DWH2003

Been a few days since I checked on the forum, hence the delay. As Jesus taught on the need to not faint he spoke of an unrighteous judge (Luke 18:1-8). He describes that judge as "a judge, who feared not God, and regarded not man" (v. 2). Since we are here speaking of the fear of God, what happens when a person does not fear God? In this example, a judge who disregards God... will also have no real regard for his fellow man. Thus, it is better for the individual who fears God (motivates him to listen to God himself) and it benefits others (because it motivates this same man to treat others properly). Also, in 2 Thess. 2, Paul speaks of a great apostasy which occurred following the first century & continues to this day. He describes how this lawlessness & digression progresses: "10 and with all deceit of unrighteousness for them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that they should believe a lie: 12 that they all might be judged who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." Think about it. If one does not fear God (and thus, be moved to seek God properly), then one is not going to be prepared for the judgment day. If a person choose to love sin, a person can get to a point where they believe that error is truth and that lies are right. Scary stuff to become blind to the difference between truth and sin... and blind to coming judgment! Job 28:28 And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; And to depart from evil is understanding. Just as when Paul wrote to the Corinthians and rebuked them for sin. What place did fear of God have in them? 2 Cor. 7:8 For though I made you sorry with my epistle, I do not regret it: though I did regret it (for I see that that epistle made you sorry, though but for a season), 9 I now rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye were made sorry unto repentance; for ye were made sorry after a godly sort, that ye might suffer loss by us in nothing. 10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation, a repentance which bringeth no regret: but the sorrow of the world worketh death. 11 For behold, this selfsame thing, that ye were made sorry after a godly sort, what earnest care it wrought in you, yea what clearing of yourselves, yea what indignation, yea what fear, yea what longing, yea what zeal, yea what avenging! In everything ye approved yourselves to be pure in the matter. 12 So although I wrote unto you, I wrote not for his cause that did the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered the wrong, but that your earnest care for us might be made manifest unto you in the sight of God. 13 Therefore we have been comforted: and in our comfort we joyed the more exceedingly for the joy of Titus, because his spirit hath been refreshed by you all. 14 For if in anything I have gloried to him on your behalf, I was not put to shame; but as we spake all things to you in truth, so our glorying also which I made before Titus was found to be truth. 15 And his affection is more abundantly toward you, while he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him. 16 I rejoice that in everything I am of good courage concerning you. Fear replaces love for sin. Fear motivates us to do what God says & treat others properly. It ultimately brings true joy & comfort, because it moves us to draw close to God & encourages others in the same direction.

Service that is well pleasing to God is with fear and reverence (Heb. 12:28). Psalm 111:10 The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of wisdom; A good understanding have all they that do his commandments: His praise endureth for ever. Deuteronomy 13:4 Ye shall walk after Jehovah your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. Isaiah 6:1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and his train filled the temple. 2 Above him stood the seraphim: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. 4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. 5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of hosts. Fear is a strong motivator. If we really believe that bad behavior has bad consequences... that God will punish those who remain in sin... it can (and should) humble us (like Isaiah) and move us to honestly seek God with commitment. Fear is a starting place for wisdom.

Giving you an example makes no difference. We have discussed many things already. While you are generally polite, you always find a way to dismiss even very plain statements of Scripture. Respectfully, there is no point conversing with you about Biblical substance.

I have yet to find anything Jesus said that you actually believe... you find some polite way to deny His words time and again. Even among the words in red... Neighbor, you might want to think about how serious it is to disbelieve Jesus.

Actually, the opposite is true. Salvation being conditional means ANYONE who believes and does what God says can be saved. The thief on the cross was pardoned directly by Christ before Christ died. The Bible teaches that the Old Law was still in effect until Christ died (Rom. 7:1-6) & that Christs' death not only ended that law, but established a new law (Mt. 26:28; Heb 9:16-17). While a person lives, they can dispense their goods any way they please. But after their death, the only legal way to receive their goods is by the terms & conditions of their testament. Thus the OLD Law was still in effect when the thief was pardoned and the New was not in effect yet. Baptism is required in the New Testament, not the Old. Also, this thief obviously know something about Jesus. Where did he learn it? Either from John or Jesus or Jesus' disciples. John prepared people for Christ and pointed to Christ by baptizing (John 3:23). Jesus made disciples by baptizing (John 4:1; Mt. 28:18-20). Multitudes came to John and even more to Jesus. Both taught baptism in order to be saved (Luke 3:3; Mark 16:16). So, whether the thief learned of Jesus from John or from Jesus... he would have been taught about baptism as a condition of forgiveness.

So... is there anything Jesus actually said that you actually believe?

So, in acknowledging that obeying Jesus is believing Jesus... you just gave away your whole premise about faith being in contrast to "works". What changed in your view to say this now? As for annihilation... Jesus said those who sin & do not come to God will go to a place where punishment is eternally experienced (Matt. 25:46). The same word eternal is used for life. Eternal life lasts just as long as the eternal punishment. Paul said: "8 rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus: 9 who shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might," (2 Thess. 1:) If annihilated, you suffer nothing... you would have no feelings, no consciousness, etc. If you do not exist, you would be nowhere. Not even away from God's presence. Jude 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, having in like manner with these given themselves over to fornication and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire. Again... suffering necessitates existence. Cessation of existence means a cessation of suffering, a cessation of punishment. God says the state of punishment after this life, is eternal fire. Not a fire that consumes, but an eternal state of fire. Matthew 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that cause stumbling, and them that do iniquity, 42 and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He that hath ears, let him hear. Jesus said the lost will go "into" this place. It is a place. Jesus said "there". Nowhere is not there, nor anywhere. Nothingness is not a place. It is a place described as a furnace of fire. Cessation of existence is nothingness... not a fire. Jesus said there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Cessation of existence... involves no feeling, no consciousness... no weeping or gnashing of teeth. Why would God create such a place? Because sin is that bad. We live in a world filled with iniquity and "get used to it". Instead, we should see sin as God sees it. It deserves eternal punishment, away from God's presence, in a never ending fire, with weeping & gnashing of teeth. Sin is that bad. He that hath ears, let him hear.

Was Jesus was doing it wrong? John 3:36, "He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him." Jesus was teaching the Gospel (Matt. 4:23). Was Paul doing it wrong - thinking that serving Christ and spreading the gospel involved "obedience of faith" (Rom. 1:1, 6). And Romans 2:8, "but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation,". And Romans 6:16, "Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves as servants unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?" And 2 Thess. 1:7, "and to you that are afflicted rest with us, at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of his power in flaming fire, 8 rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus: 9 who shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might," And was Abraham wrong? Hebrews 11:8 "By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out unto a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went." And many many more... Evidently, you do not comprehend the difference between works that are of man (meritorious works) and the works that are of God (conditions of grace). One is earned by sinless perfection (which no one but Christ accomplished), the other is a requirement of being pardoned/receiving grace. Jesus said faith that even is something man must work... and yet it is a work of God (John 6:27-28). Colossians 2:11-13 says that baptism is through faith in the working of God. Yet faith & baptism both are things man must do. Col. 2 also says this is when God makes alive, forgives trespasses (2:13). If your assertion is true, then you must reject not only baptism but faith... as "works". James 2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but have not works? can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister be naked and in lack of daily food, 16 and one of you say unto them, Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; and yet ye give them not the things needful to the body; what doth it profit? 17 Even so faith, if it have not works, is dead in itself. 18 Yea, a man will say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith apart from thy works, and I by my works will show thee my faith. 19 Thou believest that God is one; thou doest well: the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Thou seest that faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect; 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which saith, And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God. 24 Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith. 25 And in like manner was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works, in that she received the messengers, and sent them out another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead. Context: Salvation (2:14). Justification before God (2:20). Reckoned as righteous by God (2:23). Faith is dead in itself. With no obedience... faith is dead. Demons believe and tremble... but do not obey God. Is the faith you promote any better? It is the vain man who thinks that faith alone is enough. Faith apart from obeying God is barren (2:20). Notice what "work" Abraham was justified by: the offering of Isaac. Where did he get this idea? Did it originate with Abraham? No... it was an instruction from God. Thus, in doing this, he was obeying by faith. This is how & why God counted Abraham as righteous. When Abraham's faith was active, obedient. And, if your view is correct, Abraham was wrong! Your view places you in opposition to the whole of Scripture, the nature of faith, the gospel, God's revealed way of justification... in opposition to Christ, Paul, the Holy Spirit who revealed these things... Can a man contradict God and win? Neighbor, you might want to reconsider your views.

You identified the "works gospel" and the "attitude" of those who subscribe to it. I addressed both. Have a wonderful day.

Regarding water baptism. Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; 26 that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, 27 that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Titus 3:3 For we also once were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another. 4 But when the kindness of God our Saviour, and his love toward man, appeared, 5 not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 which he poured out upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour; 7 that, being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. Jesus did what man could not (Eph 5:25; Titus 3:4). Died to provide the means of sanctification, cleansing, regeneration. Jesus knew that man did not live perfectly sinless. This is why He came to be the sacrifice for sin. Notice that the text says it is not man's "works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves". Yet, this does not say "no works at all". Nowhere does the Bible ever say man can do nothing or should do nothing at all. In fact, Jesus taught that man should work the works of God (John 6:27-29). The works of God are whatever God says we should do. That is "work" and it is "of God", not of our own selves. Jesus taught that a person must be born again. The new birth (singular) involves two elements, water and Spirit. What is the only NT command that involves water and Spirit? Water baptism. How? Ephesians 5:25 says that Jesus sanctifies & cleanses the church... "by the washing of water with the word". The water is obvious. And so is the connection between the Spirit and the word. The Spirit revealed & works through the word to produce faith & conversion (John 16:14). What takes place when a person does what Jesus says must be done? Titus 3, paralleling Ephesians 5 and John 3, states that God saves us through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit". Note: Born of water and the Spirit sanctified & cleansed by the washing of water with the word Washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit These speak of the same thing. Water baptism by faith. Note also: The Ephesians, who Paul later writes to and says they are saved by grace through faith, were previously baptized into Jesus (Acts 19:5). This is not Holy Spirit baptism, since they had not yet received the Spirit (Acts 19:5). This was not John's baptism (which they had already received, but was no longer in authority) (Acts 19:3). That leaves only water baptism into Christ (Acts 2:38; etc). Colossians speaks of this same baptism: "2:11 in whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ; 12 having been buried with him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did he make alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses; The Spirit of God teaches here that there is spiritual removal of sin (circumcision not made with hands). This is being made alive and is describing forgiveness. What is this? When does it happen? When buried with Christ in Baptism. Is baptism trusting in a work of men? No. It is "through faith in the working of God". If man does it, how is it by faith in God's work? Because God provided the sacrifice. God also revealed the conditions of salvation, which include faith & baptism into Christ. Man did not create the sacrifice. Man did not invent baptism. So, even though man must do it - it is an acknowledgment of, submission to, and genuine trust in God. Faith, not in man's merit and perfection, but in God who said He would pardon if man obeys Him now. There is no inherent power in water to regenerate (cf. 1 Pet. 3:21). Yet God said regeneration happens in washing (baptism). As Paul states it, "obedience of faith" (Romans 1:5; 16:26). That is God's whole purpose, BTW. Not just to forgive us of our sins... but to convert us from it. To get us to actually, willingly, do what He says. As Romans 6 describes this: "17 But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered; 18 and being made free from sin, ye became servants of righteousness. 19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification. 20 For when ye were servants of sin, ye were free in regard of righteousness." God wants obedience from the heart to His will. God wants true conversion, not just mental / emotional agreement without obedience. Man commonly calls this "works salvation" & says there is nothing man can do. While the Bible absolutely rules out man's meritorious earning of salvation, it nowhere says there is nothing for man to do. Jesus said man must work the work of God. Paul said we must be obedient to the faith. The Spirit said we must obey from the heart. If this contradicts what you believe, perhaps you should consider why you hold a view that is contrary to the gospel. John 6:27 Work not for the food which perisheth, but for the food which abideth unto eternal life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him the Father, even God, hath sealed. 28 They said therefore unto him, What must we do, that we may work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. Jesus called belief a work. Was Jesus being elitist? Was Jesus treating others poorly who were not in "lockstep" with Him? Jesus indicated that man must do this to be given eternal life. Jesus taught that grace does not exclude man obeying God. You propose that a "works gospel" is wrong & that the approach of those who subscribe to this view are difficult. You confidently make a judgment. Yet, how can anyone know what is right or wrong? Feelings? Personal experience? No. The words of Christ are the standard (Rom. 10:17; John 12:48ff). Did Jesus ever offend anyone? Were some displeased with Jesus' words (Matt. 15:12-13) or methods (Matt. 11:16-19)? Yes. If a person's belief contradicts the words of Jesus, should I say that belief is right? If you go to the bank and deposit two checks (a $100 check and a $100 check), and the teller puts the total of your deposit as $100, would you point this out? If you did, would this show a bad "general attitude" in you? Would this prove you are not treating others well? Would this prove you are difficult to have a conversation with? If you would correct a banking error, how much more an error that affects the soul? Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; So a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. May grace be extended to you, in the truth of Christ Jesus - who is above all, exalted, and worthy of all praise and glory.

The scriptures state that silence is not permission. Your view says the opposite. You claim, "If I can do a thing, God authorizes my ability..." Ability does not authorize... Your premise promotes walking by sight, not by faith! Just because a person has the ability to make animal noises, throw pies accurately, bend balloons into animal shapes, and to whistle Dixie, pig wrestle... that does not mean it is acceptable as worship to God (John 4:24). And please note, God did not overtly prohibit these things. So, if your principle holds true, then it allows all this & more. Your position, when consistently followed, leads to confusion. God is not the author of confusion. 2 Timothy 1:13 Hold the pattern of sound words which thou hast heard from me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. 14 That good thing which was committed unto thee guard through the Holy Spirit which dwelleth in us. God overtly said that silence is not authorization (Acts 15; Heb 7). God also said hold the pattern of sound words (2 Tim. 1:13). God said this is in faith & love. God said this is in Christ. Your view says the opposite. You do not hold the pattern. Please note that when you reject what God says, you reject for yourself what He offers with it... faith, love, Christ. Regarding your denial of eternal conscious torment & belief in annihilation: You mean, you do not believe the word of Jesus on Hell either? You believe the opposite of what the King says on this also? And regarding "legalism", please find one passage where God ever condemned strictly following what He says to do. I will say this plainly - you will never find it. Your view on legalism is popular, but false. Not adhering to God's law is sin by definition. That is the whole problem in the first place! All have sinned (disobeyed). The solution is not more sin, less regard for law, less regard for His word... but more trust in God - His mercy in regards to pardon & His instructions in regards to avoiding more sin. Col. 2:8 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head... Neighbor, you practice the very thing we are warned of in Col. 2.:18-19. You do not hold to the King, you hold to doctrines of human invention. Doctrines that make void God's authority.

There is a pattern we are commanded to hold to in Christ (2 Tim. 1:13). That pattern includes making sure taht whatever we do is by His authority before acting (Col. 3:17). We are not to even think beyond what is written (1 Cor. 4:6). Even thoughts can be sinful! We are to walk by faith (1 Cor. 5:6). Faith is revealed, not made up as we go (Rom. 10:17). Silence is not permission (Heb. 7:14; 15:24). We cannot assume to have authority... Sadly, many use "freedom" as a "cloak of wickedness", as a "justification" to do things that are wrong before God (Gal 5:13; 1 Peter 2:16). Whether it be a command or a prohibition, authority is expressed as either a generic or a specific. For example, God did not just say "worship God" and leave it up to us how to worship. God specified: "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24) Sincerity and truth are required. Sincerity, is obviously the heart. But that alone is not enough. Truth is required also. God's word is truth (John 17:17). Thus, to worship acceptably before God (it is about Him after all!), we must first find out what He says is acceptable worship. I challenge you to find a NT passage that teaches Christians to use musical instruments today. It can be a command, an approved example, or a necessary inference. If you cannot support your view from the Bible, then it is not by faith. In looking only for specific prohibitions, you overlook the specific commands to hold to the pattern. In looking only for specific prohibitions, what about the specific prohibitions about not thinking beyond what is written & not adding to or taking away from God's word? What about the examples where God's silence is show to be prohibitive? The consequences of your argument is to "allow" behavior that God does not authorize.

I noted you edited a previous post as I responded. Sorry, I do the same thing, post then edit things. You edited: "...I can do whatever I want and am given permission to do so with a completely clean conscience unless it violates the spirit of God's word. Playing an instrument in church does not. It is a practice carried forward from the OT. No, not a commandment of the old covanent, but a practice. God created in us an appreciation of music in all its forms. Even smooth blues guitar through a sweetly distorted tube amp." Man has never been given a blank check by God. Even Adam & Eve were given at least one limitation to their conduct. "Spirit" vs letter. Already responded to above. Your use (to justify things not revealed) is not the way God uses it. No NT passage authorizes musical instruments in worship today. You are welcome to search and prove me wrong. Carrying forward OT practices is specifically described as sinful, and severs one from Christ (Gal. 5:4). An appreciation of something is not authorization for something. This glorifies desire over God's word. I like pizza. I really appreciate it. Does this authorize its use in worship? LOL no, sir. The point I made early about general authority & dominion over the earth applies here. The Amish misunderstand the difference between specific & general authority. Your response, though humorous, is not accurate. : P

Some things are generically authorized, others are specifically authorized. There are principles God has established in creation, and reaffirmed in both the Old Law and the New law - regarding man's role & place in nature. Man is to subdue & have dominion over the earth (Gen. 1:28). This is illustrated time and again by God's OT & NT examples of managing the earth, using things, using animals for labor, etc. Lawn care & pest spray would fall under the general authority of dominion over the earth. As for the church, God makes a distinction between individual activity & church activity. Again, in many places, but one obvious one is in 1 Cor. 11:34. The Lord's Supper is a memorial of Christ, a time of self-examination - not a common meal. The Spirit said if any man is hungry, let him eat at home, that your coming together be not unto judgment (v. 34). Eating to satisfy hunger is generally authorized. But eating for this purpose it is not authorized in worship, because God said so. As for 1 Cor. 10:23 saying all things are lawful, there is a context. This statement cannot be understood in a way that contradicts other scriptures. Truth does not contradict. Is idolatry authorized? No, Paul just said it was unlawful & we must flee it (1 Cor. 10:14-22). Thus, "all things are lawful" does not include unlawful things. Paul, after pointing out that unlawful things are unlawful, is now saying that even among lawful things, not everything is always good to do. His example is of eating meats sacrificed to idols. One can eat it, knowing that an idol is nothing and properly giving thanks to God for the food. Yet, another may be encouraged to eat of this same food... in a way that violates their conscience. They still see it as worship to idols... and while technically lawful to eat (an idol is nothing), violating & abusing our conscience is also a sin... When you argue for practicing things not authorized by God today, you are not speaking as Paul spoke.

The Psalms are of the Old Law. John 10:34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'"? (See Psalm 82:6) John 15:25 But the word that is written in their Law must be fulfilled: 'They hated me without a cause.'(See Ps. 35:19; 69:4) Hebrews 10:1 says the Old Law is a shadow of the things in Christ, not the substance. They include animal sacrifices. Which is better, animal sacrifices (the shadow), or the sacrifice of Christ (the substance)? The teachings are no longer in authority today (Heb. 7:18; 8:13; etc.). Christ's death completed the Old Law, nailing it to the cross (Col. 2:14-17). His death also established a new covenant (Luke 22:20). While no longer in authority, we can still learn from them, by the examples given (1 Cor. 10:6, 11).

LOL Sorry about breaking the posts up. Your response is very interesting. My point on car repairs was an example of the need for authority - that whatever the mechanic does must be authorized by the car's owner. You objected to the need for authority by... affirming the need for authority. In this, you contradicted yourself. You wrote: "If I told the mechanic to simply make my car work correctly, yes, fixing everything that is broken would be acceptable. If I said to fix the brakes, anything else would not be. The bible relates to the former." I agree that the mechanic may be authorized generically ("fix everything"). I also agree that the mechanic may be authorized specifically ("fix the brakes"). In both cases he needs authorization for work done. And in both cases, it is possible for him to go beyond what is authorized. "Fix everything" grants permission to repair whatever is broken. It does not authorize adding new features or removing existing features. "Fix the brakes" grants permission to repair that specific thing. It does not grant permission to work on other things. Both examples affirm the need for authority. Yet you arbitrarily say that the Bible is only the former, generic authority. Actually it uses both generic & specific authority, and neither one supports your conclusion of doing things that are unauthorized (instruments). The Bible at times is generic. For example, "go" in Mark 16:15. They could go by walking, go by boat, go by riding... as long as they "go". At times God's word is specific. For example, "Preach the gospel" in Mark 16:15. If Paul preached tent repair basics in the name of Christ... that would not be doing what Jesus said. -- You add: "Second, The book of revelation refers to adding or subtracting from that one book, not the compilation of books and letters we call the Bible." Yes, it is specifically addressing that book. But you see that same principle repeated all through the pages of scripture. What does it tell you that God is constantly saying this same principle, not just about the book of Revelation, but about everything He says? --- You add: "Third, your reference to Acts 15:24 is, in my opinion, ironic. I do not play an instrument because I was commanded to, though you seem to think I shouldn't play because I was not specifically commanded to. " Please note that you have just admitted that you have no authority, yet do it anyway. --- You add: "Fourth, Paul was discussing the current culture when he discussed the long hair." Paul praised the Corinthians for holding the traditions he (as an apostle of Jesus Christ) delivered to them (1 Cor. 11:2). Paul affirmed that man "ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God" (11:7). Paul affirmed this distinction based on God's order of creation (11:9). Paul then backs this up with a general assessment of culture (11:13) and nature (11:14) which both agree with what Paul affirmed from God. Most cultures view long hair is as feminine. Also, in nature, men have a stronger tendency to baldness than women. And notice the overtly stated conclusion of the Holy Spirit inspired writer: "14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." He concludes by saying it is shameful for a man to have long hair and glorious for women to have long hair. That is God's revealed view, confirmed by culture & nature. Also, note: "her hair is given her for a covering". Who gave this distinction between men & women? Who gave long hair to women? God. This is a perfect example of where our thoughts are not God's thoughts. We must be willing to give up our thoughts and think in ways He reveals. I used to have long hair. But after learning what God says, I want to please Him. I do not want to face Him one day living in ways He says are shameful. It is not that I am trusting in my perfect works, it is far far too late for that. It is that I am trusting in Him to the point where my own preferences and opinions will be cast away and replaced by what He says. That is walking by faith, not by sight. --- You add: "I can find not one scripture that even suggests there would be something wrong with playing instruments in church and, conversely, can find scripture supporting it. " There are clear, overt principles that say silence is prohibition, not permission. The NT is silent on musical instruments being used in worship. There is no authority in the NT, whether specific or generic, for using instruments in worship. You say you can find scripture supporting it, but have not yet offered one NT passage that authorizes its use today. If you can find positive authority in the NT (whether generic or specific) then I will gladly concede to God's word. --- You conclude: "For me, arguing that it is wrong is like arguing that it is wrong to have a bible with a blue cover." God says to "walk by faith, not by sight" (2 Cor. 5:7). Faith comes from God's word (Rom. 10:17). If God's word is silent, there can be faith to walk by. Instead it would be presumption.

You deny the need to a "thou shalt not" for every unauthorized thing. Yet you repeatedly approach God's word as something you can set aside whenever you feel like it. Your fear of God is an opinion you have created. Letter vs spirit is not a contrast between obeying law vs disobeying law. It is not "the spirit" of the law to justify practicing sin. Notice how these words are used in the Bible: 2 Cor. 3:4 And such confidence have we through Christ to God-ward: 5 not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to account anything as from ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God; 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7 But if the ministration of death, written, and engraven on stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look stedfastly upon the face of Moses for the glory of his face; which glory was passing away: 8 how shall not rather the ministration of the spirit be with glory? Letter references the Old Covenant, written and engraven on stones. Spirit references the New Covenant, revealed by the Holy Spirit. The contrast is between two "ministrations" or systems. There is nothing in the contrast that promotes practicing sin / ignoring God's word whenever you feel it is "safe" to do so... --- STOP sign vs YIELD sign. You are basically teaching that sincerity is enough, without truth. You begin your illustration with an arbitrary definition for the purpose of traffic laws. Consider, instead, what God Himself defines as the purpose of His laws (both old and new). The old ministration was given for a repeatedly stated purpose: Exodus 16:4 Then said Jehovah unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a day’s portion every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or not. The new ministration says the same principle: 2 Corinthians 13:5 Try your own selves, whether ye are in the faith; prove your own selves. Or know ye not as to your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you? unless indeed ye be reprobate. Both covenants overtly state this purpose. God wants us to actually do His will from the heart (Rom. 6:16-18). Also, John 4:24 Jesus said worship that is acceptable to God is in spirit and truth. Truth alone, without our heart, is not enough. Sincerity alone, without truth, is not enough. Respectfully, you are teaching sincerity without truth. This is not enough. --- Also, you paint "stop sign" religion as not requiring thought. Following what God says requires proper thought and action. It is rebellion that softens thought & perception. Why would you promote sin? Why would you say doing what God said does not involve thought? What heart does your view promote in people? Think about it. --- You began by denying the need for a "thou shalt not" for every unauthorized thing. Yet all your arguments & your conclusion state this very thing. I quote: "So, there is nothing in the bible that can be interpreted to NOT play musical instruments in church, so I am free to play them." You just affirmed what you denied... And you directly contradicted what God teaches about His silence: Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. 13 For he of whom these things are said belongeth to another tribe, from which no man hath given attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord hath sprung out of Judah; as to which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priests. v. 12 To change the priesthood, the law had to be changed. There has to be authorization from God, even for Jesus! v. 13 Jesus was of the tribe of Judah. The Old Law authorized Levites to be priests. None of Judah served as priests before God. Is God's silence permission? No (v. 12)! v. 14 Moses (through whom the Old Law was given) spake nothing concerning priests from the tribe of Judah. Thus, there is was no authority for it. Silence is prohibition, not permission. This is the opposite of what you argued. And note, Hebrews 7 is NT. While referring to the Old Law, the inspired writer is teaching us how to properly understand God's word today. How to think properly and act properly. --- You add: "And I just keep Psalm 33:3 in mind when I do it. Jesus' fulfilling the law should not be interpreted to suddenly make playing instruments a violation of the spirit of the law in any way, shape or form." The Old Law is fulfilled & no longer in authority due to Christ's death, and no one is to be judged by it today (Col. 2:14-16). While we can learn from its examples (1 cor. 10:6, 11), like Heb 7:12-14 does, we are not under its laws. No more animal sacrifices, no more incense in worship, no more sabbath keeping... etc. If you want even one law from the Old Law to authorize a practice today, then you must keep all of that old law (Gal. 5:3). If you want musical instruments (Psalm 33:3) then you must also practice animal sacrifices (Ps. 20:3), the Levitical priesthood instead of Christ (Ps. 132:9)!, imprecatory prayer instead of praying for your enemies (Ps. 55:15), and more. Friend, please think about what you are arguing. Why are you working so hard to promote & authorize disobedience to God? God's grace is to pardon us of sins so we may walk in newness of life (Rom. 6:4), not so that we may continue in sin under the excuse of grace abounding (Rom. 6:1).

Are you are saying there needs to be an overt "Thou shalt not" for everything that is unauthorized? That is not realistic, no one does this whether God or man. We all use statements of principle upon which to act. When you go to the bank to deposit money, do you have to specify all the bank accounts NOT to place the money into? No! You only need to specify what account it goes into. When you go to an ice cream shop and order a waffle cone with one scoop of chocolate, would it be alright if they handed you five cones with a variety of flavors and then billed you for ten? After all... you didn't say "Don't add more cones or more to my bill". If you take your car into the shop and authorize an oil change, would it be alright if they put new tires on, a new carburetor, and a new paint job... and sent you the bill? Of course not. You, the owner, did not authorize it. It is not what you said to do. Silence is not permission. The Holy Spirit, apostles & elders at Jerusalem pointed to this principle in Acts 15:24, "Forasmuch as we have heard that certain who went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment;" The Old Law didn't say anything about priests from the tribe of Judah. It authorized Levites to be priests. Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. 13 For he of whom these things are said belongeth to another tribe, from which no man hath given attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord hath sprung out of Judah; as to which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priests. Hebrews says silence is not permission. For Christ to be a priest, a new law had to be given to authorize it. God also says it this way, do not add to or take away from His word (Rev. 22:18-19). In like manner, we read of singing as the music God authorizes (Eph. 5:19). Thus, we know singing is pleasing to God. To dwell on other activities that are not revealed as part of the NT worship... is to violate & disregard what God has revealed. You correctly note that by reading the Bible we know more about God. Yet, you offer a line of thinking that minimizes something God has not authorized. To us, many things may not seem like a big deal. To me, I like long hair. Yet God teaches that long hair for a man is a shame (1 Cor. 11). I also enjoy musical instruments for personal use. Absolutely love the cello. Yet, God says sing. When we read the Bible and find out what does please Him, we need to be satisfied. Not go beyond that, for God says: Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith Jehovah. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Hebrews 7 is about Christ being distinct from the Old Law, yet it also teaches a principle about how God operates. Jesus, the King of Kings!, could not be a priest under the Old Law. Why? Because God did not express permission under that system for priests of the tribe of Judah. A New Law had to be established which authorized His role as priest. Silence was not permission. If it is good enough for the King of Kings, should it not be good enough for all of us? Regarding Psalm 150, many NT passages tell us that the Old Law was done away with by the death of Christ (Heb 10:1, 19-20). We are no longer to be judged by it as a law Col. 2:13-16). Seeking to bind the Old Law today severs one from Christ (Gal. 5:4). While we can learn from the examples given in the OT (1 Cor. 10:6, 11), we cannot bind it as a law. We must look to the NT for what God reveals today. As for instruments being pleasing to man or God, we cannot know God apart from His word. His word says to sing (Eph. 5:19). What NT passage tells Christians to play instruments of music in worship? if you can find a statement or principle that supports it, then we can (by faith) know it is right and pleasing to God. If there is not permission from God, then to add this is to please man and follow man.

God uses principles. And expects us to reason from those principles. Also, God teaches us that His silence is not permission (Heb. 7:14). We cannot assume approval without Him expressing approval. Your point effectively says: "God didn't say not to use instruments, therefore instruments are ok to use in worship." IF your principle is valid, then why not: God doesn't say not to smoke marijuana... God doesn't say not to have multiple wives... God doesn't say not to (fill in the blank with whatever!)... Please consider, who are we supposed to please? Self or God?

While humorous, I think you may not see what the reasoning is behind their conduct. The reasoning is that there is a distinction between what is authorized in worship versus what is allowed in common or personal use. For example, 1 Corinthians 11 teaches about the Lord's Supper (an act of worship). Paul pointedly says in verse 34 that if any man is hungry, eat at home, that your coming together (for worship, the Lord's supper) be not unto condemnation. He thus makes a distinction between worship behaviors & common behaviors. The only physical food identified in the NT worship is described as a memorial of Christ's body & blood (unleavened bread & fruit of the vine 1 Cor. 11; Matt. 26:26-29; etc) and not for a common meal - to satisfy hunger. In like manner, singing is overtly commanded in Ephesians 5:19 and taught in other passages as part of the NT worship. There are no NT passages showing musical instruments being used in worship in the church. Thus, we know without any doubt that singing is approved by God, but musical instruments... delves into unauthorized / unapproved actions in worship. This is not to say that it is wrong to use musical instruments for personal enjoyment, but in worship the aim is to please God, not self. Jesus plainly taught that acceptable worship involves not just the heart (our sincerity), but also truth (God's word as the standard) (John 4:24). To go beyond what God says is to invent a man made way, rather than to show faith in God.

Hello Willa, TY for responding. Please consider this: John 3:3 Jesus spoke of one, singular birth. John 3:4 Nicodemus misunderstood what Jesus said. Nicodemus got hung up on physical birth. Ironically, you are doing the same thing. John 3:5, Jesus explains the one, singular birth again. The new birth (singular) involves two elements water & Spirit. We know these are two elements of the one, new birth because Jesus is still speaking only of one birth in connection with entering the (spiritual) kingdom. Nicodemus misunderstood it, Jesus elaborated on it. John 3:6-7 Jesus here makes a stark contrast between the fleshly birth that Nicodemus incorrectly mentioned and the spiritual new birth (singular). Flesh is flesh, spirit is spirit. They are distinctly different! Jesus is telling Nicodemus that he is wrong to think of the physical birth as what Jesus is saying. Nicodemus brought up the physical birth (like you do) and was wrong. Jesus is identifying, describing & illustrating the new birth, spiritual birth, being born again. --- As for John 4:1-2, do you understand what a necessary inference is? v. 1 "Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John" Jesus made disciples through baptism. The text states this. v. 2"(although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples)," The disciples (who were baptized) were used to carry out all of the baptisms. The text says so. It is no assumption or presumption, but the stated fact: If they were disciples, they were baptized. And, if they were not baptized, they were not disciples.

It was not a violation of the Sabbath. It was a "violation" of the Pharisaical interpretation of the Sabbath. Consider the context: Mark 2:23 And it came to pass, that he was going on the sabbath day through the grainfields; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears. 24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? 25 And he said unto them, Did ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was hungry, he, and they that were with him? 26 How he entered into the house of God when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the showbread, which it is not lawful to eat save for the priests, and gave also to them that were with him? 27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: 28 so that the Son of man is lord even of the sabbath. v. 23 Disciples did something specifically allowed in Deut. 23:25. A distinction is made in Deut. 23:25 between harvesting (working) your neighbors field, and just eating to live. v. 24 Pharisees. It is well established that these fellahs created their own traditions and made void the word of God (See Matthew 15; Mark 7; etc). v. 25 Jesus points out the inconsistency & hypocrisy of the Pharisees. They would never condemn David, even though David actually did something "not lawful" according to God's OT law. The Pharisees showed favoritism! v. 27 The sabbath was made for man's benefit, not to be used as a means to manipulate people. v. 28 Jesus, as Lord of the Sabbath, is greater than David... yet they condemn Him (via His disciples). Matthew 12 gives the same account but with additional details (v. 5-7). 12:1 At that season Jesus went on the sabbath day through the grainfields; and his disciples were hungry and began to pluck ears and to eat. 2 But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which it is not lawful to do upon the sabbath. 3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was hungry, and they that were with him; 4 how he entered into the house of God, and ate the showbread, which it was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them that were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have ye not read in the law, that on the sabbath day the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are guiltless? 6 But I say unto you, that one greater than the temple is here. 7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of man is lord of the sabbath. v. 5 According to whom do the Priests "profane" the sabbath and are guiltless? God sees them guiltless, the Pharisees (if they applied their traditions consistently) would have to condemn the priests for doing what God said to do! v. 6 Jesus being greater than the temple is the same point of Him being Lord of the Sabbath / greater than David. He deserves more respect than the Pharisees were showing Him. v. 7 "Mercy, and not sacrifice" is from Hosea 6:6, which says: "For I desire goodness, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings." This means God wants us to do what is right, rather than ask for forgiveness. The Pharisees invented traditions, hunted out "transgressors" of these man made traditions (which they treated as if it were a sin against God), when Jesus said the disciples were actually guiltless. Jesus flat our denied their charge of sin. Jesus said the disciples did not violate the sabbath. Rather, he charged the Pharisees with playing favorites & being hypocritically inconsistent. No where, did Jesus justify disobedience to God or condemn obedience to God. Jesus refuted the false standard of the Pharisees.

John 15:3 Already ye are clean because of the word which I have spoken unto you. I agree they were already clean because of the word. What word was that? John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Jesus spoke of a (singular) new birth. That new birth involves water & the Spirit. The Spirit's work was to reveal & confirm truth (John 16:13; Mark 16:20). Thus, "the Spirit" involves God's word, which produces faith (Romans 10:17). What is water? The only NT command involving water is water baptism into Christ (Acts 2:38; Acts 10-11). John 3:35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. 36 He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him. Jesus required His disciples to be baptized (John 4:1-2). By the time Jesus announced to the 12 that they were clean, they had already trusted Him enough to do what He said to become clean.

The name "church of Christ" is scriptural (Romans 16:16). But that doesn't mean everyone who uses it is following Christ. A church can have its candle removed by the Lord if they do not listen to what He says (Rev. 2:5). While entertainment is fun, that is not what we read of taking place in the NT church. In fact, when it comes to personal things, Paul was very specific... "if any man is hungry, let him eat at home" (1 Cor. 11:34). We have a place for fun, food, entertainment. This may displease many, but the church was not created for secular reasons, it has a spiritual mission (1 Tim. 3:15). --- Regarding baptism, there are several baptisms mentioned in the Bible... each with its own purpose. Some baptisms were in water (John's baptism John 3:23) (baptism into Christ Acts 10:47-48). One was in the Holy Spirit (Acts 2). At least one was baptism was figurative (Jesus' "baptism" in suffering & death Mark 10:38). Holy Spirit baptism is distinct from water baptism into Christ. In Acts 10:44-48, the Holy Spirit fell on the gentiles who heard the gospel. This is before water baptism. And it is specifically described as Holy Spirit baptism in Acts 11:16-17. Interestingly, Ephesians 4:4 says there is "one baptism". So, we understandably ask, which one? Paul doesn't leave us guessing. In Ephesians 5 Paul elaborates, "25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; 26 that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, 27 that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." This passage says Christ sanctified & cleansed the church by the washing of water with the word. This is the new birth Jesus described in John 3:3 & 5, being born of the water and the word. In short, water is the "line in the sand" God has drawn. When we believe (faith) and are baptized, God says this is when he sanctifies & cleanses. It is not an inherent power in the water, as Peter explains in 1 Peter 3. "20 ...when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water: 21 which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation [asking] of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; 22 who is on the right hand of God, having gone into heaven; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." The Bible says God saved Noah through the use of water. The Bible also says God uses water in a like manner to save today. It is not some inherent, physical power of the water to cleanse filth. Rather, in being baptized, one is asking God for a clean conscience through the power of the victorious & reigning Jesus Christ.

The Pharisees had a habit of condemning others based on their traditions, rather than judging based on God's actual word. Matthew 15:15 Then there come to Jesus from Jerusalem Pharisees and scribes, saying, 2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3 And he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? The passage you cite, Mark 2:23-27, is not a case where the disciples sinned against God, but "sinned" against human invented traditions. In fact, what the disciples did is specifically authorized in Deut. 23:25. Mark 2 is not a justification for disobedience to God and you may want to ask yourself why you would look at it that way. Why is it that we strive so hard to find ways around what God has said? Friends, this ought not to be so.