"I See the Lord..."

[BaptistCanuk]

Hey Bruce, thank you for your post. There is much there to take in and think about.

I do feel that you were "talking down" to me in a few places but I'm not going to argue about it. I am going to have a thick skin as it was said today and let it slide.

As is typical when using the Socratic method I have learned a few things through this discussion and in reading this last post. I understand what you are saying about preaching. And in regards to puppet shows and drama etc., I believe that one can hear the gospel through those means. I do not believe they are only meant for entertainment purposes. I believe they can be used to teach and to minister.

I'm sorry if you felt I made light of your exegetical work but I felt I had a point. If I did not, then I didn't. I'm a big boy. Anyways, you gave me much to think about. I can't answer all that in five minutes. I'm not sure I completely understood everything you said either but for the most part, I did. I'm just not as intelligent as many people are. Sadly I have been discovering that in the last little while. I thought I was smart but I'm not. And I sure don't have what it takes to be a pastor so I don't know I was asking about that earlier.

Thank you again Bruce. God bless.
Brian

 

[BaptistCanuk]

"Is everyone in the process of whatever he calls "worship" definitely and clearly under the direction of the H.S.? Plainly this is false, for even Christians frequently think they are doing well when they are sinning. So how do you know if you are following the H.S. and not the imaginations of your heart?"

Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.[g] If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

Would this passage apply to your question?

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Brian
You have demonstrated a certain degree of maturity in your postings, maybe not always as much or as often as you could have, but that is a common failing with all of us. And it has been more than in others who may be older in years. It takes a man to admit he still has room to grow. We all have more areas to improve upon than we have areas where we may be teachers.

And I do regret if I've in fact belittled you. I don't regret being direct or prodding you manfully. Thick skin is good. And disciplined thinking is better. Remember, before you take any offense of anyone: ask yourself "Why am I feeling like this, regarding those words? Should I straighten up, or straighten him out?"
Pr. 27:6 "Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy."

God may yet make you into any number of things, especially when it comes to his church. You are still a young man. Practice being a servant and a disciple. God doesn't need brainiacs; he wants someone moldable. (Though you may be clay, I doubt that you are a clod, after all. )

 

[BaptistCanuk]

Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
Brian
You have demonstrated a certain degree of maturity in your postings, maybe not always as much or as often as you could have, but that is a common failing with all of us. And it has been more than in others who may be older in years. It takes a man to admit he still has room to grow. We all have more areas to improve upon than we have areas where we may be teachers.

And I do regret if I've in fact belittled you. I don't regret being direct or prodding you manfully. Thick skin is good. And disciplined thinking is better. Remember, before you take any offense of anyone: ask yourself "Why am I feeling like this, regarding those words? Should I straighten up, or straighten him out?"
Pr. 27:6 "Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy."

Thank you Bruce. And you are right. We should ask ourselves "why am I feeling like this?..." As for Pr. 27:6, I believe that. I just struggle with it due to all the wounds I've received in my life from those who were not my friends.

God may yet make you into any number of things, especially when it comes to his church. You are still a young man. Practice being a servant and a disciple. God doesn't need brainiacs; he wants someone moldable. (Though you may be clay, I doubt that you are a clod, after all. )

Thank you. I appreciate that. Sometimes I feel like a clod but I probably am not one. haha

 

[Kaalvenist]

Originally posted by BaptistCanuk

Originally posted by Kaalvenist
Brian,

Confessional Reformed theology (which, in this case, includes Baptists) holds to what as become known as the "regulative principle of worship." This doctrine states that whatever ordinances or elements of worship which are to be performed by us must rest upon divine appointment. All elements of worship require God's appointment (either by explicit precept or an approved example) for them to be valid; if an element of worship is not appointed, then it is extraneous and is contrary to God's command to worship Him only as He has commanded. This means that there are no "optional" elements of worship: If it is commanded, it must be done, or else we sin by omission. If it is not commanded, it is not to be done, or else we sin by commission.

Put more simply, "Whatever is not commanded in worship is forbidden."

This doctrine is not simply some expendible article of the Reformed confessions; it is a natural outgrowth of several elements of Reformed theology, which explains why Reformed churches have always held to this article. It also rests upon the clear, plain exposition of many texts of Scripture, both Old and New Testament (Lev. 10:1-2; Jer. 7:31; Mark 7:7; Col. 2:23, etc., etc.). This doctrine has been discussed several times on the Puritanboard already; I recommend that you look back through some of the older threads in the Worship section to see some good treatments of the subject.

This is the guiding principle of many (most) on the Board, and the guiding principle behind the remarks you are encountering in this discussion. Until this is addressed, you can go round and round on puppet shows all day; but if it is agreed that God Himself appoints His own worship, without leaving it up to man's wisdom to fill in the supposed gaps, the puppet question gets answered rather quickly.

Hey Sean (my brother's name is Sean too), thanks for your post.

You said, "This means that there are no "optional" elements of worship: If it is commanded, it must be done, or else we sin by omission. If it is not commanded, it is not to be done, or else we sin by commission."

I would say, maybe, just maybe, the Confession could be wrong. Scripture is the final authority and though I accept certain creeds and statements of faith, they ultimately must bow down to Scripture. I have to find in the Bible myself where it says that "If it is commanded, it must be done, or else we sin by ommission." And where it says that "If it is not commanded, it is not to be done, or else we sin by commission." One must use Scripture alone and not a creed when determining what is sin and what is not sin.

Yes, God appoints His own worship but He doesn't forbid children from doing a puppet play to teach a point to other children or even, adults. Jesus told stories (parables) and I see puppet plays used to teach children and even adults as just another way to tell stories.

Thank you for the Scripture references and the tip to check various other threads on worship. I enjoy discussing theology and appreciate the respectful back and forth. You don't always find that in the Church.

Brian,

1. Your brother has an excellent name (and, thankfully, your parents spelled it right).

2. I was not trying to emphasize the presence of the regulative principle in the Reformed creeds; had that been my object, I would have quoted them, or at least cited the sections of those creeds where the regulative principle could be found.

3. My main point was to make you aware of the regulative principle of worship, defining it for you, and identifying it as the guiding principle for many (most) on this Board, in order to clarify for you where we are coming from in our discussions with each other, and with you.

4. There is one statement in my post that you did not seem to notice: "This doctrine is not simply some expendible article of the Reformed confessions; it is a natural outgrowth of several elements of Reformed theology, which explains why Reformed churches have always held to this article." I thought that you might take interest in that statement, since you profess to hold to Reformed theology (or at least Calvinism). The doctrines of Sola Scriptura, the divine decrees, the Creator-creature distinction, total depravity, monergism, and several other aspects of Reformed theology all weigh in on this discussion, and all lend support to the concept of the regulative principle. This obviously has bearing beyond whether it is contained in the Reformed confessions; if we a priori assume the validity of these doctrines, and if it can be shown that they all point to a concept of worship enunciated by the regulative principle, we have gone a long way toward establishing it as a true understanding of God's worship. (And since each of these doctrines is essentially true, regardless of which Testament we happen to live under, this would also establish the regulative principle as true under both Old and New Testaments, and not applying solely to the Old Testament.)

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Originally posted by BaptistCanuk

Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
Is everyone in the process of whatever he calls "worship" definitely and clearly under the direction of the H.S.? Plainly this is false, for even Christians frequently think they are doing well when they are sinning. So how do you know if you are following the H.S. and not the imaginations of your heart?

Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.[g] If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

Would this passage apply to your question?

I'm not 100% I understand where you're coming from in your question.

The great issue at the Jerusalem Council was whether the Gentiles needed to become Jews (outwardly), that is: take up the Old Covenant identity in order to properly identify with the people of God. This took specific form in the question of circumcision.

Act 15:1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." Act 15:5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses."

But the ceremonial law, the whole sacrificial system, pointed ahead to Christ. Circumcision was both a sign of God's gracious covenant with Abraham and his descendants (Rom. 4:11), and the sign of inclusion in the OT covenant community under the Mosaic administration (Ex. 12:48). The determination of the assembly was that the Gentiles should not take the yoke of the Old Covenant upon them.

Their testimony written (of which you quoted a portion) instructed all the churches in the matter. The believers were not to pass under Moses' Law, but they were instructed that these generalities were of more fundamental importance than the Mosaic administration. Idol offerings were an unholy syncretism between worship of the True God, and false. Prohibition from blood was a natural ordinance going back to Genesis 9:4 (before the Law). Fornication is prohibited on the basis that God's moral requirements, though they be incorporated in the Mosaic Code (Ex. 20, the first 10 Words), are based in his holy character, and are more fundamental than the Law of Moses.

If by your question, you are seeing that this passage teaches that Christians need recourse to the Spirit and the Word to instruct them as to how God should be approached, I concur.

 

[BaptistCanuk]

Hey Bruce, I gave that passage to ask if it applies to your statement here:

[Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
"Is everyone in the process of whatever he calls "worship" definitely and clearly under the direction of the H.S.? Plainly this is false, for even Christians frequently think they are doing well when they are sinning. So how do you know if you are following the H.S. and not the imaginations of your heart?"]

I realize that passage had a different purpose but I wondered if it could still apply to your statement. My point being that they were under the direction of the Holy Spirit so the actions they took were the actions God wanted. ie. They were following the Holy Spirit and not the imaginations of their hearts.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Brian,
Yes, the majority in the end did clearly have the "mind of Christ." How did they arive at that "mind?" We know it was the true "mind" because we have an infallible Bible that reveals the fact. And yet that was clearly not the end of the dispute. Huh? How could that be, once they had determined "the mind of Christ"? Not everyone submitted!

First of all, remember this gathering is in response to a dispute (15:2), a difference of minds within the church. So, which faction has "the mind of Christ"? How are they to tell which viewpoint to approve? Yes, there were those who afterward refused to listen to the decision. Paul's letters, in which we find he has to deal with a continuation of this controversy after the council, demonstrates this.

So what does this teach us? That despite deliverances by the church as to what is really the mind of Christ, some folks are going to ignore the true "Voice of the Spirit", and call their own imaginations "Spirit led." Every side can claim afterward that they're correct, but not every claimant really does have what he claims. As Paul says elsewhere, "There must be factions among you, in order to determine which ones are approved" (1 Cor. 11:19). How do you determine what or which ones are "approved"?

Second, these men were NOT simply polling one another for "the mind of Christ". It is highly significant that in this time and place, despite the fact that there were men with prophetic gifts, apostles who saw visions, etc., they did not rely on anything of the sort in this discussion! They relied on past revelation as they came together to make their decision. They weren't "trusting their feelings" or their own judgment, or treating the Holy Spirit like a "force" for guidance. They relied exclusively on divine, revelation. Verses 7-9, previous NT age revelation; verses 10-11, application of Christian doctrine; verse 12, more data on revelation (signs and wonders) among the Gentiles; verses 15-18, recourse to the Scriptures (OT written revelation).

So, yes, in many ways this assembly serves as an example of gathering the "mind of the church" (not the Spirit, per se), and seeing how the church applies God's revelation to their issues and problems. Presbyterians gather like this frequently, in presbytery meetings (a regional church gathering), and in synods or general assemblies (larger or national gatherings).

Hope this is helpful...
Blessings

 

[polemic_turtle]

Would not the basic element inherently objectionable in puppet shows during worship be that they tend more to the entertainment and amusement of those watching than to the unmixed worship of He Whom public worship is supposed to be fully dedicated to? Perhaps my church would be considered Spartan, but we pray to God, sing to God, and hear from God( preaching ) during worship and that is all. It would seem appropriately God-centered, whereas puppet shows or the like are more for the benefit of the humans in attendance than for the God Above. Do it another day, another hour, or another place, but don't mix it in with worship. :twocents:

 

[BaptistCanuk]

Yes Bruce, that was helpful. Thank you. Thank God for the Socratic method eh?

Tyler, I hear you but I don't completely agree. The way I see it a puppet show is no more solely meant for entertainment than Jesus' parables (stories) were.

In your church you may pray to God, sing to God and hear from God and that's fine. But I believe there is more that God requires. He tells us to minister to each other. He tells us to sing songs, hymns and spiritual songs to each other. We grow in faith by singing and hearing everyone else singing as well, as long as the song being sung is solid doctrinally. For that reason, a puppet show can be used as teaching. It ministers to others and it has a Scriptural lesson.

Yes, worship is God-centred. But that God-centred worship does not neglect the corporate body and how you can minister to them. Otherwise, you could sit at home and listen to a televangelist and sing along with cds.

 

[Cuirassier]

Dear Brian,

But that God-centred worship does not neglect the corporate body and how you can minister to them. Otherwise, you could sit at home and listen to a televangelist and sing along with cds.

There is no one here, I would comfortably guess, that would advocate going against Hebrews 10: 25 in this regard. This is a straw man argument.

If I understand your argument correctly, you believe

premise (1) that church worship should entail, as one of its attributes, the ministering to the needs of its members.

premise (2) Kids are part of the church, and as such, they need to hear the gospel explained to them in a way that they will understand

premise (3) Puppets can be used to explain things to kids

Therefore

Conclusion = puppets are a legitimate part of worship.

I think that's a perfectly reasonable argument to make - assuming the premises are correct. When you look at the premises, though, I think you'll see where the problems arise.

Premise (2) & (3) are, I believe, both true. But this argument falls apart because Premise (1) is incorrect.

Premise (1) is the where the problem lies. I believe ministring to the spiritual needs of believers is indeed a part of a church's mandate. But it not the focus of worship. When we look at what the Bible defines as "worship" (lots of verses on this quoted earlier) we see that it is first and foremostly about a) Glorifying God, and b) exhorting / encouraging believvers through the preached word of God.

VBS, children's Bible classes, camp, etc - all great places for puppets. Not on Sunday morning services, according to my view of Scripture.

I trust you don't feel "ganged up on" - by sketching out the argument you are using, and showing where it is deficient, I hope you see I'm focusing on the argument, not you as a person.

In Him,

dl

[Edited on 4-26-2006 by Cuirassier]

[Edited on 4-26-2006 by Cuirassier]

 

[BaptistCanuk]

Hey Daniel, don't worry. I don't feel ganged up on. I could see by the way you went through the premisses that you were dealing with them and not attacking me as a person.

Thank you for acknowledging that the second two premisses are true. However, I do believe the first one is true as well. When we go to church, you are right, it is to glorify God. But ministering to others' needs, etc. IS glorifying God. If ministering to others' needs was not what God wanted us to do we wouldn't have to go to church in the first place right? We could listen to a televangelist or radio preacher. I think if we were to eliminate the necessity of ministering to others' needs then we would all just be there in a big group focusing only on God and ignoring each other.

We both agree that God does not need a big audience to worship Him; that He could be perfectly happy if we all stayed home and worshipped Him by ourselves right? But He wants us to gather that the Body may be edified and strengthened.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Hey Daniel, don't worry. I don't feel ganged up on.

You're a Canadian after all and used to body check.

How cool. Bob Vignault was commenting recently how he was excited to have a 2 page thread. I'm so excited I did the same and I have BaptistCanuk to thank. It was a dead thread and you resurrected it!!

 

[BaptistCanuk]

Originally posted by SemperFideles

Originally posted by BaptistCanuk
Hey Daniel, don't worry. I don't feel ganged up on.

You're a Canadian after all and used to body check.

How cool. Bob Vignault was commenting recently how he was excited to have a 2 page thread. I'm so excited I did the same and I have BaptistCanuk to thank. It was a dead thread and you resurrected it!!

LOL thanks