This is the headline for an article carried in The Christian Chronicle, Vol.60, No.10, October, 2003. This issue also contained an announcement that the Oak Hills church (formerly "of Christ") has made the decision to include in its worship services, one service that incorporates the use of mechanical instruments to accompany the singing. This article's writer goes on to point out that in doing this, the Oak Hills church is following the lead of four other of the largest churches of Christ in the U.S. who have made the same decision since 2001.
Max Lucado has been "pulpit minister" of the Oak Hills church for 15 years, and his association with denominations is legendary. He has exchanged pulpits with the First Baptist Church preacher in San Antonio, been a featured speaker at Promise Keepers meetings, and not long ago engineered for the Oak Hill church a lecture program featuring speakers from different denominations in the area. Lucado is on record as believing salvation is by "faith only" and stating that baptism is an act of obedience that transpires after one has been saved, not in order to be saved.
I have a preacher friend in Arkansas, who like me, grew up on a farm before the day of tractors and farm herbicides. In his homespun wisdom, he made the observation that nothing broadens one's outlook on life so much as watching the sun rise over the back end of a mule as he follows a plow up and down cotton rows. The gem of wisdom that he passed along to me was, "When you quit plowing, that's when the weeds and grass take over." The point that I'm trying to make in telling you this is, that Oak Hills hasn't been plowed for 15 years! That's why the weeds and grass are taking over.
The writer of the Christian Chronicle article took the pulse of some whom I suppose he regards to be leading figures in the brotherhood to get their take or reaction on these large churches introducing instrumental music in the worship.
- Flavil Yeakley sees it as "five isolated tragedies."
- John Ellas sees "a small trend related to music tied to a larger trend," that being the willingness to reevaluate previous theological positions, "with many coming to different conclusions."
- Mac Lynn sees the shift in attitude about the instrument as being only one indicator and says, "Many churches are less concerned with markers that historically distinguished Churches of Christ." He lists among these "historic markers," (Mac needs to learn the difference between what is historic and what is Scriptural) singing, baptism for remission of sins, weekly communion, church organization, and men in church leadership roles. He concludes that, "Most of the markers are still in place, but the attitude toward their essentiality has changed." What he overlooked is the fact that apostasy begins with an attitude of disrespect for the authority of the Scriptures (1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 4:1-5).
- Earl Edwards says that the instrument seems to have been added on the premise that "anything not expressly condemned in Scripture is acceptable---and since instrumental music is not specifically condemned, it is OK. Such reasoning assumes that all silence is permissive (never prohibitive)." He then makes the observation, "If that were true, infant baptism and many other things would be OK as well." Edwards is correct, for there are no passages expressly forbidding sprinkling for baptism, counting beads while praying, or substituting ham for the bread in the communion service. The Hebrew writer (Hebrews 7:14) argued that silence is prohibitive, not permissive.
- Rubel Shelly says that he is "deeply committed to a cappella music," that he would "oppose anyone's effort to introduce it into our congregational worship at Woodmont Hills," and that he is "not about to champion instrumental music for the Church of Christ."
However, if you think Rubel is going to be an outspoken opponent against its use in worship, forget it. Hear him, "But when someone wants me to go further and to condemn to hell someone who doesn't agree with my view, or to criticize congregations that choose to use instruments because they believe it will assist their outreach in a community different from mine, I have no interest in pursuing the discussion." Rubel concludes, "Instrumental music and the atonement are not of the same status or consequence to the human soul and its eternal welfare."
When it comes to determining what is Scriptural and what isn't, why does Rubel make the difference "a community different from mine" and his? Could it be that his community, Nashville, is where they conducted the Clubb-Boles and Hardemen-Boswell debates that sounded death blows to the music question, and that too many memories of it remain there for him to get on the bandwagon at this time?
And how did he arrive at the conclusion that the atonement and instrumental music aren't "of the same status or consequence?" The atonement came by the blood of Christ (Romans 3:24-27; Ephesians 1:7), and we receive it by "walking in the light" (1 John 1:7), which equals obeying the "law of faith" of Romans 3:27. Since there is no divine authorization for instrumental music in worship, one cannot use it and walk in the light, and when he ceases to do so, he is no longer cleansed by the blood that is essential to atonement; so how does he arrive at the conclusion that they aren't of equal importance? One thing is certain, he didn't use the Scriptures.
The remainder of the Christian Chronicle article cites reasons given by churches that have introduced the instrument into at least one of their services. The article's author concludes, "The churches that have added instrumental services cite a common motivation--evangelism and outreach. All report increases in attendance since the switch." This is what happens when we measure growth in numbers. We cease to be interested in a "thus saith the Lord" and become more concerned about what packs the pews.
Following Constantine's conversion (?) and his issuance, in 313 A.D., of the Edit of Toleration, which said that no longer could a person be persecuted because of his religion, a great influx of people came into the church. This massive growth (?) wasn't through conversion, but due to the popularity given Christianity when the Emperor embraced it. What this unconverted mass did was furnish material for the apostasy that was already at work in the church, thereby expediting the formation of Catholicism.
The article closed with Ellas' observation that a trend is at work among us, and that those "who would like to blame evangelism, relevancy, and meeting needs as the culprits for the introduction of instruments miss the real theological shift that has taken place," (emphasis mine, lb).
Donnie Rader once related visiting with Guy N. Woods in Nashville not long before his death, and as they talked about the church, Donnie asked Brother Woods what he saw as the greatest threat to the church at the present time. Brother Woods replied, "Our loss of respect for the need for divine authority."
This shift began in the late 40s and 50s during the controversy over institutionalism. Can local churches build and maintain benevolent organizations for their work in this field? When the smoke from this controversy settled, N. B. Hardeman and G. C. Brewer pointed out that the same Scriptures that allowed churches to subsidize benevolent organizations would allow them to subsidize educational institutions, and in came the colleges.
After WWII, a revival of interest in evangelizing nationally and internationally led to the resurrection of the defunct Texas "receiving, disbursing, and managing" cooperative church plan formed in 1867 to avert churches from evangelizing through a missionary society. Under this plan, many churches sent funds to one, whose elders oversaw sending preachers into different places to evangelize. When it reappeared in the late 1940s, it was called the sponsoring-church plan, but it worked the same way as the Texas plan. While this plan averted the mistake of forming another organization, such as the ACMS (American Christian Missionary Society) and the Texas State Missionary Society, it established an unscriptural cooperative arrangement by having the elders of the sponsoring church oversee the evangelistic work of churches in which they were not the overseers (1 Peter 5:1,2). Little changes over a period of time develop into unanticipated trends that lead to apostasies.
ACMS was formed in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1848, and the battle began in the restoration movement over whether other organizations could be formed to do the evangelistic work of local churches. It was conceded that the local church was the only organization given the church; however, it was argued that the Scriptures were silent regarding the organization of the kingdom as a whole. Therefore, we were at liberty to form another organization through which God's people, as the kingdom, could function. Hence, the erroneous conclusion that the silence of the Scriptures is permissive opened the gate for other innovations to follow.
As early as 1851, some began to advocate the use of instruments of music in worship, but the earliest record of its introduction is in the Midway, Kentucky church where L. L. Pinkerton preached. Pinkerton had been a staunch advocate of ACMS and justified bringing the instrument into worship on the grounds that their singing had degenerated into such screeching and brawling that it scared the rats away from the church building. A melodeon was introduced to help in song practice and from that worked its way into the worship. The silence of the Scriptures and expediency were used for its justification.
Youth and ladies' groups were formed to promote and raise money for ACMS. Titles, such as "Reverend," began to be attached to preachers' names. Infant church membership and women preachers followed in some of the more liberal churches, until finally in 1906, the Bureau of Religious Census recognized a difference between churches of Christ and Christian Churches. The trend that created the division began sixty years earlier, and the real culprit that caused it was a theological shift in attitude toward the Scriptures.
History is repeating itself, and churches of Christ are again witnessing the same things. In the 1940s, some churches opened the door to benevolent organizations. With the benevolent organizations came colleges, missionary societies (such as Herald of Truth), the World Bible School, and a host of other medical and educational organizations. Each of these has been promoted as a better way to spread the gospel.
Now, instrumental music is coming. Youth rallies and ladies conferences are legend, and advocates, such as Jeff Wallings, are calling for women preachers. We already have women "missionaries." We're in the midst of a full-bloom apostasy, and as we look at the changes taking place, we're missing the fact that the real culprit is "the theological shift in our emphasis on, and need for, Scriptural authority." "And whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him." (Colossians 3:17)
Brother Blasingame has done an excellent job of showing the direction in which history has taken the church, and where the "21st century thinkers" are endeavoring to lead God's people. It is so sad to see what so many of our brethren do not realize--that these so-called "modern thinkers" are not really as "modern" as they think they are.
Over and over, history bears witness to the mess in which man finds himself when he leaves God's plans in favor of his own human reasoning.
- It didn't work when Israel thought they needed an earthly king. Please read 1 Samuel 8. After God warned them where the king would lead them, they ignored the warning and still wanted the king. The divided kingdom bore testimony to the terrible choice they made.
- It didn't work when King Uzziah sought to burn incense in the temple of God. He died a leper.
- It didn't work when Nadab and Abihu thought "strange fire" was as good as the fire commanded by God.
I think you see the point!
Modern thinkers believe the "numbers" justify leaving the "old paths of truth" for the "new thinking of the masses." Sadly, they will get exactly what they deserve--churches that stand for nothing and accept anything! Without clear lines, all truth will be up for debate and a vote. The church will give the masses what they want instead of what they need. God's thinking will become obsolete to the "modern thinker" of the 21st century. Unfortunately, many brethren will follow this destructive course because they're just too lazy to examine the book and see what it says. Maybe they agree with what one liberal-minded person once told me: "I'm just tired of being in the minority." I intend to stand with the minority just as long as the minority follows the Lord.
Yes, I'm aware that the makeup of God's people is changing to fit the times. We can fight this trend by being unashamed to follow the patterns in God's book, not making excuses, not apologizing, and ignoring numbers as proof of spiritual success. We must stand squarely and soundly on the good book, never moving from its teachings and commands. We must always be willing to discuss our differences and never be haughty or arrogant about truth.
Dear reader, times are changing. A different wind is blowing among our brethren. I pray they will come to their senses before it's too late. Personally, I am committed to the belief that an eternal God could leave His creation a plan that will work no matter how long the earth lasts. I believe this to be so because the Creator must be greater than His creation. What could be easier to understand? (KMG)