Humble Beginnings

To Watch Or Not To Watch (Rated G)

As Christians, at what point should we separate ourselves from the world by not watching/supporting movies? Do we watch G-rated movies but not R-rated movies? Do we support companies that only produce family friendly films or do we take it one movie at a time? Should we watch any movies at the theater (or maybe even home) since much of the entertainment world is wicked? Is there a line we should not cross, or do we really care?

This week's top 5 movies:
1. G-Force
2. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
3. The Ugly Truth
4. Orphan
5. Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs

A Sign

True Or False

Is truth "truth" because of the one stating it, or is truth "truth" because it is true?

If we say truth is "truth" because it is true, then can we say that a book completely full of truth but published by a group with whom we may or may not agree should be shunned? I'm not necessarily condoning any publishing group or book - I'm just wondering how we should handle such a situation.

The Great Church Music Divide

This article by Bro. Ray McAlister, president of Emmaus Baptist College, Brandon, FL appeared in the March 2006 issue of the Baptist Anchor.

Nothing has divided Christians today more than Bible versions and church music. So, for whatever it is worth, I thought I would give my opinion on church music.

Let me be careful to point out that I am talking about music used in a church service, in corporate worship. Singing and music in church to me is different than singing and music outside of church. I enjoy some music that there is absolutely nothing wrong with, but it would be completely out of place in church. One of my favorite songs and melodies is "Unchained Melody." To me it is enchantingly beautiful but it has no place in a worship service.

Every church has a personality of its own. What makes up a church personality? Among many other things, socio-economic level, general educational level, general age level, preaching style, church mission, friendliness, concern, and of course, music style. That is the reason a person might enjoy attending one church and not enjoy attending another, although both may be sound Baptist churches. Different is not necessarily wrong it is just different. One church might enjoy preachers who "stomp and snort" and another church might enjoy preachers who are "calm and quiet." That does not make one right and the other wrong. It is a matter of personal preference.

There are many, many styles of music sung in our churches today. There are anthems, sacred classical and the old standard hymns. There is a little different style of songs found in such hymnals as "Favorite Songs and Hymns" and "Heavenly Highways Hymns." In my first pastorate in Arkansas, the churches in that area looked forward to getting the latest "Stamps-Baxter" song books and enjoyed singing from them. Then there is Southern Gospel, Country Gospel and Bluegrass.

I once heard a pastor say, "I hate Southern Gospel music!" He did not mean he hated the words sung in Southern Gospel music, what he did not like is the vehicle used to deliver the words.

Then there is a whole spectrum of music that has been labeled "contemporary." There are what have been called 24/7 songs -- you sing seven words twenty-four times. Then there are choruses, like we have sung for years. Some songs are old hymns sung to a different style of music, some are Scriptures set to music and some are new songs. I enjoy some contemporary music and some I do not enjoy. Whether I enjoy it or not does not make it right or wrong. What makes something wrong is not my preference, but God's Word.

There are two scriptures in the New Testament that deal specifically with church music.

"Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord" (Ephesians 5:19).

"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord" (Colossians 3:16).

Both verses have some things in common. First, they both mention the same kind of songs -- psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. A psalm (which includes the whole book of Psalms) is a religious song sung to the accompaniment of musical instruments. A hymn is a song of praise or glorification. And, a spiritual song is just what it says, a song that is spiritual in nature. All three are very closely related and it is difficult to separate them into their own categories.

The second thing these verses have in common are the words, "in your hearts." Any song sung in a worship service of a church, either congregational, choir or special, should come from the heart. According to these Scriptures, every song should be one the singer feels deeply about. From my own personal experience, most congregational songs are simply mouthing words and do not come from the heart.

The third thing they have in common are the words, "to the Lord." Church music should not be sung to impress people with the singer's talent. It should be sung as if the person were standing in the bodily presence of the Lord, looking Him in the face and singing the song only for Him. That is worship and anything less is simply making a noise. If these three scriptural principles were observed in our church music it would transform our services!

Colossians 3:16 says we are to teach and admonish each other with songs. If that is true, then the words of a song are important, must be true and must be understood. The words of a song can be used of the Holy Spirit to reveal truth, to correct and to encourage.

Church music must teach truth. A song I heard once said, "If working and praying have any reward, if anyone makes it, Lord, surely I will." That is blasphemous! Closer to home, how about, "On that bright and cloudless morning when the dead in Christ shall rise." If Jesus is coming in a cloud, as the Scriptures teach, then it will not be a cloudless morning. How about, "There's a brand new angel in the choir and I want to hear her sing." There is no such thing as a "new" angel and people do not become angels when they go to heaven. Or, "I've got to make it to heaven somehow." You don't get to heaven "somehow." I do not feel it is any better to sing error than it is to preach it.

The music must not overpower the words. It is not about the music, it is about the message. Paul said, "Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue" (1 Corinthians 14:19). If I can't understand the words I cannot be taught or admonished as Colossians 3:16 teaches.

I often wondered why some music had to be played so loud and I finally found the answer. Marilyn vos Savant, who is purported to have the world's highest IQ (228), writes a column in the Sunday news magazine, Parade. That question was asked her in the March 5, 2006 issue and her answer was, "They're trying to generate excitement, and a high level of decibels accomplishes that goal. Subjected to such intense sound, listeners' bodies produce adrenaline, noradrenaline and more. These substances make the heart pound and give an impression of increased muscle strength. Not surprisingly, some people become psychologically addicted to this hormone rush, which is implicated in thrill-seeking behavior. What a way to get -- and keep --fans." That is not the kind of excitement that needs to be generated in church.

Church music must be culturally appropriate. To make a point, let me tell an incident that Missionary Joe Morell in Lithuania related to me. It went something like this: A good Southern Gospel quartet went from the United States and sang some Cathedrals Quartet songs for a Lithuanian church. The performance would have brought the house down in many American churches. However, the Lithuanians were unresponsive. After it was over some of the Lithuanian men took Brother Morell aside and expressed the feeling that the music was the most carnal they had ever heard. What was the difference? Culture!

There are cultural differences between countries and there are cultural differences all across America. The music that is enjoyed in a small rural church in the South probably will not be enjoyed by a large suburban church in the North. Why? Because they live in different cultures. Which is right and which is wrong? Well, the one is right that enjoys the kind of music I enjoy!

As much as I hate to admit it, there are even cultural differences in different age groups. A younger colleague of mine came into my office one day almost in tears. He said, "You must come hear this song. It really touched my heart." So, I went to his office and he played the song for me. The best I remember the song was about the crucifixion. I am sorry but it did not move me. What brought him to tears left me flat. Why? Because the difference in our ages put us in two different cultures that enjoy two different styles of Christian music.

I have heard some say that a church cannot grow if it does not use a certain style of music. The facts prove otherwise. There are growing churches across America that use almost every kind of church music. However, we must face the fact that a church is not likely to attract people who do not enjoy the personality of the church.

One of the great mistakes many a new pastor has made was to try to suddenly change the personality of a church, in music and other ways. What usually happens is that the church is torn up in the process. If the personality of a church needs to be changed, it must be done with a lot of teaching, love and patience.

My conclusion is, if a song meets the Scriptural criteria, that is:

1. it is a psalm, hymn or spiritual song,

2. it is sung from the heart,

3. it is sung to the Lord,

4. it is true,

5. the words can be clearly understood,

then it is a good song, regardless of the style of music in which it is delivered. That does not mean I will enjoy it, that it will speak to my heart or that I would want to belong to a church that only used that style of music. Let’s be careful not to equate our own personal preferences with Scripture.

How To Give The Cat A Pill

1. Pick cat up and cradle it in the crook of your left arm as if holding a baby. Position right forefinger and thumb on either side of cat's mouth and gently apply pressure to cheeks while holding pill in right hand. As cat opens mouth pop pill into mouth. Allow cat to close mouth and swallow.
2. Retrieve pill from floor and cat from behind sofa. Cradle cat in left arm and repeat process.
3. Retrieve cat from bedroom, and throw soggy pill away.
4. Take new pill from foil wrap, cradle cat in left arm holding rear paws tightly with left hand. Force jaws open and push pill to back of mouth with right forefinger. Hold mouth shut for a count of ten.
5. Retrieve pill from goldfish bowl and cat from top of wardrobe. Call spouse from garden.
6. Kneel on floor with cat wedged firmly between knees, hold front and rear paws. Ignore low growls emitted by cat. Get spouse to hold head firmly with one hand while forcing wooden ruler into mouth. Drop pill down ruler and rub cat's throat vigorously.
7. Retrieve cat from curtain rail, get another pill from foil wrap. Make note to buy new ruler and repair curtains. Carefully sweep shattered figurines and vases from hearth and set to one side for gluing later.
8. Wrap cat in large towel and get spouse to lie on cat with head just visible from below armpit. Put pill in end of drinking straw, force mouth open with pencil and blow down drinking straw.
9. Check label or call vet to make sure pill not harmful to humans, drink glass of water to take taste away. Apply bandages to spouse's forearm and remove blood from carpet with cold water and soap.
10. Retrieve cat from neighbor's shed. Get another pill. Place cat in cupboard and close door onto neck to leave head showing. Force mouth open with dessert spoon. Flick pill down throat with elastic band.
11. Fetch screwdriver from garage and put cupboard door back on hinges. Apply cold compress to cheek and check records for date of last tetanus shot. Throw Tee-shirt away and fetch new one from bedroom.
12. Ring fire brigade to retrieve cat from tree across the road. Apologize to neighbor who crashed into fence while swerving to avoid cat. Take last pill from foil-wrap.
13. Tie cat's front paws to rear paws with garden twine and bind tightly to leg of dining table, find heavy duty pruning gloves from shed. Push pill into mouth followed by large piece of fillet steak. Hold head vertically and pour 2 pints of water down throat to wash pill down.
14. Get spouse to drive you to the emergency room, sit quietly while doctor stitches fingers and forearm and removes pill remnants from right eye. Call furniture shop on way home to order new table.
15. Arrange for SPCA to collect cat and ring local pet shop to see if they have a dog.

How to give the dog a pill

1. Wrap it in bacon.
2. Throw it in the air.

-- copied; original source unknown

Do-Over!

(Open to all - would especially like other preacher's comments) If there is one thing you could change in your life/ministry, what would it be? This change could be in the past or present, but please tell me what (if it's not too personal) and why.

CrossTrainers

That is the theme of The Journey at Pine Springs this week. Galatians 2:20 is our theme verse with a goal of seeing young adults allow Christ to live through them. Continue to pray for all the workers, teachers, staff, sponsors, and campers. May God bless this week of camp!

Just A Thought...

My dad sent me the following in an email. Just one of those questions that you kind of think about...You know what I mean?

We can read about the resurrected body of a saved person (buried natural, raised spiritual---sown in dishonor, raised in glory, etc) but is there anywhere in the Bible that talks of the body of the resurrected unsaved person? I cannot prove but I suspect it is buried natural and raised natural, sown in dishonor and raised in dishonor. This may be the only way that they can feel the torments of hell. Can't prove any of the last part, but just a thought.

Husband Of One Wife

This article, written by President Ray McAllister, Emmaus Baptist College, Brandon, FL, appeared in the January 2005 issue of the Baptist Anchor.

In one week three people asked my opinion on a pastor being divorced and remarried. In my forty-seven years of ministry I don't remember doing an in-depth study on the subject, I just had my opinion. 



The Scripture verses alluded to in such questions are 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6, which deal with pastors, and 1 Timothy 3:12, which deals with deacons. These are found in the qualifications that Paul laid down to Timothy and Titus concerning pastors and deacons.



Let's lay some foundation. The terms "elder," "bishop" and "pastor" are all speaking of the same office, which today we call "pastor." In the New Testament "elder" is the actual name of the office, "bishop," meaning "superintendent" and "pastor," meaning "shepherd," are descriptive titles of the office. The qualifications found in 1 Timothy and Titus are for elders (pastors) and deacons. Any other office or position does not fall under these qualifications. May I also point out that not all preachers are pastors. 
The first word in the list of these qualifications for pastors is "blameless." In my opinion all the qualifications that follow are describing how a man is to be blameless. 



To begin my study I looked at the Greek construction of "husband of one wife" found in all three verses and found them to be very similar. The same words are used. The Greek word used for husband is andra.
Since that did not give me a conclusive answer to the meaning of "husband of one wife" I checked a dozen or so commentaries to see what others have thought about these passages. I found that through the years preachers have held (and still do) to four basic positions. They are:



1. A pastor must be a married man. 


2. A pastor could be married only once, regardless.


3. A pastor could not be divorced and remarried.


4. A pastor could not be married to two women at the same time.



 Since the commentators did not agree on the meaning, the Scriptures mentioned might mean any of the above.
 


Now it is time to do some serious study and see if we can arrive at some conclusion. Whatever conclusion we arrive at, I know we will still not all agree.



First, the term "husband of one wife" could mean that a pastor must be a married man. Although I was not able to confirm it from over half a dozen commentaries or dictionaries, I have always heard that members of the Sanhedrin had to be married men. Also, "The Jews teach, a priest should be neither unmarried nor childless, lest he be unmerciful [Bengel]. So in the synagogue, 'no one shall offer up prayer in public, unless he be married' [in Colob, ch. 65; Vitringa, Synagogue and Temple]." ¹ If the members of the Sanhedrin had to be married, and priests had to be married and you couldn't publically pray in a synagogue without being married, it would not seem unreasonable that a qualification for being a pastor would be to be married.



Second, the passages in question might also mean that a pastor could only be married once, regardless of the circumstances. "The most strict interpretation and the one common among the earliest commentators (second and third centuries) . . . extends the prohibition to any second marriage, even by widowers. Their argument is that in the first century second marriages were generally viewed as evidence of self-indulgence. . . . According to this strict view Paul considered a widower's second marriage, though by no means improper, to be evidence of a lack of the kind of self-control required of an overseer, in much the same way that a similar lack disqualified a widow from eligibility for the list of widows." ² 1 Timothy 5:9 seems to support this position since Paul said "having been the wife of one man" was a qualification for a widow to be put on the list to receive help from the church.



The third and most commonly held view today is that a pastor could not be a man who had been married, divorced and remarried. The thought is, if a man is divorced and remarried he has "two living wives" and is not the husband of one wife." The divorced and remarried man does not have two wives. As L.D. Foreman used to say in class, "If a divorced and remarried man has two living wives, he should be arrested for bigamy." In John chapter four, Jesus said to the woman at the well, "Go, call thy husband, and come hither." The woman answered, "I have no husband," to which Jesus replied, "Thou hast well said, I have no husband: For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly." Jesus did not say, "You have five husbands" but "You have had five husbands." He did not say she had five living husbands, He said she did not have any husbands. He said she spoke the truth when she said she was not married even though she had been married five times.



The Law of Moses stated in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 that if a man divorced a woman she was free to remarry. However, if her second husband divorced her or died, she was forbidden to again become the wife of her first husband. If she had "two living husbands" she should have been able to return to her first husband since he was still her husband. The plain teaching is, she was no longer married to her first husband when she was divorced and remarried. 



While we are here, let's put to rest the phrase, "living in adultery," as it applies to a divorced and remarried person. "Living in adultery" is not a biblical phrase. Jesus taught that if a man divorces his wife and marries another, he commits adultery. If his divorced wife marries she and her new husband commit adultery (Matthew 5:32, 19:5). Adultery is not something you "live in," it is something you "commit." When a divorced person commits himself to a new mate in marriage and seals it with the sexual act (even though it may be adultery) the bonds with the first mate seem to be dissolved and there seems to be no relationship whatever with the first marriage. 



If our scriptures in question teach that "husband of one wife" applies to a divorced and remarried man, it is not because he has "two living wives." It would have to be because of the influence his divorce would have on his testimony. 



The fourth position is that "husband of one wife" teaches against polygamy or bigamy. Whatever position you take on these verses you must conclude it teaches against polygamy and bigamy. You cannot be the husband of one wife and have two wives. However, this does not seem to be the primary meaning since the Gentiles in the first century did not practice polygamy. 



Now, for what it is worth, I will now give you my sincere opinion. (It is not the position of Florida Baptist College, it is my opinion.) I think I will reject all of the four above positions and agree with Kenneth S. Wuest when he says, "The words, when used of the marriage relation come to mean, 'a man of one woman.' The nouns are without the definite article, which construction emphasizes character or nature. The entire context is one in which the character of the bishop is being discussed. Thus, one can translate, 'a one-wife sort of a husband,' or 'a one-woman sort of a man.' . . . Since character is emphasized by the Greek construction, the bishop should be a man who loves only one woman as his wife. It should be his nature to thus isolate and centralize his love." ³


I feel that this qualification has to do with the character of the man more than whether he must be married, be married only once or has been divorced. A pastor must be a man whose affections are centered exclusively on his wife. If he has a "wandering eye," he is not the sort of person who needs to be in the pastorate. I once knew a pastor who was married only once but flirted with all the nice looking ladies. I don't think he met this qualification. My opinion is, this qualification is all about character.



Let me leave you with a few jewels I ran across. Wuest also said, "In some matters 'the common sense of most' is a safer guide than the irresponsible conjectures of a conscientious student." I think it was Ravi Zacharias I heard say, "The more words it takes to defend your position the more likely you are of being wrong." James A. Harris said, "The difference between a conviction and an opinion is that you can discuss your convictions without getting mad."


____________ ________



1Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., Fausset, A. R., Brown, D., & Brown, D. 1997. A commentary, critical and explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments. On spine: Critical and explanatory commentary. Logos Research Systems, Inc.: Oak Harbor, Wash.
2Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. 1983-c1985. The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures. Victor Books: Wheaton, Ill.
3Wuest, K. S. 1997, c1984. Wuest's word studies from the Greek New Testament : For the English reader . Eerdmans: Grand Rapids


The following appeared in the March 2005 issue:

I have known for a long time that people do not hear what I say, they hear what they think I say.

However, I was not aware that people read what they think I wrote. After my January article on "The Husband of One Wife," it has come back to me that I wrote things I did not know I had written.

For example, I have heard that I wrote that a pastor could have all the wives he wanted as long as he has them one at a time. I did not say that because I do not believe that.

As a little background, I concluded in the article that I believed that the teaching in Timothy and Titus had to do with the character of the man and not with the fact that he may have been married twice. In other words, he is not a womanizer. He is interested in his wife and only in his wife. For example, some of our past U.S. presidents were married only once but they were not "one woman men." They would not qualify for the office of pastor or deacon even though they had been married only once.

In my opinion, if a pastor or deacon divorces his wife in order to marry another woman, his character is such that he does not qualify for the office and his ordination should be rescinded. It is not a matter of "one wife at a time," it is a matter of his wife being the only woman in his life. I remember one of my instructors, Leo Causey, saying something like, "If you are married to the witch of Endor, you made a commitment to stay with her all of your life."

SBC at odds over sale of Mark Driscoll literature (OneNewsNow.com)

SBC at odds over sale of Mark Driscoll literature (OneNewsNow.com)

Shared via AddThis

Freedom Fest '09

Everyone is invited to our annual Freedom Fest on Sunday at 10:00 am. The featured singing group is The Redeemed Vocal Band from Rodgers Baptist Church in Garland, TX. After the singing and preaching services, there will be hamburger/hot dog cookout and fellowship. So, please make plans to celebrate our nation's freedom and the freedom we have in Christ with us this coming weekend!