Oak Hills and Richland Hills

[wave runner]

This thread may not be appropriate for this forum, if not, the moderators may feel free to move or eliminate it.

Oak Hills (San Antonio) and Richland Hills (Ft. Worth) the two largest congregations amoung Churches of Christ, have made the decision to become instrumental (at least in a portion of their worship services.)  As a very active member at Oak Hills for over 24 years, I was witness to many long time members who went through much grief at the decision of the elders to add instruments at some Sunday services.  Many (hundreds) of the long time members, who had spent great time, money and effort building Oak Hills into a caring, loving congregation were forced to leave family and friends to search for another congregation.  I am sure that much of the same is beginning to  occur at Richland Hills.

Let me state first of all that Max Lucado and Rick Atchley are friends of mine.   Max to a much greater extent.  I know that at Oak Hills much of the movement was driven by Max and a few elders.  Some elders did resign when the decision was made.  I am also sure that much of the decision at Richland Hills was driven by Rick.

In my attempts to talk with Elders, I have found little but resistance to discuss the matter.  It has been a "the decision has been made, those who don't like it are free to leave" type mentality.  To me, this is wrong, just wrong, regardless of whether instruments are a salvation issue.

 

[david johnson]

"the decision has been made, those who don't like it are free to leave" type mentality

quite disgusting and convenient isn't it?  so magnanimous of them to be inclusive of all God's children.  oh well, everyone else had some of that in them.  pity.   not very impressive, though.

dj

[Serenity432001]

It's been my experience that when the leadership finally does say, "the decision has been made, those who don't like it are free to leave" that they have prayed about it and studied for years before coming to that conclusion.  So, I think it is important to note that.   

[Jaime]

Great points folks, but how is change to be implemented? Or is change the problem? I was free to leave some congregations that refused to change some things that needed changing. Nothing affecting salvation mind you. I don't think there is anything wrong with people leaving a congregation to find one that they feel more comfortable with.

I always have a question about these situations.........Who is the weaker brethren, the ones that require change or the one's that can't abide change? In either case the stronger brethren should accommodate the weaker brethren so as not to cause them to stumble. (Roman's 14)

Blessings,
Jaime

[yogi bear]

To me this is a hard topic to understand. It seems to me that both sides of IM have come to a belief of what they think the teaching of God is on it. Some think that God does not want it and others think that God does want it. It seems to me that God is silent on his preference of it.

What it really boils down to is our wants. It is what we want and want it to be what others want. Who are we to make a big issue out of something God did not make an issue out of. To me both sides are being selfish in this battle. It is not coming from God but from us. For anyone one to go into an assembly that for sometime was one way and try to change it to some other way would be selfish on my part. there are many assemblies of both types so one should chose one that is already doing it the way one prefers insteed of going to the opposite and try and change them.

This is really a very hard topic to chose sides on because of the weaker brother issue. One has to study to show thereself approved and if one devotes a lot of study and find it in their heart that God is wanting noninsturment then to that one it would be a faith issue to do opposite. Likewise if one does deep study and feels it is a choice of man and not one that upsets or goes against God then it is a faith issue for him. So see with this dilemma the only choice left is to divide. Just who is to say is the weaker brother the one that feels that IM is not or the one that feels IM is ok. Both sides have very good points. Neither side has direct answer from scripture so just Who is to be judge? The scriptures do not give a thus saith the word in a direct quote to settle this issue. That would seem to indicate that it would have to be dealt with under the Love command. Each side will have to search their own heart and see if this issue is more of selfish desire or edification when dealing with an assembly. The greater side of all assembled would be the deciding factor not just a handful of elders.

Well enough rambling and not good at stating thouhgt so I will leave it here and let all get what they can from this thought.

[da525382]

It has been a "the decision has been made, those who don't like it are free to leave" type mentality.  To me, this is wrong, just wrong, regardless of whether instruments are a salvation issue.

This, unfortunately, is reality in church leadership.  Wherever and whenever it happens, it is always sad, it seems to me.  But, the elders will tell you they are in charge, someone has to make the decisions, etc.  One wonders, however, if these decisions are really made prayerfully or not.  Seems like there is ample opportunity to have a capella services and instrumental services at different times, or even have a capella songs mixed with instrumental songs in one service.  On the bottom line, it is neither an instrument nor the absence of an instrument that is relevant anyway, so both sides of the issue are tragically positioned foundationally, it seems to me.  I simply remember Paul's admonishment that neither circumcision nor non-circumcision has any meaning, it is so true with instrumental music and non-instrumental music as well, ISTM. (not trying to start another endless thread on instrumental music!!!)

Don

[Jaime]

Thanks for your thoughts Bill and Don!

Jaime

[mistergus]

In my attempts to talk with Elders, I have found little but resistance to discuss the matter.  It has been a "the decision has been made, those who don't like it are free to leave" type mentality.  To me, this is wrong, just wrong, regardless of whether instruments are a salvation issue.

So true.  I saw this 10 years ago in Grand Prairie, TX when the "change agents" there were causing so much turmoil.

I didn't object to everything they were doing based on scriptural reasons, some of it I thought was just juvenile.  Some things were just silly, and seemed to take any reverence out of the service.  Many of the songs these people want to sing are so shallow and childish, they have nothing to "teach and admonish one another" with.

No, the biggest objections we had to these people was their sheer rudeness. Some things can certainly evolve over time, but to cram it down people's throats makes their hearts wrong, no matter what else they have to offer. They had no respect for the ones who had labored so mightily there for so many years.  They think the year zero started when they showed up. Shame on them.

I wish I knew about The Spiritual Sword then.  It would have been a great tool.

Robert G

[Bocephus]

As asinine as I think the instrumental issue is, I would not have tried to force instruments down the throats of those who have a conscience issue with them.

[wave runner]

One of the largest disappointments for me while watching this move, was the fact that this "decision" came just a couple of years after the Elders had the membership raise some $15 million for a new facility.

Many who contributed significantly towards that facility (which was acapella at the time it was built) have now been forced to leave over the decision to bring in instruments.  I do not believe it was right or appropriate to ask to have this kind of money raised probably knowing that after it was built instruments would be added.

[mistergus]

As asinine as I think the instrumental issue is, I would not have tried to force instruments down the throats of those who have a conscience issue with them.

You dismiss an issue felt strongly by such men as John Calvin...Adam Clark...Charles Spurgeon...Martin Luther...with a word like "asinine"?  These people are historical giants, and you wave off their convictions on instrumental music in worship as "asinine"?

Who are you?

Robert G

[Bocephus]

As asinine as I think the instrumental issue is, I would not have tried to force instruments down the throats of those who have a conscience issue with them.

You dismiss an issue felt strongly by such men as John Calvin...Adam Clark...Charles Spurgeon...Martin Luther...with a word like "asinine"?  These people are historical giants, and you wave off their convictions on instrumental music in worship as "asinine"?

Who are you?

Robert G

I am Gary.  I thought you knew.

[spurly]

Aren't both churches still giving options in worship, an instrumental service and a non-instrumental service?  Sounds like a pretty good solution to me.

[mdd344]

Since they were introduced the results of instruments has been and continues to be division. It was that way in the 1800's, the 1900's, and now today.



Wave,
How many left over it, do you know? I noticed two elders resigned at R.Hills. Their rationale was to reach the community etc. Is that the same as Oak hills?

[david johnson]

Aren't both churches still giving options in worship, an instrumental service and a non-instrumental service?  Sounds like a pretty good solution to me.

hey!  the same preacher can rail against the evils of pianos and accordians in worship at 8:00 and then declare it all a matter of opinion at 10:00.     superb.

dj