tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24730411591574650812024-02-20T03:27:38.351-06:00Why I am Not a Member of the Church of ChristThis blog is hosted by a recovering member of a non-institutional ultra-conservative church of Christ. Though once a member of the “only group of believers going to heaven” I have studied with fresh eyes some of the core tenants of what I used to so passionately believe. I'll discuss some of those subjects on this blog and share with you reasoning why - though still a Christian – I am no longer a member of the church of Christ.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-40391922594951927882011-09-26T01:38:00.000-05:002011-09-26T01:38:59.884-05:00This is a little off our normal topic, but you MUST see this...<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7y2KsU_dhwI?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-56428086199857314902011-09-10T22:08:00.000-05:002011-09-11T08:52:31.122-05:00Guess Who Knocked on My Door This MorningThis morning a local COC group was in the neighborhood knocking on doors and leaving their literature regarding an upcoming Seminar that they will be holding beginning tomorrow. They left me two pieces of information. A flyer for the Seminar and a tract titled "The Safety Chain." The front of the tract depicts a family of four (man, woman, boy and a girl) with a literal chain going from the family to a bible. (See below).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEk1fE8_zR4mI4tfjBYxBHe3nuFcWQmjU1nj8PjCWH7CJiUfLhmQEZ3wByxgpVm6Kt9TcpyXbo1kndaawIIpcyIAHcjRBEjp9sh6GC3MT33ahX9CwQYdbPDmjEJMPPWPANdBUjAk0IgcrQ/s1600/The+Safety+Chain.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left:1em; margin-right:1em"><img border="0" height="320" width="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEk1fE8_zR4mI4tfjBYxBHe3nuFcWQmjU1nj8PjCWH7CJiUfLhmQEZ3wByxgpVm6Kt9TcpyXbo1kndaawIIpcyIAHcjRBEjp9sh6GC3MT33ahX9CwQYdbPDmjEJMPPWPANdBUjAk0IgcrQ/s320/The+Safety+Chain.jpg" /></a></div><br />
I've seen this tract and image before. But now that I am no longer a member of the COC I see this image very differently. I suppose the average COC member sees a family protected by a "safety chain" that keeps them tethered to the Word of God. Much like a safety harness worn by a construction worker who is working several stories above the ground, the tether keeps him protected from falling to his death should he miss a step on the girder that he walks upon.<br />
<br />
Now I see something very different.<br />
<br />
A chain seems so counter-intuitive when considering the freedom we have in Christ and what He has accomplished for us (Romans 8:1,2). But when considering the COC's system of faith and work righteousness, a chain seems so appropriate. The COC claims to "speak where the Bible speaks", yet where in Scripture do we see the concept of a "safety chain." Salvation is in Christ, not a chain. Jesus describes himself as the Good Shepherd, the Vine, the Way, the Truth, the Light, but never as a chain. And if the chain connects us to the Word, what's the chain? It must be something other then the Word.<br />
<br />
Inside the tract, on page three, the following appears:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>"Please read the following chain of scriptures prayerfully. It will only take a few minutes and could save your soul!"</blockquote><br />
<br />
A few things come to mind.<br />
<br />
We see that the "safety chain" is a chain composed of "links" of Scripture, fashioned together into a "safety chain." Who determined the pattern of this chain? Which Scriptures are worthy of link status? <br />
<br />
Also notice that this chain "could save your soul." "Could" save your soul? Sounds a little noncommittal. <br />
<br />
Of course the Scriptures in the tract deal heavily with the promotion of water baptism, weekly Lord's Supper observance, weekly contributing, assembling, and singing a capella only music in worshiping God.<br />
<br />
This is work-righteousness in textbook form. <br />
<br />
Forget about the salvation that we have in Christ. Forget about the one-time for all-time sacrifice of a perfect Lamb for the sins of the world (Please, please, please read Hebrews 10:11-18).<br />
<br />
No, your salvation, they would have you to believe, is predicated on your ability to perform the aforementioned rites and present yourself righteous before God based on your spiritual accomplishments. <br />
<br />
Of all of God's commandments I broke while a member of the COC I suppose I may have been guilty of breaking the 4th Commandment the most often; not remembering the Sabbath. <br />
<br />
But not by working on Sunday or gathering sticks like the example we have in Numbers 15:32-36. My transgression was much worse.<br />
<br />
Just like the other commandments that Christ expanded upon and placed the root of the sin in the heart (i.e., killing vs. hating in our heart, adultery vs. lusting in the heart; see Matt. 5:21ff) I neglected to keep the Sabbath <i>by trying to work my way to heaven</i>.<br />
<br />
See, Jesus taught that He was the Lord of the Sabbath (Lk. 6:5) and that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath (Mk. 2:27). Christ also taught us to come to Him, all of us who are weak and heavy-laden, and we would find REST for our souls (Matt. 11:28, 29).<br />
<br />
Do we keep the Sabbath today? Of course we do. That is, if we REST in the WORK that JESUS did for us to save us. His work, not ours. If we are trying to rest in OUR works, we are violating the Sabbath and storing up wrath for ourselves in the judgement to come.<br />
<br />
Jesus Christ is our Sabbath. He is our Rest. Please stop running yourself ragged on the treadmill of religion, trying to make yourself worthy. You will never be worthy of God's majestic Grace. If you were, it wouldn't be Grace. <br />
<br />
<blockquote>"For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken afterward about another day. Consequently a Sabbath rest remains for the people of God. For the one who enters God's rest has also rested from his works, just as God did from his own works." (Heb. 4:8-10)</blockquote><br />
<blockquote>"But God, being rich in mercy, because of his great love with which he loved us, even though we were dead in transgressions, made us alive together with Christ - by grace you are saved! - and he raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, to demonstrate in the coming ages the surpassing wealth of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you are saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God; it is not from works, <b>so that no one can boast</b>." (Eph. 2:4-9)</blockquote>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-27550708898977098812010-12-22T20:59:00.002-06:002010-12-22T22:35:09.969-06:00Christmas and the Christian[For a very good and rather exhaustive but <i>general</i> article on Christmas check out <a href="http://bible.org/article/should-christians-celebrate-christmas">this</a>. My post will deal more specifically with the church of Christ and their reasoning for not celebrating it.] <br />
<br />
It seems like an unlikely question: Should Christians observe Christmas? I mean, think about it: "Christians" and "Christmas"...both words derived from "Christ"...what's the problem, right? <br />
<br />
Yet there are those who consider themselves Christians who do not celebrate Christmas as the birth of Jesus Christ. They refuse to sing religious Christmas songs, will not let their children participate in school Christmas plays, do not put angels on top of their Christmas trees, and teach their children that Christians are wrong (let's just say it, <i>sinning</i>) for celebrating the birth of Jesus in the month of December. I know this is true. It once described me. <br />
<br />
Think of it this way: If you knew absolutely nothing about Christians, and knew nothing about the observance of the holiday called Christmas, and if you came to earth and learned about the two concepts you would be puzzled to say the least that there are actually those who identify themselves as Christians yet sincerely believe and teach against observing the holiday. <br />
<br />
The church of Christ of which I was a member believed this way - and we were not in a theological-vacuum. All the other local churches that we fellowshipped believed the same way, and there were several. Unfortunately I raised my son to believe this way and he still adheres to this mindset today.<br />
<br />
Here's the reasoning: the COC say that you need "book, chapter, and verse" to practice anything religiously. They have such a carefully constructed approach to interpreting, understanding, and applying the Bible that they've painted themselves in a hermeneutical-corner. They believe that since we do not read anywhere in the NT about the Apostles or disciples celebrating the birth of Jesus (what they call an "approved example") or no specific command to do so, nor any inferences to celebrate it, we would be "unscriptural" to celebrate the Christmas holiday <i>religiously</i>. They are also quick to mention that the only time we see birthday celebrations in the Bible are for non-believers, i.e. Genesis 40:20, Matt. 14:6. <br />
<br />
What I find interesting is that I have never met a member of the COC that does not celebrate <b>their own</b> birthday, or the birthdays of their family members. I even know people who celebrate "birthdays" for their pets. So when it comes to celebrating the Savior's birth into this fallen world for the purpose of redeeming man from his sins and thus saving us from eternal torment and excommunication from God - that's a no-no because God never told us to do it. <br />
<br />
The problem I have with this argument is that it just seems pretty ridiculous when I consider the emphasis that the Word of God puts on the birth of Christ. <br />
<br />
Have you or your children ever been invited to another child's birthday party. How did you find out about it? Like us, you probably got a really cute, gender-appropriate invitation in the mail announcing the time and location of the event. You probably even received this notice well in advance of the party so that you could make arrangements to attend (and bring their kid a gift, of course). Well guess what God did. He sent out birthday invitations for <i>His</i> Son, <i>too</i>. God put a little more effort into His invitations. He sent His in the form of Old Testament prophecies uttered by the Holy Spirit through the mouths of His prophets <b>thousands of years beforehand</b> so that the people could get ready! Wow, Glory to God!!!!<br />
<br />
God's invitations told us the Child would be born of the seed of a woman (Genesis 3:15), a descendant of Abraham, (12:3), a descendant of Isaac (17:19), a descendant of Jacob (Numbers 24:17), of the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:10), an heir to the throne of David (Is. 9:7), born in the town of Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), born of a virgin (Is. 7:4), born at a specific time (Dan. 9:24-27), the Child's birth would cause the slaughter of other children (Jer. 31:15), and the family would come out of Egypt (Hosea 11:1). <b>How's that for emphasis?</b><br />
<br />
Mary did not have a copy of <i>What to Expect When You Are Expecting</i>, but she had something better. Mary's pregnancy was of the Holy Spirit and announced by the angel Gabriel who was sent by God (Luke 1:26-38). An angel also appeared to Joseph concerning the pregnancy (Matt. 1:18-25). At the time of the Birth, angels appeared to the shepherds in the field and praised God for the Birth (Luke 2:8-14). The shepherds glorified and praised God over the events (2:20). Also, to direct the Magi from the east God prepared a specific sign <i>in our solar system</i> to point the way. In verses 9-11 of Matthew Chapter 2 the Magi come to the child Jesus, presented Him gifts, and fell down and <b>WORSHIPED</b> him! I'm not too smart, but it sure seems to me that God is giving us lots of <i>inferences and examples</i> in these accounts. How can we share the story of redemption, the Gospel, without the story of Christ's Birth and the numerous prophecies that it fulfilled, thus proving the reliability of the Bible and the Faithfulness of God's Word? It's a part of the story of our salvation. Please do not rob the Gospel story of this beautiful chapter in God's plan for us.<br />
<br />
Is it just me or does it seem a little hypocritical to not celebrate the Lord's Birth (at all) "because the Bible only records the birthday celebrations of pagans" but then celebrate your own birthday every year? Not just celebrate it, but fully expect attention, gifts, and praise on that day. How can we believe that there is "no authority" or no scriptural precedent to celebrate the Lord's Birth when the Gospels of Matthew and Luke go to such lengths to document and preserve the wonderful works of God woven throughout that account? <br />
<br />
Please, do not waste another opportunity to take your family to a Christmas Eve candle-light service. Like God's people during the times of the OT (Ex. 13:8, 14) use these moments as opportunities to teach your children about spiritual things: sin, the unavoidable Judgement to come, the Atoning Sacrifice prepared by God, the humility and obedience of Jesus Christ, His life, His suffering, His death, and his Resurrection, and what that means for us today, <i>everyday</i>. <br />
<br />
The real question is not whether or not we should be celebrating Christmas as Christ's Birth on December 25, but what day should we <i>not</i> be celebrating Christ's birth? Do not spurn the opportunity that Christmas gives you to preach the Gospel to your friends, your neighbors, your family, your wife, your children, and <i>to your self</i>. <br />
<br />
Don't let the world turn Christmas into a fantasy about material gifts earned by a work-righteous reward system overseen by a false god called Santa. I'd hate to stand before God on Judgement Day with children at my side who believe in Santa but not the Creator of the Universe and the Author and Finisher of my faith. <br />
<br />
"<i>For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this</i>." Isaiah 9:6, 7<br />
<br />
Merry Christmas!!!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-13844521714930956452010-12-13T07:52:00.000-06:002010-12-13T07:52:10.789-06:00What About Christmas?Since it's that time of year, let's think about Christmas and whether or not we should celebrate it as the birth of Christ. I'm working on a post that will discuss the COC and their view of Christmas. Keep checking back...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-20425849419818554562010-11-11T18:32:00.002-06:002010-11-11T18:37:04.744-06:00Please check out the Way of the Master/LivingWaters ministry!WOW! My spiritual life has been SO BLESSED as a result of finding the Way of the Master/Living Waters ministry. I'll give you some hyperlinks to click in a minute but I want you to keep reading for now. I always felt that the COC's approach to the Gospel was lacking. In fact, it was a type of religion that was almost devoid of the Gospel. Yes we held Gospel Meetings and attended the Gospel Meetings of others, but hardly ever was their a real emphasis placed on taking the Gospel OUTSIDE THE BUILDING to a lost and sinful world. Jesus said that his disciples would be "fishers of men" (Mark 1:17), but it seemed like we were waiting for the fish to jump into the boat. What did Jesus and the Apostles do? Is that how the Christians in the New Testament evangelized?<br />
<br />
Furthermore, when I would share my faith I found myself spending more time talking about what made our group different from all the other groups as opposed to preaching Jesus Christ and Him crucified. I used to joke that our preacher had one sermon and that he simply changed the introduction and closing each week. Why? Because we spent more time talking about ourselves and our uniqueness then Jesus and the Gospel. It was like the outdoor, open air, public square preaching of the Gospel was something that was meant for the NT days but really wasn't a part of Christendom today. Brethren if these words describe you, repent TODAY and let's get back to NT Christianity. <br />
<br />
I know you don't know me, but I am sincerely concerned for you and your soul. Whether you are a new Christian, an Elder of a church, a pastor, or a Pope I beg you to listen to the audio messages that are linked to below. They will help you to cut through all the religious noise out there and will concisely and succinctly show you what the Gospel really is. You will understand the Scriptures in a whole new light and finally it will all make sense. <br />
<br />
We must truly understand the Law-Gospel relationship. It is imperative for our own salvation and for our ability to share the true, <i>Biblical</i> Gospel with others. Please don't let anything prevent you from listening to the messages below. <br />
<br />
I'll put these in a listening order that might help:<br />
<br />
Start here: <a href="http://ia700107.us.archive.org/7/items/HellsBestKeptSecret_250/hells_best_kept_secret.mp3">Hell's Best Kept Secret</a> <br />
<br />
Then go <a href="http://www.onemilliontracts.com/free.shtml">here</a> and listen to the audio messages on this page by Ray Comfort.<br />
<br />
Check out <a href="http://www.livingwaters.com">LivingWaters.com</a>. If you want more audio you can go to iTunes and search for Way of the Master Radio or simply do a Google search for Way of the Master Radio. <br />
<br />
Whatever you do be sure to check out Todd Friel of Wretched Radio and Wretched TV <a href="http://www.wretchedradio.com/">here</a>. It's a cross between Jay Leno and the 700 Club - but better theology all around! <br />
<br />
God Bless!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-40737454862874168402010-07-05T21:52:00.000-05:002010-07-05T21:52:43.201-05:00They Forgot To Tell Me ThatWhen I was a member of the COC I cannot tell you how many times I not only sung the hymn "Ivory Palaces", but also led it from the pulpit straight out of the congregation's Sacred Selections for the Church songbook (entry #70). I love the melody and the words to this song:<br />
<br />
"<i>My Lord has garments so wondrous fine,<br />
And myrrh their texture fills;<br />
Its fragrance reached to this heart of mine<br />
With joy my being thrills.<br />
<br />
Out of the ivory palaces,<br />
Into a world of woe,<br />
Only His great eternal love<br />
Made my Savior go....</i>"<br />
<br />
Shame on me for never looking at the top of the page where the Scriptural reference/basis for the song was noted. Look for yourself, it's Psalms 45:8. If I would have only taken the time to flip over to Psalms 45 I could have read for myself just what exactly the Scriptures say is coming out of the ivory palaces. Want to guess what it is? Let me quote the verse for you from the NASB:<br />
<br />
"<i>All Thy garments are fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia; Out of ivory palaces <b>stringed instruments have made Thee glad</b></i>." Psalms 45:8 NASB<br />
<br />
Hmmm. I guess they forgot to tell me that. Maybe that's why we're told to "<i>Make every effort to present yourself before God as a proven worker who does not need to be ashamed, teaching the message of truth accurately</i>." 2 Timothy 2:15 NET <br />
<br />
Are you being taught the message of truth accurately? If you're a teacher or preacher of the Gospel, are you teaching and preaching it accurately?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-34475654469047900182010-07-05T21:23:00.000-05:002010-07-05T21:23:33.347-05:00Is It "Scriptural?"Here is a pet peeve of mine. Some will say that it is "unscriptural" for you to worship God with musical instruments. Many of the same people will also tell you that you should "speak as the Oracles of God" and use "Bible words in Bible ways." But what does the Word of God say? Is the use of instruments "unscriptural?"<br />
<br />
On the contrary! Under the terms "Scripture" and "It Is Written" the New Testament quotes the book of Psalms as "Scripture" many times. Read these examples: Matthew 21:16, 42; John 2:17, 13:18, 19:36; Acts 1:20; Romans 3:4, 10-18; 4:17, 8:36; 15:9, 11; 1 Corinthians 3:19, 20; 2 Corinthians 4:13; 9:9.<br />
<br />
So, is the use of instruments in worship to God "unscriptural?" Well, if (A) the Bible refers to quotes from Psalms as "Scripture" and (B) Psalms provides examples of worshiping God with the use of instruments, then who can say that the practice is "unscriptural?" Who is really "speaking as the Oracles of God?"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-72053671962999578692010-06-27T09:57:00.001-05:002010-06-27T09:57:34.191-05:00Are there any examples of musical instruments being used in worship to God in the New Testament? Of course! Chapters 5 and 15 of the book of Revelation (which is in the New Testament) clearly gives us an example of it.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-19782265511915911312010-03-27T12:50:00.001-05:002010-03-27T12:50:41.034-05:00At the request of someone I recently corresponded with I removed the last post until I have ample time to rework it. The goal here is to discuss the Scriptures in a spirit of love. One thing I have learned is that it is always more important to be righteous rather than right. <br>"Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being, and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart." Psalms 51:6Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-83327169324998806652010-01-31T15:31:00.001-06:002010-01-31T15:31:56.295-06:00This evening I will be posting a lesson on the COC's approach to instrumental music, pointing out some errors in their application of the Scriptures.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-85132965746060883892010-01-11T09:40:00.001-06:002010-01-11T09:40:14.352-06:00Next we are going to look at the church of Christ's most sacred cow: instrumental music. Not only is this an area that they believe most other religions are in error over, but a study of this topic really strikes at the foundation of how they understand the Bible. Could they be wrong about this fundemental pillar in their system of faith?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-49558509248472332142010-01-10T17:17:00.001-06:002010-01-10T17:17:40.575-06:00If you are a member of the Church of Christ I pray that you will take great care this new year to investigate your faith. It took a lot of turmoil in my life to prepare my heart to listen to the truth. I still have family in the COC who I worry about daily. I'm not sure I believe that they are lost, but I do believe that they are following a lie; a form of religion devoid of God's love and grace. They are living under such a weight of legalism that it causes them to be non-evangelistic. They follow a religion that takes the Good News out of the Gospel. Open your heart to the Truth! God has so much more for you! Please contact me if you would like to study: <a href="mailto:whyiamnotamemberofthecoc@gmail.com">whyiamnotamemberofthecoc@gmail.com</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-50129883669853318942010-01-10T17:04:00.001-06:002010-01-10T17:04:50.932-06:00I just learned that I can<br>post articles, thoughts, and ideas to my blog from my iPhone. Excellent! Maybe now I can post more frequently.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-58235622951355886102009-09-18T16:24:00.002-05:002009-09-18T16:31:29.081-05:00Twitter is for the birds!I think I'll pass on Twitter. Too much lewd content and too many ads. It's definitely not what I thought it would be. I'll just stick to the blog.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-6484940376453545412009-08-17T21:10:00.002-05:002009-08-17T21:49:29.137-05:00I now have a Twitter account!It's been too long since I posted! I am experimenting with Twitter and now have an account. You can find me here: <a href="http://twitter.com/Whyiamnot">http://twitter.com/Whyiamnot</a><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-51404169451824337392009-04-06T22:14:00.010-05:002009-04-26T18:54:01.175-05:00Speaking as the Oracles of God - 1 Peter 4:11<span style=";font-family:times new roman;font-size:130%;" >1 Peter 4: 11 states:</span><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">"</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span"> </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span">If any man speak, </span><i><span class="Apple-style-span">let him speak</span></i><span class="Apple-style-span"> as the oracles of God; if any man minister, </span><i><span class="Apple-style-span">let him do it</span></i><span class="Apple-style-span"> as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span">"</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span"> (KJV)</span></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">While a member of the COC I was continually reminded of this verse and how it stood as a warning to Christians today that when we discuss Bible topics we <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">must</span> use Bible words <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">in Bible ways</span>. </span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">Let me elaborate... I was taught that it was not only improper, but almost sinful, to use a Bible word in a way that the Bible does not use it. For example, the word "Christian" in the Bible is always used as a noun and not as an adjective. Therefore, it would be improper to call a nation a "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">Christian nation</span>" or a period of time the "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">Christian era</span>." The argument is that, since the word in the NT is never used this way, the use of it in this manner today is not "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">speaking as the oracles of God</span>." </span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">Let's think this through. </span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">First of all, consider the word "oracle" and how it is used in the NT. In the KJV the English word "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">oracles</span>" (always in the plural in the NT) is found four times: Acts 7:38, Romans 3:2, Hebrews 5:12, and 1 Peter 4:11.</span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">Acts 7:38 reads, "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us</span>:"</span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">Romans 3:2 states, "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God</span>."</span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">Hebrews 5:12 states, "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.</span>"</span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;">And 1 Peter 4:11 reads, "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen</span>." (all verses KJV)<br /><br />In each of these references the word translated "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">oracles</span>" is the Greek word<span class="Apple-style-span"> "logion."</span><span class="Apple-style-span"><br /><br />Strong's defines it as "an utterance (of God)." Isn't it interesting that in Romans 3:1-2 the Apostle Paul says that the oracles of God <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">were committed to the Jews</span>. In Acts 7 mentioned above the Apostle Luke quotes the martyr Stephen as preaching that <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Moses received those utterances (oracles) on Mt. Sinai</span>. </span></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span"> </span></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Hmm? So two of the four passages <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">i</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">n the NT</span> clearly refer to the <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">oracles of God</span> being the OT Law, specifically the law that Moses received on the mount. So, if the COC argument is correct about speaking only as the oracles of God guides us, should we speak only as the 10 commandments speak?<br /><br />So where in the NT do we see anyone reprimand anyone else for using words in ways not "according to the oracles of God?" The answer to that would be...nowhere.<br /><br />In keeping with the COC's CENI authority formula (see earlier posts), where is this requirement Commanded, Exemplified, or Necessarily Inferred? I'm sorry, where was that at?<br /><br />Oh, you say that in 1 Peter 4:11 we find the <span style="font-weight: bold;">command</span> to do this. Oh, I see. Well was Peter referring to the OT oracles or to the NT oracles that are to be our guide? Or both? And where do we read that this distinction was made?<br /><br />Remember when Jesus warned in Matthew 7:1-2 "<span style="font-style: italic;">Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again</span>."? Let's apply Jesus' little rule here in this matter.<br /><br />Surely the COC would never violate this rule in the way that <span style="font-weight: bold;">they</span> speak, would they? They always apply their rules to themselves in the same manner that they do to the other religious groups, do they not?<br /><br />Well, no, actually. They don't.<br /><br />The COC will be the first to tell you that it is a no-no to call a meeting of the church to hear a guest speaker a "revival" because the oracles of God simply do not use the word that way in a spiritual/religious sense. That's why they call their special meetings "Gospel Meetings" because this is a better use of the words found....oh, wait a minute....we have a slight problem here. Hmm, that's odd. I can't find one reference in the NT where the word "gospel" is used as an adjective. Huh. Nor can I find the term "gospel meeting." Well, I'm sure that's just an oversight on the Holy Spirit's part. Surely that's the authorized term the Lord intended us to use to describe the meetings. Right? (Yet they eschew the use of "gospel music.")<br /><br />But here's the million dollar question: If we are only to use Bible words in Bible ways, which <span style="font-weight: bold;">language</span> are we to use?<br /><br />Let that sink in for a minute: Which language are we to use?<br /><br />We're in America, at least I am, so the COC is arguing over English words. But if we were in Germany, would we be arguing over German words instead?<br /><br />Let's stipulate that we should be using English words. Well, then, which <span style="font-weight: bold;">translation</span> into English are we to use? KJV, NASB, ASV, NAB, NIV, TEV, RSV, NRSV, HCSB, etc?<br /><br />If there is an <span style="font-weight: bold;">authorized language </span>and an <span style="font-weight: bold;">authorized translation</span>, which translation committee was inspired by God as they made their translation of the scriptures? Which is the English version that God wants me to use today? NKJV? ASV? KJV? You will find different versions of the Bible in every COC. And of course, if that version I should be using, was inspired in it's translation then it should be free of any errors. So, COC friend, which error-free God inspired English translation is the one that I should use to be pleasing to God? The silence is deafening.<br /><br />If we really want to use the exact "authorized" word, would we not have to use the original languages?<br /><br />No, the word "revival" is not in the Bible. But did you know that the word "Bible" is not in the Bible? Nor are the words "Jesus, God, salvation, church, sing, preach, worship, sin, forgiveness, blood, temptation, hope, grace, or love."<br /><br />See, these are all <span style="font-weight: bold;">English</span> words. And the <span style="font-style: italic;">oracles of God</span> were written in <span style="font-weight: bold;">Hebrew and Greek</span>. So how foolish it is to argue over the capitalization of the English word "church" in "church of Christ" when none of those words are even in the oracles of God. Further, Greek uncial and minuscule manuscripts (copies of the originals) used either all caps or all uncapitalized letters! The Apostle Paul <span style="font-weight: bold;">never</span> called the churches in the NT the "church of Christ." He didn't speak English!<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-size:130%;">Bible scholars tell us that New Testament writers/Apostles quote the Septuagint version of the OT scriptures in the NT. The Septuagint was written in the uncial format, therefore all the letters were capitalized. So, using the COC mindset one could argue that we should use all capital letters when quoting Scripture or speaking of Biblical topics. What insanity!<br /><br /></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"><span class="Apple-style-span">When the COC uses the Greek New Testament, and preaches, teaches, and sings <span style="font-weight: bold;">in the original languages</span>, then maybe they can begin to make this argument. But until then, it is foolish to even humor them in this straw issue.</span></span><span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></div><div style="font-family:times new roman;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:130%;"> </span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-57553887117574614402008-07-13T18:58:00.000-05:002008-07-13T23:51:58.596-05:00"...that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written..." 1 Cor. 4:6<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">More Observations from the 1988 Highers-Blakely Debate on Instrumental Music</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"><br /></span></div><div><br /></div>In Highers' last speech he showed a chart titled, "A<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">n Abandonment of the Restoration Plea</span>." The chart consisted largely of a quote from an article that appeared in the Apostolic Times in 1881. The person quoted was J. W. McGarvey, who Highers described as "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">one of the great pioneers in the restoration movement</span>." In the excerpt McGarvey condemned the use of a musical instrument in Christian worship. <div><br /></div><div>I find it somewhat disingenuous on Highers' part to extol the virtues of and quote McGarvey in the support of his arguments since Highers wouldn't fellowship McGarvey if he was present at the debate! As far as I can tell Highers is of the "non-institutional" brethren and therefore does not fellowship any church that supports institutions other than the local church itself. Yet McGarvey served as the <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">PRESIDENT of the American Christian Missionary Society!</span> (Alexander Campbell was the first president.) McGarvey was also a pacifist and felt that service in the military <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">lead to personal apostasy.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>The Missouri Manifesto was a document authored and signed by fourteen prominent Missouri preachers as the Civil War raged on. The document was addressed to "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">all the holy brethren in every state</span>" and stated that "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">...engaging in the fraternal strife...would be to incur the displeasure of our Blessed Lord and Saviour.</span>" The manifesto goes further and states, </div><blockquote><div>(3) K<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">nowing, as all history teaches and as the experience of many of us can testify, that <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">active military service almost invariably destroys the religious character of Christians</span> who are drawn into it, we cannot discharge our duty to Christ, if we see our young brethren rushing into this vortex of almost certain ruin without an earnest and affectionate remonstrance</span>. (Isbell, Allen. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic; ">War and Conscience.</span> Abilene; Biblical Research Press, 1966. p. 198)</div><div></div></blockquote><div>Making it clear that their position on military service was not limited to the current Civil War, the Manifesto adds in a later section, <br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"></span><blockquote><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">Let us for Jesus' sake endeavor in this appropriate hour to restore the love of peace which he inculcated; which was practiced by the great body of the church <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">for the first three hundred years</span>, in an <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">utter refusal to do military service</span>; which continued thus to be practiced by the <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">true church</span> throughout the dark ages, and which has been so strongly pled by many of the <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">purest men of modern times</span>, our own <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">A. Campbell </span>among the number</span>. (Isbell, p. 199)</blockquote></div><div>It almost sounds as if one can't be a member of the Armed Services and a member of McGarvey and Campbell's church of Christ. If this is true I know many preachers and faithful brethren that have some repenting to do for their years of service in the military. <br /></div><div><br /></div><div>Highers also placed a lot of weight on the definitions of Greek words as defined in Joseph Henry Thayer's <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. </span>That is a little concerning as well. Thayer was a <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Unitarian</span> and did not believe in the <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Trinity and/or the deity of Christ</span>. In February of 1891 Thayer also published a lecture that he gave titled <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">The Change of Attitude Towards the Bible</span> in which he expressed disagreement with the idea of Bible inerrancy.</div><div><br /></div><div>Highers also quoted several denominational religious leaders, past and present, whose positions on Scriptural passages agreed with his position. Most, if not all, of which Highers would not fellowship if they were in the room with him. </div><div><br /></div><div>Perhaps this is why we have so many cautions in the Scriptures regarding the valuing of men above God: <span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:Times;"><span id="I Corinthians 3:21" class="verse" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"></span></span><blockquote><span id="I Corinthians 3:21" class="verse" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">"</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; </span></span></span><span id="I Corinthians 3:22" class="verse" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; </span></span></span><span id="I Corinthians 3:23" class="verse" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">And ye are Christ's; and Christ </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">is</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"> God's.</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">" (1 Cor. 3:21-23)</span></span></blockquote><span id="I Corinthians 3:23" class="verse" style="display: inline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;"></span></span></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-28913088298971255182008-07-07T20:02:00.000-05:002008-07-07T20:14:04.603-05:00Squaring the Hole<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; ">For a number of years now I've had among my COC material a video of a debate on instrumental music. The debate took place in Neosho, MO in April of 1988. Alan E. Highers represented the COC and Given O. Blakely represented the Christian Church. I find it ironic that I have never taken the time to watch the video until now that I'm no longer a member of the COC. (That's common thinking in the COC though: why read or watch something when I know what I already believe on the matter?)</span></span></div><div> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">I'm have converted the VHS tape over to a format that I placed on my iPod. Now I can go through the entire four nights of the debate and really spend some time considering the arguments of both men.</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">What I have noticed already is that every doctrinal issue Highers argues for the COC always ultimately results in an affirmation of and a return to what they consider 'establishing Biblical Authority.' Every point ends up an extension or interpretation of their system of hermeneutics (Biblical interpretation).</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">Before I ever pushed play on the VCR when I started viewing the video I knew that Highers and Blakely would end the four-day discussion in disagreement over the issue. And to no surprise on my part, neither man won the other over to their side. (One thing I did notice was that Highers consistently jabbed at Blakely and his arguments to which the members of the COC in the audience would roar in laughter, mocking Blakely. Unfortunately, that type of condescending attitude and behavior is abundant among the COC brethren.)</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">In just the little amount of viewing that I have had the chance to do I noticed that in Higher's first address that he began his 'defense of the Gospel' by carefully laying the framework for his arguments: "Whatever you do in word or deed do all in the <b>Name</b> of the Lord" + "To do something in someone's <b>name</b> is to do it by their POWER" + "<b>Faith</b> comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God" + "Whatsoever is not of <b>faith</b> is sin" And so on and so on. It's a hermeneutical game of "The foot-bone is connected to the...leg-bone. The leg bone is connected to the...knee bone." AND THEN IT STRUCK ME! This might be the key!</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Times New Roman; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">Early in every discussion the COC has to lay the framework <b>for</b> the discussion. They demand that everyone work off of their approach to establishing Biblical Authority. Or in other words, you have to study and understand the Bible according to <b>their rules</b>. This is why most sermons preached by the COC starts as one thing but often ends up the same old sermon on what they consider “authority.” It's almost as if in the COC all you need is one good sermon on why our church is better then everyone else's church. Just re-title it each Sunday. </p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Times New Roman; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">This was the problem with Highers and Blakely. Highers would get up and argue that Blakely AVOIDED the questions that he was posing; that Blakely REFUSED to stick to the proposition and give a 'book, chapter, and verse.' Then Blakely would get up and passionately respond and expound upon the Scriptures, how God deals with man, what God expects of man today, and that he felt that Highers' legalistic approach to understanding and applying the scriptures is un-Apostolic and foreign to the New Testament. Blakely's arguments went totally above Highers' head. The two men were on two entirely different levels of thinking, each in disbelief that the other "didn't get it."</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">If you let the COC establish the framework for the discussion, (i.e., use the COC's hermeneutics of Command, Example, Necessary Inference - and then apply it as arbitrarily as they do) you will NEVER be able to answer their questions to their satisfaction; and they realize this. It is an unfair playing field since their system of religion is the only one that comes close to fitting in their adopted system of Bible interpretation and application. Anyone else trying to analyze their faith by COC's "standard" is like trying to put a square peg in a round hole. It will not work.</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">For example, early in Highers' first address he referenced Acts 4:7 stating that to do something by someone's name is to do something by their power. From there he linked this verse to Col. 3:17, which states, "<i>And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him</i>." What Highers began doing early on was laying the 'firm foundation' of the COC's Command, Example, and Necessary Inference (CENI) hermeneutical system.</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">But let's do something radical: Let's go back and read the <b>context</b> of this passage. Let's see <b>who</b> made this statement and <b>in what setting</b> the statement was made.</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">In Acts 3:1 we find Peter and John going up to the temple to pray. While there, they healed a man who had been lame from birth. When the people saw the once lame man now walking and leaping for joy it cause a great stir among the people (vv 8-10). When the people gathered in amazement on Solomon's porch Peter used this opportunity to preach to them about Jesus, which he does from verses 11-26.</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Times New Roman; min-height: 15.0px"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia; font-size: 14px; ">Oh, but this raised the ire of the religious-right of the day. In chapter 4 we read that the priests and the Sadducees came upon the crowd and were unhappy because they did not agree with what Peter and John were preaching. They arrested the Apostles yet couldn't prevent a number of about 5000 people from believing in the Gospel of which Peter spoke. The next day Peter and John were brought before the Jewish elders, rulers, and scribes and they demanded an answer from the Apostles as to how this man was healed. <b>THEY</b> ask Peter and John "...<i>by what power, or by what name have ye done this</i>?" We know that it was the issue of the man being healed that was the reason behind by the question as opposed to the preaching of Jesus. How do we know this? Context. Peter begins his defense by saying, "...<i>Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel, If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;</i><a href="sword://KJV/Acts%204:10?notip"><span style="text-decoration: underline ; color: #002ccc"><i> </i></span></a><i>Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that </i><b><i>by the name</i></b><i> of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him </i><b><i>doth this man stand here before you whole</i></b>."<span style="font: 14.0px Times New Roman"> </span>Peter's answer tells us that the men were not questioning whether or not the Apostles healed the lame man in violation of some written law. They wanted to know how the obvious miracle occurred and to whom (or what) it could be attributied. Peter answers them and parlays the opportunity into a chance to preach Jesus to them. </span><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">Using the COC's application of the verse, here is a case where the enemies of Christ demanded to know Peter and John's AUTHORITY for healing the lame man. I find it ironic that the COC uses this as a peripheral 'proof-text' for their CENI framework when the <b>origin</b> of the statement stems from the <b>Sadducees</b> demanding 'authority' <b>from God's Apostles</b> for some "good deed" (v.9).</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">Peter and John had not done something that ANYONE could have done. They had not picked up a musical instrument and sang a hymn to the lame man about the virtues of Christ. They had not took money out of the common purse to buy the man a new wheelchair. They did something SUPERNATURAL. They performed a MIRACLE. Tell me how in the world this relates to Christians worshiping God during a church service? This question does not originate in a church worship setting where Jesus (or an Apostle or even a disciple) is enumerating the 'rules' on how believers in Christ can establish "Biblical authority" for their corporate worship practices! This statement is <b>prior</b> to the death of Christ, <b>prior</b> to the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, and therefore <b>prior</b> to the establishment of the church. Yet the COC brethren use this passage in their daisy-chain of verses to prop up the foundation of their doctrines.</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">If Paul had wrote to one of the NT churches and asked them in whose name or by what authority they added something into their worship service, then we could apply the verse this way. But that is clearly not the case and you would have to set aside context and common sense to arrive at any other conclusion. </p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Times New Roman; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">The real question that needs to be answered in a study with the COC is 'Where is the “authority” for the COC to demand that believers today have to subscribe to a system of faith patterned after the CENI hermeneutic?” Show me <b>one verse</b> that contains CENI. Show me <b>one verse</b> that contains the phrase “<i>necessary inference</i>.” Be consistent COC brethren. Where is the “book, chapter, and verse” prescribing this format? It does not exist. </p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Times New Roman; min-height: 16.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 14.0px Georgia">Maybe they should “be silent” on CENI since the Scriptures are “silent” regarding it. </p> </div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-25738615854698335662008-07-02T21:24:00.000-05:002008-07-02T21:40:26.419-05:00Check out this site!I ran across another blog with a similar purpose as this one here: <a href="http://fideism.googlepages.com/">http://fideism.googlepages.com/</a><div><br /><div>The information there is very well stated and appears to come from someone with a good knowledge of the COC. It delves into an excellent study of the COC's approach to hermeneutics, i.e. method of interpreting the Bible. The writer's experience sounds a lot like what most people are exposed to in that group. It certainly mirrors mine. My only concern is that this person's experience caused them to lose their faith in God entirely. Tragic.</div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473041159157465081.post-55221833752388143632008-06-29T15:29:00.000-05:002008-06-29T16:12:30.809-05:00"A man's heart plans his way, but the Lord determines his steps." Proverbs 16:9<p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS">Many years ago Leroy Brownlow wrote a well-known book outlining why he <i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">was</span> </i>a member of the church of Christ. Brownlow's book is a familiar resource among the membership of the non-denominational 'church of Christ' and finds its place on the shelves of most - if not all - preachers of the church. Brownlow's intentions were to systematically provide a methodical rationalization as to why he felt membership in the church of Christ was superior to membership in any other religious group. And when I say "superior" I mean necessary for salvation - no other will do. </p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS; min-height: 14.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS">When writing to brethren who were putting a little too much "confidence in the flesh" the apostle Paul substantiated his pedigree as a Hebrew when he told the saints at Philippi, "...<i>If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.</i>" (Phil. 3:4-6)</p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS; min-height: 14.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS">In the same way I like to think that I have some experience concerning the subject of the church of Christ. I was baptized in a "liberal" church of Christ in the late 1980s - although I had no idea the church was "liberal" at all. But I would learn soon enough that not only are there "liberal" churches of Christ, but a whole host of subgroups that I did not want to be associated with: non-class, one-cup, institutional, head-covering requiring, the list goes on and on. But, I was snatched from realms of ecclesiastical obscurity and found myself a member of a true-blue, non-institutional, "conservative" group of brethren who sought to "Speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent." Although now in retrospect it seems in application more like "Shout, Be-little, and Challenge to Debates Where Our Understanding of the Bible Speaks and..." Well, I can't think of many religious subjects we were silent on. </p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS; min-height: 14.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS">But my experience does not stop there. I've taught classes, preached sermons, had private studies with members of various religious groups, and even attended debates. I own a copy of McGarvey's Acts of the Apostles, an American Standard translation of the Bible, and a complete set of the Pulpit Commentary. We didn't (and they still don't) even use likenesses of Jesus' face when teaching children so as to not give the children any false impressions of Jesus. I've driven hundreds (if not thousands) of miles to attend Gospel Meetings AND I've even been to the ACU lectureships to "see what the liberals are up to now." </p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS; min-height: 14.0px"><br /></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Trebuchet MS">To say that I know what I am talking about is an understatement.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com