For the last few months I have taken this approach with comments that have been passed along to me which are reportedly being spoken by people that are outside the direct responsibility of my ministry and our church. Most of the time these types of things ultimately die on their own and never need to be addressed. On other occasions, though, it is important to say something about the comments primarily because you want those who follow your leadership to understand your thinking on specific issues. The later of the two is what prompts me to write this blog post today. Let me state clearly that I am not writing to "return fire" by pointing out some “contrived errors” where I believe my fellow servants have gone astray or veered from acceptable tradition. Actually, one of the greatest days in my life was the day I discovered that God didn’t hold me responsible for what every other church is doing. He only holds me accountable for being faithful to follow Him in my own ministry. Consequently, I don't have to concern myself with other Bible-believing churches or feel like I'm the worship police, called to enforce my preferences on other congregations. Neither am I writing to be argumentative with the people that have made these statements, but only so that you will know the facts about my position.
Needless to say, I am, however, deeply saddened by my fellow servants and their comments, primarily because these men have known me for years, have been friendly with me (though we don’t see each other frequently), and know my strong doctrinal beliefs. You can’t pastor one church in one city for twenty-eight years and it not be known where you stand on most issues, especially when you have a ministry that broadcasts its services on weekly TV. Neither do I believe that talking about another Bible-believing church or pastor in a derogatory manner aids the cause of Christ or helps our churches win more people to Jesus.
Apparently, the two major concerns that have caused these individuals to speak against me and our fellowship are as follows: first, they disagree with the style of music we use, which entails our blending of contemporary praise music with traditional hymns, as well as our choice of instrumentation to accompany the music. And, the second concerns the fact that I use something other than the KJV from the pulpit (I use the NKJV) and will not affirm their position that it is the "only" translation in the English language for the English speaking people. When I first heard about their statements I dismissed them out of hand and never thought another thing about them. But, because they have been repeated to me now on several occasions over the last few months I think it is appropriate to address them so that people who are fair-minded will know my heart and see that these criticisms are likely agenda driven.
Of these two accusations, the most disheartening one for me is their criticism of me for not using the KJV translation from our pulpit and not affirming that it is the “only” Bible in the English language for the English speaking people. I respect my brethren for their sincere desire to honor and defend the authority of God's Holy Word. I, too, want to honor and defend God's Word against the attacks of liberal skeptics. But, the fact is, I am neither a liberal, nor a skeptic. It should concern all of us whenever we hear someone maligning the Scriptures or denying the inspiration of the Bible. But, I have always preached the Bible as the Word of God and I will continue to call people to follow Scripture in whatever it affirms. I’m also very grateful that God has preserved His Word for us in approximately 6000 ancient manuscripts and manuscript fragments, as well as other languages where the Bible was translated in early church history and in the preaching manuscripts of the early church fathers. There is no other book in all of antiquity that is as well attested as God's Holy Word. Further, I have great respect for the King James Version as it is the text God chose to use for nearly 400 years in bringing people to faith in Christ and it was the translation I used for many years in my own ministry. Sadly, though, the battle over Bible translations has become so vitriolic that harsh and extremely defamatory comments are now common fare in this discussion. It seems to me that when the substance of your argument is insufficient to win the debate, that people too often resort to ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with them.
What you should know about this issue is that the KJV "only" perspective is not the historic position of the church, nor is it the view of most Bible-believing, evangelical scholars. It is not even the view of the translators of the King James Version or Erasmus in whom the KJV “only” proponents place so much confidence. If you really want to get a feel for how differently good people can see this issue you need only look at two of the most rigidly fundamental schools in the USA: Bob Jones University and Pensacola Christian College. Would it surprise you to know that they strongly disagree with one another on the issue of the KJV being the "only" Bible in the English language for the English speaking people? I have never heard anyone say that either of these two institutions are liberal in their theology. On nearly every (if not every) major point of Bible doctrine these two colleges are in agreement, as well as in their musical preferences, I might add. As the old saying goes, “even a greased BB wouldn’t fit between them.” But, on the KJV "only" matter they are miles apart. I use this not to endorse or critize either school, but only to illustrate that differing on this subject does not necessarily make you a liberal or mean you have compromised the truth. Further, it shows that this whole KJV "only" debate is not quite as simple as some people would like you to believe. From my own study on both sides of this issue I cannot personally see how the explanations that are offered by KJV "only" advocates can be supported historically, textually, and/or logically by the evidence. I simply do not believe the facts bear out their position, but that doesn't make me a liberal or our church worthy of hurtful criticisms.
Let me again personally affirm that I believe in the inspiration, infallibility and preservation of God’s Word, as do my brethren that criticize me. However, after diligent pursuit of this matter over many years I cannot affirm that the KJV is the “only” translation of the Bible that is reliable for our use today. And, it is untenable and illogical to me for a person to take a modern translation and compare it to the KJV to determine if it is a faithful rendering of God’s Holy Word (which most KJV “only” advocates do). The Bible was not written in English and only when a translation is compared diligently to the copies of the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts, can you discover the quality of a Bible translation. Further, I believe that it is in the totality of this manuscript evidence, carefully compared by textual scholars, that we find God’s preserved Word in the original languages.
Simply put, God wants us to know His Word and I think that using a good modern translation is one of the legitimate ways we can better grasp what He is saying to us. If you choose to use the KJV because it holds a special place in your life and ministry, then by all means make it your preferred text. But, when a fellow Christian affirms his belief in the inspiration and infallibility of Scripture, but uses a different translation than the KJV, I don’t believe God is pleased when division is created over the issue.
As to the matter of our music program, I want you to know that I have never been more pleased with our worship music than I am today. We still sing hymns, but we have broadened our musical horizons to include other excellent compositions that move the heart and soul toward God. I have read and studied the Scripture consistently for the last thirty-seven years and I have never read one verse that states that a particular style of music is commanded, endorsed or specifically blessed by God. It is also undeniably true that many different types of instruments were used in the praise of God throughout the Bible, including percussion instruments. Unfortunately, too much of the debate concerning church music is generationally driven rather than Biblically driven. People grow up hearing and liking a particular style of music and that’s what they prefer when they come to church. There is nothing wrong with having a preference, but you cannot make it a law that everybody else has to follow or they’re not right with God. Most people don’t even know that some of the melodies for the hymns they love started out as secular songs that were adapted for church use by changing the words. It’s gloriously freeing when you finally discover that God can and does use people and things that are outside your own personal comfort zone.
For years I have said that Southern Gospel music is not my favorite style of music. It just doesn’t fit my ear, but I don’t belittle people or think them Biblically unsound because they love it and will travel hundreds of miles just to hear their favorite group sing. As long as the music is theologically sound and is enabling people to exalt Christ, then each of us is entitled to enjoy the style of our preference.
In our church we use many different styles and usually everyone eventually hears something they specifically like best. I think some people would like their church music tailored so that everything is exactly to their own personal preferences. Maybe we should develop personal sound booths in each pew with individual dials that permit you to choose your musical style each Sunday. Possibly we could make each seat a recliner pew so that people can be fully relaxed while doing their listening. We might even develop a means of allowing the individual worshipper to chose the specific sermon he wants to hear on any given Sunday. Of course, you know that I’m being facetious and trying to be somewhat humorous. The truth is, we all have to learn to be tolerant of each other when it comes to worship music. The older members of a congregation must accept that the young people aren’t necessarily going to like the same style of music in church that they liked growing up. But, neither should the young people be allowed to tailor all of the worship service specifically to their own personal tastes. Church is to be a blending of all types of people from many different walks of life with different tastes and preferences all praising God together...in unity. Aren’t we suppose to prefer our brother before ourselves and not just demand our own way? Shouldn’t the more mature Christians be among the most flexible in the realm of personal preferences? Isn’t it the immature that usually make the most demands and the mature that know the value of sacrifice? I make no apologies for the wonderful music we enjoy every Sunday in our services, nor for the diversity that God has allowed us to experience in this realm. We are among the most blessed congregations when it comes to singing and making melody in our hearts to the Lord. Whether it’s a hymn, psalm, or spiritual song all our music brings glory to God.
Let me close this lengthy article by saying that I love my brethren, even though they choose to misrepresent our church. You could go down the list of basic doctrinal beliefs and probably the only significant difference between us will be in the areas I’ve already addressed. I have not, nor am I going to compromise my doctrinal stance. It is the foundation on which I have built my ministry. Nor will I acquiesce on some of these secondary matters in order to please critics that apparently don’t know my heart or commitment to the truth very well. I’ll just keep loving them and seeking the best for them in the fashion Christ sought the best for those that misunderstood and misrepresented Him.
