Doxology

Bless you!

I will finish up this little series of posts dealing with vocal hygiene today by mentioning a couple more thoughts.  One guiding principle rules over all the points in this series:  vocal technique can seldom overcome bad vocal health.  Most folks struggle to sing not because of the way they treat their voices while their singing but the way they treat it when they’re not singing.

Slumber.  There’s just no replacement for a proper amount of sleep every night.  When I tell singers this I usually get the same reaction as church members do when they are told that the key to the Christian walk is prayer and bible study.  But just as your body is shaky and wobbly after long periods without sleep or inadequate sleep so are the vocal folds.  Vocal cords are muscles just like leg muscles or arm muscles.  Plus, while you’re asleep the cords are free from making contact with each other allowing any swelling to go down from a day’s use (unless you talk in your sleep a lot LOL).

On a related note, if you are hoarse after singing, REST THE CORDS!  There’s no replacement for vocal rest.  This not only includes singing and speaking but coughing, sneezing, and clearing your throat.  It’s a hard lesson to learn.  I used to be the world’s worst and doing vocal exercises to see if my voice was back.  I had to learn to be silent and trust that the cords would recover.

Allergies.  I had sinus surgery back in 2006 and I’m amazed at how positively it affecting my larynx.  My ENT showed me that I had constant, chronic infection in every sinus cavity in my head (esp. the big one between my ears!).  Scar tissue had built up from the unyielding swelling.  He told me post-surgery that it was extremely important to deal with prevention rather than cure.  So I now take a nasal inhaler every morning to inhibit mucous production and I also take an antihistamine before bed every night.  This knocks down the amount of drainage significantly.  With that being said, resistance to antihistamines occurs so I have to change up and rotate the meds periodically.

I’m sure I’ve not hit on every aspect of vocal health but hopefully these posts have helped you improve your stewardship of the only vocal instrument our Lord gave you.  Brother Music Minister, please take care of your singing voice!

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

I’m not professing to be the greatest model of vocal technique.  However, I have learned over my 25 or so years of singing that certain things will have profoundly positive or negative impact on my ability to sing effectively.

I tried to focus on the importance of hydration in my last post (not counting the TWT radio spot).  Today, I will add some items to consider.

Bad hygiene may not overcome good technique.  You may have some of the best vocal production around.  But if you’re voice is not healthy from other non-singing influences, you may be in trouble.  Wouldn’t it be great if the snap-on larynx could be developed?  I would love to be able to have one larynx I use for speaking, another for when I’m just out muddling around the house, and yet another one for when I’m singing.  Just snap one out and another one in!  Until that technology is developed (ha ha), we have to deal with the fact that we have only one instrument and we take it with us everywhere we go.  What would it be like for a guitarist if he took his guitar literally everywhere he or she went?  In what kind of shape would the guitar be?

Be careful in loud environments.  Yelling and screaming can torch vocal cords, inflaming them to the point where singing can become extremely difficult.  Obvious places where volume levels are at the highest are ballgames, concerts, rehearsals, etc.  One most overlooked place is riding in or driving a car.  The ambient decibel levels in an automobile can create situations where passengers are speaking at much higher volumes than in a quiet room.  Being aware of this can help you be more strategic in how many words you use as well as using more correct breath support and placement while in the car.  If when driving a long distance to a gig, you might even consider bringing a notepad where you can write down what you want to say. When I’m at a ballgame, I never yell or cheer and if I need to tell someone something I get as close to their ear as possible and speak as softly as I can.

Be aware of what you eat affects how you sing.  The American Diet has become, among many other things, the Great Reflux Machine.  In fact, reflux has become the diagnosis de jour for too many doctors, where IMHO I believe they cast such a diagnosis without doing enough examination.  With that being said, if you are, in fact, struggling with reflux (you may not ever have heartburn with it) you are walking around with inflamed vocal cords most of the time.  Reflux inhibitors (Prevacid, Prilosec, Nexium) will certainly help.  But another form of attack that you won’t hear about is within your own body—saliva.  Yes, you can spit your way to relief! (Forgive me.)  I have had the fight against reflux for over a decade and I have found one great weapon that works better than the aforementioned parentheticals—chewing gum.  Chewing gum increases the amount of saliva production which fights reflux amazingly well.  Try it along with all of the other standard preventatives.

I’ll have a couple more points on this subject in my next written entry.

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

Here’s today’s radio spot I did with Monk Boone at WSTS 100.9 FM.  Today we deal primarily (although in a tip-of-the-iceberg kind of way) with Worship Wars in the church as we continue talking about the role of music in the church.

Tuesdays With Tom–June 5, 2012 Click here!

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

Well, I suppose that I will wrap up this series on what ended up being a Regulative/Normative/Biblical Principle study by giving a few qualifying and summarizing bullets:

**Fight to stay in biblical balance

**Don’t make man’s interpretation the end-all to your application.  Learn from man’s teaching but never let it replace your own personal study of the scriptures.  That includes what I’ve written here.  Only let these blog entries spur you on to get into the Bible for yourself and wrestle through it.

**I’ve probably ticked off both extremes in this series.  That’s probably a good thing.  If I’m only offending one extreme it may mean that I’m on the other extreme and out of balance.

**Singing in church is in obedience to a command.  It’s not an option.  But singing is also a joyful privilege and a worshipful honor.

**Just as singing is commanded in scripture so is using instruments.  That doesn’t mean that all singing has to be with instruments but to declare instruments as illegal is in direct opposition to scripture.

**Folks who are a capella- and psalms-only proponents have to sing psalms that command the use of instruments.  What a contradiction.

**Drama may not be expressly forbidden in scripture but should be handled wisely and kept in a “non-endorsed” category.

**There should be a running list of “Endorsed Means”, “Non-Endorsed Means”, and “Forbidden Means” in your church.  For instance, preaching and singing are clearly endorsed by scripture.  Drama and video aren’t clearly endorsed nor are they expressly forbidden (at least in correct context).  Open speaking in tongues without an interpreter is clearly forbidden (1 Cor. 14:27, 28).

**Imagery should also be handled very carefully in church services.  Images of a pre-Revelation Jesus should be avoided.  Scripture doesn’t give any depiction of what Jesus looked like in the gospels and I believe that to be intentional.

**Instruments serve singing—not the other way around.

**You can’t see God-honoring ends (that pleases God) without God-sanctioned means.  Worship God while in the means and as the end.

**Music in the church must never replace preaching and teaching.  In other words, not all sanctioned means are equal.  See 1 Cor. 14

**Be careful to look upon those who are still developing in their biblical understanding but still have some blind spots with great humility and grace.  Otherwise, you reveal your own short-sightedness and immaturity.

**Treat God’s silence very carefully.  Don’t put words in His Mouth.

**There are overarching principles that must guide our dealing with God’s silence.  Body edification and love are the two chief principles.

**You can have all of your means in order and still miss God.  All of God’s means and ends are about His being treasured in the hearts of men.  Exteriors don’t guarantee Interior success.

**Interior good intentions don’t excuse unbiblical exteriors.  Obedience is better than sacrifice.  (1 Sam. 15:22)

**Unbiblical exteriors may actually be revealing bad intentions. (Rom. 1:16)

**Fight to stay in biblical balance.  (Yes, I meant to repeat myself.)

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

In my last post in this series, I focused on the central issue of means and ends in corporate worship, specifically worship through music.  That central issue is of the heart.  Having all of our means/ends correct does not guarantee that our hearts are right (in the sense of striving after the glory of God through faith).  Conversely, having our hearts right doesn’t guarantee that our means/ends are biblical.

Today, I wish to look at three reasons why our services might be out of step with God’s Word.

Ignorance.  To put it plain and simple, many pastors/ministers just don’t enough of the scriptures to know any better.  To be totally honest, in my own ministry, I’ve done things that I wouldn’t do today.  I meant well in doing them, but I now know better.  I say that meaning to convey a deep gratitude to God and to men who have pastored me through my ignorance.  I do believe my heart was right at the time, but my means (at least) weren’t.

For instance, I used to believe that I had a direct connection to leading a congregation into the “holy of holies” in worship.  I thought that as we began to sing, we were inviting God to join the service and as we sang more and more (especially with repetition) I was assisting a congregation to get closer and closer to God.

I now know that to be an unbiblical notion.  As I have studied God’s Word, I now see that it is Christ Who ushers us into the Most Holy Place through the work of His death and resurrection (Mark 15:38; Heb. 4:14-16) and that as a congregation sings it merely expresses a deeper and more concentrated affection God-ward during a song service.  That may seem to be a subtle difference of language, but it is a substantial contrast of thinking.

Immaturity.  While in ignorance (blissful? LOL) and when confronted with the truth of God’s Word that challenges our understanding of leading music—or anything else for that matter—our reaction initially may be one of offense, skepticism, or uncertainty.  Most of the time, we are so engrained in our own understanding, we can’t begin to accept a teaching that would question our own.

Because of that, many continue on in their own unbiblical way of doing things simply because they don’t yet have the maturity to humble themselves before God’s Word.  Repentance and admission of the need to correct one’s own practice is usually humbling.  Pride demands that we never admit that our own man-made means and ends are wrong.

It is this immature stage that serves as a crossroads.  Will I die to my own idols?  Will I joyfully admit that my way of doing things may not have been God’s way?  Even if my motives were sincere?  If the answer is “yes” then a great victory has been won and needed reforms can take place.  If the answer is “no” then the subject (to use C S Lewis’ term from Screwtape Letters) will thrust himself into the next category.

Iniquity.  While using unbiblical means ignorantly might not be sinful (John 9:41), using those means with knowledge is certainly sinful.  When we are reforming and being sanctified it means that we are never having arrived but always arriving.  I may be doing church music in certain ways today that I will one day repent of.  Hence the importance of “continuing in [Jesus’] words” (John 8:31).

I’ve encountered preachers and church musicians who would privately admit that they are manipulating congregations in the way they preach and sing (through the use of unbiblical means) but they would never admit it publicly.  It might be training choir members to raise their hands on cue (without heart engagement) or mood music to coerce folks to answer an alter call.  They just refuse to change because to do so would hurt their effectiveness and success (even though it may be false).

My pastor has had men who have publicly criticized him and our church for the means that we use at Grace Life Church (because my pastor and elders believe them to be clearly biblical) but those same men affirm him privately as being biblically correct.  Even as I read over the sentence I just typed, I don’t understand it.  But whoever said that sin is logical?

It is my prayer that as you read this you will search your own heart (as I am) and ask the Lord to show you where you are either immature or iniquitous and repent of any and all unbiblical means employed in your ministry (hence the warning to not harden our hearts–Heb. 4:7).  I also pray that where you simply are unaware, God would also reveal that and that your response would be of broken, joyful change.  Please pray that for me too!

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

As we continue delving into the subject of the Regulative, Normative, and Biblical Principle I left you with a crucial aspect of this entire realm that must be visited now.  It’s an area that many would rather avoid.  It’s an element that is much more easily circumvented by following forms and patterns—it’s the subject of the heart.

Many times, I wonder if elaborate templates and formalisms are developed to cut us loose from having to look at our hearts.  As I’ve written about before, getting our forms right don’t make us right with God.  Only God gets us right with God (through Jesus and His gospel).  On the other hand, I wonder if churches avoid relying entirely upon God-sanctioned means because they also don’t want to face up to the condition of their heart.  I wonder if they are ashamed to preach and sing the gospel alone because it would reveal where their church is really at spiritually.

With that being said, I would rather see a church and its leadership not have all their lyrical “ducks-in-a-row” with their song list but striving to propagate a deep humility in the way they look to God’s Word than a church that has carefully scrutinized every “jot and tittle” of their lyrics and are arrogant about having their songs biblically accurate.  We can be formally correct and spiritually incorrect.  Conversely, I would rather see a church doing their music a bit too conservatively (expression, styles, etc.) with humility than boasting in their freedoms of styles, expressions, etc. (Gal. 5:13; 1 Pet. 2:16).  We can be stylistically free and in spiritual bondage. Every effort at reform and adjustment must be done with a gospel humility and selflessness.

Another thing of note is that too many church decisions are based on dealing with lost church membership.  There have been many church models created that attempt to engage unregenerate people in worship.  The problem is that individuals who have not been supernaturally born-again cannot worship God.  They cannot worship in spirit and truth.  But many churches deviate from biblical means in order to get “goats” to act like “sheep” (Matt 25) in a service and therefore give the impression of arriving at a biblical end without using the biblical means (preaching truth, praying for the power of the Spirit) to do so.  For example, using a secular song in a church service might get a rise out of lost people but it won’t edify Christ’s Bride.

Let me also mention that trajectory can be just as important as position.  In other words, where a church is headed (fruit-bearing, maturity, reforming pulpit and music, etc.) can be as vital as where it IS today.  No church gets it all figured out overnight.  Many churches lose out on corporate sanctification because they make idols out of trying to get healthy.  As Oswald Chambers says, “Think of the enormous leisure of God”.  That is to say, God is not wringing His Hands in heaven worried about your church being more appealing to lost people or being more reformed.  He is concerned that our hearts stay humble and directed towards His Word.

When you look at the scriptures, particularly with Jesus’ dealing with specific individuals, He always cut right to the heart.  He never avoided that issue.  Using the Biblical Principle (BP) approach, which means that both leadership and laity looks at all elements of church life with humility, joy, selflessness, and love, forces all involved to deal with their own hearts.

How we land on an issue can be just as important as where we land on an issue.

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

Freeeeeeedoooooommm????

In my last post in this series, I dealt with how I believe, in looking at the scriptures, the Regulative Principle (RP) is more conservative than God.  That’s not to say that there hasn’t been much good that has come from the RP.  However, I do believe that looking at God’s word through the lens OF the RP can take a church down some dead-end roads.

That can also be said of the Normative Principle (NP).  While the RP boasts in it’s a capella-only and psalm-texts-only (in varying degrees of strictness), to name a few ascpets, the NP boasts in its “freedom” of expression.  They say “If God didn’t forbid (fill in the blank) then we’re free to use it, right?”

Well, yes and no.  Yes, God has given much freedom in corporate worship, as has been previously mentioned.  But God’s silence isn’t necessarily a blanket endorsement upon any and all means.  Many times, what we do with God’s silence reveals more about us than at any other time.

For instance, God has not said specifically that you can’t have a firetruck baptistery (as one prominent SBC church has done).  However, one would question the wisdom in so doing as to cheapen the Ordinance.  God has not said specifically that a church must never twirl their socks during worship, but one would certainly ask the question “Is this in a manner worthy of the gospel?” (see video just below).

But there are also other times where God HAS specifically spoken about the use of a particular means.  Imagery and visuals are in an entirely separate category from the auditory senses.  In Exodus 20:4, God specifically forbids the creation of any image in heaven or earth and an object of worship.  Col. 1:15 does say that Jesus is the image of the invisible God however the scriptures are very careful not to ever give us a physical description of what Jesus, as the Son of Man, looked like.  (We are given a very detailed description of Jesus, as Son of God, in John’s Revelation (Rev. 1)), however.

Why would this be?  Because, I believe, that the power of idolatry is more quickly manifested with visual images than any other sense.  If God would have given us a detailed description of Jesus’ physical features, we would be prone to making an idol out of His appearance and not His Person.  This is the primary reason why I believe (after much repentance on my part!) that pictures, dramas, movie clips, and other imagery of Jesus is, at best, unwise, and at worst, a violation of God’s Word.

This is another reason why the argument against certain music styles on the basis of particular styles being objectively “sensual” (or as one person called a particular style “aural pornography”) breaks down.  God does not speak to music styles in the same way He speaks about visual images.  Never does God say “Thou shalt not sing along with a piano” or “Thou shalt not have rap in the church”.  It’s an “apples and oranges” argument.

But in regards to music styles, God has never spoken to the endorsement of one style or a category of styles and the condemning of others.  However, just because “all things are lawful, not all things are beneficial” (1 Cor. 10:23).  So, to my NP folks, I give a word of caution:  keep in mind that even though a music style may be legal, it may not be edifying to your congregation.  God said that all things must be for mutual edification (Rom 14:19).  The use of music styles may not be an issue of right vs. wrong or legal vs. illegal but of wise vs. unwise and loving vs. unloving.

That’s why I believe the stance of Biblical Principle (BP) would guard against the somewhat unbiblical excesses seen in the NP folks.  Again, many are well-meaning.  After all, I’ve certainly done things in the church in the name of “freedom” that I now regret—even though I had the best of intentions and with the glory of God in mind….Which leads me to my next post in this series….

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

Back to our series on the Regulative/Normative Principles….In my last post in this series, I left you with the thought that it’s crucial to know when to be uncompromisingly strict and when to be uncompromisingly free.  It is my contention that the Reg. Principle (RP) folks and the Norm. Principle (NP) folks cross those lines even though they may mean very well.

I totally “get” that both the RP and the NP were simply a macro-analysis of the Bible in their inception.  However, over time, both have become, in the practice of some folks, the “laws of the Medes and the Persians” and in the minds of many almost equal to holy writ.  Today, I will speak to the RP.

Here’s where the main problem comes in.  When God spoke to the means to be used in worship He did not mean to, by default, exclude certain things.  Here’s where my dear RP folks miss it (IMHO).  They get carried away thinking that God’s silence means exclusion.  In fact, the scriptures speak very little as to what a New Testament Church service should look like.  For instance, one of the clearest verses on the topic says the following:

“When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation.  Let all things be done for edification.”  1 Cor. 14:26b

In the next seven verses (1 Cor. 14:27-33), Paul unpacks each item and gives some general guidelines as to their use in the assembly.  (I will not deal with the latter four items—they are for other endless blog entries!)  However, there is MUCH left unsaid!  I wonder what Paul would think of how our 21^st century church services look like.  But, an RP guy would read this verse and say “See!  Paul only mentions ‘a psalm’.  There’s no allowance for singing anything BUT the Psalms!”  But what about Col. 3:16?  There he mentions “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs”.  He also does the same in Eph. 5:19.

One point made by a good friend of mine (thx Jason D.)—Those who exclude anything but the psalms and all instruments other than the human voice have to sing Psalms that exhort us to praise God WITH instruments!  I’m surprised that I’ve not seen a church that tries to use only the instruments mentioned in the Psalms.  That would at least make a little more logic.

Another point—there’s no mention here of scripture reading or prayer.  Does that mean that we exclude those?  Paul does include tongues/interpretation.  I have to ask myself “what about that?”  (Don’t attack that question—it’s beside the point of this entry.)

Another point—there’s no mention of baptism or communion.  What about that?  Well, of course, we have other passages that clearly command us to observe those ordinances (Matt 28:19 and 1 Cor. 11:23-32 for example).

So, was Paul short-sighted in not specifically saying something like “each one has a psalm with an instrument”?  Should he have said “each one has a new chorus”?  Should the scriptures say “Thou shalt not use sound systems nor pianos/guitars”?  Of course not!  Just as Paul pointed out in Romans 14 there’s nothing inherently sinful in certain days or a piece of meat.  There’s nothing inherently evil in a piano, guitar, or hymn.

God only excludes things that are inherently evil.  Those things can be unbiblical lyrics, immodest clothing, visual imagery, and other things (but I’m getting ahead of myself).  His silence forces us to search our hearts rather than our electronics.  It drives us to check our motives rather than our rules.

Here’s the final thought:  it is impossible to go beyond the bounds and freedoms of scripture and avoid idolatry.

(Disclaimer—I appreciate the patience of my good RP brethren.  I have deliberately chosen not to dive into the specific tenets of the confessions of faith and documents from which the RP is based.  I try to keep this blog at a readable level and think that picking apart the language of said items would bog down the reading.  I do encourage all to do a more in-depth study on the subject including reading those documents.)

In my next entry, I will speak to the NP.

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

In my last post, I began speaking about the “interconnectedness” between the means and the end of a corporate worship service.  In regards to church music, just about every song leader/music minister/worship leader/etc. I’ve ever spoken with seems to have a similar goal or end in mind.  We virtually all want to see a congregation passionately engaged in enthusiastic singing/listening to and for Jesus.

However, it does matter how a congregation gets “there”.  Not just any old road will take a congregation to that place.  God gives us principles to follow while at the same time gives us freedoms to help us follow.  It’s on that road where many (including myself over 20+ years of leading church music) can go astray.  Here’s something to always think about:

God is the Initiator to worship.  God is the End to worship.  God gives us boundaries in worship.  Within those boundaries God gives us freedom in worship.  Because God initiates, guides, and empowers worship, He receives all the glory in worship.  The means are worship.  The end is worship.

Not only does worship directly glorify God but the means of worship glorify God.  Being too loose or too strict here can get in the way of what we all (hopefully) want.  Singing passionately glorifies God.  But responding to a music style only or lighting only or visual images only doesn’t glorify God.  Responding to the gospel does glorify God.  Even responding to seeing the rest of your church family as they respond can glorify God (if all responses are to the truth of God’s word).

Again, here’s where I can see where RP and NP folks are a bit short-sighted.  RP folks tend to allow no freedom within the clear boundaries.  NP folks see few boundaries at all.  (Keep in mind that there are more thorough RP and NP folks out there.  I’m referring more to generalities and basic practices.)

For instance, God has given us the boundary of using only scriptural lyrics (Col. 3:16; Ps. 96:1-3; plus I’ve written extensively about this here).  Within that boundary, we have the freedom to use most any song that does not violate scripture.  However, RP folks want to further restrict corporate worship (beyond what God has done) in saying that we must sing literally only Psalm texts or scripture texts.

NP folks tend to push the envelope in the other direction.  They tend to think that as long as nothing clearly unbiblical is sung then they can allow lyrics that are shallow, man-centered or vague.  As long as the lyrics mention “Jesus” or “praise God” it’s all good.  They tend to not see the clear boundaries given.  (Not all NP folks are that way—I’m trying not to paint with a broad brush here.)

What BP folks are standing for is being uncompromisingly staunch (with love and humility) on boundaries and unwavering (again, with love and humility) on freedoms within boundaries.  We do want scriptural texts but they do not have to be literal Psalm- or scripture-texts.  They may be paraphrases or exegeses of scripture, more akin to what a sermon does—although church music is NOT the same as a sermon (please do not misunderstand my point).

Knowing when to be strict and when to allow freedom is crucial to church music as well as any issue.

Brother Music Minister—know the difference!

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password:

In my last entry, I alluded to the fact that the relationship between the means in a corporate service and the ends is symbiotic.  In other words, just because you have a God-honoring “end” in mind (a congregation passionately worshiping Jesus) doesn’t mean that just any “means” are appropriate.  To say it another way, many times unbiblical means will most of the time tell me that the biblical end is not properly understood.

Before I end up sounding like a hard-lined regulative principle guy, let me be clear—there are freedoms allowed with the means we are to use in a corporate setting.  But there are also restrictions.  While I don’t hold to the regulative principle (because I believe it to be more conservative than God), I don’t hold to the normative principle completely either (because I believe it to be more liberal than God).

For those whom I may have just confused, let’s look at the two principles mentioned and then I will offer a third alternative.

Regulative Principle (RP).  This tenet says that unless the scriptures clearly indicate permission, a means to worship is not allowed.  In other words, worship is regulated strictly by only literal, approved examples given in scripture.  Within the RP camp there is disagreement, however.  The most hard-lined RP guys are “Psalms-Only” folks.  They believe that the only songs clearly permitted in church music are the 150 Psalm texts.  There are also Modified RP folks that believe that church song lyrics should only be scripture texts.  There are yet other RP folks who wouldn’t stand that conservatively on the issue.

Normative Principle (NP).  This tenet says that unless the scriptures clearly indicate non-permission, a means to worship is allowed.  In other words, if God doesn’t forbid it, it’s in play.  The most hard-lined NP guys will allow things like this.  They believe that God has given total freedom in any means necessary to engage a congregation’s affections.  There are Modified NP folks that are more conservative that would not be comfortable with the example I’ve linked but would not forbid other less-liberal examples such as regular use of mood lighting, imagery, and icons.

Here’s my concern with both camps—they unintentionally go beyond the bounds of scripture by creating extra-biblical rules.  Their intentions are very good.  All involved are after the same thing I’m after—seeing God’s Bride enamored with Jesus.  However, I fear that many times the RP and/or the NP are taking the path of Convenience over the more difficult task of wrestling through the Handbook that God gave to us.  That’s why I like to call myself a BP guy (no—not the gas station).

Biblical Principle (BP).  This tenet says that the scriptures clearly forbid some means and clearly endorse others while sovereignly remaining silent in yet other areas giving freedom all the while commanding mutual love and body edification all to the glory of God.  (I’m still trying to codify this definition and have been trying to do so for some time.  As I modify it, I will continue to share it here at the blog as well as at my Facebook page and Twitter page.)  To say it another way, the BP seeks to be conservative where God is conservative and to be liberal where God is liberal.  It seeks to be balanced , not because balance is the chief end of man but because God, in His wisdom and loving goodness can, most of the time, be best described that way.  (God forbid that I make “balance” more important than God Himself!)

I understand that I’m probably sounding high and mighty and condescending on both the RP and NP camps.  My intent is neither.  But I do believe that both the RP and NP folks, with all their sincerity and loving intentions,  have denied the sufficiency of scripture while attempting to do just the opposite (affirm scripture sufficiency).  What a paradox!  I will continue to fill all of this in over my next entries.  I guess I’ve started another series….

Share on Facebook

Twitter This

Usuario: Password: