Church of Christ Question

The idea of trying to emulate the new testament churches is a good thing. What many COC congregations (although not all by any means) do is to make other things necessary for salvation. The idea that going to a church that says "Baptist" means one cannot be saved is not Christian. The idea that singing with a piano or guitar is sin is laughable.

This smacks of the Judaizers. You must to this like me in order to be saved.

 

This is an interesting article -

An Unusual Church of Christ
Lucado has been making some controversial changes
By Cindy Crosby

Max Lucado's emphasis on second chances is prompting changes at his church—not least shortening its name from Oak Hills Church of Christ to Oak Hills Church.

"Some people find the name of 'Church of Christ' to be an insurmountable barrier," Lucado writes in the church's new vision statement. "Scripture urges us to remove cultural hindrances while remaining scripturally true." The name change is part of a bigger plan to become a multi-site church—one church, many campuses—in the next eight to ten years.

In addition, Oak Hills is one of a handful of Church of Christ congregations that include musical instruments in their Sunday evening services, as well as at "20-to-30 something" morning services, which Oak Hills holds in its fellowship hall. The three Sunday morning services in the main worship center will remain a cappella.

Most Church of Christ congregations have used only a cappella worship music throughout their history. The denomination, first recognized in 1906, is the most conservative of the three Restorationist streams (the other two being the Disciples of Christ and the Christian Churches). Other distinctives include an emphasis on New Testament Christianity, congregational independence, weekly observance of the Lord's Supper, and the necessity of baptism for salvation. Lucado, like many Church of Christ ministers, no longer believes that last teaching.

The recent changes at Oak Hills have drawn mixed reviews in the denomination. Some believe Lucado is compromising the denomination's distinctives, even though they understand his motives.

Such changes are rare in the Church of Christ, says Charles Siburt, associate dean at Abilene Christian University, where Lucado earned his undergraduate and graduate degrees. "I can only think of a handful who have done so," Siburt says. "While most leaders in Churches of Christ do recognize that some of our churches consider their Church of Christ identity as an unnecessary obstacle to their ultimate priorities, we cannot help but feel a sense of loss when a Church of Christ chooses another identity—whatever the reason."

The president of Abilene Christian University, Dr. Royce Money, says he and Lucado are good friends, and he respects Lucado. "To understand Max, one must realize that he has the heart of a missionary. He will do whatever he thinks will reach the most people for Christ," Money says. "I personally regret that his church leaders have decided to change their name and worship format, but I understand their right to do so as an autonomous congregation of God's people."

- www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/003/36.62.html

 

Eric:

The building that is used for assembly is not owned by any corporate interest. However, if it were, this would not violate the scripture or go passed that which is writtten as homes and the temple were owned by people. Furthermore, we are commanded to obey the laws of the land when they do not vioalte God's law.( Acts 5:29, Romans 13:1-5,I Pet. 2:13). Owning things does not violate any law of God. In fact, many of God's people owned things.( Abraham and Lot, Ananias and Sapphira). This argument is without foundation.
Buildings are expedients. This by biblical defintion requires a thing to be lawful to carry out a divine directive of God.( I Cor. 6:12). Ther are many expedients in the Bible. The cup(s) used for the Lord's supper is an expedient. The table the apostles surrounded and used at the supper would be an expedient. The modes of transportation in the new testament would be espedients.( ships, donkeys, walking). All of these things are lawful ways to carry out a command.

 

Chalres:
i just want you to give one verse that authorizes using instruemtnal music in worship. Just one!

If you do, you will be the first man in the history of the gospel age to do so.

You have not provided one shread of support for your contention. You simply are throwing stones because you cannot support your position.

It is not mean spirited to make accusations that are not supported by scripture.

I have researched the topic. it is posted for all to investigate. I challenge you to prove it is in accurate. I challenge you to prove the church of Pentecost or of the first centuryy used mechanicl instruments. There eight verses providing the info. Now, which one makes your case?

I challenge you to find anyone using them in worship before the year 600. Can you name just one group?

I have been a Christian for many years and I am still amazed at the irrational thought process of many religious people. Most would say it is important to understand the specific codes or our tax laws and the laws of the land, but God does not really mean what he says in his expressed will. After all, God did not say not to.

This type hermaneutic allows me to preach naked, use marijuana at the Lord's supper, burn incense and use a voo doo doll during prayer. After all, God did not say, Do Not Use Them!

Ths is the same argument instrumentalist use. It is not rational and is violation of the will of God. ( Hebrews 7:14, 8:4, Leviticus 10:1,2, Rev. 22:18,19).

 

Ken:

This article is unsupported by evidence. The vast majority of gospel preachers believe in all the tenants Max Lucado no longer accepts. Personally, It is a good thing they removed the identifying name from their sign. I would not want to be identified with apostasy. I hope and pray they will return to biblical new testament sound doctrine. ( Titus 2:1,2).

Furthermore, I would like to see the sources, and the corresponding data that supports this opinion. I am confident this will not take place. Why? Because it is wishful thinking on their part that "Many" support their brand of apostasy. If the context of many is three congregations near Abilene or Tulsa that is entirely possible. However, if the context of the many is the church overall, it is erroneous and distortion of facts.

Furthermore, I am well aware that Abilene Christian has some apostates teaching on her campus. Unfortunately, this can be found in other Christian colleges as well.

 

Charles:
You said,
"The idea that going to a church that says "Baptist" means one cannot be saved is not Christian. The idea that singing with a piano or guitar is sin is laughable.

This smacks of the Judaizers. You must to this like me in order to be saved."

Question: How do you know your statments are true?

Question: Who are you quoting? Could you be so kind as to reference the source of your statements.

Question: What scripture suports your conclusions?

Question: What is sin?

Question: Which sin(s) can one commit and take to heaven with them? How do you know?

 

If your church buildings are not owned by a corporate interst, then how do you have them? (Just curious. And corporate interest means not just a large governing body like a denomination, but even incorporating the local congregation.)

still, you keep talking about "expedient", but it seems you decide what is expedient and therefore allowable, but then say others are wrong.
You listed several scriptural examples of "expedient" things, but we're talking about things that are not "mentioned". Your general logic says that all such things are automatically "banned" just by not being mentioned, but when shown something that you use that is not mentioned "oh, but that's expedient". This is basically a pure loophole!Once again, who determines what is expedient or not? Perhaps you think it is expedient, but it is really an unauthorized "easy way", and God really wants you to "trust him" (as the argument goes), in doing His work without them.

This is why we are given liberty in an unclear, undiscussed area like this. It does no good to sit and pick out others' practices and try to rule them out, because it can be done to you, whatever excuse you may come up with.

But there are either other things LIKE them that are forbidden, and/or generqal principles. Anything associated with voodoo is false worship, and always has been clearly denounced in scripture as such. Mind altering drugs are the "sorcery" (pharmakia) condemned in scripture. Nakedness was also condemned. It exposes what is to be private and only shared with a mate. I do not see how both you and the various CCM critic can constantly throw these examples up and not see how different they are. There is no such principle in all of scripture against instruments. They are not particularly associated with pagans; God allowed them in the OT. They are not lewd, not immoral, most are not mind altering. You speak of "lawful ways to carry out a command", but have not shown a single proof that instruments are "unlawful", beyond "they were not mentioned", and try to make "make melody in your hearts" into a new "law" that excludes all details. God's Law was the 10 Commandments, and the spiritual principles that carry over from them. (I know your group tries to say they were "done away", but that's the letter; in the spirit, they carry on with more force, and thius the principles have not changed) If something doesn't violate this (not even in principle) you cannot call in "unlawful". Else, ou are making up your own "laws", not God's.

 

Frank,

How do I know my statements are true?

Because I've studied for myself - and not simply listened to those in the pulpits.

Whom do I quote?

Paul said in Rom 10:9 "if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

This is it in a nutshell. YOU cannot add your own extra points like "being added to the COC". Paul specifically states the qualifications - it doesn't UNLESS you are baptist or sing with a piano.

What scriptures? All of Romans for a start. Try John 3 as well. As far as the music thing goes - there just isn't even fodder for a debate on that one!

What is sin? Whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Rm 14:23).

What sins can we carry to heaven?

Any of them as believers - since Christ has paid for them all. Rom 8:1 - There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus..."

Frank - like I said - the idea of trying to emulate the NT churches is amiable. Many moderate COC groups fit this bill. The orthodox COC however more closely resembles several of the early church heresies in its insistence on extrabiblical qualifications for salvation.

 

1. With reference to music, 1 Cor 14:26 "How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification."

Eph 5:19 "speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord,"

Col 3:16 "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."

In each of these passages, the word "psalmos" is used as one of the types of worship acceptable to be used. The word "psalmos," in the Greek, which answers to the word "mizmor" in the Hebrew, means "to pluck with a string," as does the Hebrew word. Psalms are to be accompanied with stringed instruments.

Sin is transgression of the Law

Anything not done in faith--Rom 14:23

Anything you think to be sinful--James 4:17

Any unrighteousness--1 JOhn 5:17

Something we are all under--Rom 3:9-20

Lawlessness--1 John 3:4

Denying that we have sin, is sin--1 John 1:7-10

If you are a person who has been justified by God's grace, it is impossible to bear a sin, because God has shut the account--nothing more can be imputed to is (Rom 4:6-8)--God is faithful and just to forgive us all our sins--1 John 1:8-10.

 

Speaking as someone who was born and raised in the Campbellite heresy, the theology of the "orthodox" Campbellite churches is decidedly Roman Catholic at its base, and it falls somewhere between semi-Pelagian and Pelagian in it superficial view of sin and salvation.

 

The same one which tells you to use flush toilets, pews, church buildings, pulpits (which are only mentioned in the OT) Hymn books, electric lights, sermon notes, lesson books, little plastic shot glasses for communion, communion wafers intstead of regular Jewish passover bread, and any number of other things

 

Well, your non-denomiation has quite a few military chaplains who conduct Church of Christ services--and you can't have a chaplain for a group unless they are a denomination.

 

Major:

You could not prove your contention about Campbell if your life depended on it. I have several books about Campbell and other restoration leaders. None of them make the claims you state as fact.

If you are really interested in Campbell, try reading a documented text from someone converted by him, not from some religious hack on the internet. I suspect he would be more of an authority on what Campbell taught and did not teach. The book is entitled Alexander Campbell as a Preacher by Archibald Mclean. Mcclean was converted by Campbell and denies the very accusations you are making. Your assertions are false an unsupported by evidence.

Moreover, when Campbell or any one is corrrect on scripture I will stand with them. However, if they do not stand on the scripture, I will oppose the teaching. My devotion is to God, not to any man.

Furthermore, the church of Christ was assembled in America many years before Campbell came to her shores. According to documented records from the county seats in Bridgeport Al and Celina Tenn. the church was meeting in these communities in 1805 and 07. Campbell did not reach and preach in America until 1811. It would be most difficult to found a body that all ready exists. I would be interested to learn how one may do this!!

Furthermore, the church that belongs to Christ is not a denomination as she adheres to the authority of the new testament that demands unity based on the scriptures.( Mat. 28:18-20, Phil. 3:16). Again, you could not prove your accsuation if you had too. If one follows the new testament of Christ that makes him a Christian no more and no less. This is precisely what members of the church are called by God. (Isaiah 62:1,2, Acts 11:26). The only place you will find denominationalism is in the minds of men and their conventions, synods, magesteriums.

Unfortunately for you, the American military is not the authority on religious matters. If that were so, then you could rationally make that argument. However, such is not the case. My son is currrently in the Navy serving in Irag. He has told me they do not refer to any group as denominational, only that services are offered for all faiths. This is simply political correctness, but the military is a political group.

Now, if there is a specific doctrine that is supposedly false to Christiainity, that is taught by me, please use evidence to support it, not a vitriolic diatribe. You will have much more credibility with rational folk.

 

Charles:
God has warned of us apostasy. ( I Tim. 4:1-4, II Tim. 4:1-4).

God has identified those who have fallen away.(II Tim 4:10, I Tim. 1:20).

Those who fall away must repent of their sin or be lost.( I John 5:17, James 5:19,20, Hebrews 6:6, Rev. 2:2; 20;10; 22:15).

Furthermore, you did not substantiate your opening statements about the church.

I note you have provided no scriptural support for mechanical instruments of worship under the law of Christ.( I Cor. 9:21).

I note by implication that you seek justification under the law of Moses. ( Gal. 5:3).You have made a feeble attempt to justify pianos by linking the hebrew text of the old with the greek text of the new. However, verbs only describe the act, not the noun that precipitates the action. This is an erroneous parallel based on the eight verses in the new testament that address this subject and the gramatical construct of the text.

 

Eric:

I used examples of expedients to educate you as to what they are in practice. I provided biblical ones establish the fact there is such a thing. There are many that are not mentioned such as songbooks, pews, electricity, bathrooms, etc. All of these are lawful ways to carry out a command, action or practice. They do not violate that which is written by using them. This is what an expedient is in practice.
Consider the following:
Paul traveled by ship to Malta and Rome to preach. ( Acts 27-28, Romans 1:14-16). The ship is an expedient to carry out the command to go and teach the gospel. ( Mark 16:15,16).
Many preachers travel by airplanes to teach the gospel. ( Mark 16:15,16). The airplane, though not specifically identified in the text, is an expedient to carry out a comand. The use of the airplane does not violate the command to teach the gospel. However, it is not specifically mentioned in the bible.

As for the building issue, owning a facility in order to meet is an expedient for those who assemnble to worship. Ownership does not violate the laws of God. It allows one to carry out the command to assemble. (Acts 5:12, Acts 20;7, I Cor. 16;1,2, Acts 2:42). One must comply with the temporal government law as to the ownership of the building. Why? God commands us to obey the laws of the land.( I Pet.2:13, Romans 13;1-5).The only time we can disobey the laws of the land is when they are in conflict with God. ( Acts 5:29).
Eric, the deed to our building has the name of the elders on it. God has commanded them to lead or shepherd the flock. ( Acts 20:28, I Cor.4:1,2).

 

Charles:

You know from one verse in the Bible your statements are true.(Romans 10:9). Romans 10:9 does not support the claims you made. You said,"The idea that going to a church that says "Baptist" means one cannot be saved is not Christian. The idea that singing with a piano or guitar is sin is laughable.

This smacks of the Judaizers. You must to this like me in order to be saved."


Jesus said in Luke 13;3, one must repent or perish. Note the original language denotes a difference between the two words.

Jesus said in John 8;24, one must believe to be saved.

Jesus said in Mark 16:16, one must be baptized to be saved.

Jesus said in Revelation 2:10, one must be faithful to be saved in eternity.

Your nutshell has a large number of cracks in it.

 

Frank,

"Your nutshell has a large number of cracks in it."

Well - perhaps. But this can be said of any human's concept of God.

Here's the thing. Paul in Romans 10 as well as in Acts 16:30 clearly answers the question of WHAT one must do to be saved.

Now if you THINK that worship is better without instruments; or if you FEEL that the COC is the most correct and authentic church today then good. Your respect for God is every bit as valid as mine.

Your reference to baptism is a little since Mk 16:16 concludes with damnation to him which "BELIEVETH" not. Baptism is something to which all believers submit. But it is not the baptism which is saving but the belief.

Now...

As I said, your beliefs are as valid as mine.

But...

If a COC member (and not all do) STATES that belonging to a "denomination" or using instruments in worship PRECLUDES salvation then you have made a claim which is CLEARLY IN OPPOSITION to the clear requirements for salvation laid out by Paul and Jesus himself. And that would constitute FALSE DOCTRINE!!

 

Frank,
Jesus was indeed a priest while still on earth because notice in the previous verse it says that "it is necessary for this priest to have something to offer." Since He is called a priest before the offering was made, He was a priest on earth.

Hebrews 8:3-4 (ESV)
For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer . [4] Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law.

Also Heb. 2:17 says that the purpose of Him becoming a priest was to make propitiation for sin , showing that His priesthood existed before the act of propitiation was made, namely when he was still on earth!

Hebrews 2:17 (ESV)
Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

The reason Jesus did not have to be from the tribe of Judah, was because His priesthood was very special, after the order of Melchizedec, who was a priest even before the tribe of Judah existed! The correct interpretation of verse 4, that "if he were on earth he would not be a priest at all' simply means that if he were still on earth at that time, He would be a phony, because He wouldn't have been able to carry out His destiny of becoming the propitiation for our sins. It doesn't mean that while He was on earth that He wasn't a priest, because He had to be a priest to make the offering!

 

Frank, the point is, you're still deciding what is "expedient" and "a lawful ways to carry out a command", (mentioned and unmentioned practices that you follow), and what is not (what others do). Someone who wants to argue that buildings held in the name of the elder is a case when laws of the land are in conflict with God will be in the same position you are, and then you will be in the same position we are. Why not still use homes like the NT Church? The Church gained its own buildings when they began acquiring worldly power. The same with songbooks. Why would instruments be an unlawful "aid", but not books? The text says make melody with your hearts, not recite words out of a book!
You see how your exact reasoning comes up against you? This is what I am trying to show you.

No, but Barton Stone, one of the movement's other chief founders was starting his "Christian" groups around that earlier time. He was in Kentucky, but then there were several movements all around voicing similar concerns at the time. (part of the Second Great Awakening). These eventually came together.

 

Frank,

The new Testament says to sing psalms. One of the psalms says that it is good to sing praise to the Lord with the sound of the harp and the ten stringed lyre. Would you agree that it is right to sing this psalm? Do you think the words should be changed to 'It is bad to sing praise to the Lord to the sound of the harp and the ten-stringed lyre?"

If it is good to sing praise to the Lord to the sound of the harp, can you condemn it as sin?

In the Bible, we see that the saints, including elders, sing music to the accompaniment of harp music before the throne of God, as recorded in the book of Revelation. John saw this in his heavenly vision. Jesus told us to pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." If saints gathered together sing to God with musical accompaniment in heaven, how can you condemn it when saints do the same on earth?

If you make melody on instruments, you can make melody in your heart at the same time.

Sin is breaking the commandments of God. Where does the Bible command believers not to use instruments in their church meetings?

Where does the idea of not having instruments in church come from? From tradition. In the second century, churches had accapella music. It was this way for hundreds of years. Church meetings at this time were greatly influenced by synagogue liturgy. Instruments were taken out of the synagogue as an act of mourning over the destruction of the temple in approximately 70 AD. If you research this on the Internet, you can see this. There were instruments in the temple, and in the synagogue, before 70 AD. Are you mourning the destruction of the temple?

Jesus and Paul likely sang to instrumental accompaniment in the synagogues. They also participated in the temple, which had instrumentally accompanied singing. The early Jerusalem church met in the temple compound, where people sang to God with musical accompaniment according to the teaching of the Old Testament.