Re: Methodist: church of Christ right after all
|April 4 2011, 4:03 AM |
Quoted from the first paragraph of the article:
The reputation that the Churches of Christ had among my kinfolk was that they were eccentric because they did not use musical instruments in worship, they celebrated the Lords Supper every Sunday, they didn't have creeds (except the New Testament), and they seemed not to recognize other Christian churches who did not "bear the name" of Christ in the names of their (our) denominations. This is a very interesting read. I would urge our readers, especially our regular contributors (both conservative and liberal [progressive]), to read the article, as well as the subsequent responses from various posters to the article.
Based on the author's observations mentioned in the above paragraph, what do the liberals really believe and how do they react and respond to the following:
- That the church of Christ does "not use musical instruments in worship."
- That the church of Christ "celebrate[s] the Lord's Supper every Sunday."
- That the church of Christ "[does not] have creeds (except the New Testament)."
- That the church of Christ seems "not to recognize [or affiliate with] other Christian churches who did not 'bear the name' of Christ in the names of ... denominations."
|April 4 2011, 12:32 PM |
Trad Poster:I dont understand the gift of the Holy Spirit to refer to the cleansing, or holiness, or sanctification of my spirit. I am aware that there those who do understand it thus, but in my opinion that is a misunderstanding. The Paraclete was promised by Jesus as a replacement of His presence. He told the disciples that it was to their advantage that this happen. How so? Because the Paraclete dwells within us
I tried to read Foy Wallaces book on the mission and medium of the Holy Spirit a year or so ago, and found myself unable to finish it. Im sorry to say this, but I actually felt that Wallaces position was blasphemous. I fear that in many cases we react so strongly against a patently false position that we miss the middle ground and end up on another extreme.
My sense is that many in the Churches of Christ are moving back towards that middle ground where we can accept the indwelling of the Spirit and appreciate Gods grace without being fearful that me may have neglected to pray for forgiveness of some particular sin just prior to death and yes, I have witnessed serious discussions of that particular mindset
The problem with lifting proof-texts is that it misses many clear statements which define only a Father God, Son in His post-resurrected state:
When Jesus promised "another" Comforter that does not mean heteros or a different comforter. In John 14:18 Jesus said "I"
will come to you. Then the mutual indwelling of father-son in the obedient is also the abiding of the obedient IN father-son. Jesus was "allos" in that He was in his post-resurrection state. When the Spirit Lord appeared to Paul He said "I am Jesus of Nazareth."
Hebrews 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven,
and to God the Judge of all,
and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
The Comfoter in John 14 is "Paraklete." In First John the name of the Paraklete is:
1John 2:1 ¶ My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin,
.......we have an advocate
(paraklete) with the Father,
Jesus Christ the righteous:
1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
1John 2:3 ¶ And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
As you move toward the end of revelation the term "The Holy Spirit" gives way to the two-fold relationship in the salutations of One God the Father and One Lord:
1Timothy 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ
.......by the commandment of God our Saviour,
.......and Lord Jesus Christ,
which is our hope;
Peter made that clear on the day of Pentecost.
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly,
......that God hath made
that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified,
......both Lord and Christ.
1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God,
....... and one mediator between God and men,
........the man Christ Jesus;
Historic churches of Christ are in agreement with the original trinitarian creeds which did not recognize "the Holy Spirit" along with the One God in Heaven and One Lord Jesus. The "three people" Godhead I believe was invented by H. Leo Boles in 1938.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 188.8.131.52 on Apr 4, 2011 12:35 PM|
Methodists rejeced instruments
|April 10 2011, 2:24 PM |
Division occurs when we do not grasp that the Qahal, Synagogue or Church in the wilderness is defined exclusively in terms of teaching the Word of God handed down to tribal leader: the Patriarchal elders were in charge before the Israelites demanded a Goyim or Gentile-like king so they could worship like the Gentiles (nations). Beyond right or wrong it is a fact that Churches of Christ did not invent NOT using "machines for doing hard work" into the Bible-based assembly.
Adam Clark and all scholars at the time rejected Instruments based on the Bible
Adam Clark CHAPTER Amos VI
"The prophet reproves his people for indulging themselves in luxurious ease, and forming alliances with their powerful idolatrous neighbours, 1. He asks if their lands or their lot be better than their own, 2, that they should choose to worship the gods of the heathen, and forsake Jehovah. Then follows an amplification of the sin which the prophet reproves, 3-6; to which he annexes very awful threatenings, confirmed by the oath of Jehovah, 7, 8. He next particularly specifies the punishment of their sins by pestilence, 9-11; by famine, or a drought that should harden the earth so that it could not be tilled, 12; and by the sword of the Assyrians, 14.
Verse 5. "And invent to themselves instruments of music, like David" - See the note on 1 Chron. xxiii. 5; and see especially the note on 2 Chron. xxix. 25. I believe that David was not authorized by the Lord to introduce that multitude of musical instruments into the Divine worship of which we read, and I am satisfied that his conduct in this respect is most solemnly reprehended by this prophet; and I farther believe that the use of such instruments of music, in the Christian Church, is without the sanction and against the will of God; that they are subversive of the spirit of true devotion, and that they are sinful. If there was a wo to them who invented instruments of music, as did David under the law, is there no wo, no curse to them who invent them, and introduce them into the worship of God in the Christian Church? I am an old man, and an old minister; and I here declare that I never knew them productive of any good in the worship of God; and have had reason to believe that they were productive of much evil. Music, as a science, I esteem and admire: but instruments of music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music; and here I register my protest against all such corruptions in the worship of the Author of Christianity. The late venerable and most eminent divine, the Revelation John Wesley, who was a lover of music, and an elegant poet, when asked his opinion of instruments of music being introduced into the chapels of the Methodists said, in his terse and powerful manner, "I have no objection to instruments of music in our chapels, provided they are neither HEARD nor SEEN." I say the same, though I think the expense of purchase had better be spared.
The word µyfrph (Cano: charm, Magic)enchant happoretim, which we render chant, and the margin quaver, signifies to dance, to skip, &c. In the sight of such a text, fiddlers, drummers, waltzers, &c., may well tremble, who perform to excite detestable passions."
-Cano I.imp. cante = canite, Carm
Carm. I. Neutr., to utter melodious notes, to sing, sound, play.A. Of men: si absurde canat, Cic. Tusc. 2, 4, 12; Plin. Ep. 3, 18, 9: celebrare dapes canendo, Ov. M. 5, 113:
2.Of the faulty delivery of an orator, to speak in a sing-song tone: inclinat ululantique voce more Asiatico canere, Cic. Or. 8, 27; cf. canto and canticum.C. Transf., of the instruments by which, or (poet.) of the places in which, the sounds are produced, to sound, resound: canentes tibiae, Cic. N. D. 2, 8, 22: maestae cecinere tubae, Prop. 4 (5), 11, 9.
-Gallus , i, m., = Gallos Strab.,
A. Galli , rum, m., the priests of Cybele, so called because of their raving, Ov. F. 4, 361 sq.; Plin. 5, 32, 42, § 146; 11, 49, 109, § 261; 35, 12, 46, § 165; Paul. ex Fest. p. 95 Müll.; Hor. S. 1, 2, 121.In sing.: Gallus , i, m., a priest of Cybele, Mart. 3, 81; 11, 74; cf. Quint. 7, 9, 2: resupinati cessantia tympana Galli, Juv. 8, 176.And satirically (on account of their emasculated condition), in the fem.: Gallae , rum, Cat. 63, 12, and 34.
B. Gallcus , a, um, adj.
2. (Acc. to II. A., of or belonging to the priests of Cybele; hence, transf.) Of or belonging to the priests of Isis, Gallic: turma, the troop of the priests of Isis, Ov. Am. 2, 13, 18.
This defines the instrumental performance of the not-commanded sacrificial system. All of the words associated with the Jacob-cursed tribe of Levi point to males performing thre roles of women.
This is easier to digest if you understand that God turned the Israelites over to worship the Starry Host because of musical idolatry on a SABBATH which God gave us to quarantine us from the usual Sabazianism on the "evil" sevent day.
Primitive Baptist Churches Reject Instruments
|April 14 2011, 1:53 AM |
The "change agents" in the brotherhood must re-learn what the Holy Scripture teaches concerning the USE of musical devices in the assembly which is unnecessary, controversial and divisive.
Learn from whom? Yes, from the Primitive Baptist Church. Please read the following "introduction" in an article derived from: http://www.pb.org/pbwrite.html
New Testament Worship Service
By Elder Zack Guess
The discussion concerning whether church music should be restricted to unaccompanied singing is not new. Since the early centuries of the Christian era, scholars have made studies of apostolic practice in church music. While it has been only in recent years that instrumental music has come to be a widespread practice in church worship, this comparatively new practice has become so universal in some religious groups that many persons would be surprised to know that there are religious people who do not use musical instruments in their worship.
Most people, when attending a Primitive Baptist church service for the first time, are quite puzzled and amazed to find that no instrumental music is used. They naturally are curious as to the reasons for this practice; and unless reliable information is secured, they may conclude that merely from the standpoint of personal taste, Primitive Baptist churches do not prefer instrumental music. This conclusion is not true.
Primitive Baptist churches, in refusing the use of instrumental music in worship, do not do so just to be peculiar. To them, it is not a matter of expediency, but an issue of principle. They believe that no religious problem is rightly solved by the criteria of personal preferences, individual tastes, or human wisdom, but by the supreme authority of Jesus Christ expressed in the New Testament. They have reverently and humbly sought out the correct answer to the all-important question: Does Jesus Christ authorize the use of instrumental music in the worship of God? Their objective investigation of the divine word has produced the conclusion that there is neither command, precept, nor example for the worship of God by the use of instrumental music during the New Testament dispensation. Therefore, they sincerely believe that the practice of instrumental music in the worship service is a departure from the divine plan.
While the Primitive Baptist churches take their stand solely on the basis of Holy Scripture, they nevertheless derive comfort from the fact that they are not alone in this belief. Many of the world's great religious leaders have been opposed to using instrumental music in worship, and there are hundreds of thousands of people who do not use it.
To all who disagree with this position, a sincere appeal is presented to make an impartial, unbiased, candid investigation of the study at hand. They are urged to compare all the claims made herein with the Scriptural facts, and only then will they be able to draw a definite, honest conclusion as to the value of the stand taken by Primitive Baptist churches against the use of musical instruments in the worship of God.
It is WORKING!!!
|April 14 2011, 11:18 AM |
This is awesome....one minute William Crump is advocating that denominations are Christian-based, and now Donnie is taking advice from the primitive baptist.
You guys are showing that you can listen, and more importantly, learn!!!
|Dr. Bill Crump|
Re: It is WORKING!!!
|April 14 2011, 1:21 PM |
On the subject of instrumental music, the Primitive Baptists and church of Christ congregations realized that the early Christians did NOT use instruments in their worship. They learned the truth by examining the historical facts.
Denominational churches call themselves "Christians" and will do so until Doom's Day. We know, however, that there is only ONE true Church, and that is the Church that Christ founded over 2,000 years ago, THE Church of Christ. Denominational churches would never begin to admit that they are spiritual frauds--fakes--yet they are, because Christ founded only ONE Church, not a whole slew of different denominations. Man concocted the denominations with their varying beliefs, some of which clash with the teachings of Christ and the apostles in the New Testament.
It Should Work for the Change Agents
|April 15 2011, 3:57 AM |
No, Dave, the advice is for the change agents operating in the brotherhood, as well as for their ardent supporters and followers.
The church of our Lord Jesus Christ already believes what the Scripture teaches in regard to the use of inanimate, LIFELESS musical devices in the assembly of LIVING saints.
As Ken has constantly and accurately pointed out historical facts pertaining to musical instruments and musical idolatry, founders of major Protestant denominations rejected IM in the assembly. The fact that Primitive Baptist Churches reject the use of musical instruments in their assembly is proof that this practice (of not playing...) is not exclusively among churches of Christ.
Yes, if the change agents no longer adhere to what the Holy Scripture teaches concerning IM and other doctrinal issues, they certainly can re-learn from the Primitive Baptist Church and founders of major religious denominations.