PREACH IT BROTHER! (and only preach it)
In this article posted at The Expositor, Nathan White of Strange Baptist Fire writes about the evils of Christmas plays in the church. Here are his three basic premises from the piece
- What can be better for our souls than the preached Word?
- What can be better for those outside of Christ than the clear proclamation of the gospel through the preached Word?
- If preaching was completely sufficient to minister and save in scripture, who are we to say that it is now supplemented, at times, by better things? Has market research replaced biblical revelation?
In classic ODM style, he accuses –well, just read this
“It certainly must be noted that drama in worship is most often employed by seeker-sensitive, Arminian ministries, in an apparent attempt to evangelize…But it must be emphasized that the preaching of the word, the very proclamation of Jesus Christ, is simply not good enough, according to this logic, to attract a wide audience, and so the Christmas play is employed to bring in those who wouldn’t otherwise darken the door. Christmas plays do not offend, they do not divide households, they are generally warm and fuzzy at a very family-oriented time of year, and so they provide a great impetus for the numbers-driven mindset.“ (emphasis mine)
He then makes a pretty weighty statement to backup
“drama in worship, without a doubt, *is* a violation of scripture…God, through scripture, has left drama completely out of His Word and instruction to His Church, and that for an important reason.“
There are so many flaws in this article; I really don’t know where to begin. I am not quite sure how one can say that the reenactment of the word of God is any less powerful than talking about the word of God from the pulpit. We are not talking about a production of The Sound of Music, we are talking about a Christmas pageant. There are so many Christmas shows that often hit you over the head with the scriptures, and are very blatant in their message. I always find it ironic that these pastors complain about arts in the church, but unless they get up and simply read straight from the scriptures and say nothing but the scriptures, they too are using an artistic way to preach the scriptures. They decide how to word ideas and concepts, they choose illustrations, and they craft how we perceive the scriptures every Sunday. It is arrogant to say that only what they are doing is preaching the Word of God, when 75% of the words they give are their own.
Do we labels something as bad or heretical if it does not offend or divide households? That notion is completely asinine, but is all too common among the ODMs. If it brings people together to enjoy the story of Christmas, then it must be wrong. If no one leaves the place offended, someone messed up. And, to argue that something is inappropriate for worship simply because it is not mentioned in the scriptures is not exactly the best logic. Most hymns would be out of the question if we are going to go down that route. But, did Jesus not tell stories as a means to communicate biblical truth? It seems to me that story-telling is one of the most important elements in theatre arts.
As an actor, it is strange to hear someone say that I cannot worship God with the talents he has given me. I have been using theatre arts as a means to present the truth for years. Many of my friends have come to Christ through shows that we have produced that speak clearly the word of God. I am always puzzled as to why the church today is do hesitant when it comes to the arts. It is ok for a man to give a 45 minute monologue about the scriptures, but to present it in theatrical form or paint it is simply out of the question. We live in a world where a television show is worth a million words, a painting is worth a thousand, and words are only worth pennies. Maybe it is time we rethink how present the Word (please note that nowhere did I say rethink the Word itself).
November 29th, 2007 at 11:51 am
As a fellow actor, I would say the incredilbe amount of bad acting/bad music associate with Christmas plays might be more sinful than the play itself.
And I don’t think Jesus used the internet, either.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Oh man, that “Strange Baptist Fire” site is a hoot. Talk about Calvin-worship. The whole “Regulative Principle of Worship” thing seems near-idiotic to me, honestly.
Actually, if you get down to the nitty-gritty of it, one could make an argument that God did tell the Jewish people to use drama in worship. The passover celebration comes to mind. The whole feast has them re-enacting certain events. It’s not a play, but it’s a form of dramatically retelling a Biblical narrative.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Well, I’m no “Regulative Prince”, but I do understand a good desire to order worship as biblically as one can. It just gets a bit fascist, ya know?
Anyway…to the post:
I get more offended by the crappy aesthetics of many christian “pageants”, etc. People running around in potato sacks with some rope tied around their waist, a towel tied to their heads and wearing their Teva sandals.
HOWEVER…
I have yet to see a Christian pageant where after they creatively tell the story a pastor fails to get up and bring it all together and proclaims the Gospel.
This is tantrums over style…again.
I’d love to go to that guys Christmas service.
I’m sure it would be sooooo meaningful to sing some carols (acapella or to piano) and then listen to white guy in an ill-fitting suit from Sears and a bad haircut drone on and on and on about a story we all already know, tell me what a horrible human being I am, and then we sing a few bars of “Just as I Am” during an altar call–ironically invented by the paragon of horrific seeker-sensitive arminianism, Charles Finney.
Forgive the Snarktasticness of my comments, but I’ve really had it…AGAIN.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
ALSO!
As if there were never any Christmas pageants in churches before Bill Hybels and Rick Warren came along…
Church history?
What’s that?!
November 29th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
I Don’t know where to begin.
But the amazingly huge blind spot of ODM’s is incredible.
Their defense of their belief is so littered with incongruent thought and over generalization it is really hard to believe anything they say.
For instance; church Christmas dramas are bad but Nativity scenes should be allowed in the public square?????
November 29th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
I’m both amazed and saddened whenever anyone takes a particular point in time and freezes it as the standard for all times that follow.
Neil
November 29th, 2007 at 12:20 pm
I like how they’ve elevated the “Regulative principle of worship” to the level of scripture. Its time they stopped pretending that they regard the scriptures as authoritative.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
I was thinking, you know, if there’s such a problem with ‘drama’ in church, then what about music? Music is a wonderful ‘drama’, which evokes emotions and focuses minds on something, a subject or object, usually a story being told through the song. It is the epitomy of preformance, whether it be corporate or just the band playing a song for everyone to hear, and it is…gasp…dramatic.
What I don’t understand is why this man who wrote this tirade against drama/acting in church will not use this same standard against music and worship in his church, which is also drama. Music, hymms especially are a STORY being told through a medium; SONG, and it is by nature ‘drama.’
But if he did this, he’d have to have nothing in church but a man reading the Word, word for word. I wonder if that’s what the apostles did?
Double standards and ignorance to a full spectrum usage of the standard he’s set up; that’s what I see in his article.
I’m a musician in my chapel and I wonder if this man thinks I should stop playing Piano. I mean, Piano is a pretty ‘worldly’ medium. Hey for that matter, so aren’t Bibles printed on the world’s ‘paper’. Have you heard of this stuff guys? The world uses this blasphemous thing called…”paper”, yeah, the world uses it to print pornography, smutt, and…National Geographic. It’s obviously “of the world” by reason of how they use it, but…our Bibles are printed on this same evil paper too! The American Church is so worldly and apostate!! Heavens no!!!
Oh, cars are worldly too. They have ‘demon power’ in them that makes them move.
-end satire-
Anyone else feel like it’s getting a little “she’s a witch, burn her!!”….”it’s the devil!!!” on the blogsphere now a days?
Beer is the devil’s nectar!!
Love,
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Apparently, according to Strange Baptist Fire (emphasis on: Strange), drama damages your soul.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Joe.
You can’t just burn a witch.
You have to throw her in water first and see if she floats.
Then you can burn her
November 29th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
God, through scripture, has left drama completely out of His Word and instruction to His Church,
Argument out of silence.
The very thing people will turn and tear you for if you argue out silence for something they disagree with.
Can you say: Hypocrisy?
November 29th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
According to God; so does legalism!
November 29th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
We better be careful.
If Timmy Brister posted that article and we disagree with it, Steve Camp might get mad at us like he did with Mark Driscoll for…everything.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Did anyone notice that SBF was started specifically to rebut a website called Baptist Fire?
Hmmmm?
I wonder if DT, Tim Bell, Chris P, or Inquisitor take issue with that?
November 29th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
I see it was Nathan White who wrote the post…
phew!
We’re in the clear…
November 29th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
“…God was pleased through the foolishness of the children’s christmas pagaent and/or adult choir cantata to save those who believe.”
nc said: “Did anyone notice that SBF was started specifically to rebut a website called Baptist Fire?” What’s your point… like CRN.Info was an original idea?!
November 29th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
How many of these fundy churches use flannel graphs in their children’s Sunday School program? Isn’t that “drama”?
November 29th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
I believe Biblical drama is most effective in evangelism, even if Christmas is in the wrong season. This again illustrates that Calvinists have nothing better to do than dissect even the most minute issues in the church. God is in control Mr. Calvin, so don’t sweat it - we Arminians are resting in God’s sovereignty. You should try it!
November 29th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Wait…nc…we need a duck too.
Bring out yer deaaaaad…..
I’m so convicted by this man’s preference, by the way, that I’ve decided to give up everything worldly and eveything that is attat
November 29th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
This article comes as no surprise really. 3 themes are always present in ODM:
Calvinism
Regulative Principle
Emphasis on Teaching
Now, I have no problem with the last one. My problem come specifically when the first two are elevated to the same level of the last.
The article cited above is a good example of such.
I remember when I finally understood what was bothering these people so much. I was talking about how the Bible never condemned things like the use of creative illustrations, rock music, lights, etc. The person essentially answered back, “exactly!”
I then got a lesson on the regulative principle.
I did some research … long story short … the RP is crap. It is an argument from silence, forged and propagated for the sole purpose of being able to claim that you are more conservative than the next guy. It’s a “better safe than sorry” excuse for worshipping God without effort.
What’s sad is, the people spreading this non-biblical principle do so by somehow giving the impression to their sheep that it IS a biblical principle.
It entire idea really makes not sense at all. I’ve never seen a decent defense of it, nor have I ever seen anyone address the hypocrisy of being perfectly ok with using 18th century worship style in our churches. Explain that one.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
The non-instrumental Churches of Christ has been doing this since the Civil War as an argument to get rid of all instruments because they’re never mentioned in the NT.
Of course neither are pulpits, dedicated worship buildings, suits, ties, grape juice for communion, and many, many other things that are accepted as normative by both groups. The Regulative Principle is just an excuse to impose personal preferences as divinely mandated practices.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
“This again illustrates that Calvinists have nothing better to do than dissect even the most minute issues in the church.”
And THIS SITE illustrates that it has nothing better to do than dissect even the most minute issues of calvinism/reformed theology.
“…nor have I ever seen anyone address the hypocrisy of being perfectly ok with using 18th century worship style in our churches.” What’s hypocritical about it if that’s they way they prefer to worship?
November 29th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Uh nate…
Duh dude…we can use 18th century worship style because that was 300 years ago, and so it wasn’t ‘in the world’ as long as say, today’s worship. So therefore, it is less worldly, and we should use it. That extra 300 years makes all the difference, Satan wasn’t a big back then you see, I think hell had frozen over and he was on vacation. Spurgeon totally owned Satan while he was gone back then, apparently.
Or we could just admit it’s preference. Because 18th century worship style is nothing like how the Apostles and the first Christians did it. Maybe we should all go back to meeting in our houses and hiding from “Romans”? That would be the ‘most Biblical’, by the ODM reasoning at least.
Biblical Church is defined by Acts 2, and as long as we’re working within that model, we’re Biblical. Guitars or not.
Love,
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Keith,
Ummmm…no. I may be snarky, but I’m not an idiot. Thanks.
The point is:
It’s just the basis for some of the whine about this site. (i.e. starting a site to rebut someone else)
In the real world that crap cuts both ways.
But for ODM’s and their defenders it only is a problem when it’s people you don’t agree with.
Just more hypocrisy.
That’s the point.
Get it?
November 29th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
On the whole Regulative Principle thing again (which, by the way sounds more like a pamphlet explaining the importance of fiber in one’s diet), I always wonder how anyone can claim to be objective at all. I mean who decides what a “hymn” is? The hymns the NT church sang would probably sound very weird to our Western ears.
How much theology does a song have to have to qualify as a hymn? Why is “How Great Thou Art” considered a hymn, but Chris Tomlin’s “How Great is Our God” not. They are the same thematically, but the one uses the word “thou” so it becomes more sacred.
I guess I would respect these people more if they just were honest and said they hate music with drums and guitars, or they like church services where no one moves from their seat. That I can deal with. But instead they try to twist Scripture for their purposes. There’s no other word to describe it other than phariseeical.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
I have always wondered how “In The Garden” made it into the hymn books. And it seems to be a favorite. I mean
And He walks with me, And He talks with me,
And He tells me I am His own;
And the joy we share as we tarry there,
None other has ever known.
really? And they say some of the modern worship songs are all based on mushy love and emotion. This song make me think that someone is about to make out with god under a rose bush.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
You started it…Nanner, nanner, nanner!
The issues raised on this site of nothing to do with reformed theology and that’s the problem. The ODM’s raise issue with things that they have elevated to theology; essential things that don’t matter. Dramas, Music, Chairs over Pews, etc… Furthermore they are the only ones I see who claim the moral high ground on everything spiritually. Anything less than their prescribed standards of holiness is herectical. Thats the problem.
Hate to break the news to the hard-line reformed among us but Calvin may have been wrong on a few things.
Seriously; griping about Christmas dramas being worldly has to be the dumbest thing I’ve heard in a while.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Oh, I GET it…really, I get it.
For the record–I didn’t call you an idiot. Don’t put words in my mouth.
Non-instrumental/Instrumental Churches of Christ and Christian Churches have also been insisting on communion being celebrated/observed every Sunday–based essentially on one or two verses. You haven’t been to church if you haven’t taken communion. Everybody’s got their traditions they hold to. Are they all “hypocritical.”
November 29th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Short answer - yes
Long answer - maybe
Seriously I would say it crosses over in hypocrite-ville when extra-Biblical traditions are lifted to the place of Scripture and propped up by proof-texting. I don’t really have problems with traditions being kept as long as people see it for what it is.
For example, my grandfather really doesn’t like most modern worship music. He would rather attend a service with more traditional music. However, he doesn’t pretend that his preference supercedes others, and he doesn’t condmen people who would rather sing songs with an accented backbeat.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
IT’s one thing to hold to a tradition, Keith.
It’s another thing to say your tradition is the only scriptural one and all other practices damage the soul and betray the gospel.
Also, I didn’t say you called me an idiot.
I defined myself as not being one.
And you say we’re defensive?
Testy. Testy.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Keith,
could you expound on the communion thing, I am not too sure what you were getting at. if you are asking if believing that communion must be taken each week in order for it to be “church”, then yes it is wrong.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Everybody is hypocritically! My problem is when people don’t recognize or acknowledge it.
I’ve attended CoC churches and have never heard “You’re a heretic because you like the piano in your music”
To reference the post from a few days ago; the ODM’s make convictions and preferences; absolutes and that’s wrong.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
BTW,
hypocrisy is about the double standard.
It’s suspect/wrong for CRN.info to exist to rebut CRN’s false, slanderous fake ministry.
But it’s ok for SBF to exist to rebut a site they don’t agree with.
Is that simple enough?
November 29th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
–“drama in worship, without a doubt, *is* a violation of scripture…God, through scripture, has left drama completely out of His Word and instruction to His Church, and that for an important reason.“–
I have seen cases made where the Song of Solomon is actually a type of dramatic play. I have also seen a case made for something similar concern the Revelation.
Also, almost any Baptist preacher I have listened to will use a sense for the dramatic. Some are loud and use that, I remember several years ago a Baptist preacher who was a midget making his point by scaling the pulpit, standing on top of it, raising his arms, and bellowing out the last word or two of the sentence he was saying, to the applause of the people in the congregation.
Speaking more personally still, I came to Christ at a children’s special service which employed some dramatic tools, such as a puppet with a squirt gun.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
???
Please elaborate…
(and please don’t say it was last month)
November 29th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Keith - the guy who wrote the post about Christmas dramas made it a specific issue by mentioning Arminians. My contention is that with all the major and legitimate issues that plague the church he makes drama an issue and places the blame at the feet of Arminians. Talk about you gnats.
It is those things that make the arguments about major issues blend in with all the noise.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
NC: My “testiness” comes from hanging around here. You have to be very careful what you “say” or how it’s said or you’ll get jumped on for saying something that was never intended. If I misread your remark, I apologize.
Nathan: I used to attend a couple of Restoration Movement churches where the leadership felt and expressed that we really had not worshipped when we gathered if we did not offer communion. Funny thing, they would have communion in the morning service and then offer communion during the evening service–”If you weren’t able to take communion this morning…” I guess more than once a Sunday is too much.
I probably don’t have to state this, but I agreed with in general to Nathan White’s post; didn’t take time to dissect it…but then I’m one of those “calvinists.”
November 29th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Even though I am a non-dispensational Baptist, I believe the church should observe communion every Sunday.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
The church, for the past 2k years, has used drama. In the middle ages, since 99% couldn’t read or afford a Bible, the church put on plays. It was a way of educating the masses about Scripture.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Keith, why did you agree with Mr. White? Can you give a Scriptural command to abstain from dramatic…anything? Include ‘music/hymms’ in church in your understanding of prohibition of drama in church, so that when you explain why you think Christmas pageants are wrong, you can explain why all forms of drama are then wrong too, thanks bro.
Is your Bible evil because it uses the ‘worlds paper’? lol …Sorry I had to ask, friend. Har har. (see my first comment)
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
Joe C: I’ll have to get back with you later. Lunch time’s over and my boss(es) — for some reason — expect me to work at least some part of the day.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
This is the one time I will say this… it is a Calvinist point of view, not a reformed view. Calvin and Luther differed greatly over worship styles. Calvin called for simplicity while Luther wanted elaborate music and center of worship. So, since so many are following the man more than the scriptures… yes, it is a Calvinist position to take.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
Gotcha Keith, thankums.
Thankfully I’m off from work because my wife just delivered our first child!!!! We…er…don’t sleep much. You know what I mean.
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Ha! Have two within 12 months and then you’ll learn what it means to not sleep.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Wow….Yea, I bet that’s hard. What a blessng though!!
November 29th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
LOL,
As I’m sure you know being a parent is awesome. Congrats on your son.
November 29th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Keith,
no worries.
I appreciate your candor and honesty.
blessings today and everyday!
November 29th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Keith,
Oh stop whining, they do it to me as well! LOL!
iggy
November 29th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Keith,
Get back to work…
Your Boss
November 29th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Iggy!!! Nothing to say about this have you? -best Yoda impression-
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
It’s nice to see some joviality… I too would like to see a rational explanation of a prohibition of drama in worship.
I understand not liking most Christmas plays since they are sooooo mundane - but a carte blance prohibition?
Neil
November 29th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
1) Drama is an art. Just like music, writing, crafts, and painting a mural. If drama is a sin, then pretty much everything I am involved in and plan to do for a living is a sin, lol.
2) If drama in church is a sin, then music in church is a sin. The crafts the kids make in Sunday school is a sin. Even the Bible is a sin, because the Bible contains poetry, letters, and other types of artful writing.
3) I believe God created arts as way for humans to creatively communicate. Just like He created electricity for us to use, and oil and other resources for us to develop, and He made us capable of doing these things so why can’t we do it? Especially in church. For His glory! ODM’s don’t usually bother me but this article hit me on a more personal level and thus rubs me the wrong way.
November 29th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
I’m telling you guys…
The world uses paper…they use paper to print porn…porn is evil (truly)…therefore…the Bible, which is made of paper, is evil also. Guilt by association with ‘the world’.
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
As they do me most days!
November 29th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
It is downright scary how these guys view the regulative principles of worship. If you read through the comments, there are things like
“I do not want to sound like I am arguing against the regulative principle when I ask this question”
“Honestly, I am still studying the RPW and the exact application of the principles that I believe are prescribed by scripture”
for a guy who holds to the power of the word so strongly, you would think sola scriptura would suffice. I am adding a new sola
Sola Calvin
November 29th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Keith,
I find that communion practice odd as well. Although I’m more inclined to serve communion every time we meet as opposed to less often.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
This comment confounds me:
Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees. No one goes to a movie or play thinking that the actors are doing anything but acting. Jesus wasn’t condemning all actors - He was condemning those who intentionally put on a mask so that others thought they were something they weren’t.
It seems beyond ridiculous to me that this even an issue. I mean, come on. People are arguing about whether Christmas plays are Biblical? If they feel that strongly about such things, they should probably leave the internet immediately. I’m pretty sure Jesus never had a blog, either.
It’s wrong for Christians to be involved in all forms of entertainment apparently, too. It’s just unbelievable.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Joe C..
What can I say about this topic.. it is about as stupid as one can get… and i am holding back… LOL!
When a church has issues over things like “drama” yet misses that they are causing drama in others lives by their accusations, it just seems so juvenile.
As far as “drama” in the bible…
In Ezekiel 4:1-8
God tells the prophet to take a stone tablet and portray on it Jerusalem as it will be under siege.
God would often have prophets act out prophecies such as Jeremiah walking naked and barefoot (a sign of shame) for 3 years Isaiah 20:2-3; or Abigus’ actions in taking a belt and wrapping it around Paul’s hands and feet to prophecy what will happen to Paul in Rome.
If “acting†is not as good as preaching, then why would God have these men act out their prophecy? Why not instead just have them write it all down then hand it out as they preached.
Francis Shaffer stated, “…there is another side to the Lordship of Christ, and this involves the total culture — including the area of creativity. Again, evangelical or biblical Christianity has been weak at this point. About all that we have produced is a very romantic Sunday school art. We do not seem to understand that the arts too are supposed to be under the Lordship of Christ.â€
To sit and judge others as they try to tell the story or in this case act out the story is just too silly to imagine.
iggy
November 29th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
oops I forgot to change my name back… sorry Keith…
iggy (not really your boss)
November 29th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Also, I was just thinking - why did Jesus put mud in a blind man’s eyes to heal him? Why did He draw in the dirt when the woman caught in adultery was brought to Him? Why did he speak in parables? He certainly didn’t just “speak forth the truth”. He did many things that seem intentionally confusing - just asked the disciples. It seems they spent most of the time they were with Him being confused.
November 29th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
That’s OK Iggy. At least you’re a believer. My boss is an atheist. (It still bothers me that you’re emergent though)
8^)>
November 29th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Phil I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. More often than not we find God being “dramatic”, and making people act things out, to show a point. It even comes through in His Word, which is highly metaphorical and symbolic (for dramatic purposes in addition to other reasons) at certain points.
If God is dramatic, who can be against us?
LoL…Acting…an abomination? They can remind themself of that standard next time they do an impression of one of their friends, for fun.
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Emergent guys live like Jesus more than all the Calvinists I’ve met ever do.
Oooh..no he di-daaant!!
November 29th, 2007 at 9:02 pm
Keith,
Well it bothers me your a mean spirited Calvinist! LOL!
J/K (a little bit OK I do have a few really good friends that are not msc’s, but they do seem to come from your side of the camp.) = )
Ooooo Joe, did yo neck go back and fo when yo say dat? LOL!
iggy
November 29th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Joe C.
I think it’s properly:
di’aeennt OR di’aeeen
There is no second “d”.
There is a little taste of an “a” sound.
Sometimes you drop the final “t” (depending on regional dialect)
thus endeth the lesson.
oooooh…I used a gratuitous “eth” on a word.
I MUST be returning to the true RP, KJV worship of God.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Joe C: You asked (in a nutshell), “…why did you agree with Mr. White?…” Against my better judgment, I will answer your question here, only because I could not find an email address on your blog to respond privately. Before I respond, let me state:
1) You kindly asked; I will kindly respond.
2) I have no interest in debating my answer with you.
3) I am confident that no matter how I answer, I will be vilified here (CRN.Info). Such is life.
4) I have no illusions of changing yours or anyone else’s mind that may read this response.
5) My response will probably not satisfy all of your questions. Sorry, this is all I have time for tonight. I have a Sunday School lesson to work on.
6) CONGRATULATIONS on your new baby! Hang on; the years FLY BY! Take lots of pictures—you’ll be glad you did.
On to the matter at hand.
As part of our pastor’s current sermon series on The Ten Commandments, we recently took some time to look at the Regulative Principle and how it relates to the first two commandments. I doubt you’re interested but just in case, you and listen to the sermons at here. Contrary to Nate’s assement (comment on November 29, 2007, 1:10 pm) “the RP is crap. It is an argument from silence, forged and propagated for the sole purpose of being able to claim that you are more conservative than the next guy” I believe that God, through His Word has given specific commands/limits as to how He is to be worshipped. Consider the following examples:
– Cain failed to worship as God had prescribed (blood sacrifice). cf Gen 4:1-7; Hebrews 9:22
– God was very specific as to the construction of the tabernacle and how it was to be used (i.e. how worship was to be carried out). cf Exodus 25-30 esp 25:40
– Nahab and Abihu cf Leviticus 10, note in particular verse 3.
– Uzzah struck down by God for touching the Ark of the Covenant (2 Samuel 6:1-11). God had commanded the Ark be carried by the Levites, NOT transported on a cart. cf Numbers 4:15; Numbers 7:9; Deuteronomy 10:8. Note King David’s reference to this incident in 1 Chronicles 15:13-15–”Because you did not carry it at the first, the LORD our God made an outburst on us, for we did not seek Him according to the ordinance.” So the priests and the Levites consecrated themselves to bring up the ark of the LORD God of Israel. And the sons of the Levites carried the ark of God on their shoulders, with the poles thereon as Moses had commanded according to the word of the LORD.”
These are just a few examples I believe speak (not from silence) to the importance of how we worship.
As far as pageants, skits, etc. I don’t believe they are an acceptable “replacement” for simply preaching the Word of God. Ezra understood the importance/power of God’s Word and it’s place in the area of worship among God’s people. In Ezra 7:10 we read: “For Ezra had set his heart to study the law of the LORD, and to practice it, and to teach His statutes and ordinances in Israel.” Some years later, in Nehemiah 8
The Word of God was given prominence when the people gathered. I believe the image of Ezra’s being above the crowd, reading from the “wooden podium” gives emphasis to the Word being above all things. There were no dramas, skits, pageants, etc. The simple act of the reading (and teaching) of God’s Word obviously made an impact on the people. Note Nehemiah 8:9ff.
The Bible says of itself it is sufficient for salvation (Hebrews 4:12). I believe that is why the Apostle Paul wrote: “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.” (1 Corinthians 1:21) What was the “message preached?” Verse 18 says it is “word of the cross.” God’s Word. Again, no skits, etc.
For some reason, the Church today seems to think that preaching is passé. They feel the need to make the Bible more relevant or palatable to unbelievers. I believe God’s Word is inerrant, infallible, all-sufficient. It stands on its own. It needs no human embellishment. It IS the power to save. It tells us who God is and how we are to worship Him.
Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
That’s my response. CRN.Info Boys…have fun tearing this one apart. I’ve got faith in ya!
November 29th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Keith,
I don’t see how those examples from the Old Testament apply today. The passage of Scripture that comes to my mind right away is John 4:21-24 when Jesus is talking to the Samaritan woman.
The Jews were previously commanded to worship in Jerusalem, and Jesus is saying that will be done away with. The way God interacted with people in the OT is certainly not the way He does now. The veil has been torn.
I don’t think anyone has said anything against preaching. I’m all for it. But God can reveal truth through other mediums whether it be song, film, literature, or whatever. Even the Bible itself is a collection of different literary forms revealing truth.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Keith,
The biggest question is, what is the word of God? There’s two answers we would probably both agree on: the scriptures, and Christ Himself. Anything that faithfully communicates either definition of the Word of God fulfills exactly what you’ve outlined whether its in sermon form, or otherwise. Especially as we have so many examples of non-sermons being used to relay the word of the Lord. Communion being the obvious and huge example in the NT.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Fair enough.
“2) I have no interest in debating my answer with you.”
November 29th, 2007 at 10:27 pm
Although I will add that I love preaching and devote quite a bit of time both to consuming it and producing it, and have found personally that it is very effective, more effective than I would have believed when I first began.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Keith, thanks for bringing to my attention that I don’t have my email listed on my blog for some weird reason.
I think you should debate this issue, as it is NOT the foundation of the Gospel, nor is it a must have ‘thing’ for salvation. Lack of willingness to debate, or rather discuss, could mean you’re unwilling to be corrected (if you were wrong), or change your mind. Both of which are unscriptural attitudes. You can appreciate that I’m sure.
What you have to understand is this: No one is saying a Christmas pageant should replace regular preaching. This is what you implied was being said though. Everyone here is FOR preaching the Word. Some are just simply saying that through many mediums, as shown hundreds of times in the Biblical accounts, God works and spreads His Message. Undeniable. And this is what’s being discussed, which you didn’t address at all.
Is it wrong to have drama, acting, music, interactive sermons, or any of that during church? (Noting that most pageants and xmas plays are NOT during regular church service! So it’s replacing nothing, just adding.)
My questions had absolutely nothing to do with Regulative-whatever. I could care less about making up principles to regulate your life in Christ. If that’s what you need to do to keep from sinning, then I encourage you! I make up rules for myself too that aren’t laid out in Scripture, to prevent me from getting in to a situation where I could sin according to Scripture. But I realize they are MY preference, and MY conviction, and shouldn’t be laid on others as if it were the only Path to God Himself. I’m not saying that’s what you’re doing, but it IS done very often.
I think you’re transposing the OT regulative life under the Law, on to the Nailed-to-the-Cross, veil is torn, life in Christ. I don’t think this is a good idea, particularly. But like I said, if it helps you walk with God, then good on you, as long as you trust Jesus’ work and not your own.
If you throw out pageants, play-acting, or any other form of physical stage art, then you gotta throw out your music (which communicates the Gospel and the Word just as well as a play does), your stained glass windows, your wonderful cross display behind your pulpit, you get the idea. It’s all drama. It all evokes SOME kind of emotion. It has the Word in it. So if a Christmas pageant is out because it’s an abomination, a sin, evil, not comparable to the Word of God, and not of God, then I’m throwing my Piano and hymnals out too, because they’re the same thing.
We like to elevate our spiritual convictions to the level of the Word of God. That’s what this comes down to.
I believe God has set MANY limits on our lives, agreed, but as for the subject of Worshiping Him…I’ll stick with Jesus and the New Covenant, not the Levitical Regulative Principle (which for all intents and purposes, is what you detailed to me in your comment, with all your examples from the Israelites under the Law in the OT).
I wonder what people in the Church did before the majority of the population could read and write? Or what they did before The Word was in full publication for all to see? Surely it wasn’t all just someone reading Pauls letters, or Isaiah? What did they do?
Go research why the early Church used “Hymns”.
I wonder why there are so many ancient Christian underground churches in caves and the like with massive murals of Jesus and the Apostles, and many of the events in Scripture artistically portrayed? Why does God use so many physical and dramatic word illustrations in Scripture itself?
Is not Creation one giant artistic expression, among many other things? We are made in God’s image, and we’re artistic and dramatic. God is too. I mean come on…a pillar of fire, the pure Glory of God, on top of a mountain…booming trumpets and a voice like thunder so powerful that the people feared for their lives? Talk about dramatic.
I encourage ever brother and sister to live a little in the Life that Jesus Christ gave to you in Himself, and the freedom to worship God aside from the Law which brings death (though it is holy and great).
Personal convictions aside, I gotta go. My little boy is screaming his head off…I gotta help the new mommy. Later fellas.
Love,
Joe
November 29th, 2007 at 11:03 pm
Wow, Keith.
Talk about elevation of man-made doctrine as scripture! That’s pretty much all the RP is… modern-day phariseeism wrapped up with a cute little bow…
November 29th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Joe: Why would I debate something with someone I’m sure I won’t agree with…nor they with me? I have no fear of being corrected. I believe I am “right” in my beliefs as much as you believe you are “right” in yours. Since it is not a “salvation thing,” what difference does it make if you, I, Tim, or Chris L agree? (Especially if the OT holds little truth or instruction for us today)
“Go research why the early Church used “Hymnsâ€. Are you assuming I’m new to the whole church thing? I’m probably old enough to be the father of most of commentors here.
Chris L: I cited multiple Scriptures as the basis for my belief. The term “Regulative Principle” is just a simple means of labeling those beliefs. Sorry if my elevating Scripture offended you.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:37 pm
Keith - it’s not “elevating scripture” - it’s taking a system and eisegeting scripture to match the system - a big difference…’
Basically, Jesus came to set us free from the death brought about by the law (particularly the additions to the law brought through the additions in the Pharisees’ Oral Law which used just as much - if not more - scriptural justification for the additions contained within), and some folks just aren’t content with that - needing to build the law of death again…
The OT does contain truth for us today, but if you look to the Jerusalem Council ruling in Acts 15, along with Phil’s cited reference from the gospels, it should become readily obvious that ceremonial law (which is what you’ve cited) was not carried over from Judiasm to Christianity. Phariseeism is driven by a desire to be holy and set apart (which is not a bad thing), but ends up completely missing the fullness of God by replacing Him with rules and regulations based on preference, tradition and selective scriptural interpretation. With the Regulative Principal, you’ve basically got Phariseeism on steroids, where it’s not even built on scriptural prohibitions, but the absence of exhortation.
If you’re so hot to do things the way they did it in Jesus’ day, you’d have 20 minutes of singing and kissing the Torah, 60 minutes of scripture reading, 5 minutes of application/sermon (delivered by rotation of all members of the community), followed by Q&A with the speaker, followed by more singing and putting the Torah away. But that wouldn’t fit the traditional eisegetics of today’s pharisees, so I suspect that wouldn’t work, either…
November 30th, 2007 at 12:11 am
Keith, I in no way meant to be derrogatory to your age or experience or anything like that. It was more of rhetorical question, if you’ll look at it in the immediate are of the other questions I asked. I just wanted you to remember that hymns were used to convey the Gospel since no one could read well enough, and also so that the Spiritual Truths of God could be easily recalled and remembered. It was ‘drama’, but it worked, and it was Godly.
I am ‘new’ to the church thing, compared to you and probably a bunch of other people here, but perhaps I can bring a fresh perspective sometimes, I’d hope, and I especially hope I can learn things from more experienced people.
See here’s the thing, I know that on anything except the absolutes about salvation and the Gospel, I can be wrong. So no, I do not “believe [I am] “right†in [my beliefs]” when it comes to things like this. I’m fairly ethereal when it comes to secondary things. I know I can be wrong because I have been wrong, but I willing to take correction because I AM young in age and in being a Christian. Perhaps some of you older guys forget what it means not to be too set in your ways because of your position of years of experience. I mean no offense by that, but appealing to age and ‘elderness’ as a means of implying that you don’t need to listen others, is kind of…old. lol, no pun intended.
We need to be open to being wrong, or Judgment day is going to be the worst possible rebuke ever from God. Lucky we’re saved by His work and not ours, nor our exact knowledge of God.
Keith, if you want to talk more, my email is up on my blog now, and I’m willing to hear you out and see what you have to say about all the points I brought up. I’m trying to be not stubborn, and if you’re right, or if I feel your convictions would serve great purpose in bringing Glory to God within my life, then I’ll shut up and color, you know?
But yeah, ancient Christian art, hymns, and portrayals speak somewhat against what you’re saying concerning no drama etc etc in church. Not to mention what I feel in Scripture is the very nature of God, and how He deals with humanity.
Also, I feel this subject is a little ridiculous….we’re arguing whether telling people the story of our Lord and God coming to Earth to save us, in the medium of a play, is a sin or not? Kinda crazy guys, just sayin…
Love,
Joe
November 30th, 2007 at 12:15 am
I think that’s the way most of us feel. I was actually a little stunned to see that article try to make that argument.
November 30th, 2007 at 12:31 am
Yeah I mean why don’t we just…(here I go again)…argue that reading the Bible is a sin because the Bible uses paper, and so does the world, and they print nasty stuff with it.
LOL…come on…tell me that’s not a good hyperbole!
November 30th, 2007 at 1:45 am
Something that just seems surreal to me is that on one hand, we have Keith arguing against sharing in communion whenever the church is together, when you have positive evidence of this in the first century church in the New Testament (Acts 20:7), but yet arguing that we must not have drama in worship because it is absent (though not forbidden) in the Old Testament…
November 30th, 2007 at 1:54 am
Keith,
Do you wear cloth from two different sources? Do you work on Saturday? Do you only worship at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem? Do you wear a prayer shawl? Do you have the right number of knots on the corners of your prayer shawl (which is supposed to be round)?
When Paul wrote that “all scripture is God-breathed”, he was only referring to the Hebrew Scriptures, as the “New Testament” hadn’t yet been codified. If the only way to worship is by the instruction in the Old Testament (and observing its silence, as well), do you read only from the Old Testament with little or no commentary on the content of what has been read? Do you have instrumental music accompanying your singing?
I mean, come on, if you’re in for a penny you should be in for a pound and follow your own stream of logic right back into the bondage of the Law, man. Come on, be consistent!
Just wondering…
November 30th, 2007 at 8:02 am
Joe C: I don’t know how long you’ve been hanging around here, but my advice? “Run away, run away!” Once you get started, it’s like a bad train wreck…you can’t look away. I try to leave this place and the blood and gore just keeps drawing my back. I need to join a “CRN.Info Anonymous” support group.
You asked me a question; I answered it. My answer was wrong because Tim and Chris L have read more books, studied more Bible, figured more stuff out than ANYBODY else in the whole world. In fact, they were alive during the Old AND New Testament times; they are actually witnesses to the thoughts and actions of the Biblical writers…and Jesus Christ himself. If you have any questions about the Bible, they can answer it. Whatever you believe or THINK you believe is WRONG! They are gracious enough to point that out.
===
Chris L: NO WHERE did I argue AGAINST communion. I stated what I knew FIRST HAND about a practice in the two CC’s I attended (16+ years; even served as an elder). You’re getting almost as bad as Tim looking for a fight.
Why do you (and others) feel the need to correct everyone else? I answered Joe’s question–not looking for his approval OR yours. I wasn’t looking for you to point out your perceived errors in my thinking. I apologize for using up your space to correspond with an individual that asked me a question (he didn’t have an email available for a private conversation). I’ll try not to let it happen again.
Have you ever simply stated a belief and left it at that? If people want to agree with you, fine; if not, that’s OK, too.
Do you send you tax check to Caesar/Rome? That’s what Jesus said to do.
Yes, we have instrumental music, but only tamborines, eight-stringed lyres, flutes and harps.
==
Tim: I’m stunned to see some of the arguments made around here…I guess we’re all stunned.
November 30th, 2007 at 8:21 am
–???
Please elaborate…
(and please don’t say it was last month)
;-)–
It was quite a few years ago, right before I entered the fourth grade. It was a week of children’s services in the evening, I suppose a kind of VBS type of thing. I remember the mouse-like puppet with the squirt gun, and I think other puppets were used. Yes, it wasn’t high-end drama, but we were still young, so Hamlet would probably have been over our heads.
November 30th, 2007 at 8:30 am
Jazz,
Well, that’s cool. I just thought it funny that a squirt gun was incorporated into a Gospel presentation somehow.
November 30th, 2007 at 8:54 am
We are all under grace. Any and all instruments are acceptable in His sight. These issues are preference oriented.
November 30th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Keith,
Please get off your high-horse and at least send us some cheese to go with your whine…
Where you (and SBF) have crossed the line in this particular subject was when you took a preference and made it a conviction and then elevated it to the position of being an absolute (going back to this post for context on preference/conviction/absolute).
If you believe that your church should not use drama in worship, that is your right and part of your church community’s tradition. THIS IS TOTALLY OK.
What is not OK is trying to come up with some sort of spiritual end-around to suggest that anyone who does NOT take part in your tradition is “unscriptural” or “sinful”. This is why the RP is bunk - it is just codified tradition with scripture as window-dressing.
November 30th, 2007 at 11:38 am
Early Christians didn’t use electricity or have air conditioning in church either. Isn’t that against the Regulative Principle?
November 30th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Keith,
Don’t you find this the least bit ironic considering you’re essentially following the teachings of a man who told the largest, most powerful organization in the world to piss off because he’s right and they’re wrong.
Especially as you’ve mounted a defense from that same man on something called the “regulative principle of worship”, which I can’t seem to find in my Bible anywhere.
Then again I guess its a lot more fun to be protestants reforming the RCC than it is to be the RCC being reformed. Ken keeps calling us the new evangelicals, perhaps he should be referring to us as the new protestants.
November 30th, 2007 at 11:49 am
I would add to that this whole fascination with the “Regulative Principle” and the misunderstanding of the relationship Christians have with the Old Testament really ended up causing great harm to John Calvin.
He set up Geneva to be a “Christian” city largely by trying to make it compulsary to follow many OT rules and regulations. Of course, what was the penalty for heresy or blasphemy in the OT - death. So Servetus comes along and does teach real heresy, but Jesus’ answer to heresy was not death. Calvin said this though:
Contrast this to what Jesus said:
According to the OT, this woman did deserve death. Jesus didn’t carry out the sentence. Ironically, He was without sin, so He still could have. He didn’t, though, and it’s just another instance of Him making OT law obsolete.
November 30th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
I think Keith makes some good points about rightly ordered worship…
But this whole discussion is missing the point.
The SBF post presumes that “pageants” and the like are replacing preaching.
As I stated earlier in the thread…I’ve never seen a pageant where after it was all done a preacher didn’t come out, tie it together and offer the Gospel to those present.
If it happens differently, then I think that’s the exception rather than the rule.
This article is a text book straw man.
I think that is key to understanding what is at issue here…
The problem is when the regulative principle is used to concretize particular forms, etc. that are reflective a a particular time period of recent history. THAT is theologically laden idolatry…no matter how sincere the motive…
November 30th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
NC - I’ve frequently seen Christmas Pageants on days other then the Sunday service, not a replacement for it.
My own issues with pageants is that they are frequently used by parents to show off their cute kids and nothing more.
November 30th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
So true, Matt!
Which underscores the point even more!
This is just another tired “fake” ministry tantrum.
November 30th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Tim: “…Don’t you find this the least bit ironic considering you’re essentially following the teachings of a man…” Actually I it ironic that I have been able to comprehend a single word of Scripture on my own without the genius of Chris L and other CRN.Info contributors! I’m amazed that I’m even able to place one foot in front of the other and walk across the street! But praise be to God I found this site…”I fall down on my knees and cry holy…!”
Good grief, Chris. I said: “If people want to agree with you, fine; if not, that’s OK, too.” You said: “If you believe that your church should not use drama in worship, that is your right and part of your church community’s tradition. THIS IS TOTALLY OK.” So we agree!
Pull you head out of…well, maybe that’s why you can’t find things in your Bible. It’s hard to see from down there.
One thing I’ve always said about this site. It’s too easy to get you guys going. Like dangling yarn in front of a cat!
November 30th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
Keith,
You are one interesting person. On one post you say there isn’t enough research here, now you say that Tim and Chris L act like they know it all. Which is it?
November 30th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Fixed it.
November 30th, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Keith,
is it wrong to be frustrated and angered by people who absolutize their preferences and then make a whole “ministry” or “job” out of lying and bashing people?
Please don’t try to turn it around and say this site is the same thing…cuz it’s not. So don’t bother.
But I’d be interested in what you think people should do when they hear/read people who disfellowship people they disagree with or, as other writers have, full on question their relationship with God.
Why is it not ok to be angered by that?
We do agree…if your church does something one way, go for it.
That isn’t the issue.
The issue is taking “your” way of doing something, finding a public platform, and attacking the spiritual integrity of people who do something different then you.
We don’t do that here.
Nobody here says that if you follow RP then you are a fake Christian. We may vigorously disagree and say we believe you sorely mistaken, but nobody is disfellowshipping people and saying they are the “cult of liberal theology”, etc. etc. etc.
Why can’t people see the difference?
Bottom line:
Why is it wrong to “get going” about something unjust, divisive and sinful in its tactics?
November 30th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Keith,
I am really having a hard time reading you. I don’t think people are trying to belittle you or anything. You asked a straight up question, and we respond. If no one responded, you would probably complain that we were blowing you off and only wanted to talk to those that agree with us. It seems like we’ll be wrong in your eyes no matter what.