Is it OK to question church doctrine?
- Thread starter Blik
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I agree and disagree with you at the same time.
If you look at Nehemiah Chapter 9, you get a picture of this massive gathering of the Israelites standing together in repentance. It must have been an amazing sight to see everyone standing together confessing the sins of their forefathers. And I would agree, there were no musical instruments involved. It was very solemn, indeed.
But when the wall was built, Nehemiah, with the help of the Levitical priests, gathered them all together again in chapter 12. Here is the quote from scripture:
At the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem, The Levites were sought out from where they lived and were brought to Jerusalem to celebrate joyfully the dedication with songs of thanksgiving and with the music of cymbals, harps, and lyres. Neh 12: 27
In defense of your statement, Nehemiah went on to say that he had the choirs take their place in the house of God. I'm not really sure what that means, but it sounds like he wanted to go back to more solemn worship.
My take on all this is that when we repent, there is no rejoicing in it. It is a confession, deep sorrow for what we've done, and a turning away.
But when we realize that he forgives us through Christ our Lord, I believe lavish praise and thanksgiving to God is warranted with whatever means we have, including guitars and drums and even perhaps a lighted stage.
I agree that some of this "rejoicing" can become somewhat irreverent if we let it get out of hand. I often object when I see some of these big concert settings put on by world-famous churches. They have people jumping, spinning around, and seemingly making a mockery of worship.
But I think I would rather have these young people doing that in the name of Jesus rather than attending rap concerts glorifying the defilement of women. Wouldn't you?
I would rather have a bit of irreverent worship in the name of Jesus than a whole bunch of reverent worship to the enemy. Hopefully, one day, the youth of our world will understand that solemn repentance has its place in worship, too.
In the old testament they worshiped God in a different manner than they do in the new testament church that Jesus instituted. I believe the scriptures teach that the original church that Jesus set up has never compromised with the things of the world, and have held to only acapella singing, and praying, and preaching.
I'm sure they also don't compromise with the things of the world like electric lights, heat (or A/C), amplification, or chairs, right? None of those things were mentioned in connection with New Testament worship gatherings. No cars to get to church or indoor plumbing when you get there either. Don't even use a tissue to wipe your nose if it runs during the service. Lemme guess... women can't speak either.
Legalism is so ridiculously inconsistent.
My imhases is on worshiping God. As long as you limit it to singing, praying and preaching, you can do it under a shade tree.
Yes, you can worship God by singing and praying. You can also worship God by playing drums, teaching using PowerPoint, or speaking into a microphone so that a larger number of people can hear your words. If you are comfortable with just the three things you mentioned, fine for you, but please don't waste your time trying to convince me that your way is "right".
I think that I will stay with what the scriptures teach. You can compromise them with the desires of the world, if you like, that is your business.
I once read in a small red book titled "Trail of blood" about the churches history where the church had its first split over adding to the worship service things that would attract more people to attend.
In the first churches call The Way, they accepted each other with love. Love of the Lord and each other as the first commandment said. They would never quarrel over trivial matters like judging each other for using an instrument as they sang.
Romans 14:1
As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.
Only, they don't. Quote me even a single verse that prescribes worship as you see it (rather than merely describing it).
Needless and slanderous characterization.
To my knowledge of church history, the first split came because of a dispute between two elders over adding things to the worship service to attract a greater attendance.
In the old testament they danced before the Lord, and sang with musical instruments. The new testament church that Christ set up, they were instructed to sing and made melody IN THEIR HEART, Eph 5:19
They were instructed to preach to the lost sheep (regenerated babes in Christ) of the house of Israel (Jacob surname Israel, representing God's elect, Rom 9:11, not the nation of Israel). Matt 10:5-6.
Matt 21:13, Jesus said that his house shall be called the house of prayer.
Like... Gentiles (yes)? That was resoundingly addressed in Acts 10 with the Holy Spirit's addition of Cornelius and his companions.
Or maybe you meant circumcision (no), which was very clearly addressed in Acts 15 and again in Galatians 2-3.
Or perhaps you meant the operation of spiritual gifts (yes) which was explained by Paul to the Corinthians.
It's not a black-and-white thing. Whether something is "added" (your word) is to be considered with the input of the Holy Spirit. Some things are fine, some are not. Some are merely neutral. Even singing, praying and preaching can be corrupted, after all.
By that reasoning, singing out loud is forbidden. I'm sure you're completely consistent with your practice and don't permit any musical vocalization in your fellowship.
Regenerated people aren't "lost sheep". Lost sheep are unredeemed people. Do you preach to anyone other than the lost sheep of Israel? Yes? Another violation of God's clear and restrictive word.
That was clearly in the context of the temple, which was destroyed in 70 AD.
Do you have any more inconsistencies that you would like exposed?
Not with you being strictly in a argumentative mode, without an open mind to discuss the scriptures profitably.
Melody can be made with the sound of musical instruments, and melody can also be made by your vocal cords from your heart, of course you already know that, but the mode you are in won't let you admit it.
All mankind are not referenced as being his sheep. Only his sheep hear his voice (with understanding).
Yes the scriptures teach that the preaching of the gospel is to be preached to only those that can discern the things of the Spirit, his sheep,1 Cor 2:14. The purpose in preaching to the lost sheep (lost from a knowledge of God's righteousness) is that they are new born babes in Christ that are getting fed the milk of the word, and are in need of being taught the meat of the word. Isaiah 28:9-10.
I see you don't appreciate sarcasm. I could be direct instead, but then you would accuse me of being unkind.
Melody "from" your heart is not melody "in" your heart. You aren't going to be able to defend a very strict interpretation of church practice (which is never prescribed in Scripture) while being sloppy with interpretation of specific verses. My "mode" has nothing to do with it; I'm merely pointing out the flaws in your reasoning.
Fallacy: circular reasoning. You're conflating disparate uses of "sheep".
1 Corinthians 2:14 says nothing of the sort.
That's just wacky. "Newborn babes in Christ" aren't lost; they are saved.
I assumed that you were educated in the scriptures enough to know that I misquoted Eph 5:19, where it does say "in your heart", instead of "from your heart". so what do you interpret that to mean?
Can you give me a few scriptures where "sheep" has reference to unregenerate people?
What is your interpretation of 1 Cor 2:14?
You need to educate yourself on the Greek definition of the word saved. It means delivered, which in most cases has no reference to eternal. Newborn babes in Christ are delivered (saved) eternally in a covenant relationship with the Godhead, but as they are nourished in their growth process, being taught about the righteousness of God (the gospel), they are delivered (saved) from that lack of knowledge.
Rom 10:1-3, Israel, surname Jacob who is representative of God's elect from every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. were still babes in Christ when Paul was praying that they would be delivered (saved) from a lack of knowledge of God's righteousness, and were going about trying to establish their own righteousness through the works of the old law.
There are churches that stuck tenaciously to the Word that didn't get involved with Catholism and didn't need to reform.
Among the ana baptists and other church groups there is a seperate history from catholism and the reformation churches eg Calvin, Methodist, Luther etc..
.
Among the ana baptists and other church groups there is a seperate history from catholism and the reformation churches eg Calvin, Methodist, Luther etc..
.
I consider the definitional difference between "in" and "from".
Why would I do that?
The natural man is one who does not have the Holy Spirit within him through faith in Christ, while the spiritual man does. The Holy Spirit empowers the man to understand matters of the spirit, but the man without the Spirit, spiritual things are either unknown or not understood.
Has it occurred to you that the phrase, "You need to..." comes across as arrogant? I could say, "You need to..." and end it with all sorts of things, but you won't do any of them, because you don't agree that you "need to".
I disagree with your interpretation of this. Your view makes both faith and Jesus' sacrifice irrelevant.
Um, no. Most of the Israelites rejected Christ, and remained completely unsaved, unredeemed, and destined for destruction.
I can see that your reasoning on the matter of "saved" is circular. I'm not stepping into that vortex with you.
Why would you refuse to answer my question "Can you give me a few scriptures that refer to the unsaved as being sheep?" is because you cannot. Because there are none.
Your whole disagreement with my statements are unfounded, and not backed up by scriptures. Is this the way you discuss the scriptures?
I am sorry that you think that I am arrogant, I assure you that is not my intention. The reason that I am on this forum, is because I love to discuss the scriptures in an attempt to uphold the doctrine that I believe in, also it motivates me to keep refreshed in a knowledge of the scriptures.
I probably come across as being very blunt at times trying to explain my understanding of the scriptures, and I apologise, if sounds like I am arrogant.