Music Style Isn’t a Christian Liberty (part three)
Attraction of Musical Style
I compare biblical analysis, uncovering, of musical style, to taking away your dog’s food bowl. He’s man’s best friend, but he will growl and maybe bite if you try to take away his chow. It is a lust issue. People react with emotion, very often anger, when someone criticizes their favored musical style. You’ve seen it here in the comment section, and I’ve been relatively tame about this in this series.
For decades, I’ve said that people’s understanding of God changes more from their music than if you swapped their doctrinal statement. Someone must imagine God and music shapes that imagination of God. This occurs in more than just the sentimental and superficial contemporary Christian music churches. It also happens in other various evangelical, Baptist, independent Baptist, and unaffiliated Baptist churches. They strongly affect the church’s view of true spirituality, giving spiritual impressions through the feelings they manipulate with their music.
Becoming How You Worship
Someone’s god becomes how he worships, whether individually or corporately. Everything for the believer is an offering to God, because his worship is perpetual. The musical style shapes someone’s imagination of God. God then conforms to what he allows or accepts. How important is this musical style? It takes ahold of someone and he can’t give it up. He tries to keep both, God and the musical style.
For someone to present his body a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1), which he will if he is a brother who experienced the mercies of God as described in Romans 1-11, he will obey the command, “Be not conformed to this world.” For true and perpetual individual worship to occur, someone will obey that command. No man can serve two masters. You know who his master is, based upon his unwillingness to give up his pet music style that feeds his lust and very often pride.
Not Out of Preference
As you read this piece, you might consider that this position arises from a strong preference for sober, reverent musical style. I just like it better and I want everyone else to follow my preferences. I have a view of the world that comes from personal taste and since that’s the world I want to live in, I want to conform everyone else to that preference. You would be totally wrong.
I grew up with worldly music of a particular style. This musical style matches with the culture my parents raised me. My family didn’t listen much to music on the radio, but we watched the television show, Hee-Haw, and had records of Eddie Arnold, Glenn Campbell, and Henry Mancini. If music did play on the radio, this was it. I remember staying up all night with a friend to hear Ray Stevens’s number one song play on the radio, The Streak, in 1974. This changed and it wasn’t because I heard preaching or teaching on the subject. The Lord transformed my heart.
In what we called middle school, fifth and sixth grade, the high school in my town put on Jesus Christ Superstar andthe school required us to go. When I saw and heard it, I knew it was wrong. I would call it “blasphemous.” My parents said nothing about it to me, but I didn’t like it. I sat in my seat for the entire performance with my fingers in my ears, looking down at the floor. No one told me to do that. It was a choice I made on my own, obviously with the work of the Lord with and on me, and because of what I thought about Jesus as guided by the Bible.
Carried Along by Musical Style
Musical style relates to a person’s understanding of true spirituality. The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 12:1-2 writes to the Corinthian church:
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. 2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
Verse one is literally, “concerning spirituals.” You could say, “concerning spirituality.” The Corinthians were carried away and led by something other than the Holy Spirit. What does that? Many different influences or factors carry someone away unto something that is not of God. These Corinthians, however, said it was the Holy Spirit, even though it wasn’t. What is of the Holy Spirit must match with what scripture says about the Holy Spirit. It won’t be worldly or fleshly if it is the Holy Spirit.
At the same time, people will give credit to a feeling produced by musical style to be the moving of the Holy Spirit. They say they are borne along by the Holy Spirit, when it is the fleshly moving of the musical style that gives this feeling. That is not how the Holy Spirit works. It also is not a true manifestation of the Holy Spirit. The attraction to the worldly or fleshly musical style does not conform to characteristics or attributes of the Holy Spirit.
The Pride of Musical Style
I’ve been in settings where someone used his abilities with musical instruments and voice to produce a feeling with musical style. It moved people. They liked it. All the time he says it’s the Lord. This confuses true spirituality with this feeling. It’s not fruit of the Holy Spirit, just given credit as the Holy Spirit, like what occurred in Corinth. People very often hunger for some validation or vindication of spirituality and the feeling arising from musical style gives it to them. It easily replaces true spirituality and also promotes the person who uses it to produce the feeling.
Musical style easily exalts the one who causes it, especially when it is a popular style that moves someone along by a feeling. It’s easier than true spirituality, something that a man can do. It is a natural thing that stands in the wisdom of men, which Paul enunciates earlier in 1 Corinthians 1-3. To prepare people for this experience that counterfeits true spirituality, they accommodate and accept popular, fleshly musical styles of the world. Those styles fabricate feelings, that very often make the listeners happy. This happiness is a cheap imitation or replacement for joy.
How serious is confusing professing Christians about true spirituality? It causes great damage with the way that it fools people. Those leading in it are hurting their audience, not helping, while receiving credit for help. This affects scriptural discernment, harming it or removing it. Musical style is also a gateway to counterfeit, idolatrous religious experiences. Some call it, and truly, “strange fire,” after the idolatry of Nadab and Abihu.
More to Come
Why Haven’t Written Many Books, But Have Written Much Online
Books
Sound Music or Sounding Brass
In 1996, I wrote the book, Sound Music or Sounding Brass: The Issue of Biblically Godly Music. I won’t get into the details as to why I wrote it, but that was my first book. After writing it, I found out that for me writing a book was the easy part. What was hard was laying out and printing a book and then selling it. Writing, I would judge, was thirty percent of a book, and the rest of it at least seventy percent. Despite that, I took on a bigger project for book number two.
Thou Shalt Keep Them
Since writing a book was easy, but publishing it was hard, I took a different tact for book number two, first published in 2003. Through the years of my life, I had read historical Baptist biblical books written by numbers of different pastors. I believed I should write a biblical theology of the perfect preservation of scripture. However, I planned on recruiting Baptist pastors to write the book with me as the editor. This group of men and I wrote the book, Thou Shalt Keep Them. I wrote several chapters and edited the whole book, now in its second edition.
When you have several authors, you also get several promoters. Men, who write in the book, will help sell the book. If you don’t have a network for selling books, like most independent Baptists do not, you’ll have a hard time getting the book out there for people to read. That is why you wrote it, right? It isn’t to say, “I have a book.”
Originally the plan was to write a second volume of Thou Shalt Keep Them (TSKT) that would explain the historical aspect of preservation, making application of the preservation passages. It would answer, how was the teaching fulfilled? I’ve written a lot about that here at the blog. The second book, which could still occur, would add some chapters on biblical passages addressing the preservation of scripture and then the realization of God’s promises of preservation through history. It would explain how preservation of God’s Word occurred. TSKT has sold more than any of my books.
A Pure Church
Not too long afterwards, our church in California started a conference, The Word of Truth Conference. Men would come and every year, mostly several years, preach on a particular theme. What was unique about the conference was that the preachers would also write an accompanying chapter for a book. After three years of the conference and another year of writing and editing, in 2012 our church produced the book, A Pure Church: A Biblical Theology of Ecclesiastical Separation.
Like Thou Shalt Keep Them, A Pure Church dealt with the major or classic passages on scriptural topic or a historical doctrine from the Bible. It was written over a period of three years, then edited, formatted, printed, and then sold. It is an important work on the doctrine of ecclesiastical separation.
Other Books
In 1991, before I ever wrote my first book, I wrote a discipleship manual for our church, entitled, Disciplines for Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. We never published it, just copied it on a copy machine. It is a thirty week discipleship with lessons and homework for the thirty chapters. A couple of years ago, we published that discipleship book and its teacher edition to use for discipling new saints in Christ. It is available to buy and use for anyone who wants it (write to here to get it).
The Word of Truth Conference dealt with three other doctrines: Apostasy, the Gospel, and then Sanctification. Men finished all the chapters on apostasy, but the book wasn’t finished. All of the men involved did not complete their chapters. I, however, put all of my chapters into a book format, and have a book ready to print and distribute. It is about one hundred pages and entitled, Lying Vanities. It is not yet published (I’ll let you know if and when).
Another book that I finished writing several years ago, maybe a decade, and formatted for a book, is Fashion Statement: A Biblical Theology of Dress or Appearance. It is a 204 page book that deals with six different principles of dress or appearance. It also has not been published. Our church finished all the chapters for a book on the Gospel, entitled, The One, True Gospel, but it isn’t published either despite a lot of effort. It’s over 300 pages on the gospel. Many chapters were written on sanctification for a book on that subject too, but not finished and not published.
This Blog
Three books that I’ve written are out and I have not continued the effort necessary to see more books published. Why? Since 2005, I have written online almost every week, usually twice a week and sometimes more. I do that here at this blog, What Is Truth?
When I push the publish button on a blog post, it’s done. That 70 percent part is over. Instantly people can read all over the world. Over a thousand a day click on this blog. Every day on average, over 1,000. For one book, just one, I get an order, print it, retrieve an envelope I paid for, address it, get the book from the box, put it in and then seal the envelope, drive to the post office, and pay for shipping of that book to somewhere. For every book, rinse and repeat. Over and over.
I put in time writing here. People then read. It’s free here. That’s true, but I don’t write to make any money. If I was going to write to make money, I would write books that people wanted to read. I could do that, that is, write fiction. It is not my goal to make money from writing. For all these reasons and more, I put my time into writing online, because it is a better use of my time. It’s hard to justify the writing of books for me. I don’t anticipate my book topics becoming bestsellers.
Reasoning for the Blog Over Books
Don’t get me wrong. I’ll probably still publish some books. Maybe you could help motivate me to do that. People have called wanting the other books that are not yet published. I understand the happiness of having a hard copy, pages in the hand, and turning. Even if you don’t read, you look at the shelf and there it is with all the other books. You own that book. I believe I have far, far more impact writing here for free than putting out hard copies of books. It’s easier for me and leaves me more time.
I don’t like the seventy percent part of writing, the legwork, the busy work. Some people have had me edit their books. I can edit. It’s good to have an editor. It is one of the hardest things to do, edit a book, especially someone else’s writing. You’ve got to believe in and respect that person to spend that time. Most people don’t want editing. When you do it, it is a sort of thankless job. That is part of the process of getting books out too. It is difficult, and I don’t know if I want to spend my time like that.
At this point, I could have published many, many books, when you consider all the writing I’ve done here on this blog. I believe this is better time spent for me in the area of writing. People read here. I put in far less time writing here than I would if I had to do the whole publication process, which is very difficult. I’m open to arguments against what I’m saying. Maybe you could persuade me.
Music Style Isn’t a Christian Liberty (part two)
People would like the music issue for churches to go away. They can take various avenues to accomplish this, one of which is by making musical style a Christian liberty. A progression (or regression) occurred to get here. It started a long time ago.
Regression of Musical Style
One, many musical styles are sinful, wrong, and rejected, so distinguishing between the sacred music and profane music, accompanied by belief in objective meaning of music and objective beauty.
Two, revivalists pragmatically use popular music forms to attract a bigger audience for apparent numerical success and this blurs the distinctions between sacred music and profane music.
Three, even though professing Christians keep a breadth of difference between what is godly and ungodly in musical style, they shrink the margin of difference and make musical style an instrument for numerical growth.
Four, people question the objective meaning of music or objective beauty, advocating relativist aesthetic value.
Five, successors of revivalism, Charismatics, originate Charismatic worship music that confuses feelings caused by musical style with a spiritual, ecstatic religious experience.
Six, lovers of popular or rock musical styles conceive of rock music and begin a contemporary Christian music (CCM) movement, imitating Charismatic worship.
Seven, Christianity divides on the issue of musical style with those rejecting the CCM movement marginalized as religious fundamentalists.
Eight, larger, more popular evangelicalism accepts CCM and rejects objective meaning of music or objective beauty, categorizing musical style as a Christian liberty.
Nine, most fundamentalists stop preaching and warning about CCM, leaving very few to no churches standing against sinful musical styles.
What Influences Liberty for Musical Style
If musical style is a Christian liberty, then musical style cannot have objective meaning. Musical style must be meaningless, even if musical style is extremely important to church leaders and attendance. Both good scriptural and natural arguments exist that say that music can be moral or immoral. Musical style isn’t neutral.
The progression toward the acceptance of all musical styles happened in increments, but that did not debunk or undo the original arguments for objective meaning of musical styles or objective beauty. In many ways, like a lot of other issues of application of scripture, professing believers capitulated for various reasons. The less a church is against, the bigger it can become, what many would call a big-tent approach.
Churches that still rejected popular or rock musical styles were smaller and became even smaller as more churches accepted any and every musical style. The numbers translate to perceived success, including monetary. Success begets even greater success because success attracts even more people. Older church members see churches losing young people over musical style. Like has occurred many times in church history, the older generation concedes to the younger. The question is not, does it please God?
Sinfulness of Musical Styles
According to scripture, no one has liberty to sin (Romans 6:1)? From reading 1 Corinthians 6-10, the section on Christian liberty, more guides liberty than just whether something is sinful. The Apostle Paul takes the Corinthians through a gauntlet of considerations to determine what is right to do. Most evangelicals have just ignored this particular aspect of Christian liberty. They focus on whether something is permissible and not whether it could cause someone to stumble or fall (1 Corinthians 8:9-13, 10:12).
If a musical style violates a biblical command, then it is a sin. What could someone consider from scripture as to the sinfulness of many musical styles?
- Think on that which is lovely (Philippians 4:8).
- Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul (1 Peter 2:11).
- Be not conformed to this world (Romans 12:2)
- Deny worldly lust (Titus 2:11).
- Worship God in the beauty of holiness (Psalm 96:9).
Disobeying any of these is sin. Since music is itself its own language, another factor is “corrupt communication,” which Ephesians 4:29 forbids. That verse doesn’t give any specifics as to what corrupt communication is. Like these other verses, people must apply the verse. Most of the Bible requires application in order to live what God said. This includes music. When someone applies the Bible in a rightful and even historical manner, he should conclude the sinfulness of most musical styles.
Music Style Isn’t a Christian Liberty
Music Has Meaning and It Is Moral or Immoral
One could argue that musicians are the most popular people in the world. Three of the most followed people on instagram are musicians, four of the top ten on twitter (X). Rick Warren in his Purpose Driven Church book says that choice of music style for a church is the biggest, most important determiner of the numerical growth of the church. If musical style matters so much to people in the world, how is it that it really means nothing as many in the church address it with importance? Of course, music, not just the words, mean something. Through various passages, scripture indicates this.
Music itself communicates and almost anyone and everyone in their heart of hearts know this. They know it like “self-evident” truth. In this post, I’m not going to try to prove that, because I’ve done it so many times before. Several very good arguments from scripture and then ones based upon natural law say that music has objective meaning, like words or a language. It can in itself communicate something moral or immoral. It is not amoral. This is why even rock musicians call just their music itself “sexy.” Can music be sexy? Yes. Everyone knows that, and if they do not, its just because they’re not thinking about it at all.
If musical style can be immoral, it can be sinful.
Christians Have Liberty
I believe in Christian liberty. Paul argues for it in 1 Corinthians 6-10. That section of 1 Corinthians helps someone understand what is a liberty.
The Apostle Paul uses several words to communicate liberty, the word “liberty” one of them (7:39, 8:9, 10:29). He also says, “lawful” (6:12–twice, 10:23–twice) and “power” (9:4, 5, 6, 12–twice). Actually, “liberty” and “power” translate the same Greek word (exousia, 8:9, 9:4). If you look at BDAG, the premier lexicon, the usage of exousia is a “freedom of choice” or “right.” The word “right” isn’t in the King James Version of 1 Corinthians 6-10, but Paul uses exousia like that, even though it has several other types of uses.
So let’s ask a question using the term, “right.” Does a Christian have the right to listen to any type of musical style? Or perhaps a couple other different kind of questions. Does a Christian have the right to use whatever musical style he wants for worship? And, does a Christian have the right to allow for another Christian to listen to whatever musical style he wants or another church to use whatever musical style it wants for worship?
Musical Style Is Not a Christian Liberty
I’m saying that music style isn’t a Christian liberty. To prove that, I have to understand what is a Christian liberty, or put the way I’ve discussed, I have to understand the rights of a Christian. “Rights” are a popular subject, especially whether human rights or civil rights.
Thomas Jefferson maybe more than anyone made “rights” a popular subject. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson mentions the Creator endowing all men with certain inalienable rights. The way he uses the term in the Declaration is close to how Paul uses exousia in some of the cases in 1 Corinthians, especially chapter 9, when he says he and others have the right to marry or the right to forbear working. The King James Version says “power” and not “right,” but that’s what Paul meant.
No One Has Liberty To Sin
Liberty in 1 Corinthians 6-10 relates to the grace of God. With how Paul writes and talks, he might ask if grace gives someone liberty to sin. He does ask that very question in Romans 6:1. Is grace about the freedom to do what we want to do, essentially to do what we desire, what someone might describe as what we lust after? Believers don’t have the right to sin. It might be a legal right based on secular laws, but God didn’t and does not give anyone the right to sin.
Jefferson said that God gives men rights. Sin isn’t one of them though.
Based on the application of many different verses of scripture, playing or involvement with a certain style of music is sin. Even choosing to listen to those styles is sin. Furthermore, the playing or involvement with a certain style of music can violate guidelines for Christian liberty.
More to Come
God and His Gospel Preaching to Cain, Who Rejects It
Genesis 4 chronicles the beginnings for the first family after the fall of man into sin. The first couple of verses portray positives for the parents and their children.
1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord. 2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
So much could be said here. Here I write a day after Mother’s Day, the mother of all living conceives and bares a son. Not long before, Adam and she hid from God, ashamed and frightened after having rebelled against His command. It looked hopeless for those two and the end for all humanity. Not so fast though. God promised Eve a seed that would crush the head of the serpent, obviously Satan.
At the start of chapter 4, she maybe got that man from the Lord already. But no. She believed though. And then came along his brother, Abel. The family thrived with the raising of domesticated animals and farming the soil. God gave life, blessed with children, and provided for needs.
In light of what God says later to Cain, one should assume that God informed the two boys His regulations for worship of Him. But this is what we read in verses 3-4:
3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. 4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
Both Cain and Abel brought offerings to the Lord, but only Abel and His offering, the firstlings of his flock, pleased the Lord. Much later the author of Hebrews writes in 11:4:
By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
Faith comes by hearing the Word of God, which was then the basis for Abel offering a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. This testifed that Abel was righteous. Like 10:39 said — he believed to the saving of his soul. God has pleasure in Him (10:38), but without faith it is impossible to please God (11:6). Abel believed, was saved, but not Cain. Later John the Apostle writes in his first epistle (3:11-12):
11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. 12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.
As he was of the wicked one, love for his righteous brother was absent from Cain. God didn’t approve of Cain’s offering and rather than look to get it right, Cain got angry and pouted. Like a missionary, God confronted Cain in Genesis 4:6-7:
6 And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
God told Cain. It didn’t have to be this way for him. He could trust God, acquiesce to His Words and will, and be accepted. God reached out to Cain in a loving way. He showed him the path of goodness, the road to take. We know from the next verse, that Cain rejected it.
Even after Cain murdered his brother, and the Hebrew says it was premeditated, murder in the first degree, God visited Cain with an offer to confess and repent beginning in verse 9:
And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?
This reads like God gave Cain one more opportunity and Cain just lied to Him. When God visited Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, they repented. Their son would not.
In Genesis 4, God evangelizes Cain. He preaches to him the good news of salvation, something his brother Abel already received. Cain is an example of a typical unbeliever, who turns away from the Lord and His love. May we join God in the same ministry of reconciliation.
Crucial to a Gospel Presentation: Explain Belief (part eight)
Part One Part Two Part Three Part Four Part Five Part Six Part Seven
Except a Man Be Born Again
Jesus said, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). Someone cannot see the kingdom of God unless he is born again. At least two ideas exist here. One, born again, and, two, the kingdom of God. The two ideas relate to one another, which is why Jesus uses them in the same sentence with Nicodemus.
Something is wrong with every man that requires new birth and that same thing also keeps him from the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God, one could say, is the carrot in Jesus’ statement. A person can’t continue like he is, if he expects to see the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is some kind of a draw, but kingdom also assumes a King. I’ve addressed that already in this series, but someone who is in the kingdom of God requires a complete change of nature, which is the new birth.
Only new people, changed through new life or conversion, get into the kingdom and those are people who would want Jesus as King, not their selves as king. You’ve got to want both, that change and then that outcome, the kingdom. Most people do not want that outcome. A big part of this is that they don’t know God’s future plan for earth. To join in that future plan, someone must get with the program, understand what God is going to do. He can’t continue as is. He’s got to believe in that plan, want it.
What God Has in Store
A person must believe what God has in store and opt in for that. People may want a religious experience, but they most often do not want that program. This means they are idolaters, who are dead to God. Their god, instead of the one and only true God, is their own selves and their kingdom is their own little fictional personal fiefdom. What they want is for God to enhance their own program, not give them a new, as in different, one. This is not believing in Jesus Christ.
The future visible kingdom of God on earth starts with the second coming of Jesus Christ. For a person to believe in the kingdom and be born again to see it, he must receive the doctrine of the second coming. If you do not believe in the second coming, you do not believe in Jesus. Jesus is already judging, which leaves everyone condemned who does not believe unto the life of God, eternal life (John 3:18). But He will also continue to judge the world, its nations and people, to return the world to the purpose for which He created it.
The Crux
The word “crux” means essential matter or the heart of the issue and it is literally Latin for “cross.” The cross is the crux. It stands at the supreme juncture of one’s life, a crossroad. You can’t move on to God’s will for your life without coming to the cross of Christ. Believing in Him, that divine Person, sees His hanging there between heaven and earth as the sole mediator between himself and God. His death on the cross is just part of the plan, because the plan culminates in a Kingdom with this same man, the God-man, as King.
The saving part of the cross transports someone to a future kingdom. Jesus on the cross is saving people unto that kingdom. When He was born, all the various major characters in HIs birth story exclaimed Him as King. The magi brought gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Reception of Him was the reception of a King, which included His work on the cross. Before Jesus judges the world immediately previous to His second coming, the Father and everyone in the heavenly throne room deem Him, the Lamb, worthy to redeem the lost world.
Worthy Is the Lamb
Because the Lamb was slain and has made those believing in Him to be kings and priests, He is worthy to receive power and strength and honor and glory and to claim the inheritance of all things. Belief in Jesus Christ trades you as king for Jesus as King and your own kingdom for His kingdom. With that comes the faith that Jesus did and will do everything for salvation — His death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and return to the earth to judge the world and set up a kingdom.
Someone to whom you explain salvation or preach the gospel first of course needs to hear of his dying need for salvation. Crucial though, crucial also a word that comes from “cross” or “crucifixion,” is knowing what it means to believe in Jesus Christ. Sometimes you can’t give all the information or truth that you want to give. However, the goal is giving as much as possible, so that a person understands what it means to believe in Jesus Christ.
When I get to the end in explaining belief in Christ with a person, nearly every time, my audience will say he believes it is the truth. So then most people get saved then, right? No, despite the understanding, most people still will not. Part of the reason they do not believe in Christ is because they do understand. They understand it and they don’t want it, at least yet. Very few after hearing it, that don’t want it, will finally believe in Jesus Christ. Nicodemus in John 3 didn’t believe the first or the second time. Finally, he did believe and some will.
The Time In Which We Live in 2025
Eras or Epochs
Many describe this era or epoch of time to be one of chaos and turmoil. It sends tremors into the present world order. The argument against an obvious shift in culture is its destabilization. What is really happening today?
When you open your Bible to its last book, Revelation, you see the unveiling of the future final act for planet earth. History comes full circle with the judgment of the Lord Jesus Christ on earth. Jesus starts in Revelation 6:1-2 with what I see as a bit of a surprise in His undoing of a first seal on a vitally important scroll. These verses read:
1 And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see. 2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.
A man on a white horse is the first horseman of the apocalypse. Who is this? It is a fake peace, or a “peace, peace,” when there is no peace. One would not be wrong to say the one on the horse is the future Antichrist. “Peace” becomes the instrument for the future wrath of God on earth. It isn’t chaos, turmoil, tremors on the world order, or destabilization. Peace brings the beginning of the end. The Antichrist goes “forth conquering and to conquer” using peace. Peace is the primary weapon.
Fake Peace
Fake peace or just getting along to get along seems to be a most unlikely culprit. It hearkens back to the many speeches yearning for world peace. People want peace. Future judgment begins with offer and the allure of peace. This reminds me of the judgment of Romans 1 that the Apostle Paul describes as “God gave them up” and “God gave them over” (Romans 1:26-28) to what they want. That’s His judgment. People want to be left alone with their own desires.
On the other hand, what does Jesus bring? He says in Matthew 10:34:
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
The Antichrist comes bringing peace, what the Lord sees as turning men over and giving them up. Toward the beginning of the Olivet Discourse, Jesus says in Matthew 24:3-5:
3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? 4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
The deception is fake peace. This flushes out the enemies of the one and true Christ. Peace is a lie, a very common lie. Satan is the Father of lies (John 8:44). It’s how he rolls.
Chaos and Turmoil
But today again is chaos and turmoil, you know. Division. Separation between people. Strong borders. Promotion of national interests, not global ones. People can speak out and say scriptural things now apparently too, even if it brings chaos and turmoil. What’s happening?
The Apostle Paul in 2 Timothy 3:1 writes:
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
We are in the last days. What are these perilous times about which Paul speaks? The word “times” here is kairos, and it is not chronological. It speaks of an epoch, age, period, or season. Paul’s description is of worsening seasons or epochs of time in the last days.
Reprieve and Opportunity
What occurs is a bad period, followed by something of a reprieve or an opportunity, that when lost brings a worse era. I believe we are in a time of opportunity. This is not a good time. It is one of those periods in between bad times if the opportunity is lost. This is all based upon the providence of God. It is not a time of peace right now. There is an available fight, which one could characterize as a kind of open door. It is not a good time. A better way of seeing it is following a really bad occasion or circumstance.
This era is not a time to look for peace and I’m talking about the truth and our culture. It is not a time for shyness, but to take advantage of this moment in between periods. Even if the next era is worse, which is the usual pattern, this one is an opportunity. This is how I would characterize it. People who hold to scripture need to tell the truth, the whole truth. Let everyone know what God says without apology. Now is a time for this.
“Perilous times shall come.” Those times come. They are epochs, because some kind of separation or opportunity follows each of them. I don’t think anyone should take credit for this present open door, because it doesn’t read or seem like anything any human could have invented. I wouldn’t have. It seems it would have come in a different way. This is what we’ve got though and if it’s anything, it’s an opportunity to take advantage with the truth.
Does Doctrine Matter?
President James Monroe on December 2, 1823 first communicated the “Monroe Doctrine” in his State of the Union address to Congress. The Monroe Doctrine viewed any foreign intervention in the Western Hemisphere, the Americas, as a potentially hostile act against the United States.
One might ask Spain and Japan whether the Monroe Doctrine matters. These nations acted in violation of the aforesaid doctrine, which was met by a strong military response from the United States, leading to the Spanish-American War and U. S. involvement in World War Two.
THE SUPERIORITY OF BIBLICAL DOCTRINE
No doubt biblical doctrine matters more than the Monroe Doctrine, because God articulates that doctrine. 2 Timothy 3:16 reads: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine.” When the United States calls something a “doctrine,” this is tantamount to a sacrosanct law. The Bible treats doctrine the same, as seen in Proverbs 4:2: “For I give you good doctrine, forsake ye not my law.”
The Bible constitutes the law of God, God the Lawgiver and also the Judge. When God said to Adam, “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it” (Genesis 2:17), that is doctrine. Furthermore, the doctrine of the Lord said, “for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (also 2:17). The consequences for violating that doctrine were far worse for mankind than violating the Monroe Doctrine for the Spanish.
THE AUTHORITY OF BIBLICAL DOCTRINE
Does doctrine matter? It depends whose doctrine. After Jesus ended His Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5 to 7, Matthew explained in 7:28-29 that “when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: “For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” Jesus had authority. If He said it, that settled the doctrine.
Jesus later described the doctrine of the Pharisees and scribes in Matthew 15:9: “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Doctrine didn’t matter if it were only the commandments of men. A mere commandment or a lesser teaching of men has no ultimate authority. Earthly bodies may punish for transgressing their temporal edicts, but they hold no sway over eternal repercussions. God does not accept their vain and profane worship.
On the other hand, Jesus could say in the first verse of the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:3, “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Understood with this doctrine of Jesus was the converse doctrine: “Cursed are those not poor in spirit: for theirs is not the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus spoke doctrine with like authority in John 3:15, “That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” The opposite of believing is not believing and of eternal life is eternal death. Maybe nothing matters more to a human being than the true doctrine of salvation.
THE ABSOLUTE TRUTHFULNESS OF BIBLICAL DOCTRINE
True Doctrine Versus False Doctrine
More than any quality, what distinguishes biblical doctrine as divine doctrine, versus the mere doctrine of men, is its absolute truthfulness. Scripture is truth (John 17:17). You can always believe what God says because it is always true. Always. God cannot lie (Titus 1:2).
As much as the true doctrine of God’s Word matters through all eternity, it also contrasts with false doctrine disseminated by false teachers, who at the same time claim to be true ones. False doctrine matters too, but for the opposite reason. Also, it matters through all eternity, but instead in harmful, destructive ways.
The Bible calls false doctrine, “heresy.” The English word “heresy” transliterates a Greek word, heresis, which means “division” or “faction.” The world started with truth and heresy divides from truth. Every falsehood takes a path away from the way of truth. Jesus said in John 14:6, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Jesus says He is the way to the Father, excluding all other ways. Other different ways than Jesus alone are heresies, diverging from the one path that leads to heaven, where are the Father’s house and God the Father.
God’s Truth is Truth
Postmodernism says, “Your truth is your truth.” It is saying, “Your true doctrine is your true doctrine.” God say “no” to that. In Romans 3:4, Paul writes: “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.” God is the final arbiter of truth. If you contradict God, your contradiction is falsehood. I ask you to consider the doctrine of Genesis 1:27: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” God created two sexes and only two, male and female.
A male might call himself a female, but he isn’t. God also created a woman for man, not a man. He created Eve for Adam. God “brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22) and Adam said, “she shall be called Woman” (2:23). She was a “help meet” or fit for man. God created the woman to complement the man, not another man (2:18). A man does not complement a man and God calls this “an abomination” (Leviticus 20:13).
God also created distinct roles for the man and the woman that are required for a successful family and society (Ephesians 5:22-33, Titus 2, 1 Peter 3:1-7). The teaching, belief, and practice of these roles are true doctrine.
THE ETERNAL IMPACT OF DOCTRINE
Destructiveness of False Doctrine
The Apostle Peter says concerning certain heresies in 2 Peter 2:1, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” Heresies are mainly brought by “false prophets” and “false teachers” “among the people” or “among you.”
Certain false doctrines in particular, which deny the Lord that bought” us, bring “swift destruction.” What Peter describes in 2 Peter 2:1 about false salvation doctrine mirrors what Jesus also said in the Sermon on the Mount, when He said in Matthew 7:13-14: “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.”
Jesus speaks of the narrow way, which is the true way, and of the broad way, which is the false one. Few enter the narrow gate, which leads to life, and many the wide gate, which takes the broad way that leads to destruction. The wide gate and the broad way are more popular, even though they are false. The next verse, Matthew 7:15, explains why people take this damning path in addition to its popularity: “Beware of false prophets.” False prophets or teachers point the way through their false doctrine to a future damning destination, surely while still calling their teaching “the truth.”
Blessing of True Doctrine
Paul expresses the eternal and serious ramifications of true doctrine through his pastoral epistles in 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, especially declared by 1 Timothy 4:16: “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.” “The doctrine” will “save thyself and them that hear thee,” Paul instructs.
The salvation that comes from true doctrine carries with it ultimate fulfillment. The doctrine Jesus preached in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1-12) could and would bring the kingdom of heaven, comfort, satisfaction, inheritance of all things, mercy, joy, gladness, and reward in heaven. Heeding the doctrine of Jesus was like building your house on a rock instead of sand, so that when a storm came, your house would stand and not fall (Matthew 7:24-27).
THE EXCLUSIVITY OF TRUE DOCTRINE
Teach Only the True Doctrine
Considering everything you’ve read so far about doctrine, can someone or at least should someone say, “Doctrine doesn’t matter”? Doctrine matters as much as anything that matters. For this reason, the Apostle Paul wrote his protégé Timothy in 1 Timothy 1:3, “As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine.” Scripture requires church leaders to “teach no other doctrine.”
Because False Doctrine Deceives
God’s Word often explains how false teachers deceive people to believe wrong doctrine. The Apostle Paul again in Romans 16:17-18 writes: “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” God requires separation from false teachers, who cause these divisions from true, scriptural doctrine. They are deceptive and use “good words and fair speeches” to deceive their listeners.
Separate from Those Who Teach Different Doctrine
The Apostle John joins Paul in the seriousness of doctrine, when he writes in 2 John 1:9-10: “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed.”
Akin to John’s warning in his epistle and Paul’s teaching in Romans, Paul writes to Timothy in 1 Timothy 6:3-5: “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; . . . . from such withdraw thyself.” If a man teaches other than the true doctrine or consents to it, that is, accepts or inculcates it, from such people, Paul commands, “withdraw thyself.” Nothing helps someone more than true doctrine, but also nothing hurts someone worse than false doctrine.
Today false teachers deceive listeners by devaluing true doctrine. They often say only certain essential doctrines matter, but not all doctrine. It is similar to Satan tempting Eve in the Garden of Eden by saying that eating of the tree wouldn’t matter to her. He said, “Ye shall not surely die” (Genesis 3:4). In fact, she did die. These kinds of seductions lure people into a false sense of security. Not only do people stop taking heed to the truth, but they are offended by those who do.
THE REQUIREMENT OF TRUE DOCTRINE
The Bible requires doctrine in the preaching and teaching of churches. They who “rule well” a church “labor in the word and doctrine” (1 Timothy 5:17). Paul commands Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:2, “Preach the word . . . . with all longsuffering and doctrine.” He commands him despite the following warning in verses 3-4: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
Have we now reached the time, age, or era when people will no longer endure sound doctrine? Does doctrine not matter to most people any more? They want something else, that Paul characterizes as itching their ears. Instead of preaching sound doctrine, preachers will provide their hearers something they would rather hear. Instead of a place for doctrine, churches become mainly social gatherings to accommodate the carnal allure of this temporal world.
Many today see a drastic decline in the United States. Why is this happening? A growing percentage of people cease church attendance at all. It’s not just that churches stop preaching biblical doctrine. Neither do people want a church that preaches it. Churches adjust to this new reality by reducing their teaching time and minimizing doctrine when they do preach anything. If churches stop caring about doctrine, why would anyone else care?
Doctrine will equip and sustain people for and through tough times. As days become harder and worse, people more than ever need doctrine. It will matter more than ever. Yet, how available will it be to those for whom it doesn’t? Think about it.
The Historical Story of External Factors Perverting the Meaning of Church (part three)
Evidence in the New Testament
As you read through the New Testament, you see early attacks inside and outside of the church that correspond to what happened at that juncture of history in the world. Revelation 2 and 3 provide a good example of how churches in the first century degrade through changes in doctrine and practice in areas appropriate to the occurrences of the time, diverting from Jesus Christ and His commands. The Lord Jesus Christ gave many various means to keep His churches: faithful pastors edifying, preaching, admonishing, warning, and protecting, church discipline, the Lord’s Table, and personal and ecclesiastical separation.
All of the tools for preserving churches intact revolve around the sufficient, canonical words of scripture. The Word of God is like a purifying fire, like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces, and like water that washes away filth. The fire burns away dross, the hammer shapes something ugly into the beautiful, and the water cleanses away sin and false doctrine. All of this keeps a church or churches on track to extend to another generation.
False Tradition and Human Philosophy
Scripture itself never loses its power, but it becomes something different when someone mixes it with false traditions and human philosophy. In the Old Testament, pagan religion from surrounding foreign nations perverted Israel’s doctrine, practice, and worship. In the New Testament, Gnosticism, a collection of religious ideas and systems that emerged in the late first century AD, had a significant impact on the church by infiltrating it.
One can see in the New Testament reactions to proto-Gnostic false teaching that arose during the history of the first century. It reshaped doctrine, especially regarding the nature of God, creation, and salvation. Gnostic beliefs posited a dualistic worldview where a supreme, hidden God existed apart from a malevolent creator deity (the Demiurge), which some Gnostics identified with the God of the Hebrew Bible. They believed that material existence was flawed or evil, leading them to focus on personal spiritual knowledge (gnosis) as the path to salvation rather than faith in Christ’s sacrificial death and resurrection.
First century Gnosticism emerged from various sources, such as Jewish mysticism and Hellenistic philosophy. Scripture teaches its own sufficiency in part to combat adding and taking away from its teaching. The additions and subtractions emerge from the woof and the warp of that historical period.
Platonism
Debates over doctrine early in church history hinged on philosophical issues. These debates did not and would not occur from solely influences of scripture. Teachers familiar with the dialogues of Plato relied on the writings of the Greek philosopher in their interpretations of the biblical text. To recognize how they arrived at their teachings, one must understand how neo-Platonic Greek philosophy mixed into their doctrinal views. Plato represented a distinct view of the world seen in the type of teaching espoused by those hearkening to his ideas.
Church leaders believed Christians could appropriate the world’s philosophy and culture, where this seemed right to them. Augustine of Hippo provides an example, when he writes:
If those who are called philosophers, particularly the Platonists, have said anything which is true and consistent with our faith, we must not reject it, but claim it for our own use.
Plato’s writing contributed to the shaping of early doctrine of professing Christianity, including in systems of interpretation of scripture. The Alexandrian Jewish scholar Philo was a key figure in developing allegorical interpretations of the Hebrew Bible, aiming to reconcile biblical texts with Platonic philosophy.
Schools of Theology
Schools of theology arose, many times organizations separate from church authority. Origen was a student at the catechetical school in Alexandria, which had a strong tradition of allegorical interpretation, and likely studied under Clement of Alexandria who was known for relating Christian teachings to Greek philosophy. Origen didn’t invent allegory but he significantly advanced and popularized it, drawing on the influence of Greek philosophy. He often distinguished between a literal and a spiritual or allegorical meaning of scripture.
Doctrines did begin to change and false ones spread to various churches even in the first century, as seen what occurred in the seven churches of Asia (Rev 2 & 3). John expresses concerns over the doctrine of Christ that reflect the introduction of proto-Gnostic heresies (1 & 2 John). The Apostle Paul confronts Greek philosophy in 1 Corinthians 6, that presented a lax view of sexual immorality. In 1 Corinthians 15 he addresses something undoing the doctrine of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Roman Empire
Most professing Christians and churches could not resist the power of the Roman Empire’s embrace of Christian religion and modification to the religious power of the state. The emperor Constantine possessed his own experience of Christianity and then used his position to affect faith and practice. He promoted his imagination of Christianity with construction of cathedrals, Bible translation, and the calling of official councils for discussion of theological issues.
Like a Rome emperor wanted unity in his empire for its resultant strength, Constantine and then others after him pushed for cohesive doctrine and practice across the empire. He organized and structured Christianity around his own aspirations for Christianity. This conformed Christianity beyond the New Testament to a state religion. Doctrine and practice became malleable to the state. The emperor and the state hierarchy used its authority to use its power to mold Christianity according to the same means by which it ordered the political and secular.
Influence of the State
State endorsement brought safety and great influence. It was difficult for small churches to resist the current of state power, getting swept into the flow of its governance and acceptance. Churches could sell their freedom and autonomy for security and prominence. Anyone could conceive of the opportunities that could come with the immensity of the state and the size of its resources.
The state would endorse those with its position and finally punish those resisting it. It published and propagated what it approved. At many different points it would destroy anything in opposition. What remained available was what the state affirmed. During many various periods, the state kept what it ratified and eliminated what it didn’t. This was a means to maintain cohesion.
More to Come
When I Tried to Do Business with China
My Story
As you might know, I lived and worked in California most of my adult life (33 years). Our church, Bethel Baptist Church, which we planted in the San Francisco Bay Area in 1987, and I became a publisher, Pillar and Ground Publishing, to publish biblical and theological works. It is now a work for South Decatur Baptist Church. When we got ready to publish our book, A Pure Church, I looked into different ways to print the book. I used print-on-demand in the United States for our first book and then a United States printer for the second one.
Since the church was on the West Coast, it was easier to get connections with Asia. I did not believe that I would use China to print our book, but I wanted to see if I could do it. You can find Chinese printers online, inviting business from the United States, so I contacted a few of them. They all wanted our business, that is, until I told them the content of our book. It was illegal for a Chinese printer to do our book because of its biblical, Christian subject matter.
In other words, I could want to save money in China, but China would not do business with a church with a biblical presentation to make. None of the printers I contacted would print our book. Two of them, I believe forgetting what we were printing, contacted me again about our interest for using them. Again, I was 90 plus percent sure that I would not use a Chinese printer, but China wouldn’t do it for me anyway.
Doing Business in China
In recent days, the media reports the potential destruction of a lady’s business, who has her baby bibs manufactured in China. The Trump tariffs won’t allow her to make a profit. She has all her own money and even a sizeable loan involved in this business, and she will lose everything apparently. This is a risk she took in doing business with a foreign, Communist country like China.
How do people get cheaper prices dealing with China? Do you know? Some call it slave labor. The Chinese standard of living is very low compared to the United States. A huge part of this is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its redistribution of wealth. Since a large percentage of business in China is state owned, United States business in China helps support the CCP. Because most of the Chinese people live in poverty, someone from the United States can do their job cheaper.
It is more expensive to do business in the Untied States, because of competition not found in a Communist government and country. People have freedom and choices, so for companies operating in the United States to get the better people, they have to pay them more. The United States might pride itself in the fairness of its workplaces, but one dirty little secret is that the United State has its main workforces in third world countries.
Don’t get me wrong. United States business helps the poor people in third world countries, who make stuff for Americans. They would be worse without the business they get from the United States. However, that model of business sends manufacturing (making things) over seas. What does China then do with this?
Intellectual Theft and More
The common report for China is that China operates according to its rules in trade and business. Chinese companies will steal the intellectual property of successful business in the United States and then sell it in the United States through Walmart, Amazon, and other outlets. A company starts and builds a venture through research and development, and when it reaches a certain threshold in sales, something like five million dollars, China does its own knock-off product and sells it a very reduced price with its poverty level workforce. It stole an idea without spending anything on research and development.
When China undercuts American business, either the company or its product line go out of business. It can’t compete with the price set by the Chinese company that is also subsidized in the Chinese economy. The Chinese take that business away from a United States company. A woman may lose her baby bib business because of tariffs, but once she succeeds to something like a five million dollar threshold, she can lose her business from the Chinese knock-off strategy. They steal her bib idea and sell it for cheap.
The United States has no authority in the courts of China to prosecute theft of intellectual property. When China steals things and American companies go under, this unfair practice does not equate to free trade. The Chinese can function in American courts to get their way here, but an American businessman doesn’t have the same recourse in China.
Conclusion
When I began to write this post, I asked the internet, which now is essentially an algorithm in artificial intelligence, about the Chinese Communist Party. I wanted to know how much of a cut the CCP made from its businesses. How big a cut did it take? Artificial intelligence almost always gives an answer, especially to that kind of question. I asked it in a number of different ways and it would not give me an answer. What do you think is happening? How free are we?
I want to go back to my original point. American printers are free to print biblical content. Chinese ones are not. China can censor religious material in violation of religious freedom. The United States has a first amendment, but when it does business with China like it does, it in fact undercuts and breaches its own Constitutional rights. It is a way of evading or bypassing human rights. People can talk a good talk about these issues, but skirt or sidestep in order to make a buck in China.
Recent Comments