What Must Be Preserved of the Churches of Christ? (Singing, Part 1)

churchofchristThe New Testament is clear that the early church sang in their assemblies. And contemporary scholars struggle to determine why that is.

Beginning sometime in the 19th Century, historians of the early church once thought that the early church adopted the singing of hymns, psalms, and spiritual songs from the Jewish synagogue, but recent studies conclude to the contrary.

You see, the synagogues did later come to adopt singing as part of their Saturday practice, but every record from the time before the Romans destroyed the Temple makes no mention of singing in the synagogues. There are plenty of references to the synagogues as places of study, especially study of the Torah, and as places of prayer, but precious little evidence that singing was a part of their practice.

Now, I say “practice” because while the Temple was standing, to a Jew “worship” was something that happened only at the Temple, especially the sacrificing of an animal or other farm product. While the Temple stood, the synagogues were not places of “worship” but of study and prayer.

Therefore, it would hardly be surprising if they did not sing in the synagogues. After all, singing was part of the Temple ritual — in which the Levites sang accompanied by instruments. And we also have a number of Temple Psalms that were sung by Jewish pilgrims as they approached the Temple to worship — not that we know many details.

But this doesn’t mean that the Jews did not sing in the synagogue — only that we have no record of it and that, if they sang, it was not “worship” in their minds. It might have been praise to God, but not “worship.”

You see, the Greek word most commonly used in the New Testament for “worship” is latreia,  and we see a significant contrast in such passages as —

(Rom 9:4 ESV) They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.

(Rom 12:1 ESV) I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.

“Worship” is latreia in both passages. In Romans 9:4 latreia refers to the Temple ceremonies and rituals — the worship of the Jews at the Temple. Romans 12:1 uses the very same word to refer to daily living by Christians in honor of God.

The Jews sang in the Temple because this where they worshiped God. The Christians sang in their assemblies because they sang. While passages such as Romans 14 are clear that the assemblies included singing, Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 speak more broadly of the church as a singing community, not just on Sundays but as characterizing any Christian filled with the Spirit or with God’s word. The apostles sang even in prison! (Acts 16:25).

Therefore, we do need to get over the odd, anti-scriptural notion that there are elaborate rules for what we can and can’t do as Christians in worship but not elsewhere. I mean, if it’s unscriptural to play a piano to worship God in the assembly, then it’s just as wrong at home or in a wedding or a concert or a performance, in the church’s building or outside, because you’re just as much a Christian in one place as the other. And it’s all “worship.” We aren’t limited to worshiping in a particular place.

And so there is no prohibition against instrumental music in the assembly, and it’s really quite okay to sing along with Chris Tomlin and his fellow musicians while listening to your car stereo. This is plainly not sin. God is honored by your worship, wherever it takes place.

While the Churches of Christ have often cited the Orthodox Churches as examples of churches that also insist on a cappella singing, rarely does anyone note that the Orthodox also sing in unison, rather than with harmonies, relying on the arguments of the early church fathers (who insisted on unison singing as well as a cappella singing). Harmonies did not enter the church for over 1,000 years after the apostles, and four-part harmony was not added until the Reformation (by Martin Luther).

As one Orthodox source notes,

The Judeo-Christian tradition of worshiping and praising God with music is entirely rooted in monophonic [unison] chant; that is, melodies sung without additional instrumentation or even acapella polyphony [harmony]. In Jewish liturgical chant, and also in the early Christian Church, melodies were sung in unison by the entire congregation.

It has been argued that unison singing symbolizes the unity of the church better than harmony, but I disagree. As we learn in such passages as Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8, the real beauty of Christianity is not that we are identical, but that we can together serve a common mission and be part of a common community despite our differences.

It’s the nature of musical harmony that differences in tone are essential to presenting the beauty of the music, but the different voices must work together to produce a single beautiful song.

In unison singing, some notes are too high or too low to be sung by the entire church. But in singing harmony, those who can reach the high notes do, and those who can reach the low notes do, and the result is far better than what any one singer could do by himself or herself.

Obviously, multiple voices singing different notes could produce sheer cacophony — that is, nothing but noise — but there is a way to sing different notes and even different words and yet blend into a single, beautiful song.

And  so, if we wanted to develop a theology of Christian singing in the assembly, and if our “pattern” is to be First Century practice, then we would need to sing in unison as well as a cappella. But that would be to impose a theology on the scriptures, rather than to find a theology in them. Nowhere are we told to emulate First Century practices just because they’re First Century. Rather, we honor those practices that are driven by a sound theology — to the extent the theology drives the same conclusion today.

And there is no theological basis for unison singing, because the scriptures are silent on the question. That is, silence as to harmony does not prohibit harmony but rather grants freedom so long as the harmonies facilitate the Spirit’s purpose in teaching us to sing — even though history is clear that the early church sang in unison, and harmony was not added to church singing for a thousand years.

Just so, because the scriptures are silent on instruments, silence does not prohibit instruments but rather grants freedom so long as the instruments facilitate the Spirit’s purpose in teaching us to sing.

And I’ve heard instrumental singing and I’ve heard a cappella singing neither of which furthered the purpose behind singing — at least, not very well. And I’ve heard both kinds of music that did indeed further the purpose of singing very well indeed.

You see, the question to focus on is not what the early church fathers wrote or when the practice was first instituted, but whether the practice furthers God’s purposes — a question rarely considered in the Churches of Christ regarding instruments or any other worship question.

So why sing? Just because it’s commanded? Well, that would be a shallow way of thinking and would treat God as purely arbitrary — as though he were just testing our faithfulness — which would be more than a little bit insulting to the Almighty. If God actually is rational and loving, then he teaches us to sing for a reason — or several reasons. And it’s in investigating those reasons that we’ll come to understand both God and his commands better.

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized, What Must be Preserved of the Churches of Christ?. Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to What Must Be Preserved of the Churches of Christ? (Singing, Part 1)

  1. Ray Downen says:

    Jay, it’s good that you’re back! But I have to question why you would claim that apostolic writings made clear that early disciples sang in their assemblies. 1 Corinthians 14:26 speaks of individuals singing but says nothing about group singing. And Paul in writing to the church in Ephesus and Colosse about singing doesn’t mention that they were to sing in their assemblies. What passage speaks of congregational singing? I’ve not noticed such a passage. We’re both aware that after a honeymoon period many Christian meetings had to be in secret, and singing would surely give away their presence.

  2. Price says:

    If one understands the definition of what song called a psalms or an ode is, the scripture is not silent

  3. Skip says:

    Jay, please listen to Hillsong “Oceans” on youtube. One of the most moving worship songs I have ever heard.

  4. David Himes says:

    I have a paperback book on the history of the Paris Christian Church, Paris, KY … not far from Cane Ridge, KY. One of the stories related in the book is about one Sunday in the 1830, when a group of college students, who sang in the college choir, started singing harmony during the Sunday morning worship.

    It caused a great controversy in the congregation which lasted quite a while.

  5. I learned to sing by singing with my family at home. How many families sing together now? Or have we turned to recorded music and are forgetting how to sing ourselves?

  6. Nowhere are we told to emulate First Century practices just because they’re First Century. Rather, we honor those practices that are driven by a sound theology — to the extent the theology drives the same conclusion today.

    Beautiful, Jay, simply beautiful. It is the “why”, rather than merely the “what”, which reveals the heart of the Father to us. Thank you so much for taking us in this direction. We have for too long held onto arbitrary views of scripture without discernment, decrying any deeper understanding as “questioning what the bible clearly says”. This “just do it” approach makes the Bible a black box, obscuring rather than revealing God.

    We choose to honor certain practices for godly reasons, and do not choose to honor other first century practices. Rather than letting the question end at “You should!” vs “We don’t have to!”, our discussion should be on our own understanding and our own motives. Peter et al had a daily food program for widows. Some friends of mine today build orphanages. Are these not one and the same practice, when viewed through the lens of “why we do such things”? Does not the fellow who digs into his savings to help a neighbor in need thus fulfill Paul’s directive to Corinth to “lay by in store”? When we learn and practice and sing hymns in lovely harmony, are we not carrying out the same heart desire for worship as the orchestra who plays Beethoven’s “Joyful, Joyful, We Adore Thee”?

  7. John Fewkes says:

    To try to equate personal worship as having no distinction from “together worship” tears at the fabric of scripture; Paul CLEARLY recognizes such a difference.

    1Co 11:17-18 But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it.

    1 Corinthians 14:18-19
    18 I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; 19 however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.

    1Co 14:23 Therefore if the whole church assembles together and all speak in tongues, and ungifted men or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are mad?

    And the practice of the Eastern Church is still vocal, a cappella, not instrumental.
    Perhaps this is enough for this posting.

  8. R.J. says:

    “If anyone is happy, let him psallo” James 5:17

    According to Zohiates this Greek term did indeed lose it’s specifics reference of plucking strings. BUT it did not lose it’s musical connotation. He says that “it soon came to signify the making of melody IN ANY FASHION”.

    Among the Jews to make music by harping, piping, playing the tambourine, or singing(accompanied or not) were all equally considered psalming.

  9. Joe Woolbert says:

    Some time ago, I had a fellow from the Cowboy Church proudly tell me he ‘rode a bull for Christ’ one Sunday at their church fellowship. It didn’t sound orthodox to me but I didn’t find any scriptural prohibition against it either. It was his cognitive reasoning, which he did not feel compelled to support by scriptures, that bull riding fulfilled a divine purpose for him in demonstrating his faith in God’s protection and enabling him the opportunity to give glory to Him for the strength and courage of a successful ride on a bull. All this activity was conducted as a matter of worship in their assembly on the first day of the week.

    The preceding paragraph is absolutely true and is verifiable by at least one and perhaps two other Christians that were present. I mention this anecdotal story simply to point out that the ‘unprohibited’ is a vacuum that men’s souls have always found and continue to find thrilling to fill to satisfy their own desires. As for me, until I can be shown within God’s revealed will in the holy scriptures that He’s good with it, I’ll personally pass on riding bulls in the assembly and all other questionable innovations and stick with the liberty that lay within the expressed words of instruction of the apostles. My worship isn’t to make me feel good; to the contrary, it is to offer a praiseful life and joyful heart to my Lord and sing words of encouragement to others which He finds acceptable. As to the ‘unprohibited’, I’ll relegate that environment to the instruction of Deuteronomy 29:29.

  10. Alabama John says:

    Joe,

    As an old calf roper I also roped for Jesus and others did various events for Jesus. All the proceeds we made from that rodeo went to childrens homes or other causes needing money at the time.

    We prayed for a big attendence and usually got it. Many came from Churches all around to support the cause as it was usually held on a Sunday afternoon

    As we say many times, God works in mysterious ways, His wonders to behold!!!

  11. Mark says:

    Look at what the Shriners did to raise money for their hospitals and burn units,

  12. Jay Guin says:

    Joe,

    I understand that point you are trying to make, but your approach is not scriptural. We should not impose hermeneutical rules from Calvin (the source of the Regulative Principle) and law (the source of CENI). You ASSUME that the issue is one of authority, without any evidence. Who says the test is authority? Why did no one make such a claim before Calvin?

    Rather, we should look at what’s actually going on in scripture. The Bible is its own best interpreter. Thus, as I said, we look at God’s PURPOSES, not an imaginary grammatical rule. The reason the bull riding example seems absurd to you is not because it’s an “addition” or “unauthorized,” but because it doesn’t seem to you to fulfill God’s purposes for the assembly (or church fellowship). If he’d done something that plainly fulfilled God’s purposes — such as given his testimony about how God has worked in his life — you’d be much less inclined to declare him “unauthorized” even though such testimonies are not among the “Five Acts” that are supposedly the only authorized “acts of worship.”

    Or what if he’d baptized someone he’d converted. We are authorized to baptize, but there’s not one command, example, or inference justifying baptisms during the assembly. A baptism is not prayer, giving, communion, singing, or preaching.

    Or placing membership — which Churches of Christ routinely handle at the end of the sermon, during the assembly, although it’s plainly not an authorized “act of worship.” But what could be truer to the purpose of a gathering of God’s people?! Of course it’s approved by God even though not authorized under the CENI rubric.

    You see, authorization is the wrong discriminator. It’s not the test. Indeed, it assumes that our relationship with God is all about asking permission — that we can do nothing — even in a church fellowship — without God having pre-approved the specific action in the Bible. God evidently has no confidence in our judgment, even though he has given us his Spirit to live in our hearts and lead us (Rom 8).

    But neither are we free to do anything at all. We must be true to God’s purposes because we must have the heart of God. We should want what God wants. And, no, that doesn’t mean that every frivolous claim that X is what God wants is necessarily true, just as not every frivolous claim that X is authorized is necessarily true. All approaches to the scriptures are capable of being abused, and therefore we can’t judge an idea by the risk of abuse. (Or do I need to list the ways in which sermons have been abused over the years — although sermons are both authorized and consistent with God’s purposes for the assembly.)

  13. Joe Woolbert says:

    Alabama John,

    I commend you for your charity and for deferring your roping until after the morning worship assembly.

  14. Grace says:

    Jay, why do you find it hard to accept that the CofC denomination should take responsibility for their own decisions, rather than try to blame someone else who they could hardly ever agree with anything about? Trying to find an out for the CofC denomination’s own decisions does not lessen the CofC denomination’s declarations for themselves.

  15. Joe Woolbert says:

    Jay,

    I’m not as learned as you obviously are when it comes to the named philosophical approaches, hermeneutics, and grammatical rules so I’m not qualified to comment on Calvin and the acronym you mention. I’m a little more accustomed to cornbread English. Namely, that God has spoken His mind through Jesus in what He wants (Heb 1:1-2). Losing focus on what Jesus and his apostles actually communicated is a sure path to the ditch (Heb 2:1-4). It is possible to find church people, angels and pretty much anybody else that will preach all kinds of things that aren’t true (Gal. 1:8-9). The scriptures are what will enable me to be wise to salvation (II Tim 3:14-17). And I must be careful to avoid the natural tendency to hear only what I want to hear (II Tim 4:1-4). There is such a thing as a sin of presumption (Deut 18:20).

    I don’t see the issues as relating to authority as much as to listening and responding to God’s expressed will in the specific teachings of the Bible. As an engineer, I’ve seen multiple instances where the logic of the uninformed create hazards with the potential to damage and kill. I’m not capable of reading the mind of God where he has not given revelation and I suspect I’m not alone in that limitation.

    Thank you for your time to make an assessment of my thoughts.

  16. Joe, with all due respect, the reason for discussing hermeneutics and church history and grammar here is because these have a direct bearing on what is happening in the church today and in the past; these are merely methods of describing in better detail what we are doing and how we are reasoning. Your level of articulation indicates that you are well able to understand what Jay is writing. Let not an educated engineer decline to engage specifics due to a purported lack of intellectual sophistication.

    As to your assertions, I would question your use of Hebrews 1. You seem to suggest that there are music rules set by Jesus and the apostles and when we digress from those, we fall into sin. This is neither accurate nor the point the Hebrews writer is making. No one here is rejecting or minimizing anything Jesus or the apostles have said. And no one here is speaking of salvation issues– at least not yet– so this is beyond the Timothy reference. And inferring that others are “presumptuous” or hearing only what they want to hear would be all the better off for some proofs or evidence. Statements like this appear to be intended to cast vague doubts, rather than to point out specific errors or inconsistencies with scripture. As an engineer, you should appreciate better than most the folly of looking at a bridge and judging its stability by general appearances or personal design preferences. You would roll out the plans and do the load calcs yourself, and where there is weakness, you could point it out in fact, not in vague generalities. And if someone challenged the strength of your own bridge without the willingness to do the math and show you the weakness in specific, you wouldn’t hold his concerns to have much validity.

  17. SO… bull-riding is authorized by God only AFTER the benediction– shucks, you could even have the “Amen” mean “open the chute”, and you can consider a horse as a pew, just a place to sit. But before the benediction, the whole thing is sin. (I just have to start writing this stuff down.) Now, I just need a similar ruling on bull-tossing, as I have heard a lot of that done at church services, both during the sermon and afterward in the foyer. Should that be allowed only after the benediction or should all the bull-slinging be kept strictly in the pulpit with the experts? Got my note pad ready, under “B” for “bull”! Inquiring minds want to know.

  18. What are we free to do? Anything that is consistent with who we are in Jesus. For those who need a rule, here’s one that fits all. Try ‘er out and see how she fits. I will gladly give refunds to those who can show me where it doesn’t fit their circumstances.

  19. Alabama John says:

    Joe,

    So many argue back and forth over things that do not matter in this life or the next. Seldom does those that do so change the others mind.

    What I really want to ask and do ask of those is first tell me what you have done before you tell me what you think.

    A person can have the scriptures memorized and understand everything just right but having done nothing to bring Jesus to the lost and not be worthy, found wanting.

    When we leave this life there will be no pockets in our burial suit and no U-haul will follow our hearse Neither will there be a recording of our skill of quoting scriptures put in the casket. What will be written down to be read on judgment day is how we loved God and our fellow man and what we did to further Gods kingdom and to save others from satan and hell.

    God looks and observes knowingly far more than He listens and that seeing covers a lot of areas including the depths of the heart and intent.

  20. Joe Woolbert says:

    Charles,

    Here is my replies to your comments. I’ve tried to correlate them by post time and paragraph.

    4/23 7:42 AM Paragraph 1 – I hesitate to spend the time memorizing content and labels associated with an endless number of systematic arguments. I much prefer spending what limited time I have seeking to understand the straight forward communication of the Bible authors; outlining their thoughts, points and messages. They were inspired to write a message. My goal is to understand the message they delivered. Synthesizing greater theological maxims beyond explicitly revealed truths seems to me to be a diversion exacerbated by some of the academic endeavors. To the degree that rules of interpretation, church history and grammar enable my understanding of the straight forward communication, I’ll buy in. For instance, historical writings on the tenets of Gnosticism have been helpful to my better understanding I John. If you think there is merit beyond academics in the topic and have a recommended hermenutical reference, I’d be happy to give it a look.

    4/23 7:42 am Paragraph 2 – I quoted Hebrews 1:1-2 in the generic sense, not with a specific comment on music in mind. I will amplify in this comment to say, I believe my synthesizing a position for God to stand in where He has not spoken would be self-deception. In my view, the books by Miller, Wallace and others against Instrumental Music come quite close to such a synthesis. On the other hand, I view as equally unsupportable the assertion by one of our local preachers that God doesn’t care one way or the other about whether instruments are used in worship. My question is, If silence is silence, how does either side know? This I do know, the apostle prescribes singing within the physical contexts of hymns, psalms, and spiritual songs and I figure a guy that raised the dead is a reliable instructor on the matter. Moving on in this paragraph, I provided two Timothy citations – the first pertaining to salvation (Chap 3) and the second to Christian faithfulness (Chap 4). Again, I shared these verses as separate generic citations I take as a worthy personal instruction and caution. The Deuteronomy cite is too intended in the generic sense identified only as an additional Biblically-based instructional guide used in my broader thinking on the subject matter.

    4/23 7:54 am – I’m not sure whether this was a comment precipitated by something I or someone else said. I’ll simply offer the following thoughts that may have relevance to the comment. Romans 15:1-6 – The preservation of Old Testament teaching is for our learning, having hope, and toward being like minded. Ezekiel 22:26 – The distinction between what is holy and what is profane is a distinction defined by God (not men) and He has indicated a displeasure with the later. I don’t know what the 4/23 7:54 am comment is communicating precisely but I’ll just admit to being personally uncomfortable with an approach to maintaining holiness before God when the church comes together via such communications as “Weekly rodeo worship, Sunday at 10 am. Communion served between steer wrestling and calf roping. Y’all come. It’ll be a fun time for all. All funds collected will support a good cause.” Acts 20:7, I Cor 16:12, I Cor 11:18, I Cor 14:26 all seem to me to have a different tenor to what the assembly was about in the 1st Century. If it helps in unity, I’ll confess to currently being the weaker brother whose conscience would be offended should continued fellowship enjoin this as a worship requirement (Romans 15:1). And while weak in this regard, I’ll remain open to teachings to the contrary based on God’s Word.

    Thanks for your comments and I look forward to your further commmunications.

  21. Alabama John says:

    Ya’ll come hear Jesus speak and don’t worry about lunch as we will have fresh fish and condiment for everyone regardless of the number. Bring the kids and enjoy the outdoors and they can play in the shallow water. Open to everyone regardless of income or religion being practiced.
    Ya’ll come!

    How would that go over today?

  22. Joe Woolbert says:

    Alabama John,

    Yours is a fair request to which I am happy to reply. My primary focus as a Christian is complete surrender and obedience to my Savior. To that end and to His glory, I’ll quickly provide you with the following anecdoctal events from the last few years. I’m a participant and resource in our Wednesday night Evangelism 101 training class at 6 PM that preceeds our Bible Study hour at 7 PM. I teach Sunday Morning Adult Bible Class; topics included Old Testament Survey, Hebrews, I John, Revelation, and currently Minor Prophets so far covering Obediah, Joel, Jonah, Amos, and Hosea. I write a weekly article on Facebook titled ‘Lessons from the Woodshop’ to nudge and encourage my family and life-long aquaintences to understand the value and principles of a God-centered life and which others have found useful for incorporation into their church bulletins as articles. Until the local Alcohol and Drug Rehab facility shutdown due to lack of federal funding, I was the primary teacher (with two other church members assisting) of a weekly Wednesday night Bible Class at the Rehab Center that taught many of the same verses I referenced in my various communications; center protocol prohibited our being able to fulfill baptism requests though we coordinated followup from destination congregations when authorized to do so. I taught VBS class and was privileged to baptize two souls responding to the gospel at the conclusion of the lesson. I taught ladies in a Friday Bible class and was priviledged to witness two of them being baptized as a result. I occassionally have the opportunity to preach from the pulpit when our minister is ill or out of town. On one such occassion I was privileged to baptize four souls at the conclusion of a worship service in connection with a class lesson I had presented earlier in the day. I have organized lectureship topics and have been a lectureship speaker in our congregation’s annual lectureship. I lead congregational singing. I organized and led growth events in our congregation including a men’s retreat, an 18-month evening Bible Reading Class (we just read for an hour and half each Thursday until reading through the whole Bible) and a congregational singing school. I assist in the organization and conduct of Children’s Bible Hour classes on Sunday nights and prepare the continuum of teaching topics for the Bible Hour. I work with the teens of our congregation on Thursday nights in preparing them to teach Bible lessons through skits and object lessons. I’ve assisted in door knocking campaigns inviting households in our community to our annual meeting in October. I’m blessed to be able to pick up my grandgirls and involve them with me in worship on Sundays as their parents engage in instrument playing and media centers in a local denomination. As this is getting pretty lengthy, I’ll conclude by mentioning some time ago I’ve worn the hats of temporary pulpit preacher, bus captain, High School Coordinator, and Singles Ministry director.

    I trust these examples give a sense to the information you were seeking. I would hasten to add, regardless of all the above, Christ’s cleansing blood is my only hope and plea on that day of reckoning. That blood first applied to my sins in 1973 and cleansing me ever since.

  23. Joe Woolbert says:

    Alabama John (Re: 4:31 pm note)
    Describes our congregational community outreach fish fry held March 29 with the exception we substituted gospel singing around a camp fire for Jesus preaching.

  24. Hi, Joe, and thanks your considered response. I did not intend to tout some hermeneutic as a guide to scripture, but merely to point out that the existing hermeneutics in use in the CoC rather have to be understood if one is to make sense of the conclusions being drawn from scripture. Same for history. I can get a lot closer than the Gnostics in finding understanding about my brothers’ POV from CoC history and the use of CENI and the Regulative Principle. In fact, such understanding seems to me to be essential if we are to pry apart scripture from conclusions drawn from scripture, two things which are commonly conflated. To offer an example, there is no understanding the CoC approach to music outside John Calvin’s Regulative Principle. The modern ban on IM depends entirely on Calvin and cannot even be cogently presented without using the Regulative Principle as a given. But most people who hold this view have no idea where it originates and assume it is from Paul.

    I would suggest that if I suggested that this week’s Sunday service be an all-night gathering to eat together and hear a brother from out of town give a dusk-to-dawn lecture, that would make some of our folks uncomfortable. But that is EXACTLY what Acts 20:7 describes. If next Sunday, we announced that today there would be three prophecies, and a tongue that was interpreted, and ten different people singing ten different songs, and several shorter words of instruction by various folks, and a big potluck meal (which included the Lord’s Supper), all going on at the same time, many of our folks would be horrified. Welcome to Sunday at Corinth– AFTER they started following Paul’s instructions. So, the idea that we would be more comfortable with the tenor of a first century meeting is more than a bit questionable. We tend to read about gatherings in the NT and unconsciously frame them within our own practices. We do this unconsciously, without even considering that what those first century brothers did may not have remotely resembled how we do things today. That idea never enters our minds. But it does occur to us that people who do meetings much differently today than we do them are very likely wrong in their practice.

    Yes, the Regulative Principle sneaks in on us even when we are not being what we consider “legalistic”. The idea that a gathering of believers today should follow in form what a gathering of believers looked like in AD 60 is not something we find in Paul’s teaching, but in Calvin’s reaction to the Mass. The general “tenor” called for in a gathering, as far as Paul speaks to it, would be to care for one another and encourage one another and to consider one another’s needs before our own. But the form that takes could be incredibly varied and not verge from that general intent. Including bull-riding as object lesson, I suppose– as opposed to another form of sermon illustration, like a chalk-talk or characters on a flannel board.

    We often find ourselves uncomfortable with forms which others find useful, not because they pose some specific harm to the church, but merely because they are so dissimilar from our own practices. Our discomfort comes from bending our own comfort zone, and medicating the resulting dyspepsia with the Regulative Principle. This leads us to the conclusion that since bull-riding (or piano-playing, or shouting, or kneeling, or banner-waving, or responsive reading) at church seems weird to me and I can’t find it in the New Testament, that this means it probably should not be done. If my brother insists upon something that makes me uncomfortable, he should put that action through Calvin’s strainer if he to be allowed to continue that practice. Otherwise, he really should stop. And if he doesn’t stop, I won’t fellowship with him.

    How we have arrived at this particular spot in our practice and our view of right practice cannot be adequately explained without getting outside the Bible and into other facets of our lives. We cannot examine our own current position with any depth or integrity of inquiry without casting our net wider.

  25. Alabama John says:

    Joe,

    Thank you for the answer. I thank God everyday for men like you and know He blesses your efforts.

    You have my attention!

    By the way, the rodeos for Jesus always ended early so folks could make it to Sunday night services (back when there were Sunday night services). LOL

    We also used to meet on Sunday at odd times based on the shift changes at the local coal mine.
    Never saw the time to meet written in stone and folks used to say if we wanted to be biblical in all things, we would only meet until midnight. We do a lot of things different from those in the bible, far more than we want to admit or bring into these discussions.

    Good to have you aboard. I will have to get out the dictionary that I use for Charles but will understand most with some effort.

  26. rich constant says:

    blessings

    http://stonedcampbelldisciple.com/2013/08/26/what-the-assembly-is-about-in-the-psalms-special-attention-to-ps-95/

    In Scripture a Spiritually minded worshiper comes to the assembly (i.e. gathering) of the People of God desiring five things:
    1) The worshiper desires to come into the Presence of God (cf. 27.4,8; 42.1-2; 63.1;
    73.25)
    2) The worshiper desires to experience the forgiveness of God (32.1-5; 51.10-12; Isa. 6.1-7)
    3) The worshiper desires to give God a gift (Deut. 16.16; Ps. 69.30-31; 107.21-22; Heb. 13.15)
    4) The worshiper desires to promise God something (Ps. 116; 119.57-64)
    5) The worshiper desires to edify fellow worshippers and to be edified him/herself (Ps. 22.25; Heb.
    3.12-13; 10.25)
    From Psalm 95 we learn a way of structuring the assembly/gathering. This structure helps to highlight the themes listed above:

Comments are closed.