I am leading a weekly Bible study.  Yesterday was our first study, and we talked about why Jesus came to this earth.  Now, I don't know how to incorporate the Gospel for new people and change the study for the people that have come multiple times.  What should I do?

Sincerely,
Bible Study Leader

Dear Bible Study Leader,

We aren't exactly sure what advice we can give you.  One of the easiest ways to study the Bible is to study it expositorily.  Take a book of the Bible, and study it from start to finish.  This way you get exactly what God intended for mankind to learn.  Being a teacher is a very solemn thing and puts us under a stricter judgment because of the power to lead people astray if we don't adhere to the Bible's teachings (Jas 3:1).  If you aren't feeling that you have a comfortable grasp on the Scriptures, better to stick with an exact study of a book than to potentially veer into manmade doctrines.

I attend a church of Christ congregation that has both liberal and conservative members.  We have worked hard to accommodate one another for the sake of peace, and for the most part, we have no practices that are unscriptural.  However, every second Sunday, a potluck is held in a kitchen/classroom adjacent to the auditorium.  The more conservative members, I being one, do not participate because we cannot find anywhere in the Bible where God authorizes potlucks in the church building.  Needless to say, this has caused some debate; therefore, the topic is avoided.  Is there any Bible authority or example that allows potlucks?  We are a small congregation and do not have elders.  Sometimes, I worry that by not attending these potlucks, the more liberal members feel I'm being judgmental by not fellowshipping during these potlucks, but I've always been taught that we must have chapter and verse for anything we do.  Also, several times, conservative visitors have happened to attend on "potluck Sunday" and have voiced their disapproval.  It's difficult to conceal, and in fact, it is announced at the end of services that we are having a potluck – as if everyone hasn't already been distracted by the aroma of roast beef wafting into the auditorium during services.  Please comment.  The bottom line is: I want my life to be pleasing to God and do not want to make an unrighteous judgment.  Thank you.

Sincerely,
"Potluck Sunday" Avoider

Dear "Potluck Sunday" Avoider,

We agree that the Lord's church doesn't have authority to use the building for potlucks, social events, etc.  You are right on this issue – there is simply no biblical precedent for the church functioning as a social organization.  The work of the church is simple, and anything that doesn't fulfill that work shouldn't be done.  We posted an answer to a question regarding the work of the church: read "The Purpose Driven Church" for more details on that subject.  There was a time when the church needed to hold potlucks because people traveled such long distances by horseback or foot that it was impossible for people to stay for the full day of worship unless they had a meal between... if they went home for a meal, they might as well have stayed home.  This was an appropriate use of potlucks because they were an expediency for worship.  With today's modern transportation system and the availability of restaurants, that simply is not an issue anymore.  Today, potlucks are for the purpose of socializing, not furthering the work of the church.  If the work of the church is to socialize, we also ought to have gymnasiums, playgrounds, movie nights, etc.  The fact that potlucks are a “tamer” social event than a movie night doesn't make them any less wrong.

Having said all of that, let's now address the issue of your dissenting voice amongst the congregation.  Romans 14 is very clear on the subject of stronger and weaker brethren.  When one brother believes he can do something (this would be the strong brother), and another believes he can't (the weak brother), how should those two interact with each other?  In this circumstance, you are the weak brother.  Weak doesn't mean you are wrong or frail; it means you cannot in good conscience participate in these social gatherings.  Rom 14:1-4 says that the stronger brother should accept you without condescension or mocking because you are trying to do what you believe is right.  Rom 14:13-17 takes it one step further and says that the brother who believes he has the freedom to do something should restrain himself if it is causing his brother to stumble.  Your scenario is a good example of this.  You believe (and with good reason) that this is an inappropriate use of the Lord's funds, and you do not desire to participate.  The congregation should (at the bare minimum) accept your conscientious choice and leave it at that.  It is our experience that the opposite is often true.  Over time, many congregations as they move toward liberalism try and pressure or demean those with dissenting views.  Satan has a way of destroying good relationships by getting more liberal-minded brethren to vigorously fight for their "rights" instead of showing a gentle demeanor with those who don't believe we have the freedom to act so liberally.  Sadly, we have seen it time and time again.

In short, you are seeing things clearly, and you are right to be concerned.  May God bless you as you stand by your Bible-based convictions.

What does Ezekiel 16:6 mean?  My grandmother always used to read this when someone was bleeding or cut themselves, and the blood wouldn't stop.

Sincerely,
Grandkid

Dear Grandkid,

That is a rather odd verse for your grandma to quote, but I guess most grandmothers have funny sayings that make us scratch our heads!  Ezek 16:6 is part of a discourse from God on how bad Jerusalem had become (Ezek 16:1-2).  God metaphorically refers to Jerusalem as if it were a baby that He had found abandoned in a field (Ezek 16:3-5).  When no one else loved them, God cleaned them (Ezek 16:9), clothed them (Ezek 16:10-11), and nourished them (Ezek 16:7).  After all God had done for the Jewish people, they had turned their back on Him (Ezek 16:15).  Ezek 16:6 is the part of the speech that personifies Jerusalem as a baby born and helplessly left in its own blood.

(This post is a follow-up to “Ring In The New”)

To follow up on your response to the question of wearing wedding rings, you seem to be saying traditions are fine as long as the intention behind them is good.  There seems to be no New Testament evidence of using rings in a wedding ceremony.  In previous responses to questions regarding using musical instruments in worship, you have made statements such as, “The problem with instrumental music in worship is that it isn’t a part of the Bible pattern, and the moment we start doing things outside the Bible, we have gone beyond what God intended (1 Cor 4:6).”  Also, “There are no examples of the church using instruments to worship God in the New Testament.  If we start using them, we are adding something to God’s Word (Rev 22:18-19).”  I assume you, as elders and pastors of your local congregation, have conducted many wedding ceremonies (probably involving the exchange of rings).  How is allowing extra-biblical traditions such as exchanging rings in a wedding not in opposition to your previous statements?  If man-made traditions are fine as long as the intent behind them is good, why have a problem with congregations that use musical instruments in worship?

Sincerely,
Ringing In My Ears

Dear Ringing In My Ears,

The difference between instruments in worship and wedding rings is that God has given specific commands regarding singing, but He hasn’t given specific commands about wedding ceremonies.  The Bible specifically commands the church to sing and make melody in our hearts to God (Col 3:16, Eph 5:19).  When God gives a specific command, we cannot go beyond what He has written (1 Cor 4:6) and decide that since God wants us to sing, we should sing and play instruments – that is adding to the Bible (Rev 22:18-19).

However, weddings are an entirely different situation.  God tells men and women to get married (Matt 19:5), but He leaves it at that – the details are up to us.  This is a general command.  General commands leave the specifics up to the individuals.  For example, if you told someone to fill your car with gas, they would have the option to use premium or basic gas, they could decide which gas station to go to, etc.  The specific details would be left up to the individual.  Since God authorizes marriage, we are left to make our own decisions regarding what the marriage ceremony will entail.

I feel a fascination with Islam.  Not one that would make me convert (I don't think), but rather, I enjoy studying it.  If I am christian, which I am, then should I study my own religion rather than another one?  Is it bad to learn about another religion?

Sincerely,
Cross-Referencing

Dear Cross-Referencing,

There isn't anything wrong with studying other religions, but it would be a problem if you spent more time studying a false religion than you did studying the Bible.  How we spend our time is indicative of our priorities.  God tells us to study to show ourselves approved (2 Tim 2:15) and that we should grow in our knowledge, so we can teach others Jesus' message (Heb 5:12).  It is useful to know what false religions practice (even Paul had studied the pagan poets of his day – Acts 17:28), but not nearly as useful as knowing what the Bible says.  The best way to prepare yourself to "give an answer for the hope that is within you" (1 Pet 3:15) is to make sure to study your Bible diligently.  Once again, studying Islam isn't wrong, but you need to make sure it is properly balanced with other study habits.