Clap Your Hands

You know, there are just some things about church that just boggle my mind. Take, for instance, what happened tonight, and has happened a few other times in the previous weeks. On Wednesday nights, before they dismiss the children for class, the song leader will pick a "kids" song, and have any of the kids (usually under the 2nd or 3rd grade) that want to come up to the front and "lead" the song. It really is a pretty cool thing, and it's always fun watching the kids sing, look clueless, or stand there staring at that interesting bright light coming from the projector. Now, as many of you know, a lot of children's songs involve clapping. Sadly, I cannot name one right at the moment. But, given the relatively conservative side that dominates most of the Knoxville area, I found it utterly amazing that a majority of the people, not just the kinds mind you, a majority of the people, clapped along with them. The song ends, the kids leave, and the next song on the list is a praise song that usually has clapping associated with it. A friend of mine clapped quietly to himself during this song, and was later told after church that this particular person (who had engaged in the clapping during the children's singing) didn't find it appropriate for someone to be clapping during service. So, it's OK to clap while there are kids in the room up front singing a children's song, but not alright when it's just adults? Does this mean that, to them, it's not really part of the worship when the kids are up front? I guess since it's not a 50 something man only up front, it must be something separate from the usual church service, and so therefore the "rules" don't really apply? I'm completely confused by this person's rationale.

If there is one thing about church the institution that I cannot stand it is this mindset that only what I think and believe is right, and everyone should conform to me. If I'm comfortable with it, then it's alright, but if anyone does something that makes me uncomfortable in the least, they are obviously in the wrong. I mean, I go by what my parents believed, so it's as good as the Bible, right? Give me a break. So many people are so caught up in their traditions, they don't even know why things are done. It's just the norm. It's what they've always done. It must be what should be done. I mean, Ephesians 7:3 says, "Thou shalt not clap your hands while in the church building"...doesn't it? A friend of mine made the point that if we're supposed to "Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord..." (Ephesians 5:19) then when we sing there actually shouldn't be sound coming out at all, because it should be in our heart only. He said it completely in jest, but the point is well taken. Those people that think they're the defenders of the Bible and that they know all usually know all that they want to know, and not what it really says. They take it to mean what they're predisposed to want it to mean. It's not that I'm not guilty of that, but I certainly hope that I don't take my incomplete knowledge and force it on someone else telling them it's the truth and that they're in the wrong for believing otherwise. Everyone's knowledge is incomplete, and it's our responsibility to study on our own and with others to gain a better understanding.

Granted, there are things that are right and wrong. If someone came up to me and said that Jesus is not in fact the Son of God, that he didn't die for our sins, and that he isn't resurrected and sitting at the right hand of God, I would have issue with that. That is a central belief of mine that all of those are in fact true, and the Bible says as much, taking 4 entire books (and of course many others) to explain who Jesus was in detail in his life. If you believe the Bible, you believe the Gospel's and what was said in them. You believe what you read in the Old Testament about God's love for his people, and his anger at their wrong-doings. You believe the miracles that occurred, the stories that are told, and the people that are described. Of course, the interpretation of how these events came about is what will differ from person to person, but the underlying stories are truth.

You can't simply believe the parts you want and exclude the parts that you don't think are possible. You can't believe David's story of killing Goliath, but assume that the flood and Noah is simply a myth illustrating a point when both are presented as actual events. I guess that you could, in theory, make a case that David's story is also simply a myth for a great leader that the people admired. You just can't pick and choose though. The Bible as a whole is God's word to us and how we are to know Him. If you say that parts of it are not true or that you won't believe them as truth, you discount the entire Bible, not just those areas. So when the Bible says, "instruments in worship will condemn you to eternal suffering" you should believe it. Oh wait, it doesn't say anything like that. Some people would have you believe it though. What about people picking and choosing what they want to accept as truth, but discounting those things that they don't think applies to their culture? I don't think God in his wisdom had the Bible written by so many different people so that we could come along thousands of years later and say, well, I like this section, but these few chapters don't sit right with me, so we'll skip those. This verse works well with me, but this next verse obviously cannot apply to me. We can't pick and choose. What it does say is that if something you are doing can cause someone else to stumble in their journey, then you should avoid that in order to help your brother. The church as an institution is about loving each other, helping each other, and bringing each individual closer in their relationship with God. It's not about fighting, bickering, and complaining about tradition that people think is as good as law. And the people that take things that way are missing out on what the church really should be about.

Congrats to those that correctly answered the riddle from yesterday. Given Philip's comments...I guess there could be more than one answer, although I hadn't exactly thought of it that way. Count on a Murphy for that thought pattern though. I'll admit, I laughed after I read his comment and re-read the riddle. Now I know where Paul got his sense of humor from. On to today's riddle, entitled Decapitation. I found this one to be quite clever. Good luck.

Decapitate me and all becomes equal. Then truncate me and I become second. Cut me front and back and I become two less than I started. What am I?