Ken Sublett

Ken Sublett

Greg
Greg

February 9th, 2012, 10:53 pm #1

I have never seen research like that of Ken's and was wondering what it takes to be able to produce this kind of information. It is impressive to me as I have been a member of the Church of Christ for over 30 years and have studied the Bible with reasonable diligence but have discovered a "new frontier" in reading Ken's posts. I am clear much of it is over my head even though I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person.

I was wondering if Ken could "dumb-down" his analysis for me so I could ask a few questions of him as I am truly interested in his input.

The first question is that I am still not exactly sure if he is saying that singing (without instruments) in the worship service is acceptable as he emphasizes SPEAKING in many of his posts. So if that is the case, are we talking about chanting something from scripture instead of singing hymns from a songbook? What does he engage in? I am convicted that musical instruments are an addition to what God wants and therefore are to be left out of the worship without exception.

Were Paul and the other apostles/missionaries supported financially in any way by the churches they visited?

Are traditional sermons from the preacher different from the idea of the scripture study Ken emphasizes? Is it a preferance or a matter of faith?

I have other questions but these will suffice at this time. If anyone else wants to jump in as well as Ken feel free. I am always open to instruction and study of the Word.

Thank you all in advance,

Greg
Quote
Share

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

February 10th, 2012, 12:25 am #2

I have never seen research like that of Ken's and was wondering what it takes to be able to produce this kind of information. It is impressive to me as I have been a member of the Church of Christ for over 30 years and have studied the Bible with reasonable diligence but have discovered a "new frontier" in reading Ken's posts. I am clear much of it is over my head even though I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person.

God let me retire about 33 years ago: while serving on a board of a Christian school and Campus ministry I got myself an Apple II and began exploring: Why is it that EVERYONE sees music as commanded when I cannot find anthing that does not make music and musicians a pretty low class. I went through the Bible looking as the "hundreds" of allusions to music and worship. Much later I began collecting translations (by begging) and both Greek and Latin literature. I learned in high school to never go past a word I did not understand. I don't think there is an academia which goes beyond supplying enough to keep the preacher out of trouble IF he doesn't let us upstarts question him. When Paul PREACHED until midnight he DIALOGED.

I couldn't do that if hired to keep up a local creed.


I was wondering if Ken could "dumb-down" his analysis for me so I could ask a few questions of him as I am truly interested in his input.

A publisher asked me if I could write on an eighth grade level: I told him, no, go get an eight grader. As an Engineer technical writing was my only training and I just don't have time or time left to clean up my resources.

I will try: I don't do much explaining but quote texts, word definitions and how words are used in the ancient text. The problem with my method is that with a given word you fall into Solomon's Mines and threads just run on and run on.


The first question is that I am still not exactly sure if he is saying that singing (without instruments) in the worship service is acceptable as he emphasizes SPEAKING in many of his posts.

I try not to "applicate" too much. However, for every "sing" word you can find dozens of "speak" or "read" passages.

1. I believe that Speak one to another is clearly EXTERNAL.
2. Sing AND make melody is said to be IN THE HEART or mind. Early scholars agree with that (Philo, Niceta) but the later says that it does not EXCLUDE external singing. It just seems strange that adults have to have their lessons sung to them.
3. The object is to Teach, Admonish and comfort.
4. Jesus commanded that we teach and observe what HE commanded to be taught."
5. Peter made that the prophets by the Spirit of Christ and the prophecies made more certian by Jesus and left as the "memory" by the writers.
6. Peter said that if we do not do that we are false teachers.
7. By making it an act of worship when Jesus said the kingdom does not come with religious observations, it has been amazingly easy to translate cantillation into complex harmony and NOT using that which is written for our learning.
8. Disciples go to Bible class whereas "worship" has taken on the meaning of trying too appease God or display our talent.
9. Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day
10. There was never any singing in the church in the wilderness ordained by Christ: that is because the purpose was to rest, read and rehearse the Word of God.


So if that is the case, are we talking about chanting something from scripture instead of singing hymns from a songbook? What does he engage in? I am convicted that musical instruments are an addition to what God wants and therefore are to be left out of the worship without exception.

If you grasp that Church is a School of Christ the Campbells) and worship is "Reading and Musing the Word" then you cannot find any rationale for singing in OUR sense of the Word which medicine proves shuts down the rational or spiritual mind."

Were Paul and the other apostles/missionaries supported financially in any way by the churches they visited?

As I remember it Paul was always paid by the LAST church or by the SENDER. As a herald (kerusso or presbyter) he was always paid by the sender: if he altered the message or even opened it or tried to collect on the receiving end he would not be employed at all. Poets and Philosopers it is noted were never used as heralds because they couldn't resist the temptation to improve the message."

Are traditional sermons from the preacher different from the idea of the scripture study Ken emphasizes? Is it a preferance or a matter of faith?

The "preacher" in Ephesians 4 is the sent Evangelist and the Pastor-teachers commanded to "teach that which HAS been taught." Ephesians goes on (by word definition) to exclude all of the performing arts and crafts so that the church could read and discuss the Word of God.

A Preacher can READ, define the doctrinal content and COMFORT as Paul commanded Timothy. However, in my experience the preacher speaks about himself and preens to make himself attractive. He may read a verse and the sermonize and miss the whole point. Paul told the Corinthians that "Your assemblies do more harm than good." Isaiah 58 outlaws seeking your own pleasure or speaking your own words: it is pretty easy to elevate self over the Word:

Logos, verbal noun of lego
Opposite kata pathos
Opposite music, poetry or rhetoric
Opposite human reasoning
Opposite Epagoge bringint in to one's aid, introduction
Alurement, enticement, incantation, spell

Opposite Pathos A. that which happens to a person or thing, incident, accident,
where this incident took place, unfortunate accident,
2. what one has experienced, good or bad, experience
II. of the soul, emotion, passion (leg de path . . hols hois hepetai hdon lup Arist.EN1105b21), sophi psukhn pathn aphaireitai

Sophia, A. cleverness or skill in handicraft and art in music and singing, tekhn kai s. h.Merc.483, cf. 511; in poetry, Sol.13.52, Pi.O.1.117, Ar.Ra.882, X.An.1.2.8,
in divination, S.OT 502 (lyr.


I have other questions but these will suffice at this time. If anyone else wants to jump in as well as Ken feel free. I am always open to instruction and study of the Word.

Thank you all in advance,

Greg
Quote
Like
Share

Donnie Cruz
Donnie Cruz

February 10th, 2012, 7:42 am #3

I have never seen research like that of Ken's and was wondering what it takes to be able to produce this kind of information. It is impressive to me as I have been a member of the Church of Christ for over 30 years and have studied the Bible with reasonable diligence but have discovered a "new frontier" in reading Ken's posts. I am clear much of it is over my head even though I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person.

I was wondering if Ken could "dumb-down" his analysis for me so I could ask a few questions of him as I am truly interested in his input.

The first question is that I am still not exactly sure if he is saying that singing (without instruments) in the worship service is acceptable as he emphasizes SPEAKING in many of his posts. So if that is the case, are we talking about chanting something from scripture instead of singing hymns from a songbook? What does he engage in? I am convicted that musical instruments are an addition to what God wants and therefore are to be left out of the worship without exception.

Were Paul and the other apostles/missionaries supported financially in any way by the churches they visited?

Are traditional sermons from the preacher different from the idea of the scripture study Ken emphasizes? Is it a preferance or a matter of faith?

I have other questions but these will suffice at this time. If anyone else wants to jump in as well as Ken feel free. I am always open to instruction and study of the Word.

Thank you all in advance,

Greg
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Greg,

Thanks so much for your remarks about Ken and for the questions you've asked ... so far.

We are very blessed to have Engr. Sublett as our resident Bible School of Christ instructor. I, too, am very impressed with his cumulative scholarly research through the years.

I have benefited beyond measure from Ken as a technical resource. With my background in the Info Tech programming/analysis, I feel that I have thoroughly tested his logic and find no anomalies. His works have much depth for most of us, but in the end we find from his research that man's recorded history of events and activities (pagan and religious) are evidences of facts and truths revealed in the Holy Scripture.

Yes, we will continue to learn from our brother Ken.

Donnie[/color]
Quote
Share

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

February 10th, 2012, 6:33 pm #4

I doubt that any thing of spiritual value can be grasped without doing your own research. By posting how words are used in the writings of the time and linking to actual Greek or Latin literature a person can be their own disciple. While as on the Richland Hills thread, people can deny that a word's use does not make it mean the same thing in the Bible: my challenge is to find any recorded history that makes PSALLO have any musical content: it means "Pluck a string with your fingers and NEVER with a plectrum." Plucking a hair may make a twang but music it does not make. The challenge for the Enemies of the Word and of Christ have the burden to find any favorable use of instruments when Christ calls us into assembly to be HIS disciples.

As Donnie has noted of Psalm 150 you can use the instrument with BREATH.

I doubt that I have the ability to write smooth prose: I wrote an article on tithing to rebut the local church's teachinga and adds promoting tithing. I probably collected the data in a few hours but my brother the writer took a couple of weeks to clean it up.

I failed to make one other point: while everything from the Tabernacle onward for spiritual people must be free will, even if you could justify a preacher just making up his own message by using a verse as launch pad, it is an UNFUNDED MANDATE. Most recorded scholarship believed that "Lay by HIM in store" meant "Lay b HIM in store." That means Jim Lays by Jim a sum each week so that it grows so that Paul and team collect the money, tie it up in a bag, and deliver it to the elders free of charge. By taking you captive with a Law of Giving, the "leadership" assumes total ownership after it hits the basket and YOU have no right to pass judgment when ALL of the Instrumental Dupes planned all along to DIVERT your free gift to the "lord" to their own fun and perverted pretend "worship."

Just say No: I think we have moved into a period of earth history that you cannot trust any leader who elevates themselves.
Quote
Like
Share

Greg
Greg

February 10th, 2012, 10:01 pm #5

I have never seen research like that of Ken's and was wondering what it takes to be able to produce this kind of information. It is impressive to me as I have been a member of the Church of Christ for over 30 years and have studied the Bible with reasonable diligence but have discovered a "new frontier" in reading Ken's posts. I am clear much of it is over my head even though I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person.

God let me retire about 33 years ago: while serving on a board of a Christian school and Campus ministry I got myself an Apple II and began exploring: Why is it that EVERYONE sees music as commanded when I cannot find anthing that does not make music and musicians a pretty low class. I went through the Bible looking as the "hundreds" of allusions to music and worship. Much later I began collecting translations (by begging) and both Greek and Latin literature. I learned in high school to never go past a word I did not understand. I don't think there is an academia which goes beyond supplying enough to keep the preacher out of trouble IF he doesn't let us upstarts question him. When Paul PREACHED until midnight he DIALOGED.

I couldn't do that if hired to keep up a local creed.


I was wondering if Ken could "dumb-down" his analysis for me so I could ask a few questions of him as I am truly interested in his input.

A publisher asked me if I could write on an eighth grade level: I told him, no, go get an eight grader. As an Engineer technical writing was my only training and I just don't have time or time left to clean up my resources.

I will try: I don't do much explaining but quote texts, word definitions and how words are used in the ancient text. The problem with my method is that with a given word you fall into Solomon's Mines and threads just run on and run on.


The first question is that I am still not exactly sure if he is saying that singing (without instruments) in the worship service is acceptable as he emphasizes SPEAKING in many of his posts.

I try not to "applicate" too much. However, for every "sing" word you can find dozens of "speak" or "read" passages.

1. I believe that Speak one to another is clearly EXTERNAL.
2. Sing AND make melody is said to be IN THE HEART or mind. Early scholars agree with that (Philo, Niceta) but the later says that it does not EXCLUDE external singing. It just seems strange that adults have to have their lessons sung to them.
3. The object is to Teach, Admonish and comfort.
4. Jesus commanded that we teach and observe what HE commanded to be taught."
5. Peter made that the prophets by the Spirit of Christ and the prophecies made more certian by Jesus and left as the "memory" by the writers.
6. Peter said that if we do not do that we are false teachers.
7. By making it an act of worship when Jesus said the kingdom does not come with religious observations, it has been amazingly easy to translate cantillation into complex harmony and NOT using that which is written for our learning.
8. Disciples go to Bible class whereas "worship" has taken on the meaning of trying too appease God or display our talent.
9. Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day
10. There was never any singing in the church in the wilderness ordained by Christ: that is because the purpose was to rest, read and rehearse the Word of God.


So if that is the case, are we talking about chanting something from scripture instead of singing hymns from a songbook? What does he engage in? I am convicted that musical instruments are an addition to what God wants and therefore are to be left out of the worship without exception.

If you grasp that Church is a School of Christ the Campbells) and worship is "Reading and Musing the Word" then you cannot find any rationale for singing in OUR sense of the Word which medicine proves shuts down the rational or spiritual mind."

Were Paul and the other apostles/missionaries supported financially in any way by the churches they visited?

As I remember it Paul was always paid by the LAST church or by the SENDER. As a herald (kerusso or presbyter) he was always paid by the sender: if he altered the message or even opened it or tried to collect on the receiving end he would not be employed at all. Poets and Philosopers it is noted were never used as heralds because they couldn't resist the temptation to improve the message."

Are traditional sermons from the preacher different from the idea of the scripture study Ken emphasizes? Is it a preferance or a matter of faith?

The "preacher" in Ephesians 4 is the sent Evangelist and the Pastor-teachers commanded to "teach that which HAS been taught." Ephesians goes on (by word definition) to exclude all of the performing arts and crafts so that the church could read and discuss the Word of God.

A Preacher can READ, define the doctrinal content and COMFORT as Paul commanded Timothy. However, in my experience the preacher speaks about himself and preens to make himself attractive. He may read a verse and the sermonize and miss the whole point. Paul told the Corinthians that "Your assemblies do more harm than good." Isaiah 58 outlaws seeking your own pleasure or speaking your own words: it is pretty easy to elevate self over the Word:

Logos, verbal noun of lego
Opposite kata pathos
Opposite music, poetry or rhetoric
Opposite human reasoning
Opposite Epagoge bringint in to one's aid, introduction
Alurement, enticement, incantation, spell

Opposite Pathos A. that which happens to a person or thing, incident, accident,
where this incident took place, unfortunate accident,
2. what one has experienced, good or bad, experience
II. of the soul, emotion, passion (leg de path . . hols hois hepetai hdon lup Arist.EN1105b21), sophi psukhn pathn aphaireitai

Sophia, A. cleverness or skill in handicraft and art in music and singing, tekhn kai s. h.Merc.483, cf. 511; in poetry, Sol.13.52, Pi.O.1.117, Ar.Ra.882, X.An.1.2.8,
in divination, S.OT 502 (lyr.


I have other questions but these will suffice at this time. If anyone else wants to jump in as well as Ken feel free. I am always open to instruction and study of the Word.

Thank you all in advance,

Greg
Thank you for your prompt response. Ok......

From your point #2 about the singing can I infer that outward singing is at least not against God's law? I understand that you do not understand its purpose from a personal perspective, but I sense you are not actually advocating that scripture condemns it. Accurate assessment or not?

I have a sense of Christian unity when the congregation is singing with one heart/mind words which admonish, encourage, challenge and teach. It is of course not the only way this occurs as a Christian but is a way I believe I experience. This of course is done when one is truly focused on the words and thoughts being sung and not on how we sound harmony-wise. If you heard me or any of my family growing up singing, you would be confident we all needed a bucket to carry a tune. There were/are no buckets available in the churches I attended or attend and none of us would ever be accused of being Pavarotti! LOL! But I believe we sang with the spirit and meaning of the words and the Christian ideals and standards that were contained in those songs which is part of your points #3 and #7 and #8.

I give to the church where I attend an offering and I save some money for the poor, missions in Central America or other special food needs in the community. I guess I give (not tithe) AND I lay by instore for other occasions. Is this what you understand scripture to teach or am I in error here?

On a personal note, I come from a family of which some have engineering(metallurgical/aerospace and electrical) and military backgrounds (army and navy). I was neither as my career interests lie in the business world and my wife and I own our business. I say that because I understand and can appreciate your technical way of communicating and writing. Thank you for your efforts to make it more palatable for me.

Because of you, I learned what plecturn, musing and applicate mean. I too was taught to never go past a word I did not understand. Thanks for reminding me and challenging me!

Look forward to your reply.










Quote
Share

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

February 10th, 2012, 11:46 pm #6

Thank you for your prompt response. Ok......

From your point #2 about the singing can I infer that outward singing is at least not against God's law? I understand that you do not understand its purpose from a personal perspective, but I sense you are not actually advocating that scripture condemns it. Accurate assessment or not?

"Social Singing" has always been a way to bind "tribal" groups together. There is some evidence that social singing binds the group to the Alpha Male. I know that Preachers have a problem with knowing how to "do" church so that it works.

Many people love it, but lots of people feel the anxiety oozing out when perfect complex harmony is deliberately produced thinking that perfectly performed singing some how appeases God. I am one of those whose "anxiety" rides very close to the "edge" and a college chorus can push me over creating both spiritual and physical damage. That is based on the creation of endorphins and other "goodies" which produce the impulse to Fight, Flight or Sexual feelings. Loud singing which OSHA would outlaw if it had the nerve creates Decibel poisoning. That happens when sound is over about 85db and church music can produce 110 with permanent damage to the hearing.

We know that singing as an ACT came c. 373 so singing was not understood to be a liturgical act: that divided the west from the east churches. Even then singing would be like the modern Muslims or Jews sing: it is not metrical. If there is a command to sing in a tuneful sense, and the command is to "use one mind and one mouth to speak that which is written for our learning," then we are in trouble because God did not provide anything metrical in a tuneful sense. The Catholic never sang in a tuneful sense and the organ never accompanied congregational singing. After the Reformation people accustomed to gather in the now-state owned cathedrals learned to love harmony (not a Biblical command). Men like Calvin came to approve some Psalms (only) to be radically rewritten (many in error) and set to one of a few melodies to be sung in unison (only). Harmony came later. That's why it may be acceptable but no one can claim it as a restoration of First Century Churches.


I have a sense of Christian unity when the congregation is singing with one heart/mind words which admonish, encourage, challenge and teach. It is of course not the only way this occurs as a Christian but is a way I believe I experience. This of course is done when one is truly focused on the words and thoughts being sung and not on how we sound harmony-wise. If you heard me or any of my family growing up singing, you would be confident we all needed a bucket to carry a tune. There were/are no buckets available in the churches I attended or attend and none of us would ever be accused of being Pavarotti! LOL! But I believe we sang with the spirit and meaning of the words and the Christian ideals and standards that were contained in those songs which is part of your points #3 and #7 and #8.

I don't have any agenda to eleminate it: my wife and three girls constituted a pretty good "team" in the earlier years: I finally had to go see a doctor. He said have surgery which probably won't work or go to the University for speech therapy or QUIT trying to sing in church. I know others who have lost lots of their speech because of trying to outdo others in "doing my part." My then 94 year old Mother couldn't agree with me more but that is why a large percentage of people endure singing as hurting: the Greeks understood that and separated social festivals into age groups. That also includes lots of hearing loss.

I give to the church where I attend an offering and I save some money for the poor, missions in Central America or other special food needs in the community. I guess I give (not tithe) AND I lay by instore for other occasions. Is this what you understand scripture to teach or am I in error here?

That's true: you cannot do a modern assembly without a building and lots of costs: the early synagogue collected only for the poor but someone had to pay for the large number of buildings. Lots depends on whether you can trust the people handling the money. We know that the Tabernacle was built by free will giving and certainly the Bible defends it. But there is no law which you have to obey. Almost by definition a church cannot get much of its funds to the poor and collective efforts may let the few do the work so that the "mite givers" can feel secure. The "Lay by him in story" is I believe what Jesus was speaking about: if you see someone in need you should give alms. At the same time when a church moves toward the "social gospel" it is easy to minimize the command to assemble yourself to learn. You could do that better at home with a computer but "confessing together" seems to be speaking or singing the Words of Christ as a mutual confession. Praise ditties composed by people not very Scriptural I think defeats that.

Before churches in the ancient world and even in my time small communities had a community building and took care of those in need. A DISCIPLE is a STUDENT and when Paul uses "give heed to" or "give attendance to" he uses forms of "worship."


On a personal note, I come from a family of which some have engineering(metallurgical/aerospace and electrical) and military backgrounds (army and navy). I was neither as my career interests lie in the business world and my wife and I own our business. I say that because I understand and can appreciate your technical way of communicating and writing. Thank you for your efforts to make it more palatable for me.

Because of you, I learned what plecturn, musing and applicate mean. I too was taught to never go past a word I did not understand. Thanks for reminding me and challenging me!

Look forward to your reply.

Tell the "psallo" based instrumentalists that they violate the command to use only the fingers and only on a string: you cannot pluck a trumpet.

I learned Applicate when the Bible head of a Christian school used it. Another is EXPLICATE which is outlawed as private interpretation or further expounding. Before you explicate or applicate we should educate and let the Bible rest in its own culture. I can't think of any change in culture which would minimize a Disciple of Christ from being a Student of Christ. The Campbells really tried to restore worship as Reading and Musing the Word: of course the Lord's Supper is a teaching activity. I think "doubtful disputation" in Romans 14 was Paul saying "let your personal opinions not hinder just teaching the text" in context.
Quote
Like
Share

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

February 10th, 2012, 11:46 pm #7

Thank you for your prompt response. Ok......

From your point #2 about the singing can I infer that outward singing is at least not against God's law? I understand that you do not understand its purpose from a personal perspective, but I sense you are not actually advocating that scripture condemns it. Accurate assessment or not?

I have a sense of Christian unity when the congregation is singing with one heart/mind words which admonish, encourage, challenge and teach. It is of course not the only way this occurs as a Christian but is a way I believe I experience. This of course is done when one is truly focused on the words and thoughts being sung and not on how we sound harmony-wise. If you heard me or any of my family growing up singing, you would be confident we all needed a bucket to carry a tune. There were/are no buckets available in the churches I attended or attend and none of us would ever be accused of being Pavarotti! LOL! But I believe we sang with the spirit and meaning of the words and the Christian ideals and standards that were contained in those songs which is part of your points #3 and #7 and #8.

I give to the church where I attend an offering and I save some money for the poor, missions in Central America or other special food needs in the community. I guess I give (not tithe) AND I lay by instore for other occasions. Is this what you understand scripture to teach or am I in error here?

On a personal note, I come from a family of which some have engineering(metallurgical/aerospace and electrical) and military backgrounds (army and navy). I was neither as my career interests lie in the business world and my wife and I own our business. I say that because I understand and can appreciate your technical way of communicating and writing. Thank you for your efforts to make it more palatable for me.

Because of you, I learned what plecturn, musing and applicate mean. I too was taught to never go past a word I did not understand. Thanks for reminding me and challenging me!

Look forward to your reply.









Thank you for your prompt response. Ok......

From your point #2 about the singing can I infer that outward singing is at least not against God's law? I understand that you do not understand its purpose from a personal perspective, but I sense you are not actually advocating that scripture condemns it. Accurate assessment or not?

"Social Singing" has always been a way to bind "tribal" groups together. There is some evidence that social singing binds the group to the Alpha Male. I know that Preachers have a problem with knowing how to "do" church so that it works.

Many people love it, but lots of people feel the anxiety oozing out when perfect complex harmony is deliberately produced thinking that perfectly performed singing some how appeases God. I am one of those whose "anxiety" rides very close to the "edge" and a college chorus can push me over creating both spiritual and physical damage. That is based on the creation of endorphins and other "goodies" which produce the impulse to Fight, Flight or Sexual feelings. Loud singing which OSHA would outlaw if it had the nerve creates Decibel poisoning. That happens when sound is over about 85db and church music can produce 110 with permanent damage to the hearing.

We know that singing as an ACT came c. 373 so singing was not understood to be a liturgical act: that divided the west from the east churches. Even then singing would be like the modern Muslims or Jews sing: it is not metrical. If there is a command to sing in a tuneful sense, and the command is to "use one mind and one mouth to speak that which is written for our learning," then we are in trouble because God did not provide anything metrical in a tuneful sense. The Catholic never sang in a tuneful sense and the organ never accompanied congregational singing. After the Reformation people accustomed to gather in the now-state owned cathedrals learned to love harmony (not a Biblical command). Men like Calvin came to approve some Psalms (only) to be radically rewritten (many in error) and set to one of a few melodies to be sung in unison (only). Harmony came later. That's why it may be acceptable but no one can claim it as a restoration of First Century Churches.


I have a sense of Christian unity when the congregation is singing with one heart/mind words which admonish, encourage, challenge and teach. It is of course not the only way this occurs as a Christian but is a way I believe I experience. This of course is done when one is truly focused on the words and thoughts being sung and not on how we sound harmony-wise. If you heard me or any of my family growing up singing, you would be confident we all needed a bucket to carry a tune. There were/are no buckets available in the churches I attended or attend and none of us would ever be accused of being Pavarotti! LOL! But I believe we sang with the spirit and meaning of the words and the Christian ideals and standards that were contained in those songs which is part of your points #3 and #7 and #8.

I don't have any agenda to eleminate it: my wife and three girls constituted a pretty good "team" in the earlier years: I finally had to go see a doctor. He said have surgery which probably won't work or go to the University for speech therapy or QUIT trying to sing in church. I know others who have lost lots of their speech because of trying to outdo others in "doing my part." My then 94 year old Mother couldn't agree with me more but that is why a large percentage of people endure singing as hurting: the Greeks understood that and separated social festivals into age groups. That also includes lots of hearing loss.

I give to the church where I attend an offering and I save some money for the poor, missions in Central America or other special food needs in the community. I guess I give (not tithe) AND I lay by instore for other occasions. Is this what you understand scripture to teach or am I in error here?

That's true: you cannot do a modern assembly without a building and lots of costs: the early synagogue collected only for the poor but someone had to pay for the large number of buildings. Lots depends on whether you can trust the people handling the money. We know that the Tabernacle was built by free will giving and certainly the Bible defends it. But there is no law which you have to obey. Almost by definition a church cannot get much of its funds to the poor and collective efforts may let the few do the work so that the "mite givers" can feel secure. The "Lay by him in story" is I believe what Jesus was speaking about: if you see someone in need you should give alms. At the same time when a church moves toward the "social gospel" it is easy to minimize the command to assemble yourself to learn. You could do that better at home with a computer but "confessing together" seems to be speaking or singing the Words of Christ as a mutual confession. Praise ditties composed by people not very Scriptural I think defeats that.

Before churches in the ancient world and even in my time small communities had a community building and took care of those in need. A DISCIPLE is a STUDENT and when Paul uses "give heed to" or "give attendance to" he uses forms of "worship."


On a personal note, I come from a family of which some have engineering(metallurgical/aerospace and electrical) and military backgrounds (army and navy). I was neither as my career interests lie in the business world and my wife and I own our business. I say that because I understand and can appreciate your technical way of communicating and writing. Thank you for your efforts to make it more palatable for me.

Because of you, I learned what plecturn, musing and applicate mean. I too was taught to never go past a word I did not understand. Thanks for reminding me and challenging me!

Look forward to your reply.

Tell the "psallo" based instrumentalists that they violate the command to use only the fingers and only on a string: you cannot pluck a trumpet.

I learned Applicate when the Bible head of a Christian school used it. Another is EXPLICATE which is outlawed as private interpretation or further expounding. Before you explicate or applicate we should educate and let the Bible rest in its own culture. I can't think of any change in culture which would minimize a Disciple of Christ from being a Student of Christ. The Campbells really tried to restore worship as Reading and Musing the Word: of course the Lord's Supper is a teaching activity. I think "doubtful disputation" in Romans 14 was Paul saying "let your personal opinions not hinder just teaching the text" in context.
Quote
Like
Share

Brian Cade
Brian Cade

February 11th, 2012, 5:50 am #8

I have never seen research like that of Ken's and was wondering what it takes to be able to produce this kind of information. It is impressive to me as I have been a member of the Church of Christ for over 30 years and have studied the Bible with reasonable diligence but have discovered a "new frontier" in reading Ken's posts. I am clear much of it is over my head even though I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person.

I was wondering if Ken could "dumb-down" his analysis for me so I could ask a few questions of him as I am truly interested in his input.

The first question is that I am still not exactly sure if he is saying that singing (without instruments) in the worship service is acceptable as he emphasizes SPEAKING in many of his posts. So if that is the case, are we talking about chanting something from scripture instead of singing hymns from a songbook? What does he engage in? I am convicted that musical instruments are an addition to what God wants and therefore are to be left out of the worship without exception.

Were Paul and the other apostles/missionaries supported financially in any way by the churches they visited?

Are traditional sermons from the preacher different from the idea of the scripture study Ken emphasizes? Is it a preferance or a matter of faith?

I have other questions but these will suffice at this time. If anyone else wants to jump in as well as Ken feel free. I am always open to instruction and study of the Word.

Thank you all in advance,

Greg
Greg, Ken is not a trained Bible scholar interested in truth nor is he willing to admit when he is wrong, as he often is. His motivation is not to teach truth but to win arguments and he will do so by any means necessary, including attacking and condemning anyone who dares disagree with him. He also will fabricate lies and claim they are from the Bible, for example, teaching that the Israelites were condemned for musical idolatry (whatever that means) at Mt Sinai, when the relevant passage in Exodus 32 says nothing of the kind.
You would do well to ignore Ken's ramblings. Do not be fooled by the large amount of cutting and pasting that he does, either. That only indicates he knows how to use a word processor to obscure his distinct lack of scholarship and dishonesty.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

February 11th, 2012, 10:05 am #9

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Brian,

I would advise you to make a numbered list of disputations and "fabricated lies" that you can think of from all of Ken's writings. Let us start with your example:

Thesis 1. Musical idolatry: Exodus 32 says nothing of it.
Thesis 2. ______________________________________
Thesis 3. ______________________________________
. . .
Thesis 95. ______________________________________

Then, let's discuss each one as numbered.

Briefly, please re-read and study Exodus 32 more carefully. [You might notice in v. 2 that "your sons" wore golden earrings. LOL!!!] Seriously, notice the molten calf. Notice the "dancing" in verse 19. Associate dancing with singing or music and musical instruments.

There are numerous passages in the Scripture that support the fact that music and dancing go hand in hand (I Sam. 18:6; etc.). Daniel 3 is a good example of "musical idolatry."

Psalm 150 is a favorite chapter among instrumental music lovers in terms of its use in the assembly of saints. Some, perhaps the Charismatics, love the "music and dance" combo; others wish that "dance" weren't in the passage. But "timbrel and dance" [KJV] is stated specifically in verse 4.

[OK, I stated all that briefly as it would take a considerable amount of time to discuss "musical idolatry."]

BTW, Greg's e-mail address is available. Perhaps, you would like to correspond with him.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

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

February 11th, 2012, 5:46 pm #10

Donnie: Briefly, please re-read and study Exodus 32 more carefully. [You might notice in v. 2 that "your sons" wore golden earrings. LOL!!!] Seriously, notice the molten calf. Notice the "dancing" in verse 19. Associate dancing with singing or music and musical instruments.

I missed that one completely but it fits the UNIVERSAL patternism of religious performers.
Quote
Like
Share