Categories
purity standards

99 44/100% Pure

Friday’s Column: Supplemental Strength

81121814_2462862270639428_5746232403106463744_n

Brent Pollard

When Harry Procter first marketed his Ivory soap in 1891, he used the simple slogan, “It floats!” Within a few years, however, he conceived of a new angle he could use to peddle Ivory to the masses. He decided to have an independent laboratory analyze his soap along with Castile soaps also available on the market in the 1890s. The laboratory’s conclusions were used by Procter to declare that Ivory was “99 44/100% Pure.” And that was Ivory’s new slogan. 1

 The problem with that slogan is that there was no standard for comparison. Who defined what “pure” meant? Was it the independent laboratory that Procter paid to do the analysis? That does not pass the smell test. If paid to find a particular result, are you going to maintain your integrity and admit that there was no litmus test for soap purity? Thus, when you look at a package of Ivory soap today with its vaunted claim of being “99 44/100% Pure,” remember that is a subjective statement based on a clever marketing ploy. In other words, Ivory is pure only because it proclaims itself to be so.

If we are not careful, we can be guilty of doing something similar spiritually. That is, we might puff ourselves up, stating we are superior to those around us when we have no objective basis for our statement. Jesus cautioned us against such behavior. He told us not to do things to be seen of men in His Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6.1-6). He gave the parable of the Pharisee and the publican to caution us that we should not seek to justify ourselves by looking upon others with contempt (Luke 18.9-14). The sobering truth is that even when we have done everything commanded of us, we are to say, “We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done” (Luke 17.10b NASB). Indeed, Jesus calls us to second-mile service (Matthew 5.41).

Regarding the final judgment, Jesus warned that there would be some who would stand before Him and laud those works (of their devising) they had done. His response for them will be, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness” (Matthew 7.23 NASB). It is not as if the desires of God are unknown. He has declared them to us. And this constitutes the criteria for our judgment (John 12.48). Indeed, we must do the will of the Father (Matthew 7.21). As such, we have an objective standard by which to compare our lives. Beyond that, we are to show mercy. We must walk in the same love as Christ had for us (Ephesians 5.1-2). That was a generous love putting our interests ahead of His own. In like manner, we must avoid allowing the abuse of our Christian liberty to cause another to stumble (1 Corinthians 8.9). Only when doing such, can we begin to say that our righteousness is not like filthy rags (Isaiah 64.6).

Fortunately, we do not have to guess whether we are living lives pleasing to Him. Hence, even if we cannot quantify our purity with an exact number like 99 44/100%, we can still rest assured that the blood of Jesus Christ has us thoroughly cleansed (1 John 1.7). In the interim, we plead with David, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me.” (Psalm 51.10).

 Reference

1 “Ivory (Soap).” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 10 June 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivory_(soap).

1800s_blue_ivory

Categories
authority pattern truth Uncategorized

The Inevitable Standard

Neal Pollard

Everywhere, each generation tries to figure out the why and how of living. Most will not find the right path (Mat. 7:13-14). Almost all are convicted, even passionate, about the way they wish to live life. They may be fiery about politics, social issues, relationships, and even religious ideals, and to be consistent they must appeal to some ultimately, overarching authority that makes right right and wrong wrong whatever their point of view. Will it be feelings, friends, the majority, the minority, the church, family, a teacher, culture, or something else? The Bible claims to be the arbitrator by which all matters are judged. But if not the Bible, there has to be some universal absolutes with an adequate origin to compel people to follow it. Whether the issue is rape, murder, stealing, or similar norm that stands between order and chaos, there has to be adequate reason to submit to it. 

This inevitable standard helps us decide whether or not a Creator exists. If there is nothing (no One) greater, bigger, wiser, and stronger than us, why can’t we decide right and wrong as our whims determine? Why would we desire civilization and peace? Why would we wish good will or at least peaceful coexistence with each other?

The inevitable standard helps us decide which god (God) is to be followed. Do their alleged writings and teachings cohere and show consistency? Do they adequately answer the great questions of life?

The inevitable standard helps us decide whether or not Bible doctrines taught by men are consistent with and true to what the Bible actually teaches. How do we know how to worship, be saved from sins, what roles to play in life, what our purpose is, and how to reach a desirable destiny? The nonsensical claim that you have your truth and I have mine is unacceptable in every other discipline (building construction, medicine, physics, mathematics, etc.). Even falling back on “you have your interpretation and I have mine” is a dangerous slope since there are matters of life and godless ( Pet. 1:3). 

The inevitable standard helps us fulfill our roles in the home, the church, and the world. How should we live and how should we help our physical family, spiritual family, and communities live? It matters!

It may gall us to think we all must concede to a standard of right and wrong, of absolute truth. To say that all of us are accountable to the same standard may be construed as bigoted, small-minded, or narrow, but everything falls apart if each of us follows our own set of rules. Imagine an interstate where every driver followed whatever they thought they should and ignored whatever they felt they could or should. All of us are on the road of life heading somewhere. How will we get there? There is an inevitable standard, given by God to us through men He moved to write it down (2 Tim. 3:16-17). 

tape measure.jpg

Categories
authority Bible pattern Uncategorized

THERE IS A PATTERN OF TEACHING

Neal Pollard

The Bible claims to hold the answer to your greatest problem. Not only that, but it helps you to identify what that problem is which you may or may not even know about. In Romans 6:16-18, Paul talks about a “form of teaching” given to those at Rome. 

Paul writes this powerful epistle to emphasize that salvation is by faith and not by works of law, but faith in what? One might say, “Faith in Jesus,” and Paul makes that point repeated in Romans (3:22; 3:26, for example). But how do we have faith in Jesus? He says, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” (10:17). 

Elsewhere, Paul reminds us that there is “one faith” (Eph. 4:5), so a purely subjective faith (what we think we should believe) is not the faith commanded in Scripture. So, we’re looking a t a faith produced by reading, learning, and following God’s Word.

No wonder, then, that Paul emphasizes the importance of obedience in this text. Does God want you and me and everyone else to obey the same thing? Or can you pick what you want to obey while I pick what I want to obey and everyone else do the same? Paul talks about an objective standard of teaching that is for everyone, everywhere, for all time. Look closer at what he says in this brief passage of Scripture and what it means for us today.

THE FACT OF THE PATTERN (Rom. 6:17)

Paul talks about a form, a kind, class, or thing that suggests a model or pattern (BDAG 1020). It is the word used in the Greek Old Testament in Exodus 25:40 and quoted by Stephen (Acts 7:44). Translators chose the word form (“standard,” ESV, or “pattern,” NIV) in this verse. 

For those who pour concrete, you use “form boards” to cause it to conform to their shape in width, length, and height. Without some way to hold the concrete, what a waste of time and money! The concrete would be totally useless. It’s the same concept for those who bake and use cake moulds, muffin pans and cookie cutters. If you put dough or mix into a round pan, you don’t expect a rectangular finished product. 

Paul talks about a teaching that conforms to a certain form or pattern, having definite, identifiable structure. So, the Romans received teaching that was meant to produce the same result in every case. A growing number of people look at the Bible as basically shapeless and formless. They reject the idea of pattern theology, the very thing Paul appeals to in Romans 6:17. The alternative to there being a pattern for salvation, worship, church leadership and organization, sexuality, morality, gender roles, and all teaching is that we have no pattern.

Without a standard to appeal to, how do we determine right and wrong? Historically, when humanity rejects an absolute standard, we choose what we think is right and wrong (cf. Jud. 17:6). This is a fatal way to live (Prov. 16:25), and it destroys societies (Prov. 14:34). But everyone is going to appeal to something as the final say and authority, even if it’s only self. There is a “standard of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13). It must be retained and it carries with it the authority of Christ Jesus.

THE FRUIT OF THE PATTERN (Rom. 6:17-18)

Since there is a pattern of teaching, what are the consequences? Paul implies that we must obey it and commit to it, just as the Romans did. The end result of such obedience is that we become slaves to the right master. Everyone will inevitably be enslaved, whether to sin or righteousness. This pattern shows us the right choice to make. We’re not just talking about information, but rather information which leads one to do something and become something. 

THE FREEDOM OF THE PATTERN (Rom. 6:18)

Ironically, those who reject the idea of pattern theology claim that such unfairly restricts and inhibits us. But, Paul draws a different conclusion. Obeying the form of teaching and committing themselves to it led them to be free from sin. Sin brings spiritual death (5:12), condemnation (5:16), enslavement (6:6), and deception (7:11). If we understand the true nature of sin (which biblical teaching defines), we will want to be free from the burden of it.  The form of teaching shows us how to do that. Anyone who wants freedom from sin can have it, but anyone who wants freedom from sin must follow the pattern. 

Obeying Christ’s teaching is not legalism. It is faith in His power, but also submission to His will. There is truth. We can know it (John 8:32). We must obey it (Rom. 6:17). It will free us (John 8:32)! 

fh07may_pourc_01-2

Categories
authority standards truth Uncategorized

HOW IS TRUTH DETERMINED?

Neal Pollard

Recently, I received some feedback on a recent article (Truth Is Truth, No Matter Who Disagrees With It). Negative feedback is not rare, but expected when we put ideas down on paper (or on electronic media like blogs). This feedback was not personal, nor unkind. Yet, it reflects the thinking of so many who shun the idea of absolute, objective truth. Consider the major arguments made by the one who wrote:

—No matter what you believe, the majority disagrees with you.
—You are no smarter or more sincere than those who disagree with you.
—Everyone is certain their religion is right, but this is a function of the brain and proof of nothing
—Conflicting views within the “Restoration Movement” shows the fallacy of being certain about truth
—Certainty is dangerous because it does not allow for change

The last three arguments seem more of a confrontation of certainty than arguments against truth, but consider each of these individually.

Does the inevitability of disagreement nullify the idea of absolute truth? If someone argues our answer that two plus two equals four, and were able to get a majority to side with them that the answer is five, does that nullify the truth of what two plus two equals?

If a person with demonstrable intellectual capacity and apparent sincerity nonetheless avers that two plus two equals five, do we rewrite the laws of addition and reprint the textbooks? If not, why not? Is it not because we can take two of something, add it to two more of the same something, like integers or apples or books, and find the inescapable, universal truth that now there are four?

Can any religion be certain that they are right, but be wrong? Universalists believe everyone will ultimately be saved. Those who believe that murdering those they deem “infidels” pleases their God and they teach others that this is truth. Cults often dub their leaders the Messiah. On what basis would we object or oppose any religious tenet, like these, without an objective standard of truth?

Does the imperfection of people in applying revealed truth impugn the reality of absolute truth? It will never be suggested that anyone is perfectly interpreting or applying the perfect standard of truth, including those trying to restore New Testament Christianity (which, incidentally, implies belief in a perfect, objective standard of truth). But, does that mean restoration can or should be rejected for ideas which clearly contradict what the New Testament says (i.e., “sinner’s prayer’ versus how the New Testament teaches people were saved)?

If there is a conflict between the certainty of New Testament teaching and the desire for change, which is to be preferred and chosen? The religious world has changed a myriad of things that the New Testament explicitly teaches must be done or taught a certain way. Isn’t it a faulty premise to choose change proposed by men, when it assaults a certainty revealed by God?

That there is religious confusion and division is indisputable. It is disheartening. The Bible warns that articulate, polished religious leaders would teach things contrary to the revealed truth of the New Testament (Gal. 1:6-9; 2 John 9-11; Rev. 22:18-19). Let us never put confidence in man, but let us ever put confidence in the truth of Scripture.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Categories
resolutions resolve Uncategorized

Resolutions Reinforcements–#6

Neal Pollard

“Who cares?” That is not necessarily an expression of apathy or scorn. All of us need to feel like we have people in our lives who care about us and our wellbeing. Such people should do more than offer positive reaffirmation and reassurance. We benefit from those who keep us honest and are willing to say even the difficult things we need to hear. When we talk about goals and resolutions, we need at least someone whom we seek out to hold us accountable. Accountability, in its strictest sense, means “liable to judgment and punishment” when used of God’s holding mankind accountable (Rom. 3:19; BDAG 1037).  Today, we typically mean by accountable that we are responsible to someone to explain or defend our actions. Am I succeeding or failing? Who will help me accurately assess that?

Augustine of Hippo, in his fourth-century Confessions, wrote, “A brotherly person rejoices on my account when he approves me, but when he disapproves, he is loving me. To such people I will reveal myself. They will take heart from my good traits, and sigh with sadness at my bad ones. My good points are instilled by you and are your gifts. My bad points are my faults and your judgements on them. Let them take heart from the one and regret the other. Let both praise and tears ascend in your sight from brotherly hearts, your censers. …But you Lord…Make perfect my imperfections.” We are well-served to have those willing to disapprove, to sigh, and to render gentle judgment as much as give their positive counterparts.

Do you have someone in your life right now who can help you stay accountable to your goals? Ideally, it would be your spouse, but maybe it’s a trusted friend, a sibling, a local Christian, a church leader, or a parent. Find someone in whom to confide your goals and then establish a system to have them evaluated. Just knowing that someone else knows what you’re aiming at may dramatically improve your likelihood of hitting it.

accountability-1024x703

Categories
culture human reasoning sin social media Uncategorized world worldliness

Why Is The World Asking “Why?”

Neal Pollard

Today, everyone is hurting. Whether because of gun or knife violence or vehicular homicide, groups of people in our nation and other parts of the world are being torn from time and prematurely vaulted into eternity. We weep and mourn for the loss. We consider the enormous grief and heartache multiplied many families face from California to Florida, Connecticut to Texas, Colorado to Tennessee, Virginia to Nevada (and many other places).  Those whose voices we hear the most through all of this, like the national and local media, seem fixated on learning the perpetrator’s motive each time it occurs. Experts and analysts look at religious ideology or mental health issues. It seems as if they believe that if they can determine the motive, that will solve the violent epidemic that has disturbed the peace of so many people in our society. The danger of oversimplifying any specific tragedy notwithstanding, there are some right answers the world will have a difficult time embracing but that get us so much closer to resolving this plaguing problem. Why are these horrific crimes occurring?

  • The world has rejected God. Romans 1:28 says, “ And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper….” “Not proper” seems benign to us in the way we use the phrase in English (bad table manners, having your shirt untucked, etc.). Kittel says, “Paul has in mind what is offensive even to natural human judgment. The decision against God leads to a complete loss of moral sensitivity, the unleashing of unnatural vices, and hence the type of conduct that even healthy pagans regard as improper” (386). Paul tells us this improper conduct includes “all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife” and other things we see in these current tragedies (29, cf. 30-31). Read the context to appreciate the rotten fruit of such thinking.
  • The world has redefined sin. A worldview or value system is built bit by bit, choice by choice. Paul writes, “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life” (Gal. 6:7-8). If we devalue human life through sinful practices like abortion or euthanasia, we plant destructive seed. If we glorify violence or imbibe in sins like pornography that objectify human beings, we plant desensitizing seed. Long ago, Isaiah warned, “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (5:20). Such leads to weeds which choke out spiritual fruit.
  • The world has rebelled against biblical counsel. The absolute truth of Scripture is lost in the shuffle of worldly values. Jesus says, “Treat others the same way you want them to treat you” (Luke 6:31). He says, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mat. 5:44). Paul echoes, “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom. 12:21). He also writes, “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others” (Phil. 2:3-4). The Bible urges us to be kind, unselfish, compassionate, and helpful through precepts and examples. The world has ignored the ethics of Scripture in preference of humanistic philosophy.
  • The world has replaced God with self as lord. What is the ultimate consequence of denying God the place that rightfully belongs only to Him? Isaiah referred to a worldly nation, saying, “I have spread out My hands all day long to a rebellious people, Who walk in the way which is not good, following their own thoughts” (65:2). Repeatedly, Scripture decries the folly of crowning ourselves king and dethroning God (Jer. 10:23; Prov. 14:12; 16:25).  When a society writes its own rules or tries to live life on its own terms, it charts a path for heartache and disaster. How concisely Solomon says this, that “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace (shame, reproach) to any people” (Prov. 14:34). When whatever a person says, wants, or believes is what goes, ultimately nothing is out of bounds for him or her.

Brethren, in this frightening, dark, and uncertain atmosphere, a world which “lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5:19), we must share what we know! John says, “We know that we are of God…and we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life” (5:19a, 20). We have security, confidence, understanding, and hope, all because of God and His Son. Take courage and share that with everyone you can! It’s the only hope the world has!

kcmkjjb5i

Categories
Bible Bible study

If The Bible Is God’s Word…

Neal Pollard

  • It answers the biggest mysteries of this life that so baffle humanity.
  • It reveals the plan of the Creator of everything.
  • We are accountable to it.
  • It tells us where we are going.
  • It will give us a guide we can have confidence in as we head to the future.
  • We cannot refuse to follow it.
  • We should share it with as many people as we possibly can.
  • It is not on a par with other books; it is superior to all of them.
  • He disapproves of religious division.
  • There is a right way to worship Him.
  • We can know the truth.
  • We discover some great, precious and exciting truths and promises.
  • The New Testament church is eternally important.
  • We should read and study it faithfully.

Investigate the Bible and explore its origin and the book as it is today.  God’s Word is not afraid of investigation.  It has been more scrutinized than any other book ever written, and it still stands.  It is a foundation we can confidently build our lives upon.  It is a guide that can safely lead us now and forever.  Have you been in the book of books today?

Categories
pluralism religion truth

“CONTRADICT: THEY CAN’T ALL BE TRUE”

Neal Pollard

Kathy just called me and told me she saw this bumper sticker on a truck as she fought traffic on Wadsworth Boulevard.  How clever!  It uses the same religions that the infamous “Coexist” bumper sticker uses, including Hinduism, Daoism, Shintoism, Unitarian Universalism, Satanism, Atheism, Islamism, and Judaism. There is a website where these bumperstickers can be purchased (http://www.contradictmovement.org; warning: I do not endorse everything on this web site, whether message or method).

The “Coexist” campaign is meant to promote pluralism,  a theory or system that recognizes more than one ultimate principle. The very idea is contradictory.  The Koran says, “And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers” (3.85).  Shintoism says that humans become gods (kamis) after death, and they do not believe in absolute right and wrong with the soul losing individual identity and becoming part of one great guardian spirit (Japan-Guide.com; litesofheaven.com).  Atheism believes, since there is no God, that there is no judgment and no accountability to a higher power. Taking any number of tenets about conduct, salvation, our nature, deity, afterlife, and the like, one sees inescapable and frequent contradiction between these faiths and philosophies.  Yet, even without all of this, there is the exclusive truth claim of Christianity in Scripture.  The “Contradict” bumper sticker has a passage that says much.  “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father but through Me” (John 14:6).  Jesus speaks of an exclusive way, calling it “the” way and saying there is “no other” way.

The “Coexist” mentality is founded, for some, upon a noble enough desire, the desire for peace and harmony.  Yet, it seeks the wrong way to peace and harmony, letting mankind devise their own way for this to exist. We do not have that prerogative.  The Bible reveals God, the Creator, in a specific way, revealing His nature, His will, and His expectations.  With that, there is human accountability and an expectation that people will follow that way or suffer the consequences of disobedience.  Conflicting, opposing positions contradict one another, and they cannot all be true!

Categories
faithfulness

“I Don’t Consider Myself Unfaithful”

Neal Pollard

An intelligent, independent young American man in his mid-20s showed up at the Siem Reap church building for mid-week services.  He not only grew up in the church, but he even attended a “Christian” high school and one of our brotherhood universities.  He is doing field research for an advanced degree in cultural anthropology, which brought him to Cambodia.  He is a decent, inquisitive person seemingly intent on bringing positive change to this world, but upon leaving his home state after graduating college he ceased association with the church.  When asked about his religious life, he said, “I don’t consider myself unfaithful, but I’m not attending the church right now.  I guess you could say I’m taking a break.”

Rather than being a “what’s wrong with young people is…” or “what’s wrong with the church is…” article, I want to think in terms of what faithfulness or unfaithfulness is.  Is it something we can gauge, and, if so, how?  Can we claim faithfulness but fail to demonstrate it?

The Bible speaks of the faithfulness of God, for example.  How do we know He is faithful?  Moses suggests we conclude such based on His work, ways, and attributes (Deut. 32:4). The psalmist points to His word and work (Psa. 33:4).  Faithfulness involved His working wonders and deliberately planning (Isa. 25:1).

In the same way, the Bible identifies faithfulness as something tangible and measurable, as visible as justice and mercy (Mat. 23:23), as demonstrable as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, and self-control (Gal. 5:22-23).  The very word refers to loyalty and trustworthiness (Utley, np).  In Galatians 5:22, it “describes the believer’s new relationship with people, especially believers” (ibid.).  In this list, it is more than trust or belief.  The other eight words indicate ethical qualities, so this should be interpreted as such, too.  In other words, being faithful is seen by how we live and what we do.  Can we be faithful to Christ and His church when we do not attach ourselves to a local congregation, provoking others to love and good works as a manner of habit (Heb. 10:24-25).  If we are not seeking to build up one another (1 Th. 5:11) or cause the growth of the body (Eph. 4:16), how is that not unfaithful?  Twice in the gospels, Jesus tells parables concerning faithfully accomplish our Christian responsibilities (Mat. 25:14-30; Luke 19:11-27). There could be no judgment and accountability without there being concrete ways to measure and determine faithfulness.

We do not get to define it for ourselves.  The Lord has already revealed what He considers faithfulness and unfaithfulness.  Ceasing to work for and worship Him, failing to encourage the spiritual family, and abstaining from such service as soul-winning and moral distinctiveness are tangible indicators that we have ceased from faithfulness.  Let us so live that in the end we can hear our Lord exclaim, “Well done, good and faithful servant” (Mat. 25:21,23).

Carl preaching at the mid-week service at Siem Reap church of Christ.
Categories
authority Bible

IS TRUTH “OBJECTIVE” OR “SUBJECTIVE”?


Neal Pollard

“You folks believe baptism is essential, but we believe we are saved when we accept Jesus in our hearts by faith.” “Why does the church of Christ think it is wrong to use a piano?”  “You must not like women.  You sure don’t let them use all their ‘gifts’ in your worship and leadership.”  These are just three random examples of statements of perception made by our friends and family concerning “our beliefs.”

How would you answer these?  Even within the Lord’s church, more than one answer is often offered.  Sadly, too often the heat of emotion eclipses the light of scripture in these matters.  How is truth determined?  Is it man’s right to decide what truth is “for him”?  Can I have my truth and you have your own, different truths, and we both are right?  Please understand that I am not speaking of matters of judgment, opinion, matters that must be determined by principles of scripture, scruples, and conscience.  Take the three examples mentioned-baptism, church music, and the role of women.  Are these matters that must be decided by mere human judgment, opinions, and conscience?  Or can we “know the truth” on these things (cf. John 8:32)?

All of this ultimately boils down to our attitude and approach to God’s Word.  Do we accept it at face value and glean from it what it has already said, or do we infuse (insert) into it our predetermined values and desires?  Consider the three examples.

Baptism is connected to salvation in the gospels (Mk. 16:16), the history book of the New Testament (Acts 2:38; 22:16; etc.), and the epistles (Rom. 6:1-6; Gal. 3:27; Col. 2:12; 1 Pet. 3:21; etc.).  Why would we deny it?  Do we really hope to make scripture fit our view by trying to make Bible verses conflict with each other (cf. John 3:16; Acts 16:31)?  If the Bible repeatedly says baptism is necessary for salvation, isn’t that a truth objective and universal?  If not, why not?

Singing is specifically commanded in major worship passages like Colossians 3:16 and Ephesians 5:19.  We have no doubt that God wants us to sing.  Now, some say that it is a matter of preference whether you sing with or without instrumental accompaniment.  I find it interesting that a New Testament writer teaching a New Testament principle makes his point with an example from the first covenant.  In Hebrews 7:14, the penman writes, “For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood.”  Moses did not forbid a man of Judah from serving as a priest.  God simply specified that the tribe of Levi was to be the priestly tribe.  Was priesthood selection a matter of personal preference?  Absolutely not (see 1 Kings 12)!  

Women’s role in the church is discussed in the midst of an epistle the thesis of which is that the church may know how to conduct herself (1 Tim. 3:15).  Part of that conduct regards women’s role in the church (1 Tim. 2:9-15).  The Christian woman is not to teach or have authority over the man (2:11-12).  The reason is not tied to Greek culture, but way back to original design at the beginning of the world (2:13-14).  When some push for an “expanded” role for women, are they letting cultural pressure of heavenly desire drive them?

Certainly, we cannot be callous or altogether dispassionate in studying or discussing these matters.  But, without recognizing a sovereign, divine standard of truth, what are we doing with Scripture?  Whether meaning to or not, we are subjugating God’s stated will to our subjective, ever-shifting will.  John 12:48 reminds us that the latter will ultimately be irrelevant.