Water Woes, Etc.

Rain! . . . Let's Keep It

Most sections of the Texas Panhandle have gotten a few inches of rain over the past two weeks. In some cases it's been the typical downpour accompanied by lots of wind. But we've also had some gentle overnight showers. The high plains are relatively green these days.

However, . . . Lake Meredith, a key source of Panhandle water, continues to sit at record-low levels. (The photo of a buoy where there used to be a lake is no gag). Given the circumstances, I'm amazed that some folks here in Amarillo continue to leave their lawn sprinklers set to run every day. That's not even an effective way to keep the lawn healthy. Every third day, in the early morning, is plenty. Because of the recent wet weather, I've watered maybe twice in the last three weeks.

And then there's the problem of over spray and run-off. You don't have to look around much in this city to see well-watered driveways and soaked sidewalks, with the excess running down the street. Most everyone here would agree that we have a problem. Few seem ready to acknowledge that they're a part of that problem. We can and must do better.

The Silencing of God: Part Deux

I don't plan to write about every segment of the "Silencing of God Seminar." I just don't want to. But here are a few responses based on notes taken during the second installment. Speaker Dave Miller begins with George Washington's farewell speech, delivered at the end of his second term as President. Several quotes from Washington are read, words to the effect that religion and morality are essential to the common good. So far, so good.

The speaker then says that, from his words, we must draw the conclusion that our first President rejected the idea of separation of church and state. (!) Here we have a completely unwarranted leap, a textbook example of non sequitur. "It does not follow." To say that a great nation must first be a moral nation is simply not an argument against what Thomas Jefferson called a Constitutional "wall of separation."

Something positive! I agree with Miller's assertion that you can't go just anywhere and, among any group of people, set up the institutions of an American-style federal republic and come out with the same results that we've seen in the U.S. Along this line, Miller's passing critique of the Bush Plan in Iraq is, in my opinion, spot on.

Back to the negative. It's a little irritating to see the way that other Protestants, and even Deists, are referred to as "Christian" when under different polemic circumstances representatives of the Churches of Christ have not acknowledged the Christian identity of these people. The subtitle of the "Seminar" is "The Dismantling of America's Christian Heritage." And the U.S. Founding Fathers are said to have established a Christian nation.

However, if any of the Founders had strapped himself into into ye olde time machine, set the dial to 2008, and flown forward in time, my guess is that very few promoters of the "Silencing of God Seminar" would extend to any of those men the right hand of fellowship. That is to say, none of the Founders would be considered true Christians. So tell me again how it is that non-Christians established a Christian nation. . . .

Video of Mark Henderson Interview

A few months ago, Frankly Speaking featured a few posts about the Quail Springs Church of Christ adopting instrumental music. Located in the Oklahoma City area, Quail Springs was formerly an a-cappella-only congregation. At the time, I didn't see a video of an interview featuring Mark Henderson, preacher at Quail Springs.

The Attack Ad on Mark Henderson and the Quail Springs Church of Christ

In my previous post, I mentioned my distaste for the ad that appeared in "The Oklahoman" last week, the one lambasting Mark Henderson, preacher for the Quail Springs Church of Christ. The ad violates the standard of Christian propriety. It also contains several errors which, if recognized, would have prevented it from seeing the light of printed day.

Before I talk about that, though, I want to clarify something: I don't intend my criticism of the ad to be a defense of the decision made by the Quail Springs elders and their preacher. I still prefer, and would argue for, a cappella worship. But in addition to that, I have my questions about the way in which this change at Quail Springs was made. Maybe there was due process before the decision was announced. However, from this distance it seems as though many members at Quail Springs were surprised. Was that the case? I don't know. Either way, preachers and elders should pay close attention to that section of Christian ethics that would fall under the heading "the ethics of congregational change."

About the ad: I said, among other things, that it contains a good bit of Scripture twisting. What follows are three of the more glaring examples:

2 John 9

The ad states that instrumental music in Christian worship takes a person “outside the doctrine of Christ.” But take another look at the passage in context. A reading of 2 John clearly shows that “the doctrine of Christ” refers specifically to the doctrine that Christ came in the flesh. So how does the music question fit into that? One thing I've noticed is that people sometimes want to place anything and everything under the heading "the doctrine of Christ." That way, if you happen to cross one of those many lines, then you're outside of the doctrine and, according to the verse, don't have God. That's nonsense.

Galatians 5:4

“You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.” The ad states that this verse applies to pro-instrument people when they refer to Old Testament passages that mention instruments in the worship of ancient Israel. But once again, the meaning of the verse and its application in the ad have absolutely no connection. In Galatians 5:4, Paul is speaking against the idea that Christian men must be circumcised in order to be true members of the family of God (see the many references to this in Galatians 5:1-12). Another part of the mindset in the Galatian churches was that all Christians had to observe the various "days and months and seasons and years" of Judaism (Galatians 4:10). Contrary to the ad's mishandling of the passage, the question of whether it's proper to appeal to the Old Testament for a certain practice is nowhere in view.

Romans 16:17

The authors of the ad cite this verse as the basis for their marking of the Quail Springs preacher. But had they done the least bit of study, they would have discovered that Romans 16:17 gives no support for the practice of publicly branding another Christian.

For example, twenty five years ago, Dr. Jack P. Lewis published the short article, “Mark Them Which Cause Divisions.” It first appeared in an issue of the Firm Foundation dated February 22, 1983. Five years later, it was reprinted in a collection of Lewis articles called Exegesis of Difficult Passages (Searcy, AR: Resource Publications, 1988) 111-115. Evidently, it should be required reading in preacher training schools everywhere. Here's how Lewis begins:

"The obligation, almost universally felt among our preaching brothers, to label other preaching brothers who hold positions thought to be erroneous, rests upon a misunderstanding of Rom. 16:17 which in the KJV and ASV reads:

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Under the influence of the KJV and the ASV, we have men who apparently feel their chief mission in life is the branding in the eyes of the whole church all those who differ with them. We have a type of journalism whose chief function seems to be to attack the reputation of those who differ . . ."

Sound familiar?

In his characteristic style, Lewis goes into a study of the biblical text, giving attention to every fact. His conclusion is that Paul's meaning in Romans 16:17 is that Christians are to "take notice of" those who cause divisions. And, in 1611, the publication date of the KJV, that's exactly what "mark" meant. To quote Lewis again:

"The verb 'mark' in 1611 meant 'to take notice of'; it carried no connotation of branding. It did not suggest that one should do what the Lord did when he put a mark on Cain. . . . Today, apart from the phrase 'mark my word,' 'mark' is seldom used in the sense of 'take notice of' but does primarily carry the sense that it is most commonly understood by our people when they read Rom. 16:17. They register the meaning they know best, not asking themselves if that is the correct one."

Lewis concludes by saying that he has no problem with spiritual vigilance, but that he does have a problem with religious vigilantes. So should every Christian.

For the sake of comparison, you can see the ad here.

Quail Springs and Mark Henderson Get Written Up

If you're a member of the Churches of Christ, then you had to expect this would happen. But it still makes me sad and angry. I'm talking about what appears to be a full-page ad in "The Oklahoman," the state-wide newspaper, dated Wednesday, February 6, 2008.

What's all the fuss? As I mentioned in a previous post, the Quail Springs Church of Christ in Oklahoma City has added a Sunday service that includes instrumental music. So now, evidently, three preachers from non-instrumental churches are out to show that Mark Henderson, the preacher at Quail Springs, is more than wrong. According to them, he's a bad person.

The preachers libelously call Henderson "a false teacher." And they attempt to cover such ugliness with the cloak of religious obligation: "Pursuant to the Lord's instructions in Romans 16:17" they say, "congregations all across Oklahoma and Texas have marked" the Quail Springs preacher. They even include a photo of Henderson, as though their ridiculous ad were some sort of wanted poster. Of course, they challenge him to a public debate. And when Henderson refuses to take them up, they'll probably claim he's afraid to defend his position because he knows he's in the wrong.

Words fail me. I can't come up with something that would adequately express my disgust. (Actually, I probably can, but I'm not going to write it here). At any rate, I have to say that this makes me sick.

It is one thing to disagree with someone. But it is another thing for those who represent Christ to do something like this in public. On the one occasion when these "gospel preachers" had the opportunity to speak to an entire region, what was their message? An unwarranted attack on a brother in Christ.

Not to mention that the text of the ad is riddled with misapplication of Scripture. I think that will be the subject of my next post. Until then, if you've got the stomach for it, you can see the ad here. News articles that have appeared in "The Oklahoman" include the following:

"Quail Springs Church of Christ will add service with musical instruments" dated January 26, 2008.

"Instrument use strikes discord in area church," dated February 7.