THE
TWO DIVIDERS
"Means we use must be as pure as the
ends we seek."
Martin Luther King Jr (1929-1968)
An important introduction to Part One and Part Two.
Martin Luther King Jr (1929-1968)
An important introduction to Part One and Part Two.
Page content drawn from various sources.
The apostle Paul, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and having encountered such, stated:
“I appeal to you,
brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create
obstacles
contrary to the
doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their
own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naïve”
(Rom 16:17,18, ESV).
doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their
own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naïve”
(Rom 16:17,18, ESV).
Well, I can think of two things that have certainly caused terrible divisions (and created obstacles) within the Christian Church:
1)
Contemporary worship in the form of copycat worldly ways aided by the likes of drum-kits and rock guitars.
2)
Women elders and pastors; and bearing in mind that elders and pastors are actually one and the same thing.
And the great tragedy is that these two things have left many wounded Christians behind who’ve felt forced (conscience wise) to leave their particular church for another, or who’ve formed a small group elsewhere (often in homes). They not wanting to sit around watching others dancing around what they see as modern golden calves, and lest they come under God’s condemnation too. And some of these dear folk have left the Church completely, discouraged, disgusted, or both.
Would God be behind such havoc wrecking introductions? Of course not! And hardly at such a critical time in the Church’s history when it can’t afford to be rocked any further by ill.
But, we’re told, different people worship in different ways, and different people hold different views. Well, the apostle Paul certainly didn’t hold to such thinking, hence the following:
“But even if we or
an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one
we
preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:8, ESV).
preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:8, ESV).
Where people have a problem with the words of God, it’s usually because of the words of men. It's also true that simple men see simple things, but not so the academic who often gets lost in a self-made complexity of human thought. The work of Revelation may be progessive but never contradictory.
"Trust in the LORD
with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding" (Prov
3:5, NASB).
"Speaking
of these things in all of his [Paul's] letters. Some of his comments
are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have
twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do
with other parts
of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction" (2 Peter 3:16, NLT).
of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction" (2 Peter 3:16, NLT).
So, this is where we need to use a little logic. Our unchangeable God is not the author of confusion, nor has He said to anyone, “Worship as you wish, believe whatever you think is so.” Far from it. We’re to be upholders of what God has clearly imparted, thus making sure that we’re clinging to sound doctrine.
And it was God who told His people not to imitate the ways of the surrounding nations. And nothing has changed in this regard. “Come out of the world,” “Come out of Babylon [false teachings and religious corruption] My people,” God shouts via His Word.
Bear the following in mind:
“Israel had lost the knowledge of God and mixed the values and life-styles of the surrounding pagan, barbaric
nations with the “worship” of God. With their consciences seared and anchored in their self-delusion, they did
“not know how to do right.” That produced an amoral society, which easily excused things once considered abominations.”
From the book A Compassionate Roar by John O. Anderson.
"Much of the singing in certain types of meetings has in it more of romance than it has of the Holy Ghost. Both words and music are designed to rouse the libidinous. Christ is courted with a familiarity that reveals a total ignorance of
who He is. It is not the reverent intimacy of the adoring saint but the impudent familiarity of the carnal lover"
A. W. Tozer
"The object of faith is no longer Christ, but our self-esteem; the goal of faith is no longer holiness, but our happiness, and the source of faith is no longer the Scriptures, but our experience. Christian music currently reflects this. We are producing a generation of people that feel their God, but do not know their God."
Steven John Camp, contempoary Christian singer.
nations with the “worship” of God. With their consciences seared and anchored in their self-delusion, they did
“not know how to do right.” That produced an amoral society, which easily excused things once considered abominations.”
From the book A Compassionate Roar by John O. Anderson.
"Much of the singing in certain types of meetings has in it more of romance than it has of the Holy Ghost. Both words and music are designed to rouse the libidinous. Christ is courted with a familiarity that reveals a total ignorance of
who He is. It is not the reverent intimacy of the adoring saint but the impudent familiarity of the carnal lover"
A. W. Tozer
And here's what things have come to:
"The object of faith is no longer Christ, but our self-esteem; the goal of faith is no longer holiness, but our happiness, and the source of faith is no longer the Scriptures, but our experience. Christian music currently reflects this. We are producing a generation of people that feel their God, but do not know their God."
Steven John Camp, contempoary Christian singer.
Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) predicted the likes many years ago:
"A time will come when instead of
shepherds feeding the sheep, the church will have clowns entertaining
the goats."
Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892)
Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892)
As Adrian Rodgers said:
“It’s better to be divided by truth
than to be united in error.”
Both Christ and the apostles would have been first and foremost in promoting such contemporary worship styles and women elders/pastors if such was what God intended be.
But once again, there was to be order in all the churches, and that order was laid out under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
“These things God
has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches
everything, even the depths
of God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting
spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (1 Cor 2:10,13, ESV).
of God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting
spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (1 Cor 2:10,13, ESV).
Accusing the apostles of a cultural bias brings into question anything they've imparted, and also questions the intelligence and foresight of Christ.
It was after the apostles died that things started to change.
“The apostles had hardly died ere the
spirit of deception thought it could easily break into the churches as
into
an empty house left without a guard…It may be conceived that in this second century originated nearly all the
heresies which afterwards raged in the church.”
The Magdeburg Centuries, chap. 1, p2.
“Toward the end of the second century, most of the churches assumed a new form, the first simplicity disappeared,
and insensibly, as the old disciples retired to their graves, their children, along with new converts, both Jews and Gentiles, came forward and new-modelled the cause”
Ecclesiastical Researches. Chap. 5, p. 51, edition 1792.
"For fifty years after St. Paul's life a curtain hangs over the church, through which we strive vainly to look; and when
at last it rises, about 120AD with the writings of the earlist church-fathers, we find a church in many aspects very
different from that in the days of St. Peter and St. Paul."
Story of the Christian Church, p 41, by Jesse Lyman Hurlbut.
an empty house left without a guard…It may be conceived that in this second century originated nearly all the
heresies which afterwards raged in the church.”
The Magdeburg Centuries, chap. 1, p2.
“Toward the end of the second century, most of the churches assumed a new form, the first simplicity disappeared,
and insensibly, as the old disciples retired to their graves, their children, along with new converts, both Jews and Gentiles, came forward and new-modelled the cause”
Ecclesiastical Researches. Chap. 5, p. 51, edition 1792.
"For fifty years after St. Paul's life a curtain hangs over the church, through which we strive vainly to look; and when
at last it rises, about 120AD with the writings of the earlist church-fathers, we find a church in many aspects very
different from that in the days of St. Peter and St. Paul."
Story of the Christian Church, p 41, by Jesse Lyman Hurlbut.
The truth is, love’s not in the business of creating schisms, but rather, and for the sake of unity, not uniformity, forgoes something rather than offend someone. No, love doesn’t leave a trail of hurt and confusion behind, love isn’t into that humanistic “means justifies the end” nonsense.
Better to go without a drum-kit than offend one soul.
Better to go without women elders/pastors than cause any schism.
No, love doesn’t force its way, nor acts cunningly. It’s only the devil who’s behind dissensions and schisms.
If God had wanted these two things that are causing divisions, He would have made it clear in order to prevent such upsets within the Church.
But, “The Bible says to praise God via this and that,” they say, pointing to the likes of Psalm 150. Well, Psalm 148 tells the sun, moon and mountains to praise God. Too often such figurative speech is misapplied, and sometimes to suit, no doubt. The purpose of Psalms 150 isn’t to specify precisely and literally the location or the instruments to be used to praise God musically. Psalms also tells the mountains to praise God!
Ancient Israel was a religious nation, and yet a very clear distinction was made between the music of the temple-cum-Sabbath worship and the music of everyday life which entailed work and play.
“Therefore, since
we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful,
and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe” (Heb 12:28, NIV).
and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe” (Heb 12:28, NIV).
And ask yourself, how can a female pastor truly represent the male Father?
It’s only Babylonian teaching that places a woman at the forefront via its blasphemous trinity.
It has only been paganism that has had women priests and goddesses, and Papal Rome following in its footsteps via its veneration of Mary who it promotes as a co-mediator, intercessor.
A male priesthood was a sign of a specifically biblical Jewish and Christian identity.
So, wouldn’t Satan’s natural intention be to destroy any male imagery given that he is always seeking to introduce substitutes that misrepresent God, His will, ways, design and intent?
If a man (male pastor), represents God the Father, who might a woman (female pastor), represent? Could it effectively be the Queen of Heaven as the Catholic Church wrongly views Mary?
Now get this:
If Christ is male,
if Christ and the Church are supposed to be Husband and wife, Bridegroom and bride (and husbands and wives having an intimate relationship),
if the pastor represents Christ (the Bridegroom), and the Church represents the bride,
and you replace the male pastor with a female pastor, you then have a female being intimate with a female, a lesbian situation.
Oh yes, imagery counts.
Some argue that God is neither male nor female. Well, God made two distinct humans, male and female, and chose to present Himself as a male (one who has both masculine and feminine characteristics, as we all have). Mary was told she would have a Son. Christ was clearly a man. We’re told to pray to the Father. Christ said, “If you’ve seen Me you’ve seen the Father.” And once again, we're also told that Christ is the Bridegroom and the Church His bride.
“Unlike many of his
contemporaries among the deities of the ancient Near East, the God of
Israel shares his power
with no female divinity, nor is he the divine Husband or Lover of any. He scarcely can be characterized in any but masculine epithets: King, Lord, Master, Judge, and Father.”
Elaine Pagel
with no female divinity, nor is he the divine Husband or Lover of any. He scarcely can be characterized in any but masculine epithets: King, Lord, Master, Judge, and Father.”
Elaine Pagel
We should always work within the framework that the Bible presents, and not go outside of it.
The symbol of Fatherhood wasn't created by prophets or apostles, but was revealed and given to us by God Himself.
If feminists had their way, we would be living in an androgynous world. The funny thing, though, is that they often refer to God as "she." Saying that God is neither male nor female is simply playing into the hands of such people and paganism to boot.
It comes as no surprise then that evangelical feminists are behind the push for women pastors. Where feminists are disputing Scripture we can be pretty sure that it isn’t because of the promptings of the Spirit but because of the agitations of injury and restlessness so common to modern Eves. Those women who vigorously (and some with an outrageous hue and cry) seek the servant role of pastor-elder, should bear in mind the awesome responsibility and accountability that’s attached to it.
Restricting a certain role to either a male or female is often in harmony with reality, practicality and spiritual parallels and object lessons.
Though a woman can preach, as can any of us, it's clear from God's Word that whether ordained or not, a woman is not to act in the capacity of a pastor because such is a role for men alone. And therefore, a woman pastor would become a false witness and usurper.
God appointed David as king. The ceremony performed by Samuel was therefore a mere formality in the sense that God had already chosen David. Likewise, regarding women pastors, it’s not so much about ordination, but the fact that they’re being appointed to a role that’s only been given to men.
See my poem at the bottom of this page called: Ordination's Become A Red Herring.
"But I do not allow a woman to
teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet" (1 Tim
2:12, NASB).
Women are forbidden to teach as the leaders of the church because this would place them in a headship role of authority over men.
In other words, the argument against women being made pastors still stands where women are not actually ordained.
If a woman was preaching from a pulpit conveying messages from God as a prophet, say, it still wouldn’t give her pastor status, because she would only be speaking as a prophet and not as the shepherd of that flock.
So,
“Woe to those who
call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for
darkness,
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isa 5:20, ESV).
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isa 5:20, ESV).
No, there’s nothing in the Bible that says our worship should change to suit whoever or whatever.
There’s nothing in the Bible that says women can or should be made elders/pastors.
People are simply building cases based on human thought and feeling, rather than a “Thus saith the Lord.”
And those persisting in such agendas need to remember the Aaron and Miriam situation — Miriam fairing the worst, incidentally. God’s already had His say, and soon He’ll have His day.
God’s ways are not our ways, we’re told, and why we only see with one eye and challenge at our peril.
Yes, it’s a perilous thing to strike out in a direction that’s not clearly laid out in Scripture, and when the weight of evidence says otherwise.
The following quote comes to mind:
“I distrust those people who know so
well what God wants them to do because I notice it always
coincides with their own desires.”
Susan B. Anthony.
coincides with their own desires.”
Susan B. Anthony.
And so it often is that many Christians pursue this or that because they’re so sure it’s what God wants when it’s not what God wants. Or they convince themselves that it’s what God wants when it’s really what they want; and they searching for those who’ll agree with them — the itchy ear syndrome.
Thinking that we've been called to a certain position doesn't automatically mean that we actually have been. Many people have strong convictions that are proven to be false ones.
“There is a way
that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death” (Prov
14:12, ESV).
All why we first see Satan’s lies, then Eve, then Miriam, then Jezebel and finally the harlot.
All why we first see false doctrine, then rock guitars and drum-kits, then woman pastors, and finally Babylon with its doomed musicians (Rev 18:22) who aid the image [coming cruel religious-political power — Rev 13:11-18] to the beast [past cruel religious-political power — Rev 13:3], just like they did the image of Nebuchadnezzar. Their music just as corrupted.
When all is said and done, neither of those two division causing elements that I’ve mentioned throughout are necessary, but simply desired.
Remember how the Israelites clamoured for a king much to God’s displeasure too, and oh, look at all the troubles they had as a result.
Those behind such agendas mentioned, should also pay attention to the following texts and surely adopt the same principles:
“It is better not
to eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another
believer to stumble” (Rom 14:21, NLT).
“So if what I eat causes another believer to sin, I will never eat meat again as long as I live —
for I don’t want to cause another believer to stumble” (1 Cor 8:13, NLT).
believer to stumble” (Rom 14:21, NLT).
“So if what I eat causes another believer to sin, I will never eat meat again as long as I live —
for I don’t want to cause another believer to stumble” (1 Cor 8:13, NLT).
Thus these two texts could well be put this way:
“It’s better not
to introduce drum-kits, rock guitars or women elders/pastors if such
might cause
another believer to become upset and discouraged, and it affect his or her walk.”
“So if by introducing drum-kits, rock guitars or women elders/pastors it causes another believer to go astray
somehow, I’ll never dream of doing such things again, because I don’t want to cause another believer to
come unstuck in his or her faith.”
another believer to become upset and discouraged, and it affect his or her walk.”
“So if by introducing drum-kits, rock guitars or women elders/pastors it causes another believer to go astray
somehow, I’ll never dream of doing such things again, because I don’t want to cause another believer to
come unstuck in his or her faith.”
It’s not just wrong, but an evil thing when anyone creates unnecessary divisions within a family, and the Church is the family of God. Dare we be among the modern Aarons and Korahs.
As Christians, it’s our duty to expose and condemn any errant teaching and practice. And we need to remember that error isn't always obvious. Hence those counterfeit notes, and so it can be with Satan's deceptions, substitutes. It's only by being very familiar with the genuine article that we're able to detect the fake.
Sadly, there are many who take the comfortable "neutral" position on some issue rather than paying the price for taking a stand for or against. So much for taking up one's cross.
And lastly, pride and rebellion argue, humbleness and obedience accept.
In other words, stick with God’s Word, dwelling on it and living by it, making sure that you know it soundly in order to do just that.
A very short summary of the above (given that far more is conveyed via Part One and Part Two):
We don’t please God by hurting some in order to please others.
It’s always Satan who’s behind disorder, confusion and divisiveness.
We should always keep in mind the folly of Aarons, Korahs and Ahabs.
Golden calves come in different forms.
Error can closely resemble truth, just like those counterfeit notes.
The apostolic gospel is not to be abused or altered by modern interpretations.
Thinking we’re on the right path doesn't always mean that we are.
We’re not to turn to fallen things for sacred purposes.
Biblical worship principles remain as unchanged as the unchangeable God who the same reverence and respect is due.
Female pastors mimic pagan religions.
Female pastors distort and corrupt the biblical imagery of the bride and Bridegroom.
Female pastors covet and steal a role that's only been given to males, thus usurping God's authority.
Female pastors blur God's creational design and intent for male headship in the home and church.
God has chosen to present Himself as a male. Therefore, it’s not for us to operate outside that framework.
God’s ways are not our ways, we’re told, and why we only see with one eye and challenge at our peril.
If the Old Testament became irrelevant after the cross, why did Christ and His apostles often refer back to it in order to back up their arguments?
Men and women are clearly designed to compliment each other in every way, and differing roles being part of that equation, and thus a blessing and not a curse when willingly accepted.
To force a woman pastor on a congregation that doesn't wish one, and where there’s controversy over such a matter, is to go contrary to both the ways of Christ and the Gospel message.
Underhand attempts to achieve some so-called good simply reveal the unworthiness and unreliableness of those who’re seeking it, and thereby suggests its dubiousness.
And finishing with a borrowed thought: The headship of a husband in his own family can hardly remain unaffected if his own wife serves as the head of the congregation to which he belongs.
Oh, a word regarding homosexual pastors:
A homosexual pastor is hardly a true representative of the God who created male and female and who talks and operates in such terms.
A homosexual pastor is therefore a distortion of God’s creational intent and design for men and women.
A homosexual pastor has too much conflict of interest going down.
A homosexual pastor is more prone to temptation given the greater difficulty he has because of his need to repress those feelings he has for the same sex (much like Catholic priests struggle because of their vow to not marry).
A homosexual pastor would only encourage further division, and be a stumbling block, given the many members who're strongly opposed to the idea of a homosexual pastor.
A homosexual pastor would draw sympathisers who might feel emboldened.
A homosexual pastor would always be subject to suspicion and derision, something hardly healthy for the Church.
A homosexual pastor presiding over a wedding would not only hold God’s Word up to ridicule but be an effrontery.
A homosexual pastor is inhibited in his ability to counsel a husband and wife because he isn’t orientated that way, cannot relate in that sameness, and this being why many wouldn’t approach him for the help that they need.
Lest God Condemn Us Too
No wonder God is pleased when we uphold His truth, because He’s the God of truth,
Just as much as He’s the God of love, adored by angels above.
So onward Christian, defender of truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,
But please make sure that it’s done in love, as that same God is watching from above.
You see, what you’re saying may well be right, and what you’re wanting may well be too,
But how are you going about it, because that’s where it could all go askew.
The right thing but the wrong way, or truth marred by injury, which just doesn't pay,
And God saying to you too, “Depart from Me, hurt and coercion’s not My way.”
And neither is any unrighteous subtly, clever means God wouldn’t use,
And which surely any thinking, transparent and Christ-like Christian wouldn’t choose.
So mind those introductions more desired than inspired, or not of He,
Who doesn’t want truth, or anything else, defended or sought injuriously.
No, Aarons, Korahs and errant defenders don’t please the God of truth and love,
Who, only mansions for those who act like Him, is currently building above.
And therefore, how we go about things being where it’s at, Heaven’s litmus test,
And hence why that path we take should always be the one that’s heavenly and blessed,
Lest God condemn us too.
By Lance Landall
Those Divisions That Shout Disunity
They come into the Church — your Church? — and see those divisions that shout disunity,
Be those divisions over women pastors or worship that’s contemporary.
Both not critical, nor necessary, but shamefully pushed despite the damage,
And those new Christians, or potential Christians, caught in the middle of that sandwich,
Oh, when will folk learn it’s all about what God desires, and never about us,
Far too many focussed on their obsessive agendas rather than on Jesus.
They pointing to so-called evidence whilst seemingly ignoring harm they’ve done,
Behaviour no one ever saw coming from the humble, self-sacrificing Son.
Not only is the world horrid, but churches can be horrible too, a real turn off,
Not just disgusting peacemakers and strugglers, but causing non-believers to scoff.
So many acting like kids who want their own way, and thinking that God’s on their side,
When He’s just as repulsed by it, and lamenting that growing and hurtful divide,
One that’s not just growing between members.
And worse of all, leadership’s often part of that division causing drive — oh dear,
Because haven’t they learnt from ancient Israel? Leadership just as askew there.
But no, Aarons aplenty, same ill in modern garb, today’s flock in danger too,
Eyes off the ball, too much attention being given to what malcontents pursue.
By Lance Landall
Those A-Bob-Each-Way Churches
The Bible knows nothing of a church that caters for both conservatives and
Liberals — and I meaning, those separate services that each week are planed.
God never spoke of such, never endorsed such, but just the one path, the one way,
He not a God of confusion, but clear direction — yes, black and white, not grey.
And nor does the Spirit lead some this way and some that way, but to the truth, and
We either walking in it or not — there no smorgasbord, we must understand.
No, God doesn’t accept any worship, but only what He has declared right,
It to be reverent and respectful, not worldly, nor designed to excite.
Yes, it’s more about attitude than latitude, God not all over the place,
And thus choosing to worship in some form that suits us isn’t to be the case.
Our desires to be fully surrendered to His, and His universal,
For everyone, because He’s the author of order and harmony still.
So leave what you want, and what you think, at the door of His Church, it His, not yours,
Too many Christians taking to the living water with their own desired oars.
The living water not Babylon’s wine of confusion, but “Thus says the Lord,”
Accepted by the honest seeker, who at the foot of the cross, and truth, is moored.
By Lance Landall
Cause For Solemn Reflection
In God’s Holy Word we are told of some people who did ill,
Thinking that what they were doing was fulfilling the Lord’s will.
So why should we be surprised if there also happens to be
Wrong within Christian churches through some acting mistakenly.
Some may truly think they’re right in pursuing what they do,
But so did many angels who were fooled by the devil's view.
Therefore, surely that example should have Christians take great care,
Lest the things they implement be those things that they shouldn’t dare.
By Lance Landall
Made For God's Pleasure
We were made for God’s pleasure, just like we make things for our pleasure, and therefore,
All we say and do should be pleasing to Him; and how we open Heaven’s door.
Self, rebellion, sin having disappointed God, like something that we made too
That didn’t please us like we’d hoped, and why we possibly turned to something new.
And so, when we do what doesn’t please God, we ignore our purpose, God’s pleasure,
And why the things of Heaven and not the things of this world we’re taught to treasure.
God not pleased with what jiggers or interferes with our godly operating,
And why only with what tugs God’s heartstrings we’re meant to be co-operating.
And come worship it’s the same, not about what we’d like, but what God wants to see,
Or hear, and why nothing of self should corrupt any earthly sanctuary.
That “I” or “Me” where ill begins, we not to be usurpers of God’s glory,
Neither in or out of church, lest we repeat that sad Edenic story.
By Lance Landall
Keep It Neutral
Some like to worship this way, some like to worship that way,
And in our own time or place, how we worship, may be okay.
But when we come together as we do each worship day,
We should consider others who don’t see things the same way.
So, let’s keep worship neutral for the sake of unity,
Given Satan’s looking for any opportunity.
He loves to stir up friction, and division loves to cause,
So, let’s keep worship neutral lest he give himself applause.
When Christians come together, they shouldn’t seek their own way,
But rather, the good of all, and not selfishness display.
The God that Christians worship wants their worship to be free
Of anything that’s tainted with a ‘me’ mentality.
So, let’s keep worship neutral and not seek to introduce
Anything that’s divisive, or that friction may produce.
It’s better plain and simple, and where all are in accord,
For we aren’t there for our sake, but to honour and praise the Lord.
Must we also place our stamp on this time God’s set apart?
Must we have our way here too, showing a self-centered heart?
Can’t we forgo our own way for the sake of just one day,
That morning, that hour, that we study, listen, sing and pray?
Yes, let’s keep worship neutral so that all can happier be
Worshipping in a sanctuary divisive and friction free.
When we all come together, peace and harmony can be,
If everyone’s God-focused, and minus that ‘me’ mentality.
What in worship upsets others, may upset our Saviour too,
For at times, even some things lawful, we shouldn’t choose to do.
If we’ve true love for others, and desire to please the Lord,
We won’t seek to introduce those things that’ll cause discord.
By Lance Landall
As
far as contemporary worship and women elders/pastors go, and in the
scheme of things, they're a biblical non-event, and the reason why
being:
We as Christians (regardless of our denomination) have been called to save the lost — that’s our priority!
We as Christians have been called to point others back to the narrow way — that’s our priority!
We as Christians have been called to shine the light of truth midst the darkness of falsehood that's engulfing the world — that’s our priority!
We as Christians have been called to put others first, to love one another, to live in peace and harmony, and in accordance with God's code of conduct — that’s the priority!
Not contemporary styles of worship, nor women’s ordination. Such merely distract, waste precious time, money and resources, and create terrible schisms.
We as Christians (regardless of our denomination) have been called to save the lost — that’s our priority!
We as Christians have been called to point others back to the narrow way — that’s our priority!
We as Christians have been called to shine the light of truth midst the darkness of falsehood that's engulfing the world — that’s our priority!
We as Christians have been called to put others first, to love one another, to live in peace and harmony, and in accordance with God's code of conduct — that’s the priority!
Not contemporary styles of worship, nor women’s ordination. Such merely distract, waste precious time, money and resources, and create terrible schisms.
Keep It Out
Never take the physical to church,
church being all about the heart and mind
Hence what pertains to the loins being left outside, lest inside, offence we find,
Like that low cut dress, that earthly beat, that look-at-me whatever, which shouts man,
Both pride and self being rebellion, and how the great controversy began.
And the whole contemporary worship scene full of pride and self, me, me, me,
Many taking to church their ego or worldly props — “Hail” our adversary.
Worship thus tainted and corrupted, Satan stealing glory and honour, oh,
And more and more so, ’cause familiarity always increases the flow.
Yes, modern worship going nowhere, it all about feelings and pleasure, thus
Gone are worship disciplines, that plunging of Scripture, that focus on Jesus.
Man more the centre of things, it so like the world, and newcomers shocked to see
The very things that left them feeling empty smirking in God’s sanctuary.
By Lance Landall
Hence what pertains to the loins being left outside, lest inside, offence we find,
Like that low cut dress, that earthly beat, that look-at-me whatever, which shouts man,
Both pride and self being rebellion, and how the great controversy began.
And the whole contemporary worship scene full of pride and self, me, me, me,
Many taking to church their ego or worldly props — “Hail” our adversary.
Worship thus tainted and corrupted, Satan stealing glory and honour, oh,
And more and more so, ’cause familiarity always increases the flow.
Yes, modern worship going nowhere, it all about feelings and pleasure, thus
Gone are worship disciplines, that plunging of Scripture, that focus on Jesus.
Man more the centre of things, it so like the world, and newcomers shocked to see
The very things that left them feeling empty smirking in God’s sanctuary.
By Lance Landall
This introductory article was added to 22 December 2019.
PART ONE
Contemporary
Worship
Part One is broken down into the above headings.
A link to related poems and diagrams can be found at the bottom of Part One.
Sources available.
Worship
Only God is worthy of worship (Rev chap 5; 1 Sam 2:2; Ps 19:1). It was He who created this world and its inhabitants (Gen 1:1,26-31; Rev 4:11; Col 1:16; Ex 20:11). He also died to save humans (Rom 5:8; John 3:16) when they fell into sin [Adam and Eve] (Rom 5:12) and came under sins penalty (Rom 6:23). He is also a Holy God (Rev 15:4; Ps 22:3; Joshua 24:19; 5:15; Ex 3:5). Given all this, He should be greatly respected, greatly reverenced, and greatly appreciated. He deserves our devotion. Because He is Holy, God’s Word tells us that He should only be worshiped in a certain way, that is, very reverently and respectfully (Ps 29:2; Heb 12:28; Eccl 5:1; Ps 96:9; 89:7; 5:7; 95:6; Hab 2:20; Lev 19:29; Mark 11:17). Even the inhabitants of heaven, such as angels, worship Him with great reverence and respect (Rev 7:11; 5:14). That’s the way that the Jewish nation was instructed to worship Him also (Lev 19:29). In the Old Testament, God was always very particular about His place of worship [called the ‘sanctuary’ or ‘temple’] (Mark 11:15-17; Ex 25:8) and how He was worshiped (Isa 62:6, KJV; Lev 27:28). When certain ones worshiped Him incorrectly, or dishonoured His place of worship, He was very displeased, and His response showed it (Lev 10:1-3; Ezek 9:4,6; 22:26; Amos 5:23). God is very displeased when we are more concerned with doing what makes ourselves or other people happy, rather than with what makes Him happy (Gal 1:10). Though there is no longer a ‘sanctuary’ (except in Heaven - Heb 8:1,2,5) like there was in the days of ancient Israel, God’s principles for holy worship still apply whenever and wherever He is worshiped (Matt 18:20) because He is still the same unchangeable (Mal 3:6; James 1:17) and Holy God (Heb 12:28; Rev 7:11). Satan became jealous of this worship that is rightfully due to God alone (Isa 14:12-14). As a result he rebelled against God and had to be removed from heaven (Rev 12:7-9,12). He is still trying to claim that worship, and has been busy trying to fool the inhabitants of this world into giving him that worship rather than God. He has been very successful and has even fooled, as he has done before, the very ones who should know better (Ezek 22:26). Satan has managed to get Christians to mix holy things with unholy things [worldly ways, sounds, etc]. That way he manages to get some of the worship that’s being given to God. Where he can’t get it all, he’ll get as much of it as he can! Also, by getting Christians to mix more and more of the unholy with the holy, he hopes that eventually he’ll get the lot, little by little. If he tried to do it all at once Christians would catch on to what he’s up too. This is why it is very important to study God’s Word to find out His will regarding such matters, rather than going by our own feelings or wishes, or anybody else’s. Because Christians today don’t all live in a separate nation like ancient Israel, the distinctions that were very clear then, are no longer as clear, so worship principles act as a guide to ensure the right worship practices still occur, because God can only accept worship that is done correctly (Lev 10:1,2). Because Christians have been living in a non-Christian environment for so long now [like the Israelites in Egypt], they have adopted many wrong ways, and their spiritual vision isn’t as clear as it used to be. It has always been Satan’s desire to blur the distinctions between Christian and non-Christian things in the hope that eventually there won’t be any difference at all. Satan knows that by getting this to happen the Christian witness to the world will be weaker, and God will become less known, respected or loved. By this, Satan gets more following him instead of God. Satan always tries to represent God as someone who is very restrictive, so that God will be disliked, when God is really trying to bring about what will eventually make us all happier, and what is rightfully due to Him. Satan has even managed to convince many Christians that the church building that they have traditionally worshiped in, is really of no importance. As a result, many are now worshiping in common buildings like warehouses, halls, etc, even when they could have a church if they wanted too. As a result, many Christians now show less respect towards holy things, less respect towards God, and have lost sight of the following important points:
The Church Building
Firstly though,
Until the decay (certain attitudes and behaviour) set in, a church was a place that was reverenced in accordance with the Holy personage that it was built and set apart for.
So what caused the decay?
1)
Hybrid instruments (drum-kits, and rock guitars with their cornuto shaped design) that are far less acceptable (indeed not acceptable) to that set apart, spiritual, God-dedicated, prayerful environment.
More on this can be seen further down.
2)
a) Responses associated with the entertainment world like clapping (rather than the God praising Amen).
b) Introductions associated with the entertainment world like drama, puppets, croony and pop type singers, etc.
Such is a humanistic “end justifies the means” approach rather than relying on the power of the Word.
More on this can be seen further down.
3)
Casual clothing that automatically encourages casualness, unlike the suit and tie that’s associated with something or someone of importance, and that inhibits casualness.
4)
A drop in attendance due to:
a) A greater worldliness coming from Christians (which is hardly fixed by worldly introductions).
b) Poor and unimpassioned orators.
c) A lack of pastoral care and ongoing spiritual maintenance.
d) Errant leaders.
e) A new theology that downplays obedience, accountability; and that thereby creates:
5)
Less godly fear (healthy respect) for both God, His Word and spiritual environments like a church.
6)
Lacklustre, generic, warm fuzzy, people pleasing (rather than God pleasing) sermons that do little to awaken lukewarm, comfortable, ignorant, erring, backsliding members.
7)
A lack of church discipline.
8)
Discontent with a church’s architectural configuration which was so designed in order that ministers could speak to the flock as a whole, bring up to spiritual speed, and soundly instruct a flock that might be doing little of itself to plumb the depths of God’s Word lest “My people perish for a lack of knowledge,” and lest they not present themselves to God as “one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”
And this discontent here, having more to do with a wrong focus (attitude) than any inherent issues. When a church is used more like a workshop than a place of worship where study is part and parcel of that worship, godly respect and reverence can be lessened (for it as the House of God) via the bustle of activity and altered approach.
9)
The view that a church is just a building.
Well, and secondly, a church is not just bricks and mortar, as some would have us believe.
Why not?
1)
Because the church building helps the Christian identity given that the building itself becomes a Christian symbol within society, much like a flag.
2)
The church building helps the Christian witness because of its difference from non-Christian things.
3)
The church building helps to create a respect for Holy things, that which is set apart, thereby helping prevent the abuse of the spiritual.
4)
The church building helps lessen worship distractions. A hall, warehouse, or clubroom, for example, could bring images to our mind of the social events we attended there, the games and antics that occurred. Or there might be worldly images on the walls.
5)
The church building helps us to appreciate and grasp better the difference between holy and unholy things.
6)
The church building provides us with a place where a special atmosphere (including architecturally) can be created that will aid people in worshiping more reverently, and that will be more suitable for meditation and prayer. That’s why God called His place of worship a house of prayer (Mark 11:17). Satan of course wants the opposite — loud music, distracting noise, and bustle.
7)
The church building provides us with something that we can keep especially for God, thus showing our deep love for Him. God’s Word says that He is a jealous God (Ex 20:5; Deut 5:9). He doesn’t want us giving to someone else what He alone should get. Imagine how your spouse would feel if you wanted another spouse as well, in other words, if you wanted to share them with someone else.
8)
The church building is an ideal training place for the very young that they may better appreciate such spiritual realities. It also helps them to learn that there's a time and place, which proves helpful regarding the likes of hospitals, nursing homes, libraries and so on
Because there are Christians still worshiping in churches, Satan has tried to get Christians to treat their church like a common place by introducing common everyday things — for example, clowns, puppets, drama, dancing, etc, and by convincing Christians that they can also get excited, clap, laugh and joke there. Satan is not holy like God, so he doesn’t have a problem with such things, and like a spiteful child he just loves to spoil what is God’s. Satan has also convinced Christians to wear casual clothes to church because he knows that when folk wear casual clothes they soon start acting more casually [carelessly]. He also knows it conveys the impression that the One they’re going to meet with isn’t really that important.
Let us remember this: Wherever we worship God (be it in a church, hall, or paddock), it is a Holy exercise and should be carried out respectfully and reverently. Indeed any spiritual exercise. God is a holy-righteous God. When we worship Him we should do so as if we are literally in His presence. It is worth noting that God is omnipresent. Christians need a place to meet together to worship God. Scripture says we're to meet together. A church is dedicated to God. Therefore, it's not just a building. It's designed solely for holy-spiritual exercises, and as we can see, for very good reasons. God wants His things set apart. Therefore, nothing of a secular nature, nor a holy-unholy mix, should occur within a church.
Methods
Laughter:
1)
Laughter detracts from the sacred dignity of the gospel, place, purpose, and God’s holy nature.
2)
Laughter is irreverent.
3)
Laughter lessens respect for the Lord and His place of worship.
4)
Laughter detracts from the solemnity of the message.
5)
Laughter belongs with improper chatter, noise, and gimmickry.
Clapping:
1)
Clappings historic venue was the theatre, the sports arena, and the social gathering.
2)
Clapping is a secular response that measures entertainment value, which is counter to worships purpose.
3)
Clapping stimulates pride and self-adulation. We should not engender pride and self adulation in others.
4)
Clapping secularizes the sacred.
5)
Clapping encourages the superficial.
6)
Clapping spotlights the human, pushing the divine backstage.
7)
Clapping is common in heathen worship.
8)
Clapping applauds virtues some do not possess.
9)
Clapping is addictive.
10)
Clapping minimizes holiness.
11)
Clapping encourages preachers and musicians to be more superficial and entertaining, as opposed to the hushed and reverent “Amen”, which encourages them to be more penetrating and spiritual.
Entertainment:
1)
The church is not a concert venue, theatre or entertainment centre. Thus drama, skits, clowns, puppets, and the likes, are clearly inappropriate.
2)
Entertainment is self-centred gratification rather than God-centred adoration. Praise and worship is God-pleasing, entertainment is man-pleasing.
3)
Entertainment trivializes and cheapens the importance of the message.
Drama:
Drama: role-playing, impersonating; a play, a skit.
PART TWO
Women Elders, Pastors
When Eve sinned, she brought on women the opposite to what she had sought, sadly,
Marital abuse, rape, porn, infidelity and sexual slavery.
In other words, the fall of man, men taking that path that saw love go askew,
Enter selfishness, lust, violence, lies, corruption, and that befuddling brew.
All why women should once again mind what they reach for, things not like they appear,
God having allotted to both men and women their very own unique sphere.
But such lost on modern Eves who once again are hearing beguiling sounds, which,
Are just as false as those deceiving words that were once uttered by Endor’s witch.
Yes, the old serpent certainly made things sound good, and is still at it today,
The Scriptures twisted to suit, and New Age humbug added to those vessels of clay.
And thus the Holy Spirit struggling to undo those lids that seem vacuum tight,
Modern Eves and their supporters utterly but wrongly convinced that they’re right.
And are they any happier for what they’re reaching for? No, of course they’re not,
Because behind it all both delusion and the devil are easy to spot.
Eve hardly attaining greater heights via that fruit she stole, nor women today,
Who, even in the Church are seen to wrongly reach, despite what God’s had to say.
Yes, they too fixated on certain things rather than where it all truly matters,
Like repairing breeched walls, saving souls, warning of coming events, and hence why,
Given the lie, things are in tatters.
Certain demands splitting the Church less triumphant, gone unity, harmony,
And all because of reaching for the fruit of yet another don’t-go-there tree.
Time to head back to Eden, that way God designed things to be, and the one tree,
The tree of life, the other tree having led to all the hollering that we see.
In other words, Eve’s legacy living on in those women who still can’t see
That within the Holy Scriptures there has always been a continuity.
By Lance Landall
If Women can be ordained as elders/pastors, (and please excuse some repetition here), why does Scripture only appoint men to the role of pastor (elders and pastors biblically being one and the same)?
If role distinctions are simply cultural, as many claim, and given that Christ was revolutionary in His attitude toward the treatment of women and broke many conventions, why didn’t He include women in His choice of 12 apostles, and more so given that women played leading priestly roles in the Roman-Hellenistic religious culture at the time? Such would have been readily accepted in the Gentile world.
Didn’t Christ teach by example, and don’t actions speak louder than words? If it’s an injustice to deny women ordination, why didn’t Christ set the example by including women amongst His twelve apostles? Christ had no inhibitions when it came to speaking out about the injustices of His time, nor the apostles, for that matter.
Why are wives told to submit to their husbands [priests in their own homes], and to show their husbands respect, if they can have authority over their husbands as elders/pastors within the church -- an oxymoron of sorts? Isn’t eldership by its very nature a ministry of authority in the Church? Aren’t the elders to “rule” well (1 Tim 5:17, KJV)? Surely the husband’s headship (1 Cor 11:3) in his own family (1 Tim 3:5) could hardly remain unaffected if his own wife were to serve as the head of the congregation to which he belongs? Isn’t a woman’s being the head of a congregation incompatible with her biblically submissive role (Eph 5:22)? It’s interesting that the qualifications for the office of elder follow immediately after the prohibition of women as teachers/elders (1 Tim 2:11-15).
Why was Judas replaced with another man?
Why did Paul rebuke the Corinthian church (the problem church of Paul’s day) where so-called emancipated women were rebelling? Why did he say to them, “Did the word of God originate with you?” (1 Cor 14:36)?
How can a women pastor model before the congregation the male imagery of God -- God the Father? Surely such would be an adulteration. After all, God chose to reveal Himself as a father. Christ taught His apostles to address God as, “Our Father,” and He spoke of the fatherhood of God. And doesn’t Paul indicate that all forms of fatherhood derive from and reflect the fatherhood of God?
Why did Paul say that what he and the other apostles were teaching were things that God had revealed to them through the Spirit, that such wasn’t (isn’t) their words (1 Cor 2:10,13; 1 Thess 2:13), and why the appeal to the creation order (1 Tim 2:12-14)?
Obviously the apostles weren’t prisoners of their culture. If Paul was chauvinistic, sexist, why would he teach that women are equal to men, and why did he include them in his general ministry, as did Christ?
Why would God give us a guide book that contained incorrect instruction for Christians? Why are we told we can trust His Word if the apostles have things askew? Why are we told that all scripture is inspired by God (2 Tim 3:16) and that every word of God proves true?
It’s interesting that evangelical feminists have been clamouring for a re-symbolization of the Godhead based on impersonal or feminine categories. Such, of course, clears the path for a female priesthood. It’s well known that the feminists’ destructive vision is that of an androgynous society. Feminists fail to recognise that equality does not require sameness. God designed men and women to complement each other. Thus, equal in worth and being, different in function -- theological, not cultural. If such forces as these are wanting the roles as laid down in Scripture to be removed, isn’t that a sure sign that we should be upholding those roles? It’s from such forces that the women’s ordination issue has arisen, and not from within Christianity. Hence why we’re seeing the feminising of Christianity and the likes of the homosexual lobby using similar secular ‘social justice’ arguments.
Given that females (as well as males) were priests in pagan religions but never in the history of the Jewish nation, given that females were never appointed as pastors/elders in the apostolic Church, given that Scripture says only men, and given that Satan is always coming up with substitutes for anything God has set up or laid down, isn’t it plain folly to ordain women as elders/pastors too?
It’s worth noting that life has been better for women under the influence of Christian culture and traditions than under any other influence. But despite that, we’re seeing legions of modern Eves. How long will it be before we see other beliefs and practices challenged, or has that already happened? To ordain women as elders/pastors is to surely wrongly question the authority of God’s Word for defining Christian beliefs and practices.
A simplistic overview:
God is a God of order (1 Cor 14:33). Even in a perfect world there has to be order. In fact, that is what helps to make a perfect world perfect. In a perfect world everything has its place and its part to play. It’s like that with the Trinity [the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit] (Matt 28:19). Though equal, each has their place and their part to play [function] (1 Cor 11:3; John 5:30; 15:26). So it is with men and women. Though created equal, they each have their place and part to play [complementary functions]. Both men and women are subject to the creational order ordained by God. God in His wisdom, knew that for things to work best in a marriage there would need to be some sort of order. Imagine a factory where everyone wanted to be the manager, or where no one wanted to be the manager. Or where everyone was fighting over who should be doing what [in general]. What chaos there would be! Similar problems can occur in a marriage. Thus man was given the ‘headship’ role [he was to protect and guide his wife] (Eph 5:23), and the woman was to be in ‘submission’ to him [allow him to protect and guide her] (Eph 5:22,24; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:7). This became more necessary after the Fall because a spirit of rebellion (Gen 3:6-13) had then come into this world. Even so, man was not to rule over his wife [try to control her], and the wife was not to challenge his leadership [by displaying any form of disrespect]. When the New Testament talks about women’s submission to man it refers to the order of creation in Genesis chapter two (Eph 5:31; 1 Cor 11:8,9; 1 Tim 2:13,14), not to the curse of the woman in Genesis 3:16. Man therefore is the leader (1 Tim 3:5), protector (1 Peter 3:7), provider (Gen 17-19), father (Eph 3:14), and woman is the companion/helper (Gen 2:18), home maker/mother (Mal 2:15). This is why the Bible says that God the Father is the head of His Son Jesus Christ, that Jesus is the head of man [and the church (Eph 5:23)], and man is the head of his wife (1 Cor 11:3). Man’s headship role here is all about responsibility, not rank. The husband shows his love for his wife by loving ‘headship,’ and the wife shows her love for her husband by her willing [not forced] ‘submission.’ This arrangement symbolizes the relationship that should exist between Christ [the groom, who is the loving head] and the church [the bride — which should willingly submit to Christ] (Eph 5:22-24,33; Rev 19:7-9). The wives submission to her husband also models that of Christ’s submission to His Father (1 Cor 11:3). When women refuse to submit to their husbands, they discredit the Word of God (Titus 2:5). God’s Word asks women to submit to their husbands for Christ’s sake (Col 3:18). Man was given his headship role before the Fall occurred [before Adam and Eve sinned] (1 Cor 11:8,9; Gen 3:17; 2:22; 1 Tim 2:13,14). Man was created first (1 Tim 2:13,14), put in charge of the garden of Eden (Gen 2:15), given instructions regarding the forbidden tree (Gen 2:16,17), named all the creatures (Gen 2:19) and also the woman [both before and after the Fall] (Gen 2:33; 3:20). Woman came from man (Gen 2:22), that is why she is called woman (Gen 2:23). God’s Word also shows how man displays his headship by leaving his parents and joining with his wife [man takes the first step, takes the initiative] (Gen 2:24). Satan attempted to undermine man’s headship right from the beginning by deceiving Eve (Gen 3:1-6). Even though Eve was the first to sin, it was Adam that God went after first, in recognition of his headship role [function] (Gen 3:9). His headship role made him especially responsible. It was only after Adam blamed his wife that God then spoke to Eve (Gen 3:13). Adam was later addressed by God for having listened to his wife (Gen 3:17). Where God said [after the Fall that is] to the woman [Eve] “he will rule over you” (Gen 3:16, NASB), it was simply God telling the woman very clearly that she must return to her ‘submission’ role, which she had broken by doing her own thing [wandering off from her husbands watch care and getting caught out]. God also was expressing the fact that unfortunately because of sin in the world now, men would sadly abuse their headship role. God is able to see ahead remember. He can predict the future. Contrary to what many think, Paul the apostle, who had much to say on marriage and headship, was not presenting a cultural view, but instead, acting according to his Lord’s instructions (Titus 2:5; 1 Thess 2:13; 4:8; 1 Cor 2:10,13; 7:10; 14:36). In fact, Paul had brought about a riot in Ephesus with his different teachings (Acts 19:23-41). His message was pointing in the opposite direction to which society [the Roman Empire] at the time of his writing was going. The marriage bond was suffering a complete breakdown, divorce and adultery were rife, many couples were embracing lifestyles of independence, and women were spurning the home and traditional concepts of male leadership. Many were no doubt offended by what Paul had to say regarding male headship. Rather than going along with society, Paul courageously and correctly presented the Word of God (Jude 3; 2 Tim 4:2).
Feminists, caught up in their anger at men’s abuses of women, have been foolishly attempting to do away with any gender [male and female] roles [functions], and even any gender distinctions [male and female differences], where possible. To God the gender distinctions [male and female differences] and functional roles [headship, submission] are very important. To alter the roles that God has set up, or to blur the gender distinctions in any way [e.g. unisex fashions (Deut 22:5)] is to go against God’s creational design. Such would cause confusion, create doubts about doctrines [biblical beliefs] based on creation [as this one is], would be a rejection of God’s order established at creation for men and women, and would be doing things man’s way [humanistic belief] (Gal 1:10; 1 Sam 15:23; James 3:16; Luke 14:11). Evangelical feminists are well aware of the significance of the man’s biblical role and how it relates to God the Father. They see this as a real problem when it comes to the ordaining of women as elders or pastors. Thus they have been zealously attempting to breakdown this symbolization in an attempt to clear the way for a female priesthood (James 3:16; Luke 14:11; 1 Sam 15:23). It has always been Satan’s desire to cause chaos and confusion in this fallen world, and to misrepresent God the Father. He has been very busy doing this by trying to convince women that they can also be pastors and elders; by introducing unisex fashions that blur the sexual differences between men and women (Lev 22:5); by inciting women to rebel against their husband’s headship role; and by fooling men and women to generally interchange their roles, whether that be in the home, church or even workplace. Given all that’s been mentioned here, it would seen fitting then, that men should be the ones who fill all the leading roles in society [prime ministers, mayors, etc] in keeping with their general leadership role, thus upholding and strengthening men’s responsibilities in society.
More thoughts, from Ken Unger's book True Sexuality:
Men and women, their differences.
Being a man or a woman constitutes a different way of expressing the humanity that both share equally.
The average man is taller than the average woman.
The male skeleton is usually stronger than the woman’s. The bones are thicker and heavier. The greater strength of its bone structure obviously equips the man’s body better than the woman’s to overcome physical obstacles and to carry loads. The man has greater steadiness, strength and stress resistance due to his stronger bones. The man’s hand is stronger and bonier pointing to the fact that the man is built to control the environment practically and creatively, whereas the softer daintier woman’s hand is more suited to taking in hand the environment and looking after and caring for it protectively. A man’s bones are more angular, more rugged in shape, while the woman’s have rounder, less sharply marked forms and blunter corners. Woman’s bones are not merely finer, thinner and more graceful, but also softer, rounder and less rugged in shape. The more angular shape of the male body is more fitted for resistance, assaults and pushing than the rounder female body.
The striated muscles in men are more strongly developed and constructed than women’s. They serve above all for dealing with external obstacles. Wherever we manipulate, model or effect the environment, the striated muscles come into action. The man’s superior equipment in this respect and his stronger bone structure indicate that by nature the male rather than the female is designed to overcome external environmental obstacles, to reshape and master the environment. The woman is also naturally active, and is particularly concerned with things in her immediate environment. But her activity does not involve her much in pushing forward and overcoming external obstacles, so much as in caring and nursing, in sorting, tidying and polishing. A woman’s muscles are particularly suited to their tasks. They are by nature less suited to strong contractions than to active compliance at the right moment.
The suitability of women’s muscles to their tasks matches a similar capability of women in the psychological realm. The woman’s psyche, just like her muscles, can adapt very rapidly to every internal and external change. The average woman adjusts mentally and physiologically to external circumstances with versatility and adaptability.
The relative lack of muscle in women, which incidentally is not culturally conditioned but is the result of hormonal differences, is compensated for by more fat. As a result of this, and the shape of the bones already mentioned, the woman’s body is rounder and the mans more angular. We may sum up by saying that the man’s bodily frame is fitted for remodeling the environment, while the woman’s bodily shape expresses her greater gifts in arranging and caring for a circumscribed world of the nearest and most intimate things.
A woman’s skin is much softer, more tender, and smoother than a man’s, giving greater sensitivity. Women are therefore more aware of the pleasures of touch. This greater sensitivity of the skin matches the greater sensitivity of women in the psychological realm, their ability to approach matters carefully, their greater adaptability and sympathy, their capacity to give and take and to go along with situations; whereas the man tends to try to alter reality by changing it.
A woman, in contrast with all highly developed animals, has the appearance of motherhood without being or becoming a mother. This fact shows that the woman is built for motherhood as the goal and fulfillment of her being. The capacity for natural motherhood matches the motherliness in a woman’s psychological make-up, which may be developed even if biological motherhood is denied her.
The sexual organs serve the purpose of procreation and the establishment of new life. They thereby point to the man’s natural function of begetting and the woman’s of bearing. They also point to the man’s appointment to fatherhood and the woman’s to motherhood. The design of the sexual organs has as its consequence that the man as begetter in the act of intercourse is the active, giving and life-creating party, while the woman as bearer is the passive, receiving and life-sustaining party. Female passivity, male activity, female letting-it-happen, male effecting it, female receiving, male outpouring, female being found, male seeking and acquiring characterize the physical interaction of sexual intercourse. While the man has the more leading role and makes the ultimate decision if and when the union takes place, the behaviour of the woman is that of loving subjection, which she fulfills through the offering of her body. The woman’s resting egg is penetrated by the male sperm, awakening and bringing it into development. While a man simply becomes a father through begetting, conception is for the woman only the beginning of a period of far-reaching burdens and demands. The physical contribution of the man is thus fleeting in comparison with the bodily processes which the woman undertakes in motherhood. While a man is more strongly equipped for creative or destructive remodeling of his environment, the woman is more strongly equipped for arranging what the man has acquired for her or she has received from him.
A man’s life is characterized more by spontaneity than a woman’s: a woman’s life is characterized more by receptivity than a man’s. Among examples of man’s grater spontaneity one may cite his greater drive, greater aggressiveness, greater desire for leadership [dominance] and his particular capacity for creative achievements in all fields of intellectual life, a sort of intellectual procreative ability and analogous to his biological procreativity. Women have verbal superiority [linguistic, articulation, fluency, relating]. Men have spatial conceptualization superiority [technical, mathematical, scientific, industrial, discovery, inventing, philosophy, art, musical composition] and abstract thinking [chess]. The most brilliant achievements in the realms of philosophy, art, and musical composition and the pioneering discoveries in modern science are overwhelmingly the work of men. Invention is also predominantly a male preserve. Man is well known in his thinking to be the more creative, the woman is known to be more receptive when it comes to thought. This is confirmed by aptitude tests which have shown male superiority when it comes to comprehension and reasoning, while women excel in all rote-learning tasks.
Regarding total intelligence the sexes are not really different.
Women are more holistic, more dominated by their feelings and more emotional. She is in less danger than a man is of isolating her soul from her body or her thinking from her feelings. A woman has a more developed relationship to the world of persons, a greater readiness to submit to the leadership of others [to serve, to give others help and support when they are in trouble] and a greater sociability [the tendency to seek the company of others and take pleasure in it]. Man has a more developed relationship to the world of things, is more eccentric and his thinking is more strongly directed toward the conceptual and general. For men this carries the danger that their reflection may become autonomous and cut off from the real world. The greater receptivity of women is seen in her greater ability and willingness to imitate, her greater adaptability and suggestibility, her greater linguistic aptitude and her superior capacity to sympathize, which rests on their greater sensitivity to people’s expression of feeling.
Whereas male cells contain a Y-chromosome and an X-chromosome, female cells have two X-chromosomes. This difference involves all the cells of the organism; probably the real personal differences between the sexes are determined by this. Sexuality affects the whole of a person’s body and not only a part. It is also evident in different hormone levels, in the different constitution of the blood and bodily liquids, of the nervous system, of internal organs and brain structure.
Every person possesses to a certain extent sexually specific characteristics of the other sex. This goes for biological as well as intellectual and psychological aspects. So in this way there is neither a total man nor a total woman.
This section was added to 7 December 2018.
You might also like to read my other poems on the subject of women elders, pastors (one titled: Ordination's Become A Red Herring) which can be accessed via the following link:
On Whose Authority?
Contemporary
Worship
The Church Building; Methods; Music; Stance
and Letter
Part One is broken down into the above headings.
A link to related poems and diagrams can be found at the bottom of Part One.
Sources available.
“The One who created us to worship Him also has decreed how we shall worship Him. We cannot worship God
as we will; our worship must always conform to God’s pleasure. God does not accept just any kind of worship.
He accepts worship only when it is pure and when it flows from a heart under the afflatus of the Holy Spirit.
Only such worship, compatible with His holy nature, can possibly be accepted by Him.”
The Purpose Of Man, by A.W. Tozer
"A sheep dressed in wolf's clothing is a strange way to approach the sinner or the saint.
The whole scenario is confusing to the world and to the church."
Gary Erickson, Music On The Rocks? p 74.
“In many of our churches, we’re knocking ourselves out trying to be ‘relevant’ so we can attract new members. We don’t want to appear to be different, extreme, or too spiritual, for fear of turning off unbelievers. By contrast, once the church in Oradea was willing to be different from the world, the very unbelievers who had once ridiculed them were irresistibly drawn to Christ. We have accommodated to the world rather than calling the world to accommodate to Christ. When will we realize that the world is not impressed with a religious version of itself?”
Nancy Leigh DeMoss, from her book Holiness, p.160, and
where she’s writing about the great revival in Romania.
“A number of people in today’s Church like to set about repairing some sections of the Word of God because
they feel they are not in line with modern culture. But it is not that the Bible is out of step with culture; it is that
culture is out of step with the Bible. Culture changes, Scripture never changes.”
Author unknown.
as we will; our worship must always conform to God’s pleasure. God does not accept just any kind of worship.
He accepts worship only when it is pure and when it flows from a heart under the afflatus of the Holy Spirit.
Only such worship, compatible with His holy nature, can possibly be accepted by Him.”
The Purpose Of Man, by A.W. Tozer
"A sheep dressed in wolf's clothing is a strange way to approach the sinner or the saint.
The whole scenario is confusing to the world and to the church."
Gary Erickson, Music On The Rocks? p 74.
“In many of our churches, we’re knocking ourselves out trying to be ‘relevant’ so we can attract new members. We don’t want to appear to be different, extreme, or too spiritual, for fear of turning off unbelievers. By contrast, once the church in Oradea was willing to be different from the world, the very unbelievers who had once ridiculed them were irresistibly drawn to Christ. We have accommodated to the world rather than calling the world to accommodate to Christ. When will we realize that the world is not impressed with a religious version of itself?”
Nancy Leigh DeMoss, from her book Holiness, p.160, and
where she’s writing about the great revival in Romania.
“A number of people in today’s Church like to set about repairing some sections of the Word of God because
they feel they are not in line with modern culture. But it is not that the Bible is out of step with culture; it is that
culture is out of step with the Bible. Culture changes, Scripture never changes.”
Author unknown.
Worship
Only God is worthy of worship (Rev chap 5; 1 Sam 2:2; Ps 19:1). It was He who created this world and its inhabitants (Gen 1:1,26-31; Rev 4:11; Col 1:16; Ex 20:11). He also died to save humans (Rom 5:8; John 3:16) when they fell into sin [Adam and Eve] (Rom 5:12) and came under sins penalty (Rom 6:23). He is also a Holy God (Rev 15:4; Ps 22:3; Joshua 24:19; 5:15; Ex 3:5). Given all this, He should be greatly respected, greatly reverenced, and greatly appreciated. He deserves our devotion. Because He is Holy, God’s Word tells us that He should only be worshiped in a certain way, that is, very reverently and respectfully (Ps 29:2; Heb 12:28; Eccl 5:1; Ps 96:9; 89:7; 5:7; 95:6; Hab 2:20; Lev 19:29; Mark 11:17). Even the inhabitants of heaven, such as angels, worship Him with great reverence and respect (Rev 7:11; 5:14). That’s the way that the Jewish nation was instructed to worship Him also (Lev 19:29). In the Old Testament, God was always very particular about His place of worship [called the ‘sanctuary’ or ‘temple’] (Mark 11:15-17; Ex 25:8) and how He was worshiped (Isa 62:6, KJV; Lev 27:28). When certain ones worshiped Him incorrectly, or dishonoured His place of worship, He was very displeased, and His response showed it (Lev 10:1-3; Ezek 9:4,6; 22:26; Amos 5:23). God is very displeased when we are more concerned with doing what makes ourselves or other people happy, rather than with what makes Him happy (Gal 1:10). Though there is no longer a ‘sanctuary’ (except in Heaven - Heb 8:1,2,5) like there was in the days of ancient Israel, God’s principles for holy worship still apply whenever and wherever He is worshiped (Matt 18:20) because He is still the same unchangeable (Mal 3:6; James 1:17) and Holy God (Heb 12:28; Rev 7:11). Satan became jealous of this worship that is rightfully due to God alone (Isa 14:12-14). As a result he rebelled against God and had to be removed from heaven (Rev 12:7-9,12). He is still trying to claim that worship, and has been busy trying to fool the inhabitants of this world into giving him that worship rather than God. He has been very successful and has even fooled, as he has done before, the very ones who should know better (Ezek 22:26). Satan has managed to get Christians to mix holy things with unholy things [worldly ways, sounds, etc]. That way he manages to get some of the worship that’s being given to God. Where he can’t get it all, he’ll get as much of it as he can! Also, by getting Christians to mix more and more of the unholy with the holy, he hopes that eventually he’ll get the lot, little by little. If he tried to do it all at once Christians would catch on to what he’s up too. This is why it is very important to study God’s Word to find out His will regarding such matters, rather than going by our own feelings or wishes, or anybody else’s. Because Christians today don’t all live in a separate nation like ancient Israel, the distinctions that were very clear then, are no longer as clear, so worship principles act as a guide to ensure the right worship practices still occur, because God can only accept worship that is done correctly (Lev 10:1,2). Because Christians have been living in a non-Christian environment for so long now [like the Israelites in Egypt], they have adopted many wrong ways, and their spiritual vision isn’t as clear as it used to be. It has always been Satan’s desire to blur the distinctions between Christian and non-Christian things in the hope that eventually there won’t be any difference at all. Satan knows that by getting this to happen the Christian witness to the world will be weaker, and God will become less known, respected or loved. By this, Satan gets more following him instead of God. Satan always tries to represent God as someone who is very restrictive, so that God will be disliked, when God is really trying to bring about what will eventually make us all happier, and what is rightfully due to Him. Satan has even managed to convince many Christians that the church building that they have traditionally worshiped in, is really of no importance. As a result, many are now worshiping in common buildings like warehouses, halls, etc, even when they could have a church if they wanted too. As a result, many Christians now show less respect towards holy things, less respect towards God, and have lost sight of the following important points:
The Church Building
Firstly though,
Until the decay (certain attitudes and behaviour) set in, a church was a place that was reverenced in accordance with the Holy personage that it was built and set apart for.
So what caused the decay?
1)
Hybrid instruments (drum-kits, and rock guitars with their cornuto shaped design) that are far less acceptable (indeed not acceptable) to that set apart, spiritual, God-dedicated, prayerful environment.
More on this can be seen further down.
2)
a) Responses associated with the entertainment world like clapping (rather than the God praising Amen).
b) Introductions associated with the entertainment world like drama, puppets, croony and pop type singers, etc.
Such is a humanistic “end justifies the means” approach rather than relying on the power of the Word.
More on this can be seen further down.
3)
Casual clothing that automatically encourages casualness, unlike the suit and tie that’s associated with something or someone of importance, and that inhibits casualness.
4)
A drop in attendance due to:
a) A greater worldliness coming from Christians (which is hardly fixed by worldly introductions).
b) Poor and unimpassioned orators.
c) A lack of pastoral care and ongoing spiritual maintenance.
d) Errant leaders.
e) A new theology that downplays obedience, accountability; and that thereby creates:
5)
Less godly fear (healthy respect) for both God, His Word and spiritual environments like a church.
6)
Lacklustre, generic, warm fuzzy, people pleasing (rather than God pleasing) sermons that do little to awaken lukewarm, comfortable, ignorant, erring, backsliding members.
7)
A lack of church discipline.
8)
Discontent with a church’s architectural configuration which was so designed in order that ministers could speak to the flock as a whole, bring up to spiritual speed, and soundly instruct a flock that might be doing little of itself to plumb the depths of God’s Word lest “My people perish for a lack of knowledge,” and lest they not present themselves to God as “one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.”
And this discontent here, having more to do with a wrong focus (attitude) than any inherent issues. When a church is used more like a workshop than a place of worship where study is part and parcel of that worship, godly respect and reverence can be lessened (for it as the House of God) via the bustle of activity and altered approach.
9)
The view that a church is just a building.
Well, and secondly, a church is not just bricks and mortar, as some would have us believe.
Why not?
1)
Because the church building helps the Christian identity given that the building itself becomes a Christian symbol within society, much like a flag.
2)
The church building helps the Christian witness because of its difference from non-Christian things.
3)
The church building helps to create a respect for Holy things, that which is set apart, thereby helping prevent the abuse of the spiritual.
4)
The church building helps lessen worship distractions. A hall, warehouse, or clubroom, for example, could bring images to our mind of the social events we attended there, the games and antics that occurred. Or there might be worldly images on the walls.
5)
The church building helps us to appreciate and grasp better the difference between holy and unholy things.
6)
The church building provides us with a place where a special atmosphere (including architecturally) can be created that will aid people in worshiping more reverently, and that will be more suitable for meditation and prayer. That’s why God called His place of worship a house of prayer (Mark 11:17). Satan of course wants the opposite — loud music, distracting noise, and bustle.
7)
The church building provides us with something that we can keep especially for God, thus showing our deep love for Him. God’s Word says that He is a jealous God (Ex 20:5; Deut 5:9). He doesn’t want us giving to someone else what He alone should get. Imagine how your spouse would feel if you wanted another spouse as well, in other words, if you wanted to share them with someone else.
8)
The church building is an ideal training place for the very young that they may better appreciate such spiritual realities. It also helps them to learn that there's a time and place, which proves helpful regarding the likes of hospitals, nursing homes, libraries and so on
Because there are Christians still worshiping in churches, Satan has tried to get Christians to treat their church like a common place by introducing common everyday things — for example, clowns, puppets, drama, dancing, etc, and by convincing Christians that they can also get excited, clap, laugh and joke there. Satan is not holy like God, so he doesn’t have a problem with such things, and like a spiteful child he just loves to spoil what is God’s. Satan has also convinced Christians to wear casual clothes to church because he knows that when folk wear casual clothes they soon start acting more casually [carelessly]. He also knows it conveys the impression that the One they’re going to meet with isn’t really that important.
Let us remember this: Wherever we worship God (be it in a church, hall, or paddock), it is a Holy exercise and should be carried out respectfully and reverently. Indeed any spiritual exercise. God is a holy-righteous God. When we worship Him we should do so as if we are literally in His presence. It is worth noting that God is omnipresent. Christians need a place to meet together to worship God. Scripture says we're to meet together. A church is dedicated to God. Therefore, it's not just a building. It's designed solely for holy-spiritual exercises, and as we can see, for very good reasons. God wants His things set apart. Therefore, nothing of a secular nature, nor a holy-unholy mix, should occur within a church.
Methods
Laughter:
1)
Laughter detracts from the sacred dignity of the gospel, place, purpose, and God’s holy nature.
2)
Laughter is irreverent.
3)
Laughter lessens respect for the Lord and His place of worship.
4)
Laughter detracts from the solemnity of the message.
5)
Laughter belongs with improper chatter, noise, and gimmickry.
Clapping:
1)
Clappings historic venue was the theatre, the sports arena, and the social gathering.
2)
Clapping is a secular response that measures entertainment value, which is counter to worships purpose.
3)
Clapping stimulates pride and self-adulation. We should not engender pride and self adulation in others.
4)
Clapping secularizes the sacred.
5)
Clapping encourages the superficial.
6)
Clapping spotlights the human, pushing the divine backstage.
7)
Clapping is common in heathen worship.
8)
Clapping applauds virtues some do not possess.
9)
Clapping is addictive.
10)
Clapping minimizes holiness.
11)
Clapping encourages preachers and musicians to be more superficial and entertaining, as opposed to the hushed and reverent “Amen”, which encourages them to be more penetrating and spiritual.
Entertainment:
1)
The church is not a concert venue, theatre or entertainment centre. Thus drama, skits, clowns, puppets, and the likes, are clearly inappropriate.
2)
Entertainment is self-centred gratification rather than God-centred adoration. Praise and worship is God-pleasing, entertainment is man-pleasing.
3)
Entertainment trivializes and cheapens the importance of the message.
Drama:
Drama: role-playing, impersonating; a play, a skit.
1)
Role-playing [impersonating] is pretending to be another individual [person]. It is wrong to pretend, because pretending is a form of deception, a form of lying. Lying and deceiving are strongly condemned in God’s Word (Prov 12:17; 19:5; Ps 101:7). Though we may know they’re acting, it’s still pretence. Thus, drama is a violation of the ninth Commandment. Christians are witnesses for God, and are called to live lives of absolute integrity, transparency, and honesty (John 1:47; 1 Peter 2:22). Impersonation requires that a person not be true to what God has made them; to set aside their person and identity and become someone else.
2)
Satan is called the father of lies (John 8:44), and deception in the form of role playing originally came from him. Remember the serpent in the tree that deceived Eve (Gen chap 3)? Satan also impersonated Samuel in order to deceive Saul (1 Sam chap 28), and has been continuing to role play throughout history. Deception has always been Satan’s hallmark, and God’s Word tells us that he will make good use of deception just prior to Christ’s second coming (Rev 16:13,14; 13:13,14). It’s worth remembering Jacob, who pretended to be his brother, with disastrous results (Gen 27:24-29).
3)
It is interesting to note that the word hypocrite [two faced] is in both its Greek and Latin forms a designation of an actor in the theatre. When a person is playing the role of another, they’re making out that they’re someone else when they’re not, just like a hypocrite. We sometimes refer to hypocrites as being two faced, hence the two faced theatrical logo. Thus, in a sense, it could also be said that the act of impersonating (drama) is somewhat schizophrenic in its mode, given that one is alternating between two individual personalities. Drama is the activity of attempting to become another person. The actor seeks to become the subject of another man's actions, and he even attempts to acquire the traits and personality of that other person.
4)
Evidence exists that actors can suffer from emotional/psychological disorders that require treatment. Such problems are linked to the fact that they are pretending to be someone that they are not [hence guilt]. When actors pretend to be someone else, they effectively have to take on that persons personality. The best actors are those who can immerse [bury] themselves so well in another’s personality that they really feel and seem like they are that person. Thus, many aren’t really sure who or what they are anymore, so to speak. If it has this affect on actors, you can be assured it doesn’t meet God’s approval. Isn’t it unnatural to look someone in the eye and act as if you're someone else; to feign anger, a cry, or a laugh? Shouldn’t that make you feel uncomfortable?
5)
No Christian should ever take on the personality of another person. Christians do not bring glory [credit] to God when they subordinate their own God-given personalities in order to portray others. Each one of us is a unique individual with a unique experience, and that’s the way God wants it to stay. God wants His children to stand in their own God-given personalities as they come to worship Him. God desires that our praise shall ascend to Him marked by our own individuality.
6)
Role playing can create a desire for self adulation and a desire for attention which runs counter to the biblical pattern of selflessness and humbleness set by Christ Himself (1 Cor 10:24; Phil 2:3,4; Col 3:12; Luke 14:11; James 3:16).
7)
The earliest evidence of role-playing, aside from Satan, is associated with pagan worship rituals. Thus, it could be said that drama effectively belongs to Revelation's Babylon.
8)
Drama is using an illegitimate secular medium to achieve spiritual results, something forbidden in Scripture. The “end justifies the means” is flawed human philosophy.
9)
It is also biblically and ethically wrong to impersonate a divine being. It is interesting to note that there were no pictures of the Godhead in the Temple, Synagogue, or even the early Christian churches [in accordance with the Second Commandment]. In the catacombs Christ is represented not by pictures, but by symbols like the fish or the anchor. That was because the early Christians understood that no human being can bring God down to the human level without violating His transcendent majesty and purity. Playing God or with God is sacrilegious.
10)
The early Christians did not use drama, in fact, they spoke out strongly against it. However, Gentile Christians brought into the church their pagan beliefs and practices, which, along with the apostasy of the early church, led to Passion Plays [drama] becoming common place. The only time drama was widely used in the church was during the Dark Ages. Doesn’t that say something. At the time of the Reformation, Protestants overwhelmingly rejected the use of Passion Plays.
11)
Neither Christ or the apostles used drama even though drama options were readily available to them as they brought the Gospel to cities equipped with amphitheatres and actors.
12)
The Lord only instructed the Apostles to proclaim the Good News of salvation through the medium of preaching (2 Tim 4:2-4). Because of its entertaining lure and its power to seize and hold the attention of those watching, drama is a serious threat to replacing the preaching of the Word. Drama is an addictive medium, which is why Satan makes good use of it.
13)
There are those who believe that people are saved as a result of Christian movies. What they must remember is that people are saved in spite of. God always attempts to bring good out of bad. Sadly, many connect any good they see occur, with the wrong thing that was used. As a result, the wrong thing that was used is promoted, thus compounding the problem.
14)
Did the early prophets use drama? No. Symbolism, figurativeness, metaphors, similes, allegories? Yes. But these are not drama. People are steadily reducing the meaning of the word ‘drama’ until it fits something that is found in God’s Word. The word ‘drama’ has been stretched way beyond its meaning. Thus, many make exaggerated claims. For example: They state that the Old Testament prophets used drama, quoting the likes of Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. Ezekiel, who’s often used as an example of one who used drama, and who comes the closest to drama (twice), never represented [impersonated] other people. He simply acted out what he himself had already been through. Only in the case of Jeremiah and Ezekiel could it be said that on a couple of occasions was there what might be called by today’s definitions a form of street theatre and then that would be stretching the point. It’s unfortunate that people take certain things conveyed in Scripture and stretch them well beyond what is legitimate to try and prove their argument. The Old Testament sanctuary activities are another example of such stretching. Symbolism, yes, drama [impersonation], no. There is no parallel to modern theatrical performance anywhere in the Bible.
We need to remember that any deception that comes into the Christian church will be given some sort of biblical justification.
15)
To display such emotions as anger, sorrow, fear, or elation under artificial stimulation, is to profane the gifts and powers that our Lord only intended be used in sincerity and truth. Drama is the expressing of sentiment that's neither genuine nor sincere, given that it is feigned.
16)
Can anyone claim innocence for acting out the sin of an individual they impersonate? Does/will God acquit someone for acting out the sin of another person? Impersonation effectively permits someone to play with sin. The Christian is told to flee from sin, in any form. God would hardly be delighted if we engaged in the sin of another, for the sake of entertaining, or making a point?
17)
Does Scripture specifically state “You must not use drama?” No. However, neither does it say “You must not use marijuana.” Where there is no specific directive the Christian draws on biblical principles. Drama [role playing] by its very nature is contrary to, and violates, biblical principles, and should therefore never be employed by Christians in worship or secular activities. Drama draws the church over the line of separation between the church and the world.
18)
Impersonation attacks God’s sovereign right to rule His creation as He pleases. It is God’s right to require that we live as those whom He has made us. The person who attempts to become someone else, via impersonation, is challenging God’s sovereign right not to make them that other individual. Such is a sinful attempt to be what God has not made them. Thus, impersonation is rebellion.
19)
Drama is theatrical and entertaining. Entertainment is self-centred gratification rather than God-centred adoration. Praise and worship is God-pleasing, entertainment is man-pleasing. Anything used or done to draw people is really entertainment because we are trying to interest, please and amuse them. The church is not a concert venue, theatre or entertainment centre. If role-playing is done badly it makes a mockery of sacred themes, undermines the lessons God would have us learn. If done well it draws attention to the actor.
20)
And last but not least, how can the Spirit work within, and speak to us, during these times when we're not even being our self?
Role-playing [impersonating] is pretending to be another individual [person]. It is wrong to pretend, because pretending is a form of deception, a form of lying. Lying and deceiving are strongly condemned in God’s Word (Prov 12:17; 19:5; Ps 101:7). Though we may know they’re acting, it’s still pretence. Thus, drama is a violation of the ninth Commandment. Christians are witnesses for God, and are called to live lives of absolute integrity, transparency, and honesty (John 1:47; 1 Peter 2:22). Impersonation requires that a person not be true to what God has made them; to set aside their person and identity and become someone else.
2)
Satan is called the father of lies (John 8:44), and deception in the form of role playing originally came from him. Remember the serpent in the tree that deceived Eve (Gen chap 3)? Satan also impersonated Samuel in order to deceive Saul (1 Sam chap 28), and has been continuing to role play throughout history. Deception has always been Satan’s hallmark, and God’s Word tells us that he will make good use of deception just prior to Christ’s second coming (Rev 16:13,14; 13:13,14). It’s worth remembering Jacob, who pretended to be his brother, with disastrous results (Gen 27:24-29).
3)
It is interesting to note that the word hypocrite [two faced] is in both its Greek and Latin forms a designation of an actor in the theatre. When a person is playing the role of another, they’re making out that they’re someone else when they’re not, just like a hypocrite. We sometimes refer to hypocrites as being two faced, hence the two faced theatrical logo. Thus, in a sense, it could also be said that the act of impersonating (drama) is somewhat schizophrenic in its mode, given that one is alternating between two individual personalities. Drama is the activity of attempting to become another person. The actor seeks to become the subject of another man's actions, and he even attempts to acquire the traits and personality of that other person.
4)
Evidence exists that actors can suffer from emotional/psychological disorders that require treatment. Such problems are linked to the fact that they are pretending to be someone that they are not [hence guilt]. When actors pretend to be someone else, they effectively have to take on that persons personality. The best actors are those who can immerse [bury] themselves so well in another’s personality that they really feel and seem like they are that person. Thus, many aren’t really sure who or what they are anymore, so to speak. If it has this affect on actors, you can be assured it doesn’t meet God’s approval. Isn’t it unnatural to look someone in the eye and act as if you're someone else; to feign anger, a cry, or a laugh? Shouldn’t that make you feel uncomfortable?
5)
No Christian should ever take on the personality of another person. Christians do not bring glory [credit] to God when they subordinate their own God-given personalities in order to portray others. Each one of us is a unique individual with a unique experience, and that’s the way God wants it to stay. God wants His children to stand in their own God-given personalities as they come to worship Him. God desires that our praise shall ascend to Him marked by our own individuality.
6)
Role playing can create a desire for self adulation and a desire for attention which runs counter to the biblical pattern of selflessness and humbleness set by Christ Himself (1 Cor 10:24; Phil 2:3,4; Col 3:12; Luke 14:11; James 3:16).
7)
The earliest evidence of role-playing, aside from Satan, is associated with pagan worship rituals. Thus, it could be said that drama effectively belongs to Revelation's Babylon.
8)
Drama is using an illegitimate secular medium to achieve spiritual results, something forbidden in Scripture. The “end justifies the means” is flawed human philosophy.
9)
It is also biblically and ethically wrong to impersonate a divine being. It is interesting to note that there were no pictures of the Godhead in the Temple, Synagogue, or even the early Christian churches [in accordance with the Second Commandment]. In the catacombs Christ is represented not by pictures, but by symbols like the fish or the anchor. That was because the early Christians understood that no human being can bring God down to the human level without violating His transcendent majesty and purity. Playing God or with God is sacrilegious.
10)
The early Christians did not use drama, in fact, they spoke out strongly against it. However, Gentile Christians brought into the church their pagan beliefs and practices, which, along with the apostasy of the early church, led to Passion Plays [drama] becoming common place. The only time drama was widely used in the church was during the Dark Ages. Doesn’t that say something. At the time of the Reformation, Protestants overwhelmingly rejected the use of Passion Plays.
11)
Neither Christ or the apostles used drama even though drama options were readily available to them as they brought the Gospel to cities equipped with amphitheatres and actors.
12)
The Lord only instructed the Apostles to proclaim the Good News of salvation through the medium of preaching (2 Tim 4:2-4). Because of its entertaining lure and its power to seize and hold the attention of those watching, drama is a serious threat to replacing the preaching of the Word. Drama is an addictive medium, which is why Satan makes good use of it.
13)
There are those who believe that people are saved as a result of Christian movies. What they must remember is that people are saved in spite of. God always attempts to bring good out of bad. Sadly, many connect any good they see occur, with the wrong thing that was used. As a result, the wrong thing that was used is promoted, thus compounding the problem.
14)
Did the early prophets use drama? No. Symbolism, figurativeness, metaphors, similes, allegories? Yes. But these are not drama. People are steadily reducing the meaning of the word ‘drama’ until it fits something that is found in God’s Word. The word ‘drama’ has been stretched way beyond its meaning. Thus, many make exaggerated claims. For example: They state that the Old Testament prophets used drama, quoting the likes of Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel. Ezekiel, who’s often used as an example of one who used drama, and who comes the closest to drama (twice), never represented [impersonated] other people. He simply acted out what he himself had already been through. Only in the case of Jeremiah and Ezekiel could it be said that on a couple of occasions was there what might be called by today’s definitions a form of street theatre and then that would be stretching the point. It’s unfortunate that people take certain things conveyed in Scripture and stretch them well beyond what is legitimate to try and prove their argument. The Old Testament sanctuary activities are another example of such stretching. Symbolism, yes, drama [impersonation], no. There is no parallel to modern theatrical performance anywhere in the Bible.
We need to remember that any deception that comes into the Christian church will be given some sort of biblical justification.
15)
To display such emotions as anger, sorrow, fear, or elation under artificial stimulation, is to profane the gifts and powers that our Lord only intended be used in sincerity and truth. Drama is the expressing of sentiment that's neither genuine nor sincere, given that it is feigned.
16)
Can anyone claim innocence for acting out the sin of an individual they impersonate? Does/will God acquit someone for acting out the sin of another person? Impersonation effectively permits someone to play with sin. The Christian is told to flee from sin, in any form. God would hardly be delighted if we engaged in the sin of another, for the sake of entertaining, or making a point?
17)
Does Scripture specifically state “You must not use drama?” No. However, neither does it say “You must not use marijuana.” Where there is no specific directive the Christian draws on biblical principles. Drama [role playing] by its very nature is contrary to, and violates, biblical principles, and should therefore never be employed by Christians in worship or secular activities. Drama draws the church over the line of separation between the church and the world.
18)
Impersonation attacks God’s sovereign right to rule His creation as He pleases. It is God’s right to require that we live as those whom He has made us. The person who attempts to become someone else, via impersonation, is challenging God’s sovereign right not to make them that other individual. Such is a sinful attempt to be what God has not made them. Thus, impersonation is rebellion.
19)
Drama is theatrical and entertaining. Entertainment is self-centred gratification rather than God-centred adoration. Praise and worship is God-pleasing, entertainment is man-pleasing. Anything used or done to draw people is really entertainment because we are trying to interest, please and amuse them. The church is not a concert venue, theatre or entertainment centre. If role-playing is done badly it makes a mockery of sacred themes, undermines the lessons God would have us learn. If done well it draws attention to the actor.
20)
And last but not least, how can the Spirit work within, and speak to us, during these times when we're not even being our self?
Remember:
Good that comes from something that’s done, isn’t proof that the right thing was done,
Though often, when something wrong is done, that it is evidence, we see spun.
However — in spite of, not because of — is why sometimes good occurs,
As God — out of some wrong thing that’s done — and for His cause — good brings or spurs.
Quotes relating to drama:
“A psychoanalyst in Beverly Hills, interviewed for TV Guide, talked about what is bothering actors today. He talked about the guilt that seems to be common in Couch Canyon. The actor, he says, “feels guilty because it’s wrong to be a pretender. He pretends to be so-and-so and he’s not really so-and-so. That’s lying. That’s hypocrisy.”
Dick Hobson, ‘What’s Tormenting Actors Today,’ TV Guide, July 26, 1969.” Quoted by Marjorie Lewis Lloyd in “Too Slow Getting Off” p.80.
"All actors, in some way, suffer for their craft, with the very act of losing oneself inside another
being coming at a high price."
Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times, 31/12/2010
“One more day of make believing, one more day of playing the star, one more day of endless pretending, do you know who you are?”
Neil Sedaka, famous singer.
"The stage as an institution has within itself the seeds of corruption, and exists only under a law of degeneracy.”
Herrick Johnson.
“The actor’s profession is unnatural and radically wrong. It is an unworthy profession. . .Solon, the great lawmaker of Greece, denounced the profession as “tending by its stimulation of false character, and by its expression of sentiment not genuine or sincere, to corrupt the integrity of human dealing. . .”
M.E. Kearn
“Stage life, according to my experience, has a tendency to deaden the finer feelings, to crush the inner nature of men and women, and to substitute artificiality and hollowness for sincerity and truth; and, mind you, I speak from an intimate experience of the stage, extending over thirty-seven years.”
Theatrical critic, London Press. Quoted by M.E. Kearn.
“Drama is . . . . . .generally believed to have had its roots in primitive religious rituals.”
Encyclopedia Britannica. Origins of Western Theatre. Section headed “Pre-classical Antiquity”
“Basic role-playing is associated with the religious rituals of the Mesopotamian, Egyptian and ancient Greek cultures; eg things in nature, leading later to portrayals of kings and gods.”
Encyclopedia Britannica. Section headed “Ancient Near Eastern and Egyptian Civilization”
“Greek theatre arose from the religious festivals celebrating the worship of the god Dionysius.”
A Concise Encyclopedia of the Theatre p.103
Good that comes from something that’s done, isn’t proof that the right thing was done,
Though often, when something wrong is done, that it is evidence, we see spun.
However — in spite of, not because of — is why sometimes good occurs,
As God — out of some wrong thing that’s done — and for His cause — good brings or spurs.
Quotes relating to drama:
“A psychoanalyst in Beverly Hills, interviewed for TV Guide, talked about what is bothering actors today. He talked about the guilt that seems to be common in Couch Canyon. The actor, he says, “feels guilty because it’s wrong to be a pretender. He pretends to be so-and-so and he’s not really so-and-so. That’s lying. That’s hypocrisy.”
Dick Hobson, ‘What’s Tormenting Actors Today,’ TV Guide, July 26, 1969.” Quoted by Marjorie Lewis Lloyd in “Too Slow Getting Off” p.80.
"All actors, in some way, suffer for their craft, with the very act of losing oneself inside another
being coming at a high price."
Betsy Sharkey, Los Angeles Times, 31/12/2010
“One more day of make believing, one more day of playing the star, one more day of endless pretending, do you know who you are?”
Neil Sedaka, famous singer.
"The stage as an institution has within itself the seeds of corruption, and exists only under a law of degeneracy.”
Herrick Johnson.
“The actor’s profession is unnatural and radically wrong. It is an unworthy profession. . .Solon, the great lawmaker of Greece, denounced the profession as “tending by its stimulation of false character, and by its expression of sentiment not genuine or sincere, to corrupt the integrity of human dealing. . .”
M.E. Kearn
“Stage life, according to my experience, has a tendency to deaden the finer feelings, to crush the inner nature of men and women, and to substitute artificiality and hollowness for sincerity and truth; and, mind you, I speak from an intimate experience of the stage, extending over thirty-seven years.”
Theatrical critic, London Press. Quoted by M.E. Kearn.
“Drama is . . . . . .generally believed to have had its roots in primitive religious rituals.”
Encyclopedia Britannica. Origins of Western Theatre. Section headed “Pre-classical Antiquity”
“Basic role-playing is associated with the religious rituals of the Mesopotamian, Egyptian and ancient Greek cultures; eg things in nature, leading later to portrayals of kings and gods.”
Encyclopedia Britannica. Section headed “Ancient Near Eastern and Egyptian Civilization”
“Greek theatre arose from the religious festivals celebrating the worship of the god Dionysius.”
A Concise Encyclopedia of the Theatre p.103
You may also wish to read
my two poems There's
No Virtue In Pretence, Christian section (and
amongst the linked poems, number 138 or there abouts), and Drama — It's
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! which is in the orange
box titled The
Folly Of Winning, Christian section.
Music
"Music is the handmaiden of theology."
Martin Luther
"Every musical creation conveys either chivalry or injury, nobility or degeneracy."
The poet, author
Martin Luther
"Every musical creation conveys either chivalry or injury, nobility or degeneracy."
The poet, author
To
be in harmony with Scripture, biblical patterns, God’s holiness, and
worship principles, the music in church worship should meet the
following criteria:
1)
It should be conducted by people who are trained, dedicated, and
spiritually minded.
2)
It should be reverential — in tune with the sacred nature of worship.
3)
It should respect and reflect the purpose of the premises set aside for
such — the church.
4)
It should be disciplined, controlled, restrained, and dignified.
5)
It should not be irritating to the ear, and nor should it be loud.
6)
It should not be played in a way that draws attention to oneself, in a
way that creates a secular feeling, or that mimics secular entertaining
styles.
7)
The instruments should not compete with, nor overshadow, the choir, a
soloist, or the congregation.
8)
The instruments should be as unintrusive as possible given the primary
purpose in worship is to praise God via words.
9)
Thus, instruments that
blend best with the voice would be preferable.
10)
The singing should be orderly, melodious, intelligible, and meaningful.
Our experience in church
should be different to that experienced in the world.
Unqualified contemporary Christian Music:
1)
Copies the world [inappropriate secular styles, sounds, rhythms, even lyrics].
2)
Mixes the holy with the unholy [which war against each other; are unequally yoked; a clash of interests; a mismatch; such sacrifices principles].
3)
Is performer focused [idol worship; image building; detracts from God].
4)
Is entertainment based [self pleasing; common].
5)
Generates response to the music rather than the Holy Spirit [is feelings based; appeals to the physical].
6)
Reminds of and encourages Christians back into the world.
7)
Corrupts the Christian message, identity and witness. The Christian alternative is to confront the world with the purity and power of the Gospel, not to conform to its values and practices.
8)
Engages in fellowship with the works of darkness [uses Satan’s tools to do God’s work].
9)
The emphasis of most contemporary sacred and secular music is on the rhythm. Therefore, most of today’s music, secular and sacred, feeds and satisfies the self-seeking, self-centred, and self worshiping part of man (James 1:14,15).
Drums and Rock guitars:
Drums.
The trap-set or drum-kit was invented in the early 1900's. It's a unique instrument, contraption, one that was unknown to Bible writers. Its main purpose being to power jazz, rhythm and blues, and all varieties of rock-n-roll.
On a personal level, though the drum-kit is of questionable origin, and thus despite conerns I have as a Christian, I do enjoy its presence in my music at home, but only when it's played in a restrained and more appropriate way. I believe that music is spoilt when drumming becomes too intrusive, or of a certain nature, and that it's completely out of place when it comes to the religious — Christian worship — for here there are certain demarcation lines, and for good reasons. Play being one thing and worship being another. The earthly being one thing and the heavenly being another. One appealing to the physical, which is okay in a general sense given that we're physical creatures (the Song of Solomon coming to mind), but not okay when it comes to such a sacred and Holy exercise.
And this all being why God also set one day apart as Holy at creation (the seventh day, Gen 2:1-4; Ex 20:8-11); it a Sabbath, soley for spiritual purposes, not a day for work or play, but a day where all eyes and thoughts are meant to be soley on Him, and so it should be with Christian music, because Christian music is soley all about that Christ in Christian.
So a drum-kit shouldn't be used in Christian music, nor when it comes to Christian worship, for here, such worship (such music) is all about the heavenly, the holy, a holy, righteous God; thus nothing of a worldly, common, fleshly nature contaminating such a sacred occasion (or church), even by association.
In other words, worship music should be in keeping with the dignity of a Holy, righteous God — reverent, suitably restrained, in keeping with, of a lofty nature. Ancient Israel was a religious nation, and yet a very clear distinction was made between the music of the temple-cum-Sabbath worship and the music of everyday life which entailed work and play. And hence why only certain instruments were allowed in the temple.
A drum-kit is very secular in nature (more physically orientated), akin to those other six days of creation — just like we shouldn't use a lawnmower on that day that God set apart and made Holy; a day that was never meant for work or play. Either it's a Holy day or it isn't.
I’m appalled by the kind of music (and even things in general) that the king and queen of Britain have had to sit through when they’ve attended the Royal Variety shows. Such hardly in keeping with either their tastes or elevated position.
Some would argue that Christians shouldn’t listen to any music with a drum-kit in it given that it's been said (true or false) that all of its rhythms are associated with pagan practices and gods. Personally, I'm still thinking this through given that some things can be stretched too far. And you know, just about any musical instrument can be used in a rocky, jazzy, funky way.
As for electronic drum-kits. Well, they're simply a variation on a theme, and thus making no difference come worship. Yes, same thing, different garb -- oh, how Satan loves to scheme.
Rock guitars.
Rock guitars are also clearly out when it comes to Christian music and worship. The rock guitar abandoned the rounded shoulder of the classical or folk guitar, taking on its own unique appearance, the pointed shoulders of the modern guitar [eg. Stratocaster] closely resembling the cornuto sign that’s considered the devil’s sign; The forefinger and little finger extended, while the other fingers are curled into a fist; one finger is higher than the other. This sign is representative of a satanic/occult symbol—the two horned goat or/and the imagined horns of Satan. This sign is used by black arts practitioners to ward off “the evil eye”.
And both the rock guitar (which includes those bass guitars) and its extended arm lending itself to being used as a phallic symbol, being used in a sexual manner, at rock concerts. It slung low and strummed near the genitals, used in a thrusting motion.
A rock guitar is a symbol of, and an instrument of, rebellion, and therefore is hardly appropriate for church usage, any worship setting. Such acting like a pig in a synagogue.
Thus the prudent Christian will choose a guitar as far away as possible from such associations.
Two things that we need to remember:
1)
Music helped promote the false worship and homage that took place in ancient Babylon, (under Nebuchadnezzar), where all were forced to worship an image. See Daniel chapters three and four -- (more specifically, 3:1-15; 4:30).
2)
In the book of Revelation, where it speaks of another Babylon, a modern Babylon, (false doctrine and worship), we can see that music is once again implicated in false worship and homage to another image. Revelation tells us that God is calling His people to come out of Babylon, and that its musicians will be destroyed. See Revelation chapters thirteen and fourteen -- (more specifically, 13:15,18; 14:8; 18:2,3,4,21,22; 17:1-6).
The two Babylon’s, compare —
Jer 51:13 with Rev 17:1.
Jer 51:8 with Rev 14:8.
Jer 51:45 with Rev 18:4.
Jer 51:60-64 with Rev 18:21-24.
See the diagram under my poem: A Certain Type Of Beat
Stance
Here are some reasons to dwell on that one might put forth for not entering or remaining in church
during worship when a wrong is present or occurring:
1)
God is being offended by the incident or item.
Will remaining where you believe God is being offended, bring you under His condemnation also? How much importance are we to give to what occurs when worshiping God?
2)
Such presence suggests or is effectively condoning the wrong occurring.
Could the wrongs occurring within church worship be due in part to the fact that very few folk are removing themselves when the wrong is occurring? Thus those doing the wrong, seeing such weak opposition, may not feel the degree of discomfort or dissent that may be needful to change their attitude or have them stopping their actions. After all, confronting people about their wrong doesn’t always work.
3)
Remaining while such is occurring may cause a fellow member to stumble in their spiritual walk.
What if someone, who believes it is wrong to be in church when a wrong is occurring, sees you there, knowing your own disapproval of such things?
4)
Such presence may effectively encourage the wrong things occurring.
Could your presence be seen as silent approval, as not everyone may know your opposing view, that you are only putting up with it? Visitors, other members, new members?
5)
Compromise belongs with conformity.
A pig in a synagogue [in this case symbolic of something offensive in church worship] is still a pig no matter what is done with it.
6)
Remaining is putting man ahead of God.
Would one be remaining because of fear, discomfort? Concerned we might offend? Would that serve us well in the future? After all, putting man before God is forbidden to the Christian.
7)
Are we by remaining, not helping the offender to see the wrong, and therefore perhaps depriving them of the steps they should take to respond to the offended [as is biblical]?
The biblical admonition is, that even if something is alright, don’t do it if it offends a fellow member.
8)
Often such removing of one’s self is the only real option a person may feel they have.
The greater appreciation we have of how wrong or bad something is, the more it upsets. Many of those offended by others actions don’t like to approach the offender because many such offenders are unapproachable or respond un-Christ like and it makes a bad situation worse. Some may not have the confidence to approach the offender, especially when that approach needs to be made to a person who is very assertive or somewhat aggressive in manner. Majority votes at church business meetings may appear democratic and thus a reason to accept the introduction of such things in church worship, but in reality, completely contrary to Christian principle and biblical instruction. So often now, things that were once never allowed into the church because of God’s Word, are getting in because of a majority vote. Doesn’t that say something.
9)
Remaining may leave our children confronted with consistent wrong influences that may bear bad fruit in their own lives later, as those wrong influences may begin to appeal to them, simply by beholding. Just telling them sometimes is not effective enough.
The Scriptures make it clear that if you believe doing a particular thing is wrong, and yet do it, even if it is not wrong, then you have sinned. Therefore, to remain in church, when you believe doing so would be wrong, would surely make you a sinner in God’s eyes and accountable, and maybe those encouraging you to remain also.
10)
Do we think that by remaining we might be able to achieve some good that we may not otherwise be able to?
Isn’t that another form of the humanistic ‘end justifies the means’ approach? Does not such an approach place you in the midst of the ‘golden calf’ throng. You may not be dancing, but you’re nevertheless indirectly involved.
11)
Conscience.
If in all conscience one feels that they cannot remain, believing that it is wrong in God’s eyes to remain where wrong is occurring, then that consciousness must be the determing factor — not the desire to make a point, but conscience and conscience alone.
And lastly, the following words from the pen of someone I had contact with in the past are worth considering:
The local church we attend is directly within our sphere of influence, so we have a duty to speak out. What happens in the local church is the view of church that our children will develop. How we react to the rightness or wrongness of the church will teach our children how to view it.
Letter
From Steven John Camp, a contemporary Christian singer.
Out of love and zeal for Biblical truth and the desire to bring it to light, I come to you, brethren, burdened and broken over the current state of Christian music. I come, not out of a heart of condemnation, but out of convictions immersed in tears, one in desperate need daily of our Lord's grace to be conformed to His image. I come being aware of the depravity from which I have been saved and that my heart, apart from the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, is desperately wicked and eternally sick.
Early in my own musical journey I wrote songs that neither represented good music nor precise theology. My motives were vitiated; my actions were not godly; and my lips were unclean.
The thirst for prominence and position made my heart prideful, judgmental and callused. But the Lord, out of His infinite grace and otherworldly love, broke me with His chastening hand to bring true repentance in my own life--and it's that life of repentance, which is my greatest desire and my greatest failing. It is out of the crucible of those experiences that I am driven to speak with conviction to these issues.
This document is a call to Reformation--a clarion call to recover Biblical Christianity in the arts.
Music is a powerful tool from the Lord Jesus to His church Intended for worship, praise, encouragement, edification, evangelism, teaching, admonishing, and exhorting God's people to holiness--with always our chief aim “to glorify God and worship Him forever.”
But beloved, the serpentine foe of compromise has invaded the camp through years of specious living, skewed doctrine and, most recently, the secular ownership of Christian music ministries. While I assert this, I recognise that there are godly men and women who love and work for these companies, but that's not the issue here.
The crux of the matter is that the overall nature of our industry has dramatically shifted. The Apostle Paul warned "it takes only a little leaven to leaven the whole lump" (1 Corinthians 5:6). When sin is tolerated it ultimately permeates and corrupts the entire church. What is pure today will inevitably be polluted tomorrow if we do not "purge out the old leaven..."
In the past several years, there has been a not-so-subtle drifting away from Christocentric music to an anthropocentric music. Sadly, this has resulted in various visible manifestations of spiritual sedition--where currently, the CCMI finds itself on a slippery slope sliding away at accelerated speeds from the Saviour, the Scriptures, and the church.
Contemporary Christian Music originally began unashamedly declaring Jesus Christ as Lord. Within a few years His name was replaced by several generic titles filtering out the name of God ultimately to the non-specific cognomen, 'LOVE." This led to a multitude of pseudonyms: 'The Man Upstairs," "My Higher Power," "Our Family Values Expert," ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
This Biblical illiteracy I've coined as 'theological ebonics"--Biblical language diminished to cultural unintelligible chatter affirmed as profound, acceptable spiritual truth. Os Guinness is "spot on" when saying, "We have seen a change from an emphasis on "serving God," to an emphasis on "serving the self" in serving God."
The object of faith is no longer Christ, but our self-esteem; the goal of faith is no longer holiness, but our happiness, and the source of faith is no longer the Scriptures, but our experience. Christian music currently reflects this. We are producing a generation of people that "feel" their God, but do not know their God. We have been given a solemn and sacred duty to communicate through music the fathomless riches of God's eternal Word. The Word of God is the most holy thing we will ever hold in our hands in this lifetime. As Dr John MacArthur says,
"This book contains: the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Read it to be wise, believe it to be saved and practice it to be holy..."
Lamentably, the music of heaven has been sold to the world--to the ones who had the deepest pockets and made the sweetest promises. In a very real sense, "Simon the Sorcerer" has succeeded in purchasing the work of God from "the apostles" of our industry. (Acts 8:14-25).
What has been the result of this partnering with the world? Gospel music today has become music for the moment, but not for eternity. Transitory, temporal, trivial messages that devalue Deity and raise "felt need" affairs above eternal "real need" concerns produce disposable, consumer driven, cotton-candy music. This is playing marbles with diamonds.
We are unequally yoked with an unbelieving world. Sin goes undisciplined--is even tolerated for some artists because of their visibility and sales power--and the truth and authority of Scripture is all but abrogated. Biblical illiteracy is pandemic. Accountability to the local church has all but been abandoned. Moral pluralism and erroneous forms of ecumenism are the dyslexic doctrines of today. A politically correct, reductionist gospel that appeals only to the flesh, and a syncretistic methodology in communication through the arts, have sought to replace the true "Gospel According To Jesus" evidenced in the fruit of an obedient life fully surrendered to the Holy Spirit and His truth.
Could it be that the love of money is at the root of it all? Or could it be that ignorance has revealed the unschooled in matters of faith and doctrine? Unquestionably both. For many, money has been and continues to be the prerequisite for 'ministry" and Biblical truth is no longer vital but vicarious! Departure from the Word of God is now clearly evidenced in our music, lyrics, business practices and Alliances. Beloved, if we do not repent of our sins, God's judgment will surely be upon us.
When Martin Luther stood at Wittenberg's Door in 1517 he called for reformation from the recalcitrant Roman Church. Now it is our turn, almost five centuries later, to sound the alarm in our generation. This time, to call the Christian Music Industry to reformation--back to the supremacy, sufficiency and Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Genuine revival--a fresh return to obedience in Christ--is surely needed today, but that would be almost impossible given the current environment of our industry. Why? True revival is marked by repentance; true repentance brings restitution, true restitution demands that Christian music be owned and operated only by believers whose aim is the glory of God consistent with Biblical truth. This means that the current CCMI labels must return all the money they have received to their respective secular counterparts that purchased them and divorce alliances with them.
The CCMI has gone too far down the wide road of worldliness and there is not the tenacity of character and the Biblical courage of heart and mind to do the right thing no matter what the cost.
These are serious times, brethren, that call for real answers. This is not a time for duplicitous people, proclaiming a diluted message, from disingenuous ministries. It is a time for those whose lives are tempered with the steel of righteousness, girded with the belt of truth, standing firm in the gospel of peace, raising high their shield of faith, guarded with the helmet of salvation, to wield the sword of the Spirit with a surgeon's exactitude, "praying always with all prayer and supplication, with all perseverance for all the saints in the Spirit." (Ephesians 6-10-20).
Will we champion again the manifesto of the Reformers: Sola Fide (by faith alone); Sola Gratia (by grace alan"!); Sola Scriptura (on the Word alone), Salus Christus (because of Christ alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (to the glory of God alone)? Do we have the conviction of heart and courage of mind to do what's just? Do we have the boldness to shout above the roar of the marketplace that the Emperor has no clothes? Will we leave our careers, our contracts, our carefully cultivated plans and press releases, our unequally yoked record companies to serve the Lord again with all our heart, soul, mind and strength? There is no grey in this--it's a matter of obedience.
Oh brethren, "we have a name to be alive, but we are dead." (Revelation 3:1). There is no greater love song to proclaim than the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ our Lord at Calvary, but yet others feel content to sing about the chaff of this world. What the New Testament church wrestled with the least is what our industry craves the most--money! How dare we think we can play politics with God, with His truth, and with His church! We can't negotiate with sin no matter what kind of capital is at stake--and that really is the issue here.
Let us "press on, that [we] may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of [us]" (Philippians 3:12).
Let us "lay aside every weight and the sin that so easily ensnares us and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us" (Hebrew 12:1).
Let us fall on our faces before our Holy Lord, repent of our sin and return to our First Love. With lives bathed in
His grace, let us provoke one another to love and good works. With undivided hearts may we leave the prodigal's pigpen and come back to the Father's house. Let us commit ourselves to prayer and fasting, seeking the Lord's will with a broken, contrite, and obedient heart. Let us return to our churches, and to the faithful pastors/elders that shepherd us--submitting ourselves to their godly leadership.
May we be students of His Word, filled daily with His Spirit. Let us come away from an industry that has all but abandoned Christ and forqe, by God's grace, what it was always meant to be ... a ministry -- doing His work, His way, according to His Word, by His Holy Spirit
Pray on this. Pounding on "Wittenberg's Door," let us come together to make history--to make Contemporary Christian Music Christian again.
I'm unsure of the exact source of this letter which I understand was penned in 1997.
You may also like to read my poems on this subject which can be accessed via the following link which also includes diagrams:
Should I Go Or Should I Stay
You may also wish to read my article called In Defense Of Easy Listening Music which is on my secular page called There's More To Be Said, which is accessed via my page Food For Thought, Home page.
A great deal of value can be found in the books: Restoring True Worship by Ruth Webb, and Worship In The Melting Pot by Peter Masters.
This section was upgraded 1 September 2018.
Unqualified contemporary Christian Music:
1)
Copies the world [inappropriate secular styles, sounds, rhythms, even lyrics].
2)
Mixes the holy with the unholy [which war against each other; are unequally yoked; a clash of interests; a mismatch; such sacrifices principles].
3)
Is performer focused [idol worship; image building; detracts from God].
4)
Is entertainment based [self pleasing; common].
5)
Generates response to the music rather than the Holy Spirit [is feelings based; appeals to the physical].
6)
Reminds of and encourages Christians back into the world.
7)
Corrupts the Christian message, identity and witness. The Christian alternative is to confront the world with the purity and power of the Gospel, not to conform to its values and practices.
8)
Engages in fellowship with the works of darkness [uses Satan’s tools to do God’s work].
9)
The emphasis of most contemporary sacred and secular music is on the rhythm. Therefore, most of today’s music, secular and sacred, feeds and satisfies the self-seeking, self-centred, and self worshiping part of man (James 1:14,15).
Drums and Rock guitars:
Drums.
The trap-set or drum-kit was invented in the early 1900's. It's a unique instrument, contraption, one that was unknown to Bible writers. Its main purpose being to power jazz, rhythm and blues, and all varieties of rock-n-roll.
On a personal level, though the drum-kit is of questionable origin, and thus despite conerns I have as a Christian, I do enjoy its presence in my music at home, but only when it's played in a restrained and more appropriate way. I believe that music is spoilt when drumming becomes too intrusive, or of a certain nature, and that it's completely out of place when it comes to the religious — Christian worship — for here there are certain demarcation lines, and for good reasons. Play being one thing and worship being another. The earthly being one thing and the heavenly being another. One appealing to the physical, which is okay in a general sense given that we're physical creatures (the Song of Solomon coming to mind), but not okay when it comes to such a sacred and Holy exercise.
And this all being why God also set one day apart as Holy at creation (the seventh day, Gen 2:1-4; Ex 20:8-11); it a Sabbath, soley for spiritual purposes, not a day for work or play, but a day where all eyes and thoughts are meant to be soley on Him, and so it should be with Christian music, because Christian music is soley all about that Christ in Christian.
So a drum-kit shouldn't be used in Christian music, nor when it comes to Christian worship, for here, such worship (such music) is all about the heavenly, the holy, a holy, righteous God; thus nothing of a worldly, common, fleshly nature contaminating such a sacred occasion (or church), even by association.
In other words, worship music should be in keeping with the dignity of a Holy, righteous God — reverent, suitably restrained, in keeping with, of a lofty nature. Ancient Israel was a religious nation, and yet a very clear distinction was made between the music of the temple-cum-Sabbath worship and the music of everyday life which entailed work and play. And hence why only certain instruments were allowed in the temple.
A drum-kit is very secular in nature (more physically orientated), akin to those other six days of creation — just like we shouldn't use a lawnmower on that day that God set apart and made Holy; a day that was never meant for work or play. Either it's a Holy day or it isn't.
I’m appalled by the kind of music (and even things in general) that the king and queen of Britain have had to sit through when they’ve attended the Royal Variety shows. Such hardly in keeping with either their tastes or elevated position.
Some would argue that Christians shouldn’t listen to any music with a drum-kit in it given that it's been said (true or false) that all of its rhythms are associated with pagan practices and gods. Personally, I'm still thinking this through given that some things can be stretched too far. And you know, just about any musical instrument can be used in a rocky, jazzy, funky way.
As for electronic drum-kits. Well, they're simply a variation on a theme, and thus making no difference come worship. Yes, same thing, different garb -- oh, how Satan loves to scheme.
Rock guitars.
Rock guitars are also clearly out when it comes to Christian music and worship. The rock guitar abandoned the rounded shoulder of the classical or folk guitar, taking on its own unique appearance, the pointed shoulders of the modern guitar [eg. Stratocaster] closely resembling the cornuto sign that’s considered the devil’s sign; The forefinger and little finger extended, while the other fingers are curled into a fist; one finger is higher than the other. This sign is representative of a satanic/occult symbol—the two horned goat or/and the imagined horns of Satan. This sign is used by black arts practitioners to ward off “the evil eye”.
And both the rock guitar (which includes those bass guitars) and its extended arm lending itself to being used as a phallic symbol, being used in a sexual manner, at rock concerts. It slung low and strummed near the genitals, used in a thrusting motion.
A rock guitar is a symbol of, and an instrument of, rebellion, and therefore is hardly appropriate for church usage, any worship setting. Such acting like a pig in a synagogue.
Thus the prudent Christian will choose a guitar as far away as possible from such associations.
Two things that we need to remember:
1)
Music helped promote the false worship and homage that took place in ancient Babylon, (under Nebuchadnezzar), where all were forced to worship an image. See Daniel chapters three and four -- (more specifically, 3:1-15; 4:30).
2)
In the book of Revelation, where it speaks of another Babylon, a modern Babylon, (false doctrine and worship), we can see that music is once again implicated in false worship and homage to another image. Revelation tells us that God is calling His people to come out of Babylon, and that its musicians will be destroyed. See Revelation chapters thirteen and fourteen -- (more specifically, 13:15,18; 14:8; 18:2,3,4,21,22; 17:1-6).
The two Babylon’s, compare —
Jer 51:13 with Rev 17:1.
Jer 51:8 with Rev 14:8.
Jer 51:45 with Rev 18:4.
Jer 51:60-64 with Rev 18:21-24.
See the diagram under my poem: A Certain Type Of Beat
Stance
Here are some reasons to dwell on that one might put forth for not entering or remaining in church
during worship when a wrong is present or occurring:
1)
God is being offended by the incident or item.
Will remaining where you believe God is being offended, bring you under His condemnation also? How much importance are we to give to what occurs when worshiping God?
2)
Such presence suggests or is effectively condoning the wrong occurring.
Could the wrongs occurring within church worship be due in part to the fact that very few folk are removing themselves when the wrong is occurring? Thus those doing the wrong, seeing such weak opposition, may not feel the degree of discomfort or dissent that may be needful to change their attitude or have them stopping their actions. After all, confronting people about their wrong doesn’t always work.
3)
Remaining while such is occurring may cause a fellow member to stumble in their spiritual walk.
What if someone, who believes it is wrong to be in church when a wrong is occurring, sees you there, knowing your own disapproval of such things?
4)
Such presence may effectively encourage the wrong things occurring.
Could your presence be seen as silent approval, as not everyone may know your opposing view, that you are only putting up with it? Visitors, other members, new members?
5)
Compromise belongs with conformity.
A pig in a synagogue [in this case symbolic of something offensive in church worship] is still a pig no matter what is done with it.
6)
Remaining is putting man ahead of God.
Would one be remaining because of fear, discomfort? Concerned we might offend? Would that serve us well in the future? After all, putting man before God is forbidden to the Christian.
7)
Are we by remaining, not helping the offender to see the wrong, and therefore perhaps depriving them of the steps they should take to respond to the offended [as is biblical]?
The biblical admonition is, that even if something is alright, don’t do it if it offends a fellow member.
8)
Often such removing of one’s self is the only real option a person may feel they have.
The greater appreciation we have of how wrong or bad something is, the more it upsets. Many of those offended by others actions don’t like to approach the offender because many such offenders are unapproachable or respond un-Christ like and it makes a bad situation worse. Some may not have the confidence to approach the offender, especially when that approach needs to be made to a person who is very assertive or somewhat aggressive in manner. Majority votes at church business meetings may appear democratic and thus a reason to accept the introduction of such things in church worship, but in reality, completely contrary to Christian principle and biblical instruction. So often now, things that were once never allowed into the church because of God’s Word, are getting in because of a majority vote. Doesn’t that say something.
9)
Remaining may leave our children confronted with consistent wrong influences that may bear bad fruit in their own lives later, as those wrong influences may begin to appeal to them, simply by beholding. Just telling them sometimes is not effective enough.
The Scriptures make it clear that if you believe doing a particular thing is wrong, and yet do it, even if it is not wrong, then you have sinned. Therefore, to remain in church, when you believe doing so would be wrong, would surely make you a sinner in God’s eyes and accountable, and maybe those encouraging you to remain also.
10)
Do we think that by remaining we might be able to achieve some good that we may not otherwise be able to?
Isn’t that another form of the humanistic ‘end justifies the means’ approach? Does not such an approach place you in the midst of the ‘golden calf’ throng. You may not be dancing, but you’re nevertheless indirectly involved.
11)
Conscience.
If in all conscience one feels that they cannot remain, believing that it is wrong in God’s eyes to remain where wrong is occurring, then that consciousness must be the determing factor — not the desire to make a point, but conscience and conscience alone.
And lastly, the following words from the pen of someone I had contact with in the past are worth considering:
The local church we attend is directly within our sphere of influence, so we have a duty to speak out. What happens in the local church is the view of church that our children will develop. How we react to the rightness or wrongness of the church will teach our children how to view it.
Letter
From Steven John Camp, a contemporary Christian singer.
Out of love and zeal for Biblical truth and the desire to bring it to light, I come to you, brethren, burdened and broken over the current state of Christian music. I come, not out of a heart of condemnation, but out of convictions immersed in tears, one in desperate need daily of our Lord's grace to be conformed to His image. I come being aware of the depravity from which I have been saved and that my heart, apart from the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, is desperately wicked and eternally sick.
Early in my own musical journey I wrote songs that neither represented good music nor precise theology. My motives were vitiated; my actions were not godly; and my lips were unclean.
The thirst for prominence and position made my heart prideful, judgmental and callused. But the Lord, out of His infinite grace and otherworldly love, broke me with His chastening hand to bring true repentance in my own life--and it's that life of repentance, which is my greatest desire and my greatest failing. It is out of the crucible of those experiences that I am driven to speak with conviction to these issues.
This document is a call to Reformation--a clarion call to recover Biblical Christianity in the arts.
Music is a powerful tool from the Lord Jesus to His church Intended for worship, praise, encouragement, edification, evangelism, teaching, admonishing, and exhorting God's people to holiness--with always our chief aim “to glorify God and worship Him forever.”
But beloved, the serpentine foe of compromise has invaded the camp through years of specious living, skewed doctrine and, most recently, the secular ownership of Christian music ministries. While I assert this, I recognise that there are godly men and women who love and work for these companies, but that's not the issue here.
The crux of the matter is that the overall nature of our industry has dramatically shifted. The Apostle Paul warned "it takes only a little leaven to leaven the whole lump" (1 Corinthians 5:6). When sin is tolerated it ultimately permeates and corrupts the entire church. What is pure today will inevitably be polluted tomorrow if we do not "purge out the old leaven..."
In the past several years, there has been a not-so-subtle drifting away from Christocentric music to an anthropocentric music. Sadly, this has resulted in various visible manifestations of spiritual sedition--where currently, the CCMI finds itself on a slippery slope sliding away at accelerated speeds from the Saviour, the Scriptures, and the church.
Contemporary Christian Music originally began unashamedly declaring Jesus Christ as Lord. Within a few years His name was replaced by several generic titles filtering out the name of God ultimately to the non-specific cognomen, 'LOVE." This led to a multitude of pseudonyms: 'The Man Upstairs," "My Higher Power," "Our Family Values Expert," ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
This Biblical illiteracy I've coined as 'theological ebonics"--Biblical language diminished to cultural unintelligible chatter affirmed as profound, acceptable spiritual truth. Os Guinness is "spot on" when saying, "We have seen a change from an emphasis on "serving God," to an emphasis on "serving the self" in serving God."
The object of faith is no longer Christ, but our self-esteem; the goal of faith is no longer holiness, but our happiness, and the source of faith is no longer the Scriptures, but our experience. Christian music currently reflects this. We are producing a generation of people that "feel" their God, but do not know their God. We have been given a solemn and sacred duty to communicate through music the fathomless riches of God's eternal Word. The Word of God is the most holy thing we will ever hold in our hands in this lifetime. As Dr John MacArthur says,
"This book contains: the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Read it to be wise, believe it to be saved and practice it to be holy..."
Lamentably, the music of heaven has been sold to the world--to the ones who had the deepest pockets and made the sweetest promises. In a very real sense, "Simon the Sorcerer" has succeeded in purchasing the work of God from "the apostles" of our industry. (Acts 8:14-25).
What has been the result of this partnering with the world? Gospel music today has become music for the moment, but not for eternity. Transitory, temporal, trivial messages that devalue Deity and raise "felt need" affairs above eternal "real need" concerns produce disposable, consumer driven, cotton-candy music. This is playing marbles with diamonds.
We are unequally yoked with an unbelieving world. Sin goes undisciplined--is even tolerated for some artists because of their visibility and sales power--and the truth and authority of Scripture is all but abrogated. Biblical illiteracy is pandemic. Accountability to the local church has all but been abandoned. Moral pluralism and erroneous forms of ecumenism are the dyslexic doctrines of today. A politically correct, reductionist gospel that appeals only to the flesh, and a syncretistic methodology in communication through the arts, have sought to replace the true "Gospel According To Jesus" evidenced in the fruit of an obedient life fully surrendered to the Holy Spirit and His truth.
Could it be that the love of money is at the root of it all? Or could it be that ignorance has revealed the unschooled in matters of faith and doctrine? Unquestionably both. For many, money has been and continues to be the prerequisite for 'ministry" and Biblical truth is no longer vital but vicarious! Departure from the Word of God is now clearly evidenced in our music, lyrics, business practices and Alliances. Beloved, if we do not repent of our sins, God's judgment will surely be upon us.
When Martin Luther stood at Wittenberg's Door in 1517 he called for reformation from the recalcitrant Roman Church. Now it is our turn, almost five centuries later, to sound the alarm in our generation. This time, to call the Christian Music Industry to reformation--back to the supremacy, sufficiency and Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Genuine revival--a fresh return to obedience in Christ--is surely needed today, but that would be almost impossible given the current environment of our industry. Why? True revival is marked by repentance; true repentance brings restitution, true restitution demands that Christian music be owned and operated only by believers whose aim is the glory of God consistent with Biblical truth. This means that the current CCMI labels must return all the money they have received to their respective secular counterparts that purchased them and divorce alliances with them.
The CCMI has gone too far down the wide road of worldliness and there is not the tenacity of character and the Biblical courage of heart and mind to do the right thing no matter what the cost.
These are serious times, brethren, that call for real answers. This is not a time for duplicitous people, proclaiming a diluted message, from disingenuous ministries. It is a time for those whose lives are tempered with the steel of righteousness, girded with the belt of truth, standing firm in the gospel of peace, raising high their shield of faith, guarded with the helmet of salvation, to wield the sword of the Spirit with a surgeon's exactitude, "praying always with all prayer and supplication, with all perseverance for all the saints in the Spirit." (Ephesians 6-10-20).
Will we champion again the manifesto of the Reformers: Sola Fide (by faith alone); Sola Gratia (by grace alan"!); Sola Scriptura (on the Word alone), Salus Christus (because of Christ alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (to the glory of God alone)? Do we have the conviction of heart and courage of mind to do what's just? Do we have the boldness to shout above the roar of the marketplace that the Emperor has no clothes? Will we leave our careers, our contracts, our carefully cultivated plans and press releases, our unequally yoked record companies to serve the Lord again with all our heart, soul, mind and strength? There is no grey in this--it's a matter of obedience.
Oh brethren, "we have a name to be alive, but we are dead." (Revelation 3:1). There is no greater love song to proclaim than the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ our Lord at Calvary, but yet others feel content to sing about the chaff of this world. What the New Testament church wrestled with the least is what our industry craves the most--money! How dare we think we can play politics with God, with His truth, and with His church! We can't negotiate with sin no matter what kind of capital is at stake--and that really is the issue here.
Let us "press on, that [we] may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of [us]" (Philippians 3:12).
Let us "lay aside every weight and the sin that so easily ensnares us and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us" (Hebrew 12:1).
Let us fall on our faces before our Holy Lord, repent of our sin and return to our First Love. With lives bathed in
His grace, let us provoke one another to love and good works. With undivided hearts may we leave the prodigal's pigpen and come back to the Father's house. Let us commit ourselves to prayer and fasting, seeking the Lord's will with a broken, contrite, and obedient heart. Let us return to our churches, and to the faithful pastors/elders that shepherd us--submitting ourselves to their godly leadership.
May we be students of His Word, filled daily with His Spirit. Let us come away from an industry that has all but abandoned Christ and forqe, by God's grace, what it was always meant to be ... a ministry -- doing His work, His way, according to His Word, by His Holy Spirit
Pray on this. Pounding on "Wittenberg's Door," let us come together to make history--to make Contemporary Christian Music Christian again.
I'm unsure of the exact source of this letter which I understand was penned in 1997.
You may also like to read my poems on this subject which can be accessed via the following link which also includes diagrams:
Should I Go Or Should I Stay
You may also wish to read my article called In Defense Of Easy Listening Music which is on my secular page called There's More To Be Said, which is accessed via my page Food For Thought, Home page.
A great deal of value can be found in the books: Restoring True Worship by Ruth Webb, and Worship In The Melting Pot by Peter Masters.
This section was upgraded 1 September 2018.
PART TWO
Women Elders, Pastors
How Many Trees Does It Take?
When Eve sinned, she brought on women the opposite to what she had sought, sadly,
Marital abuse, rape, porn, infidelity and sexual slavery.
In other words, the fall of man, men taking that path that saw love go askew,
Enter selfishness, lust, violence, lies, corruption, and that befuddling brew.
All why women should once again mind what they reach for, things not like they appear,
God having allotted to both men and women their very own unique sphere.
But such lost on modern Eves who once again are hearing beguiling sounds, which,
Are just as false as those deceiving words that were once uttered by Endor’s witch.
Yes, the old serpent certainly made things sound good, and is still at it today,
The Scriptures twisted to suit, and New Age humbug added to those vessels of clay.
And thus the Holy Spirit struggling to undo those lids that seem vacuum tight,
Modern Eves and their supporters utterly but wrongly convinced that they’re right.
And are they any happier for what they’re reaching for? No, of course they’re not,
Because behind it all both delusion and the devil are easy to spot.
Eve hardly attaining greater heights via that fruit she stole, nor women today,
Who, even in the Church are seen to wrongly reach, despite what God’s had to say.
Yes, they too fixated on certain things rather than where it all truly matters,
Like repairing breeched walls, saving souls, warning of coming events, and hence why,
Given the lie, things are in tatters.
Certain demands splitting the Church less triumphant, gone unity, harmony,
And all because of reaching for the fruit of yet another don’t-go-there tree.
Time to head back to Eden, that way God designed things to be, and the one tree,
The tree of life, the other tree having led to all the hollering that we see.
In other words, Eve’s legacy living on in those women who still can’t see
That within the Holy Scriptures there has always been a continuity.
By Lance Landall
Note:
A
link to other related poems can be found at the bottom of Part Two (the
end
of this page).
Sources available.
Begin:
EQUAL DOESN'T MEAN THE SAME, AND DIFFERENT DOESN'T MEAN UNEQUAL.
The case for women pastors is soley built on human reasoning and not a
"Thus saith the Lord."
As far as the Word of God goes, and
male headship and the practice of appointing only men as elders and
pastors, there's a
very obvious pattern, the cumulative witness of
Scripture that attests to such, clear biblical instruction,
and the following:
Men and women have been designed to compliment each other. If there
were no differences between them (including certain role distinctions)
they could hardly compliment each other, and there would go the appeal
of the opposite sex that attracts, not just because of the sexual
differences, but each others inherent uniquenesses, like how men and
women even think differently.
So read on.
1)
A pastor and an elder [the
Bible considers them the same (Titus 1:5-7; Acts 20:17,28; 14:23)],
as the leaders of each church congregation, are representative [symbolically] of
God the Father to the church members (1 Cor 4:14,15; 2 Cor 6:18; John
20:17; Eph 3:14; Matt 6:9-15). God is literally a father. Only a man [a male] can
actually represent a father. Therefore, God has only chosen men for
this position (1 Tim 3:1-7; 2:12-14; Titus 1:5-9; Luke 6:13; Acts
1:23-26; 1 Cor 14:33-36; 11:3-10). To ordain women as elders or pastors
is to violate God’s design, distort the elders/pastors symbolic
representation of God the Father, and to wrongly question the authority
of God’s Word for defining Christian beliefs and practices.
2)
Christ when on earth chose only men as His apostles. Christ appointed
only men as apostles at a time when most pagan religions had
priestesses as well as priests. The male priesthood was a sign of a
specifically biblical Jewish and Christian identity.
3)
Judas was replaced by a man (Acts 1:23-26).
4)
The apostle Paul refers to himself as the father of the Corinthian
believers (1 Cor 4:14,15).
5)
The apostle Paul indicates that all forms of fatherhood derive from and
reflect the fatherhood of God (Eph 3:14,15).
6)
In God’s Word the church is seen as an extended family which is led by
elders/pastors who function as spiritual fathers (1 Cor 4:14,15).
7)
God sent His first born Son to this earth (John 3:16).
8)
God’s Word speaks of Christ as the new Adam (1 Cor 15:21,22).
9)
Christ spoke of the Fatherhood of God (Mark 13:32; Matt 18:14; John
12:49,50; 14:2,8-13; 20:17).
10)
Christ taught His disciples to address God as “Our Father” (Luke
11:1-4; Matt 6:9-15).
11)
God’s Word speaks only of a man being an elder, “the husband of one
wife” (Titus 1:6, KJV; 1 Tim 3:1-7, KJV).
12)
Paul rebuked the Corinthian church for going contrary to God’s
instructions regarding this matter (1 Cor 14:36,37).
13)
In the Bible, only a man is given the shepherding function [put in charge of looking after
the flock — the congregation, membership] (1 Peter 5:2;
John 21:16; Acts 20:28).
14)
The qualifications for the office of elder follow straight after the
prohibition of women as teachers/elders (1 Tim 2:11-15).
15)
If
Christ is male, if Christ and the Church are supposed to be husband and
wife, bridegroom and bride, (and husbands and wives having an intimate
relationship), if the pastor represents Christ and the Church
represents
the bride, and you replace the male pastor with a female pastor, you
then have a female being intimate with a female.
Section Two
1)
Man was created first (1 Tim 2:13; Gen 2:7,18). Man bears the
name
‘man’ or ‘human’ which designates the whole human race.
2)
Man is seen as the head and representative of humanity (Rom 5:12; 1 Cor
15:22), also as the embodiment of the race.
3)
Man was given the leadership role in Eden, pre-Fall (Gen
2:15-17,19,20,23; 3:9-11,20; 1 Cor 11:9).
4)
Man named all the animals, and also the woman, before and after the
Fall (Gen 2:19,20,23; 3:20).
5)
Man was stationed in the garden of Eden to develop and guard it (Gen
2:15).
6)
Man was addressed by God concerning the forbidden tree, and entrusted
with the responsibility of passing that information on (Gen 2:15-17).
7)
Man was not deceived (1 Tim 2:14).
8)
Man though, was held directly responsible for the tragic events that
occurred, and for abdicating his headship (Gen 3:9-11; 17-19; Rom
5:12). Only after he blamed his wife did God address Eve (Gen 3:12,13).
9)
Woman derived from man (Gen 2:18,21-23; 1 Cor 11:8). In biblical
thought origin and authority are interrelated (Col 1:15-18).
10)
The woman was created for man, not man for woman (1 Cor 11:9).
11)
The woman was given to man as his helper (Gen 2:18).
12)
The woman was deceived in contradiction to her divinely ordained
submission through asserting her independence from man (1 Tim 2:14; Gen
3:13).
13)
The woman at the time of the Fall was summoned by God to return to her
creational submission to man (Gen 3:16). God’s judgment represented the
divine remedy to maintain the intended order of the sexes as it appears
in Genesis chap 2. Gen 3:16 also expresses the effect of sin corrupting
the relationship, origin of suppressive subordination.
14)
Eve [woman]
is seen as the mother of all human beings, but not as the embodiment of
the race.
15)
The husband is the head of the wife in the same way that Christ is the
head of the church (Eph 5:23).
16)
The Husband is the head of the wife in the same way that God is the
head of Christ (1 Cor 11:3; 15:28; John 5:30; 14:28).
17)
The wife’s submission to her husband models that of our submission to
Christ (Eph 5:22,24).
18)
The wife’s submission to her husband models that of Christ’s submission
to His Father (1 Cor 15:28; John 5:30; Phil 2:5-11).
Section Three
1)
Man lays upon [covers]
the woman [the leading
and protective position], while the woman submits to man [offers her body in loving
subjection].
2)
Man enters the woman. Thus man is the active [seeking] partner,
while woman is the passive [allowing]
partner.
3)
Man plants the seed, woman receives the seed. Thus man is the life
creating [giving]
partner, while woman is the life bearing [sustaining] partner.
4)
The woman’s resting egg is awakened [penetrated] by the
male sperm.
5)
The sexual organs point to the man’s appointed role of fatherhood, and
the woman’s appointed role of motherhood.
Section Four
Adam's role
pre-Fall was to work, provide (Gen 2:15). Eve's
role pre-Fall was to help, submit (Gen 2:18).
Adam's
role post-Fall was to work, provide (Gen 3:17). Eve's
role post-Fall was to help, submit (Gen 3:16).
Adam named Eve pre-Fall -- headship, leader (Gen 2:23).
Adam
named Eve post-Fall -- headship, leader (Gen 3:20).
Man's role post Old Testament -- headship, leader (Eph 5:23; 1 Tim
3:5). Woman's role post Old Testament -- help, submit (Titus 2:5; 1
Peter
3:7).
Also worth
noting:
Only men are recorded as performing baptisms (Acts 8:12,38).
Most commentators agree that all the books of the Bible were written by
men (2 Peter 1:21).
And here's a little digression to ponder on regarding elders
being on either side of the pastor when he's preaching during worship:
Elders thus act as the pastors guards lest he come under attack in some
way [the disciples often flanked Christ on earth. In heaven
God’s throne is protected by guards];
Elders share in the leading out — e.g. announcements, prayer, calling
for the offering, fetching for the pastor, etc;
Elders uphold the pastor in prayer as he preaches, and by their very
presence give support;
Elders correct the pastor if necessary to do so;
Elders share the combined burden of leadership.
Elders up the front with the pastor, (one on each side), symbolize the
ecclesiastical leadership/authority and may also represent the Godhead
— the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
The elder texts:
1 Tim 3:1-7, KJV
“This is a true saying
[faithful,
worthy of trust],
If a man
desire the office of a bishop [elder/pastor], he
desireth a good [commendable]
work. A bishop then must be blameless [irreproachable,
must have proven
moral fitness],
the husband
of one wife [married
only once; an elder divorced for any reason would be handicapped as a
spiritual leader. This obviously would also include someone who is
separated. An elder acts as a role model to the congregation. Only an
untarnished record of marital fidelity would serve as a worthy pattern
for his flock],
vigilant [Greek,
nephaleous — an abstainer
from wine. In classical usage ‘nephaleous’ is used to describe a wine
less meal],
sober [prudent,
sound minded, self controlled], of good
behaviour [orderly], given to
hospitality, apt to teach [skilled
in teaching. Must be willing to be taught and also qualified to
instruct others in the truths of God’s Word]; Not given
to
wine [not
addicted to
wine, models of sobriety], no striker [not
quarrelsome, must be a peace
maker],
not greedy of filthy lucre [money]; but
patient, not a brawler [not
a fighter, must be a conciliator], not
covetous; One that
ruleth well [presides
over]
his own house
[family,
household],
having his children in subjection with all
gravity [seriousness.
Should have obedient and respectful children]; (For if a man
know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the
church of God?) Not a novice [newly
planted, must be spiritually mature], lest being
lifted [puffed] up with
pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil [in
other words, he will receive the same condemnation or
judgment
accorded the devil when pride precipitated his rebellion in heaven].
Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without [his
reputation in the community must be of the highest character, one that
merits the full respect and confidence of those not connected with the
church]
lest he fall into reproach [receive
harsh criticism and
reviling by believers and unbelievers] and the
snare of
the devil.”
Titus 1:5-9, KJV
“For this cause left I [Paul]
thee [Titus]
in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting [the
organizing of the Cretan
church],
and ordain [appoint
and ordain]
elders in every city, as I had appointed [directed,
previously instructed]
thee: If any be blameless, the husband
of one wife, having faithful
children [ones
who were
Christian believers] not accused
of riot [without
restraint]
or unruly [rebellious,
undisciplined].
For a bishop must be blameless, as the
steward of God [the
faithful and correct manager of God’s affairs]; not
self-willed [arrogant],
not soon angry [quick
tempered],
not given to wine, no striker, not given to
filthy lucre; But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men [rather,
“goodness”],
sober, just [upright],
holy [devout,
of
appropriate conduct, respectful of God, dutiful],
temperate [self
controlled];
Holding fast [clinging
to]
the
faithful word [the
gospel]
as he hath been taught, that he may be able [as an
apt and humble teacher,
having the intellectual ability] by sound
doctrine [must
have a firm grasp of God’s
word, and use Scripture correctly] both to
exhort [urge,
encourage by argument,
admonish, advise],
and to convince [convict] the
gainsayers [those
who
speak against].”
A summary by Werner Neuer
(from his book Man and Woman in Christian Perspective):
1).
The biblical view of the sexes can be summed up in three points:
a. The unconditional affirmation of sexuality within divinely set
boundaries as a good creation of God.
b. The full equality of man and woman because both were made in God’s
image and fully redeemed in Christ.
c. The distinction of male and female, which involves different tasks
for the sexes and a different
position of man and woman.
2).
The biblical ordering of the sexes consists in the man being seen as
the head of the woman and the woman as supporter of the man (Gen 2).
3)
Headship for the man means:
a. The task of leadership and direction in marriage, church and society.
b. The acceptance of this leadership in dedicated selfless love,
imitating Christ.
4)
The position of supporter for the woman means:
a. Loving subordination under male leadership.
b. Completing the man by her special gifts as a woman.
5).
The biblical ordering of man and woman (male superordination and female
subordination) is an ordering in love, is sanctified by love and is
also limited by it.
a. It is sanctified by love
in that it reflects the eternal, inner-Trinitarian love of God (1 Cor
11:3) and the covenant of love between Christ and the church
(Eph
5:22ff).
b. It is limited by love, since love
makes impossible every type of arbitrary male despotism and every
slavish
subjection of women.
6)
As an ordinance of creation the biblical
ordering of man and woman fundamentally applies to everyone, since it
rests on the created nature of male and female.
7)
As an ordinance
of total love it presupposes the new person who has been redeemed in
Christ and in him freed from egoism for selflessness.
8)
As an
ordinance of selfless love it ends the age-old battle of the sexes; it
brings both sexes to God’s intended development of their character, and
so fulfils God’s creative intention for male and female.
9)
The
biblical view of the sexes is the perpetually valid Christian answer to
the perversion of masculinity and femininity by unredeemed humanity. It
is a call to repentance directed at both sexes which condemns both the
oppression and devaluation of women just as much as the feminist revolt
against God’s creation ordinance.
10)
The biblical view of the
sexes is of peculiar relevance to the present, for never before have
the fundamental differences between men and women been so denied and
the levelling out of all, except physiological, gender differences been
so propagated. Behind this tendency to identify the sexes with each
other, which finds its sharpest ideological expression in feminism,
lies the confusion of the equality of the sexes with their identity.
From the viewpoint of biblical theology this tendency is ultimately an
anti-Christian rebellion against the divinely intended destiny of male
and female. It must be seen as part of the eschatological rebellion of
autonomous man against God’s ordinances and commands. That feminism is
ultimately anti-Christian is frankly admitted by the feminist Mary
Daly: ‘In its depth, because it contains a dynamic that drives beyond
Christolatry [i.e., the worship of Christ], the women’s movement does
point to, seek and constitute the primordial, always present, and
future anti-Christ.’
11).
Currently fashionable attempts to
relativise the biblical view of man and woman as culturally conditioned
and in need of revision are bound to founder. This is because the
biblical view of the sexes is characteristically different from the
conceptions of its contemporary environment.
12).
A more precise
analysis of the biblical view of the sexes shows that it is not only
based on the created nature of man and woman, but ultimately on the
nature of God himself. This means that a rejection of this view affects
the Christian view of God and with it the fundamentals of the Christian
faith and Christian theology.
13).
The Christian church should
therefore make it one of its central tasks to put into practice the
biblical view of man and woman as fully and consistently as possible.
14)
An unavoidable consequence of the biblical ordering of the sexes is the
rejection of a female priesthood.
15)
The spiritual power and authority of Christianity depends on making the
biblical view of man and woman a reality. A spiritual renewal of the
church of Jesus Christ can only be permanently effective if the
biblical view of the sexes is recognised as a valid norm for Christian
marriage and for the church.
If Women can be ordained as elders/pastors, (and please excuse some repetition here), why does Scripture only appoint men to the role of pastor (elders and pastors biblically being one and the same)?
If role distinctions are simply cultural, as many claim, and given that Christ was revolutionary in His attitude toward the treatment of women and broke many conventions, why didn’t He include women in His choice of 12 apostles, and more so given that women played leading priestly roles in the Roman-Hellenistic religious culture at the time? Such would have been readily accepted in the Gentile world.
Didn’t Christ teach by example, and don’t actions speak louder than words? If it’s an injustice to deny women ordination, why didn’t Christ set the example by including women amongst His twelve apostles? Christ had no inhibitions when it came to speaking out about the injustices of His time, nor the apostles, for that matter.
Why are wives told to submit to their husbands [priests in their own homes], and to show their husbands respect, if they can have authority over their husbands as elders/pastors within the church -- an oxymoron of sorts? Isn’t eldership by its very nature a ministry of authority in the Church? Aren’t the elders to “rule” well (1 Tim 5:17, KJV)? Surely the husband’s headship (1 Cor 11:3) in his own family (1 Tim 3:5) could hardly remain unaffected if his own wife were to serve as the head of the congregation to which he belongs? Isn’t a woman’s being the head of a congregation incompatible with her biblically submissive role (Eph 5:22)? It’s interesting that the qualifications for the office of elder follow immediately after the prohibition of women as teachers/elders (1 Tim 2:11-15).
Why was Judas replaced with another man?
Why did Paul rebuke the Corinthian church (the problem church of Paul’s day) where so-called emancipated women were rebelling? Why did he say to them, “Did the word of God originate with you?” (1 Cor 14:36)?
How can a women pastor model before the congregation the male imagery of God -- God the Father? Surely such would be an adulteration. After all, God chose to reveal Himself as a father. Christ taught His apostles to address God as, “Our Father,” and He spoke of the fatherhood of God. And doesn’t Paul indicate that all forms of fatherhood derive from and reflect the fatherhood of God?
Why did Paul say that what he and the other apostles were teaching were things that God had revealed to them through the Spirit, that such wasn’t (isn’t) their words (1 Cor 2:10,13; 1 Thess 2:13), and why the appeal to the creation order (1 Tim 2:12-14)?
Obviously the apostles weren’t prisoners of their culture. If Paul was chauvinistic, sexist, why would he teach that women are equal to men, and why did he include them in his general ministry, as did Christ?
Why would God give us a guide book that contained incorrect instruction for Christians? Why are we told we can trust His Word if the apostles have things askew? Why are we told that all scripture is inspired by God (2 Tim 3:16) and that every word of God proves true?
It’s interesting that evangelical feminists have been clamouring for a re-symbolization of the Godhead based on impersonal or feminine categories. Such, of course, clears the path for a female priesthood. It’s well known that the feminists’ destructive vision is that of an androgynous society. Feminists fail to recognise that equality does not require sameness. God designed men and women to complement each other. Thus, equal in worth and being, different in function -- theological, not cultural. If such forces as these are wanting the roles as laid down in Scripture to be removed, isn’t that a sure sign that we should be upholding those roles? It’s from such forces that the women’s ordination issue has arisen, and not from within Christianity. Hence why we’re seeing the feminising of Christianity and the likes of the homosexual lobby using similar secular ‘social justice’ arguments.
Given that females (as well as males) were priests in pagan religions but never in the history of the Jewish nation, given that females were never appointed as pastors/elders in the apostolic Church, given that Scripture says only men, and given that Satan is always coming up with substitutes for anything God has set up or laid down, isn’t it plain folly to ordain women as elders/pastors too?
It’s worth noting that life has been better for women under the influence of Christian culture and traditions than under any other influence. But despite that, we’re seeing legions of modern Eves. How long will it be before we see other beliefs and practices challenged, or has that already happened? To ordain women as elders/pastors is to surely wrongly question the authority of God’s Word for defining Christian beliefs and practices.
A simplistic overview:
God is a God of order (1 Cor 14:33). Even in a perfect world there has to be order. In fact, that is what helps to make a perfect world perfect. In a perfect world everything has its place and its part to play. It’s like that with the Trinity [the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit] (Matt 28:19). Though equal, each has their place and their part to play [function] (1 Cor 11:3; John 5:30; 15:26). So it is with men and women. Though created equal, they each have their place and part to play [complementary functions]. Both men and women are subject to the creational order ordained by God. God in His wisdom, knew that for things to work best in a marriage there would need to be some sort of order. Imagine a factory where everyone wanted to be the manager, or where no one wanted to be the manager. Or where everyone was fighting over who should be doing what [in general]. What chaos there would be! Similar problems can occur in a marriage. Thus man was given the ‘headship’ role [he was to protect and guide his wife] (Eph 5:23), and the woman was to be in ‘submission’ to him [allow him to protect and guide her] (Eph 5:22,24; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:7). This became more necessary after the Fall because a spirit of rebellion (Gen 3:6-13) had then come into this world. Even so, man was not to rule over his wife [try to control her], and the wife was not to challenge his leadership [by displaying any form of disrespect]. When the New Testament talks about women’s submission to man it refers to the order of creation in Genesis chapter two (Eph 5:31; 1 Cor 11:8,9; 1 Tim 2:13,14), not to the curse of the woman in Genesis 3:16. Man therefore is the leader (1 Tim 3:5), protector (1 Peter 3:7), provider (Gen 17-19), father (Eph 3:14), and woman is the companion/helper (Gen 2:18), home maker/mother (Mal 2:15). This is why the Bible says that God the Father is the head of His Son Jesus Christ, that Jesus is the head of man [and the church (Eph 5:23)], and man is the head of his wife (1 Cor 11:3). Man’s headship role here is all about responsibility, not rank. The husband shows his love for his wife by loving ‘headship,’ and the wife shows her love for her husband by her willing [not forced] ‘submission.’ This arrangement symbolizes the relationship that should exist between Christ [the groom, who is the loving head] and the church [the bride — which should willingly submit to Christ] (Eph 5:22-24,33; Rev 19:7-9). The wives submission to her husband also models that of Christ’s submission to His Father (1 Cor 11:3). When women refuse to submit to their husbands, they discredit the Word of God (Titus 2:5). God’s Word asks women to submit to their husbands for Christ’s sake (Col 3:18). Man was given his headship role before the Fall occurred [before Adam and Eve sinned] (1 Cor 11:8,9; Gen 3:17; 2:22; 1 Tim 2:13,14). Man was created first (1 Tim 2:13,14), put in charge of the garden of Eden (Gen 2:15), given instructions regarding the forbidden tree (Gen 2:16,17), named all the creatures (Gen 2:19) and also the woman [both before and after the Fall] (Gen 2:33; 3:20). Woman came from man (Gen 2:22), that is why she is called woman (Gen 2:23). God’s Word also shows how man displays his headship by leaving his parents and joining with his wife [man takes the first step, takes the initiative] (Gen 2:24). Satan attempted to undermine man’s headship right from the beginning by deceiving Eve (Gen 3:1-6). Even though Eve was the first to sin, it was Adam that God went after first, in recognition of his headship role [function] (Gen 3:9). His headship role made him especially responsible. It was only after Adam blamed his wife that God then spoke to Eve (Gen 3:13). Adam was later addressed by God for having listened to his wife (Gen 3:17). Where God said [after the Fall that is] to the woman [Eve] “he will rule over you” (Gen 3:16, NASB), it was simply God telling the woman very clearly that she must return to her ‘submission’ role, which she had broken by doing her own thing [wandering off from her husbands watch care and getting caught out]. God also was expressing the fact that unfortunately because of sin in the world now, men would sadly abuse their headship role. God is able to see ahead remember. He can predict the future. Contrary to what many think, Paul the apostle, who had much to say on marriage and headship, was not presenting a cultural view, but instead, acting according to his Lord’s instructions (Titus 2:5; 1 Thess 2:13; 4:8; 1 Cor 2:10,13; 7:10; 14:36). In fact, Paul had brought about a riot in Ephesus with his different teachings (Acts 19:23-41). His message was pointing in the opposite direction to which society [the Roman Empire] at the time of his writing was going. The marriage bond was suffering a complete breakdown, divorce and adultery were rife, many couples were embracing lifestyles of independence, and women were spurning the home and traditional concepts of male leadership. Many were no doubt offended by what Paul had to say regarding male headship. Rather than going along with society, Paul courageously and correctly presented the Word of God (Jude 3; 2 Tim 4:2).
Feminists, caught up in their anger at men’s abuses of women, have been foolishly attempting to do away with any gender [male and female] roles [functions], and even any gender distinctions [male and female differences], where possible. To God the gender distinctions [male and female differences] and functional roles [headship, submission] are very important. To alter the roles that God has set up, or to blur the gender distinctions in any way [e.g. unisex fashions (Deut 22:5)] is to go against God’s creational design. Such would cause confusion, create doubts about doctrines [biblical beliefs] based on creation [as this one is], would be a rejection of God’s order established at creation for men and women, and would be doing things man’s way [humanistic belief] (Gal 1:10; 1 Sam 15:23; James 3:16; Luke 14:11). Evangelical feminists are well aware of the significance of the man’s biblical role and how it relates to God the Father. They see this as a real problem when it comes to the ordaining of women as elders or pastors. Thus they have been zealously attempting to breakdown this symbolization in an attempt to clear the way for a female priesthood (James 3:16; Luke 14:11; 1 Sam 15:23). It has always been Satan’s desire to cause chaos and confusion in this fallen world, and to misrepresent God the Father. He has been very busy doing this by trying to convince women that they can also be pastors and elders; by introducing unisex fashions that blur the sexual differences between men and women (Lev 22:5); by inciting women to rebel against their husband’s headship role; and by fooling men and women to generally interchange their roles, whether that be in the home, church or even workplace. Given all that’s been mentioned here, it would seen fitting then, that men should be the ones who fill all the leading roles in society [prime ministers, mayors, etc] in keeping with their general leadership role, thus upholding and strengthening men’s responsibilities in society.
More thoughts, from Ken Unger's book True Sexuality:
Men and women, their differences.
Being a man or a woman constitutes a different way of expressing the humanity that both share equally.
The average man is taller than the average woman.
The male skeleton is usually stronger than the woman’s. The bones are thicker and heavier. The greater strength of its bone structure obviously equips the man’s body better than the woman’s to overcome physical obstacles and to carry loads. The man has greater steadiness, strength and stress resistance due to his stronger bones. The man’s hand is stronger and bonier pointing to the fact that the man is built to control the environment practically and creatively, whereas the softer daintier woman’s hand is more suited to taking in hand the environment and looking after and caring for it protectively. A man’s bones are more angular, more rugged in shape, while the woman’s have rounder, less sharply marked forms and blunter corners. Woman’s bones are not merely finer, thinner and more graceful, but also softer, rounder and less rugged in shape. The more angular shape of the male body is more fitted for resistance, assaults and pushing than the rounder female body.
The striated muscles in men are more strongly developed and constructed than women’s. They serve above all for dealing with external obstacles. Wherever we manipulate, model or effect the environment, the striated muscles come into action. The man’s superior equipment in this respect and his stronger bone structure indicate that by nature the male rather than the female is designed to overcome external environmental obstacles, to reshape and master the environment. The woman is also naturally active, and is particularly concerned with things in her immediate environment. But her activity does not involve her much in pushing forward and overcoming external obstacles, so much as in caring and nursing, in sorting, tidying and polishing. A woman’s muscles are particularly suited to their tasks. They are by nature less suited to strong contractions than to active compliance at the right moment.
The suitability of women’s muscles to their tasks matches a similar capability of women in the psychological realm. The woman’s psyche, just like her muscles, can adapt very rapidly to every internal and external change. The average woman adjusts mentally and physiologically to external circumstances with versatility and adaptability.
The relative lack of muscle in women, which incidentally is not culturally conditioned but is the result of hormonal differences, is compensated for by more fat. As a result of this, and the shape of the bones already mentioned, the woman’s body is rounder and the mans more angular. We may sum up by saying that the man’s bodily frame is fitted for remodeling the environment, while the woman’s bodily shape expresses her greater gifts in arranging and caring for a circumscribed world of the nearest and most intimate things.
A woman’s skin is much softer, more tender, and smoother than a man’s, giving greater sensitivity. Women are therefore more aware of the pleasures of touch. This greater sensitivity of the skin matches the greater sensitivity of women in the psychological realm, their ability to approach matters carefully, their greater adaptability and sympathy, their capacity to give and take and to go along with situations; whereas the man tends to try to alter reality by changing it.
A woman, in contrast with all highly developed animals, has the appearance of motherhood without being or becoming a mother. This fact shows that the woman is built for motherhood as the goal and fulfillment of her being. The capacity for natural motherhood matches the motherliness in a woman’s psychological make-up, which may be developed even if biological motherhood is denied her.
The sexual organs serve the purpose of procreation and the establishment of new life. They thereby point to the man’s natural function of begetting and the woman’s of bearing. They also point to the man’s appointment to fatherhood and the woman’s to motherhood. The design of the sexual organs has as its consequence that the man as begetter in the act of intercourse is the active, giving and life-creating party, while the woman as bearer is the passive, receiving and life-sustaining party. Female passivity, male activity, female letting-it-happen, male effecting it, female receiving, male outpouring, female being found, male seeking and acquiring characterize the physical interaction of sexual intercourse. While the man has the more leading role and makes the ultimate decision if and when the union takes place, the behaviour of the woman is that of loving subjection, which she fulfills through the offering of her body. The woman’s resting egg is penetrated by the male sperm, awakening and bringing it into development. While a man simply becomes a father through begetting, conception is for the woman only the beginning of a period of far-reaching burdens and demands. The physical contribution of the man is thus fleeting in comparison with the bodily processes which the woman undertakes in motherhood. While a man is more strongly equipped for creative or destructive remodeling of his environment, the woman is more strongly equipped for arranging what the man has acquired for her or she has received from him.
A man’s life is characterized more by spontaneity than a woman’s: a woman’s life is characterized more by receptivity than a man’s. Among examples of man’s grater spontaneity one may cite his greater drive, greater aggressiveness, greater desire for leadership [dominance] and his particular capacity for creative achievements in all fields of intellectual life, a sort of intellectual procreative ability and analogous to his biological procreativity. Women have verbal superiority [linguistic, articulation, fluency, relating]. Men have spatial conceptualization superiority [technical, mathematical, scientific, industrial, discovery, inventing, philosophy, art, musical composition] and abstract thinking [chess]. The most brilliant achievements in the realms of philosophy, art, and musical composition and the pioneering discoveries in modern science are overwhelmingly the work of men. Invention is also predominantly a male preserve. Man is well known in his thinking to be the more creative, the woman is known to be more receptive when it comes to thought. This is confirmed by aptitude tests which have shown male superiority when it comes to comprehension and reasoning, while women excel in all rote-learning tasks.
Regarding total intelligence the sexes are not really different.
Women are more holistic, more dominated by their feelings and more emotional. She is in less danger than a man is of isolating her soul from her body or her thinking from her feelings. A woman has a more developed relationship to the world of persons, a greater readiness to submit to the leadership of others [to serve, to give others help and support when they are in trouble] and a greater sociability [the tendency to seek the company of others and take pleasure in it]. Man has a more developed relationship to the world of things, is more eccentric and his thinking is more strongly directed toward the conceptual and general. For men this carries the danger that their reflection may become autonomous and cut off from the real world. The greater receptivity of women is seen in her greater ability and willingness to imitate, her greater adaptability and suggestibility, her greater linguistic aptitude and her superior capacity to sympathize, which rests on their greater sensitivity to people’s expression of feeling.
Whereas male cells contain a Y-chromosome and an X-chromosome, female cells have two X-chromosomes. This difference involves all the cells of the organism; probably the real personal differences between the sexes are determined by this. Sexuality affects the whole of a person’s body and not only a part. It is also evident in different hormone levels, in the different constitution of the blood and bodily liquids, of the nervous system, of internal organs and brain structure.
Every person possesses to a certain extent sexually specific characteristics of the other sex. This goes for biological as well as intellectual and psychological aspects. So in this way there is neither a total man nor a total woman.
This section was added to 7 December 2018.
You might also like to read my other poems on the subject of women elders, pastors (one titled: Ordination's Become A Red Herring) which can be accessed via the following link:
On Whose Authority?
