Current Worship Patterns

Joined: February 11th, 2016, 11:16 pm

July 26th, 2017, 6:39 pm #11

Most people have not had a voice while Christianity was being destroyed in America. People want to hold on to anything that reminds them of Christianity. They are being manipulated to fight for these symbols. Traditionally the chuch of Christ never had any symbols and did not support those things. This is simply a case of not knowing what to do to fight the secularization that has been gaining ground for decades. Many who would never have defended things like crosses are swept along with the masses, thinking that there is no harm. Never understanding that they have been brainwashed for just this reaction. This to me shows even more the lack of education, especially the history of Christianity. Each generation has passed on less and less information. We should be able to teach within a smaller time frame, at least a general outline, then get to the in depth study.
Quote
Like
Share

William
William

July 27th, 2017, 4:18 am #12

In response to William in discussion of Sabbath vs Sunday--it is all too typical for announcements to be made, after which the announcer says "Now let us begin worship." William brings up some very good ideas.

Then we have a series of worship songs, usually call "praise songs." These songs are generally all directed to(ward) God with little self-improvement and self-edification, and normally the complete absence of conversion songs. The praise team kicks in, and the audience (trapped worshipers) are asked to stand on their feet for three or four songs.

Normally the songs are those derived from about 1980 or later, with the traditional hymns only a small minority of the songs. The traditional hymns found in the humnals do contain a fairly even distribution of conversion, reflection, duty, and other themes than just praise songs. But these themes are considered irrelevant to today's commercial processing of those who come to worship.

I suspect that William worships in such an environment, as do most readers of this thread.

In some churches, when the "worship" is over, there used to be a final song [to end the worship] and then no telling what is going to take place--items that are not classified as worship, but which are either entertaining and secular or whatever.

I would say that William thinks the "Now let us begin worship" should not be stated.

Many churches which fit this pattern are in the process of "transitioning," but are not clear about what this means. One church is in the process of lowering its pulpits and installing a flat 5 inch high stage to accommodate what is not quite clear. These changes look like the Jimmy Swaggert stage. Often the Lord's Table is considered a distraction, and it may be placed in the back of the auditorium, so this "sacrament" no longer is the focal point, but the stage antics become the attraction. In some churches the baptistry is placed in the foyer.

Rather than extend the invitation at the end of the sermon, the audience is instructed "if there is any way we can help you, let us know. The shepherds are in the foyer to give counsel." The "sacrament" of baptism is not mentioned.

The Lord's Supper (called Communion by the transition teams) and baptism seem to be an artifacts rather than working agents.

At the same time, the preacher often says that all the accomplishments of the church members have not been achieved by them, but by the "Holy Spirit" who opens doors and gives growth. The congregation is also informed that the Lord's Supper is not to be a solemn feast of introspection, but an opportunity to TALK to the person next to you all about the preceding week and about the Lord's and Holy Spirit operation. In some churches, members are asked to take a stone at the start of the worship period, and during the Lord's Supper to bring it forward and place it near the Lord's Table. This is to indicate that the "stone" (hindrance) in the worshiper's life is to be removed during this Supper. These comments may be given by a preacher in his 20s who says he knows more about 1 Corinthians 11 and 12 than all the people who have studied these passages for half a century.
To me, the assembly is when we assemble. Don't know how it got so complicated. The key, for me, is that the assembly should be done "decently and in order" The order seems to be up to us.
Communion -- derived from "common union" -- is a phrase used everywhere I have ever been, as a guest or attendee. It is not a Biblical word, just as church is not a Biblical word.
I have attended services where the servers of the Lord's Supper assembled in the rear and brought in the emblems, but the prayer was still in front. A little different, but certainly not a drunken revel. Who says that the serving implements have to be piled up in front?
Hopefully, I will be in Nashville in early September, and maybe I will go to a "Hills" or "Creek" church just to see what they do.
Quote
Share

Scripture
Scripture

July 27th, 2017, 1:59 pm #13

I know of one "Hills" church that turns off the lights so that you can't read your Bible.
Quote
Share

Scripture
Scripture

July 28th, 2017, 3:08 pm #14

Communion is used to refer to Lord's Supper in the KJV. "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Jesus Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" 1 Corinthians 10:16.

Communion can be called "common union" or "sharing". Communion with someone else is "sharing", regardless of its nature. We "share" when we include other people in our activities and resources. The Bible refers to communion with demons, for example. 1 Corinthians 10:20.

Communion is a good word for the Lord's Supper, so the Christian world frequently called it "the communion", rightfully so. Either word can be used, but in the Churches of Christ I attended it was called "the Lord's Supper." Communion is often used in churches with "high" worship. High worship churches are the mainline denominations. Low churches, such as evangelical, are normally those that populous. But many in the high worship churches consider themselves evangelicals as well.

The Lord's Supper is a sharing, and from it we get spiritual gifts--it is not a meaningless form. 1 Corinthians 11:30, "For this cause many of you are weak and sick, and a number sleep." Catholics call the communions a sacrament. Baptism is also considered a sacrament. The elevation of the video screen to the front of the auditorium reduces the significance of both ordinances.

Low churches generally disregard weekly "communion" at the Lord's Supper, and baptism is generally not mentioned, or it is delayed for a season, when "batches" of people are baptized. "Low church" is not a negative expression since it refers to those without fixed "liturgy." Both high and low churches can have spirituality, in that sense.

When we meet together on Sunday morning, with songs, and Bible readings along with a common sermon theme, we are "sharing" or have "common union" or "communion" with those around us. But the Lord's Supper sharpens the focus and clarifies the bond between us--the bond being that we are saved through Jesus Christ's gift.

This is why many worry that screens, and specialized music, can distract from the communion at the "Lord's Table."



Quote
Share

William
William

July 28th, 2017, 7:21 pm #15

Yes, I am aware, and I apologize for my lapse in thinking and imprecise syntax. The KJV translators (God`s Secretaries) seemingly inserted communion where virtually no other does. Most other translations use variants of sharing or partaking, etc., more direct gerunds than communion. My comment was in response to the comment that the transition team calls the Lord`s Supper "communion", and ff. Have you ever heard anyone say we have now reached the point in our service where we take the Sharing? Communion does not refer to the Lord's supper but to a metaphysical state that occurs when we share or partake or join in common union.
Basically, some little to do about nothing.
I understand the worry, too. The distraction from the metaphysical state, because the physical acts are meaningless without understanding, purpose, and intent. I am not so sure of the general demeanor at the first one, with lots going on, people milling about, lots of conversation, etc. I have visited where lights were dimenished, soft hymns, etc., and I found it disquietly funereal.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

July 28th, 2017, 9:41 pm #16

In response to William in discussion of Sabbath vs Sunday--it is all too typical for announcements to be made, after which the announcer says "Now let us begin worship." William brings up some very good ideas.

Then we have a series of worship songs, usually call "praise songs." These songs are generally all directed to(ward) God with little self-improvement and self-edification, and normally the complete absence of conversion songs. The praise team kicks in, and the audience (trapped worshipers) are asked to stand on their feet for three or four songs.

Normally the songs are those derived from about 1980 or later, with the traditional hymns only a small minority of the songs. The traditional hymns found in the humnals do contain a fairly even distribution of conversion, reflection, duty, and other themes than just praise songs. But these themes are considered irrelevant to today's commercial processing of those who come to worship.

I suspect that William worships in such an environment, as do most readers of this thread.

In some churches, when the "worship" is over, there used to be a final song [to end the worship] and then no telling what is going to take place--items that are not classified as worship, but which are either entertaining and secular or whatever.

I would say that William thinks the "Now let us begin worship" should not be stated.

Many churches which fit this pattern are in the process of "transitioning," but are not clear about what this means. One church is in the process of lowering its pulpits and installing a flat 5 inch high stage to accommodate what is not quite clear. These changes look like the Jimmy Swaggert stage. Often the Lord's Table is considered a distraction, and it may be placed in the back of the auditorium, so this "sacrament" no longer is the focal point, but the stage antics become the attraction. In some churches the baptistry is placed in the foyer.

Rather than extend the invitation at the end of the sermon, the audience is instructed "if there is any way we can help you, let us know. The shepherds are in the foyer to give counsel." The "sacrament" of baptism is not mentioned.

The Lord's Supper (called Communion by the transition teams) and baptism seem to be an artifacts rather than working agents.

At the same time, the preacher often says that all the accomplishments of the church members have not been achieved by them, but by the "Holy Spirit" who opens doors and gives growth. The congregation is also informed that the Lord's Supper is not to be a solemn feast of introspection, but an opportunity to TALK to the person next to you all about the preceding week and about the Lord's and Holy Spirit operation. In some churches, members are asked to take a stone at the start of the worship period, and during the Lord's Supper to bring it forward and place it near the Lord's Table. This is to indicate that the "stone" (hindrance) in the worshiper's life is to be removed during this Supper. These comments may be given by a preacher in his 20s who says he knows more about 1 Corinthians 11 and 12 than all the people who have studied these passages for half a century.
Pagans always want to force the Kingdom of Christ back to Babylon.

http://www.piney.com/Atrahasis.html

John 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

This defines most people's limitation. However, to those with eyes and ears He said:

John 6:63 It is the SPIRIT that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the WORDS that I speak unto you, they are SPIRIT, and they are LIFE.

The Mass is Babylonish which began with the need to regularly execute a god. The gods got wise and let the king (senior pastor) be executed. The Jews regularly sacrificed infants and Hezekiah substituted goats. Most christians want to dress up as God and keep Jesus an infant in a cradle. The Catholics want to keep Jesus on the cross. A few days ago my wife's devout Catholic niece visited and she was troubled with the Catholic cross which still has Jesus pinned to it.

In Babylon.

Nintu made her voice heard
And spoke to the great gods,

On the first, seventh, and fifteenth of the month
I shall make a purification by washing.
Then one god should be slaughtered.
And the gods can be purified by immersion.

Nintu shall mix the clay
With his flesh and blood.
Then a god and a man
Will be mixed together in clay.

Let us hear the drumbeat forever after,
Let a ghost come into existence from the god's flesh,
Let her proclaim it as her living sign,
And let the ghost exist so as not to forget the slain god.


"For Frazerians literature harks back to myths that were originally the scripts of the key primitive ritual of regularly killing and replacing the king in whom the god of vegetation resided, in order to ensure good crops for the community. "The king must die".

Ezekiel 8 describes the death and resurrection of Tammuz.

Britannica: According to the EUCHARISTIC doctrine of Roman Catholicism, the elements of bread and wine are "TRANSUBSTANTIATED" into the BODY and BLOOD of Christ; i.e., their whole substance is converted into the whole substance of the body and blood, although the outward appearances of the elements, their "ACCIDENTS," remain.

"Such practices as the ADORATION and reservation of the HOST [Sun Image] follow from this doctrine that the whole Christ is really present in his body and blood in the forms of bread and wine. During the 19th and 20th centuries the Roman Catholic Liturgical Movement put new emphasis on the frequency of communion, on the participation of the entire congregation in the priestly service, and on the Real Presence of Christ in the church as the fundamental presupposition for the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

"In Reformed Christianity, Huldrych Zwingli emphasized the memorial aspect of the Eucharist. John Calvin, however, taught a "real but spiritual presence" of the living Christ, but in the sacramental action rather than in the elements.


You cannot eat his flesh or drink His blood without ritually killing Jesus.

John Mark Hicks apparently wants to EAT THE FAT of Jesus in the Eucharist as a "feast with and for god God: God eats with us while we burn the fat.
Quote
Like
Share

Scripture
Scripture

July 29th, 2017, 2:29 pm #17

Some thoughts come to mind.

Strangely enough, church and ecclesia are etymologically different. "Church" replaced ecclesia in the translation of the New Testament, beginning with the King James, but preceded by centuries of religious thought. In other words, the King James translation only sealed thought that came centuries before.

Ecclesia literally means "the gathering of those summoned," or merely "assembly" as William has mentioned. Roots of "assembly" can be said to be "those called out." In only three cases in the New Testament is "ecclesia" correctly translated as "assembly". See Acts 19:32,39,and 41.

Church however is etymologically derived from "that of the Lord", or kuriakos, or "pertaining to the Lord." This word is found only two times in the Greek New Testament, 1 Corinthian 11:20 and Revelations 1:10. The first refers to the Lord's Supper, the second verse to the Lord's Day. Church probably gets its modern usage from the fact that worship centers (buildings) were for worship to the Lord. Hence, "church" originally referred to the building, but the called-out assembly (ecclesia) was called the church (kuriakos). So the modern words are different from the original meanings.

This may be unfortunate since the usage of the word "church" ignores the fact that God's family are those "called out." "Called out" can refer to those who respond to Jesus being the "Son of God," and are called out as a result of that fact. See Matthew 16:18. "Upon this rock will I build my assembly (church)." Those who respond to His sonship are called out from the immoral unbelieving life to a life transformed by the love of God and the gift of Christ.

"Church" on the other hand, refers to ownership, and the developing clergy of the early centuries found this meaning to be to their advantage, at least some would say. Church evolved into referring to s superstructure which began to exercise authority beyond that recognized in the New Testament.

A real turn-about is that "church" in its original meaning is closer to "the Lord's Supper", since church refers to that pertaining the Lord, or owned by the Lord. Communion on the other hand might refer to how the called-out (assembly, or ecclesia) bond together in sharing thought, prayers, songs, and Biblical reading.

Communion, in that sense, is a broad term, referring to a number of sharings that Christians have with one another. Then the Lord's Supper is not the only communion. We have communion from the time we are "called out." Oddly enough, the called out (kecclesia or assembly) has a communion (ownership, sharing, or kuriakos) on the Lord's Day and during the Lord's Supper. That common ownership or sharing is made possible by the Sonship of Christ whereby we are called out from paganism and immorality.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

July 29th, 2017, 3:38 pm #18

Thanks! That makes it pretty clear. As noted the Catholic Kuria (sp) makes the Pope the "owner".

Does that also mean Senior Pastor?
Last edited by Ken.Sublett on July 29th, 2017, 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Scripture
Scripture

July 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm #19

When the elders give subservience to their pastor, we have the beginning of hierarchy. Then when Right Now Media is introduced, the elders, pastor, and the "laity" know who the bishops are over their churches. All very nicely laid out, then some time down the road we can get the Protestant pope, chosen from those who are authoring the most books with evolving theology.

So I think we could have a SuperChurch, the Protestant Vatican.
Quote
Share

Scripture
Scripture

July 29th, 2017, 8:41 pm #20

The tendency of many "transition" (evolving) churches is to cancel Bible classes so as to break that momentum of Bible textual study. Additionally some churches have abandoned Bible Study on Wednesday nights. Films and self-analysis is in their place.

Bible classes are usually taught by those with a long track record, who are versed in restoration history. These teachers are an impediment to "transition." This may be why their classes are cancelled. Right Now Media is their substitute.
Quote
Share