“At thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore” (Ps. 16: 11)
The Basket Case Chronicles #165
“And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air” (1 Cor. 14:7–9)
Paul’s argument here is a fortiori, a “how much more” argument. A melody cannot be made out apart from a distinction of notes, whether from a pipe, or harp. And if a trumpet gives a series of tangled blatts, how will the troops know to get ready for battle? Unless there is distinction in the notes, the whole operation is just a disturbance in the air. In the same way, speaking in an unknown tongue apart from interpretation is just so much noise.
Therefore, in a Christian worship service clarity and ease of understanding are to be prized. We are to stand opposed to anything that gets in the way of such understanding, even if that something is edifying to this person or that one individually. The body needs to be able to say amen.
You’re applying this to a Christian worship service, pastor Doug — and hey, who can blame you, since that’s where you’d feel your bread gets buttered.
But might Paul’s / the Spirit’s focus here be broader? — to all the activities of the hive, including also when the Smiths stop by the Dornans for tea?
How many of those Psalm 8 militia Christian babies that “roar” as part of the “body” say amen?
Yes, all Israel was behind the bloodied doors at Passover, but who ascended the mountain when it actually came to saying the amens? Exodus 24 shines some light on the architecture of the worship service.
(Sorry. Couldn’t resist. This lack of distinction offends my delicate architectural sensibilities to the degree where I cannot but help sound forth a clear utterance.)
Hoorah! and I mean that in the clearest sense of the word.
Worship service is the most important place that we should be seeking to be clear but, yes, also with each other outside of worship. We are to build each other up, encourage one another, spur one another along, correct, teach, etc. You can’t really do that by using a kazoo for the battle call, even if it does suit you.
The question:
“How many of those Psalm 8 militia Christian babies that “roar” as part of the “body” say amen?”
The answer:
All
“Through the praise of children and infants
you have established a stronghold against your enemies“
Precisely, Mike. That’s why we don’t let our children anywhere near a worship service until they are conversant in English and their cute little slurring of words has been completely diminished. They need to have something reasonable to contribute before they can be let in or be disciples, for that matter.
Rich — you jest, but …
While my ducklings nestled close to me on the folding chairs at a nondenom meeting, I got a whisper in my ear from a bouncer:
“We’d like you to take your kids out.
We have a nice place for them elsewhere.”
Or later, from the RCUS elder:
“We’d really rather you not come up for communion.”
Yes heaven forbid that the Holy Spirit should ever upstage the pastor in charge
Its becoming obvious in this regard that some people cannot be stretch ed beyond what they already know
Having said that I do generaly enjoy and agree with your posts….
H
Pastor Wilson, You said: “We are to stand opposed to anything that gets in the way of such understanding, even if that something is edifying to this person or that one individually.” I get the first part of that sentence, but as for the second — how could it be edifying to the person individually – assuming they also would need translation to understand it? If the reason it is unedifying to others is b/c they do not understand, then would that same reason not apply to the person speaking it? Am I misunderstanding something about the nature of this… Read more »
Matt
Tis called reverie
“Precisely, Mike. That’s why we don’t let our children anywhere near a worship service until they are conversant in English and their cute little slurring of words has been completely diminished. They need to have something reasonable to contribute before they can be let in or be disciples, for that matter.” Did you even read Exodus 24? I wasn’t proposing exiling children, or even unbelievers from the worship service. My point was that there are different roles within the architecture of worship. It was only the elders of Israel who climbed the mount and dined with the Lord (whom they… Read more »
Dear Eric
As a proof for paedosacraments, the poor, abused Psalm 8 is the sacramentalist’s equivalent of peppered moths and debunked embryo diagrams. In this, the paedobaptist’s use of Scripture is like the proof-texting of the dispensationalist or even the Jehovah’s Witness. You have been told for so long that this is the meaning of the verse that you have become blind to the verse, its context, and its Covenant context.
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2011/06/22/psalm-8/
Mike
Very creative, unfortunately.
But is a zygote capable of faith?
Thanks Eric, but how about dealing with the objections?
I can think of plenty of adjectives to describe paedobaptism, but they don’t explain why it’s so contrary to the mind of God and the Gospel of His Son.
Mike – zygote: faith?
Eric No. Paedocommunionists put Sacrament before Word. The entire point of “the Word” is that it is intelligible. A zygote cannot hear and cannot understand. The fact that this requires pointing out shows how misguided, carnal, illogical and infantile things can get when you allow this monstrous hybrid of circumcision and baptism to twist every other doctrine. Apologies of the lack of grace, but this is exactly the tone Paul takes in Galatians. The irony is that paedobaptists fail to see that the apostle’s cross hairs are aimed right at them. If you look at your minister’s vestments the next… Read more »
An argument from the intelligibility of the Word is inadequate against paedobaptism. If true, it would rule out paedocircumcision also. Circumcision, after all, was an ordinance that sealed righteousness received by faith in an intelligible Word. Therefore the circumcision of infants put “Sacrament before Word.”
I guess Paul’s laser sights in Galatians reflect right back on himself, since he includes children among the “saints who are in Ephesus, and faithful in Christ Jesus” (compare Eph. 1:1 with 6:1).
John,
It is a seal only for those truly given faith, not to all receiving the sign.
Mike,
Which do you go with:
All dead babies go to hell? (No faith possible for babies, you say)
God brings some faithless babies to heaven?
Eric – good question. I have answered this one before. First you must define the boundaries of New Covenant obligation. It is not the Church but all people across the world. The saints are ministers within this global Covenant. Baptism is thus not a sign of obligation to believe but obligation to serve, to witness, to die if necessary. That’s what the Last Supper is about — union with Christ in His sufferings. So, this means that whatever benefit you think you are giving your infants in baptism has already been given to all infants everywhere in Christ, who died… Read more »
So you’re a universalist, Mike?
God loves all babies, Esau included?