Worship

[Michael Wrenn]

Yep - But I'm not being a strict literalist. It seems from your posts here that you are condemning those who don't worship like you do and so I figured it MUST be fully Biblically based if we must do it that way.

I personally don't like liturgical kind of worship. It reminds me way too much of the dark time I was in the Catholic church. Instead, I love the freedom to worship the Lord with my whole spirit in our church service. If I were to go into a liturgical church, I honestly begin to feel sick. I don't know why but I do.

No, no, no. Besides, I don't worship just one way; I enjoy and appreciate different kinds of worship.

I think it is sad that people won't use liturgy because they think it is "Catholic". And I'm sorry that liturgy makes you feel the way you described.

I find that liturgy and freedom are not contradictory.

 

[saturneptune]

Of course I agree with you on that.

I just wonder why Baptists and evangelicals don't use more liturgy. Is it because they fear it is too "Catholic"?

I guess it does not bother me a lot because I grew up in a Presbyterian Church and the Apostles Creed was part of every Sunday morning service. As long as it lines up with Scripture, it is fine with me. It is also ok if a church does not use creeds.

 

[Zenas]

It is right there in Acts 2. The only thing we add that is not there is song. But I don't see any rote prayer, kneeling or nature involed.

Oh but there is, Ann. You just cited it awhile ago: Acts 2:42 "And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers."

Note that it doesn't say "prayer." It says "THE PRAYERS." That means they had rote prayers. I noticed this several years ago and with my Baptist background found it somewhat surprising.

 

[Zenas]

When you go to church you are approaching the throne of the King of Kings, and that means you should act respectful. You wouldn't meet the President in the Oval Office dancing or wearing blue jeans. You would be polite, courteous and would wear your very best clothes. You would not spend your time chatting with the person next to you, but would be focused on the man behind the desk. If you do this with a mere mortal human being, isn't the King of Kings entitled to at least as much respect and honor.

 

[saturneptune]

When you go to church you are approaching the throne of the King of Kings, and that means you should act respectful. You wouldn't meet the President in the Oval Office dancing or wearing blue jeans. You would be polite, courteous and would wear your very best clothes. You would not spend your time chatting with the person next to you, but would be focused on the man behind the desk. If you do this with a mere mortal human being, isn't the King of Kings entitled to at least as much respect and honor.

Very good post. I have always imagined the feeling of seeing Jesus Christ face to face in His eternal state. I do not believe our minds can even grasp the essence of the concept.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Oh but there is, Ann. You just cited it awhile ago: Acts 2:42 "And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers."

Note that it doesn't say "prayer." It says "THE PRAYERS." That means they had rote prayers. I noticed this several years ago and with my Baptist background found it somewhat surprising.

I honestly don't understand the objection to written prayers. The Lord's Prayer is a written prayer. And if singing together is okay, why not praying together?

Also, people talk about the freedom of non-liturgical worship, and yet the same order is followed every Sunday.

Now I think all worship is good -- liturgical or non-liturgical; so, why limit it to one kind or the other? How about some variety? Now that would really be freedom in worship!

 

[Michael Wrenn]

When you go to church you are approaching the throne of the King of Kings, and that means you should act respectful. You wouldn't meet the President in the Oval Office dancing or wearing blue jeans. You would be polite, courteous and would wear your very best clothes. You would not spend your time chatting with the person next to you, but would be focused on the man behind the desk. If you do this with a mere mortal human being, isn't the King of Kings entitled to at least as much respect and honor.

I don't think it matters what we wear; I don't think God cares about that.

Otherwise, good points.

 

[ktn4eg]

I still want to see your "scriptural mandate" for the typical evangelical worship.

Oh, and there is evidence that the earliest churches had the Lord's Supper every Lord's Day. So, why don't evangelicals do that? The only ones I know who do are the Churches of Christ.

The "City Church of Woodbine (an area of 'South' Nashville that used to be [maybe 30-40 years ago predominately "White"] but NOW is pre-dominately Kurdish, Burmese, Somali, Hispanic, Guatemalan, Argentinian, and who knows what else, due their particular homelands being either strife-torn by internal "civil" wars or very economically poor, and/or a combination of both of these factors)," which is a "church plant" that my home church (located some 10 mi SE from the Woodbine area of "Music City USA") in large part helped to "mother," observes not only the Lord's Supper in each of its Sunday PM services, but also sings the "Doxology" ("Glory be to the Father,....") at the end of each of its services.

And, I might add, we are neither Church of Christ, nor are we, by any stretch of the imagination, "litgurical."

So there!!! :thumbs:

 

[saturneptune]

I don't think it matters what we wear; I don't think God cares about that.

Otherwise, good points.

That has changed over the years in my experience. When growing up in the 50s and 60s, it was coat and tie every Sunday even as a kid. Today, I wear slacks and a nice shirt Sunday morning, the same Sunday night, and sometimes jeans and a nice shirt on Wednesday. I do not want to look like a tramp, but agree that a tie and coat is not necessary. I do wear a tie when serving the Lord's Supper or doing a Wednesday night Bible study.

I still do not understand all the difference of opinion, since the basis of style of worship is what the local church decides. There is no right or wrong. One goes to the church that they feel the Lord leads them to. As I stated above, I have no problem with written prayers or creeds that are Scriptural. I have lots of problem with church proclomations by a hierarchy based on flawed opinion being incorporated into worship of the Lord.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

That has changed over the years in my experience. When growing up in the 50s and 60s, it was coat and tie every Sunday even as a kid. Today, I wear slacks and a nice shirt Sunday morning, the same Sunday night, and sometimes jeans and a nice shirt on Wednesday. I do not want to look like a tramp, but agree that a tie and coat is not necessary. I do wear a tie when serving the Lord's Supper or doing a Wednesday night Bible study.

I still do not understand all the difference of opinion, since the basis of style of worship is what the local church decides. There is no right or wrong. One goes to the church that they feel the Lord leads them to. As I stated above, I have no problem with written prayers or creeds that are Scriptural. I have lots of problem with church proclomations by a hierarchy based on flawed opinion being incorporated into worship of the Lord.

Good post; I agree with all of it.

I just wish Baptists and evangelicals were not so put off by liturgy.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

The "City Church of Woodbine (an area of 'South' Nashville that used to be [maybe 30-40 years ago predominately "White"] but NOW is pre-dominately Kurdish, Burmese, Somali, Hispanic, Guatemalan, Argentinian, and who knows what else, due their particular homelands being either strife-torn by internal "civil" wars or very economically poor, and/or a combination of both of these factors)," which is a "church plant" that my home church (located some 10 mi SE from the Woodbine area of "Music City USA") in large part helped to "mother," observes not only the Lord's Supper in each of its Sunday PM services, but also sings the "Doxology" ("Glory be to the Father,....") at the end of each of its services.

And, I might add, we are neither Church of Christ, nor are we, by any stretch of the imagination, "litgurical."

So there!!! :thumbs:

Good for you, and them

 

[saturneptune]

Good post; I agree with all of it.

I just wish Baptists and evangelicals were not so put off by liturgy.

I really respect the tone and content of your posts even when I disagree, and that is not too often. You are obviously more open minded than me when it comes to other denominations, as my experience is limited to Presbyterian and Baptist.

What I am trying to say is that I hope you understand that I have no ill will against any faith, and am willing ot discuss any issue. What set me off about TS was comparing Baptists to JWs and Mormons, and calling on all of us to stop believing false doctrine and return to our catholic roots, which we never had. To me, that was crossing a line considering that this is a Baptist community.

Anyway, hope you do not think any less of me, but that is beyond any form of respect and decency. I notice you are living in Mississippi. The Presbyterian Church I attended while growing up was in Gulfport.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I really respect the tone and content of your posts even when I disagree, and that is not too often. You are obviously more open minded than me when it comes to other denominations, as my experience is limited to Presbyterian and Baptist.

What I am trying to say is that I hope you understand that I have no ill will against any faith, and am willing ot discuss any issue. What set me off about TS was comparing Baptists to JWs and Mormons, and calling on all of us to stop believing false doctrine and return to our catholic roots, which we never had. To me, that was crossing a line considering that this is a Baptist community.

Anyway, hope you do not think any less of me, but that is beyond any form of respect and decency. I notice you are living in Mississippi. The Presbyterian Church I attended while growing up was in Gulfport.

Remember that was Wittenberger, not TS. And, yes, Wittenberger's post set me off, too. He definitely crossed the line.

I really appreciate your kind words. Sometimes I allow myself to be drawn into confrontations where I post inappropriately, and I have to back off, cool off, and repent.

I like your posts and agree with what you say almost always. I have not lost any respect for you. What Wittenberger posted was one of the most vile attacks that I have seen, and he needed to be called on it.

 

[ktn4eg]

Good for you, and them

BTW, the City Church of Woodbine doesn't hold ANY SUNDAY MORNING SERVICES!!!

Can that church be considered to be "Baptistic" and do something like that????









































Well, I guess they can. Besides, the church from which TCCofW rents its building, holds Their Sunday AM services in that building!! :laugh:

 

[Crabtownboy]

In the Baptist section, I started a thread on the Baptist distinctives I would miss most if I joined another denomination.

Here I want to discuss what I miss most from the Episcopal Church -- worship and liturgy.

What should worship consist of? Doesn't worship in Baptist and evangelical churches lack something? Shouldn't worship be more than a few hymns, someone "leading in prayer", a sermon, and a closing hymn? What about the mystery, awe, and beauty that should be experienced by being in God's presence as a community?

In short, I find the typical evangelical worship sadly lacking.

Interesting question and maybe opening a can of worms for some. I grew up in a Baptist church and have always been a member of one. When I am visiting relatives in VA I go to a Mennonite church ... not an Old Order one nor a "Black Bumper" one. The worship services in both are very much alike ... except the Mennonite four-part harmony is vastly superior to the singing in most, if not all, Baptist churches.

My problem is the opposite of yours as I find the liturgy very unsatisfying for me. However, I would never criticize another who finds satisfaction in a liturgical church and I can understand that you find something lacking in Baptist worship services.

I guess it all depends on the person.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Interesting question and maybe opening a can of worms for some. I grew up in a Baptist church and have always been a member of one. When I am visiting relatives in VA I go to a Mennonite church ... not an Old Order one nor a "Black Bumper" one. The worship services in both are very much alike ... except the Mennonite four-part harmony is vastly superior to the singing in most, if not all, Baptist churches.

My problem is the opposite of yours as I find the liturgy very unsatisfying for me. However, I would never criticize another who finds satisfaction in a liturgical church and I can understand that you find something lacking in Baptist worship services.

I guess it all depends on the person.

Not just Baptist, but other evangelical services, too.

 

[SovereignMercy]

It's funny how literalists dismiss something if it's not written in the Bible, even if it was a practice done by the earliest Christians. So, tell me, do you drive to church in your car, or do you walk?

In NT times -- you know, before and during the time when the books were being written -- communion was done every Sunday.

How do you know communion was every Lord's Day?

 

[annsni]

Oh but there is, Ann. You just cited it awhile ago: Acts 2:42 "And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers."

Note that it doesn't say "prayer." It says "THE PRAYERS." That means they had rote prayers. I noticed this several years ago and with my Baptist background found it somewhat surprising.

Oh? Do you have evidence of this from the Greek? Does anyone who knows Greek know if this means "rote prayers"?

 

[Walter]

I really respect the tone and content of your posts even when I disagree, and that is not too often. You are obviously more open minded than me when it comes to other denominations, as my experience is limited to Presbyterian and Baptist.

What I am trying to say is that I hope you understand that I have no ill will against any faith, and am willing ot discuss any issue. What set me off about TS was comparing Baptists to JWs and Mormons, and calling on all of us to stop believing false doctrine and return to our catholic roots, which we never had. To me, that was crossing a line considering that this is a Baptist community.

Anyway, hope you do not think any less of me, but that is beyond any form of respect and decency. I notice you are living in Mississippi. The Presbyterian Church I attended while growing up was in Gulfport.[/QUOTE

You have accused TS TWICE sense apologizing to him for falsely accusing him of comparing Baptists to JWs and Mormons and calling on all Baptists to stop believing false doctrine and return to Catholic roots. Is your memory that short or are you so blinded by your anti-Catholic BIGOTRY that you want to believe that about him? Seriously, you have accused him twice sense you publicly apologized. You even admitted that Wittenberger and TS's names are not even similar. You need to KNOCK IT OFF!!

 

[Walter]

Remember that was Wittenberger, not TS. And, yes, Wittenberger's post set me off, too. He definitely crossed the line.

I really appreciate your kind words. Sometimes I allow myself to be drawn into confrontations where I post inappropriately, and I have to back off, cool off, and repent.

I like your posts and agree with what you say almost always. I have not lost any respect for you. What Wittenberger posted was one of the most vile attacks that I have seen, and he needed to be called on it.

He continues to make these false accusations against TS after he (Saturneptune) apologized and even admitted he doesn't know how he made such a mistake given the fact that the names are not the least bit similar. I have my own ideas why he continues to post this. Maybe Saturneptune can explain.