A meal is the time that “family’ comes together, slows down, enjoys each others company and shares in the joys and sorrows of life. So is our assembly setting to be a place to share with one another what the Lord has done for us, through us by the power of His Spirit and give the glory to God the Father of us all.

I have to wonder what we would say to letting baptism go by the wayside as the Love Feast has been set aside. The early church assembled to share by the power of the Spirit what was done in and through their lives through prayer, song, teachings, scripture readings and even sharing in material possessions. They gave all glory and honor to God the Father through all of these activities.

The Church of our Lord Jesus Christ needs to continue the great work of restoration and begin worshiping by 1) allowing for any individual speak, sing, pray, give testimony of God’s work, ect. as the Spirit leads them. 2) Have a start time. 3) Throw the clock away; it is the Lord’s day. What is more important than to spend the day praising God, sharing in His love, and sharing in one another’s lives the blessings of one another.

Father, help us in our weaknesses as we try to please you. May we set aside our notions and focus on the simplicity of your institution that your son Jesus died for. Help us to fulfill our purpose; to show your love to a lost and dying world through good works and your word. I ask in the name of your son Jesus our Lord and Christ your blessings upon us. Amen

And I smile a little smile.

Chris also said, “Clapping is not needed if the song leader is using his hands in the proper 2,3 or 4 beat pattern.”
>>>
Another little smile. I am waiting for Jay to offer us a new thread on the proper use of hands in a worship service, including Chris’ proof texts for the “proper beat pattern” and a lively discussion on whether or not the song leader’s hands may touch each other at any time during the song. I personally am prepared to toss in a whole sermon outline on how scripture prohibits the use of 5/4 time in the public assembly unless your song leader is Dave Brubeck.

And a chuckle, and I’m outta here…

solos, sermons, prayers, congregational singing, quartets, testimonials, a true lord’s supper remembering not only the sacrifice, but the body of Christ (the assembly) to name a few things. Only that one thing at time be of the order.

The good news of the gospel is freedom through the blood of Christ. Legalists have stolen freedom from themselves, their converts, and us. As a result, the freedom of the good news has been nullified by chains. Legalists expect the lost to enjoin themselves to their bondage. They will not. Legalism is blind folly and folly is a barrier to church growth.
At the risk of sounding a contradictory note, I declare that reaching the postmodern world does not require a shift to the left or the right of the gospel message; it demands strict adherence to Christ’s Law instead! Sounds legalistic? It does, but as I stated previously, the gospel rejects legalism; so if we adhere to it strictly, legalism will be purged as freedom is embraced, and reaching the Post-Modern world requires the freedom of the gospel. It requires us to boldly reject the burdens of religious traditions that were historically imposed by man’s legalism and currently retained by the same. It requires that we let freedom reign.

What is freedom in Christ?

Freedom in Christ is part and parcel of the Law of Christ. It is the liberation of an individual to glorify God in whatever he or she does. It is equally freedom from the enslavement of sin as it is freedom from the bonds of legalism-inspired religious traditions.
The origin of the “Five acts” is interesting since Scripture does not enumerate 5 acts. Acts 2:42 states:
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

This passage is often used as a proof text to support the theory of five acts, but, for a minute, let’s examine it. It says, “The devoted themselves to:”
1. Apostle’s teaching
2. Fellowship
3. Breaking of bread
4. prayer
Hmm … four “acts of worship.” While we can resolve that the Apostle’s teaching is equated with our preaching; the breaking of bread is equated with the Lord’s Supper, and prayer is as is; to which of the “five acts” do we equate fellowship? Moreover, was it Luke’s intent to limit the acts of worship to just four? The same passage continues with the following:
44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, Acts 2:44–46 (NIV84)
Were selling possession and giving to others as they had need, meeting EVERY DAY, and eating together not acts of worship as well? If not, how can we conclude that the preceding passage lists acts of worship? If these are acts of worship, how many more than five acts do we have now? And if we turn to other passages to get giving and singing as 4th and 5th acts; why can’t we turn to more passages that will reveal other acts of worship?
Are the five acts of worship an example of the legalist’s reinterpretation of Deuteronomy 5:32?
Is not scripture reading an act of worship? Is obedience an act of worship?
What the legalists of our time have done is they have told us how to hold a church meeting. Scripture does not tell us how to have a meeting. We are instructed to meet regularly, meet often and to edify one another diligently. We are instructed to build one another up in love and encourage each other in good works. The ways that we accomplish those in the meeting can change as long as the purpose of the meeting does not.
As if there are regulations for New Testament worship, a brother once asked me, “Where is the scriptural authority for ‘additional’ acts of worship?” Well, freedom in Christ is the authority for what has been called “additional” acts.

New Testament regulations for worship

The Hebrew writer tells us the following:

Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. Hebrews 9:1

Note which covenant had and earthly sanctuary and regulations for worship. By the number of examples that we can cite, it is evident that under that same covenant freedom was not granted where there was no law.

Now, drawing from the form of the first covenant, legalists infer that New Testament worship has regulations for worship also. But where are they? There are none. NT law and worship are not like Old Testament law and worship (Heb 8:9).

The second covenant does not have an earthly sanctuary (John 4:19-24) and NT law informs us that where there is no law there is liberty. So the argument can be made that one of the NT regulations for worship is freedom. If there are NT regulations for worship, they are certainly not like that of the first covenant. NT regulations for worship are similar to these:
Colossians 3:17 And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.
1 Corinthians 14:40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
The question of scriptural authority generally is answered by the freedom that we have in Christ and most certainly by Colossians 3:17. Freedom in Christ is the scriptural authority for “whatever you do!”

We often speak of freedom as an option for the individual Christian, not the church. But neither is true. Freedom is not an option! Paul wrote (Galatians 5:13–14):
13 You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
If we have been called to freedom, then freedom is only an option if we reject the calling. Freedom, incidentally, only is governed by love for God and others.
It is that same freedom that Paul exercised in becoming all things to all men. It is the same freedom that we must exercise to do the same.
As expressed through the pen of New Testament writers, freedom in Christ liberates the Christian from religious directives that are not God’s and modes of behavior or rituals that did not originate with Christ.
In the early church those religious directives and behaviors that robbed the churches of their freedom were taught primarily by believing Pharisees. In contrast to legalism Paul wrote :
Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (2 Corinthians 3:17)
James adds the following (James 2:12):
12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom.

It is important that we understand what James wrote. He is contrasting the Old Testament (OT) law with that of the new. James is instructing Christians to “Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom;” not one that enslaves. Peter wrote the same. Peter (1 Peter 2:16) says:

Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God.

They are all saying, live free of legalism, but don’t use your freedom as a cover for wrong doing;.” use it love God and others.
You may have heard it said, “We speak where the Bible speaks and we are silent where the Bible is silent.” That’s a good saying. But I tell you, how it is interpreted either supports or violates the NT law. If it means that where there is no NT law we will not make any laws then it is true. If it means that silence does not give freedom of choice as individuals or as a church then it violates scripture. It if violates scripture, it is wrong and ought to be rejected.

Paul says “Plant your feet firmly therefore within the freedom that Christ has won for us, and do not let yourselves be caught again in the shackles of slavery” (Galatians 5:1)
Reaching the Post Modern world requires strict adherence to the gospel of “grace and truth”; without which we will be in bondage.
Legalism is a mortal wound to a body of believers whose primary purpose ought to be making disciples of the people whom, through their legalism, they have come to despise.

Legalism within The Churches of Christ

Within Churches of Christ the shackles of legalism begin with our common view of New Testament worship. It is commonly taught that worship is the sum of no more than five “authorized” acts; performed one act at a time. Those acts are as follows:
1. Prayer
2. Non-instrumental Singing
3. Preaching
4. Lord’s Supper
5. Giving
While prayer, singing, preaching, the Lord’s Supper and giving are important “acts” of worship, I believe the church which confines its worship to just 5 acts with a non-instrumental singing stipulation is (a) misguided in its view of scripture, (b) missing a lot of other acts of worship and (c) guided by it legalism rather than its mission. I will make further comments on the idea of five acts of worship when I discuss the biblical concept of freedom.
Paul’s words tell us that in order to reach the lost one cannot be mired in the mud of legalism. One must know the ways of the lost, engage the lost and “become all things to all men so that by all possible means” one might save some. In other words, we must make evangelism – not denominational traditions – not denominational association – the main thing.
Like Paul we must become subservient to the interests of the lost to create the opportunity to save some.
How do we reach young people? Young people are NOT interested in our old traditions. We must make ourselves subservient to their interests. They should be taught how to become and to live as disciples in ways that they understand, in lessons relative to their circumstances. For example, an enactment of CS Lewis’, Screwtape Letters or a version of it with modernized circumstances is a powerful way to teach the concept of spiritual warfare. Further, engaging young people to write and publicly read poetry expressing the realities of their discipleship of Christ in their everyday situations reaches their generation.
Their spiritual songs should not be defined by their association to the retro periods of the European or American “Great Awakenings,” but by the Lord to whom they offer those songs in whatever format they choose to offer them. It may be rock and roll or rap; it may be R&B and, as much as the thought may unsettle our legalistic souls, it may be reggae.” With musical instruments?” you ask. Yes! If musical instruments will reach them – yes!
Further; Easter, Christmas and each New Years present opportunities to sow the seed of the word in the hearts of those who would not normally come to hear a lesson. We dismiss the opportunities these days (and seasons) present to corporately and formally reach out to others because we do not accept those traditions. Why should we dismiss those opportunities because they are not in keeping with our tradition? If our intent is to reach people then we should make it our tradition.
What Paul is teaching us is this: In order to reach others, we cannot focus on our interests – we are fishers of men.
What gives us the authority to do any the above? The freedom of the gospel is the authorization and reaching the lost is the motivation.

In my last post, I will seek to justify all that I have said.

Now regarding NT freedom -
John wrote, “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” John 1:17
So Jesus’ law is rooted in truth AND grace.

How does legalism affect church growth?
One NT command that legalists tend to overlook, disregard or otherwise minimize is taken from Matthew 28:19–20:
“Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

Historically, legalists have been unwilling to make adjustments to reach the world. Their primary objective is to maintain old traditions; therefore they see any adjustment as a “turn” to the left or the right.
Legalists are not motivated by the fact that we are fishers of men and fish are attracted to what they like, not what legalists prefer.
The freedom of the gospel furnishes the church with a vast variety of bait which legalists reject.
Legalists have tried to reach the world on their terms, but they have not been successful, because the world is not interested in what they offer.
To the contrary Paul wrote: (1 Corinthians 9:19–23)
19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

According the BDAG, the word “slave” as used in verse 19 carries the meaning: “to make one subservient to one’s interests.” In doing just that Paul:
• Became like a Jew
• Became like one under the law
• Became like one not having the law
• Became weak (This statement is easy to misunderstand. In the context (See 1 Corinthians 8), however, Paul refers to those who, by their faith, could not eat meat sacrificed to idols as “the weak.”)
• Became all things to all men so that by all possible means he might save some
Paul is saying, for him evangelism was the main thing. It is clear from scriptures that the world in which the Apostle Paul lived was even more corrupt than ours. Yet, he was effective in his outreach.
Is there a lesson to be learned from the combination Paul becoming all things to all men and the success of his ministry?
Considering his strategy and resolve are you surprised at his success?
Although we are familiar with what Paul has written, the legalism of the church creates blinders to what he is saying, so it would be futile for me not to give practical examples of how legalism is manifested among us. I realize that the practical address of an important issue may rub sensitive issues – but I must and I’ll do so in the next post.

However, while the intent was good, in practice, legalists (Jewish religious leaders especially) read verse 32 as, “So be careful to do [some of] what the LORD your God has commanded you; do not turn aside [from those things] to the right or to the left. [Others are not as important].” Another version may read, “Ensure that everyone else (i.e., excluding the insurer) does all that the LORD God has commanded; make sure that they do not turn aside to the right or to the left.”
Under the law, legalists found comfortable breeding ground; and as if the Law itself was not onerous enough, they further burdened the people with their traditions and oral laws which appeared to hold a greater significance than the Law itself.
By the time we get to the New Testament, the Pharisees, Sadducees and teachers of the law represented the legalists. Their legalism gave rise to some of Jesus’ harshest words. For example; Matthew 23, Jesus said:
2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy loads and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
13 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.
15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
17 You blind fools!
19 You blind men!
23 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.

New Covenant legalists maintain the view that New Testament law (or Christ’s Law (1 Cor 9:21)) is like that of Old Testament law, that is, purely a system of commands, regulations, and statutes and, as with OT legalists, they insist on keeping Christ’s Law selectively while condemning others who do not adhere strictly to their interpretations of selected aspects of Jesus’ law.
In matters of regulations and rituals legalists excel. With regard to personal sin, they appeal to grace.
The fundamental problem with legalism is it not compatible with the gospel message – it is rejected by the New Covenant which now offers freedom as a replacement for the legalism associated with the first covenant.

I will continue the thought on NT freedom in another post

As far as Nadab and Abihu are concerned you better read the entire chapter. In Leviticus 10, when God speaks He doesn’t remind Aaron about strange fire He tells him to make sure the priests don’t show up drunk for the temple service. Make sure your prooftext is supported by the context.

And for that mater – where in Ephesians 5 does Paul suggest he is discussing the Sunday assembly when he encourages singing? Where does Acts 20:7 say that we must partake of communion on Sunday and on every Sunday? Where are we commanded to take up a collection every Sunday for the needs of the local congregaion? As you pointed out Paul is concerned with several congregations working together to meet the needs of Christians elsewhere. This money was to be collected to be sent abroad with Paul. Isn’t it adding to Paul’s commands to take up this collection and keep it for the local work? Where does Paul limit preaching to the assembly or require it in every assembly? And if it is required then why don’t we use multiple speakers as Paul commands in 1 Cor 14:26-33?

Of all of your so called requirements for the assembly only prayer is clearly commanded as a constant and can be arrived at without adding to the clear statements of Scripture, a practice which you yourself condemn.

So whoever created this pattern and then proclaimed that all who added to the Scripture were damned was by his own anathema damned.

2. Prayer – 1 Timothy 2:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:17-18;

3. Lord’s Supper – 1 Corinthians 11:23-33; Acts 20:7 (Note: Singing and clapping during communion is in an unworthy manner)

4. Singing – Ephesians 5:19

5. Giving – 1 Corinthians 16:2 (Paul is speaking of a special collection for the Jewish Christians who had fallen on hard times, we know that we are to give as we have prospered and cheerfully 2 Corinthians 9:7)

Be careful brothers and sisters that you do not try to conform to the world by changing the Word of God or trying to fit worldly ideas into scripture.

Only a few of the largest congregations would have a fulltime minister of music, but countless congregations have hired a man for a hybrid role, such as minister of spiritual formation/music.

Give prayerful thought to what you might offer a congregation in addition to leading worship.

You should also check out this link: http://oneinjesus.info/churchjob-finder/ministers-looking-for-churches-churches-looking-for-ministers/