Truth Magazine

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

Since I have never been asked to sing a solo or in a quartet (in fact, I was once asked to sit at least four pews back so the song leader could sing), I thought I would tackle the thorny problem presented by my friend and brother Weldon Warnock in the April 2, 1987 issue of Guardian of Truth on the above subject.

In this article, “Confusing Law and Expediency” of which the above title was a subheading, brother Warnock said some good things that need to be said. I commend most of the article. He is a good writer and stirs our thinking at times when it needs to be stirred.

On the matter of solos and quartets in our worship assemblies, I suspect that there is not a nickel’s worth of difference, if that much, in what I encourage and practice and what brother Warnock encourages and practices. He says, “I doubt there have been many preachers in the last 25-30 years who have been more outspoken against choirs, quartets and other ‘specials’ in the church than I have.” I have not heard Weldon speak on the subject, but knowing him as I do, I can imagine that he has spoken with force and in no uncertain terms. So, if you are thinking of soliciting Weldon Warnock to help you get the brethren to let you have a choir, quartet or solo singer – you would be ringing the wrong number. You won’t get any encouragement from him.

Now, having said all of that, what is the problem? Why do I feel the need to reply to his aticle? Where do I differ from brother Warnock?

Brother Warnock believes solos, quartets and choirs are lawful (authorized in the New Testament) and objects to them only on the ground that they are inexpedient with grave danger of abuse.

I believe there is another reason to object. I do not know a passage that clearly establishes their lawfulness – brother Warnock’s observations notwithstanding.

He bases his case on one verse – 1 Corinthians 14:26. He says, “1 Corinthians 14:26 plainly shows solos were sung in the assemblies of the first century church, even at the same time that Paul wrote Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16. These passages in Ephesians and Colossians did not condemn and preclude what I Corinthians 14:26 allowed, namely, solo singing, and neither do they today” (all emphasis mine, EOB). He follows then with a paragraph showing why he believes 1 Corinthians 14:26 applies today. He then assumes what I believe he has yet to prove: “It is strange to me that solo singing was scriptural for the first 65 to 70 years of the New Testament church, but sinful today. It is also strange that Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 allowed solo singing then, but not now. Indeed, it is strange.”

You see, he interprets any difficulties (?) in Colossians 3:16 and Ephesians 5:19 in the light of his plain (?) passage of 1 Corinthians 14:26. It seems to me that it ought to be the other way around. It is not at all plain as to what use was made of the psalm in 1 Corinthians 14:26. The only way that one can know that it was sung before the assembly as a solo is to assume it. The passage simply does not say what the brother who had it did with it. He may have simply passed it along to the congregation for them to sing. It is listed with several other things miraculously received by members of the Corinthian church who had spiritual gifts. The following verses tell about the use of tongues, their interpretation, and prophecies. They were to exercise these gifts “each in turn” or “by course” with others keeping silent. But, not one word is said about the psalm. Yet, brother Warnock says it was plainly sung as a solo and assures us that such was done during the first 65 to 70 years of the New Testament church. A few times in my life I have received a good song (a piece of sheet music) and carried it to the assembly. It was pasted in the front of the song book and we learned and sang it. It was not given to me by the Holy Spirit, but nevertheless when the church came together I had a psalm. I did not sing it as a solo (to the relief of a lot of brethren), but simply passed it on to the assembly for all of us to sing.

1 Corinthians 14:26 is dealing with things being delivered to the church by inspiration. Various members would have various types of inspiration. Some, no doubt, received psalms from the Holy Spirit. They could deliver these songs to the congregation without necessarily standing before the congregation and singing a solo. To say that this is a clear example of solo singing in the first 65 to 70 years of the New Testament church is to assume more than the passage says or necessarily infers. I believe that such an interpretation contradicts what is clear, to me at least, in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16.

The Ephesians passage says, “speaking to one another (heautois) in psalms.” The Colossians passage says, “Teaching and admonishing one another (heautous) in psalms.” In both passages Berry’s Interlinear renders the pronoun, “each other.” This is a reciprocal pronoun. Of “reciprocal,” Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language says, ” 1. done, felt, given, etc. in return; as, reciprocal tolerance. 2. on both sides; each to the other; mutual: as, they felt reciprocal affection. . . . 5. in grammar, (a) expressing mutual action or relation: as, each other is a reciprocal pronoun.” Reciprocal pronouns describe action that is reciprocated. It is not a one way street. The same action is returned by the other party.

Both Thayer and Vine point out the reciprocal nature of the pronoun (heautou) in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16:

“3. It is used frequently in the plural for the reciprocal pronoun alklou, allelois, allelous, reciprocally, mutually, one another: . . . Col. iii. 13,16. . . ” (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, J.H. Thayer, p. 163).

“(b) different forms of the plural of heautou ‘of himself,’ used as a reciprocal pronoun, e.g., Eph. 5:19, RV, ‘one to another’ (KJV, and RV marg., ‘to yourselves’; . . . ” (W.E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Thomas Nelson Publishers, pp. 446,447).

So, any effort to obey these two passages needs to include the idea of reciprocity. If there is to be singing that does not include that element – the authority will have to be found elsewhere. Any arrangement (solo, quartet or choir) that precludes it does not fit these two verses. These verses are talking about reciprocal action.

Thayer gives other passages to illustrate the reciprocal nature of the pronoun. Here are the references as translated in the New King James Bible: “And they reasoned among themselves” (Matt. 16:8).

” . . .they said among themselves” (Matt. 21:38).

” . . . And they were astonished beyond measure, saying among themselves” (Mk. 10:26).

“And they said among themselves” (Mk. 16:3).

“And they reasoned among themselves” (Lk. 20:5).

“. . forgiving one another” (Eph. 4:32; Col. 3:13).

“. . having fervent love for one another” (1 Pet. 4:8).

“. . minister it to one another” (1 Pet. 4:10).

So, it seems to me that 1 Corinthians 14:26 is the more obscure passage to be interpreted in the light of these two plain passages, instead of the other way around.

When brother Warnock receives a psalm, we will be glad for him to bring it to the assembly where I attend – but he will have to do it so as not to violate the reciprocal action of Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16.

Too be sure, brethren, congregational singing fits into what is authorized in these verses – beyond the doubts of anyone that I know. Even brother Warnock says that solos, quartets, etc. should not be used in our assemblies. Brother Warnock and I will continue to encourage brethren to practice only congregational singing in our worship services. So, don’t anyone get excited that we are about to part ways over this “issue.”

It has been simply my purpose to show why I believe that solos and quartets should be opposed on grounds other than that they are merely inexpedient. I do not believe that anyone has proven them to be scriptural. While those who oppose them only because of abuses may presently strongly object to their use – I fear that the seeds of justification are being sown by their writings for the next generation to use them, having been convinced by the writings of this generation that they are indeed lawful. They may not perceive the abuses and dangers as we do. Brethren, think about it.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 11, pp. 326, 342
June 4, 1987

By Norman Midgette

When we talk with others about the Bible we often refer to numerous passages of Scripture from different places in the Bible. This is true whether we are speaking of the Lord’s supper, studying about the church or discussing baptism. The objection sometimes encountered, especially on the subject of baptism, is this: “You just skip all over the Bible for your verses and put them together making them teach what you want.” How do you counter this?

While there are two or three approaches you might take, one of the best is to show where the same thing was done by the apostles in the New Testament. Since it was done by them it is an inspired procedure that is right before God.

In Romans 15:9-12 Paul proved from the Scriptures that it was God’s intention to include the Gentiles in the gospel of Christ. In these four verses of continuous quotes he referred to Psalms 18:49 first, then Deuteronomy 32:43, followed by a quote from Psalms 17:1 and concludes with Isaiah 11:10. These verses are all in context and are used showing the many places in the Old Testament God taught the same thing about His plan for the Gentiles.

Peter used the same divine approach and did the same thing in 1 Peter 2:6-8. In showing God’s plan for Christ as the foundation of the gospel and church, he quoted from three Old Testament verses in rapid succession. He first referred to Isaiah 28:16, then Psalms 118:22 and, in conclusion, Isaiah 8:14.

James did the same in James 2:20-23. In using Abraham as our example of one saved by faith and works, he first referred to an event in Genesis 22, the offering of Isaac. Then in one sentence he combined two widely separated passages recorded over 700 years apart. James stated, “. . and the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness; and he was called the friend of God.” The first part of the sentence is from Genesis 15:6 and the last expression, “. . . and he was called the friend of God,” is found in Isaiah 41:8 and 2 Chronicles 20:7.

All of the verses used by these men are taken in context and are used to teach only what they taught where they are found in the Old Testament. It is a perfectly scriptural procedure to amass many Scriptures from different writers in different ages to prove what you are teaching as long as they are used to teach what they taught in their original context.

When you can “skip around in the Bible” and find numerous Scriptures proving the same point you should rightly be commended not criticized. It just shows you know your Bible and that God has given evidence to prove your point, not once, but several times.

If this is a good and accepted pattern for the apostles in their writings it shows God approves this being done. Keep up the good work.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, p. 303
May 21, 1987

By Dennis C. Abernathy

Today it is quite common for people to dress immodestly. People of the world think little of it. But the Christian is not to be “conformed to this world” (Rom. 12:2). Modesty is to characterize the Christian. “In like manner, also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works” (1 Tim. 2:9-10). From this passage you will notice that a Christian woman has a godly profession. It is evident that one cannot profess godliness while at the same time dressing ungodly.

A close study of this verse will show the censure of wearing gaudy or sensually appealing clothing. One may be guilty of this by “overdressing” which is motivated by pride and vanity. But primarily (especially at this time of the year) we are concerned with a lack of dress. As one good brother put it: “At this season when little boys are thinking of going barefooted their older brothers and sisters frequently ‘out-strip’ them by baring considerably more than a foot.”

It is a shame the way many dress today. But I think an even greater shame is the fact that many Christians join right in with such ungodliness. The woman who would be seen in public with shorts, halters, mini-clothes, see-through blouses, slacks which are so tight the under garments can be seen, etc., has not learned the principles of modesty! Clothing that is bold, daring and down-right risque should not be a part of the wardrobe of the Christian. Excuses, situations, and circumstances will not justify such.

Young people (young ladies especially) need to be taught modesty at home. If mothers and fathers do not teach their children modesty, the world will teach them immodesty. An integral part of teaching is setting the right kind of example before them. A mother cannot teach her daughter to be modest if she is constantly seen with little on in public. She cannot teach and emphasize the importance of the “hidden man of the heart” (1 Pet. 3:1-6), while exposing and emphasizing her physical body to the gaze of the world.

Pure thinking is to be encouraged (Phil. 4:8). How can Christians encourage such and at the same time dress in such a way as to discourage the same? How can one “flee fornication” (1 Cor. 6:18), while dressing in such a way that encourages that very sin? If a man “looketh on a woman to lust after her,” he commits a sin (Matt. 5:27-28). But at the same time, how can the woman be guiltless if she dresses in such a way that invites that kind of look?

After all is said, and all of the excuses are offered (“We can’t define modesty … .. Everybody dresses this way, so no one thinks anything about it,” “I just want to keep cool,” etc.) the Bible will still teach that Christians are to dress modestly, and all immodesty will still be sin and ought to be repented of. My fellow preachers, dust off the sermons on this subject and, my fellow Christian, let us set the example for others to follow.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 11, p. 321
June 4, 1987

By Billy Ashworth

Jeremiah, the “weeping prophet,” had warned Israel of a coming desolation because of her sins in turning away from the living God to serve heathen idols. While the prophet warned with tears flowing from his eyes and words of love and warning flowing from a broken heart, he felt the total rejection of not only himself, but of Jehovah also. Having warned the people in the book of Jeremiah, the prophet is found in the introduction to his book of Lamentations mourning over the once mighty city Jerusalem which now was reaping the bitter fruits of her rejection of God and His prophet.

As Jeremiah sat in the rubble of that once great city and observed the sacking of the city and the ravishing of her people, he cried out in his grief: “Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by?” (Lam. 1:12) I am sure that to Jeremiah it was incredible that these people who were once the people of God could be so calloused as they went their way without feeling any pain or regret for the fall of this once mighty city. What was wrong with these people?

The reason for the captivity of God’s people by a heathen monarch is found in the first part of chapter 1. “How does the city sit solitary, that was full of people! ” (Note: That is not a question; it is an exclamation.) He continues: “she that was great among the nations, and princess among provinces, how is she become tributary! . . . Her adversaries are the chief, her enemies prosper; for the Lord hath afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions: her children are gone unto captivity before the enemy. . . . Jerusalem hath grievously sinned” (Lam. 1:1, 5, 8a). Yes, Jerusalem ad forgotten God, sinning grievously, and reaping the bitter fruit of her own wickedness. Remember Paul’s solemn warning to the churches of Galatia: “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but lie that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting” (Gal. 6:7, 8). But the people of Jeremiah’s day, of Paul’s day, and the people of our day, did not/do not listen! Sinful man closes his eyes to the dangers that lie ahead because he wants to do whatever he wants to do! And he resents any faithful servant of God who dares to warn him of impending doom.

The writer of the book of Judges revealed a very important fact concerning how soon succeeding generations turn away from the religion of their fathers and turn away from God. “And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers (the generation that followed Joshua, BA) and there arose another generation after them which knew not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel. And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim: and they forsook the Lord God of their fathers . . . and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and provoked the Lord to anger” (Judg. 2:10-12). Think of it – only two generations removed from Joshua’s time, there arose a generation that knew not the Lord!

Alas, history repeats itself. Over and over, the people of God have apostatized from Him only two generations removed from faithful grandfathers and grandmothers. And, their attitudes have been as calloused as in the days of Jeremiah. I cry aloud today as Jeremiah did in his day to my brethren and fellow-Americans: “Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by?” I grieve at the sight of a generation that is only one generation removed from me; how many do not hold rigidly to the sound doctrine that is plainly set forth in God’s holy Word. The attitude of liberalism has set up in many professed Christians concerning purity of heart and life that is required of God as laid down in the New Testament. Why is this true? I hasten to add that I am no indicting all of the succeeding generation. But I am concerned about those who bold a “more liberal attitude” toward the supremely important things mentioned above.

The answer as to why it is that the “new generation” is being affected by liberalism is manifold. First, God’s people are always adversely affected by the people of the world around them. This happened to the Israelites who went after the “gods” of the heathen around them. Today, we live in one of the most affluent and worldly countries ever known. Yet we, as well as our children, live daily in grave danger of being contaminated by the world around us which has invented so many ways of seducing God’s people to the heathen “gods” of our day. The “gods” of gold, pleasure and modern technology have devastated a large portion of God’s people in our generation.

I love this great country (yes, still great) we call America. I thrill when the flag is waved and people sing the National Anthem and such songs as “God Bless America” and “America the Beautiful.” But, will God continue to bless this great country of free people who e in a land that is becoming not so beautiful? Will e continue to be free when there has arisen a generation, some of whom do not appreciate the sacrifices of millions to give them a free country, some of whom fight to defend this freedom, some who would capitulate to a heathen aggressor because they become rotten in their lives and ideals?

TV miniseries, America, should shake up a bunch of complacent cowards who think that “it could not happen to us.” There are some naive Americans o refuse to look at the heathen country of Soviet Russia in the light of their own boasts that they will take erica without firing a shot, Every American should w the show America more than once. Although it fiction of America’s being in subjugation and servitude to the Communists of Russia only ten years from w, it surely gives any sober-minded, God-fearing, country-loving citizen of this great country food for bought and alarm. To those fellow-Americans who think “it could not happen to us” and who take personal freedom for granted, I ask: “Is it nothing to you hat daily this country is sinking into a quagmire of its own filthiness; that the horrible disease of AIDS, which s a disease usually resulting from immorality on the part of godless people who have tried to mock God, is rampant? It is nothing to you that the frantic attempts at fighting AIDS in this country are not aimed at the cause of the disease – i.e. sexual perversion – but at trying to find a cure? Is it nothing to you that the public school systems have been taken over by the Federal government and the Humanists are controlling what must be taught -organic evolution – and what must not be taught – the Genesis account of creation? The American Civil Liberties Union is an atheist front, having been formed by communists, whose goal is to eradicate the idea of God from the consciences of our children who are “the next generation.” The ACLU is the legal arm of the Humanists and together they control the Federal Judiciary which rules that “creationism” cannot be taught in public schools while the godless concept – evolution – will be taught as true science! Is it nothing to you all ye that pass by?

While I love this great country in which we live and enjoy civil freedom, I love the kingdom of God more and value my citizenship in it far more than the earthly one. For thirty-four years I have been preaching the I ‘gospel of the kingdom” (Mt. 4:23) as it is revealed in the gospel of Christ, God’s power to save (Rom. 1:16). 1 have engaged in the battle over human institutionalism which resulted in the apostasy of the majority of God’s people. We saved a remnant of God’s people from apostasy, but now we find these people in far too many places engaged in worldliness, bitter fightings among themselves, condemning any preacher who dares call their ungodly lives and practices in question. Many no longer want plain, powerful gospel preaching, preferring “smooth words and fair speeches” from timeserving “preachers” who love themselves more than the souls of men.

As I look around and observe the current status of churches of Christ, and the shameful actions of many individual members plus the ungodly activities of the saints collectively (church action), I feel as Jeremiah did in the long ago. I want to cry out, “Is it nothing to you, all ye that pass by?” While it is good to have a “positive approach” to all matters, including spiritual things, we need to get our heads out of the clouds and come down to reality. There are many things going on that are destroying the churches’ influence for good, plus destroying the hope of heaven for many, if not all, members of those churches.

What can we do? The only answer I can think of is Paul’s instruction to Timothy: “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:2). And to the church at Corinth Paul wrote: “Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong” (1 Cor. 16:13). And finally, “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt save both thyself, and them that hear thee” (1 Tim. 4:16).

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 10, pp. 308-309
May 21, 1987