Comments on: Excluded Instrumental Congregations

By: Wendy

Wendy — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:45:58 +0000

Jay Guin has a good post about the Regulative Principle and it’s origins.
http://oneinjesus.info/2009/02/03/renewing-our-worship-authority/

By: Keith Brenton

Keith Brenton — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:41:28 +0000

Michael, I appreciate your gracious reply. We’ll likely not resolve our differences here, but it has been good to exchange views here.

Matthew, thanks for providing the forum for it!

By: Michael Grooms

Michael Grooms — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:13:27 +0000

Matthew,
It’s been a long time since you and I have sat down together and discussed such brotherhood issues. I miss that. You asked the question as to whether this would be like the 1906 census. I do not believe it will be. 21st Century is not trying to police the brotherhood here, just to provide a useful service. Those who produce the publication must make some decisions as to who or what will be included. They have that right. The term “1906 division” is really a misnomer. The listing of the “Christian Church” apart from the churches of Christ in the 1906 census was simply a recognition by the government of a division that had already taken place. The 1906 census was an official government recognition of this fact. “Churches of Christ in the United States” is not official in any sense, nor do I believe 21st Century intends it to be.The 1906 census took place after the division had become defined. We have not reached that point, though we may. Let us all pray that the truth will prevail and we may be what Christ prayed we will be in John 17. Let us pray that we may indeed be unified as prescribed in 1 Cor. 1:10.

By: Michael Grooms

Michael Grooms — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:56:51 +0000

Keith.
While you and I disagree, I appreciate the spirit in which you wrote your post. When I spoke of certain churches having left, I did not mean that they wanted to be excluded from any directory. I meant that they have left the doctrinal position that they once held concerning these things and have made the decision to move into areas that they know will sever their fellowship with many if not most of the church of Christ. Once more, I point out that it is they, not we who have made these changes.

One thing that seems to be lost in these discussions is that instrumental music is not the only issue. In fact, it is only a symptom of certain other issues, such as biblical interpretation and respect for biblical authority. The Regulative Principal IS a matter of respect for biblical authority. Such requires authority from God in matters of worship, doctrine, and organization in the church. While instrumental music is one example of a lack of respect for biblical authority, others like serving the communion on Saturday are equally important considerations.

By: Michael Grooms

Michael Grooms — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:29:56 +0000

Yes Rex, it does explain where you ae coming from, but it has nothing to do with where I was coming from. I did not say that those who use the instrument in worship fit the same category as the Antichrists that are being discussed in 1 John 2. I simply meant that the sentiment expressed in the words quoted were fitting. They have gone from us because they are not of us. I stand by that point. The rest of the things that you have inferred and credited to me are not mine, but yours.

By: K. Rex Butts

K. Rex Butts — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:17:32 +0000

Michael,

It sounds sort of strange that you accuse me of being judgmental, considering your earlier post. We all make judgments and I believe your use of 1 John 2.19 was a gross misuse of scripture. Why? When you consider the fact that the apostle John is addressing an pre-form of gnosticism that denied Jesus was the Messiah who came in the flesh and were denying the reality of sin, to use a passage that says someone is not and has never been part of the body of Christ because they have instruments in worship becomes a misuse of the particular scriptural intent. If we went with the logic you are attaching to this scripture, then anyone in a preceived error would be considered as never being a part of the body of Christ – not now nor before. In that case, everyone of us would be excluded because we have all changed our views on something in the past. If we have never changed a veiw, then we are excluded for the error of lacking humility. Such logic is a dead end that is very inconsistantly applied and I believe a man by the name of Todd Deaver has done a masterful job with his book “Facing Our Failure” in showing the inconsistencies. I am just thankful that such logic really has nothing to do with the Christian faith.

I hope that explains where I was coming from.

Grace and peace,

Rex

By: Michael Grooms

Michael Grooms — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:38:32 +0000

Rex,
If you can refrain from the judmental attacks long enough, I would appreciate if you would point out exactly how I took 1 John 2:19 out of context.

No, it doesn’t seem candid. It seems judgmental.

Michael

By: K. Rex Butts

K. Rex Butts — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 05:47:21 +0000

Michael,

1 John 2.19…are you kidding? That is the most misused and abused proof-text example if I ever saw one. You are not free to rip scripture out of its historical and cannonical context to just use it to support whatever cause you wish. And if I might be a bit candid, to do so only shows a very low respect for the authority of scripture.

-Rex

By: Keith Brenton

Keith Brenton — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:17:41 +0000

It isn’t really that they’ve “left.” Most did not request to be omitted from this directory.

At the same time, Michael, you (and many, many others) are drawing the line that leaves them out. That line, for you, is instrumental worship. For someone else, it might be institutional support; for another, having a Sunday School not specifically authorized in scripture.

The apostles Paul and John drew lines, too. But they tended to draw them on issues of the incarnation, the requirement of circumcision, the binding of Jewish law on Gentiles; the superimposition of genealogies; the elevation/worship of angels. We both believe that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit to speak on these things previously unspoken in scripture.

Can we be so certain that the men who generated the Regulative Principle, the patternistic hermeneutic and the law of silence were equally and unquestionably inspired of God to impose them on the fellowship of churches of Christ?

By: Michael Grooms

Michael Grooms — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:01:43 +0000

There is no doubt that this generation has been placed in a situation that merits much wisdom, caution, and spiritual integrity. We are not alone, 100 years ago others found themselves where we. The paths that we choose will affect the generations that follow us. Let us prayerfully consider who we are, whose we are, and what we will do. I am thankful that there were those 100 years ago who stood without compromise upon the truth. I am thankful that the lines of fellowship that were drawn (painful though they were) maintained the purity of the church so that I could be blessed to be a part of the church that is fashioned according to the scriptures. I pray that I will have the wisdom and the moral fortitude to do what I can to restore the erring when possible, but to protect the purity of the bride of Christ where I may do so. There comes a time when fellowship can no longer take place. If we cannot have fellowship in the truth, we have no fellowship.

Remember who has left whom here. They (instrumentalists) were where we (a cappella) are. Who has moved? Who has caused division? Unity as prescribed in the Bible is that we “speak the ame thing” and “be of the same mind” (1 Cor. 1:10). Anything else is not unity. In many cases the lines of fellowship have already been drawn. They were drawn by those who left our fellowship.

The words of H. Leo Boles spoken to those who followed the path of the instrument and the missionary society still ring true today, though spoken in 1939: “Brethren, this is where the churches of Christ stand today; it is where unity may be found now; it is where you left the New Testament; it is where you left the churches of Christ, and it is where you can find them when you come back. ”

And finally the words penned by John as inspired by the Holy Spirit in 1 John 2:19 seem fitting…

“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.”