The Temple
Ferguson concedes that instrumental music was in fact used as part of the Temple worship. The question thus becomes, even if Ferguson’s historical conclusions were to be correct, whether the Christian assembly — according to the scriptures — is actually patterned after the synagogue, the Jewish home, or the Temple.
Much to the surprise of many modern Christians, the answer is that the Christian assembly has more typology — patterning — on the Temple than the others.
After all, there’s nothing at all in the scriptures suggesting that the early Christians are to pattern their assemblies after the synagogue or the Jewish home (except the Passover, which was celebrated at home once a year and which plays a big part in the origins of the Christian assembly via the Lord’s Supper).
The Temple? The huge marble building where animals were slaughtered by the thousands, where huge choruses of male Levites sang Psalms, and which God allowed Rome to destroy. Yep.
The Temple as type of the assembly
Consider these familiar passages —
(1Co 3:10-17 ESV) 10 According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building upon it. Let each one take care how he builds upon it. 11 For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw– 13 each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. 14 If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. 16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? 17 If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.
In an extensive metaphor, Paul describes the Corinthian congregation as a temple of the Holy Spirit under construction. Like the Temple in Jerusalem, the temple can be made of gold, silver, precious stones, or lesser materials (as in the case of Nehemiah’s temple).
And like God’s Temple in Jerusalem, this temple can be destroyed — and such a destruction would be a dreadful sin against God.
Later, Paul uses the same typology to make another point to the Corinthians —
(2Co 6:16 NAS) 16 Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, “I will dwell in them and walk among them; And I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”
Peter offers the same typology —
(1Pe 2:4-5 NAS) 4 And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
Thus, we repeatedly see a congregation characterized as a temple for the Holy Spirit as well as a place for church members to offer “spiritual sacrifices.”
Now, we should urgently note that the congregation is God’s temple whether or not it’s gathered together on Sunday morning to worship. It’s always a temple. But when the saints are gathered as the ekklēsia, the stones are fit together more closely and there is surely a special presence of the Divine —
(1Co 5:4 NIV) So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present,
— just as God is omnipresent, but has a special presence in the physical Temple.
Jesus himself serves as the atonement sacrifices previously offered in the Temple. The Lord’s Supper and agapē (love feast) replace the fellowship offerings that were eaten as meals in the presence of God.
The prayers offered as a congregation replace the national prayers offered at the Temple.
The songs sung in the congregation replace the singing of the Psalms in the Temple.
Jesus as Temple
There is a subtle but important metaphor here. We are supposed to think of the Temple as being replaced by Jesus himself. N. T. Wright explains how this is true —
— “The Temple was a true signpost to God’s future.” “Jesus … offered the reality to which the Temple had been pointing.”
For a deeper discussion of this subject, see Jesus the Temple
So how do we reconcile the two metaphors or typologies? Well, the church is the body of Christ. The church is a temple because it is part of Jesus, who replaced the Temple — by accomplishing the things the Temple pointed toward — forgiveness of sins, instruction about God, and even bringing the very presence of God to the people.
It’s easy enough to see how Jesus brought God’s presence to earth, but how about the church? Well, consider —
(1Co 14:23-25 ESV) 23 If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds? 24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25 the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.
Our assemblies, properly conducted, will show the very presence of God among us! And that is exactly one of the essential purposes of the Temple itself.
Thus, we see that the Christian congregation, especially — but not only — when assembled, replaces the Temple. Well, actually, Jesus does, but God wishes to have a temple on earth, physical and visible, and it’s the church as the body of Christ.
The church is only a temple to the extent it serves as the presence of Jesus on earth — by offering forgiveness, by embodying the word of God, by sharing meals with God Almighty, and by bringing the very presence of God among his people.
All of which brings us to this quotation from Ferguson —
The Christians’ practice of singing in their assemblies would have had its ultimate roots in the psalmody of the temple.
(Kindle Locations 4794-4795). Absolutely! The connection is obvious when we stop to think about the Temple imagery and typology in the New Testament. The singing of psalms (not mere cantillation by a reader) comes from the Levitical choruses that sang the Psalms.
But Ferguson then adds,
The transfer of the use of the Psalms to a congregational setting apart from material sacrifice and without instrumental accompaniment presumably occurred in the synagogues. The influence of synagogue practices in general upon the early church makes this a likely historical source for the Christian practice of unaccompanied song. The most explicit evidence from the first century, however, of religious songs without instrumental accompaniment pertains to religious exercises in homes and in sectarian groups. Whatever the exact Jewish antecedents , the Christian practice of unaccompanied singing of the Psalms and other religious songs is well attested and would have been quite at home in the context of the Judaism of the first century.
(Kindle Locations 4795-4800). No, no, no! This misses the point entirely.
Why on earth is it necessary that the singing of psalms come to the Christian assembly via the synagogue? We aren’t even certain that the synagogues of the time sang songs — and there’s precious little evidence that they sang congregationally. That’s a mighty thin thread on which to build doctrine. I mean, the church was founded in Jerusalem and met in the Temple courts at its founding. Why would the church have to learn about singing the Psalms from the synagogues?
Why not follow the path the scriptures give us — directly from the Temple to Jesus to the church. That’s biblical thought. The synagogue is utterly beside the point.
Why does the church sing psalms? Well, in part because the psalms were sung at the Temple and Jesus and the church replaces the Temple. But also because Jews have always sung psalms to celebrate things worthy of celebration — and the assembly is all about celebrating the work and presence of Jesus.
And so, you see, when we follow biblical imagery, metaphors, and typology and when we think in terms of the Temple, Jesus, the Spirit, and God, and their church, rather than synagogues and Philo, when we think in terms of the most central, most profound topics in the Bible, we find nothing that tells us to worry the least about instruments.
Rather, we find that the scriptures point to a nation, created by the hand of God, that loves to celebrate and worship with instruments, a nation that at times is threatened with the overwhelming sadness of having no more instrumental music (because instrumental music is associated with celebration), and who are promised that after a time of rebellion, God will bring his Kingdom — and the coming of the Kingdom will be celebrated with instruments!
In short, reading the Bible as a whole, following the plotlines from Old to New Testament, we begin to see a picture emerge, and the picture says nothing of a God who refuses to be worshiped with instrumental music. Rather, the scriptures rightly read tell a very different story.
(1Co 5:4 NIV) So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, Wow.. I was going to give a hearty Amen to your post relative to the logical progression of singing and celebration but got immediately distracted by this verse. Don’t remember reading it lately and don’t remember it grabbing my attention like it did this morning… When the God is in our presence, His Spirit is there and it is the POWER of Jesus… When was the last time that you noticed POWER over Function… Who looks for the absence of power? I bet one would notice if the announcements were read in the middle of the “worship” service or if one cup was suddenly used one Sunday…But, who has the power meter going ?? Who invites the Lord in with POWER… ?
Sorry, I totally agree with your take on instruments and the correlation with the Temple… I just began to consider how God showed up in Power on Mt. Sinai, in the Tabernacle, in the Temple, and for those that would accept Him, in the church… Wow… made my morning.. Come Lord Jesus with Power !!
Interesting post. Think also of Ephesians 2:20-22 where the church is “…built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and joined together and rises to become a holy temple in The Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.”
I especially liked this paragraph: “The church is only a temple to the extent it serves as the presence of Jesus on earth — by offering forgiveness, by embodying the word of God, by sharing meals with God Almighty, and by bringing the very presence of God among his people.”
The church offers forgiveness by preaching the gospel of forgiveness – but also as exemplifying forgiveness “as God for Christ’s sake has forgiven you.” We must be a place where forgiveness is the culture.
I agree with this guy on his view of Ferguson’s conclusions. I admire scholars. They are often wrong even after they have done the hard work of research. I recommend this critique by a guy we know and respect. /2010/09/29/instrumental-music-everett-ferguson-responds-to-danny-corbitt/
We get it. He’s wrong, you’re right. Instrumental music has been argued ad nauseum on this blog. I’m not sure who you are trying to convince considering you’re pretty much preaching to the choir. Soon your congregation will introduce a Saturday evening instrumental service I suspect, you’ll run a few pesky conservatives off, you’ll announce becasue of the overwhelming positive response there will now be a instrumental service on Sunday morning as well. Mission accomplished! Behold the pattern!
“The church offers forgiveness by preaching the gospel of forgiveness – but also as exemplifying forgiveness “as God for Christ’s sake has forgiven you.” We must be a place where forgiveness is the culture.”
I have not heard forgiveness preached in a cofC pulpit but maybe once in my life, save for its use in an invitation when he preacher was begging people to come forward for baptism. However, the newly baptized would probably be condemned to hell within a month. Absolution was something never spoken of from a pulpit, nor was the concept of atonement. I have heard 4 sermons in a row on the need for a general confession one Sunday in the future, but obviously someone did not like it as the sermon topic changed and confession never came up again.
As a member of the only denomination in a hundred years to make instrumental music a matter of fellowship or disfellowship, gt decries even the possibility that such an ill-considered and hurtful doctrinal position might be undone by people in his own denomination. This unique doctrine has developed the power to isolate the CoC from 98% of the body of Christ, which most of us would consider a bad thing. So gt seeks to shame Jay and his congregation into keeping the status quo by mocking anyone who would consider moving beyond this artificial barrier. But I guess shaming is all you can do when neither God nor reason are on your side.
I have long suspected demonic activity here. How else does one explain how such a tiny issue has created division so adamant and for so long, and to have generated such doctrinal loyalty that hundreds of thousands of believers would rather divorce their brethren than let them play a guitar in a single church service. For years, the church has struggled and divided over large issues. The destructive power of this inconsequential one calls for a better explanation than simple disagreement.
One of the reasons I was drawn to the COC was because of its non-denominational proclamation. But I’ve discovered that the COC is just as much shackled by tradition as any denominational church I’ve attended, if not more so. And the sad thing is these things have nothing to do with salvation.
All of this is a bit overwhelming to me – controversies over clapping, musical instruments, one cup, fellowship halls, etc. I’ve never seen so much division and it truly saddens me.
Although I’ve met many wonderful people in the COC, I think I’m going to have to seek out a true non-denominational church.
Chris, I’m with you!! I left the One Cup, no class, no Instrumental Music, no everything else group 2 years ago. I grew tired of the refusal of that group to have any fellowship with other Christians in the American Restoration movement. I now attend the Independent Christian Church and have no regrets about leaving the church of Christ denomination.
Royce,
I’d entirely forgotten about that old post. As I recall (now), I was in something of a mood when I wrote it.
Thanks for the note.
Chris,
You should make a distinction between the Church of Christ denomination, which is filled with division, as you say, and certain congregations of the Churches of Christ that are working very hard to return to the original principles of the Restoration Movements, such as –
“We are Christians only, but not the only Christians.”
One should also realize that among the traditions of the restoration movement is a deep commitment to the authority of God as expressed in scripture. When anyone can break free of the CENI way of reading scripture and instead read it through the lens of God’s gracious gift of life in Christ Jesus, then s/he is ready to begin sloughing off the traditions that come from men instead of from YAWEH.
Jay, sorry, I didn’t mean to lump all COC together. I think it’s a wonderful thing for congregations to return to its restoration roots. However, it’s easier for those familiar with COC to distinguish the difference.
Barriers exists from those on the outside looking in. People with not so positive experiences with COC tend not to make such distinctions. So, my question is – how do progressive congregations distinguish themselves? How do progressives distance themselves from all the baggage that comes from being associated with the COC denomination?
I think sometimes you determine that by trial and effort. Also, some moderate congregations do not use the descriptor “church of christ”, but are known as XYZ church.
Mark,
I think that’s an excellent starting point. It would certainly alleviate the painful discussions about how different we are, etc. We could simply respond “we’re a non-denominational” church and leave it at that.
After all, if you’re a non-denominational congregation, why would one want to carry the denominational label?
In the northeast, many cofC congregations still use the name but are moderate to leftist. They are not hard-line conservatives. Some even have women in the pulpit. You can usually tell their leanings by listening to the sermons. That is an incentive to put the sermons online and have a website which states that we are egalitarian and believe in congregational autonomy.
I would suggest that the RM mantra, “Christians only, but not the only Christians”, is so dated as to be of no real value beyond perhaps trying to uproot the antithesis of it found in a few corners of the CoC. The other use, I suppose, would be to take an elliptical shot at any member of any denomination, but that has long ago proved pointless at best.
Seriously, when is the last time you heard anyone besides a CoC person suggest that a believer had to be a member of a particular denomination? Or of any denomination for that matter? Or insist that the believer must not join a denomination? The burgeoning number of believers who do not claim any denominational affiliation suggests that this treasured RM adage is an widely-accepted given. Holding to it is like continuing a campaign insisting that women should be able to cut their hair if they like. This train long ago left the station.
“We are Christians only, but not the only Christians.” For 98%+ of us believers, the response is, “Yeah, so?”
It is time to retire this chestnut and relegate it to history where it belongs. Or preserve it in the church foyers of a few arch-conservative CoC congregations who have long been able to say it without actually believing it.
Chris,
That’s a truly excellent question — and not easily answered.
Some Cs of Christ change their name, but in so doing, they lose much of their ability to influence the more traditional Churches of Christ.
Some Churches try to redeem the name, by being the kind of church they believe God called them to be — doing missions, evangelism, and benevolence, all the while trying show the fullness of God’s grace, cooperating across denominational lines, and building a reputation in the community for love and compassion.
Both choices have obvious disadvantages and advantages.
Chris,
Traditional, conservative Churches of Christ have long argued that they are not a “denomination,” because they are the one true church — as though “denomination” means “not the true church” or something like that. But, as you suggest, they will often cling more tightly to the denominational name than anything else, because their identity is tied to a set of teachings and practices rather than to Jesus as a person.
Indeed, one of the biggest barriers to any Church of Christ member escaping legalism is the name — oddly enough. I say “oddly enough” because it’s absolutely standard teaching among the more traditional Churches that you may use any “scriptural name,” even if not “Church of Christ” — but in practice, it’s “Church of Christ” or you’re not one of us. The feeling of group identity associated with the name is remarkably strong.
Charles said; “I have long suspected demonic activity here. How else does one explain how such a tiny issue has created division so adamant and for so long, and to have generated such doctrinal loyalty that hundreds of thousands of believers would rather divorce their brethren than let them play a guitar in a single church service.”
Charles what would the limit be on instruments allowed ? would every member be allowed to bring their own worship enhancement. or would you limit it to just a few. If it was limited, how would that be different from a ban all together. You would allow some and deny others, or would you draw straws. If one person gets to play a guitar, we should all get to play our harp, our fiddle , our banjo, and our trumpet, our saxophone, our bells, our xylophone our drums, I especially like bass drums., cymbals. surely you wouldn’t restrict the harmonica. 500 instruments playing should be impressive. especially the tuning session. Maybe you could hold auditions to see who was good enough to worship God. Who would decide who was good enough, you, the elders, or maybe a sign from the holy spirit. this could run into many more rules than the church has now. Just wondering how you are going to do this Charles. without choosing one over the other.
Indeed, one of the biggest barriers to any Church of Christ member escaping legalism is the name ————————————————————————————————————————– The feeling of group identity associated with the name is remarkably strong.
Absolutely accurate statement , otherwise I suspect Jay and others here would be members of the Baptist church. instead of struggling to change the CoC.
Tens of thousands of churches have figured it out Laymond. (re; instruments)
At least one baptist church has a woman senior pastor and who won’t be the only one.
Royce is quite correct, Laymond. And if that’s no good, Paul’s guidance to the Corinthians about how to bring what they have to the meeting would probably still be good advice.
David spoke to how musical instruments should be played… Psalms 33Sing joyfully to the Lord, you righteous;
it is fitting for the upright to praise him.
2 Praise the Lord with the harp;
make music to him on the ten-stringed lyre.
3 Sing to him a new song;
play skillfully, and shout for joy.
Note the PLAY SKILLFULLY part… verse 3.. The Lord has never been a Lord of Chaos.. From the precision design of the Temple..to the those that were chosen to lead the singing and play the instruments…all things were done skillfully and in order.. As Charles suggested above, even the gifts of the Spirit were to be orderly and under control… The suggestion that the skillful playing of instruments to accompany singing in worship or in our daily life will lead to chaotic banging of the drums is not well thought through and certainly not a reasoned objection to the main point of this post.
It is conceivable that one would bring their flute, another a violin, another a piano, another a cello, etc. and would be able to play with each other in an orderly and beautiful way that would honor the God that gave them the talent to do so. In fact, it is done quite regularly and they have a name for it: Orchestra.
That is why G-d made Mozart, Beethoven, and other musicians, who all composed musical settings for mass and the requiem. The cofC really needs to appreciate music.
Price, said ” Praise the Lord with the harp; make music to him on the ten-stringed lyre.”
price give me the quote about guitars, organs, pianos . if God was so strict on wood to burn at offerings, why would he not be jus as strict on music at offerings today.?
How many churches today play the “harp, and lyre” ?
Mark, I am pleased to know someone who knows as much as you do about why God does what he does. even though the bible says you don’t know any such thing.
Ignorance of the bible always shows up, to pretend it is brilliance.
Charles, as you know I don’t hold what Paul said as equal to what Jesus said.in any situation.
Jesus said worship God in “spirit and truth” not play God a tune. I do believe even Paul describes instruments in a different manner than you seem to think. Can you tell me what Paul really said about worshiping God with a lifeless instrument?
I’d rather see them use their talents for good rather than evil…
1Cr 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
1Cr 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?
1Cr 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
1Cr 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
1Cr 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
When an artist plays an instrument in church assembly, we have to assume there is love of God being demonstrated here. We certainly cannot read another’s heart.
And as Paul said “except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. ”
Unless we understand what is being said either by voice, or instrument how can we really know what we encourage, or agree with in church.
“Our assemblies, properly conducted, will show the very presence of God among us!” Herein lies the problem. “Properly conducted” does not mean proper order, proper procedures, proper doctrines, or quiet solemn behavior. In my opinion “Properly conducted” is not about church format, rather, do the members come to love, serve, help, be real, praise God, pray fervently, get to know one another, bear each other’s burdens, encourage one another, admonish one another, show great joy, share victories, see the lost being saved, and do this all humbly and reverently. If I found this behavior in a church I would embrace it and would love to worship there. Look at the early church in Acts 2. They had great joy, witnessed 3000 baptisms, were devoted to “Bible Study”, the fellowship, breaking of bread, and to prayer. There was no format. I don’t see Peter preaching on proper procedures. There was simply incredible joy, gratitude, praise, and fellowship. Modern Churches of Christ need to reboot and pretend like they know nothing. Start all over with humility, prayer, and fresh eyes on the scriptures.
“Let all things be done decently and in order” certainly does not mean having everything scripted as much as a month in advance as to who is to do what and when in our assemblies. Do we need a cacophony with many people speaking at once? Of course not – but some spontaneous participation gives space for the Spirit of God to interact with our spirits and with our spirits to interact with each other in a very meaningful way.
Laymond, Jesus never addresses music in scripture, except in one prophetic metaphor. I’ll leave you to find it. It is rather illustrative in this case. Jesus certainly never discussed what sort of music -if any- should be found in a church meeting. So your dismissal of Paul’s guidance is on your own hook– you can’t contraast it with anything Jesus said. With Jesus not mentioning the matter, and you rejecting Paul for your own reasons, I’m not sure what you bring to this discussion but your own opinion. We readers can weigh that item for ourselves.
I do hope I don’t hear you complaining any more henceforth when our discussions stray from scripture. After this, such would be rather hypocritical.
Sometimes I think we throw away the banana and eat the peel when it comes to grasping scripture. We indiscriminately swallow the outside and leave the inside for others. It is not unusual to see a specific biblical instruction which is really just a snapshot of a larger issue. Was Paul really against hair-braiding? Was he concerned that Timothy was not drinking enough wine? Did Jesus really mean the only way we can follow him is if we sell all our goods first? Or is his instruction to the “rich young ruler” only useful to us as illustrating a principle?
An interesting example of this sort of instruction is Paul’s instruction to Corinth that in a meeting, two prophets, or at the most three, should speak. Does that mean it’s not an “official church service” until you round up at least two prophets? Does it mean that the Holy Spirit can speak through three prophets, but not through a fourth? (At least not until the evening service?) Or is this all about using sensible self-limits to assure that we are blessing one another?
No, in all these cases, we should eat the fruit without feeling obligated to swallow the peel. We don’t kick little Cindy out of Sunday school for having braids; we allow people to take Pepto-Bismol instead of the house red; we actually follow Jesus with some cash in the bank. We don’t have to go over to the nearest Charismatic group and borrow two prophets so we can have a sanctioned church meeting.
If we could read Paul’s instruction about gatherings with the same modicum of wisdom, we would not find ourselves arguing over how to chew that bitter banana peel and how much of it we have to swallow to be safe from the wrath of God.
Charles, knowing what Paul meant, but didn’t say, is nearly as gifted as Mark, knowing why God did things. you are both truly gifted. but I knew that about you already. speaking in tongues, and healing and all that stuff.
Jerry, Bingo and Ditto.
Charles, excellent examples. Also, in regards to obscure old testament instruments, does it mean that we shouldn’t give because our dollars don’t equate to ancient currency?
Laymond wrote,
I have no desire to be a Baptist. Zero.
Rather, I feel a great compassion for the members of the more conservative Churches of Christ. I feel deeply for those who are miserable, agonizing over whether they are saved. I hurt for the bright, gifted preachers who teach a false gospel, and despite a great love for Jesus, are endangering their souls as they blindly lead others to faith in works and five acts of worship. I pray constantly for those trapped in the falsehoods that have captured the conservative Churches.
I stay in the Churches of Christ because I love the people who make up the Churches of Christ. I have no desire to be anywhere else.
Charles said, “Laymond, Jesus never addresses music in scripture, except in one prophetic metaphor.”
I never meant to say Jesus did mention music in worship, but Jesus did say how we are supposed to worship to please God. Seems to me if music was intended to be used in worship of God, Jesus might have thought to mention it. After all, was it not Jesus who built the church.
” I feel a great compassion for the members of the more conservative Churches of Christ. I feel deeply for those who are miserable, agonizing over whether they are saved. I hurt for the bright, gifted preachers who teach a false gospel, and despite a great love for Jesus, are endangering their souls as they blindly lead others to faith in works and five acts of worship. I pray constantly for those trapped in the falsehoods that have captured the conservative Churches.”
Jay, it seems to me that would be a miserable way of life, to sit with people knowing I was saved (as you claim), and believing those around me were going to hell, and there was nothing I could do for them.
The Baptist claim they know their future as well, seems you might want to join those in worship here that you will be joined to in worship there.
I am not agonizing over things I have no control over. I do believe there will be a judgment day, and I don’t believe that day was when I was baptized. I do have hope in God’s word as the absolute truth. And I do have faith in that word.
Rom 8:24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
Rom 8:25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.
Psa 31:23 O love the LORD, all ye his saints: for the LORD preserveth the faithful, and plentifully rewardeth the proud doer.
Psa 31:24 Be of good courage, and he shall strengthen your heart, all ye that hope in the LORD.
Laymond, you asked, “was it not Jesus who built the church?”
In this you assume that the building of the church is a past event and that the church arrived on earth in a completed state, presumably at Pentecost.
Yet scripture repeatedly speaks of the building of the temple of God as an ongoing process as living stones are added to it. The building of the church will not be complete until The Lord returns.
Who is building it Jerry, you or God. I believe it was completed by Jesus, but God keeps adding to it, not restructuring it. I believe the corner stone remains the same. and the foundation remains on solid rock. I don’t believe you or anyone else can change what Jesus built. Not even God claims to change it, just to add souls to what Jesus had already built..
Jerry, if 100 Christians die, and one Christian is baptized, is the Lord’s church shrinking or being added to. The church does not have to be changed to be added to.
Laymond, if 100 Christians die they are still part of the glorious temple that is being built as a habitation for God. My previous point was that the church is still being built; the building of the church is not a past event. It will continue until The Lord returns to deliver his kingdom up to the Father.
Laymond wrote, “Seems to me if music was intended to be used in worship of God, Jesus might have thought to mention it.” Here we have what my mom might have called a “wonder why”. The thing about Mom was that she knew the difference between a “wonder why” and an actual fact.
Consider one easy parallel to Laymond’s reasoning here:
“Jesus said to love my neighbor, and gave me the Samaritan rescuing a stranger as an example. Seems to me if Jesus had intended this love to include shoveling the snow from my neighbor’s driveway, he might have mentioned it. Conclusion: not only do I not have to shovel my neighbor’s driveway, but Jesus doesn’t want me to love my neighbor in this non-biblical way.” 🙂
I might as well smile; I’m too bald to pull any more hair out.
One could also “wonder why” if he meant to exclude it he failed to mention that either. This is especially true since it was in the OT at God’s command and will also be in heaven. And with nothing said against it in the NT, we can certainly “wonder why” – and many do.
Likely because some things are so minor in the grand scheme of things that they did not warrant mentioning. There Is No extraneous material in the Torah, the prophets, or the gospels, unlike today when articles can be long since paper is not needed.
The slogan for the CoC seems to have changed to” where the bible is silent, we take advantage”
Or ” where the bible is silent, we see an opening”
Why must one automatically equate silence with prohibition? The New Testament mentions nothing about bathrooms in churches, yet I’m sure most would agree this is a good thing.
The NT doesn’t mention anything about Church buildings, electric lights, parking lots, and a PA system. I guess the silence in scripture is going to kill all modern churches.
Laymond, Actually, where the Bible speaks we are silent because the Bible is the final word. Where the Bible is silent we actually can speak because the Bible does not address the subject nor any attendent prohibitions.
But there sure are a lot of prohibitions not prohibited directly by the Bible.
Chris, do you go to the bathroom to worship, do you actually see that as an action of worship.
Skip, I don’t recall any of the things you mention as a facet of worship of God. every thing you mentioned is either a necessity (parking lot), or a comfort to the members (building with electricity) .
None of the things mentioned is considered “worship”. Have you ever driven up to the CoC building, on Friday, where paid non-CoC workers are either working on the roof or parking lot, and asked what is going on, and they answered “we are worshiping God with our spades, and hammers.”
What you have said here is ridiculously off the point. It is not even comparing apples to oranges, at least they are both fruits. What you have done is compare apples to “horse apples” that fall behind the horse.
Mark, I agree.
Laymond, Technically worship is giving thanks, praise, and glory to God. It is not going to Sunday School. It is not singing a few shaped note songs about the little church in the valley. It is not required to be in a church building. It is something a few Christians can do together or I can do all alone with the Lord.
Laymond, relax, I was attempting to use humor to prove a point. The point being that many COC members simply pick and choose which things in the new testament that accomodates them, even if scripture is silent and even when it speaks. Why does COC have Wednesday night service? Why aren’t women’s heads covered? Why does no one speak in tongues or prophesy?
Please spare me the one size fits all culture and cessation arguments.
I have never knowingly attended a CoC that anointed members with oil, washed each others feet, greeted each other with a action that was described as a Holy Kiss. Weren’t these actions examples in the early church? Have we not just chosen to ignore instructions and examples of the use of these actions in CoC churches of today yet apply conclusions from silence as a law?
Larry, precisely the problem. Don’t you dare cross the guardians of the church who overlook scriptures like this. 🙂
Larry, I have never seen the resurrection of the dead, nor the healing of the sick, but maybe you can explain just what the things you have never witnessed in the CoC has to do with worshiping God. And maybe you can tell me other churches who do these thinks because they allow instruments in their worship.
Jump right in Skip, I would like to hear your experiences as well .
I will continue to bring the conversation back to instrumental worship, the origin of this conversation.
And I might recommend “The seventh day Adventist”
Charles said, “I might as well smile; I’m too bald to pull any more hair out”.
Charles please don’t blame me for the loss of your covering, I seem to recall about a dozen kids. 🙂