Tuesday, April 24, 2007

diversity, confomity, unity and division

I recently ducked out of going to the national meeting for the national work that my Church works with. With health, vehicle and school concerns, not to mention I thought the Church could use the money better toward local outreach, I did not go. Boy howdy, did I miss some interesting things.

At some point during the business sessions, a gentleman from southern state (not Texas) asked for a motion to be entertained. The motion he presented was that "for the sake of unity, all speakers use the Authorized Version only!" "for the sake of unity" is the part that drives me crazy. In his mind, if everyone that uses his preferred translation, we can be unified. in his mind, conformity is unity. It seems to me that in his "unifying" motion he actually was causing division as he making a translation preference a test of fellowship.

For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god is their appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who set their minds on earthly things. (Php 3:18-19 NASB)

Later this same gentleman made an additional motion of the same spirit. This time he asked that only "Baptist" be allowed to present. He apparently had an issue that someone that was brought in to do special music was at Church that did not have "Baptist" in the name. The woman that sang was from a "Baptistic" community church and had been at a Baptist Church, and is Baptist at heart. The woman had only come to celebrate the Sovereignty of Christ and His Glory in Song. I wonder if at any point in her preparing to minister in song did she realize that she would be possible banned for not being “Baptist.”

Not only would this limit those who sing to being Baptist, but also the preaching, leadership conference and breakout sessions. In truth, even the great Charles Spurgeon would not be able to preach at our convention/association because he was never ordained by a Baptist Church (by his choice he was never ordained) nor did he ever pastor a Church with Baptist in the name.


The out come of this all was that wise people saw that these motions were tabled. And we will have to wait till next year when they meet in Waco, Tx to see what will happen.
A few more thoughts ...
Who authorized this Bible? The best reason to use the King James Bible is the precedent that it has be widely and predominately used for 400 years. Yet the KJVO crowd that presses that we must used the Bible that was used back at the 1611 time mark fail to realize that they would be dragging the Apocrypha back into the Church. Additionally, if we must use this Authorized Bible, then should not use the same Hymnody and play the same style of music. Why do we not dress the same, maybe we should bring back the wigs and robes!

One last thought …
When the man who proposed these motions began, he made sure to mention that he knew nothing of the Biblical languages, that he was ignorant of such. Why would you ever begin a charge with telling those you want to persuade to your view point with a statement that basically says “I have no clue what I am talking about?”

1 comment:

Mike said...

Well said. I wish you would have been there.