Bribes and Cheapening the Sacred

What a sad, sad day this is for our country. As I sat last night and listened to the vote count on the health care reform, I was numb. When Nancy P. said "Tonight we make history and better our nation," I said she was half right. History was made, but a nation was not bettered.
I sat and watched a democracy turn another page towards socialism, and what tore me up even more was to see Ohio Representative Driehaus, 'change his mind' and revise at the last minute his vote to a yes in favor of health care reform. This of course had nothing to do with Vice-president Biden making a special visit last week to a fund raiser for Driehaus. Many back door deals are being pointed at as to the reason this bill was able to be passed....regardless of how you feel about the reform, we all can agree we love our nation and we will pray for our leaders.
Those back door deals though, they fire us up don't they? The audacity to bribe and cheapen politics such as that....but that leads me to our thought this week....
Zoo Day, free kites, Freddy the Flipping Frog give away, come see the BMX star do a back flip, pizza, hot dogs, cotton candy, win a bike, everyone wins a prize, carnival games, bring your mamma to see the llama, horse rides, limo rides, and all for just riding OUR BUS to church this week!
This of course is nothing like the bribing and cheapening of our nations heritage in politics, this is SOULS! That justifies it...right?
We have four routes each week, and thank the Lord for the privilege of bringing others to church. I have spent the last 27 years of my life in three churches that all ran successful bus programs. I have worked on many bus routes, driven bus routes, captained four routes, and started three routes from scratch. I have been personally in charge of our jr. church program and worked in a jr. church off and on since I was 16. I have seen many children make professions of faith....hundreds of children...without exaggeration 1,000s of children make professions of faith through these ministries; and I know of maybe 50 still in church of those professions.
I did again, you know, I looked in the Bible for Bus routes. Couldn't find anything. I know, I know....

And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. Luke 14:23

Of course we would have to ignore that in context the Lord was teaching how that the Jews had rejected the Truth and the Gospel was being taken to the gentiles. It's a great motivational verse though to reaching the lost, but this was done for 2,000 years without gimmicks and prizes or a bus route that does such.
Now let me say this plainly: I love our bus routes. I love every child that rides in on those busses, I wish we had 30 bus routes, we will always pick up all those who desire to go to the house of God. I just wonder the following:
1. If our desire is to bring those who desire to come to the house of God, why do we not run them on Sunday nights or mid-week?
2. I know it happens, I've watched it all my life, many of the children go to the church that gives away the best stuff. What lesson are we instilling in them? Are we not teaching them that determining which church to go to revolves around what you are getting out of it? And then we wonder why they grow up and quit or go to evangelical, vineyard, flesh pleasing assemblies? We taught them that way.
3. Wasn't church designed for the saint? I am not saying that people can't be saved at a church, but the church was designed by God for the saint and the perfecting of that saint. We all must agree that when a church is designed with the lost in mind (Vineyards, purpose driven, evangelical), it must weaken doctrine, change music, be centered on activities and entertainment, and keep giving and putting out in order to keep them coming...sounds like Jr. Church doesn't it?
4. What percentage of church budget is being spent on pizzas, stuffed animals, 2 liters, and a myriad of Kipp Bros. junk? While the missionary's support is being lowered, pastor is getting a second job, and the mortgage continues on the property?
5. Doesn't 1 Cor. 11 teach against gathering in the house of God in the wrong spirit: "I praise you not that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse"? It does matter in what spirit you come to assemble, and greed and selfishness are not proper spirits.
6. Do we not believe that proselyting is wrong? If there is a brother that is going to another Bible believing Baptist church, it would be wrong to steal them from that church so that they can be added to this flock; yet, it is accepted in the bus ministry. Not just with the children, in order to win the trip to King's Island amusement park, they have to bring visitors, and thus take their Aunt Mollie, Grandpa Jones, and other relatives away from their local church to come to ours. Isn't that contrary to Scripture and the doctrine of the local church?

The Lord's churches are like nothing else on this earth. It is unique and it is sacred. To be a member of one such church, one must be saved and Scripturally baptized. He then can join the church by that baptism, by moving of letter as a result of God moving Him for a doctrinal reason, or by statement should his previous church unfortunately cease existence. I do know that God does move folks and sets the members in the body, but this is clearly God's moving.
Does not our goldfish, pizza, horse rides, and $5 bills contradict everything we have discussed? Are we not cheapening the church, our Lord's sacred institution?
I am not against having a hot dog, slice of watermelon, or a full out meal with the members of the church-including our bus riders; but when we make that the reason why they come...well..."have ye not houses to eat in?"
I agree that the prize doesn't change the Gospel, and that truly was my motivation in keeping on giving away our trinkets...but it does cheapen and belittle the doctrine of the church. We will continue as long as our Lord allows us, to run routes and pick up those who desire to come to our church, but we cannot bribe, we cannot steal from the other sound church, we cannot cheapen the church and train young people to belittle it.
When we do, we are not better than a high ranking political figure buying a vote to achieve his goal.

Church Van Needed

Our church is in need of a used 12 or 15 passenger van. If any church has one or knows of one available, please contact me by email or commenting on this thread. Pass the word along for me. Thank you!

Lord's Supper Dinner Show

Paul said in 1 Corinthians 11 "For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.
What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."
In this passage, Paul rebukes the Corinthian church because they had made a feast out of the what supposed to be a memorial. They were filling their bellies and leaving drunken. Paul said, "Have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?" The Lord's Supper was to be a memorial (11:24-25), a time of personal examination (11:28), a testimony to others what we have believed in (11:26), and a symbol of what it took for our salvation (11:23).
I believe it needs to be remembered that it is the LORD'S SUPPER. It's not mine, not yours, it's our Lord's. We don't need to improve it, revise it, or update it...it is perfect as He instituted it.
He instituted it and set the guidelines. The Lord gave the ordinance to the local church. He gave the ordinance of baptism to the local church. We baptized and added one to the church yesterday...did anyone else out there vote or even know that who is not a member of our church? No? It is because the ordinance was given to the local church and not some made up 'invisible church.' So is the Lord's Supper.
It is to be observed by the local church and by the members of that local church. Notice the references in our text to "when ye come together." The book was written to the church at Corinth.
The Lord limits who the participants are. Even when He instituted the Supper, we know there were near 120 believers, yet He instituted it with only the 12. 1 Cor. 12:28 teaches that the apostles were the 'first church.' So why were the other believers not invited? They were not members of that first church, and the Supper is only for members of the church.
Furthermore, none would argue that church discipline is to be administered by the local church. It is a ludicrous and impossible suggestion that "all believers of like faith" or "some universal church" discipline its members. There is a wonderful church in Mongolia right now, and have never met the transgressing believer that is facing discipline at your church. How could they have a part in this? Of course they cannot, for church discipline is a local church matter. The Lord gave the instructions for discipline again to the first church (Matt. 18). I mention this because 1 Cor. 5:9-13 reads

I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

We are to judge them that are within. Within what? The local church. And those that are involved in an unconfessed, unrepented sin such as fornication we are 'not to eat' with. They cannot observe the Lord's supper with the church. Now, it stands to reason that if we are to judge within and not to eat with those who are facing church discipline, how can we allow anyone to partake with us that is not a member of our local body? We cannot. If that believer from Mongolia visits our church this Sunday, I have no idea whether he is facing church discipline or not there in his local church. Thus, I cannot allow him to partake with us.
Simply, the Bible only teaches CLOSED communion; and to be a true Baptist, you will believe in only Closed communion. To do otherwise is ecumenical in thought and foundation and will always lead to a weak stand on alien baptism.
It is the Lord's Supper, and I believe this foundation was crucial to understanding my thought as follows. Many have made the observance of the supper a show, a performance, and/or ritual.
I have sat in churches that when the observance time drew near, the lights were dimmed, the organ plays softly, everyone sits and watches a 'priestly pastor' bless and pass out the elements. When did this performance begin? The observance should be done reverently, but not as a show. We don't play music, don't dim the lights to set the mood, and we don't even allow our nursery workers that evening to observe (The nursery is next week's topic). How can a nursery worker be examining, remembering, thanking, and praising God in that environment? How can the organist watching her notes be doing the same? (and should she miss a note...well there goes everyone thoughts).
Fact is, like many other areas that we have been looking at, we have "Catholicized" our services. We want to appear religious like them; but this is nothing new. Why a pure virgin envies and desires to appear like the whore (Rev. 17) is truly a mystery, and a battle today.

Now Let Us Have A Little Talk With Jesus

I grew up with the above mentioned song, and never quite understood it all. The chorus is penned:

Now let us have a little talk with Jesus,
Let us tell Him all about our troubles,
He will hear our faintest cries
And He will Answer by and by,
Now when you feel a little prayer wheel turning,
Then you'll know a little fire is burning,
You will find a little talk with Jesus makes it right.

How does one feel a little prayer wheel turning? I know the Buddhist have prayer wheels, but that can't be what I'm singing about, could it?
Any ways, just an introduction to this thought, Prayer in the church.
There is so much Scripture in regards to prayer in the New Testament. Without a doubt the early church was a praying church. The Lord Jesus taught His disciples (the first church) the importance of prayer. His lesson as found in Matthew 6 and Luke 11 teach the following. We see that His disciples asked the Lord "Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples." Then we see our Lord's lesson:
1. Don't be as a hypocrite: (Matt. 6:5)
a. To love to stand up in the synagogue
b. To love to stand in public view in the streets
c. To love to be seen of men praying
2. Prayer should be in 'the closet.' (6:6)
a. Secretly
b. Directed to the Father
c. Answered by the Father publicly
3. Not as Heathen (6:7)
a. Pray with vain repetition
b. Pray with much words
c. Pray as to 'inform God' of needs
4. Prayer Correctly (9-14)
a. To the Father (9)
b. Praise (9)
c. Submission (10)
d. State daily needs (11)
e. Forgiveness (12)
f. Protection from sin (13)
g. Dedication to God (13)
h. Claiming the Promises of God (14-15)
5. Prayer can be associated at times also with Fasting (16-18)
a. Again not as hypocrites, done in view of others
b. Secretly
6. Prayer will be heard and answered by God (Luke 11:5-13)
7. Pray according to the will of God and in the interest of His will (Matt. 6:19-24)
8. Leave it in the hands of God and don't worry, but rather trust Him (6:25-34)

Throughout the Bible, prayer is mentioned as being done by individuals, in one accord, and as being requested by those in need. Always, in the New Testament, prayer was done individually or individually with a group. No where in Scripture does one 'lead in prayer' on behalf of a congregation.

Does someone leading in prayer in the church not contradict the above foundational teachings of our Lord concerning prayer? When 'Bro. So-in-So" leads us in prayer, is he not:
1. Standing up in public view and being seen of men when he prays
2. Not praying in secret
3. Often times somewhat repetitive in wording-(Dear Heavenly Father, bless_____, bless_________, speak to hearts, use the preacher, bless gift and giver, dismiss us in your care, bless this service, etc)
4. Not personal

The church prayed together in the New Testament. Acts 1:14 reads:

These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.

So did Mary and the women pray out loud or lead in prayer? Doubted, as that would be a direct contradiction to 1 Tim. 1:12 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, not to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." When read in light of 1 Cor. 11 this is made clear that a woman could not have lead vocally in prayer.

Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.
Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

So how was the church praying in Acts 1 or in Acts 12 when Peter was arrested and in prison? Could it be that they all just came together and each person spent time in prayer personally? When it was time to move on, I suppose the pastor or one could inform the congregation? They did in Acts 12 when Peter was at the door knocking. Either way, everyone in Scripture was to pray, and no one in Scripture ever 'led the church in prayer.'
Are there not Christians who struggle in praying in their personal life? If there was a time of prayer in the church like the examples above, would not new converts and mature saints learn to pray the only way we know we can learn to pray..by doing it? Do we not agree that when someone 'leads in prayer' a group in the congregation is listening to the 'prayer' instead of praying to our God? If every heart was in prayer, do we not believe the power of God would be most evident in lives?
"But we have to have someone open in prayer?" Do we?
"We have to have someone bless the offering?" Not if we don't pass the plate and everyone gives as they enter or leave.
"We have to have someone close in prayer?" Jesus, sang a hymn after He met with His disciples.
Imagine a service that we call "Prayer Meeting" actually be a prayer meeting. Imagine a service where we gathered at an appointed time, spent time in prayer as individuals, sang some hymns together, a man of God preached, and a hymn in dismissal. (and of course the people gave their offerings as they entered/left).
Fellowship would follow, and folks wouldn't be in such a hurry, for there was more time seeing how there wasn't specials, offertories, announcements, etc.
Something to think about. We have men lead in prayer, we have a man ask God's blessings on an offering, we have a man dismiss in prayer; but should we?

Side Notes

I was ask to recommend a reading concerning our last post called The Great Invitation. This book can be found on Amazon.com. I have purchased a copy of it, but as of yet, have not received it. I do, though, look forward to reading it.

Secondly, I know this is not important and completely off subject, but thought I would take the moment to invite. I have a fantasy baseball league set up if anyone is interested. It is totally not important, and if you plan on spending hours studying and playing it, don't bother, you take it way more serious than me and anyone on earth probably should. It is with Yahoo.com, and the league ID number is 355608. If you are interested, email me at: tburke002@gmail.com and I will send you the password to join. Again, just for fun for people who like baseball like me.

Lastly, I wish to thank all those who have emailed/texted/posted comments durring our discussion. It has been educational, challenging, and eye opening. I was a little suprised at the amount of churches on the poll that do not have an invitation already. I would be interested in knowing the name of those churches. If you voted "No" and would like to do so, please comment below and let me know what church you are referring to (and you may even remain anonymous for this comment).

We will continue our study on such areas in the weeks ahead.

An "Invitation" to Consider

With heads bowed and eyes closed, if the Lord has spoken to your heart today, would you come? Would you come and accept Christ as your personal Saviour? Will you come and make that decision? Will you come and ask forgiveness for that sin?It is then a verse of "Just As I Am without one plea, but that thy blood was shed for me, and that thou bidst me come to thee, O Lamb of God I come, I Come."
The "Altar Call" has become 'the most important part of the service' to most Baptist Churches. Even formerly popular contemporary Christian artist (before he 'came out' confessing he was a Sodomite) Ray Boltz has an entire song about this practice:

The service is nearing an end
The choir is singing "Just As I Am"
And now as that old song is played
People at the altar are kneeling down to pray
Some are finding mercy
Forgiveness for their sin
Some are fighting battles
They’ve been struggling to win
The time has come to give them to the Lord
That’s what this altar is for

That’s what this altar is for
You don’t have to carry those burdens anymore
There’s a light in the darkness
And there’s a love that’s true
And Jesus is waiting
Waiting here for you
Go quickly now before they close the door
That’s what this altar is for

Churches that don't have an altar call, or invitation, well...they are either Calvanistic or unBiblical! I mean, how are people supposed to get saved without an altar call? And don't get us started about those people that don't go forward when the rest of the church does...they are nothing short of being backslidden! Right?
Now, let me start by saying WE HAVE AN INVITATION AT OUR CHURCH, but I am studying it and asking the Lord, why? I seek Scripture and the teaching of the Holy Ghost to show us. Again, everything is going well, the pieces are all there, but is it as the Designer of the church intended it be?
I begin by looking in the Scripture for an altar call or invitation. Unfortunately, there are no illustrations of an invitation as we know it given. There are many "Come unto me"'s, but those are spiritual decisions and not physical movements. I searched church history and found no record of invitations given...that is until the early 1800's.
The invitation as we know it was originated and put into practice first by Charles Finney. Finney would have empty 'anxious seats' up front where those who were 'anxious' about their souls could come and receive counsel and prayer. Finney's words concerning this was as follows:

Preach to him, and at the moment he thinks he is willing to do anything . . . bring him to the test; call on him to do one thing, to make one step that shall identify him with the people of God. . . . If you say to him, "there is the anxious seat, come out and avow your determination to be on the Lord's side," and if he is not willing to do a small thing as that, then he is not willing to do anything for Christ

The practice was originated to get results..and that it did. The torch was then carried on by Moody, Sam Jones, Torrey, Billy Sunday, Bob Jones, Gipsy Smith, John R. Rice, Billy Graham, and then pretty much most of us now. The 'invitation' was here to stay!
Having an altar call is now synonymous with being 'old fashioned,' when really the altar call is a more modern method. Even the phrase "altar" referring to the front of the auditorium was a Church of England (Anglican) phrase as they were the first to refer to the area around the communion table as being the altar.
When reading in Scripture, the focus was upon the preaching and the Holy Spirit's work...have we made the focus on the invitation and the work of man as they 'come forward and...'?
It has already been discussed that the doctrine of salvation has been so muddied that many doubt and/or make false professions. We have discussed the danger of trusting in a 'prayer' as your means of salvation. Perhaps, the foundation behind that false teaching lie in the invitation? Consider Billy Grahams words carefully at a recent campaign:

Don’t let distance keep you from Christ. It’s a long way but Christ went all the way to the cross because he loved you. Certainly you can come these few steps and give your life to Him."

God’s word however does not teach that one is saved by changing his location but by believing in his heart. We insists that people come and speak to the pastor or a Godly counselor and 'get right'. Isn't that strangely similar to what the Catholics teach in needing a mediator or one to confess to? I know we don't take it that far, but "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" (1 Tim. 2:5).
Do we encourage false professions by inviting people to the front of the auditorium to make a profession of faith? Without a doubt, God wants us to confess our faith before men, but that 'confessing' in Scripture is a life of good works. That truly is a confession of our faith Biblically speaking. It begins with Scriptural Baptism and then followed with good works. How many have walked our aisles, talked to a counselor, prayed a prayer, let the church know, and then disappear back into the world? But, if you see them and ask if they know they are going to Heaven they will respond with a "Of yes, I walked that aisle on____ and took the preacher's hand." Of course, they have continued living in sin since then, but we assured them at that altar that they came forward.
We play our song softly, perhaps someone sings, and the preacher begins his pleading for folks to come forward. We even judge the success of our services on 'how many came forward.' When folks begin coming forward the urge to join the herd is soon felt by others and a 'peer pressure' kicks in. Again, in defense of his altar call, Billy Graham stated the following:

Many psychologists would say it is psychologically sound.

No Scripture was given in support of this practice, only psychological reasons.
But again, just because Scripture is silent on a matter does not make it wrong. Is it wrong to have an invitation? Without doubt, countless souls have been saved as part of an invitation. Many have made spiritual decisions that have affected eternity. But, let us consider some principles:
1. Does it confuse the meaning of faith? When we say, "Come forward and receive Christ as your Saviour," are we confusing what faith is? Cannot someone in their pew put their faith in the Lord Jesus? Spurgeon said the following (he by the way didn't use invitations-and yes I know he also smoked a cigar but I'm not going to)

Go to your God at once, even where you are now! Cast yourself on Christ, now, at once, ere you stir an inch! Let me say, very softly and whisperingly, that there are little things among ourselves which must be carefully looked after, or we shall have a leaven of ritualism and priesthood working in our measures of meal. In our revival services, it might be as well to vary our procedure. Sometimes shut up that enquiry-room. I have my fears about that institution if it be used to permanence, and as an inevitable part of the services. It may be a very wise thing to invite persons who are under concern of soul to come apart from the rest of the congregation, and have conversation with godly people; but if you should ever see a notion is fashioning itself that there is something to be got in the private room which is not to be had at once in the assembly, or that God is more at the penitent form than elsewhere, aim a blow at that notion at once. We must not come back by a rapid march to the old ways of altars and confessionals, and have a Romish trumpery restored in a coarser form. If we make men think that conversation with ourselves or with our helpers is essential to their faith in Christ, we are taking the direct line for priestcraft. In the Gospel, the sinner and the Saviour are to come together, with none between. Speak upon this point very clearly, "You, sinner, sitting where you are, believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, shall have eternal life. Do not stop till you pass into an enquiry-room. Do not think it essential to confer with me. Do not suppose that I have the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, or that these godly men and women associated with me can tell you any other Gospel than this. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life"

2. Does it confuse the fact that their is only one mediator between God and men?
3. Is not the Holy Spirit able enough to convict and guide souls to repentance?
4. Does it place the focus on 'getting decisions' and away from 'preaching the Word?"
5. Is it aiding to false professions?
So while we ponder these things, we shall continue standing, bowing our heads, closing our eyes, and inviting people to 'come and get right.' Perhaps there is nothing at all wrong with this? Perhaps I am over scrutinizing? We shall continue inviting folks to come with our banner invitation song continuing to be: "Just As I Am...I come, I come" ....of course this hymn was written by Charlotte Elliot who was an invalid most of her life and wrote the hymn on the fact, that although she was unable to care for herself and too weak to physically move, she could still come as she was to Christ, as it was not a physical moving, but a spiritual decision. Her hymn was first published in the "Invalid's Hymn Book of 1836." Ironic isn't it?

Giving..."I Have to Get This In"

First of all, I would like to reiterate that if you are going to leave a comment, you must leave a name with it. No anonymous comments will be posted. If one does not have the backbone to put their name behind their comment, then the comment is untrustworthy at best. For example, I received the following anonymous post this week:

Why don't you try it for a month. No specials, Women keep silent which will leave just men signing the hymms in unison. Before you know it, you will have the men wearing beards and them funny round brim hats and the women folk wearing thos funny head coverings (since that is a commandment to!).
Aren't you glad your saved by Grace. Its all a heart issue anyway. If a man loves God, he will keep his commandments, abstain from what he calls abominitions and do what he says makes him happy ( God loves a cheerful giver, every preacher that calls himself baptist gets that in every sermon he preaches). You look at the service thru eyes of proper biblical eticic, God looks on the heart of the believer.

First of all, if you are going to comment, please first study grammar and spelling fundamentals. While perfection is not demanded, a simple understanding of basic principles is appreciated; or if this is not the case, please ask your daddy or mommy's permission before posting a comment next time please.
I will address these thoughts though because it leads into my thought for today.
1. I am praying about trying it for a month at church.
2. We are not going to have any specials, just congregational singing.
3. Women are not commanded to keep silent in all things, but not to usurp authority over the man, not to teach a man, but to be in silence in these matters and to learn in silence in all subjection (1 Tim. 2:11-12)
4. According to 1 Cor. 11 a woman's covering is her hair. And yes, I believe women should have hair. By 'funny head coverings' I assume you refer to bonnets? If so, you have taken 1 Cor. 11 out of context.
5. I am glad I am saved by grace.
6. You then confuse me....you say a 'man that loves God will keep His commandment' but then criticize me for wanting to follow the Bible? Aren't those God's commandments? You speak on behalf of most of the evangelical world I suppose. Very typical. "God loves me, I love Him. I will keep His commandments, unless I don't feel like it, but that really doesn't matter because God sees my heart and He knows I love Him." Well my grammatically challenged or child friend, the Bible teaches we are saved by grace in Eph. 2, and says

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them

You see we have His Word to teach us how to live and act and behave-including in the house of God. (1 Tim. 3:15). After salvation we are to be His workmanship...unto good works...we should walk in them. So yes, "biblical eticic" is of great importance.
7. You also lead me into today's thought in your side thought "God loves a cheerful giver, every preacher that calls himself baptist gets that in every sermon he preaches" Thus our title for today, "Giving...I have to get this in." (Don't blame me...Anonymous told me too!)
Simple thought for today. We know there was giving for the New Testament church. In the first church our Lord started, there was a treasurer, Judas. (John 13:29). We again cannot use Temple/Synagogue practices for giving as THE MODEL for the New Testament church; rather we look to Scripture in how the church gave.

And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. Acts 4:35
Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet. Acts 4:37
And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
Acts 5:2

We know there was giving in all the churches on the first day of the week.

Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. 1 Cor. 16:1-2
Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your bounty, whereof ye had notice before, that the same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not as of covetousness.
But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver
2 Cor. 5:9-7

So we know offerings were given, on the first day of the week, as God hath prospered they were to give, and the offerings were laid at the apostle's feet.
When did "passing the plate" begin?
Now, I feel this is a good time to say this: "Just because the Bible is silent on a subject does not make it wrong." But having said that, if the action is contrary to Biblical principle, then it is most definitely wrong. So my question for today is, "Is passing the plate contrary to Biblical principle?
Again, let me state, our church does pass the plate. I am not looking to debate someone, just seeking other's counsel (not sarcasm). What principles could be contradicted in passing the plate?
First and foremost is the principle of accountability. By 'leaving the offering at the apostle's feet' the giver was seen by the church as a giver. What was given was a matter between them and the Holy Ghost. This being exampled in Acts 5 with Ananias and Sapphira. The people were aware that they had given. There was accountability in this way. Today a 'non giver and robber of God' can hide in his pew by just passing the plate. Then, a non giver was noticed in that they never gave. Now what they gave was a matter between them and the Holy Ghost. Peter says in that passage about their offering, "Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost...thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God." A church that did have the members give at the apostle's feet would be a much more accountable church.
Second, is the principle of greed and a lack of faith in God. The best I can figure, we pass the plate because we know we will 'get more money.' We know that those who are just giving a $5 or a $10 probably would not make the effort to get up and give it, so we come to them. And, we might be able to squeeze a few bucks out of the lazy who would otherwise not make the effort to move. Are we displaying a covetous spirit and robbing people of the privilege of worshipping God in their giving?
Again, just thoughts....let me know what you think.