Blog

Blog

“A-Cappella Singing and Baptism”

Categories: Meditations

 

We’re talking apples and elephants here, right?  Sure, most of the denominational world disagrees with the churches of Christ about both of these things, but they’re very different kinds of issues.  There are a dozen passages in the New Testament that explicitly say that we have to be baptized to be saved.  There aren’t any passages in the New Testament that explicitly say we had better not use musical instruments in worship, or else.

And yet, I’ve noticed something funny about the progressive churches that end up taking “of Christ” off the sign.  They’re going to bring in the instrument.  That’s a given.  They’re going to engage the community church down the street in the battle of the bands.  To the most skilled go the visitors!

Along with that, though, they start getting awfully mushy about baptism.  Consider, for instance, this video  produced by The Hills Church, formerly the Richland Hills Church of Christ.  The men in the video say that baptism is commanded.  True.  They say that baptism is an expression of our commitment to Christ.  Also true. 

Notice what they’re not saying, though.  They’re not saying that baptism is necessary for forgiveness of sins.  At one point, Rick Atchley scoffs at the notion that water washes away sins, never mind Acts 22:16.  He says we’re saved by the blood of Jesus instead, making a distinction that the Bible never makes. 

Additionally, if someone starts attending The Hills who was sprinkled as an infant, they say they will encourage them to get baptized as an adult.  Why?  Because they need to make that commitment for themselves rather than having their parents make it for them.  They do not say that such people need to be baptized in order to be saved from their sins.

What in the world?  As I noted above, the Scriptural witness on baptism is manifold.  It doesn’t talk about commitment.  It talks about salvation.  Forgiveness of sins.  New life.  I’m pretty sure Rick Atchley owns a Bible.  I suspect he’s even read it some.  However, his teaching on baptism isn’t coming from the Bible.

Instead, it appears to be constructed to be as inoffensive to as many people as possible.  You’ve got the old guard at The Hills, the people who were “raised in the church” and have a traditional understanding that baptism is important, even though they don’t know why.  They hear these men saying “Baptism is necessary,” and they’re satisfied.  No stumbling block for them.

No stumbling block for denominational visitors either, whatever their religious background might be.  Somebody who has been baptized into the Baptist Church will hear this and say, “I’m good!”  Somebody who is sprinkled as an infant will understand that they need to get baptized someday, but until then, they still have been saved by faith. 

Baptism at the Hills ends up being like changing your furnace filter.  You know you should, but it’s easy to put off.  They have adopted this position not because of faithfulness to the word, but because it will be the most popular.

In practice, it is awfully hard to draw a bright line separating the adoption of the instrument and The Hills’ position on baptism.  Even though the Scriptural evidence is different, the thought process is the same. 

Nobody studies the New Testament and says, “Here’s the passage that plainly teaches that instrumental music is fine!”  Instead, they look around, realize that instrumental worship is popular (with “the young people”, with outsiders, etc.), and then go hunting for Biblical justification.  Once you start down that road with worship, you keep going with salvation.

Every congregation must decide who its lord is going to be.  Is it going to be the children we hope to retain, the visitors we want to become members?  Or is it going to be the One who died and was raised for us?  Our approach to the word in all things will reveal the truth.