3 Dec 2006

Note: This is not intended to be a “transcript” of the Both/And messages, though in places it does resemble one. Rather, consider this an outline of the major points, where some of the outline represents word-for-word what was said, but where other parts simply use phrases to highlight the major points. Of course, in creating this document I may have inadvertently used a word differently than it was spoken, as my purpose was to capture thoughts and concepts, not quotes. Word-for-word accuracy is not claimed for this document, though more often than not that is what is recorded here. And in the interests of brevity, some commentary incidental [in my own judgment, of course] to the main thrust of the message has been omitted. I’ve tried to indicate by use of italics, underlining, or boldface portions of statements that were stressed, but again, these emphases are based on nothing other than my own impressions of what was said. The audio recordings of these three messages are freely available.

Version Information:

1/28/2007

3 Dec 2006

Message #1 of 3: The Both/And Church

00:00

All elders fully support these messages.

03:15

Introduction

05:00

RHCC will introduce a Saturday evening worship service using instrumental music in the Spring of 2007.

Elders spent 3 years studying, praying, fasting.
Desire all these decisions to be completely “above-board.”

09:00

Two Primary Questions

1 – Is it Biblically OK to worship God with singing accompanied by instruments? (To be addressed in Message #2 of 3; will look at many scriptures.)
2 – Even if it is “OK,” is it wise to do so? (To be addressed in Message #3 of 3. Also in #3 will address the issue of Saturday evening communion.)

10:00

Set the context for the discussion, and then address Seven Fears.

12:20

RHCC has had a 50-year history of successfully addressing change. So much so that RHCC has been labeled “Progressive.”

13:07

RHCC needs to become a Both/And church.
What is that?

Consider several questions from the political arena.
“Do you support tax cuts OR helping the poor?” This question assumes that selecting one choice, e.g., “support tax cuts,” eliminates the possibility of choosing the other item, e.g., “helping the poor.”
“Do you support the military being in Iraq OR should we be searching for Bin Laden?” Same issue – the question-asker assumes that one choice precludes the other.
How about these theological questions?
“Is Jesus human OR is Jesus divine?” The correct answer to this is NOT “either/or” but rather “both/and,” i.e., Jesus is BOTH human AND divine.
“Is God sovereign OR does man have free will?” Again, the answer is NOT “either/or” but rather that God is sovereign AND man has free will.
“Is God three or is God one?” Answer: God is BOTH three AND one.
How about the question a young man in Abilene asked me? He wanted to have a three-evening debate with me to discuss this question: “Are there Christians outside the Church of Christ OR is baptism essential to salvation?” My answer is unequivocally BOTH/AND: Yes, there are Christians outside [what we call] the Church of Christ, and Yes, Baptism is absolutely essential to salvation.

But is there Absolute Truth? Absolutely. Consider these questions:

“Is Jesus Lord… or Caesar?”
“Can man serve God… and mammon?”
“Is Jesus THE way to God… or A way to God?”

Many liberal denominations insist that Jesus is A way, but not the ONLY way, to God.

“Are we saved by grace… or by works?”

The WAY we ask the question is IMPORTANT!

Liberal churches take EITHER/OR questions and make them BOTH/AND.
Legalistic churches take BOTH/AND questions and make them EITHER/OR.

17:33

Church leaders must discern between BOTH/AND and EITHER/OR questions.
Can a Christian worship God acceptably with instruments, OR is vocal praise alone acceptable to God?

I was raised in a church where that was an EITHER/OR question. But with all my heart, I believe today it is a BOTH/AND issue.
I’ve come a long way from the way on this journey.

When I was small I was taught that it was soul-damning to worship God accompanied by instruments.
When I was a member of the ACU senate, I voted against allowing Christian musical artists to have concerts on campus. I was told, “but it’s just entertainment, not worship.” I responded, “Well, if it’s not worship, and if it’s just entertainment, they are taking the name of the Lord in vain!”
But as I grew, and studied, I left the Anti-Instrument position and became instead Pro A Cappella. (Those are two different things.)

RHCC has no intent to force anyone to worship one certain way.

22:30

Let’s consider an incident in the life of the early church.

Our issue of whether to worship accompanied by instruments pales in comparison with the struggle the early church had over the circumcision issue. Circumcision defined who you were.
Many Gentiles were coming in to the church. Consider how a Jewish Christian would feel about this.

How can you understand Jesus without understanding Moses?
How can you understand Calvary if you’ve never heard of Sinai?
Sure, Gentiles can be saved. But they must come through the screen door of Moses in order to get to Christ, i.e., you must become a Jew before you can become a Christian!
They believed their commission was to “Go into all the world” circumcising and baptizing.

[Lots of discussion about the Jerusalem conference, Acts 15.]

31:00

The Jews had lived for centuries with an EITHER/OR outlook: EITHER you must be circumcised OR you can not be a part of the people of God.

That was their identity, their heritage.

Jerusalem conference: You can be circumcised if you want, but we will not bind that on everyone.

32:00

I have learned that for every church problem there is a Simple and Wrong solution. The Simple and Wrong solution is to make a law that restricts freedom in Christ and then to tell everyone they have to live under it.

The early church did not do that.

32:22

Let’s examine 4 principles we learn from the Jerusalem conference.

1 – They had a clear and respectful discussion. No slander, no impugning the motives of another, no name-calling, no character assassination. If your position is so weak you need to engage in character assignation, your position needs to be rethought.

The apostles and elders decided. It was not a vote of the entire church.
Some think elders are simply election poll judges who monitor the voting. NOWHERE in scripture is this idea supported. God expects the leaders to lead.
Leaders need to communicate with the church. For instance, some things will never change. The leaders here have never discussed changing the name of this church.

35:00

2 – The believers listened with an open mind. The Bible says they welcomed, they listened, and they considered. They suspended their generations-old understanding of circumcision, and they listened respectfully.

37:00

3 – They turned to the Word of God for a solution.

James based his argument out of the book of Amos. [Amos 9:11-12] They arrived at a conclusion only because they believed it was Biblical.
They looked at an old text in a fresh way.
They came to the Bible and said, “If I have to change what I’ve believed in order to be under the Word of God, I’ll change.”

38:00

4 – They were more committed to their Mission than to their Heritage.

They chose the Commission over their Tradition.

The key to understanding the whole text is in verse 19, when James, the brother of Christ, said: “We should not make it more difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.”

Circumcision was an unnecessary barrier to those who were coming to know Christ.

· My understanding of the Mission is: The Gospel is barrier enough to unregenerate man. It says, “Forget all that ‘I’m OK, you’re OK’ stuff. You are not OK. You have fallen short.”

· James: “Why would we put up any barrier to becoming a Christian that was not absolutely demanded by faithfulness to scripture?”

40:32

But that is what I believe our fellowship has done with our historical position on using instruments of music. I have traveled all over, visiting many churches of Christ. Most do not see this as a salvation issue. So why do we continue to hang onto it? I think there are two reasons:

o 1 – Fear

o 2 – A small minority in our movement love our heritage more than our mission. They are content to stay in stagnant, declining churches – as long as their church doesn’t change.

42:30

I think we are very afraid, for seven reasons:

1 – We fear a loss of the beauty of the a cappella tradition.

Note though that the loss of four-part harmony is already well underway. Four-part harmony was not inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Alexander Campbell put no musical notes in the hymnbook he published, because he feared we would become enamored of the way we SOUND when we sing rather than putting emphasis on the WORDS of the hymn.
Remember, the plea is not to get rid of a cappella music, but to become a both/and church.

44:20

2 – We fear that instrumental music will discourage congregational singing.

I’ve attended many churches which use instruments in their worship, and I can tell you that the claim that instrumental music will discourage congregational singing is not true – but that is what I was taught while growing up.
MANY in the a cappella churches do not sing! About a month ago I arranged to meet a guest I’d invited to the 10:45 service who said he’d sit on the back row. I stood back there waiting on him, and noticed that of about 50 people sitting in that particular section only 3 were singing! So I went to the other back sections of our auditorium, and observed that there were more lips sealed than were moving.
Mid McKnight said years ago that even though the Church of Christ said it had no choirs, it was wrong, as people in the front half of the auditoriums have been singing to those in the back half for years.
A person can become disengaged from worship whether instruments are used or not.
The heart of the matter in worship is a Matter of the Heart.

46:50

3 – We fear the use of instrumental music will encourage the performance aspect of the worship.

I’ve been in both types of worship where I felt the leaders called attention to themselves instead of to God. Ironically, we seem to think it is OK if the preacher tells us something entertaining – but we don’t allow this from a worship leader.
The abuse of a practice is not a sound reason to disallow its use.

Because some Christians have abused the notion of accountability partners does not mean we can’t be accountable to each other.
If some have held up hands and called attention to themselves, it does not mean that the elders should make a rule to forbid it.
You don’t disallow a Biblical practice just because someone somewhere did it with poor motives.

48:30

4 – We fear family conflict.

This is very, very painful, and is probably the hardest one to deal with.
Here is my own personal experience:

17 years ago when I began preaching at this church, my father came to visit. Sunday evening we had our 5^th and 6^th grade classes come in to the auditorium and sing some songs they had learned.
My father became livid because we allowed a “choir” to sing. He told me that he no longer trusted my ability to interpret the Bible if I was content to preach at a church which allowed such a practice. So we didn’t speak to each other for five months.
But I was going to speak at a conference near Chicago, where my folks lived, so I called Mom and asked if I should come by while I was there, or not. She said, “Yes, come stay with us. Your dad has some things he needs to say to you.” While I was there, Dad came into the room with a thick yellow note pad. Since he had returned home in January, he had spent his evenings, beginning at Genesis and going through the entire Bible, writing down every verse that had to do with worship.
He told me, “I owe you an apology. I have found that there is nothing in the Bible to forbid groups singing to the rest of the Body. I am ashamed that I spent 30 years believing something in error because someone told me it was in there. And just reading my Bible, I don’t know why we think instrumental music is wrong either.”

When you speak with your parents, your grandparents, about this, give them great honor. It is very important for them to know that we honor them. We stand on the shoulders of great men and women. In no way do we diminish those who have come before.
I hope I have raised my own children to so love the Word of God, that they will choose the leading of God over what I’ve said.

53:12

5 – We fear we will lose members from RHCC to other churches.

This will happen. But these Christians are not lost to Christ, or to the Kingdom. They will serve faithfully with other churches.
RHCC has faced this issue many times over the last 50 years.

30 years ago the leaders of this church announced we would begin a ministry for singles. We were told that this would cause a bunch of divorced people to come to our church, and if this happened, people would leave. We started the singles ministry.
20 years ago from this pulpit you were told that the Kingdom of God was larger than the Church of Christ. Some of you said, “If you say that again, we’ll leave.” We said it again.
15 years ago we announced that we would have a praise team. Some said, “If you do, we’ll leave.” We still have a praise team.

If we must choose between TRUTH and Keeping The Peace, we will choose TRUTH every time.
But you need to know this: If we remain an either/or church, we will also lose members.

Many have left already because we have waited so long to deal with this issue.

55:52

6 – We fear a loss of influence among other Churches of Christ.

First, it’s fair to ask: “Should that EVER be our goal???” NO!
Second: Becoming a both/and church may inspire other churches. It may stem the disturbing tide of gifted young leaders who are leaving.
My email box is flooded with email from preachers and elders across the country who are encouraging this church in its decision.

57:30

7 – We fear the loss of brotherhood identity.

If our identity is in the wrong place, it needs to be lost.
Our identity is supposed to be in Christ and the cross, and something is very wrong if that is not enough for us.
There is an unstoppable tide of tens and hundreds of thousands who are tired of being known for what we’re AGAINST and are ready to become known for what we are FOR.

This church has a 50-year history of Majoring in Majors, not Minors.

60:00 Next Sunday we will deal with the many references in the Bible to this topic.

10 Dec 2006

Message #2 of 3: The Both/And Church

0:00 All elders fully support this message.

1:45 Have received overwhelmingly positive feedback.

3:00

I knew years ago I would have to teach this lesson – if I had any integrity at all – whether or not we ever began a service with instrumental music. Ten years ago, in this pulpit, I was preaching from chapter 2 of Galatians. Paul confronted Peter to his face over a tradition. Peter knew it was not wrong to eat with Gentiles, but “these Jews are just not ready for it. I think it would cause unrest in the body, so it’s just best not to do it [eat with Gentiles.]”

When you let people believe that something is wrong that is NOT wrong, to the point at which it is dividing fellowship in the body, it must be confronted.
And so I’m preaching away and the Holy Spirit convicted me: “And that’s what you and all the preachers like you are doing who haven’t for years believed that the worship of God with instruments is wrong, but you continue by your silence to let people think it’s wrong, to allow the body to be disrupted, and you do so under the plea, ‘Well, we’re just maintaining peace.’”
But that’s not Peace! That’s cowardice. I knew then the day would come that I’d have to teach this lesson.

6:00

When I was young, I taught that we must be content to let the Bible be the final authority. I said, “Just read it honestly, and you will conclude that instrumental music in praise to God is sinful.” I realize now that conclusion was simplistic, judgmental, arrogant, and divisive, because the truth is, almost no one, reading the Bible sincerely, for the first time, would ever conclude that instrumental praise is unacceptable to God.

Let me repeat that: No one, reading the Bible sincerely, for the first time, would ever conclude that instrumental praise is unacceptable to God.
I’ve met with thousands of Christians who worship with instrumental music, and none do so because they don’t want to follow the Bible. They want to follow the Bible, and their view of the Bible is every bit as high as my own.

8:40

I am still convicted by the statement in the front of my youth minister’s Bible of 30 years ago:

“Is it the Truth that drives me, or is it Fear that I’ve been wrong for so long?”

9:00

Old Testament reasons for accepting instrumental music:

God did not just allow instrumental music… He commanded it.

2 Chronicles 7:6 -- The priests took their positions, as did the Levites with the LORD's musical instruments, which King David had made for praising the LORD and which were used when he gave thanks, saying, "His love endures forever." Opposite the Levites, the priests blew their trumpets, and all the Israelites were standing.
1 Chronicles 28:12,19 – (12) He gave him the plans of all that the Spirit had put in his mind for the courts of the temple of the LORD and all the surrounding rooms, for the treasuries of the temple of God and for the treasuries for the dedicated things. (19) "All this," David said, "I have in writing from the hand of the LORD upon me, and he gave me understanding in all the details of the plan."
2 Chronicles 29:25 -- He stationed the Levites in the temple of the LORD with cymbals, harps and lyres in the way prescribed by David and Gad the king's seer and Nathan the prophet; this was commanded by the LORD through his prophets.
2 Chronicles 5:13-14 -- 13 The trumpeters and singers joined in unison, as with one voice, to give praise and thanks to the LORD. Accompanied by trumpets, cymbals and other instruments, they raised their voices in praise to the LORD and sang: "He is good; his love endures forever." Then the temple of the LORD was filled with a cloud, 14 and the priests could not perform their service because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the temple of God.
Psalms 33:1-3 -- 1 Sing 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.
Psalms 92:1-3 -- 1 It is good to praise the LORD and make music to your name, O Most High, 2 to proclaim your love in the morning and your faithfulness at night, 3 to the music of the ten-stringed lyre and the melody of the harp.

NOTE: Instrumental music in the Psalms is not an aid to worship; it is worship itself.

Psalms 150, the last Psalm in the psaltery, reads like this --

Praise the LORD.

Praise God in his sanctuary;

praise him in his mighty heavens.

2 Praise him for his acts of power;

praise him for his surpassing greatness.

3 Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet,

praise him with the harp and lyre,

4 praise him with tambourine and dancing,

praise him with the strings and flute,

5 praise him with the clash of cymbals,

praise him with resounding cymbals.

6 Let everything that has breath praise the LORD.

Praise the LORD.

NOTE: These are the very Psalms in the New Testament we are commanded to read and to sing.

i. Why would the Holy Spirit command us to sing Psalms we are forbidden to practice?

Psalms 81:1-4 -- 1 Sing for joy to God our strength; shout aloud to the God of Jacob! 2 Begin the music, strike the tambourine, play the melodious harp and lyre. 3 Sound the ram's horn at the New Moon, and when the moon is full, on the day of our Feast; 4 this is a decree for Israel, an ordinance of the God of Jacob. 5 He established it as a statute for Joseph when he went out against Egypt, where we heard a language we did not understand.

NOTE: God commanded instrumental praise before the Law was given, [in Joseph’s time, 400 years before the Law was given.]

i. Exodous 15:20 -- Then Miriam the prophetess, Aaron's sister, took a tambourine in her hand, and all the women followed her, with tambourines and dancing.

ii. Miriam and the women praised the Lord with voice and with instruments before the Law.

iii. NOTE: Some people (mistakenly, I think) use the verse about the Law being nailed to the cross to say that instrumental music was part of the Law, and it was nailed to the cross. But instrumental music was commanded before the Law was ever given.

14:00

Last summer I went to ACU for 3 days and read everything the anti-instrument position has produced. I came across this statement: “Regarding instrumental music in the Old Testament, God tolerated it as He did David’s polygamy, but He approved of neither.”

I have to ask you: Is that standing UNDER the Word of God or OVER the Word of God? How can you reach a conclusion that God was not pleased with what he ordered and commanded?
In the Old Testament God did not just allow instrumental praise – He ordered it!

15:10

God blessed instrumental praise. We read in 2 Chronicles 5:12-14, “12 All the Levites who were musicians—Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun and their sons and relatives—stood on the east side of the altar, dressed in fine linen and playing cymbals, harps and lyres. They were accompanied by 120 priests sounding trumpets. 13 The trumpeters and singers joined in unison, as with one voice, to give praise and thanks to the LORD. Accompanied by trumpets, cymbals and other instruments, they raised their voices in praise to the LORD and sang: "He is good; his love endures forever." Then the temple of the LORD was filled with a cloud, 14 and the priests could not perform their service because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the temple of God.”

“The glory of the Lord filled the temple of God.” God was pleased with the praise offered that day, with instrumental music.
There is no hint in the entire Bible that God was ever anything but pleased with instrumental praise offered from sincere hearts.

Did God condemn the use of instruments in the book of Amos? Let’s look at that passage.

Amos 6

1 Woe to you who are complacent in Zion, and to you who feel secure on Mount Samaria, you notable men of the foremost nation, to whom the people of Israel come! 4 You lie on beds inlaid with ivory and lounge on your couches. You dine on choice lambs and fattened calves.
5 You strum away on your harps like David and improvise on musical instruments.
6 You drink wine by the bowlful and use the finest lotions, but you do not grieve over the ruin of Joseph. 7 Therefore you will be among the first to go into exile; your feasting and lounging will end.

He condemned their self-indulgence and that they’re not burdened over the sin of Judah, and that’s why they went into exile.
We can find in the Old Testament where God condemns fasting, Sabbaths, and any ritual or any act of worship that’s done insincerely, but there is not a hint anywhere in the Bible that God was ever anything but pleased by instrumental praise offered from a sincere heart.

17:00

One last point from the Old Testament: Messianic prophecy anticipated that instrumental music would continue in the coming Kingdom.

Psalms 45:6-7 -- 6 Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom. 7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.
The Holy Spirit guides the author of Hebrews in Chapter 1 to use that passage to refer to Christ:

Hebrews 1:8-9 -- 8But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. 9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.”

Look at the next verse from that passage in Psalms: “8 All your robes are fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia; from palaces adorned with ivory the music of the strings makes you glad.”
So the Spirit takes this metaphor and applies it to the coming Messiah. Certainly the people who knew that Psalm well could not imagine that the Messiah was not gladdened by the praise of instruments, but even more convicting is the passage in Romans.
Romans 15:8-9 – “8For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews[b]on behalf of God's truth, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs 9so that the Gentiles may glorify God for his mercy, as it is written: ‘Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles; I will sing hymns to your name.’”
The problem there is that there are several verses in the Psalms like that. The most likely is either Psalms 18:49 (Therefore I will praise you among the nations, O LORD; I will sing praises to your name.) or Psalms 57:9 (I will praise you, O Lord, among the nations; I will sing of you among the peoples.) In both of these Psalms though the Hebrew word David used for “sing hymns to your name” is ZAMAR. You will not find a lexicon anywhere that fails to include instruments in defining what the word ZAMAR meant.
So Paul says, here’s the prophesy that in the Messianic age the Gentiles are going to ZAMAR to your name. Just to be sure what that word means, look at Psalms 57:7-9.

Psalms 57:7-9

7 My heart is steadfast, O God, my heart is steadfast; I will sing and make music.
8 Awake, my soul! Awake, harp and lyre! I will awaken the dawn.
9 I will praise you, O Lord, among the nations; I will sing of you among the peoples.

19:40

In the Old Testament:

God commands instrumental praise.
God blesses instrumental praise.
God prophesies its use in the Messianic age.

Now, if God’s attitude toward instrumental music changed in the New Testament, you would expect one of the following three things:

A clear passage condemning its use.
A clear passage commanding a cappella praise only.
A prophesy announcing the end of instrumental music.

Is that what we find in the New Testament?

20:30

Let’s turn now to the New Testament.

Jesus never deals with the issue. The anti-instrumental advocates must speak where Jesus has not spoken. He did speak about the role of the sincere heart in worship, but He never once addressed instrumental music. And you would think He would if it were worth splitting His church over.

The prodigal son. They were making music. The word used there is symphonos, which deals with instruments or a band.
You’d have a hard time, based on what Jesus said, to decide that He had a problem with instrumental praise. We know He taught regularly in the temple, in the presence of instrumental praise, but note that He did not cast out the musicians with the money changers.

Instrumental music is a non-issue in the book of Acts.

The early disciples met daily in the temple courts. Apparently they could worship “in spirit and truth” in the presence of instrumental music. But nowhere in Acts is a pattern for musical praise specified.
In fact, nowhere in the New Testament is congregational singing specifically authorized.

i. Let me repeat that: Nowhere in the New Testament is congregational singing specifically authorized.

The New Testament commands us to sing. It neither prescribes nor prohibits instrumental music. The issue is never the presence or absence of instrumental music; it’s the presence or absence of the Spirit-filled heart.

Ephesians 5:18-19 -- 18Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. 19Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord,
Colossians 3:16 -- Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God.
James 5:13 -- Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise.
All these references of singing in the New Testament are speaking to the individual in his daily walk. The corporate assembly is not the context for any of these passages.

i. The irony is this: The one reference to music in the assembly in the entire New Testament is 1 Corinthians 14:26, “What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.” And this one reference which addresses assemblies is talking about solos! And these are forbidden in churches which have the anti-instrument position.

These passages are talking about the heart. My personal opinion is, I don’t think God hears the voice. I don’t think He hears music from the instruments. I think God hears the heart of the person who produces both.
Finally, let these passages say what they say and don’t make them say more than they say.
There is no New Testament command to sing only a cappella. To say that sing means sing unaccompanied is a human inference that comes dangerously close to speaking where God has not spoken.

28:30

The New Testament refers to instrumental music in heaven, giving further evidence that instrumental music is pleasing to God.

Revelation 5:8-9a -- when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9And they sang a new song:
Revelation 15 -- 2And I saw what looked like a sea of glass mixed with fire and, standing beside the sea, those who had been victorious over the beast and his image and over the number of his name. They held harps given them by God 3and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb:
Some books, supporting the anti-instrument position, state: “Notice that they were holding the harps, not playing them!”
And most say you can’t take it literally.
It’s irrelevant. John: “Here’s an image from heaven. Here’s a picture for you to be encouraged by.”
Am I to believe that right now what God is enjoying in heaven, He is despising on earth??

30:30 Finally,

The New Testament idea of giftedness supports the practice of instrumental praise.

Don’t say that you can only praise God from the heart with your voice.
Playing an instrument to the glory of God is not just an aid to worship – it is an act of worship.
Psalms 150:3 -- Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, …
1 Chronicles 23:5 -- Four thousand are to be gatekeepers and four thousand are to praise the LORD with the musical instruments I have provided for that purpose.

34:30 Bottom Line

The authority to forbid instrumental music has got to be established apart from a clear command of God. You can’t open your Bible and show where God forbids it. In fact, the New Testament writers were not remotely concerned with the presence or absence of instrumental music and would be appalled to learn how we have lifted their verses and made them say things that were never even remotely on their minds.
What was central to their message was the cross. That’s why ordinances like baptism and communion are mentioned so prominently, because baptism and communion tell the story of the cross; they visibly preach the Gospel!
Two things that will never change at this church are the essentiality of baptism and the regular observance of the Lord’s Supper – they preach the cross!

35:50

The best-written book to defend a cappella music was by Dr. Everett Ferguson. In his book “A Cappella Music and the Public Worship of the Church,” he honestly admits on pages 40 and 41: “before leaving the New Testament references we may note in passing that the New Testament gives no negative judgment on instrumental music, per se. The situation is simply that instruments are not referred to in the church’s worship.”
It was a non-issue. They were not spoken about positively or negatively. It wasn’t an issue.

36:30

In fairness, I need to deal with the two most common arguments against offering instrumental praise to God.

1. The PSALLO argument

1. It is contended that the meaning of PSALLO (Colossians 3, Ephesians 5: “sing”) changed by New Testament times. I’ll admit the original meaning of the word was to pluck, then to play, a stringed instrument – and this was the dominant use of PSALLO in the Septuagint (the Hebrew scriptures translated into Greek), the Bible of the first Christians. In their Bible, the Septuagint, the dominant meaning of PSALLO was to play or to pluck.

2. But they argue that “on the street” by the first century, the word had evolved into “making music with the voice,” and some contend it only meant that by the first century, and that’s how Paul meant for it to be understood. You can read articles about this until you are tired in the head, but I’ll just tell you – the bulk of scholarship disagrees.

3. The word PSALLO is clearly used by Josephus as “to play an instrument” in the first century, by the Roman historian Sartonius in the second century, by Chrysotum and Gregory as late as the fourth century, and it was clearly the meaning of the word in the Bible of the first Christians who would have known exactly what it meant to the authors of the text that they read and studied.

4. If the Holy Spirit’s purpose was to forbid instrumental music, why did He use a word so commonly associated with it?

5. Again, the problem is, we’re trying to make “sing” mean “sing only.” But we don’t play that game with other New Testament words.

i. Paul said to Timothy, Take a little wine for your stomach’s sake.

1. Does that mean to take wine only?

2. Would it be a sin if he took wine and water?

ii. When James says, Is anyone sick? Let him call the elders…

1. Would it be a sin to call the elders and the preacher?

2. Would it be a sin to call the elders and your parents?

3. Would you sin if you didn’t call the elders only?

iii. We don’t play that game with any other word in the New Testament! Why would we do it with PSALLO? Is it any wonder the anti-instrument argument seems contrived to all but those who were raised in an anti-instrument position?

2. The Law of Exclusion is probably the chief argument used to oppose the instrumental music position.

1. Also called, “The Argument from the Silence of Scripture.”

2. The contention is that anything not specifically authorized in Scripture is forbidden, and therefore even though instrumental music was acceptable to God in the Old Testament, we have to assume it is now unacceptable because God did not specifically re-authorize it in the New Testament.

41:00

3. This flawed approach to interpretation is the same argument that has split the Lord’s church over

i. Bible school

ii. Number of cups

iii. Having church buildings

iv. Having located preachers

v. Supporting orphans from the church budget

vi. and the list goes on and on and on…

4. This silence in the New Testament on instrumental music is not intentional; it is incidental. I believe silence in the Bible is neither inherently prohibitive OR prescriptive.

5. If it is a sin to worship God, except as He has specifically told you to do, then Jesus violated the Law of Silence.

i. Where in the Bible does God authorize the synagogue? Nowhere. But Jesus went to synagogues.

ii. Where in the Bible does God authorize a Feast of Lights? That was started by the Maccabees in the inter-testamental period, but in John 10 Jesus went to the Feast of Lights.

iii. Where in the Bible does God authorize using wine in the Passover meal? God does not mention wine one time in connection with the Passover. But Jesus took wine with the Passover meal.

iv. The point is this: Jesus did not allow his worship of God to be restricted by the very law we’ve tried to bind on our brothers and sisters.

43:40

6. I want to ask you this: What great message of God did He ever communicate by saying nothing about it? The Father in Heaven makes it clear what He expects of us. And He does not communicate by saying nothing.

What are the real concerns we have? The elephant that has been in the room for decades is much bigger than just whether we can worship with instruments. Here are two issues I have with the way we’ve handled this in the past.

1. What it says about the Bible.

a. One of the best things about the Restoration Movement was the freedom from the deductions and inferences made by men. I’ve always resonated with the idea that a simple student of the scriptures could read and understand God’s will – and I still do. That’s why I must reject the anti-instrument position. No one not already indoctrinated would arrive at such a conclusion without someone teaching them to read the text through their particular interpretive grid.

b. Here’s our problem: We don’t attempt to defend from the Bible what we practice in this area.

i. If a visitor were to meet me in the atrium after one of our services and say, “I saw you baptize a person this morning. Why do you do that here?”, I would open my Bible and show him the answer.

ii. If that visitor said, “I noticed you all shared communion this morning; why do you do that?”, I would open my Bible and show him why.

iii. But if that visitor said, “I noticed you only sing a cappella here; why?”, then I don’t open my Bible.

c. This will have serious and foreboding consequences for our future, and our children’s future, if we continue to tell them they must exclusively practice a form of praise which we will not open our Bibles to defend.

d. I will be accused, and this church will be accused, of being soft on the Bible. I want to tell you from the depth of my heart – it’s the exact opposite! My love for the Bible compels me to say what I’ve said this morning. I can not in good conscience allow people to teach as Bible what the Bible does not teach.

2. What it says about God. This is fundamental to the whole discussion.

a. I do not believe God vacillates, liking one form of praise in one dispensation and disliking it in another.

b. I do not believe that God so segregates life that what is acceptable in a car, or a wedding, is not acceptable in a worship service.

c. I do not believe God is going to hand you a harp after sending millions to hell for mistakenly playing one.

d. Most of all, when I read in my Bible of a God that was so desperate to save me that the sacrifice of His own Son was worth it, I can not accept that my relationship to that God could be jeopardized because I didn’t discern His inference or interpret His silence. A God that loves me so much he would die for me would send me to hell because I didn’t properly understand some thing he never spoke about?! That’s not the God of the Bible, and that’s not the God of the cross.

e. I believe God is passionately committed to saving a lost world and He’s deeply desirous for His church to get serious about doing that.

Next Sunday – We will discuss how this all relates to our effectiveness in Mission.

One last question: Are we going to be driven by Truth, or by Fear that we might have been wrong?

God bless you all.

17 Dec 2006

Message #3 of 3: The Both/And Church

Two topics in this message:

Saturday night worship and communion
Missional effectiveness

3:45

Let’s talk about the whole business of Saturday night – the idea of the church meeting Saturday evening as a regular part of its worship schedule. For several years, our attempts to add a third service has had mixed results. We think having a different kind of service at a different time may help that. Three questions come to mind:

#1 -- Why Saturday evening?

The New York Times (ran a survey and?) determined that the hour from 5 to 6 PM on Saturday evening is the most unscheduled hour of the week for Americans. So this is a very effective time to invite unchurched friends. And it allows us the flexibility to add more services in the future.

#2 -- Is it OK to meet Saturday instead of Sunday?

§ Practice of early Christians was to meet every day

· Acts 2 -- 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

§ It is important to remember that there is no New Testament command to meet only on Sunday.

· There are examples of churches doing that, and these are useful for discerning principles, but they are not to be used for making laws that God has not made.

· Time: How did New Testament believers keep time?

o Jewish

§ Sundown to sundown

§ Genesis 1 -- 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

§ The Sabbath began at [our] 6:00 PM Friday. The Jewish Sunday began at [our] 6:00 PM Saturday.

§ EVERY EXAMPLE we have in the New Testament of the church meeting was in the evening. So, if you are in a predominantly Jewish church, and you meet in the evening on the First Day of the Week, you are meeting on what we today would call Saturday night. If you are a Gentile worshipping with this church, you are worshipping on Saturday night with people who are worshipping on their First Day of the Week.

o Gentile/Roman

§ Each new day begins at midnight, the same as we do today.

§ If you are a Gentile meeting in a Gentile church on Sunday evening, you are meeting on your First Day of the Week, but your Jewish friend who worships with you that night is meeting on his Monday!

· There is no indication in the New Testament, or early church history, that such matters were ever an issue. The guiding principle is that the Sabbath is made for man, not the other way around. And Paul, who has this whole “special day” issue going on, says in Romans 14: 5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord.

11:00

§ So our council is this: That each member of Richland Hills should follow his own convictions and be fully committed in his own mind, without judging a brother who has a different conviction.

#3 -- Is it OK to take communion on Saturday instead of Sunday?

§ A – The Richland Hills Church of Christ remains fully committed to the observance of weekly communion.

· Will we serve communion on Saturday night? Yes, we will.

§ B – The earliest Christians were fully committed to the observance of DAILY communion. See Acts 2:

· 42They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

· 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts,

· The Greek expression “they broke bread” is the New Testament expression of communion, and we’ll see that very clearly in a moment in Acts 20.

· I think if you could transport one of the earliest Christians to our century, they would recognize a lot of what we do in our worship services – preaching, praying, singing – but they might look at us when we pass out little pieces of crackers and little cups of juice, and say, “What are you doing?” Our practice does not much resemble the Love Feasts which they held in their homes.

14:13

· Early history makes it clear that the Christians then observed the Lord’s Supper much more often than we do today.

o Cyprian, a church leader beheaded in the 3^rd century, and Ambrose (another church leader) in the 4^th century, and Chrysotum (maybe the greatest preacher of the first 5 centuries) all write of the DAILY sacrifice of the Lord’s Supper. Now this is as late as 400 years after the death of Christ.

o Basil, another great church leader in the 4^th century in Asia Minor, wrote that it was the custom in their area to met 4 times each week to have the Lord’s Supper together as Christians.

o Augustin, perhaps the most influential Christian father in the 1^st 500 years, wrote that the frequency of observance of the Lord’s Supper simply “varied from place to place” – there was no consistent pattern among the churches.

· Again, of significance, there is simply no indication among any of the writings, that this was ever even a point of contention.

§ C – I was raised in the church to believe that Acts 20 teaches us that we can only observe the Lord’s Supper on Sunday. Let’s look at Acts 20 now.

· Acts 20 -- 6But we sailed from Philippi after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and five days later joined the others at Troas, where we stayed seven days. 7On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight. 8There were many lamps in the upstairs room where we were meeting. 9Seated in a window was a young man named Eutychus, who was sinking into a deep sleep as Paul talked on and on. When he was sound asleep, he fell to the ground from the third story and was picked up dead. 10Paul went down, threw himself on the young man and put his arms around him. "Don't be alarmed," he said. "He's alive!" 11Then he went upstairs again and broke bread and ate. After talking until daylight, he left. 12The people took the young man home alive and were greatly comforted.

· Troas was a Roman colony.

· This instance is a very important example.

But remember the place of examples. Does what one church did at one time settle what all churches have to do at all times?

· Troas was one of the capital cities of the Roman Empire, the second capital of Asia Minor. It was so Roman a city that it was not taxed the “land tax” because it was considered a part of Italy. My point is, in Troas they used Roman time. Luke is a Gntile. He is writing to Theophilus, a Roman official, telling him about the Christian faith. The chronology simply doesn’t fit Jewish time; this is Gentile, or Roman, time. So let’s remember what we just read:

o The church in Troas met on what we call Sunday evening.

o Paul preached until midnight.

o A young man fell out of the window, and was restored to life.

o The group came back into the room and broke bread together.

· So, when did they actually “break bread?” Monday morning!

o Apparently no one said, “It’s too late to have the Lord’s Supper now, because it is no longer Sunday.”

· The preeminent text we have used for years to prove we can only have communion on Sunday is about a church that had communion on Monday!

19:00

· If this text is our chief argument for the “Communion only on Sunday” position, that position stands on pretty shaky ground. Besides, let me ask one last question:

o Can an example of a church override a command from the Lord?

o Think about that as a Biblical interpreter.

o The only command regarding the Lord’s Supper that mentions frequency is from Jesus himself. Listen to Paul in 1 Cor 11:

§ 23For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

o Your Bible might say “for as often as” instead of “whenever.” The word in Greek is HOSAKIS, a “relative adverb.” The preeminent scholar of the Greek language in the last 100 years that everyone recognizes is Dr. A. T. Robertson. He writes that “Hosakis is only used with the notion of indefinite repetition.” We see that clearly in the only other time in the New Testament that the word was used, Revelation 11:6, where John has the vision of the two witnesses: “These men have power to shut up the sky so that it will not rain during the time they are prophesying; and they have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they want.” How often were they told to do this? The actual frequency was left to the two witnesses to determine: “as often as they want.”

o Loved ones, in the New Testament, the emphasis is on the FOCUS of communion, not its frequency. Jesus made the EVENT important; man has made the DAY important.

o We will practice and observe weekly communion.

§ We will do it on Saturday and we will do it on Sunday.

o One last question: When did Jesus institute the Lord’s Supper? What day did He inaugurate it? Thursday night! (Or, depending on how you do the chronology of the gospels, perhaps Wednesday night.)

22:40

Let me close this part of our teaching with a thought that I think under-girds the controversies we’ve been considering the last 2 or 3 weeks.

There are many in our heritage still struggling with placing faith in a plan more than a Man. They are looking for a pattern of “doing church” they can duplicate, and it’s a salvation strategy with a track record of producing anxiety and division and tremendous inconsistency.
This past week I’ve received an enormous number of emails. A great number have been nominally encouraging. Christian leaders across the country are encouraging our church to be bold and to go forward with our intentions. But I have also received fierce criticism. Criticism that is so ungodly, and so vile, that you honestly wonder how anyone could read the gospels and justify it.

I’ve been called a devil.
I’ve been told I don’t deserve to wear the name of Christ.
One elder wrote, “If you are murdered it will be too good for you.”

Where does a person justify that kind of venom? Well, I understand – it’s because they have believed a false gospel. It’s a gospel that says, “If I don’t get every detail right – not just the details God made clear, but also the details that He did not make clear – if I don’t get inferences and silences right, my eternal soul will burn in hell.” And if that is your gospel, you are going to be anxious, you are going to be fearful, and you are going to be angry.
I don’t feel anger for people who write such emails – I feel such an intense sadness that the Christian faith can be lived with such a burden to carry, such a joyless gospel to preach. And haven’t we seen the track record of that gospel? It’s been preached among us now for decades, and everywhere it’s preached churches split and churches decline and children leave.
I’m encouraged by the great numbers of people that are wanting to discover grace and wanting to be liberated, and that’s what the Lord’s Supper does – it calls us back to the cross, to the place where we put faith in what JESUS did. Our salvation is based in the common faith in the One whom we remember when we break the bread. The Lord’s Supper reminds us to put our confidence in Christ because HE is righteous. It is an affront to the Gospel that says, “If you don’t get it all right you will burn in hell.” That’s why Jesus instituted the supper in the first place – to call us back to the cross.
And so, we will observe – weekly – a time of communion with the Lord.
We will proclaim the cross and His grace as the only gospel that brings joy and freedom and is the only gospel that bears the fruit of evangelistic effectiveness.
And I would say to all of you, follow your heart, your conviction, and your conscience, and worship where and when you choose without in any way judging a brother who goes to a different service.

27:00

Now I want to enter what is the most subjective part of this teaching.

It is Biblical to praise God with or without instrumental music. None of the emails I received as a result of this teaching mentioned the verse where God condemns instrumental praise, because it is not there. But, the second, and harder, question is: Is it missionally effective? Is it proper for this church, at this time, in this culture?

I say again: We are entering an area of subjectivity, but I want to share my opinion why I believe it is a wise strategy to pursue – fully recognizing your right to disagree.

Look at this picture (on the overhead). It shows President George W. Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, in 2005, walking along holding hands with crown prince Abdula of Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia it is a sign of honor and respect to hold hands with a man of status. To build relationships with those of another culture, you must attempt to understand and respect that culture. Every missionary understands this.

Let’s look at 1 Corinthians 9: 19Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.
THAT IS THE MISSIONAL MANDATE. We must understand and reach across cultural divides.
The New Living translation reads: “Yes, I try to find common ground with everyone” so that I might bring them to Christ.
The Good News translation says: “I become all things to all people, that I may save some of them by whatever means are possible.”

30:36

This church needs to understand that we live in a mission field!

Many of us grew up under the illusion we lived in a Christian nation, and that we lived in a thing called the Bible Belt. Here’s the truth:

This weekend, in Ft. Worth, Texas, Tarrant County, only 21% will attend a house of worship. (EVERY kind of house of worship, i.e., not just Christian.) And this city is one of the most “churched” cities in America!
Less than 9% of those aged 25 or under will attend a house of worship.
Less than 4% of the “bridger” generation, those aged between 15 and 30, will attend any church. (The 4% data is from Tom Rainer.)

We live in a mission field. WE are the aliens.
We must engage our culture without being seduced by it!
The Gospel never changes… but the packaging must.
I believe if we are to reach this 96% of the population under 30 who are turning off of church, we must think strategically and missionally about the role of music.

33:30

“But I’ve always heard the early Christians didn’t worship with instruments.” Let’s deal with that. Why did the early church not worship with instrumental music?

We don’t know the worship practices of all the early churches, but only those in the “civilized” world of Asia Minor and Southern Europe. What about the churches in India and Africa during the first and second centuries after the Gospel was preached there, for instance? But of the places we do know about, the worship was almost exclusively a cappella. You can read until your brain goes tired about why that was, and you will not find consensus. Scholars and historians are simply not sure. They offer a number of reasons, however:

Because they gathered in secret to avoid persecution. There are parts of the world still today where it is illegal for Christians to meet and worship.
Instrumental music often was associated in the ancient world with pagan rituals. So in order to disassociate themselves from the hedonism of their pagan world, they made their gatherings look as different as possible from the pagan gatherings.
Perhaps the early Christians modeled their worship after the Jewish synagogue, where the worship was a cappella. Again, scholars disagree on why it was a cappella, but they suggest it may have been due to rabbis who felt playing instruments would have violated Sabbath prohibitions against work. (Remember, synagogue worship itself was never authorized in the Bible, but it was certainly a legitimate form of worship that Jesus endorsed.)
In accordance with Psalm 137, “How can we sing the songs of the Lord in a strange land?” the captives in Babylon hung their harps on the trees and they said, We can’t sing our songs of praise until the temple is restored. In AD 70 when the temple was destroyed the Jewish leaders forbad praise in the Jewish community – not just instrumental, but vocal, praise – because the temple was destroyed. In many orthodox Jewish communities to this day, there is no instrumental praise, because there is no temple.

36:30

Is it possible that one or all of these reasons were factors in the use of a cappella praise by the early church? Absolutely! But here’s the point: In their culture, for the reasons we just mentioned, it was the cultural and missionally strategic thing to do, to reach their culture.

What is important to remember is while they may not have used instrumental music, no church father condemned its use until the 3^rd century, 200 years later.
2^nd century, Clement of Alexandria: “If you wish to sing and make melody to the kithra or lyre, there’s no blame; you shall imitate the righteous Hebrew king in the thanksgiving to God.” He’s talking about Christians in social settings here, but there is no condemnation of instrumental praise during this time in which they worshipped a cappella.

37:30

Church history is our guide; it’s not our authority. We might also mention, for several centuries the church met only in homes, and they only sang in unison. You might also argue that you don’t have to have instruments to worship God, you don’t have to have buildings to meet in, and you don’t have to have 4-part harmony to sing.

Church history is our guide; it is not our authority.
Our task is not to duplicate these earliest churches. Our task is to imitate their goal of being culturally relevant outposts for the Kingdom of God.

Why do I believe music is critical to our mission, in this place, at this time, to reach this culture? (These thoughts are mine; I confess they are subjective, though I do hold them strongly.) Our mission is reaching the lost!

All churches make cultural concessions to reach the lost. We have made them here.

Length of worship service. 1 hour here. 4 to 5 hours in Africa. In fact, many African-American churches in America don’t think you can “do” church in only 1 hour! Why do we worship for about an hour?

That’s the culturally appropriate thing to do if we’re going to invite our neighbors to come worship with us.

Dress. Why do we dress less formally than we used to dress?

Because there is not a likely chance that my mechanic neighbor across the alley is going to come to church with me if I tell him he’s got to wear a suit.

Bible translations. Why do we use contemporary translations of the Scripture? Can’t we read the Gospel in the King James translation?

You can, but it’s culturally more strategic to give your unchurched neighbor a version he can understand easier.

Why do we use media and technology?

None of these things water down the Gospel. They’re not compromise. They’re culturally strategic decisions to change the package, so that the Gospel which never changes can be heard. This isn’t compromise. It’s the very imitation of God. God is the ultimate contextualizer! He who is above all culture chooses to work within it! How else could we receive His revelation? The Word became flesh – God entered our culture in a way we could understand.

42:00

Paul called on us to use “all means possible” to reach the lost.

I personally believe that that means missional music.
Lyle Schaller, probably the best-known church consultant and analyst in America, studied the 50 churches in America which were growing the most, in terms of reaching lost people. He wrote… And by the way, you many not like what he wrote – that’s OK – it doesn’t make it untrue. He wrote, “Music is the first, and last, and most powerful impression people take from a church. Music either makes or breaks the preaching.” That may not be true of you, but that is true of many, and I am persuaded it is especially true of the generation we’re losing. You see, this generation, unlike prior generations, does not view music as entertainment.
Some will say, “You’re just selling out, getting into the Entertainment Business.”

NO! We are in the TRUTH business. And because we are in the Truth business we must explore all means possible to get the Truth to the culture we must reach.

It started probably in the late 60’s.

My parents’ generation, who I believe probably were the greatest generation – they survived the Depression, won the Great War – my parents’ generation views music as entertainment – always have, always will.
But my generation, and those after me, have a different understanding, because as a young man I watched a President of the United States look straight in the camera, and lie. I’ve seen another president do it since. And what’s happened in the last 30 to 40 years is, the young people have decided “we don’t trust the people we are told to trust”, the people that write the newspapers and make the TV shows, “John Lennon told the truth”… they turned to the artists. This generation turned to music for their world view.
In this post-modern world, they don’t get their truth propositionally; they get it through experience, and music is one of the preeminent ways they experience their world view.

And so they ask one question of music: “Does it lead me to your God, or not?”

And how many in this generation are listening only to a cappella music? How many of them have their radio buttons set to a cappella stations?

How may of you do?

Now I will be misunderstood at this point. Some will argue that I’m saying that having instrumental praise is the end-all to reaching the lost. Let me say this as clearly as I can. That is not what I’m saying. Hundreds of churches here in Tarrant county are dying that have instrumental music.

If a church doesn’t have a burden for the culture, and if you and I don’t go to bed every now and then with tears in our eyes for our lost friends, it doesn’t matter what kind of teaching or music we have. OK?
Having said that, if our burden is to reach the lost: Is our fellowship courageous enough to face the possibility (the probability) that our exclusive music preference hinders our evangelistic efforts?
I love the Churches of Christ. I know the Kingdom of God is larger than Churches of Christ, but it’s the heritage I was raised in; it is where I came to understand Jesus; it’s the heritage where God has asked me to work. I love this fellowship.
This fellowship is not doing well. It’s in decline. In the 5 states where there are more Churches of Christ than any other state, we are losing members in every one of them. The last 3 years, in Texas, there are 8000 fewer members of Churches of Christ. Our churches are getting smaller, and they are getting older.

One of the criticisms I face is: Well, your agenda is that you’re on an ego trip, because you just want a big church.

Let me tell you something: If my sin is I want every Christ-exalting, Bible-preaching church to grow and reach more lost people – I am guilty of that sin. OK? I am guilty.
I want this church to grow. I want every church that preaches Christ and lifts up the Bible to grow.
I want our fellowship to grow, but we’re not.

Ironically, the fastest growing Christian group in America today are the Independent Christian churches. They’re growing at about 20% per year. They baptize for remission of sins; they take weekly communion; they have male elderships.

This is hard for us to hear, because our music seems completely normal and beautiful, because we’ve been raised with it. It’s so hard for us to step outside our heritage and hear our praise through the lens of a completely unchurched person. When our culture thinks “music,” it assumes “instrumental music.” And this culture gets its truth through experience, so if instrumental music is acceptable to God, if it’s a powerful and relevant cultural way to build a bridge to the lost, and if we’re missionaries, why would we not take advantage of such a potentially fruitful tool?

We’re not arguing to replace a cappella praise, but rather that we use both forms of praise to reach more people.

49:40

This is why many of our young church leaders and church planters are abandoning our heritage.

There was a church planter gathering at one of our Christian colleges lately, where the professor made an impassioned plea to plant churches inside this fellowship. And I was told by a person there, that not a single young person committed to do that, because if their future depends on their ability to reach the lost, they don’t want to have to do so in the context where tradition trumps what they think would be the most strategic way to reach the lost. And that makes me sad.
And so some of our very best evangelists are leaving our fellowship.
And so are our kids. And that’s REASON #2.

I hope we can become a both/and church not just to reach the lost, but to keep our children.

I preach at a lot of large brotherhood gatherings, and over the last several years I’ve been asking them a question, and here’s the question I ask:

How many of you have children who no longer attend churches of Christ? The response is staggering. And the rooms get just as quiet as it is right now in here.
Would you hear me say one more time: The Kingdom of God is larger than the Churches of Christ. Always has been, always will be.
If God has determined that churches of Christ have served their purpose, and it is His will for them to not exist in generations to come, that’s His call. But I must say that right now, at least from where I see things, I don’t see how God is honored by dying, irrelevant churches. I think revival would honor God much more.

I don’t have time to share with you a pretty extensive survey done as a doctrinal dissertation for why people leave churches of Christ, but the single, preeminent reason they leave involves worship.
I think to retain our children, we must do one of two things.

Either we preach a cappella music is the only way to please God, and if you worship any other way your soul’s in jeopardy.
Or, we give them the wonderful option of a cappella AND instrumental praise, and teach them to value and love and praise God.
I don’t think the first approach is working. I think the second just might increase their appreciation of both kinds of praise. But what we can not do, we can not continue to ask our kids to hold on to a practice we’re not defending Biblically.

Some have said to me, Rick, why do we have to talk about this now? Why can’t we let the next generation deal with this issue?

Because if we wait, the next generation won’t be here… to deal with it. That’s why. In fact, my fear is that we’ve already waited too long.
Someone once said, Even the right decision is the wrong decision if it’s made too late.

I believe God has raised us up for a time such as this.

I believe this decision is Biblical.
I believe it’s missional.
And I believe it’s doable.
And I believe we are the people of God to do it.

Let’s pray.

Father, I thank You for the beautiful way this teaching has been received, in open hearts and minds, not just here, but across this country.
I do pray God for revival in this church and in churches around the world where Your Scripture is honored and Your Son is exalted. I pray for a revival in this country. I pray Father that this next generation can be reached with the Gospel.
And I pray for an increased burden in the hearts of Christians everywhere; not a burden for what the church down the street is doing, but a burden for the lost neighbor right across my own street.
I pray God, that we will truly be a church that belongs to Christ because obedience to His mission trumps every other consideration. Help us be that church for the sake and glory of His name. Amen.

God bless you.