?
I want people who deny baptism’s role in the plan of salvation to accept it and to be immersed for the remission of sins if they have not. I want those who use instruments in worship to lay them down and just sing as God has asked us.
DMH wrote:
I would love to see a discussion on spiritual gifts here.
Let me give you a preview of how it will go: people who already believe that miraculous spiritual gifts exist today will continue to believe so. Those who believe Paul when he said they’d cease and that they have will continue to do so. Many words and scriptures will be used and no minds will change.
Randy wrote:
I am saying you are beating around the bush, least Johnny and these others will come out and tell people flaty that they are lost if they dont understand baptism as they do…or as they understand the bible to say
Well…whatever. I’ve made my position crystal clear – those who are physically and mentally able to be baptized must be in order to have salvation. Those who have some understanding of baptism, yet deny the full truth of it when they’re taught are rejecting the commandments of God and are lost. Sprinkling, pouring, infant baptism, baptism “after” salvation…all are false doctrines and will not result in salvation. You continue to teach that baptism is for the remission of sins, yet you contradict yourself by saying that the person doesn’t have to have a full understanding of baptism, which I guess means that you would accept the baptism taught in denominations (which also contradicts Acts 19).
my point of course continues that someone, somewhere wrote those songs and the “notes” that our songs are made to are developed from the notes on a piano. Some people have perfect pitch and you could use a pitch pipe yes, but where do you think the notes on the pitch pipe came from? It’s all derived from the notes on the piano. From the musical clefs and notes on the musical bar.
So any song that you are singing without an actual instrument in the worship service was more than likely created through the aid of musical instrument. So what is the difference if you use the IM in the worship, because in effect you are using the products of the instrument by singing the song.
By the way…
http://www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx320.htm
Now, the question is, will James respond to this or just blast the source.
In the OT, they generally used a “harp” for the same purpose and was similar to what our “piano” is today.
I’m just curious how it would be okay to sing a song that was written with the aid of a musical instrument but its not okay to use the musical instrument itself. If that’s the case, that the IM is wrong then no songs should be sung at all, because the notes of any song can be traced back to the notes on the piano.
Katie, whats your yahoo email address
virginiakatie@yahoo.com
You are right, Katie. If a person does not have “perfect pitch” they will have to sit down at a piano (or use some instrument) to help figure out the notes to be sung. That’s an interesting point that I’ve not heard brought out before.
I really believe that music is just a part of our make up as humans. Because I have two children who just sing all day long and make up songs and one is only a year old.
In the OT it says that God Himself sings to us (I’ll have the check on the reference). So it’s hard for me to imagine that singing would be inherently “evil”, “bad”, or “sinful”. And if that’s true, and that it is NOT those things, then I cannot figure out how you would have singing and notes without a musical instrument. I’m not a musical theorist, but I have taken my fair share of courses throughout the years and being a musician myself I know that apart from the instrument, there is note and that without a note there is no song.
Corey wrote:
“Let me give you a preview of how it will go: people who already believe that miraculous spiritual gifts exist today will continue to believe so. Those who believe Paul when he said they’d cease and that they have will continue to do so. Many words and scriptures will be used and no minds will change.”
Ha! That’s the story on just about every doctrinal point raised here. It’s one of the shortcomings of using the internet or the television to try and influence people’s opinions.
The truth of the matter is that we are relational – and change can really only effectively occur when people are sitting face to face talking, listening, challenging, disputing and persuading. God can use these other mediums to influence people, but the best way is face to face where we can really invest in each other’s lives, IMO.
So, what do we do with that?
#1: We sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Notice that Paul gives us freedom in the song selection. A Christian could write a spiritual song for everyone to sing.
#2: The songs we sing are written by many different people. All that matters is the content. An atheist could write a song that is Biblically sound if they went to the Bible to write it. The author is not important.
#3: Most congregations use song books that are filled with Biblically-sound songs. There are musical notes on the pages, but unlike in some denominations, there are no parts where there are musical notes but no lyrics to accompany them.
#4: God never commanded “perfect pitch”, He commanded singing. The emphasis is the heart where the melody is made, not in the ear.
#5: The human voice can replicate the notes of the musical scale played on an instrument. Would you say there was no singing before instruments? Would it not make more sense that the musical scale for instruments was based upon the human voice rather than the other way around? If not, then you must believe no one sang before someone created an instrument.
#6: It doesn’t matter if someone wrote the song using an instrument, it matters if they then sing that song with the instrument in worship to God.
This all sounds like a revised “which came first, the chicken or the egg” argument.
Zephaniah 3:17
The LORD your God in your midst,
The Mighty One, will save;
He will rejoice over you with gladness,
He will quiet you with His love,
He will rejoice over you with singing
Theres the reference for my previous post
Oh I wasn’t trying to be nasty about it Corey
it’s just something I have thought about it.
Your point that perhaps the notes of the musical instruments are derived from the notes of the human voice, is a good point. Touche.
“Easy on the zeal Churchos… I’ve got something to say. Don’t you GET it? It’s ALL Christianity, people! The little stupid differences are NOTHING next to the big stupid similarities!”
— Bart Simpson
“The Father, The Son & The Holy Guest Star”
The Simpsons, Season 16, Episode 22
originally aired May 15, 2005
Profound wisdom from the most unlikely of places.
Couldn’t resist sharing that 😉
” On June 5, 2008 at 11:46 am answeringchurchofchrist Said:
You are right, Katie. If a person does not have “perfect pitch” they will have to sit down at a piano (or use some instrument) to help figure out the notes to be sung. That’s an interesting point that I’ve not heard brought out before.”
Could that be done at home before the worship service?
Chris at least we know now who you’re worshipping with , Bart Simpson. Is he the preacher or what ?
Hey Chris,
Good to see you! Well, see your comment. I can’t actually see you.
Question – we’re waiting for episode 2. Any update on when that will be available for viewing?
“Question – we’re waiting for episode 2. Any update on when that will be available for viewing?”
Soon. That’s the best I can say at the moment.
Johnny, why do you guys insist on acting like I know Nathan, when its plain as day on Topix where his IP was showing he lives– (Free proxy list to Hide IP Address ) Shawn seen this as did Norm…..so the question isnt do I know Nathan, the question is DO YOU?
1. Norm Fields and Bible QnA – Topix
Norm Fields and Bible QnA. Posted in the Chatham Forum. Comments. Showing posts 1 – 3 of 3 … Atyrua, Kazakstan.
Everyone has been given gifts from God. Some a simple gift of being able to listen to others when they need someone to talk to, some have a gift in making other people laugh, and some have a gift in playing music, and some in singing. Whatever we find our gift to be we should use it to glorify God, I believe that always pleases Him. I also believe that if a person cannot believe when God says He has saved us by His grace not by our works, well they have little faith in God.
Katie, that is from one of my favorite verses found in Zephaniah 3:17:
“The Lord your God is with you,
the Mighty Warrior who saves.
He will take great delight in you;
in his love he will no longer rebuke you,
but will rejoice over you with singing.”
Oh, I see you already posted it-I LOVE that verse!! 🙂
Carry on…
Once again I’m not understanding how am man is capable of condeming another man by offering oppinion,
belief or in a recent reply scripture reference?
Have you all agreed on a deffinition of condem I’m not familiar with?
Know one responded regarding my knew dilema.
If God desires to be worshipped with musical insturments, Did he request it in his word? I am
still searching. “It is impossible to please God without Faith” HBRWS 11;6 “faith comes from hearing his word” RMS 10:17 I want to make sure I’m pleasing him not me. Do we applaud the music at worship, if so is it because it pleases us? HELP Psalm 118:8
No Bart Simpson verses , Please.
whats your position jbb? You think the bible teaches one can have music in assembly of the saints??
Other things that aren’t in the Bible…
– Dedicated church buildings
– Use of television
– Websites
– E-mail
– Worship on Sundays (the original New Testament Christians worshiped together on Saturday, and it wasn’t until the time of the Emperor Constantine that this began to shift to Sunday)
– Worship being led by a single man or small group of individuals. In fact, worship among the New Testament Christians was something that EVERYONE could contribute fully to!
No doubt there are many other thing also, which could be added to the list.
If a congregation does not wish to use musical instruments, that’s fine with me. But that is no reason to practically condemn as heresy those believers who do use them.
Why do some bind their identity so much in what they refuse to be, instead of binding their identity in Christ, Who alone is sufficient?
Chris said:
“If a congregation does not wish to use musical instruments, that’s fine with me. But that is no reason to practically condemn as heresy those believers who do use them.
Why do some bind their identity so much in what they refuse to be, instead of binding their identity in Christ, Who alone is sufficient?”
Amen, Chris!! AMEN. That is why I get so frustrated when more time is spent “fighting denominations” than finding our common bond in Christ-tearing down our own brothers and sisters, dividing and conquering-and to me, that is not for the sake of Christ, but only for an agenda.
I often look at these conversations and think, “How have we missed the point so much?” How can people who CALL themselves Christians treat each other like this? It must sadden our Lord-because it is FAR from what He sent Jesus to die on a cruel cross for. We can stand firm in our beliefs without having a message of condemnation, and one full of love-because that is WHO God is!!! Yet, that often seems to become VERY lost in the conversation, or television program, or “ambush”.
When agendas triumph the love of God-something has gone very VERY wrong.
Continuing on…we have GREATLY institutionalized and here in America have Americanized “church” and “religion” until we have often lost focus on what is important and what the BODY is really supposed to be about and who it is. We have narrowed it down to buildings instead of people; names and creeds instead of Jesus; binding doctrines instead of Jesus; making sure we get worship EXACTLY right one day a week for a few hours fearing damnation if we do not…instead of being the body of Christ!!! If anyone actually thinks that being a Christian is only about those few hours a week they enter into a building for worship, they need to read the Bible and seriously think again…because it is not. We look nothing like that first century church-and for those who believe that should be our goal-we have miserably failed. However, we are not called to completely replicate that-so failure does not mean condemnation…but it does mean we need to step back and examine what God has called us to do…and then GO DO IT!!!
What an amazing thing it would be if we could look past the lines we ourselves have set up to divide and recognize our common ground in Jesus. Instead, all I see from these guys is trying to point out every single difference they have from every other church ONLY to prove that they are right once again-filling up their egos and puffing up their pride. It is not about bringing people to Jesus, but to “their” way of thinking and into their camp. They denominate themselves even worse than those they condemn, and only divide more. Do I like the divisions that humans have created? Absolutely not. Does God? No. Jesus prayed for unity, and we are a far cry away from that. But, why add to the division-why make it worse? Why not recognize those who are striving to be like Christ, forsaking the world and attempting to live a life worthy of Him-joining with them to fight satan’s evil ways, while we tell others about Jesus and His hope for the world? What good does it do to try and prove you are right? Do you get some kind of satisfaction from that? You think being “right” will actually save you? God is going to and has saved who He wants to, whether we choose to accept that or not will NEVER change that…so, why not accept those who are in the body of Christ WHEN THEY ARE??!! I will never understand that-to me, this line of thinking seems like they don’t even WANT everyone to go to heaven-just those they have chosen, and that’s it. WHY? If you are an honest and loving Christian, then you will want what God wants-EVERYone to come to Him for salvation and eternal life!!! Yes, I know the reality is that not everyone will choose that, but I want everyone to, and so does God…choosing as fallible humans-who cannot EVEN begin to comprehend who God really is or what He does-to actually tell HIM who is or who is not saved is foolish.
We have made Jesus into a religion instead of a relationship with our Savior. That is the reason why many people do not want to be a part of “Christianity”-when all they see is hypocrisy, division, and condemnation. Where is the love, the grace, the hope?! That is the ENTIRE message of God!! Yes, if we love God-we WILL obey His commandments!! Absolutely, BUT His commandments are not burdensome, they are not grevious-His yoke is easy and His burden is light-He invites us to COME. We are the ones who are guilty of placing stumbling blocks in the way to Him, and that is wrong.
No human should ever attempt to place themselves in the throne room of God and place condemnation on them. That is not our job-it is not our duty. He has called us to love Him and love each other-what went wrong??!!
On June 5, 2008 at 5:29 pm Chris Knight Said:
Other things that aren’t in the Bible…
– Dedicated church buildings
– Use of television
– Websites
– E-mail
Hi Chris. They will calls these “aides” and they have their arguments lined up for this already.
A while back, James asked if Romans 14 didn’t apply to him. Now, when they read Katherine’s post, they’ll probably come back with, “Well, you are the ones provoking disunity!”
Which, if they did say this, I would have to say nope. And here’s the simple reason why.
I have no reason to doubt that hyperconservative church of Christ individuals are Christians who are heaven-bound. I wouldn’t presume to say which ones are and which ones are not – but from what I know about their doctrine, the “essentials” are in place.
But, the hyperconservative church of Christ individuals with whom I have communicated on this blog and other places would vehemently deny that I am not heaven-bound – because I am not in the hyperconservative church of Christ. I am not a brother to them, I am not “family” to them, I am a hell-bound, “lost as a doodle-bug” sinner that doesn’t have a chance unless I come around to their interpretation of Scripture.
It’s like you have a family, and a single father. Now, in that family there is one child who cries and pouts all the time, insisting to his brothers and sisters that he is really the only child of the father.
This is the dilemma in which we find ourselves.
faithless,
a relationship is not salvation.
prove otherwise, and get my money.
god be merciful to you a sinner.
and btw corey dont be discouraged if i dont change my mind. and really i hope you dont shake any dust off just yet, you are a reasoable person. but if if you choose to
ill see you in heaven. dont worry about me.
lee
Katherine wrote- “It must sadden our Lord-because it is FAR from what He sent Jesus to die on a cruel cross for.”
– I could not agree with this more. After reading over the conversation I could not help but to think the vague verses on IM, proper baptismal practices, rules of silence, etc., are vague for reason. 1st Century Christians probably never thought such things were pertinent issues. It would take man centuries to argue and divide over them.
“They will calls these “aides” and they have their arguments lined up for this already.”
Then why can’t a musical instrument be considered an “aide” as well?
If nothing else they aid in staying in tune with everyone else.
They are a help for people who for whatever reason God in His wisdom chose not to imbue with a talent for singing.
People like me, f’rinstance 😛
What if a person is unable to use their voice, is mute, but they have an amazing gift in playing a musical instrument. Should they not be able to participate in worshipping God by playing music to glorify Him. And I love the Christmas song the Little Drummer Boy, especially the part where he says he played his drum for Him and he played his BEST for HIM! That’s what I’m talking about, if you can play music and you play it to praise the Lord, God bless you.
“Truth” is speaking truth!! 🙂
I like Rudolph the red nose reindeer and frosty the snowman, does that mean we can have those in our worship service? How about those that know how to juggle
can they use this while the piano player plays when the “special offering”, “love offering” and the “Lottie Moon offering” is taken up? How about when they ride the motorcycle through the building to give to the preacher have everybody sing “Wild Thing” seriously folks
1Co 14:40 Let all things be done decently and in order.
You answered your own question. “Lottie Moon offering”-what is that?
Instruments can be used decently and in order 🙂
Don’t you think if God wanted us to stop playing music to praise Him, He would have told us to stop playing music. Or do you just like to put words into Gods mouth, not very wise, do you think.
“What if a person is unable to use their voice, is mute, but they have an amazing gift in playing a musical instrument. Should they not be able to participate in worshipping God by playing music to glorify Him.”
Exactly.
And some of us can neither sing or play an instrument. Whenever I visit a church, I wind up *whistling* the music. People don’t mind. They think it’s rather neat, even.
But since the Bible does not mention whistling, does that mean that I am committing error and am “disobedient” when I whistle in church?
how about hand clapping to the singing, is that also a no-no. Some church of Christ say yes and some say no…who to believe??
can I pat my foot to the singing – seeing the bible is silent also about that? We could we take this “speak where the bible speaks” way too far…couldnt we?
“And some of us can neither sing or play an instrument. Whenever I visit a church, I wind up *whistling* the music. People don’t mind. They think it’s rather neat, even.
But since the Bible does not mention whistling, does that mean that I am committing error and am “disobedient” when I whistle in church?”
yes.
““Lottie Moon offering”-what is that?”
She was a woman missionary to China .
“On June 5, 2008 at 10:25 pm Truth Said:
What if a person is unable to use their voice, is mute, but they have an amazing gift in playing a musical instrument. Should they not be able to participate in worshipping God by playing music to glorify Him. And I love the Christmas song the Little Drummer Boy, especially the part where he says he played his drum for Him and he played his BEST for HIM! That’s what I’m talking about, if you can play music and you play it to praise the Lord, God bless you.”
And what verses can I read the account of the little drummer boy?
The principle is found here:
“And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by Him. And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men.” Colossians 3:17 & 23
But since the Bible does not mention whistling, does that mean that I am committing error and am “disobedient” when I whistle in church?”
yes.
Okay, that settles it…
Folks, there’s no way that faithful can be a real disciple of the Church Of Christ In Name Only.
Because no true followers of Christ could possibly, very sincerely be absolutely serious when they say that whistling is a sin!
faithful, this is all a gag, right? I mean, what you’re doing has got to be what can only be described as brilliant parody, in an effort to make the so-called Church of Christ in this area look… well, silly.
That’s it, isn’t it?
Or are we to actually believe that God on His throne frowns with displeasure when one of His children, without even regret for being denied a gift for music, attempts to compensate and praise the Almighty with what has been given him, by whistling?
Can you comprehend how ridiculous that would be, for that to be a sin?!?
But this is just an ongoing sarcastic act, meant to demonstrate the hypocrisy of what these guys are teaching, right?
It’s gotta be. I hope it is. Because if you really do believe that, then there is come an end to any useful conversation with you.
Chris I have felt that way several times… that it was time for me to end my conversation with several people on this blog.
The arguments run in circles. The only advantage I have found is that I am getting a much clearer picture of the bondage this men are in… and it’s sad and I’m glad to live in the FREEDOM of Christ 🙂
Reply To Randy;
Well, Iuse to, considering the matter more deeply.
Thus the dilema. The more I consider the act the more it seems it has been somthing I’m fond of, somthing I do because it makes me feel good. Positon on hold.
jbb
JBB,
Would you be interested in watching some videos on the subject? I can link you to some very helpful videos on music of the church and Biblical authority. Just let me know and I’ll post them. I think it would be much more helpful and exhaustive than for me to try and type it all out.
Corey
On June 5, 2008 at 10:00 pm Chris Knight Said:
“They will calls these “aides” and they have their arguments lined up for this already.”
Then why can’t a musical instrument be considered an “aide” as well?
If nothing else they aid in staying in tune with everyone else.
I agree, they do aid singing, but my point was that these guys will say they add to the command “sing”. They will not even use the word aid when talking about music…they knows mucic aides singing just as much as their song leaders, pitch pipes, song books…but they just will not call music an aid. I played the drums for years, so I know for a fact that singing and music are hand in hand…they aid each other
Chris: But since the Bible does not mention whistling, does that mean that I am committing error and am “disobedient” when I whistle in church?”
Faithful: yes.
This is about the craziest thing I have ever heard – no, its a sin to whistle to the song….boy, faithful, have they really put the ropes of bondage on you guys………..so sad !
I guess one must stand like a robot scsard to do anything but “SING”
How is whistling “speaking to one another” or “teaching and admonishing one another”? Chris obviously has a voice, so he can’t claim that he’s mute or unable to sing. God never said you have to be Pavarotti, you just have to sing.
If married Christians whistle while they have intercourse is it extra-super “worship” Chris?
I guess one must stand like a robot scsard to do anything but “SING”
The mental image that I am now getting of what this kind of “Church of Christ” is, is that of the Daleks from Doctor Who: soulless, emotionless automatons incapable of crying out anything other than “I OBEY!” and “EXTERMINATE!” and determined to wipe out everyone who is not a Dalek like they are.
Sound familiar?
I think Katie is right – we often just run in circles on here, but at the same time, we are also learning from these guys, meaning we have even a clearer picture of the bondage they are under. Plus this blog makes a great tool for learning their every doctrinal point – points from both sides ( conservative cofC and Liberal ) and allows us to see that they are just as divided if not more divided than the denominational people they condemn. The truth is they are a denomination too, and the more they comment, the clearer it is, so please do keep the comments coming.
“Plus this blog makes a great tool for learning their every doctrinal point – points from both sides ( conservative cofC and Liberal ) and allows us to see that they are just as divided if not more divided than the denominational people they condemn. The truth is they are a denomination too, and the more they comment, the clearer it is, so please do keep the comments coming.”
This much I know from life, having seen it all too often…
When you become obsessed with the enemy, you become the enemy.
Which is why I encouraged everyone here who disagrees with the hyperconservative POV to be in prayer for our three main subjects. I don’t want this to be a discouraging place, and I would encourage anyone who is starting to feel discouraged to follow Katherine’s lead and take a vacation to Cancun. Of course, if you can’t actually get to physical Cancun, then go to virtual Cancun instead of this blog for a while.
http://www.holidays.net/travel/maps/na/mexico/map-mex170-cancun.htm
Yes, it is very refreshing-I HIGHLY recommend it!! 😉
How in the world we got from instruments to whistling being a sin, I have no idea-the first cannot even be backed up, much less the second. It reveals much of what you: Katie, Chris, and Randy are saying-but it also reveals something else to me…how they view God. They have put Him in a box, telling Him what He will and will not accept-and fearing if they step outside of that box one little bit God will be ready to strike them down. How can you see God as a loving, gracious, merciful, yet just God when that is not what you preach and is not how you treat others-especially the body of Christ. That reveals a LOT to me. How they view and worship God flows out into how they view and treat others. It is very sad to me-Christ came to set us free from this mentality, but they are still under it. It still never excuses their behavior, though-they will be held accountable for that because their actions have been pointed out and questioned over and over again. They can certainly not feign ignorance on that.
My prayer continues to be that their view of God will change so that it will shed light on their agenda and the harm it is doing; and that they will be able to know that love, grace, and mercy of Christ. You can still stand strong in your beliefs and fully live in the love and grace of God-I think some see that as the problem. Either extreme is bad, but there is middle ground. The first thing, though-is that you have to make sure you are following God and not going with the flow, not towing the party line, not just believing something because that is the way you’ve always done it. The problem is when you are more loyal to an institution than to God, and that is the problem we have here. When they come out of their denial and see the light, this will no longer be a problem. I pray that God will change their hearts, they just have to be willing 🙂
So, Chris can come along and say absurd things like sex is worship and whistling is a perfectly acceptable substitute for singing and no one has a problem with that. He has become, as the url for this subject says, “the acofc greatest blog hero”.
When someone comes along and says “let’s just follow the pattern of the New Testament and not go beyond what is written” that is “putting God in a box” and not showing grace.
I guess my question Corey would be very simple.
Where is the command (I want BCV) that says that God has commanded all Christians to follow only the methods of worship found in the written NT?
It seems to me that the CofC has applied a lot of rules, routines, and regulations that God Himself never found fit to supply us with. I realize that there are certain things that God most definitely does NOT condone… and He outlines it word for word in various scriptures in the NT.
But where is the command that we should “look like the NT church”. Was that NT church perfect? Certainly not, because if they were, would they have needed the letters of Paul… or would Jesus have called each of them out in the book of Revelation pointing out their failures.
Obviously these churches weren’t the end all/be all to the way we must act and worship God because if that’s true, then following them will lead us to the same positions of failure.
Why are we following the NT church? Why are we not following the Lord? Why are we making up rules that God never uttered? Why are we following the letter of the routine and ignoring the relationship?
All of these things together adds up to a very strict and lawful (AND awful) view of Christianity and God.
Chris wrote:
The mental image that I am now getting of what this kind of “Church of Christ” is, is that of the Daleks from Doctor Who: soulless, emotionless automatons incapable of crying out anything other than “I OBEY!” and “EXTERMINATE!” and determined to wipe out everyone who is not a Dalek like they are.
The stuff you say reminds me of the Sirens from Greek mythology. They sang a sweet-sounding song that lead men to destruction.
Corey, I think perhaps it may be because we aren’t reading things quite so literal as you. Chris can correct me if I am wrong but I really didn’t think he meant sex as worship quite so literally and I most certaintly don’t believe he meant it as in a ritual of Godly worshiip in an assembly of believers.
While I am on the topic, one of my problems with the hypercon coC is that they pick and choose buffet style what they accept as literal examples of what God wants in our Christian living and what he doesn’t (ie no musical instruments is a literal must do but the New Testament example of greeting with a holy kiss is not excepted to be taken literal)while at the same time condemning the rest of us (the pot calling the kettle black).
This is part of an article in today’s Danville newspaper: “The new game, not yet released, is giving a voice to the atheist community, that’s according to the game’s creator, a University of Virginia graduate student. He wouldn’t release his name, for fear of his safety. “Atheists have never really had anything to speak for them like this. It’s the general atheist premise that the world might be a better place without some of those religions,” explained the creator of the game. The object of the game is to stop the spread of Christianity and Islam by murdering Abraham and the authors of the Bible, before beheading Muhammad.”
This is the sort of fight (the threat from an atheistic world) that Johnny should be engaging and not a fight seeking to distroy other Christ worshiping churches.
I agree daddy and it’s the very fighting and bickering (or debating) that we engage in that keeps our young people away from Christ… they want nothing to do with a religion whose followers behave the way many claiming Christians do.
Katie,
Here are just a few BCV examples for you:
1 Corinthians 11:2
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.
2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.
Jude 3:
Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.
So there are 3 verses saying who gets to make the rules – the inspired apostles and the Lord Himself. If the practices we see in scripture were handed to those people directly from the apostles it is incredibly arrogant to think that we can improve upon them.
The first Christians were not perfect, but the doctrine and practices given to them by the apostles, through the Holy Spirit, IS perfect. How have men improved upon the writings of the NT? By adding instrumental music to them? By removing the role of baptism in the plan of salvation? By changing the way that the congregations are governed here on Earth? Are those improvements or changes?
As far a Chris goes, the question was “is sex between married Christians worship” and his answer was a resounding “yes”. Don’t pretend that wasn’t his answer.
I didn’t mention Chris’ response at all in my post. I know what his response was. I think the problem is that you are comparing his answer to yours and both of you have entirely definition of what it means to “worship”.
But anyway
I appreciate the verses. I would have to agree with you that based on those verses that the Paul is instructing us to follow the guidance and direction that has already been given to the churches via himself, which was words from the Lord.
I don’t see in those verses though a warning against instruments, etc. I just know that Paul was a very clear and concise writer. When he speaks of the sexual immoralities and such, he lists them out. He was not a brief and generalized author. So it strikes me that were he to have meant that nothing else was to be a part of worship or teachings, etc that he would have very specifically said so as he was very specific in other areas of his letters.
*supposed to say “entirely DIFFERENT definitions of worship”
Isn’t it possible that since the New Testament Christians recognized the Old Testament as their cannon of Scriptures and the Old Testament writers and great leaders such as David encouraged the use of instruments in worship that Paul assume no need to write of the use instruments since it was already a practice of God’s people?
It is true that we have different definitions of worship. He has a made-up definition that appears to come solely from his own mind and I use the definition that is found through the scriptures.
By what you’re saying, and what others have said, every time there is a commandment the inspired writers would then need to list everything that wasn’t acceptable as well. The command should be able to stand alone. You brought up how Paul lists out many sexually immoral practices that are wrong. He didn’t include pedophilia, but I’m guessing we’re both against it. We know what is sexually immoral because we have verses that tell us what is sexually moral – the marriage bed alone. Paul didn’t have to list every transgression because the fact that only the marriage bed is listed as acceptable rules out everything else. The same principle can be applied to IM. We don’t need a verse saying “don’t do this” if we already have a verse saying “DO this”.
Rick wrote:
Isn’t it possible that since the New Testament Christians recognized the Old Testament as their cannon of Scriptures and the Old Testament writers and great leaders such as David encouraged the use of instruments in worship that Paul assume no need to write of the use instruments since it was already a practice of God’s people?
This has been explained several times already. The only people authorized to use the instruments were the Levites. Many of the Jews Paul wrote to had no idea what tribe they were from. Regardless, Jesus did away with the actions of the Levites when He became our High Priest. A Jew from any other tribe was never given the authority to use them in worship.
Corey, why isn’t the churches of Christ consistent in their literal interpretation of the New Testament Church practices?
Rick,
One argument down so on to another?
What are you referring to? The “holy kiss” which I’ve explained before? I’m going to need more info before I can give an answer.
So wht do you do with Psalms 150? 1.Praise the Lord. Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty heavens.
2.Praise him for his acts of power; praise him for his surpassing greatness.
3.Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, praise him with the harp and lyre,
4.praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the strings and flute,
5.praise him with the clash of cymbals, praise him with resounding cymbals.
6.Let everything that has breath praise the Lord. Praise the Lord.
I don’t believe that David was addressing the Levites? And it does appear that David said prasie the Lord in the Sanctuary with instruments.
Who was permitted to use those instruments in the sanctuary? The Levites.
Corey, I’ll have to respond later to further posting..I have company ( little neice and nephew have arrived)..have good afternoon all
Looks like the conversation is still pumping.
I was curious as to what everyone thought about the following verses. Why are these clear NT examples not observed in the CoC? (at least any I have been to)
Acts 4
32Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.
1 Corinthians 11
4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
James 5:14-15
14Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
2 Chronicles 29: 25 He stationed the Levites in the temple of the LORD with cymbals, harps and lyres in the way prescribed by David and Gad the king’s seer and Nathan the prophet; this was commanded by the LORD through his prophets. 26 So the Levites stood ready with David’s instruments, and the priests with their trumpets.
27 Hezekiah gave the order to sacrifice the burnt offering on the altar. As the offering began, singing to the LORD began also, accompanied by trumpets and the instruments of David king of Israel. 28 The whole assembly bowed in worship, while the singers sang and the trumpeters played. All this continued until the sacrifice of the burnt offering was completed.
So, who played the instruments? The Levites. What did the people who weren’t Levites do? They sang.
Acts 4
32Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.
This is practiced at my congregation and I’m sure many others. I know that all I have is from the Lord and not my own. If a brother or sister is in need, then we will provide for that need. We’ve done it for house fires, sicknesses and deaths. We follow this example. Some point to the example of selling all that they had, but they also laid their money at the apostles feet. We can’t do that, so we know there is a pattern to follow, but we can’t directly do what they did.
1 Corinthians 11
4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
Most translations of this are full of commentary by the translators. The covering of the man was hair, hanging down “like a mantle”. This would be hair so heavy it hung over the eyes and over the shoulders. I’ve not seen anyone like this praying within the church.
As to the women, we must have historical context. Just as we need historical context to fully understand Matthew 5:41. It was a custom for the pagan women to cut their hair like the local goddess. There is even some evidence to suggest that Corinthian prostitutes were recognizable by the way they cut their hair. Women who came out of idol worship or prostitution, and had it evidenced by their haircuts, were to cover their head until their natural hair became their “covering”.
I would also note that this section is closed by Paul saying “and if any man is contentious then we have no such custom in the church of God”.
James 5:14-15
14Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
I have been to the Destin church of Christ in Florida and days before they had followed this exactly. The elders went to the hospital, annointed a sick woman’s head with oil and prayed for her. She made a full recovery and was back to worship.
We must note that the “oil” James speaks of was used in a medicinal fashion. We don’t need oils for medicine today, but we do need to call for the elders to pray for us. My elders were contacted when I was in the hospital and came to me. I know of many congregations that practice this as well.
1 Chronicles 13:8
“David and all Israel were celebrating in God’s presence with all their might, with songs, with lyres, harps, tambourines, cymbals, and trumpets.”
– It does seem that only the Levites played music in God’s santuary, but weren’t they the only ones that could enter the Holy area?
Yes. The sanctuary was made up of the courtyard, the holy place and the most holy place. Only the Levites could go into the most holy place I’m fairly certain.
Corey,
Again, thank you for answering in a clear and concise manner.
Why are these verses put under differing examination standards than other verses that are given their clear BCV meaning?
For example, the verses that mention “breaking bread” on the 1st day of the week in Acts are taken to mean that Christians should follow this example, and observe the Lord’s Supper every Sun. I have no problem with people doing this, but it seems quite a stretch to bind this on others through such a vague statement.
“no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.”
– on the other hand, this statement seems very clear that they were practicing more than simple charity. It seems to be a communal lifestyle situation.
“I have been to the Destin church of Christ in Florida and days before they had followed this exactly. The elders went to the hospital, annointed a sick woman’s head with oil and prayed for her. She made a full recovery and was back to worship.
We must note that the “oil” James speaks of was used in a medicinal fashion. We don’t need oils for medicine today, but we do need to call for the elders to pray for us. My elders were contacted when I was in the hospital and came to me. I know of many congregations that practice this as well.”
It is interesting that you have actually seen this done. I am pretty surprised. (My very conservative Grandmother probably would have stormed out of the building at such a “denominational” practice)
The oil in the 1st Century may have very well been associated with medicinal purposes, but anointing a person’s head with oil also has very symbolic meanings to the Hebrew community. (Just one example I can think of is the anointing of Kings Saul and David). But, the root of the matter is we have a clear BCV of an inspired writer saying that Elders should anoint sick people with oil to forgive his/her sins. It does not matter that a few churches have decided to do it. Couldn’t it be said that the ones not doing it are ignoring the clear example?
Why are these verses put under differing examination standards than other verses that are given their clear BCV meaning?
I don’t think they are. Some verses are tied into culture and historical context, others are not. They should all be examined the same to see which it is. I would say a passage like 1 Corinthians 11, which seems confusing to many (me included) with just a casual reading, must be examined somewhat closer than other passages.
For example, the verses that mention “breaking bread” on the 1st day of the week in Acts are taken to mean that Christians should follow this example, and observe the Lord’s Supper every Sun. I have no problem with people doing this, but it seems quite a stretch to bind this on others through such a vague statement.
We know that they not only “broke bread” (which can have at least two meanings) on Sunday, they specifically observed the Lord’s Supper on Sunday. Now, what is the safe and respectful approach? To take it 4 Sundays a year? To take it every day? To take it each Sunday? Again, we can go to historical writings (Josephus covers this I believe) that confirm what we see in the NT – that the first Christians took the Lord’s Supper each Sunday and that it was an important part of their worship. Like I’ve said, historical, uninspired writing as not our guide, but they can be used to confirm or understand some things.
on the other hand, this statement seems very clear that they were practicing more than simple charity. It seems to be a communal lifestyle situation.
You might say they practiced “commonism”, not “communism”. Paul said that we are to give as we are prospered and not grudgingly. This tells us that we are not to bind the selling of all of goods or enforced “commonism”. There would be nothing wrong with doing so, but to say it is a binding example doesn’t harmonize with Paul’s writings.
But, the root of the matter is we have a clear BCV of an inspired writer saying that Elders should anoint sick people with oil to forgive his/her sins.
That isn’t quite right. It is the Lord that forgives the sins and heals them because of the prayers, not because of the oil. When we understand that, I think we can see that the oil was used in an earthly medicinal way and the prayers are the spiritual part. Look at verse 15 again:
15And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
“I don’t think they are. Some verses are tied into culture and historical context, others are not. They should all be examined the same to see which it is. I would say a passage like 1 Corinthians 11, which seems confusing to many (me included) with just a casual reading, must be examined somewhat closer than other passages.”
– Except I would take it even further and examine each letter, written to each particular church, to address particular problems (some of which we do not even clearly know), in their proper cultural context. Of course, you can see how people would get differing opinions over which verses should be viewed in proper cultural context and which would not, therefore deriving differing views on the same verses.
“Now, what is the safe and respectful approach? To take it 4 Sundays a year? To take it every day? To take it each Sunday?”
– Honestly, probably all of those. I would also add that the Thursday night before Passover would be pretty scriptural too. I am not sure the intention was to worry over the “safe approach” as to regularity and form, it seems the inward details and humbling yourself before Christ’s sacrifice is what is stressed. (The Josephus reference is interesting, it has been a while since I have read the Antiquities, I will have look into it).
“Paul said that we are to give as we are prospered and not grudgingly.”
This is an interesting point too. Commonism/communism was being practiced by the Christians in Jerusalem before Paul ever wrote those words. It leads me to wonder if most Christian 1st Century Churches had differing practices. What letters, gospel writings, and scriptures that we have and follow today, did they actually have exposure to?
A question suggests itself…
What exactly IS worship?
How do we define “worship”?
Is worship ONLY meant to be coming together every Sunday, or whenever, in a designated location?
Or is it something else? Something more?
I’ve already posted this article once here that clearly explains the Biblical difference between worship and service. I’ve also shown that there are other things that are acceptable, but are neither. The article is found here:
http://www.scripturessay.com/article.php?cat=&id=302
Of course Little Drummer boy isn’t scripture but it is very inspiring. I knew you would say that. But nobody has shown me where it is WRITTEN that God tells us NOT to play music in worship.
Hello everybody,
I’m glad to see such productive, civil conversation going on. Corey, even though I disagree with you, I want you to know how much I appreciate your attitude here. It is so different discussing these issues with you and discussing these issues with JR or his acolytes. Notice the tone of the conversations? Nobody getting upset or sarcastic? But still ably getting their points across?
Good stuff, everyone.
I will rephrase my question. Can you show me where it is WRITTEN that God tells us NOT to play music in worship?
RE: scripture essay article on worship.
Have a few thoughts on it.
1. I am always skeptical when someone criticizes a Biblical translation because the “Greek is bad.” Pretty much every 20th century scripture translation was overseen by some of foremost Greek scholars available. Maybe the author is one too, I have no idea, but it just sends warnings off.
2. The Ethiopian was traveling to specially worship in Jerusalem. This is not surprising considering the importance of physical holy places in Judaism; it does not prove worship must be formally orchestrated in a certain pattern today.
3. The conversation involving formal v. informal worship was interesting.. Strangely, it made me think of many VBS seminars in the CoC. Are they informal or formal worship? If formal, why is all the dancing and clapping allowed? If it is neither, then what is it? I find it hard to believe that God in not pleased and being glorified with children singing and clapping. Why is the same behavior not acceptable on Sun. morning?
Why we are authorized to play instruments in worship.
In the OT, the priests played instruments in worship. It was authorized by God, and apparently pleasing to him.
Now, under the New Covenant, who are the priests?
and
We are to offer spiritual sacrifices and declare God’s praises. How did the priests declare God’s praises? With instruments of worship.
And, back to TRUTH’s question (and the question we always ask) – where (BCV) did God declare instruments to be an invalid part of the worship equation?
It’s not there, “Truth”, but they will try to pull out the rule of silence to condemn it. I don’t have one problem with worshipping sans instruments (in fact I love my a cappella heritage), and if it violates one’s conscience to participate in instrumental worship-then by all means do not participate…but it is a completely different step to go all the way to condemning someone for choosing to worship in that manner, when GOD NEVER CONDEMNED IT. That is simply trying to play God, and I will not attempt to play that role. If people take it that the Bible tells them to simply sing, then so be it-that is the tradition I was raised in and it is beautiful, but I cannot easily say based on what I read in the Bible that it is the only worship God will and does accept.
The problem is that arguments on IM and many other topics are simply very inconsistent, especially when attempted to be backed up by the CENI or the “law of silence” hermeneutic.
DMH, good points.
Exactly Katherine. For them to say that God does not like us to play music in worship, when He has never said that, it is like if someone here were to go and tell everyone that I don’t like dogs, which you know I have never said that. I love dogs. The thing is they are putting words into Gods mouth, like you said playing God, and that is not good.
“The problem is that arguments on IM and many other topics are simply very inconsistent, especially when attempted to be backed up by the CENI or the “law of silence” hermeneutic.”
Kat, you are so correct and I wish that the folks within the local churches of Christ could grasp this; again great comments Kat !
It is also much like the assumption that since all husband are men, that all men must be husbands.
The arguments have stopped from the opposing side. Does that mean they’ve run out of things to say?
Ha! I doubt it.
Interesting lull, though.
So, how is everybody?
Dunno.
Credit must go to David Hume (1711 – 1776) for the “men/husbands” causal fallacy.
I am good, by the way 🙂
If someone told you they were going to hear someone sing, does that mean that the person singing will do it without music. Or must they say they are going to hear someone sing with music.
Let me put it another way, if someone told you they were going to hear someone sing, does that mean that the person singing will do it without music. When you know the person singing has done so with music.
Great points “truth”!
Also, there are passages in the OT where singing is stated only in the verse, but they-cofC never will use these verses because they know the singing stated here doesnt mean “only singing” as David shows. So did people read the verses in the OT that stated singing and understand it to mean sing only – sure doesnt appear they took this view.
Below is an article from Rays blog, I pasted it since it’s a short article, but relates to what we have talked about here.
-A pattern, a pattern, I see a pattern.
Here a pattern, there a pattern, everywhere a pattern.
Follow my pattern or spend eternity in hell.
Pattern theology has been our curse. Rather than unite, it has sorely divided us.
Some have seen a pattern related to how the church must collect and spend its money.
“Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem” (1 Corinthians 16:1-3 KJV).
Most quote this passage to prove:
It is a universal command for all churches for all time.
It limits this contribution to evangelism, edification, and benevolence.
Yet, this “order” was not given until about A.D. 54-55 when Paul wrote it. That is 24 years after the church was established on Pentecost. No such command existed until 1 Corinthians 16:1-3!
Second, if one will carefully read the passage, the “order” is given to (1) the churches of Galatia and (2) Corinth. There is nothing in the passage that includes other congregations then or today.
Third, the Jerusalem church is not included in this giving, it is the recipient. Since they are not included in the “order,” it cannot be a universal command.
Fourth, nothing is said about this contribution being for evangelism or edification. It is for the sole purpose of relieving the saints in Jerusalem. It is a specific “order,” to specific congregations, for a specific purpose, for a specific locality, and in a specific time frame.
Fifth, this collection is not for the purpose of paying the preacher, buying property, building a church building, or paying the utility bill. It is a “collection for the saints” to be taken “unto Jerusalem.”
If one may add congregations to those already specified, the door is opened to add other things not specified.
If one may add evangelism and edification to the specifically stated purpose for the collection, the door is opened to add other things not specifically stated.
It seems that our man made patterns have caused us more harm than good. That being the case, maybe we are guilty of creating something from the Bible that God never intended. Perhaps we have simply missed the meaning of “the good news.”
Great stuff! I posted it with a link on the front page, I liked it so much.
I’ll be praying for you today Chris. Stay Strong God is with you!
Dear Coreydavis’
Thanks for being the only one to respond to my thoughts or questions. Yes i would appreciate any videos on the subject. Still non of the regular bloggers have responded to my question re: condeming, how can one mans differing opinion condem someone?
or any scripture where God ask’s for insturmental
worship. Is dance o.k. ?
jbb
jbb,
Sorry you haven’t been answered except for Corey.
1) Condemning question – I’m not sure I understand your question. Could you rephrase it?
2) Scripture where God asks for instrumental worship. Do we believe that the Bible is God’s Holy Word? Inspired from cover to cover? “From God’s mouth to the writer’s hands”? If so, then look at Psalms 150. We are commanded in Psalm 150 to use instruments of worship in our praise to God.
The issue we discussed recently was the fact that the command was not rescinded, and in fact we find the use of musical instruments alluded to once more at the end of the Scriptures, in the book of Revelation, as a picture of something that will occur in heaven to praise of God for all eternity.
I’d invite you to read back and remind yourself what we discussed on this subject.
Psalm 149 and Psalm 150 both command us to worship God with dance, by the way. “praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the strings and flute…” (150); “Let Israel rejoice in their Maker; let the people of Zion be glad in their King. Let them praise his name with dancing and make music to him with tambourine and harp.” (149).
Nathan, I recall you telling me once you made this rookie mistake with the cofC boys, so you may get the same reply from jbb that you got the first time….
Thanks, answeringcoc;
I see in psalms where this is stated.
I have been to many worship services over the past 10 years but have never wittnessed tamborines or harps being played.I have seen few that dance. If this instruction is for christians as well as it was for jews, as someone has already pointed out what about
incense, what about levtical priests and so on?
and if we don’t play the harps, tamborines and trumpets are we disobeying God’s command?
As far as the use of the word Condem. I’ve read several times wherer bloggers have claimed another is condeming someone for offering thier belief or point of view. As far as I know only God has the power to condem anyone.
told you Nathan, same reply you got the first time you said this to the cofC boys. It’s almost impossible to use the OT as proof of what worship is today. I am really suprised nobody else brought up the “dance” issue with singing. Thats an old argument they use.
God has specified singing. Thus, we sing. We don’t replace it with something else. However, musical accompaniment is not a replacement of singing. Jesus pointed out the distinction quite clearly in Matthew 15:4-6. God commanded that one’s parents be shown certain considerations by the children. Some religionists were seeking to avoid their responsibility here by replacing the command with one of their traditions. Jesus condemned them, saying, “And thus you INVALIDATED the Word of God for the sake of your tradition” (Matthew 15:4-6). Was there anything wrong or sinful about their tradition? Of course not. In fact, had these religionists done both (God’s command and their tradition) they would have been commended. It was that they sought to REPLACE the former with the latter that constituted the sin and drew the rebuke. Their tradition did not accompany God’s command, it invalidated it. That was the problem.
The use of musical instruments as either accompaniment or as an aid to SINGING in no way whatsoever invalidates or negates or replaces singing. Singing still occurs. You ask “shall we dance” JBB: let me ask you, can you clap your hands, can you pat your feet, can you move at all when you sing? Can we have song books written with songs written by sinners? Can we even have song books, how about song leaders, how about the invitation song…all of which are SILENT in scripture…We could take this argument a long ways and prove nothing.
The Levitical priest issue has been put to rest. We’re told in 1 Peter 2 that we are a royal priesthood. We’re told in Hebrews 3:1 that Jesus is our high priest. Therefore, the role of the priest has been transferred to the believer. As James inadvertently pointed out, this would include the use of musical instruments in worship.
Why would it be disobedient for us not to play the instruments? The Levitical priests weren’t running around with a checklist, making sure that they used each instrument mentioned in the verse each time they praised God. All of the Levitical priests didn’t have to play instruments all of the time.
There’s no Scriptural evidence that I’m aware of that would prove that they acted this way. And, there’s no Scriptural evidence that we need to act that way, either.
The point of the Psalm is that we praise Him. And in both the Old and the New Testament, we learn that what really matters to God is our heart.
God tells us in 1 Samuel 7b, “The LORD does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”
The Lord says in Matthew 15:8, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with [their] lips; but their heart is far from me.”
And we are told that “whatsoever ye do, do [it] heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;” (Col 3:23) – or to put it in more modern terms – we are do all that we do “from the heart, as to the Lord”;
This can be done acapella, or with instruments, or with dance. And conversely, we can be doing everything “the right way”, with hearts that are hardened and far away from Him.
Great points, Nathan-especially that last one.
answeringcoc/randy
If the “command ” was not rescinded as you said, then it is still a command right? Do we not have to obey God’s commands re: worship? My heart re; worship is what I am examining. I suppose I can clap, jump scream, stump….
My issue is with me. 1. to try and worship God as he has requested . to his liking. this blogg has made me consider things, have i been worshipping with more emphassi on how I want to or how God wants me to?
have I in anyway been a stumbling block to others in the way I have worshipped?
Song books by sinners?
was there ever a song book , musical insturment, ect..
made by man that wasn’t made by a sinner?
One of my questions to all concerning worship,
When we applaud after a song in service are we apllauding the worshipers for their part, what they have done? I for one have been quilty of this. I have to ask myself where was my heart? Focused on somthing I enjoyed is my answer to me.
jbb,
The most helpful videos are found here:
http://www.youtube.com/preachernorm
I would start on page 2 with “Understanding Biblical Authority”. There are 3 parts to that video series.
Then on page 6 there is “The Music God wants in His Church / Music in the NT Church”. There are 5 parts to that series. I think Norm does a great job explaining some difficult things and he answers the questions you’ve asked here.
I hope those are of some help to you. Let me know if you still have questions and I’ll try to help.
Corey
When I applaud after a song, I am applauding in praise to God. It is important that we examine our hearts, definitely.
The thing I have a problem with is when we decide what God will and will not accept-when we hinder the gifts He has given us by not offering them back to Him in praise. It reminds me of the parable of the talents. I think sometimes it is worse to deny God the gifts He has given us. But, of course, always-EVERYthing we do should be for the glory of God, not for ourselves.
“And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.” ~Colossians 3:17
On June 9, 2008 at 12:52 pm coreydavis Said:
jbb,
The most helpful videos are found here:
http://www.youtube.com/preachernorm
-How ironic that Norm is one of the men here on TV. 🙂
Like I said on the other post. The thing is that the cofC believe they have to earn their way to heaven. If our good works were to get us to heaven then we would ALL fail miserably. That is why God told us He has saved us by His Grace.
If they cannot try to understand this, then they will not understand how God could want someone to use their gift that He gave them in playing music to praise Him.
Something else ironic – Corey was having words with Faithful and Johnny as if they were against each others teachings, even being called a liberal by Johnny, which means he does not see Corey as his brother in Christ. And now, you cofC guys are like best buds… ….either they are playing you Corey or we are all being played by you cofC guys.
Truth’
I may have missed the other post.
But’ are they saying That you can worship your way into salvation?
Are you saying that you can be in God’s grace without worship?
The first offering a recall in The Bible is in Gen. 4
Was either worship acceptable to God?
One brother’s talent tilling the Ground The other a sheppard.
I just love you guys being able to use the OT to prove a point, but how dare we go there to show God allowed Music. I guess you are saying everyone must worship as you “understand” the bible to say. In other words, you have this all fiqured out and we would do well to follow your views lest we be lost. When will you guys get it, you do NOT know it all, nor do we. Can one not grow in Christ and in the understanding of the word, and yes, some people may never reach the same learning level as you, does that mean they are lost? Cant you guys see you are not for unity but are the very cause of the many sects within your very own denomination…yes, the church of Christ denomination…
jbb, see how you twist words. And who are you to say which way of worship is acceptable to God. I just haven’t seen anywhere in the Bible where God tells us not to use music in praising Him. The cofC just use the Bible to twist Gods word to try to attack other Christians and tell them everything they do is wrong.Well, to tell the truth just as the Bible tells it, it is a sin to boast, or be boastful, so it seems that the cofC have a lot of repenting to do, we should be humble just as Jesus came.
Pernell/Truth
Who are you Guys?
I went to ot on Answeringcoc’s point about harps and dancing. Was it ok for him to go there and me to follow?
and once again I’m examining myself here. I appreciate the give and take but have I stated any where in my questions how somone should worship?
What view did I make? Idon’t know it all thats the point of discussion right? I don’t see what words I have twisted please point them out to me. I don’t want to offend anyone on this sight and will go to another if I have. I’m not trying to boast and don’t know where I have. Please show me what I have done or said besides simply ask questions and give reference to Bible verse. Sorry
I Thank you all for allowing me to have participated in discussion regarding worship. Once again I’m sorry if offended anyone, that certainly was not my intention. This site did pose many thuoght provoking points that i will continue to dwell on. Although I have not fully come to a conclusion of what corse I should now take. In going over my questions I am confused at what I wrote that was boastful. Not once did I claim anyone was lost. Nor do I claim to be a studios person in the Bible. I have studied and worshiped with numerous denominations over the past 10 or so years seeking understanding in God’s word never before have I been accused of attacking a Christian and fail to see how I did so here. I am sorry if I offened anyone and will leave now.
JBB
jbb,
You certainly didn’t offend me, and I apologize if you had questions that I wasn’t able to answer. I’m trying to spend less time here, but I want to help you if I can. Any questions you might have can be emailed directly to me:
coreydavis@insightbb.com
I will always try to give you a scriptural answer to any questions you might have.
Corey
I was stating that the cofC, which I should’ve said the hyper-conservative cofC we are talking about here are boastful people and the Bible tells us we shouldn’t be that way.
jbb, I was certainly not offended and appreciate your questions and seeking heart. I hope you will stick around.
You are right in that we do not have the right or power to condemn others as humans, and you have not done that. I hope you will continue to seek and learn, asking the questions and discussing here. Blessings on your walk! 🙂
I happened to catch Johnny Robertson talking about what happened last night on WGSR.
There is no way that a humble, sincere follower of Christ could say what Robertson just said live on the air.
It really is all about *him* and his “Church of Christ”, isn’t it?
What he’s doing isn’t about serving God at all. He’s not even PRETENDING that this is about really serving Christ.
That’s all I tried to say last night. That without the love of Christ motivating us, all we do is for naught.
Robertson doesn’t understand that. I don’t know if he CAN understand that.
At least three people have quietly told me that after watching his show last night for the first time, that there is no question in their minds that Johnny Robertson is demon possessed.
The sad thing is, I really don’t know of anything to say in defense of Robertson against that kind of charge. Parse that as you will.
Chris, you made some good points, but like I stated this morning, Johnny will pick at the bad points, meaning things that are not in the bible. We all make these mistake ( all but Johnny )well maybe except for the time he and Norm disagreed over a passage in the bible and guess who was wrong?? What you done took guts, but I do wish the entire 25 minutes would have been devoted to the bible or to their doctrinal views.
Randy,
There was no way that 25 minutes could have been devoted to their views. It just wasn’t feasible. I wasn’t going to attempt it, either.
They have the luxury of THOUSANDS of dollars to spend on airtime each month, and I don’t have that. And I really wouldn’t care to do that either.
So in the end I chose not to show my DVD, and just speak from the heart. With whatever God was putting on it after what He had shown me from scripture this past week.
I’m going to make available the video that I had put together, hopefully by the end of this evening. Even then I put my movie in the package because like I said, I promised the people who helped me with it that one way or another I’d get it on TV. And I did. Just one more promise that God has let me uphold. In that regard He has been very good to me.
But Johnny Robertson still cannot answer the most important question of all…
“How is what Johnny Robertson is doing, giving devotion to Christ and showing His love for the world?”
He has not answered this.
Is he afraid to answer it?
Is it even POSSIBLE for him to answer it?
Because if he does not REALLY have Christ in his life and is thus unable to show it, then what DOES Johnny Robertson have, then?
On June 9, 2008 at 5:24 pm Chris Knight Said:
Randy,
There was no way that 25 minutes could have been devoted to their views. It just wasn’t feasible. I wasn’t going to attempt it, either.
They have the luxury of THOUSANDS of dollars to spend on airtime each month, and I don’t have that. And I really wouldn’t care to do that either.
– I agree with you, but I think most were thinking you would do something more along those lines. And, yes they do spend thousands per month. Im not trying to come accross like I agree with Johnny, because I do not and he also knows I do not. However, I do hold to some of the Church of Christ teachings…but I would not dare write you off or anyone else for not seeing things my way, afterall, I could very well be wrong.
Chris,
You said you heard JR talking about what happened, was this on another venue other than his show? If so, what did he say (in summary)?
“You said you heard JR talking about what happened, was this on another venue other than his show? If so, what did he say (in summary)?”
Happened to catch Robertson talking to Charles Roark on the “warm up show” this afternoon.
The gist of Robertson’s spiel was: “Chris was an idiot to think he could take us on. He can’t do it. We won! He threw in the towel! Yay for us! We are better than he is! We are better than ANYONE!”
Like I said last night: Christianity is not supposed to be a competition.
Does Robertson have any shred of conscience at all, in realizing how WRONG his attitude is?
Certainly isn’t the kind of attitude the Bible teaches us to show as Christians. Like being compassionate and patience and like I said earlier to not be boastful.
It is a pretty sad ordeal. It is all about pride and power, instead of humility and love-which is what Jesus is ALL about.
My work is done. Johnny Robertson provided an answer to my question after all.
And that answer is, from Johnny himself:
“We are here to defeat destroy you…”
http://theknightshift.blogspot.com/2008/06/johnny-robertson-sez-we-are-here-to.html
Thank you, Johnny.
The record will reflect this long after the memory of whatever happened in the past few days on WGSR has faded.
And people in years to come will know that Johnny Robertson of the Martinsville Church of Christ declared that it was his God-ordained mission to “defeat (and) destroy you”.
Forever, Johnny. Forever. You can’t take that back.
I said the other night that Christianity is not a competition.
But you made it one. And then you made the mistake of framing this as a short-term debate for your own glory…
…while you, quite foolishly, took on – if God might indulge me to boast this one time – a historian. Someone with a much more long-term perspective of things.
In a battle of wits, Johnny Robertson, you came unarmed.
And your own words now testify against you. Forever.
I did not come seeking a “victory” of any sort. I just wanted an answer to a question. This day, the Lord has doubly blessed me.
Again, thank you Johnny.
Forever.