| December 12, 1999 |
Vol. II, No. 33
|
It has been nearly one and one-half centuries since the advocates of instrumental music drove the dividing wedge into the body of Christ. In 1860 the church at Midway, Kentucky began worshipping with the instrument over the protest of many of its members. That fact stands out in our minds, along with the incident which occurred at Add-Ran College in Thorp Spring, Texas a few years later, when Addison Clark said those fateful words, “Play on, Miss Bertha.” Roy Deaver, quoting a speech from Don Morris, wrote in an article... “As the organ and singing started, Joseph Addison [Addison Clark’s father] arose with his wife and led the opposition out of the auditorium. He was a gray-bearded man, seventy-eight years old, with a cane. About 140 people... followed the elderly Clark out of the building.”
Think what a blessing it would have been if those who favored the instrument had been less determined to satisfy their own whims and fancies and more determined to keep the “unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” Not one of those who insisted on using the instrument believed such was essential. All would have agreed that the instrument could have been left off without rendering the worship unscriptural. It seems that love for their brethren and for unity would have dictated they forego the use of the instrument.
Do we not face a similar situation today with those who are trying to change our worship to fit their own whims and fancies? Some want to clap to accompany the singing and at other times during the worship. If clapping is acceptable, then I wonder if it would be all right to hold a song book in one hand and clap the other hand against the back of the song book? If so, then would it be all right to strike one’s hand against a drum? What about whistling?
Some have made the argument that clapping is the same as saying, “Amen.” But there is one difference; the scriptures authorize saying, “Amen” (1 Cor. 14:16), and they do not authorize clapping. Besides that, clapping, at least in the minds of some, detracts from the dignity and the solemnity of our worship.
I have a question for those who want to clap during our worship periods. Is the desire to clap stronger than the desire to keep “the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”? Certainly one would not take the position that clapping is necessary, or that it makes our worship more acceptable to God. Can it be left off without hindering the work and worship of the church? Then, my beloved brethren, please leave it off in the interest of peace and harmony.
Some want to have what they call “special music” (solos, choirs, quartets and the like) in worship. That kind of music simply is not authorized in the New Testament despite efforts on the part of some to prove that it is. Not one of the advocates of this kind of music would take the position that God does not accept congregational singing, nor deny that we can worship acceptably without ever having any other kind of singing. Will the advocates of “special music” place their own personal preferences above the welfare of the church? Will they have their solos, quartets, and choirs, even if these become the wedge which divides the church? Those who love the church and who want God’s people to be united certainly will not place their personal whims above the welfare of the church.
There are those who like to sing during the eating of the Lord’s Supper. Of course, those who follow the teaching of the New Testament do not fall into this number. Jesus and His apostles ate the Supper and then sang a song (Matt. 26:30). I heard of one congregation where singing during the Lord’s Supper became a problem, and those who wanted to sing would not agree to leave it off altogether, but did agree to leave it off during the eating of the bread. They continued to sing during the drinking of the grape juice. That shows they know singing during the Supper is not necessary. Will those who want to sing during the Supper push their own desires ahead of the interests of the body of Christ? Surely one who really loves the church will be willing to set aside his own preferences in order to maintain unity and peace in the body of Christ.
What is the attitude of those who think we need to make these changes? Is it the same as was the attitude of L.L. Pinkerton, preacher at Midway, Kentucky who encouraged the use of the instrument? Is it the same as that of brother Addison Clark, who read the request of his brethren not to use the instrument, and then turned to the organist and said, “Play on, Miss Bertha”? Or will they take seriously the admonition of Paul in Eph. 4:1-3, “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”
In the Judgment, I would rather be in the shoes of the soldier who pierced the Lord’s side, than to stand in the shoes of the man who drove the wedge which divided His body, the church.
--Bobby Duncan via Vigil
In Matt. 13:1-9, Jesus tells a parable of a sower who went out to sow seed. “And as he sowed, some seed fell by the wayside; and the birds came and devoured them. Some fell on stony places where they did not have much earth; and they immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth. But when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. And some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them. But others fell on good ground and yielded a crop: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.”
Then, in verses 18-23, He explained the parable. He explained that the seed in the parable symbolized God’s word. The different soils in the parable represented the hearts of the different individuals to whom God’s word is preached. Some people are like the soil in the wayside or pathway, hardened and compacted. Before God’s word has a chance to penetrate, Satan comes along like a bird and steals it away. Some people are like the stony soil, where the seed germinates, but never becomes fully rooted and grounded. When problems, persecutions, misunderstandings, &c arise, such individuals quickly stumble and fall away. Some who hear God’s word are represented in the story by the seed that fell among thorns. In these individuals, the word of God is taken into a heart already filled almost to capacity with worldly cares and interests which quickly crowd out what little influence the word of God might have had. But fortunately, the word sometimes finds its way into a heart that is responsive and productive. Such a person “hears the word and understands it, [he] indeed bears fruit and produces: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.”
Within this parable and the Lord’s own explanation, Jesus takes time to explain why He taught in parables. First, it had been foretold by the Old Testament prophets that He would do so. See. Isa. 6:9-10 and Psalm 78:2. Second, He sought to impart to His disciples an understanding of spiritual principles by placing them along-side of physical matters they already understood. Third, He wanted to delay direct confrontation with His enemies until the time came for Him to lay down His life on the cross. See Matt. 13:10-17.
Also, Mark’s account shows that Jesus indicated that an understanding of the parable of the sower will help us to understand His other parables, Mark 4:13. Our English word “parable” is a transliteration of the Greek word PARABOLE. The Greek word conveys the thought of placing one thing beside another for the purpose of comparison. Greek scholar W.E. Vine warns: “Two dangers are to be avoided in seeking to interpret the parables in Scripture, that of ignoring the important features, and that of trying to make all the details mean something.” Either the speaker or the writer (or both) will supply the information needed to understand the parable, without our having to use human imagination.
--CRJ