Lowest Common Denominator

What do AWANA, Max Lucado, Beth Moore and Lessons From Mayberry (and possibly others) have in common ? They all have managed to get their literature in congregations to be used as study material. While I am not sure all of these are used in ABA churches, some of them are. Where do you draw the line? Once you leave the truth to get literature from outside sources you get corrupt fruit from a corrupt tree (outside of the truth, all you can find is error). How do you get a Jezebel (someone not a church member and from false worship) teaching in a NT church? Make some popular literature and offer it as the hottest thing out there in religion. The church at Thyatira practiced pulpit affiliation (Rev. 2:20). Pulpit affilliation does not require a flesh and blood presence in the pulpit to occur! As best as I can tell, these offer nondenominational, renegade COC (ecumenical and instruments in worship), SBC (universal church and wrote off 1500 years of Baptist history) and moral examples types of literature used to replace the Bible and Bible based literature. If you can do it on a screen, be like the Protestants or do like everyone else is doing, you, too, will face the temptation to use the wrong material. When all congregations are using this lowest common denominator, the truth has fallen into the street, there will be a dumbing down and a loss of spiritual discernment. Has your church reached the lowest common denominator?

What Can A Preacher Do?

A preacher can do much to contend for the faith by his preaching, teaching and his influence by taking a stand. In the book "Old Landmarkism: What Is It?" by J. R. Graves, page 141, "A looser sentiment and practice commence to prevail through the influence of those ministers, who loved the praise of men more than that of God." Graves, p. 152, "Thousands are preaching today with no other ambition than to build up large churches, and to gain an enviable reputation." We should "advocate the presentation and enforcement of some one of our distinctive...principles or doctrine in every sermon," (Graves, p. 158). Through this method "the church...will be gradually indoctrinated," (Graves, p. 158). How many sermons have you heard in MB churches that would have pleased any Protestant if they had heard it? How many have you preached with so little doctrinal truth that everyone loved them? If we preach sin, salvation, Heaven, Hell, judgment, the church, missions, giving, church discipline and closed communion with a clear commitment to doctrinal purity, God's people in His churches will be influenced to remain strong in the faith. When churches get feel good or pop psychology sermons over the long term, they lose their doctrinal identity and soon find nothing wrong with practicing like the Protestants. What can a preacher do? Contend for the faith. God help us to do more.

Assocational Baptists and Splits

Associations of churches (like churches) may go astray. What would be the cause for a church to withdraw from an association? Some have suggested and others predicted a future split in the ABA.
A. J. Kirkland in the book Why Associational Baptists Divided and Other Vital Issues, wrote, "If a Baptist church ...is sound on its doctrine and practice concerning the church ordinances, its letter of dismission or application for membership is honored," (p. 53). He also stated, "Good, sound Baptist churches sometimes identify themselves with groups which have unsound programs. Therefore a church cannot altogether be judged heretical because it associates with the wrong group....A church may be considered wrong in practice to a certain extent without losing its identity as a scriptural church," (Kirkland, p. 53). Another quotes states, "All the churches were commanded to do the same thing at the same time, and, they were to be doing it for a common cause," (Kirkland, p. 50). I might add "do the same thing the same way, according to scriptural commands or principles." When churches are of the same mind, doing the same thing the same way for a common cause it is the nature of a scriptural associated work. When churches do different things, by different ways for different causes, there is no basis for continuing in an association. What is the checkmate reason for withdrawing from an association?

Tradition vs. Culture

The issue of women wearing a dress or skirt to worship is actually a tradition vs. culture decision.
Some hold to the man dressing like a man and a woman dressing like a woman.
Some think modesty is on one side, some the other.
Some think casual dress is OK. but where do you draw the line with casual? How casual is too casual?
IMO, women that wear a skirt to worship do so on a spiritual basis (no, they are not more spiritual than others) - for reasons that have to do with reverence. Worship in a skirt is the only way to dress to make a difference between the school, the place of business, the ball game, the concert or the yard. It is a matter of reverence for a godly woman to worship in a skirt.
The choice is actually culture vs. tradition. Which is more reverent - tradition or culture?
While each will ultimately decide for themselves, I would rather follow a reverent tradition than in irreverent culture.

Others Like Me?

When Elijah felt sorry for himself, He felt as if he was the only one standing true for the Lord. I do not feel that way, but I rejoice at God's answer concerning thousands of others who were standing like Elisha. I wonder if there are others like our church? If you have these same convictions, please let me know.

1. KJV
2. Associate in ABA for missions support, literature and for benevolence offerings
3. Separation from false worship (don't sing or preach for them in worship or revival, don't invite them to do those things at our church)
4. Tithes and offerings
5. Women wear dresses (skirts) to worship
6. Use only ABA literature (including youth)
7. No fund raisers

New Worship

The old, traditional worship structure thrived for centuries due to it being grounded in a biblical and spiritual perspective. New worship ideas seek to replace a spiritual and biblical perspective in worship with a culture based worship. I heard a seminary instructor say God is not about culture. If churches and preachers turn to new worship based on culture, where does that leave spirituality and a biblical perspective? The aggressive methods of new worship in replacing the old, traditional worship structure actually throws the baby out with the bath water. God has blessed worship from a spiritual and biblical perspective with souls saved, churches strengthened and believers maturing to fruitbearing. Why would anyone think there is value in the culture, emotion, easy believism, singalongs (follow the bouncing ball?) and unstructured service(anything goes) of new worship. Have you ever heard the old motto, "If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin' "? If we throw out the KJV Bible, pews, hymns, songbooks, pianoes, organs, pulpits, sermons, and the gospel, what is left but the chaff? Is new worship good or right because it is new? Neither is everything in old, traditional worship good because it is old. Everything in worship should be from a spiritual and biblical perspective. We need to take a step back and look what direction we are heading!

Church Steeples

Quoting from Old Landmarkism: What Is it? by J. R. Graves, pp. 116-117, "And if they be invited to the funeral of any pedobaptist [infant baptizer], they will go to the house and accompany the corpse with the rest of the people to the door; but there they retreat--they call it the Steeple House....They did not visit their Steeple Houses, because they did not believe God was worshipped in them, but His holy name and service profaned by the priests, by their senseless and popish forms and ceremonies; for Christ had said, 'In vain do they worship me who teach for doctrines the commandments of men.' Baptists of that day thought they would be regarded as countenancing, in some sense, the priests of the church of England should they attend their administrations. And if we will only consider the influence of acts closely, we shall be forced to conclude that they acted consistently."
1. This was a day in 1587 when true Baptists separated themselves from false worship
2. True Baptists at that time did not have steeples on their houses of worship
3. They were Landmarkers in the sense they considered carefully the results of their actions before doing anything that would give others the idea they approved of false religion in any way
4. Landmarkers today should practice consistently - it is not enough to preach the truth and then practice like a Protestant congregation.