Wow. Ok, now I'm a little embarrased. In thinking (and ranting) about instrumental worship, I've ran across a number of books, blogs, and sermons on this same subject. Very well written, researched, and reasoned material produced by obviously wiser and more studied minds than mine. Therefore, I will now shut up about it and encourage you to carry on from here on your own. I will make only a couple of statements in parting, about the anti-instrumentalist's favorite argument against it. That is, the so-called "Law of Silence". Jesus' and the apostles' lack of writings on the issue of instruments in worship does not prove, nor in anyway imply that instruments are forbidden or unathorized. The only thing their silence should imply is that the subject was simply a non-issue. It never occured to them to mention the issue, because it simply wasn't one. Remember, Jesus and most of His apostles were Jews, had grown up under the Law of Moses, and used instruments in their own worship! If, after Jesus' death and resurrection, it had suddenly become forbidden to use them in worship, I'm about 100% sure at least one of them would have mentioned it somewhere.
Anti-instrumentalists also like to mention Revelation 22:18-19. That's the one about not "adding to the words of this book". Ok, this seems obvious to me, but I'm gonna say it anyway. Those verses have nothing to do with the Bible, at least, not the New Testament. Not in the way most people mean it. The apostle John had no idea (or else he surely would've written about it) that someday, there would be a collection of inspired writings that christians would refer to as "The Bible". In fact the Bible, as we know it, didn't even exist until many years later. The book that John is referring to must be either his own Revelation, or the Book of Life which he mentions just a couple of chapters earlier. Now, that doesn't mean we shouldn't speak where God hasn't spoken, or be silent where God has given clear decrees. And condemning instrumental music when Jesus doesn't, comes dangerously close to speaking where God was silent. The Church of Christ was born out of the Restoration movement, and one of the main goals of the movement was freedom from the deductions and inferences made by men. Yet here in the 21st century we have an example of once again living under rules inferred by man, rather than spoken by God. An example of Tradition being elevated to the level of Commandment.
And finally, what does this Law of Silence say about my God? Do you, dear reader, actually believe that the Creator of the Universe loves you enough that He would sacrifice His one and only Son just to have the faintest chance of spending Eternity with you? If you say "Yes" to that question, then can you honestly believe that this greatest of all sacrifices could be nullified simply because you failed to correctly interpret God's silence? Really? I don't know whether or not you have children, but if you did, would you give them the ultimate punishment for violating a rule you had never handed down, and that they knew nothing about? What kind of parent would that make you? Well, God is a perfect parent, and I cannot fathom the idea that He, who loved me enough to die for me, would destroy me because I didn't properly understand something He never talked about! Sorry, that's not the God I worship. The God I worship doesn't say instrumental music with christian-themed lyrics that praise and honor Him is ok to listen to at home, but not in a worship service. The God I worship loves me with a passion, and wants me to feel and express love back to Him. God loves an earnest, honest heart. He does, however, as evidenced throughout the Old and the New Testaments, hate hypocrisy. Hypocrisy? Yes, as in hypocrites. Who are they? They're the ones who'll yell and scream that I'm going to hell for having a guitar in church on Sunday morning, and then get themselves all choked up and teary-eyed when Martina McBride sings "God's Will", or when Carrie Underwood sings "Jesus, Take The Wheel".
To them, it's apparently ok to use instruments to sing about God while in the car, but not while in God's house. That, to me, is hypocrisy.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Saturday, September 27, 2008
To Play or Not To Play, verse 3
Some folks who are against instrumental worship say it is because of the "look at me" factor. Now, on this point, I can understand where they're coming from. Maybe. Yes, there does exist the very real possibility that the main reason a musician is standing on that stage is for self-glorification. What most people don't seem to realize however is, 1.) That danger exists whether the worship is instrumental OR a capella, and 2.) the worship leaders at any given church are appointed by the church leadership, hopefully the Elders. However, it seems to me that anyone with much sense should be able to tell by attending a few services whether or not the worship leaders are trying to be "transparent" (i.e. giving all the glory and praise to God).
If it seems to you that they are in it to bring glory to themselves, my advice is to pray for them, approach them after church, shake hands with them, engage them in conversation, speak to them, ask them how much time and effort they put into preparing for the worship service, ask them what motivates them to get up there week after week and lead the congregation like that. Look them in the eye. Then see if you still think they're just in it for personal glory. And IF you still do, then go speak with an Elder. But whatever you do, don't you dare sit back there in your comfy ol' pew with your arms crossed, your face frowning, your tongue tsk-tsk-ing, and judge people whose hearts you don't even know. For one thing, you are commanded not to in the Bible (look it up). And secondly, YOU are supposed to be worshiping!
That's certainly on thing I don't understand. If everyone was busy doing what they were supposed to be doing, most people wouldn't have time to sit and judge what someone else was doing. Judging the worship leader's motives isn't really supposed to be your job.
It's God's.
In the same way, a worship style is not supposed to define you.
Christ is.
Some conservatives, (a word which here means "set in their ways"), argue that a capella worship is part of what sets us apart from those other people who think they're going to heaven, too. It's part of what defines us. It's part of our "heritage". I have only one thing to say about that. Would you prefer it if the government were still feeding us to the lions? That's part of our heritage too, right? How 'bout being burned at the stake? How 'bout being stoned to death outside the city? Hmmmm? Really? You really wanna hang on to all that "heritage"?
Finally, there's the "entertainment" argument. Yes, I agree that worship is not supposed to be entertainment. But that does NOT mean that it is wrong to get "enjoyment" out of it. Some of our worship songs reflect a spirit that is full of love for God, His creation, our neighbors, etc. Some songs reflect a spirit that feels triumphant, victorious, and filled with God's power. I have experienced these types of songs in both instrumental and a capella services. In both types, the feelings of exuberant joy and exaltation are the same!
Other songs are written to reflect more reverent attitudes such as humility, conviction, repentance, contrition, etc. They might bring images of how Christ suffered for our sins, how we are all guilty for causing the death of Jesus, and how completely and utterly lost and hopeless we would be without Him. They remind us of how much we need our Savior, which in turn reminds us of how much He loves us, and there we stand in helpless adoration, with tear-stained cheeks, realizing that we will never, ever, be worthy of the Gift, and the only thing we can do is accept it with undying gratitude. And again, I've experienced all of these feelings during both instrumental and a capella worship servcies.
My friend, worship is not a passive activity. One must participate. It is something you must DO, not something you feel. No, it is never supposed to be entertainment, but if it's never something you enjoy . . .
Well, I'll pray for you.
If it seems to you that they are in it to bring glory to themselves, my advice is to pray for them, approach them after church, shake hands with them, engage them in conversation, speak to them, ask them how much time and effort they put into preparing for the worship service, ask them what motivates them to get up there week after week and lead the congregation like that. Look them in the eye. Then see if you still think they're just in it for personal glory. And IF you still do, then go speak with an Elder. But whatever you do, don't you dare sit back there in your comfy ol' pew with your arms crossed, your face frowning, your tongue tsk-tsk-ing, and judge people whose hearts you don't even know. For one thing, you are commanded not to in the Bible (look it up). And secondly, YOU are supposed to be worshiping!
That's certainly on thing I don't understand. If everyone was busy doing what they were supposed to be doing, most people wouldn't have time to sit and judge what someone else was doing. Judging the worship leader's motives isn't really supposed to be your job.
It's God's.
In the same way, a worship style is not supposed to define you.
Christ is.
Some conservatives, (a word which here means "set in their ways"), argue that a capella worship is part of what sets us apart from those other people who think they're going to heaven, too. It's part of what defines us. It's part of our "heritage". I have only one thing to say about that. Would you prefer it if the government were still feeding us to the lions? That's part of our heritage too, right? How 'bout being burned at the stake? How 'bout being stoned to death outside the city? Hmmmm? Really? You really wanna hang on to all that "heritage"?
Finally, there's the "entertainment" argument. Yes, I agree that worship is not supposed to be entertainment. But that does NOT mean that it is wrong to get "enjoyment" out of it. Some of our worship songs reflect a spirit that is full of love for God, His creation, our neighbors, etc. Some songs reflect a spirit that feels triumphant, victorious, and filled with God's power. I have experienced these types of songs in both instrumental and a capella services. In both types, the feelings of exuberant joy and exaltation are the same!
Other songs are written to reflect more reverent attitudes such as humility, conviction, repentance, contrition, etc. They might bring images of how Christ suffered for our sins, how we are all guilty for causing the death of Jesus, and how completely and utterly lost and hopeless we would be without Him. They remind us of how much we need our Savior, which in turn reminds us of how much He loves us, and there we stand in helpless adoration, with tear-stained cheeks, realizing that we will never, ever, be worthy of the Gift, and the only thing we can do is accept it with undying gratitude. And again, I've experienced all of these feelings during both instrumental and a capella worship servcies.
My friend, worship is not a passive activity. One must participate. It is something you must DO, not something you feel. No, it is never supposed to be entertainment, but if it's never something you enjoy . . .
Well, I'll pray for you.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
"To play or not to play" verse 2
Many proponents of a capella worship will say that instrumental worship is invalid, because a piano, or a guitar, or an accordian (ha ha), is not alive, and therefore cannot worship God.
These people are being completely obtuse and idiotic. If you see a man standing up in front of a congregation, singing a worship song while strumming a guitar, would you think to yourself, "that guitar sure is trying to worship God"?
No?
Of course you wouldn't.
Why not?
Because you're not barking mad, that's why not.
If you observed a hunter with a rifle stalking a deer through the forest, taking aim with his rifle, then shooting the deer dead. Would you think to yourself, "that Winchester M 94 sure is doing a good job hunting down that deer"?
No, because again, you are not a complete moron.
My friend, when instruments are used in worship to God, IT IS NOT THE INSTRUMENTS DOING THE WORSHIPING, it is still the PEOPLE who are worshiping.
Again, anti-instrumentalists will remind you that Hebrews 13:15 calls vocal worship "the fruit of our lips".
Well what about the fruit of our hearts? Do they think that God doesn't see that as well?
There are several examples throughout the New Testament (I'll let you look them up yourself. Consider it "homework") where we are told to use our gifts for God. Use your talents to bring glory to God. Do everything you do, as if you were doing it for God. Sounds familiar, right?
Why is musical ability (other than singing) excluded then? If someone discovers that he has a natural affinity and ability for playing guitar, hones his skills, becomes quite accomplished at playing this instrument, then meets and gives his life to Jesus, are you telling me he should not use that amazing ability in His service?
Oh, perhaps you think he should just use his guitar to play uplifting songs that, in some vague way, promote Christian principles? Or maybe he could play jazz, classical, or country music, in concert gatherings that otherwise have nothing to do with promoting Christ, as long as he remembers to give his "testimony" or make some remark about loving Jesus at some point during the show?
Poppycock and Balderdash.
Whether with instruments or without, it is still, and always will be, the people doing the actual worshiping. The inclusion of instruments does not make worship any more or less valid, any more or less holy. But for many unbelievers, it makes praise music more accessible.
Let's go back to the hunting example. If I were to tell you I went dove hunting this weekend, you would undoubtedly make some assumptions. The first one probably would be an assumption that there were firearms involved. You wouldn't picture me chasing down doves, trying to catch them in a large net, or picnic basket. You probably wouldn't picture me holding a rod and reel. Or a baseball bat. Or a taser. You'd picture me with a rifle, correct?
Same thing with music. You tell most people that we're going to sing a whole bunch of worship songs, they assume there will be instruments even though you said "sing".
If I said to you, "I heard Celine Dion sing at Carnegie Hall.", would you assume there were no musical instruments there, other than her voice? If I invited you to a venue, and told you it was because I wanted you to come hear my friend Mandy Holmes sing, would you be suprised to find at least a piano there? What about a full band? You wouldn't say to me "Hey! What are all these instruments doing here? I thought you said she was going to 'sing' !" ?
No, I doubt you'd say that. And yet afterwards, you wouldn't leave the place saying "I really don't think that was a valid display of Mandy's vocal talents because she was accompanied by instruments.", would you?
So how can someone say that another person's worship is invalid because while that person sang to God with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength, he was also playing a musical instrument? That playing that mechanical instrument somehow completely negates all the love and devotion that the worshiper was trying to communicate to God?
Codswallow!
Then there are those who question the church musician's motives. That the church praise band members are really just up there to entertain, or put on a show, or to draw attention and/or glory to themselves rather than God. . . . .
Stay tuned for verse 3.
These people are being completely obtuse and idiotic. If you see a man standing up in front of a congregation, singing a worship song while strumming a guitar, would you think to yourself, "that guitar sure is trying to worship God"?
No?
Of course you wouldn't.
Why not?
Because you're not barking mad, that's why not.
If you observed a hunter with a rifle stalking a deer through the forest, taking aim with his rifle, then shooting the deer dead. Would you think to yourself, "that Winchester M 94 sure is doing a good job hunting down that deer"?
No, because again, you are not a complete moron.
My friend, when instruments are used in worship to God, IT IS NOT THE INSTRUMENTS DOING THE WORSHIPING, it is still the PEOPLE who are worshiping.
Again, anti-instrumentalists will remind you that Hebrews 13:15 calls vocal worship "the fruit of our lips".
Well what about the fruit of our hearts? Do they think that God doesn't see that as well?
There are several examples throughout the New Testament (I'll let you look them up yourself. Consider it "homework") where we are told to use our gifts for God. Use your talents to bring glory to God. Do everything you do, as if you were doing it for God. Sounds familiar, right?
Why is musical ability (other than singing) excluded then? If someone discovers that he has a natural affinity and ability for playing guitar, hones his skills, becomes quite accomplished at playing this instrument, then meets and gives his life to Jesus, are you telling me he should not use that amazing ability in His service?
Oh, perhaps you think he should just use his guitar to play uplifting songs that, in some vague way, promote Christian principles? Or maybe he could play jazz, classical, or country music, in concert gatherings that otherwise have nothing to do with promoting Christ, as long as he remembers to give his "testimony" or make some remark about loving Jesus at some point during the show?
Poppycock and Balderdash.
Whether with instruments or without, it is still, and always will be, the people doing the actual worshiping. The inclusion of instruments does not make worship any more or less valid, any more or less holy. But for many unbelievers, it makes praise music more accessible.
Let's go back to the hunting example. If I were to tell you I went dove hunting this weekend, you would undoubtedly make some assumptions. The first one probably would be an assumption that there were firearms involved. You wouldn't picture me chasing down doves, trying to catch them in a large net, or picnic basket. You probably wouldn't picture me holding a rod and reel. Or a baseball bat. Or a taser. You'd picture me with a rifle, correct?
Same thing with music. You tell most people that we're going to sing a whole bunch of worship songs, they assume there will be instruments even though you said "sing".
If I said to you, "I heard Celine Dion sing at Carnegie Hall.", would you assume there were no musical instruments there, other than her voice? If I invited you to a venue, and told you it was because I wanted you to come hear my friend Mandy Holmes sing, would you be suprised to find at least a piano there? What about a full band? You wouldn't say to me "Hey! What are all these instruments doing here? I thought you said she was going to 'sing' !" ?
No, I doubt you'd say that. And yet afterwards, you wouldn't leave the place saying "I really don't think that was a valid display of Mandy's vocal talents because she was accompanied by instruments.", would you?
So how can someone say that another person's worship is invalid because while that person sang to God with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength, he was also playing a musical instrument? That playing that mechanical instrument somehow completely negates all the love and devotion that the worshiper was trying to communicate to God?
Codswallow!
Then there are those who question the church musician's motives. That the church praise band members are really just up there to entertain, or put on a show, or to draw attention and/or glory to themselves rather than God. . . . .
Stay tuned for verse 3.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
To play or not to play, IS that the question?
Greetings! Apparently that same morbid curiosity, or plain old ennui has brought you back to my lair once again. Eh? You heard music on the way in? Probably Here To You by a christian rock group called Decypher Down. One of several christian groups that I happen to enjoy very much. In my humble opinion, they're up there with Decemberadio, Big Daddy Weave, Ten Shekel Shirt, Jars of Clay, DC Talk, (way better than Creed), and as good as Day of Fire and Third Day.
Third Day is especially good. In fact the praise band at my church has played Third Day's version of quite a few songs.
What's that?
Yes, we have a praise band at the church I attend.
Heh, heh, well yes, it IS a Church of Christ.
This suprises you? Yeah, well the idea of instrumental worship, especially in a C of C tends to suprise or offend many people. In fact, it's a very volatile issue with strong feelings on both sides. Both sides think they are right. Both sides think the Scriptures support their views. Hmmmm.
Ok, lets start there.
How do you take scripture, and argue against having instruments in the worship service?
Some people go to the Old Testament (OT) and try to show that unauthorized worship consituted a death sentence. One example they use is the story of Nadab and Abihu. The problem there is that those guys were violating some very explicit instructions about their worship. They were not dealing with something that God had been completely silent about. Another problem there is that if one uses examples from the OT to enlighten us on how we should worship, then that would suggest we should use instruments in our worship service, because it is clear from numerous examples throughout the OT they they used instruments in theirs. Also, I seriously doubt that when Moses recorded this story in Levitcus he was thinking that, (thousands of years later), Christians would be trying to decide whether or not to use instruments in worship, and so decided to include this story. The point of the story of Nadab and Abihu is not that they tried to introduce innovations in worship, or that they broke some "Law of Silence", it's that they blatantly broke several very explicit rules regarding their worship service.
Another reason I believe that arguments against instruments fail is because it cannot be applied to other aspects of worship. For example, people who evoke the Law of Silence will say that since God didn't say to do something, then we have no authority to do it. Well, when did God say to use non-alcoholic grape juice in Communion, when the New Testament example is clearly wine? In scripture, we're told to greet each other with a holy kiss. Who does that? In my entire life, I've met ONE man that did that. One. Everyone else greets with a handshake or hug.
As far as I can tell, first century believers met outside, or in one another's homes. Nowhere in the New Testament are christians commanded to erect church buildings, or purchase a church bus, or provide baptistries, all things that even very conservative christians seem to be perfectly fine with. One cannot argue for or against instrumental worship based on Jesus' teachings, because Jesus simply never said a word about instruments.
Which brings us to my next point. Why are so many people getting so bent out of shape on this issue, when it seems to me to be exceedingly low on the Important Stuff list. There are so many things, such as hypocritical worship, hypocritical church leaders, sexual immorality, personal finances, legalism, and other issues on which Jesus did have very much to say. And yet many churches conveniently overlook, or ignore, or pretend these problems don't exist in their congregation. Church leaders and members alike will sit and argue passionately for hours about things such as instruments, the communion table, the name on the sign, even about the exact number of songs to be sung before the sermon is delivered. Meanwhile, Joe Lost and Suzy Sinner across the street remain in darkness and despair. If Jesus showed up to one of those meetings, do you think he'd stick around for very long? I doubt it. I think he'd be outside, having an impact on the community. And let me tell you something, having an impact on the community is what instrumental worship is all about.
Folks, this is not the 1800's anymore. It's not even the 1900's anymore! It's time to catch up.
I know, I know, scripture tells us to be in the world, but not of the world. But if we are to remain effective in having an impact for Christ on the world, then we have to always be able to communicate with the world. Most people who don't attend church today, especially those under 40 years of age, aren't going to be attracted to a church whose members drone on about The Old Rugged Cross while looking as if all the joy has been sucked out of their lives the moment service began, then sit through a thirty or fourty-five minute "fire and brimstone" sermon which does nothing but make them feel guilty while re-enforcing the idea that God is some vengeful Creator sitting up in heaven just waiting to zap us with his Gospel Gun.
Scripture tells us that God is Love. Jesus said in Mark12:28-31 that the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. And that the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as much as you love yourself. I believe that our worship service, especially the musical aspect of it, should reflect those commandments.
Worship should be joyous. It should be uplifting. It should reflect our love for God, our eagerness for Jesus to return, and the awe and reverence we feel at the thought that He who created the universe loves each individual one of us. (Enough to die for us. Wow.)
That worship must also be honest, truthful, and heartfelt.
Jesus said "God is spirit, and they that worship Him, must worship Him in spirit and in truth."
Tell me this, if the worship leader at church is leading the song "Amazing Grace", and he believes the words and ideas in that song with every fiber of his being, then would you say he is worshiping in spirit and in truth? Now suppose that same worship leader, leads that exact same song, with the same amount of passion and belief one week later, only this time there is someone accompanying him on piano, does that make his worship any less spiritual, or truthful?
Well I don't. God doesn't just see what you're doing on the outside, He sees what's in your heart as well.
More on this issue coming soon. Stay tuned!
Third Day is especially good. In fact the praise band at my church has played Third Day's version of quite a few songs.
What's that?
Yes, we have a praise band at the church I attend.
Heh, heh, well yes, it IS a Church of Christ.
This suprises you? Yeah, well the idea of instrumental worship, especially in a C of C tends to suprise or offend many people. In fact, it's a very volatile issue with strong feelings on both sides. Both sides think they are right. Both sides think the Scriptures support their views. Hmmmm.
Ok, lets start there.
How do you take scripture, and argue against having instruments in the worship service?
Some people go to the Old Testament (OT) and try to show that unauthorized worship consituted a death sentence. One example they use is the story of Nadab and Abihu. The problem there is that those guys were violating some very explicit instructions about their worship. They were not dealing with something that God had been completely silent about. Another problem there is that if one uses examples from the OT to enlighten us on how we should worship, then that would suggest we should use instruments in our worship service, because it is clear from numerous examples throughout the OT they they used instruments in theirs. Also, I seriously doubt that when Moses recorded this story in Levitcus he was thinking that, (thousands of years later), Christians would be trying to decide whether or not to use instruments in worship, and so decided to include this story. The point of the story of Nadab and Abihu is not that they tried to introduce innovations in worship, or that they broke some "Law of Silence", it's that they blatantly broke several very explicit rules regarding their worship service.
Another reason I believe that arguments against instruments fail is because it cannot be applied to other aspects of worship. For example, people who evoke the Law of Silence will say that since God didn't say to do something, then we have no authority to do it. Well, when did God say to use non-alcoholic grape juice in Communion, when the New Testament example is clearly wine? In scripture, we're told to greet each other with a holy kiss. Who does that? In my entire life, I've met ONE man that did that. One. Everyone else greets with a handshake or hug.
As far as I can tell, first century believers met outside, or in one another's homes. Nowhere in the New Testament are christians commanded to erect church buildings, or purchase a church bus, or provide baptistries, all things that even very conservative christians seem to be perfectly fine with. One cannot argue for or against instrumental worship based on Jesus' teachings, because Jesus simply never said a word about instruments.
Which brings us to my next point. Why are so many people getting so bent out of shape on this issue, when it seems to me to be exceedingly low on the Important Stuff list. There are so many things, such as hypocritical worship, hypocritical church leaders, sexual immorality, personal finances, legalism, and other issues on which Jesus did have very much to say. And yet many churches conveniently overlook, or ignore, or pretend these problems don't exist in their congregation. Church leaders and members alike will sit and argue passionately for hours about things such as instruments, the communion table, the name on the sign, even about the exact number of songs to be sung before the sermon is delivered. Meanwhile, Joe Lost and Suzy Sinner across the street remain in darkness and despair. If Jesus showed up to one of those meetings, do you think he'd stick around for very long? I doubt it. I think he'd be outside, having an impact on the community. And let me tell you something, having an impact on the community is what instrumental worship is all about.
Folks, this is not the 1800's anymore. It's not even the 1900's anymore! It's time to catch up.
I know, I know, scripture tells us to be in the world, but not of the world. But if we are to remain effective in having an impact for Christ on the world, then we have to always be able to communicate with the world. Most people who don't attend church today, especially those under 40 years of age, aren't going to be attracted to a church whose members drone on about The Old Rugged Cross while looking as if all the joy has been sucked out of their lives the moment service began, then sit through a thirty or fourty-five minute "fire and brimstone" sermon which does nothing but make them feel guilty while re-enforcing the idea that God is some vengeful Creator sitting up in heaven just waiting to zap us with his Gospel Gun.
Scripture tells us that God is Love. Jesus said in Mark12:28-31 that the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. And that the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as much as you love yourself. I believe that our worship service, especially the musical aspect of it, should reflect those commandments.
Worship should be joyous. It should be uplifting. It should reflect our love for God, our eagerness for Jesus to return, and the awe and reverence we feel at the thought that He who created the universe loves each individual one of us. (Enough to die for us. Wow.)
That worship must also be honest, truthful, and heartfelt.
Jesus said "God is spirit, and they that worship Him, must worship Him in spirit and in truth."
Tell me this, if the worship leader at church is leading the song "Amazing Grace", and he believes the words and ideas in that song with every fiber of his being, then would you say he is worshiping in spirit and in truth? Now suppose that same worship leader, leads that exact same song, with the same amount of passion and belief one week later, only this time there is someone accompanying him on piano, does that make his worship any less spiritual, or truthful?
Well I don't. God doesn't just see what you're doing on the outside, He sees what's in your heart as well.
More on this issue coming soon. Stay tuned!
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Who's Faith Is It Anyway?
Ah! Once again, my friend, I see you've nothing better to do than to make your way to my lair to see what's going on here. Unfortunately for you, you've caught me in a surly mood.
I've just been insulted because of my point of view on an issue that is not, in my opinion, relevant to salvation, by someone who apparently thinks everything is a salvation issue. And as if this weren't ugly enough, this person can offer absolutely NO biblical support for their point of view. And when I asked for a scriptural basis for this person's beliefs, they could offer nothing except more disparaging remarks.
Wow. How does that happen? What kind of person will attack your opinion about something, just because it differs from their own? An even better question is, what kind of person believes what they've always been taught without having checked out those beliefs by testing them against scripture? Sadly, I think this is a case of confusing scripture with tradition.
The exact issue at question isn't relevant to this particular rant, but it is a rather hot topic and I'm sure I'll have much to say about it in a future post, but for now the question I put to you is:
Where does your faith come from?
Is it truly yours, or are you simply a parrot repeating what you've always been told? I don't know of anything more depressing, frustrating, and infuriating, than to meet someone who believes what they believe because it's what they've been told to believe. If you find yourself guilty of this, dear reader, I can not encourage you strongly enough to study! Read your Bible! Question your beliefs! Your parents are human! Your sunday school teachers are human! Your pastor is human! Your Elders and Deacons are human! So what? So they are every one of them flawed. None of them are perfect. And everyone of them have their own bias and opinions which they are all too happy to spread to others.
Now this is NOT to say that I don't advocate listening to the advice or opinion of wise and godly men and women. And I'm not saying we shouldn't listen to our parents. The Lord knows I expect my children to listen and to believe what I tell them. But as they get older, I will expect them more and more, to take my advice, or my teaching, and compare it with what they read in their Bible. Believing what your parents tell you is fine until you become an adult, but by the time you get there you should have learned how to think for yourself! Or at the very least, how to read! So I encourage you my newly found friend, question everything. Ask yourself why you believe what you believe. I encourage you to read your Bible, to read books by christian authors, and to pray, asking God to reveal His Will to you through your study of his Word. Grow out of your parents' faith. Make your beliefs, your Faith, your own!
I've just been insulted because of my point of view on an issue that is not, in my opinion, relevant to salvation, by someone who apparently thinks everything is a salvation issue. And as if this weren't ugly enough, this person can offer absolutely NO biblical support for their point of view. And when I asked for a scriptural basis for this person's beliefs, they could offer nothing except more disparaging remarks.
Wow. How does that happen? What kind of person will attack your opinion about something, just because it differs from their own? An even better question is, what kind of person believes what they've always been taught without having checked out those beliefs by testing them against scripture? Sadly, I think this is a case of confusing scripture with tradition.
The exact issue at question isn't relevant to this particular rant, but it is a rather hot topic and I'm sure I'll have much to say about it in a future post, but for now the question I put to you is:
Where does your faith come from?
Is it truly yours, or are you simply a parrot repeating what you've always been told? I don't know of anything more depressing, frustrating, and infuriating, than to meet someone who believes what they believe because it's what they've been told to believe. If you find yourself guilty of this, dear reader, I can not encourage you strongly enough to study! Read your Bible! Question your beliefs! Your parents are human! Your sunday school teachers are human! Your pastor is human! Your Elders and Deacons are human! So what? So they are every one of them flawed. None of them are perfect. And everyone of them have their own bias and opinions which they are all too happy to spread to others.
Now this is NOT to say that I don't advocate listening to the advice or opinion of wise and godly men and women. And I'm not saying we shouldn't listen to our parents. The Lord knows I expect my children to listen and to believe what I tell them. But as they get older, I will expect them more and more, to take my advice, or my teaching, and compare it with what they read in their Bible. Believing what your parents tell you is fine until you become an adult, but by the time you get there you should have learned how to think for yourself! Or at the very least, how to read! So I encourage you my newly found friend, question everything. Ask yourself why you believe what you believe. I encourage you to read your Bible, to read books by christian authors, and to pray, asking God to reveal His Will to you through your study of his Word. Grow out of your parents' faith. Make your beliefs, your Faith, your own!
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Why the Hell?
This posting is an excerpt from an email I sent to a friend of mine at church. He thought it was interesting enough to share. If you agree, great. If not, sorry for taking up your time.
Jeremy !!
Been thinking about what you said Saturday, and just wanted to share some thoughts with you in hopes of starting a discussion that we both might find illuminating or, at least, interesting. You ask, "How could a loving God send individual parts of His creation to hell? Especially if hell is as described, a place of darkness and fire that will cause those sent there to feel agonizing torment for ever and ever?" Hmmmm. Well, the obvious answer is one that you touched on already. The ever popular, "God doesn't send people to hell, people send themselves there." When I was a member at RHCC before (back in the early 90's), Rick taught a lesson in which he postulated the idea that when it comes to our eternal destination, God simply honors the choice we make in life. If we spend our life loving Him, chasing after Him, trying to learn more about Him, then in the afterlife He'll grant our wish. If, on the other hand, we spend our life disbelieving or, at the very least, not really caring one way or the other, basically spending our life outside of God's presence, there again, God will give us exactly what we sought in life: an existence outside His presence.
Something else I wonder: Is it possible that there is something that's impossible for God? Could it be that because of God's very nature, it's impossible for anything impure or unholy to be in His presence? That would pretty much include me, you, and everyone else we know. That's where the Good News comes into play. Check this out, what if . . .
1) God is Holy
2) God loves His creation and wants us to spend eternity with Him
3) Nothing unholy can exist in God's presence
4) Man is fallen, inherently sinful, unholy
5) Man can never enter God's presence
6) Jesus' blood can cleanse us and make us holy again
7) Anyone who wishes to spend eternity with God can be made holy, per #6.
See? I wonder if the people who will end up in hell will do so simply because they failed to make themselves holy? And, perhaps sending people to hell is not a decision God makes out of wrath, or to punish, or for revenge. Perhaps hell is simply the only alternative to heaven? We believe our souls to be immortal, right? What if that immortality is not an intrinsic attribute, but is contingent on God's presence? As long as we're alive, we are in God's presence, eh? God is omnipresent, so he's present in wedding chapels, church buildings, hospital rooms, funeral homes, at the top of the highest mountain, and in the deepest ocean. Then he's also on Death Row, in the crack houses, in the meth labs, and in the alleys with the pimps and the hookers. His creation is infused, saturated, with His being, His presence. As long as anyone, no matter where they are, is alive then they have an immortal soul, and God yearns for them to love Him, and get to know Him. As long as there is life, the opportunity to become holy through Jesus' blood exists.
BUT
Once it's over, it's over. Once you've reached the end of your Life, it's too late. Sin's stain becomes permanent. Matthew tells us (chptr 22, v32) that God is the God of the living, not the dead. Jesus' blood only cleanses the Living from our sins, our stains, our darkness. That gift is not offered to the Dead. So if our souls' immortality is contingent upon being in His presence, and nothing unholy can exist in God's presence, then maybe what happens is that all the souls that are outside His presence lose the ability to remain viable, to exist? Hell has been described as "everlasting" punishment. As in punishment that never ends. But perhaps instead of never ending, the word "everlasting" should be interpreted as "permanent". Perhaps hell is the final, irrevocable, and permanent destruction or dissolution of souls that are outside of God's will? From what I understand, the word "hell" in the original bible texts is often actually the word "sheol", which means "grave". So maybe when we die, those souls that are holy (through Jesus' blood) are capable of entering into God's presence, and those not covered (therefore, unholy) can't and so end up dying, and because of God's very nature, He can't, or maybe won't, do anything about it.
Whether any of this makes sense, or is scripturally accurate, I don't know. But the one thing I do know, is that I don't know everything. When these kind of subjects get too deep or complicated, I always come back to this thought: There's only one God, and He ain't me. His ways are not my ways. Besides, if it was possible for us to figure out everything, what would we need faith for?
Jeremy !!
Been thinking about what you said Saturday, and just wanted to share some thoughts with you in hopes of starting a discussion that we both might find illuminating or, at least, interesting. You ask, "How could a loving God send individual parts of His creation to hell? Especially if hell is as described, a place of darkness and fire that will cause those sent there to feel agonizing torment for ever and ever?" Hmmmm. Well, the obvious answer is one that you touched on already. The ever popular, "God doesn't send people to hell, people send themselves there." When I was a member at RHCC before (back in the early 90's), Rick taught a lesson in which he postulated the idea that when it comes to our eternal destination, God simply honors the choice we make in life. If we spend our life loving Him, chasing after Him, trying to learn more about Him, then in the afterlife He'll grant our wish. If, on the other hand, we spend our life disbelieving or, at the very least, not really caring one way or the other, basically spending our life outside of God's presence, there again, God will give us exactly what we sought in life: an existence outside His presence.
Something else I wonder: Is it possible that there is something that's impossible for God? Could it be that because of God's very nature, it's impossible for anything impure or unholy to be in His presence? That would pretty much include me, you, and everyone else we know. That's where the Good News comes into play. Check this out, what if . . .
1) God is Holy
2) God loves His creation and wants us to spend eternity with Him
3) Nothing unholy can exist in God's presence
4) Man is fallen, inherently sinful, unholy
5) Man can never enter God's presence
6) Jesus' blood can cleanse us and make us holy again
7) Anyone who wishes to spend eternity with God can be made holy, per #6.
See? I wonder if the people who will end up in hell will do so simply because they failed to make themselves holy? And, perhaps sending people to hell is not a decision God makes out of wrath, or to punish, or for revenge. Perhaps hell is simply the only alternative to heaven? We believe our souls to be immortal, right? What if that immortality is not an intrinsic attribute, but is contingent on God's presence? As long as we're alive, we are in God's presence, eh? God is omnipresent, so he's present in wedding chapels, church buildings, hospital rooms, funeral homes, at the top of the highest mountain, and in the deepest ocean. Then he's also on Death Row, in the crack houses, in the meth labs, and in the alleys with the pimps and the hookers. His creation is infused, saturated, with His being, His presence. As long as anyone, no matter where they are, is alive then they have an immortal soul, and God yearns for them to love Him, and get to know Him. As long as there is life, the opportunity to become holy through Jesus' blood exists.
BUT
Once it's over, it's over. Once you've reached the end of your Life, it's too late. Sin's stain becomes permanent. Matthew tells us (chptr 22, v32) that God is the God of the living, not the dead. Jesus' blood only cleanses the Living from our sins, our stains, our darkness. That gift is not offered to the Dead. So if our souls' immortality is contingent upon being in His presence, and nothing unholy can exist in God's presence, then maybe what happens is that all the souls that are outside His presence lose the ability to remain viable, to exist? Hell has been described as "everlasting" punishment. As in punishment that never ends. But perhaps instead of never ending, the word "everlasting" should be interpreted as "permanent". Perhaps hell is the final, irrevocable, and permanent destruction or dissolution of souls that are outside of God's will? From what I understand, the word "hell" in the original bible texts is often actually the word "sheol", which means "grave". So maybe when we die, those souls that are holy (through Jesus' blood) are capable of entering into God's presence, and those not covered (therefore, unholy) can't and so end up dying, and because of God's very nature, He can't, or maybe won't, do anything about it.
Whether any of this makes sense, or is scripturally accurate, I don't know. But the one thing I do know, is that I don't know everything. When these kind of subjects get too deep or complicated, I always come back to this thought: There's only one God, and He ain't me. His ways are not my ways. Besides, if it was possible for us to figure out everything, what would we need faith for?
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Welcome!
Greetings, Dear Reader!
I'm sorry you're so bored today. How's that? Oh, well, simple really.
I simply can't fathom a scenario in which someone of your wit and intelligence would find themselves in a situation where you end up asking yourself, "I wonder what Ken is thinking right now?"
Let me try . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nope, can't see it.
I must conclude therefore, that you are reading this out of sheer boredom, or perhaps simply a morbid curiosity that would cause you to wonder what goes on inside the mind of a wyrm.
Specifically, the Drumwyrm.
Fear not, for I will never fully reveal that to you.
(You're welcome.)
However, like Dumbledore's pensieve, there are some thoughts rattling around in my cranium which might manage to escape, and end up in here.
Why "Breath Weapon"? Hmmm, that seems rather obvious don't you agree? My words can sometimes be inflammatory.
And for the uninitiated,
Wyrm (wurm), noun: a type of dragon with a long slender body, often able to breathe fire.
Alrighty then?
I don't know how often I'll post, nor can I promise that any of it will be worth reading, so just remember - You can always click the "back" button, and navigate to a worthier blogger's post.
For those of you who choose to read on: You have my apologies, and my gratitude.
Thank you for the amount of time, however short or long, that you choose to spend with me!
I'm sorry you're so bored today. How's that? Oh, well, simple really.
I simply can't fathom a scenario in which someone of your wit and intelligence would find themselves in a situation where you end up asking yourself, "I wonder what Ken is thinking right now?"
Let me try . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nope, can't see it.
I must conclude therefore, that you are reading this out of sheer boredom, or perhaps simply a morbid curiosity that would cause you to wonder what goes on inside the mind of a wyrm.
Specifically, the Drumwyrm.
Fear not, for I will never fully reveal that to you.
(You're welcome.)
However, like Dumbledore's pensieve, there are some thoughts rattling around in my cranium which might manage to escape, and end up in here.
Why "Breath Weapon"? Hmmm, that seems rather obvious don't you agree? My words can sometimes be inflammatory.
And for the uninitiated,
Wyrm (wurm), noun: a type of dragon with a long slender body, often able to breathe fire.
Alrighty then?
I don't know how often I'll post, nor can I promise that any of it will be worth reading, so just remember - You can always click the "back" button, and navigate to a worthier blogger's post.
For those of you who choose to read on: You have my apologies, and my gratitude.
Thank you for the amount of time, however short or long, that you choose to spend with me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)