Featured reading Philippians instead of a sermon?

My understanding of Reformed policy is that the regulative principal of worship rests heavily on the primacy of preaching. It also asserts that only those things which are expressly commanded by God in Scripture are to be allowed in worship. That means the reading of the Word, the preaching of the Word, prayer, singing and the Sacraments are essential elements of worship.

I would be surprised if a reformed-leaning pastor allowed preaching to be sidelined by reading. Just as they would not allow preaching to become secondary to singing, as is often the case in many other churches.

I would imagine a special service, not a main Sunday worship service, may be allowed for what what you are asking to do.








There is nothing informal about evangelism. Preaching is preaching. It must be done with careful and prayerful dedication to remain true to the Word as God inspired it.

Is preaching a "mandate"? I would say....yes, most assuredly. I find no example in Scripture where God called a man to go and read. Why?

2Ti 4:1 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom:
2Ti 4:2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.
2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,
2Ti 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. (NASB, emphasis mine)

Preach.....because a time will come when men will not endure it. Why then should we suggest, imply, or infer that to not preach is ever OK?

 

Is this http://www.arbca.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=71&Itemid=65 the link you shared the other day?

If so, I spent a couple days reading through both papers (the one on worship and the one on revelatory gifts) and enjoyed them. They were quite helpful.


Thanks
Jason

 

Incorrect. Acts is a transitional book. Many (but not all) of its practices were exclusive to the early Apostolic church. We do not meet daily. God has ordained one day in seven for the church to meet corporately for worship.

I am not proposing a sermon every day. Again, the church is commanded to gather for worship on the Lord's Day - one day in seven. Some churches, like mine, observe the Lord's Supper weekly.

I made an appeal based on logic, not emotion. Paul's command to Timothy is a strong one. Logically, how would Timothy act on Paul's command? How often was the church supposed to meet corporately? Well, even at that point in the Apostolic church they met on first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:2). 1 Cor. 14:26 provides this insight, "What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation." The word for lesson is διδαχἠν (didaxen). It means "teaching." While most Baptists believe that revelations, tongues, and interpretations of tongues have ceased, the church still practices hymns and teaching. I can go further into this if necessary, but I think the evidence weighs on the side of the Word being preached on the Lord's Day as opposed to just read.

See my previous comment.

You keep confusing logic with making your point. Not preaching the Word on the Lord's Day is irregular. That is a statement of fact. That it falls in one of two categories (irregular or improper) is based on how serious you consider the departure from orthodoxy to be. My opinion? It is error. I base that on cumulative evidence in the Word of God on the side of preaching.

Of course not. You are presenting a scenario that is truly irregular and providential. It does not address the normal function of preaching. What if the sanctuary caught fire during the opening hymn and everyone had to flee the building. The fact that a message may not have been preached is not a sin. Your OP is not dealing with a situation like this. Your pastor has a decision to make; either preach the Word or not preach the Word.

 

The framers of the confession wrote this as a positive command (based on scripture). As a positive command it assumes compliance.

By the way (to those who are going to say I am elevating a confession over the Bible), I am not citing this confession over scripture. I was asked what the discussion has to do with Reformed theology, and I was simply answering Ann.

 

Jason, no. The link I shared in this thread is the part of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith that has to do with worship.

 

I'm sorry I was not clear. I was asking if you had posted that link a few days ago in a different thread. I knew you were not posting the same link in this thread.

 

Oh, sorry. I think I did.

 

I don't need to admit any such thing. I maintain that preaching is preaching. Romans 10, in my estimation, is universal to all preaching. Why? Because the Gospel is the subject at hand, or it should be.


If you think Scripture reading is not given enough time in your church the answer is not to deny the proper time to preaching. The answer is to make time for reading Scripture.

It sounds to me like you don't like how your pastor preachers through the Bible. I would suggest talking to him about it.

A prayer meeting is just that, a prayer meeting. It is not an occasion of corporate worship. There is nothing wrong with prayer meetings. If you want more prayer, don't preach less....pray more. Maybe have a time open for people to pray, or share a Scripture, during the service before, or after, the sermon is preached.

 

I believe it was before you got "Herald" back and posted as "Reformed". In any case, thank you.

 

You're welcome.

 

Good points. Preaching is not a zero sum game. Don't take away from preaching if you want more scripture reading and prayer.

 

So you asked for input for the simple reason of being able to argue your point and try to justify trying to get your pastor to do what you want.

 

Interesting. It is my belief in the authority of scripture that moved me from the normative principle to the regulative principle.

 

They did what the OP is suggesting for one of the sessions of the 'Passion' extravaganza last year:

Passion 2012 – A Recap

video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgYec28s7pg