When I was a pastor, 50% of our gatherings were spent caring for each other, discussing internal benevolence etc..ay any time 1/5 were in a crisis so 4/5 were helping that group...it was not a burden..it was wonderful
@ChristianRevivalOrg I am assuming that you are writing this comment although you are most probably deceased, being that you refer to yourself as a " former" pastor. Yet I suppose that it could be possible that the apostles can retire also!
@@Brotheral-pb1oj I filled in as a youth pastor, because there were no other people that could. The church then hired someone andnthey took over. I am ready in season and out of season, but God doesnt always keep someone in the same role. God bless.
@sephardim4yeshua155 LOL! Thank you much for your explanation. Actually, it was extremely naive of me to boldly presume something about the intricacies of someone's situation in which I have no knowledge ! I sincerely apologize, and I actually feel relieved now that you cleared that up!🙏❤️
God bless you brother Tom!! "Knowledge will increase..." This makes me so happy - I've been feeling this for YEARS! I tried so many churches that didn't care if I was there... I started doing the Sabbath myself (I'm a 68 yr old woman) getting on my knees to pray every day... GATHERING with my Christian brothers and sisters ONLINE (Facebook) and just keeping it simple and REAL. GOD started to bless my life abundantly... He just placed me into an affordable apartment in a beautiful place beside the water... PRAISES!! He's there. Watching and listening... Waiting to bless us! Hallelujah!
The interesting thing is how after I was born again, there were a number of occasions when I was “worshipping” as we do in the modern west by standing and singing, but I found my legs unable to support me and I would end up kneeling. It wasn’t quite prostration, but it seems to be a common phenomenon when someone is overcome by the Holy Spirit 🕊️
thank you from the bottom of my heart. Listened to you for the first time two days ago and have found this so helpful. I received Christ as my Savior almost 41 years ago and have been reading His Word faithfully through the decades and have seen things that have made me wonder, "What is this really all about?" I've listened to part 1 twice and my wife and I are halfway through part 2 and already I'm understanding better why we meet together and how confused I've been about that English word Worship that, as can be seen from the comments, has many facets to it. And what we want to know is what those Greek words actually meant and consequently we will benefit. Your teaching helps me understand better what went wrong with our initial effort at home churching. We were making more like a protestant church service than "One Anothering" Thank you for sharing your many years of labor for us to benefit so easily, Praise the Lord!
Your comment resonates with me. I especially love that phrase "One Anothering". A friend shared part 1 with me this morning and I am so blessed by it- went through it twice. I intend to listen to the whole 7 installments. It is amazing how when we are committed to knowing the Truth of our faith, God orders our steps to solid resources like this. All glory to God
"GOD that made the world and ALL things therein, Seeing that ‘HE IS’ LORD of heaven and earth, Dwelleth 'N-O-T' in temples Made with Hands; Neither is 'Worshipped' with men's Hands, As though HE 'Needed' Anything, Seeing HE Giveth to all Life, and Breath, and All Things." (Acts 17:24-25)
True worshippers worship God in Spirit and in Truth. This simply means that everything True believers do is for God's glory. Worship has nothing to do with where we go to assemble ourselves. Worship is every breath we take and every step we make until we leave this world.
I was just thinking out loud! I promise you that I in no form or fashion meant to critique your presentation. I totally agree with your message. I thank God that you have the discernment and gall to present this much needed message in the midst of this current so-called christian movement here in America. Actually it was the Truths of your teachings that led me to comment on this subject, although I may have been a bit zealous. It is rare for me to hear any teachings that are not embedded in the current established Christian movement. I wish you Godspeed in your ministry.
@@tomwadsworthit seems obvious, by your remark, that you might be offended and a smidge snarky. Idk, just an observation. If I'm wrong then accept my sincere apology. I noticed you didn't comment back after this person explained the comment. Just bad manners.
@@tomwadsworthyou’ve confirmed what I believed in Spirit, people love to “ go to the Greek” but the same gospel was preached to the Israelites, but in different words, I’ve never heard anyone confirm this, love to know your thoughts on the “ contradiction “ that is not a contradiction, I was ejected from reformed Presbyterian church for pointing this out with some other points, Gave himself a ransom for all, can only mean a ransom for all, the reformed Presbyterians refuse to acknowledge this and use the verse “ ransom for many “for their false doctrines, but they clearly have no understanding who the “ saviours “ are when Edom ( esau ) is judged when kingdom is the Lords in Obadiah 1:17 and 1:24, they simply don’t understand what one in Christ means, as Christ is also one with his father and made the way for all men to be saved, ( propitiation for sins of the whole world)one there even told me God who has no beginning or no end died on the cross!!! Sacrificing your life for your enemy’s as Jesus did and loving them, not judging them and doing his commandments with a broken heart and contrite spirit seems very close to what you have said, this would mean bowing down to him and trying with heart mind and soul to seek him,and do his ways, but of course only God can give this great gift. Better still, kiss the Son, whiles you are alive, study like a workman, meditate day and night in his word, in the hope he gives you the “ earnest “ of the word, the “ sincere milk”. Psalms 2:12 “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.” Hebrews 4:2 “For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” Old Testament: same meaning as New Testament Joshua 1:8 “This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.” 2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” 1 Timothy 2:6 “Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” Mark 10:45 “For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” 1 John 2:2 “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” Not many “ righteous are saved from second death? 1 Peter 4:18 “And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?” But God is not going to lose one “ sheep “from his pasture/field/ forest, psalm 100 says lands, not Israel…… But best to suffer for right doing than wrong doing, if so be …… 1 Peter 4:18 context KJV standard…… If so be one is blessed with the spirit Of God, Romans 8:9 “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Two of the Reformed Presbyterians even threatened me with violence, and their preacher said it was a myth that we need to be as a little child, and as humble , Matthew 18:3 “And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 18:4 “Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” If I’ve confused, maybe this verse is true?? 1 Corinthians 1:27 “But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;” One more question, whom was the disciple Jesus loved? Impossible it was John, Jesus did not have a brother called John. John 19:26 “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!” Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.
My take is: Society grow and people evolve. They would never do things the exact way it was done centuries prior. It is impossible. Our goal is not to trying to go back to the same circumstantial ways of the first church or any period for that matter but try to learn from both the positives and negatives. The early church's gathering in homes,caves,dens etc was not a standard that they sort on purpose but only a consequence. They were poor people who left the security and comfort of the temple worship system- where else could they have gone? What we need to see and take particular note of is how not withstanding the major drawbacks to their several disadvantages they, upon finding such joy and fulfillment in Christ were able to take these negatives and achieve great obedience to God and service to each other. Now today we are far more privileged and have the benefit of large buildings dedicated to the service of the saints through Christ. We need not try now merely abandon these and seek to go back to homes or such like. What we need do is devote our hearts,lives and all such provisions and humbly ask God to so touch/change us that we too in our day like saints of old may too find great fulfillment and obedience with our present lot. To each his own let every generation serve God in the order in which God had called them not covet those things that belong to another people and time. Only let Jesus change our hearts. Salvation is of the Lord not by man's doing.
Let us agree to disagree peacefully. I agree that we cannot go back fully, but I do agree about the need to return to a biblical base foundation. For most of the churches today lacks that. Smaller groups makes for a better foundation. You won't get lost. Accountability is place better. The praise teams have gotten too secular in a lot of churches. He's teaching us to step back and take a sincere look at where we come from and how far we have departed.
@@Wanda-i9y We need to go back to caring FOR EACH OTHER. Not a BUILDING, PASTOR OR CEREMONY - that is of the Pharisees... that's what JESUS rebuked. FALSE CEREMONY. GOD bless you and all here.
First, to compare the freedom we have in America to the totalitarian Roman Empire ruling over Israel is poor. We never had the persecution like many during the early church. Second, God never asked His children to continue to fully adapt to modern culture. Those in the 1600s understood prostration as worship, regardless of whether it was to an idol or the Most High. Sadly, man continues to get the Word to adapt to our ways. God hasn't changed; man does. We get bored of the old, tried and true, so we create new methods to suit our nature. We changed the definition of worship to God.
But the essential question is: Why is the current culture of praise a bad thing? Because it replaces the comprehensive teaching of the Bible. Most of Christendom has been led astray by 1700+ years of replacement theology, which is why comprehensive teaching and understanding of the Bible is minimal, and it cannot even be done unless we first get out of the ravages of replacement theology. "Good can be the worst enemy of the best," said a famous writer (O.S.)
I remember a while ago reading something in the book of Daniel and saw that Nebuchadnezzar (I'm sure I've spelt his name wrong 😂) had "fallen down to worship Daniel", but Daniel didn't correct him. This thoroughly confused me, so I went to the interlinear and saw that the word can also mean prostrate, and just assumed that that was the more appropriate meaning to attribute to it. But never went back into the topic, as I've continued to read the word, that same question of people "worshipping" has come to mind in terms of what it really means. So thank you for this study!!
It's wonderful to find this. I went through this study in 1979/80 time frame primarily using Vines as a resource. I am an engineer not a theologian. I was shocked at what I didn't find. Finally, I searched for God's definition of worship and found it in James 1:27 and Romans 12:1. Also, you mentioned "Holladay". I am assuming Carl Holladay. Carl is my wife's first cousin. I used to go to their family reunions with my "one question" for Carl. A very nice guy!
Thanks for the comments! I would tweak your observations to say that "God's definition of threskeia worship is found in James 1:27, and God's definition of Christian latreia worship is found in Romans 12:1." The two verses use two different Greek words that have two distinct and different meanings, and none of them are the same as the modern English term "worship." I don't recall mentioning Holladay, but I've long been a fan of Carl Holladay's work. An excellent NT scholar! I have two questions for you: (1) In what state are you located? and (2) With which church culture/denomination are you most familiar? Is it the Church of Christ?
@@tomwadsworth Tennessee - Oak Ridge area. And yes, CoC is the tradition I grew up in. The congregation I am with now is CoC, but there has been a lot of positive movement toward freedom in Christ - especially compared to the congregations I grew up in.
@40:36 As a saint living in the last days awaiting the coming of the LORD prostration has been a part of my life. It is with great expectancy that I wait to bow down in the presence of my Creator and ELOHIM face to the ground and inhale His presence.
@@RevelationMinistries114Did you listen to the entire series? God doesn't need anything from you. People do. Caring for one another is the highest act of worship.
Thanks for the compliment. Just curious ... (1) In what state do you live? (2) With what denomination are you most familiar? (3) What is your highest educational level?
@Peachcreekmedia This videois simply true teachings, prompted by the Holy Spirit. No True minister of God attends any seminary. It is the Holy Spirit that equips called ministers to proclaim the GOOD NEWS of the Gospel. 1st John chapter 2-verse 27. Seminaries are a product of the traditions of men. None of the original apostles ever attended any kind of school to learn anything about proclaiming the Gospel. For what it's worth, I submit to you that there are many DIFFERENT Seminaries that teach many DIFFERENT faiths in our Lord. Before you jump on the bandwagon with these so-called ministers, please read Ephesians chapter 4 verses 1 thru 6. My entire point is that this teaching on this video comes from the Holy Spirit. Seminary teachings comes from whatever man invented the denomination!
@tomwadsworth I apologize for belatedly replying to your questions. I live in SC. I'm not personally familiar with any denomination, yet I have researched many. I have, in fact joined a couple of denominational assemblies years ago, but it was all superficial because I was under the erroneous impression that as a new convert it was my duty to join an organization al representation of what was and still is deemed to be God's Church. I was led by the Holy Spirit to come out of the traditions of men and to be a witness of Christ, as to being rooted and grounded in Christ, and to being complete in Him first and foremost, and not adding on unessesary titles and labels that allow for the leaven of divisions and outright chaos that has engulfed the so-called christian presence in America. As far as my education, I'm a high school grad. Personally I think that your teachings concerning the assembly of believers is impressive to me in several aspects. Not trying to flatter you, but it is rare for me to see or hear any minister teach the Truth in the midst of the status quo. I can appreciate you not being judgemental concerning what I call the established religious movement. I respect your piety, yet as for myself, I find it hard to understand how anyone can be born-again and not already understand the points that you are making based on scripture. I pray that I'm not being judgemental for questioning someone's salvation. I ask that you pray for me to be enlightened in the righteousness of God.🙏❤️🤔
The image at 12:15 is Israel's King Jehu prostrating himself before Assyrian King Shalmaneser III. It appears on a black obelisk at the British Museum.
When you have context adapted to the word you see then you have a word Incorporated in that same word which walks with the same context you read on the line you have a word that you see that cannot be changed because you know what is being thought of the word that is put down
The difference between our bowel and then and bowing that goes on now is that we were personally showing our imperfection and need for help now we have it and there's no need to go through those Acts
Loved this message until he claimed that Christians never Proskuneo (34:38). Luke 24:51-53 states: 51 While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven. 52 Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. 53 And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God. The word worship here is Proskuneo. This act of Proskuneo is NOT a greeting, as the speaker claims. Jesus has left the scene. Moreover, it signals some emotional response, for when they finished with their Proskuneo they left with joy and praised God. I have to question this research when the author makes such simple errors. Please be more scholastic and explain what the text says. Give more analysis rather than opinion.
Worship is a part of the law which reminds people over and over no matter how they perform this act they cannot do it perfectly the body in all its contortions demonstrates in act that comes up short every time thereby reassuring that person who is taught correctly that no matter what they do they need a savior
I wonder why he didn't stick to the word prostrate in the explanation of Christ's encounter with the Samaritan woman. The word "worship" was used a few times between Christ and the woman.
The issue here is not that there is no need or reason for worship in Christian but what is the purpose and how is this purpose fulfilled. Is it fulfilled by through physical means e.g. dancing, offering, jumping, singing, prostration, Kneeling down. Reading the NT, how die the early church perceive worship, is our gathering for worship or for fellowship. God is everywhere and He can be worship anywhere why gathering then to worship God that could be worship anywhere by anyone?
Thx, many may be deceived, thinking they won't "worship" the beast per the English, but merely willfully submitting to antiGod policies is worshipping the beast.
This right here would be an awesome subject to study. It seems everybody’s waiting for a very obvious antichrist and a very obvious bowing of the knee and a very obvious mark on the forehead and right hand, but it seems that this is not the case.
Wouldn't the first century Christians not fully understand the vertical, because they were used to others doing that for them? I believe during the time of both the first and second temple, these functions did happen, as well as during all the time that there has been Jewish Synagogues, which is believed by historians to have existed in BC days or in that era. And, as you talked about, there was the separation of priests and non-priest duties/functions, many of the "lay" people would not have participated in these. And definitely still, in the first century AD time frame, as that is when the pharisaical mentality was happening. Pursuing a vertical, where you are now the priest (the veil to the Holy of Holies was ripped/torn) and our bodies/hearts are the temple, understanding and exhibiting that would have been a new thing. I doubt very seriously they understood this fully that fast. I too am frustrated with the modern organized church context, but I think we are placing the first century Christians on a pedestal they never actually lived on themselves. Jesus had brought a whole new thinking to His plan of Salvation. Well, new to the Jewish community, and of course to the gentiles, He never has been confused about any of it. We are the ones trying to understand it all.
I got to hear a pastor say the church will worship the way he wants to. Loud music. Standing with hands up. Lots of lights. Repetitive lyrics. Lots of adrenaline and drums. People standing enjoying the show. Why not? They practiced hard. This has got me willing to dig deeper and ponder how we got off track.
One example is in Romans when Paul said some false belief stands by fayth Noah Webster standardized this word to Faith but Paul said these people had a false faith and he spelled it with the letter Y instead of the letter i . This is an example of variant spellings which are extremely necessary because these people had the wrong faith
Great explanation on worship. I know I have been confused about the meaning. In the past, I have had Catholics tell me it is okay to worship Mary because they do not worship her as a god. So I thought that was interesting. But I believe that some do actually fall on their face and nose to Mary also. So I don't know how they can explain that. But I have also read the Catholic bible, Douay Rheims. In that, it uses the word 'god' to mean anything from a historical biblical character, to an engraved image or idol, and also current leadership. And even in our modern Bibles it speaks of "there are many gods" which points to leaders and historical figures too. So by the real meaning of worship, I'd say worship of other gods would also include leaders, pop stars, historical figures, or any gods from the various established religions.
And as to "looking God in the eye," all the OT instances of the appearance of the Angel of the Lord, a theophany--some of which include patriarchs and others saying, "I have seen God and not died"-- the subjects of the appearances look at the Lord. The whole point of the theophany was to be able to see and interact with God in a form enabling a person to encounter God and not die.
Overkill discussion to the point of monotony and boredom. DO NOT THINK YOU WILL BE HEARD FOR YOUR MANY WORDS. Excellent research, thorough discussion, and thankfully amendable to 1.75x playback speed. Thank you.
contextually in the Tenach it is usually just suggesting to bow or lower one self, suggesting submission, the obligationis always centered upon the intent of the heart and not the actual physical manifestation.
Thanks for asking. I think the verse is wrongly translated when it uses the word 'worship.' Proskuneo--in its 260-some occurrences in the NT and LXX--never means "worship" in the sense that we use the word today. When the word is used in a temple context, as it is here in John 4, it routinely refers to the obligatory ritual act of prostrating oneself before the deity. Jesus is not here trying to refine how prostration was done, but he is calling for spiritual sincerity ("in spirit and truth" vs. 23-24), not just the rote performance of a religious duty. Jesus called for the same spiritual sincerity in his teachings about fasts, prayers, vows, donations to the poor, loving enemies, etc., in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-6). Jesus' ultimate point in John 4:20-24 is that sacred places (temples), whether in Gerizim or Jerusalem ("in this mountain or in Jerusalem" v. 21) are soon to be obsolete. He makes the same point explicitly in Matt 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. It should be noted that the context of John 4 says nothing about Christian assemblies, and none of the NT epistles ever applied John 4:24 to Christian assembly activities. Even in the 2nd-4th centuries, early Christians did not apply the verse to assembly behavior. They applied the verse as I described it above. In November I will be publicly making the case that "Proskuneo Does Not Mean 'Worship'" at the annual Evangelical Theological Society Conference in San Antonio.
If the word worship means posture/bowing one’s physical body just how the Old Testament talks about people bowing the knee to Baal, then wouldn’t worship in spirit and truth mean the same thing? That we spiritually and truthfully bow in submission and reverence to the Lord God by following his commandments and reverencing Him and no other? Isn’t this the first commandment to Love the Lord God with all your heart mind soul and strength. And the second would naturally follow, which is to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, which are found in the 10 Commandments and all throughout Gods statutes and ordinances. I pray the Lord lead us into all truth and understanding 🙏❤
How can he say Christ used the Greek old testament. The scroll of Isaiah that Christ read in the synagogue is most likely to be either Aramaic or Hebrew.
So we know what the Greek words translated as worship, my question is what would be the word worship in Greek? I mean if what Greek word exactly means worship? Or is this word even exist in Ancient Greek or Hebrew?
Great question! The Greek word σέβω might be the closest Greek term to our English term 'worship'. When I studied every time σέβω is found in the Septuagint and in the New Testament, the word mostly connotes the idea of "revering." Jesus uses the word in Matt 15:8 when he quotes Isa 29:13: "‘This people Me with their lips, But their heart is far away from Me. And in vain do they worship (σέβω) Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’” Here, σέβω is used synonymously with the idea of "honoring." Paul uses a form of the word in Acts 17:23 in reference to the Greeks' "objects of worship" : "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship (σεβάσματα "objects of reverence"), I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.’ Therefore, what you worship (εὐσεβέω) in ignorance, this I proclaim to you." Remember: the word σέβω is not used in the New Testament to refer to what Christians did in their assemblies. The reason? I think it's because first century Christian assemblies had no sacred items or representations of the deity to revere in their assemblies. Christianity was odd to the surrounding culture; it did not match up with anyone's idea of a "religion" (see Jas 1:26-27). Christianity was a "Way" (Acts 9:2; 18:25-26; 19:9, 23: 24:14, 22), not a "religion" with sacrifices, altars, statues, priests, and temples. In this way, the Jesus movement was vastly different from anything that Jews or pagans understood or practiced.
Not to be critical but I listened to one of your videos about worship and I had to listened to the whole thing to understand one point and you could have told it in a couple paragraphs. The question once what was worship back then and all you had to say was what it was . I hate listening to a whole thing to find out I could have understood it in like 10 minutes yes the other stuff was informative about what worship was back then but if you would have just explained what it was and THEN explain why you believed that it would have been better I hate people give tiny bits and pieces as. Then keep us wandering right to the very end I don’t have that tension span. In other words get point and then tell why you believe that
Okay, Tom, I'm with you. But if we're to be rigorous about consistent translation, should we translate John 4:23-24 using "prostrate" rather than "worship"? And if we do, are we saying that Jesus was simply picking up on the word used by the woman at the well, going with it, and making his point about genuine spirituality, but not suggesting that God wants us to prostrate ourselves -- ever? You seem to have hurried away from this passage without fully stating how it fits with all the other instances of προσκυνεύω.
So, how do we understand the Psalms in the Old Testament, the doxologies in the New Testament, or Paul's instructions to the church in Ephesians 5? David is celebrated for his deep, worshipful adoration of God, and Jesus is called the King of Judah, or the King of Praise. This perspective on worship seems to overlook the full spiritual experience that the Bible's history and theology present. It reflects a Eurocentric, Westernized view of worship.
What is confusing about this presentation, and the one before it, is that it is not clear how Dr. Wadsworth is defining the English word "worship." Is he saying that when we gather in our assembies that we should not engage in prayer, or sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs? And that we should not be doing these things with a deep sense of reverence and respect for God? And what did Jesus mean when He told the Samaritan woman that we are to worship God in Spirit and in truth?
Defining the English word 'worship' is a meaningless task. After all, none of the NT writers (or Jesus) ever used the English word 'worship'. As I explain in the videos, the key issue is not to define 'worship'. The key issue is to define the Greek words that are translated as "worship." As it turns out, the five Greek words that are translated as "worship" are not synonymous; they all refer to different aspects of behavior done for deity. Video #2 explains this, and it answers your question about the Samaritan woman. In addition, none of these Greek "worship" words are used to describe what Christians did in their meetings. In addition, even though we have massive volumes of Christian writings from the second and third centuries, these later Christians also did not use "worship" words to describe their assemblies. Why is that? Video #6 shows how 4th century Christianity began to use ancient "worship" language in reference to Christian assemblies. In essence, today's widespread idea that "we gather to worship" is a flawed idea that has no basis in NT Christianity.
@@tomwadsworthBut what about the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs? What about the Lord's Table? What about baptism? And what about what our Lord called the first and greatest commandment, to love the Lord our God with all our soul, heart and might? I should mention that I was a part of a house church a few years ago, and understand that the early church would have functioned quite differently from our modern, institutionalized church. But we did sing hymns in our group, and we would have someone deliver a sermon of sorts, as I was called upon to do from time to time.
None of the Greek words for "worship" are ever used to describe any of those activities (singing, Lord's Supper, baptism, or sermons). They don't qualify as "proskuneo worship," "latreuo worship," "leitourgeo worship," "sebomai worship," or "threskeia worship." Watch Video #2. Having said that, it's clear in the NT that the early church gatherings certainly included singing and the Lord's Supper. The early assemblies certainly included "teaching," but the idea of "preaching sermons" is not. Watch Video #4. The word "sermon" is not found in the Bible ... not even in the "Sermon on the Mount." The term is only found in subheadings that were added by the Bible publisher. I should add that baptism is never depicted as an assembly activity. Here's the bottom line. Our penchant of describing our meetings as "worship" and describing our assembly activities as "acts of worship" is foreign to the NT. We should be asking, "What was the purpose of these gatherings?" Paul couldn't be clearer when he identifies "edification" as the purpose of the assembly and as the purpose of all assembly activities. "Let all things be done for edification." (1 Cor 14:26) If we truly want to pattern today's assemblies after biblical assemblies, we should stop trying to justify what we do. Instead, we should open our Bibles and let it instruct us. Truth is, our assemblies are patterned after centuries of errant thinking, not after the clear teaching of the Bible.
I guess that the main reservation I have about your presentation is the antithesis that you posit between the "horizontal" and the "vertical." I think that, biblically speaking, the horizontal exists precisely because it is grounded in the vertical. All true believers share a mystical union with Christ, and should share a common devotion to Him, which, in turn, should draw us together as one body in Christ. Jesus did not tell the Samaritan woman that worship was abolished. Rather, He said that "true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers." We first begin by presenting "your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship" (ten logiken latreian - Rom. 12:1). "Through Him, then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name" (Heb. 12:15). And this, in turn, means that in our assemblies we are to speak to one another in "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father . . ." (Eph. 5:19,20). And believe it or not, the word "sermon" actually does occur in the Bible! In Acts 20:7, describing an assembly gathering in a private home on a Sunday evening, Luke tells us that Paul protracting his "ton logon," which is translated in the Latin Vulgate as "sermonem."
@@robertwheeler1158 (1) I never said that the horizontal wasn’t grounded in the vertical. The point still stands: The lion’s share of NT assembly activities are clearly and indisputably horizontal activities that are directed to “one another.” Modern assemblies, by their own explicit admission, are “worship services” that are vertically directed to God. (2) Concerning John 4, you have missed the essential point: proskuneo, whenever it is used in a temple context in the LXX and the NT, refers to prostration. In the first 300 years of Christianity, proskuneo is never used in reference to what Christians do when they get together. It again strongly appears that you have not listened to the presentation. (3) Concerning Rom 12:1, Paul uses the term latreia, which does not mean “worship” in the modern sense. In the NT, latreuo and latreia never refer to Christian assembly activity. If you listened to the presentation, you would know what latreia means. Please … before you critique the presentation, spend the time to listen to the presentation.
You lost a bit of credibility when you said "Sunday/Friday Salaam" refers to prostration. It never has. Salaam is a greeting. It means peace. A muslim's Friday salaam is a holy day greeting, not a prostration.
If the word worship means posture/bowing one’s physical body just how the Old Testament talks about people bowing the knee to Baal, then wouldn’t worship in spirit and truth mean the same thing? That we spiritually and truthfully bow in submission and reverence to the Lord God by following his commandments and reverencing Him and no other? Isn’t this the first commandment to Love the Lord God with all your heart mind soul and strength. And the second would naturally follow, which is to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, which are found in the 10 Commandments and all throughout Gods statutes and ordinances. I pray the Lord lead us into all truth and understanding 🙏❤
The Priests worshiped as they worked their specific functions. Why I say this, is not the Hebraic word for worship & work have a commonality?? Again just asking! But I appreciate the challenge on what we call worship! Singing praises has its place, adoration too has its place! So I guess praising with adulation could be considered worship 😮🙌🎶
I know this is confusing. But remember: The challenge is NOT to define the English word 'worship'. That endeavor accomplishes nothing. The challenge is (1) to define the Greek words that are translated as 'worship'. And since the NT does not use "worship language" to describe Christian assemblies, the challenge then is (2) to determine why the early Christians met, what did they do, and how did they describe what they were doing.
Your first premise: "The priests worshiped as they worked their specific functions" needs to be challenged. What do you mean by "worship"? How did you determine what you meant by "worship"? Does the Bible actually support your premise? The OT (LXX) and the NT use a very specific word to describe what the Jewish priests did in the temple: leitourgeo/leitourgia. The word is used 150 times in the OT, and it refers to "priestly work." The word has no reference to what the priests were "feeling" as they worked.
Greek and Latin are easily interpreted through English letters but now all we have are just plain letters and when it comes to the Bible the English letters correct the Greek and Latin that have strayed through individual in private interpretations when we use the English letters in the first edition 1611 Bible all languages have a seat at the table through Greek and Latin the proper thought is lined up with the proper word therefore the words that are put in front of you cannot stray and cannot be changed but when your teachers refuse to notice the engrossed intrinsic properties of the language in English letters they can rewrite the scripture however they choose it is unheard of for thinking to be in language but thinking has been in language since its Inception and at the height of its use it was put in the 1611 first edition because it was being done everywhere it was hushed out of existence from 1800 forward the Constitution of the United States of America was the last best example of a major undertaking so no one could change what they put on paper the United States Constitution is highly engrossed with words Incorporated inside of words which is called oyer Terminaler when you take the thinking from the words it's called oyer determiner.
I seriously am concerned that The Master & his disciples used the Septuagint. As they were in the Temple or Synagogue which had Torah scrolls from which they would have read from. Aramaic was the common language amongst the people, Hebrew the Religious language of the Hebrew Temple & its priests; Greek apparently the business lingo. What reference is there that the 70 Rabbi’s who did the translating bought back their own copies to Israel in particular to Jerusalem? Just asking bcos it does not make sense! Thanks
Good questions, nicely asked. When Alexander the Great conquered the countries around the Mediterranean basin, he injected the Greek language wherever he went. The pervasive Greek culture that he spread is called Hellenism, and it engulfed the land of the Jews in the first century. So, the Greek language was quite widespread, even among the Jews. That's why all of the earliest NT manuscripts that we have are in Greek. None are in Hebrew or Aramaic. Try doing a Google search for, "Did Jesus use the Septuagint." In the results, look for a source that you respect, then read what it says. I'm not trying to be combative or argumentative. I'm just trying to help.
@tomwadsworth I watched it. My church, assembly combined with Sunday school seems maybe as close as I can get. Our preacher gives short sermons mostly about application of the Gospel to life, our Sunday school has a lot of back and forth, and our praise music is nothing like a concert. What do you think? I know every church is different, even within the Church of Christ
@@jondeauxman I don't want to be the Judge of anyone's assembly; I simply want to point out Paul's emphasized directives. In 1 Cor 14, Paul focused on whether "all things" were done for edification (v. 26). His directive can be achieved in many different settings. But when the stated focus is on "worshipping God," the edification directive can get lost.
But you have to have a reason for prostrating yourself in worship is how it was supposed to be identified good or bad in this case bad because those men weren't beleeuers.
I am sorry, I don't see you point about prostration. In many, if not all of the cases where people fall on their faces and prostrate themselves before God, are they not worshipping God? That might not be how you or I typically 'worship', but it emphasises how meaning has been sucked out of the word. 'Worship' that is merely singing a trite ditty about how 'I' feel towards God is not true worship.
The NASB of 1995 says "ministered" in Acts 13:2. The new NASB of 2020 says "serving" in Acts 13:2. www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+13%3A2&version=NASB
57:30 Sorry, but it is literal. We are to present ourselves as a living sacrifice. I agree not a cow or sheep. Living sacrifice as in physical repentance. That is our reasonable worship. Rom 12:1
If it is literal, you would be literally dead. Your literal blood would be splattered on a literal altar. And a literal priest would be presiding over the literal burning of your literal dead body. When Paul adds the qualifier λογικὴν, he makes clear that λατρείαν in Rom 12:1 is not to be understood literally. Thanks to the literal once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus, you can respond to his literal sacrifice with a metaphorical sacrifice of offering your life in obedience.
Worship of YHWH was something that happened at the Temple with blood sacrifice. We see in Acts that the Apostles continued to worship at Temple even after Christ was resurrected. And most of the Bible was written prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. So after the destruction of the Temple, worship and sacrifice had to take new forms in both the synagogues and the Christian churches. Seems natural and logical.
Are you saying that the apostles were sacrificing animals in the temples in the New Testament and the book of acts? If that’s what you are saying then that is incorrect. The apostles went to the synagogues to preach the gospel. Acts 17 (Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ.”) There was only one final sacrifice that was Jesus Christ. Hebrews 10 (When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.)
I think you are incorrect. Daily sacrifices were performed at the Temple in Jerusalem, with a lamb sacrificed every morning and every evening. The priests performed these rituals on the behalf of all the worshippers at the Temple. All attendees. And Acts 21:26 shows Paul performing Temple rituals as usual: "The next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he went to the Temple to give notice of the date when the days of purification would end and the offering would be made for each of them." This verse shows that Paul participated in Jewish purification rituals at the Temple in Jerusalem, even many years after Jesus' crucifixion. It demonstrates that the early apostles, including Paul, continued to engage in some Jewish religious practices and attend the Temple, while also spreading their new faith in Jesus as the Messiah.
Maison means mansion in French is a language feminine language in my father's house are many mansions the Mason goes around building temples of worship they deny their body as being a house of praise Maison's met in houses they dropped the eye out of Maison and dropped God the modern Mason cannot claim antiquity their founding day is June 26th 1717 at that point they were building temples of worship they believe that this Earth is going to be a place where a kingdom is going to be set up they don't believe it's going to be burned up. In my father's house are many mansions Maisons
The issue of the "correct" pronunciation of NT Greek terms has been an ongoing debate for centuries. See the excellent recent work by Benjamin Kantor, "The Pronunciation of New Testament Greek" (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2023).
@@tomwadsworth One of the tools I have used is to have a conversation with a current greek person living in Greece, asking about meanings and pronunciations. Modern Greek is still very similar to koine, and the pronunciations are still very intact. omicron and omega are still very different sounds, as are episilon and ata.
@@jimyoungblood1687 I've been to Greece several times, and my experience (with omicron and omega) was not the same as yours. Kantor's book also says that Koine and Modern Greek pronounce omicron and omega the same way. All that aside, we all tend to pronounce Greek the way we learned it. Right or wrong, I learned it in 1972 from J. Gresham Machen's grammar, which also pronounces omicron and omega the same way. Ultimately, we can't allow pronunciations to divide us or to make us despise other pronunciations. (I'm not saying you're doing this.) But Kantor's recent scholarly deep-dive into the issue is a helpful resource.
@@tomwadsworth Tom, I apologize and do not mean to bring discord. My third year greek prof who we called "Doc: was a stickler for pronunciation, and would often use humiliation to bring us in line when we strayed. So, following strict rules rather than loose rules of pronunciation was drummed into us. By the way, I loved Doc, and later in his life we were best of friends. Blessings to you.
Yes, it seems paganistic to us to prostrate before another human. But in the Bible, it was common to prostrate before another human. In these dozens of cases, the person is often not a pagan, and is usually prostrating before an honored human or a superior, such as a king or a prophet.
@@tomwadsworth Sorry I should have qualified it better. I meant post Jesus coming to us. And can fully understand it in Old Testament times. The kings and prophets were Gods anointed that wielded enormous power on behalf of God. But not so know.
This is a good analysis of the meanings of the various Greek words. However, I think you must define “worship” because that’s the word that has some meaning to us. It comes from the English “worthyship”. This means to give people their due respect. Humans have been called “your worship” as recognition of their status and doesn’t have anything to do with deity. The problem is using the term worship for these different Greek words. The mostly Protestant translators brought in their preconceptions into the translations they made. I have to disagree with his conclusions. Leitourgeia is used in Acts because a priestly function was being indicated. It is where we get the term liturgy. So, he’s wrong that liturgy is not mentioned in the NT. Christian “worship”, latreia and leitourgeia, is the liturgy and this involves sacrifice. It is not metaphorical. Sure, it means offering ourselves to God but it means more. The Eucharist is a sacrifice. It is offered to God. It is consumed like sacrifices in the OT. The Jewish sacrifice (Korban) was a means of drawing near to God. The Jewish tradition said that all sacrifices would cease when the Messiah came except the Thanksgiving sacrifice. The Todah, or Thanksgiving sacrifice, was observed using bread, not unleavened bread. See Leviticus 7. The a reformers rejected the Roman Catholic understanding of sacrifice because they interpreted it as a reactive of Christ. They did not know the Eastern Orthodox view. The Orthodox have a correct understanding of sacrifice. The Eucharist is a sacrifice, an offering for drawing near God and, interestingly, it means “thanksgiving”. It is the sacrifice instituted by Christ that survived the destruction of the earthly Temple. People object and say we do it to remember Christ. This is a misunderstanding. A “memorial” is a sacrifice in that tradition. So, the Eucharist is a memorial, Thanksgiving sacrifice to God. Oh, the Orthodox do a lot of prostrations during a leitourgeia (liturgy), when they enter, when they are present, when they leave. The old understanding has been preserved in the Eastern Orthodox. Faith.
Thanks for your comments. I think you have presented a good explanation of the Eastern Orthodox view. With all due respect, I would disagree on some key points. (1) From my close study of the 165 times that λειτουργέω is used in the LXX and NT, I came to the conclusion that λειτουργούντων in Acts 13:2 cannot be taken literally as "priestly service." The five "prophets and teachers" were certainly not "priests," nor did they perform any activities that would typically be identified as the work of "priests" in the first century. Historically, the term "priest" would not be applied to Christian ministers for another 200 years. So, λειτουργούντων in Acts 13:2 must be taken metaphorically. In short, it seems clear that Luke is using λειτουργούντων as a flattering way to depict the special ministry of these five in prophesying and teaching. λειτουργέω and its cognates would not be commonly used in reference to Christian "liturgy" until the fourth century. (2) The idea that the Lord's Supper is a sacrifice did not emerge for another century or more. As you may know, the Reformers such as Luther and Zwingli adamantly rejected the idea that it was a sacrifice. Zwingli even included this denunciation as one of his 67 "theses" (#18), when he expressly said, "The mass is not a sacrifice." We can agree to disagree on this. But I ask you to watch video #6 "How the Later Church Developed Worship Services." It contains the fruit of my research into second, third, and fourth century Christian literature, in my attempt to discover when, how, and why "worship" terminology began to be applied to the Christian assembly. ua-cam.com/video/4CfNZbjK6Sg/v-deo.html Thanks again for watching and commenting.
@@tomwadsworth Thank you, Sir, for your kind and thoughtful reply. I love your videos so far even if I disagree with some things you say. It is a worthy subject on which to present. I'm currently listening to your video No. 3 in this series and intend on watching all of them. BTW, I was raised in the Churches of Christ. It's been a long trek to the Orthodox Church. I do agree that we will disagree on some things, but I do really appreciate your focus on the subject of worship and the Temple. I agree that these are key to understanding the early Church and its “worship”. Unfortunately, we are kind of stuck with this word in English because I don’t think anything else is going to catch on. :-) But there’s nothing wrong with explaining it though! As for disagreements, do think that the Eucharist as a sacrifice is expressly referenced by the earliest Christian writers. In the first century, both the Didache and 1 Clement reference the Eucharist as a sacrifice. Ignatius of Antioch at the turn of the first century does too. Justin Martyr and St. Irenaeus both do in the 2nd century. This is clearly present very early. I think the misunderstanding of the reference to priests comes from the use of different terms like ἱερεύς and πρεσβύτερος. IIRC, the English word “priest” comes from πρεσβύτερος. I think it has been connected to ἱερεύς because a πρεσβύτερος will exercise the activities of a ἱερεύς, but does other things too. A believer is, in a way, called to be a ἱερεύς. St. Ignatius’ letters clearly present the bishops, presbyters and deacons as performing priestly liturgical functions related directly to the Eucharist; this is right at the turn of the 1st century and he had been doing it for some time. The difficulty in understanding these expressions and use in the early Church by reading the NT is that the NT was not written to explain these things. Attempting to extract the answer from the NT text may be asking for something it was not designed for. The Church existed decades before the NT was completed and it wasn’t written as an instruction manual to build Church communities for those not connected to the Church. I agree with you that a good amount of information can be gleaned but, as you point out, context must be the controlling element. Looking at the extra-biblical records helps with understanding the context. This applies to house churches as well. I do really appreciate your focus on the Temple. I don’t yet know where you’re going with it but the Tabernacle/Temple imagery is a significant feature of early Christianity. This imagery passes right from the Jews into the Church. The Church truly saw itself as the Assembly, the Kahal Israel. Of course, while we have the earthly Church and its worship, we have a heavenly one as well and they are connected. You correctly point out that phrases like “household of God” are Temple references. I don’t understand why you don’t apply this to the Church though. St. Paul expressly calls the Church the “household of God”. (1 Timothy 3:15). St. Peter ties it all together “you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”. (1 Peter 2:5). The problem with the Reformers is that their worldview was shaped by Roman Catholicism. Their agreements and disagreements are all within that context. Most Western Christians have maintained that same paradigm, either for or against Rome. The early Church’s viewpoint was different. I am not posting this to be contentious. I truly appreciate you addressing this subject. It’s close to my heart. I look forward to watching your other videos. May it be blessed.
@@colum6 You're right and I'm wrong about "the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice didn't emerge for another century or more." The concept was indeed present in the Didache 14:1-3; Ignatius, Philadelphians 4, but less so in 1 Clement 44:4. Yet, the concept (that Lord's Supper = sacrifice) is certainly lacking in the NT documents. Few would disagree that many inappropriate developments took place in the post-NT era; it behooves us to cling more closely to the NT documents rather than the later literature. As I spent much time in these later documents, it seemed to me that the church (inappropriately) reverted to sacrificial concepts that were prevalent in the surrounding pagan and Jewish culture. The danger of viewing the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice is the assumption that it is a sacrifice that must be continually offered for forgiveness. Hebrews (7:27; 9:12; 10:10, et al.) repeatedly emphasizes that Jesus's "once for all" sacrifice eliminates the need for recurring sacrifices. My study has also made me strongly aware of the modern tendency to view the NT anachronistically, assuming that our modern assembly practices (whether Orthodox, Catholic, or Protestant) were somehow present in the first century. If we study the NT with a "clean slate," I think it's very difficult to conclude that (1) they viewed their assemblies as "worship," (2) they viewed the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice, and (3) their meetings were liturgical in nature. All these are later developments that became firmly entrenched in the Christian culture. Please reply when you can. I'm greatly enjoying your input and our exchange.
If the church already screwed things up by the time of the didache and Ignatius, then there isn't much point in trying to emulate the Apostolic religion, because that would mean it's obviously very unstable in theology and practice, unable to endure past the first generation. Either those sources clarify the practices of the apostles, or else there is no reason to value the practices of the apostles.
@@johnbahler In some respects, the church had already screwed things up in the NT era. Many of the apostles' admonitions and correctives in the NT era were issued because "the church had already screwed things up." The challenge is to compare the (first century) NT writings with the writings of the later era to see when variances began. Check out my video, Worship #6 How the Later Church Developed Worship Services, at ua-cam.com/video/4CfNZbjK6Sg/v-deo.html.
We are not under the law of Moses, brother, and we are not under your "law" of worship. If God blesses people through praise and worship teams, what's it to you?
When I was a pastor, 50% of our gatherings were spent caring for each other, discussing internal benevolence etc..ay any time 1/5 were in a crisis so 4/5 were helping that group...it was not a burden..it was wonderful
@ChristianRevivalOrg I am assuming that you are writing this comment although you are most probably deceased, being that you refer to yourself as a " former" pastor. Yet I suppose that it could be possible that the apostles can retire also!
@@Brotheral-pb1oj I filled in as a youth pastor, because there were no other people that could. The church then hired someone andnthey took over. I am ready in season and out of season, but God doesnt always keep someone in the same role. God bless.
@sephardim4yeshua155 LOL! Thank you much for your explanation. Actually, it was extremely naive of me to boldly presume something about the intricacies of someone's situation in which I have no knowledge ! I sincerely apologize, and I actually feel relieved now that you cleared that up!🙏❤️
@@Brotheral-pb1ojIsn't that a different person?
@@danello7 I'm sorry! I don't understand what you mean!
God bless you brother Tom!! "Knowledge will increase..." This makes me so happy - I've been feeling this for YEARS! I tried so many churches that didn't care if I was there... I started doing the Sabbath myself (I'm a 68 yr old woman) getting on my knees to pray every day... GATHERING with my Christian brothers and sisters ONLINE (Facebook) and just keeping it simple and REAL. GOD started to bless my life abundantly... He just placed me into an affordable apartment in a beautiful place beside the water... PRAISES!! He's there. Watching and listening... Waiting to bless us! Hallelujah!
The interesting thing is how after I was born again, there were a number of occasions when I was “worshipping” as we do in the modern west by standing and singing, but I found my legs unable to support me and I would end up kneeling. It wasn’t quite prostration, but it seems to be a common phenomenon when someone is overcome by the Holy Spirit 🕊️
Shared this series with many people, very interestin research that challenges a very popular modern view in the Church. I love it
thank you from the bottom of my heart. Listened to you for the first time two days ago and have found this so helpful. I received Christ as my Savior almost 41 years ago and have been reading His Word faithfully through the decades and have seen things that have made me wonder, "What is this really all about?" I've listened to part 1 twice and my wife and I are halfway through part 2 and already I'm understanding better why we meet together and how confused I've been about that English word Worship that, as can be seen from the comments, has many facets to it. And what we want to know is what those Greek words actually meant and consequently we will benefit. Your teaching helps me understand better what went wrong with our initial effort at home churching. We were making more like a protestant church service than "One Anothering" Thank you for sharing your many years of labor for us to benefit so easily, Praise the Lord!
Your comment resonates with me. I especially love that phrase "One Anothering". A friend shared part 1 with me this morning and I am so blessed by it- went through it twice. I intend to listen to the whole 7 installments. It is amazing how when we are committed to knowing the Truth of our faith, God orders our steps to solid resources like this. All glory to God
"GOD that made the world and ALL things therein,
Seeing that ‘HE IS’ LORD of heaven and earth,
Dwelleth 'N-O-T' in temples Made with Hands;
Neither is 'Worshipped' with men's Hands,
As though HE 'Needed' Anything,
Seeing HE Giveth to all Life, and Breath, and All Things."
(Acts 17:24-25)
Good point
i bet the early church didn't have the ubiquitous worship team and worship leader that's insidiously crept into so many contemporary churches.
IKNOW they didn't have them,because there's no mention of them in the NT.
I am so glad I found this channel .
And is half comprised of narcissistic people wanting admiration for themselves rather than God.
Watch the first video. Yes you are correct.
That's because no one in the early church had musicianship skills.
True worshippers worship God in Spirit and in Truth. This simply means that everything True believers do is for God's glory. Worship has nothing to do with where we go to assemble ourselves. Worship is every breath we take and every step we make until we leave this world.
You missed the point. It's obvious that you didn't watch the video.
I was just thinking out loud! I promise you that I in no form or fashion meant to critique your presentation. I totally agree with your message. I thank God that you have the discernment and gall to present this much needed message in the midst of this current so-called christian movement here in America. Actually it was the Truths of your teachings that led me to comment on this subject, although I may have been a bit zealous. It is rare for me to hear any teachings that are not embedded in the current established Christian movement. I wish you Godspeed in your ministry.
@@tomwadsworthit seems obvious, by your remark, that you might be offended and a smidge snarky. Idk, just an observation. If I'm wrong then accept my sincere apology. I noticed you didn't comment back after this person explained the comment. Just bad manners.
@@cassielitton753 I did reply--by hitting the Like button. Another comment seemed unnecessary. We're good.
@@tomwadsworthyou’ve confirmed what I believed in Spirit, people love to “ go to the Greek” but the same gospel was preached to the Israelites, but in different words, I’ve never heard anyone confirm this, love to know your thoughts on the “ contradiction “ that is not a contradiction, I was ejected from reformed Presbyterian church for pointing this out with some other points,
Gave himself a ransom for all, can only mean a ransom for all, the reformed Presbyterians refuse to acknowledge this and use the verse “ ransom for many “for their false doctrines, but they clearly have no understanding who the “ saviours “ are when Edom ( esau ) is judged when kingdom is the Lords in Obadiah 1:17 and 1:24, they simply don’t understand what one in Christ means, as Christ is also one with his father and made the way for all men to be saved, ( propitiation for sins of the whole world)one there even told me God who has no beginning or no end died on the cross!!!
Sacrificing your life for your enemy’s as Jesus did and loving them, not judging them and doing his commandments with a broken heart and contrite spirit seems very close to what you have said, this would mean bowing down to him and trying with heart mind and soul to seek him,and do his ways, but of course only God can give this great gift.
Better still, kiss the Son, whiles you are alive, study like a workman, meditate day and night in his word, in the hope he gives you the “ earnest “ of the word, the “ sincere milk”. Psalms 2:12
“Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.”
Hebrews 4:2
“For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.”
Old Testament: same meaning as New Testament Joshua 1:8
“This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.”
2 Timothy 2:15
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
1 Timothy 2:6
“Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.”
Mark 10:45
“For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.”
1 John 2:2
“And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”
Not many “ righteous are saved from second death?
1 Peter 4:18
“And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?”
But God is not going to lose one “ sheep “from his pasture/field/ forest, psalm 100 says lands, not Israel……
But best to suffer for right doing than wrong doing, if so be …… 1 Peter 4:18 context KJV standard……
If so be one is blessed with the spirit Of God, Romans 8:9
“But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.”
Two of the Reformed Presbyterians even threatened me with violence, and their preacher said it was a myth that we need to be as a little child, and as humble , Matthew 18:3
“And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 18:4
“Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”
If I’ve confused, maybe this verse is true?? 1 Corinthians 1:27
“But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;”
One more question, whom was the disciple Jesus loved? Impossible it was John, Jesus did not have a brother called John.
John 19:26
“When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!” Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.
Very well done, my brother.
Thank you for sharing truth.
This is fascinating. Love it.
You had me at "Kittel's" and the "greet one another with a holy kiss" became more clear to me.
My take is: Society grow and people evolve. They would never do things the exact way it was done centuries prior. It is impossible.
Our goal is not to trying to go back to the same circumstantial ways of the first church or any period for that matter but try to learn from both the positives and negatives.
The early church's gathering in homes,caves,dens etc was not a standard that they sort on purpose but only a consequence.
They were poor people who left the security and comfort of the temple worship system- where else could they have gone?
What we need to see and take particular note of is how not withstanding the major drawbacks to their several disadvantages they, upon finding such joy and fulfillment in Christ were able to take these negatives and achieve great obedience to God and service to each other.
Now today we are far more privileged and have the benefit of large buildings dedicated to the service of the saints through Christ. We need not try now merely abandon these and seek to go back to homes or such like. What we need do is devote our hearts,lives and all such provisions and humbly ask God to so touch/change us that we too in our day like saints of old may too find great fulfillment and obedience with our present lot.
To each his own let every generation serve God in the order in which God had called them not covet those things that belong to another people and time. Only let Jesus change our hearts.
Salvation is of the Lord not by man's doing.
Let us agree to disagree peacefully. I agree that we cannot go back fully, but I do agree about the need to return to a biblical base foundation. For most of the churches today lacks that. Smaller groups makes for a better foundation. You won't get lost. Accountability is place better. The praise teams have gotten too secular in a lot of churches. He's teaching us to step back and take a sincere look at where we come from and how far we have departed.
@@Wanda-i9yDon't think you understand his/her post correctly.
Your diatribe is vanity.
@@Wanda-i9y We need to go back to caring FOR EACH OTHER. Not a BUILDING, PASTOR OR CEREMONY - that is of the Pharisees... that's what JESUS rebuked. FALSE CEREMONY. GOD bless you and all here.
First, to compare the freedom we have in America to the totalitarian Roman Empire ruling over Israel is poor. We never had the persecution like many during the early church.
Second, God never asked His children to continue to fully adapt to modern culture. Those in the 1600s understood prostration as worship, regardless of whether it was to an idol or the Most High. Sadly, man continues to get the Word to adapt to our ways.
God hasn't changed; man does. We get bored of the old, tried and true, so we create new methods to suit our nature.
We changed the definition of worship to God.
Thank you!
But the essential question is: Why is the current culture of praise a bad thing? Because it replaces the comprehensive teaching of the Bible. Most of Christendom has been led astray by 1700+ years of replacement theology, which is why comprehensive teaching and understanding of the Bible is minimal, and it cannot even be done unless we first get out of the ravages of replacement theology. "Good can be the worst enemy of the best," said a famous writer (O.S.)
Perfection is the enemy of the good.
"You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 5:48 (ESV)
we gotta obey 🤷♂️
Thank you so much
I really thank you for this!
Awesome!
But I really love what you have done. Am looking forward to watch the other 5 episodes. God bless you
I remember a while ago reading something in the book of Daniel and saw that Nebuchadnezzar (I'm sure I've spelt his name wrong 😂) had "fallen down to worship Daniel", but Daniel didn't correct him. This thoroughly confused me, so I went to the interlinear and saw that the word can also mean prostrate, and just assumed that that was the more appropriate meaning to attribute to it. But never went back into the topic, as I've continued to read the word, that same question of people "worshipping" has come to mind in terms of what it really means. So thank you for this study!!
It's wonderful to find this. I went through this study in 1979/80 time frame primarily using Vines as a resource. I am an engineer not a theologian. I was shocked at what I didn't find. Finally, I searched for God's definition of worship and found it in James 1:27 and Romans 12:1. Also, you mentioned "Holladay". I am assuming Carl Holladay. Carl is my wife's first cousin. I used to go to their family reunions with my "one question" for Carl. A very nice guy!
Thanks for the comments!
I would tweak your observations to say that "God's definition of threskeia worship is found in James 1:27, and God's definition of Christian latreia worship is found in Romans 12:1." The two verses use two different Greek words that have two distinct and different meanings, and none of them are the same as the modern English term "worship."
I don't recall mentioning Holladay, but I've long been a fan of Carl Holladay's work. An excellent NT scholar!
I have two questions for you: (1) In what state are you located? and (2) With which church culture/denomination are you most familiar? Is it the Church of Christ?
@@tomwadsworth Tennessee - Oak Ridge area. And yes, CoC is the tradition I grew up in. The congregation I am with now is CoC, but there has been a lot of positive movement toward freedom in Christ - especially compared to the congregations I grew up in.
@40:36
As a saint living in the last days awaiting the coming of the LORD prostration has been a part of my life. It is with great expectancy that I wait to bow down in the presence of my Creator and ELOHIM face to the ground and inhale His presence.
Worship means to me, How you live your life in honor of God.
Worship is celebrating the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and it is based on individual relationship with Jesus.
@@RevelationMinistries114Did you listen to the entire series? God doesn't need anything from you. People do. Caring for one another is the highest act of worship.
@@graftme3168 That is not worship. That’s called loving your neighbor and being a servant. But worship is celebrating Jesus for what he has done.
@@graftme3168 And yes watched the entire series and thoroughly enjoyed it.
@@RevelationMinistries114but how is that fleshed out in our daily lives? You are making generalities.
Fantastic!! I loved the clarity. This is seminary level learning.\
Thanks for the compliment. Just curious ... (1) In what state do you live? (2) With what denomination are you most familiar? (3) What is your highest educational level?
@Peachcreekmedia This videois simply true teachings, prompted by the Holy Spirit. No True minister of God attends any seminary. It is the Holy Spirit that equips called ministers to proclaim the GOOD NEWS of the Gospel. 1st John chapter 2-verse 27. Seminaries are a product of the traditions of men. None of the original apostles ever attended any kind of school to learn anything about proclaiming the Gospel. For what it's worth, I submit to you that there are many DIFFERENT Seminaries that teach many DIFFERENT faiths in our Lord. Before you jump on the bandwagon with these so-called ministers, please read Ephesians chapter 4 verses 1 thru 6. My entire point is that this teaching on this video comes from the Holy Spirit. Seminary teachings comes from whatever man invented the denomination!
@tomwadsworth I apologize for belatedly replying to your questions. I live in SC. I'm not personally familiar with any denomination, yet I have researched many. I have, in fact joined a couple of denominational assemblies years ago, but it was all superficial because I was under the erroneous impression that as a new convert it was my duty to join an organization al representation of what was and still is deemed to be God's Church. I was led by the Holy Spirit to come out of the traditions of men and to be a witness of Christ, as to being rooted and grounded in Christ, and to being complete in Him first and foremost, and not adding on unessesary titles and labels that allow for the leaven of divisions and outright chaos that has engulfed the so-called christian presence in America. As far as my education, I'm a high school grad. Personally I think that your teachings concerning the assembly of believers is impressive to me in several aspects. Not trying to flatter you, but it is rare for me to see or hear any minister teach the Truth in the midst of the status quo. I can appreciate you not being judgemental concerning what I call the established religious movement. I respect your piety, yet as for myself, I find it hard to understand how anyone can be born-again and not already understand the points that you are making based on scripture. I pray that I'm not being judgemental for questioning someone's salvation. I ask that you pray for me to be enlightened in the righteousness of God.🙏❤️🤔
@@Brotheral-pb1oj Thanks for all your comments. I think that you are on a productive path. Stand firm.
@@tomwadsworth Love ya much! I'm truly blessed to know that you are truly blessed!
The image at 12:15 is Israel's King Jehu prostrating himself before Assyrian King Shalmaneser III. It appears on a black obelisk at the British Museum.
When you have context adapted to the word you see then you have a word Incorporated in that same word which walks with the same context you read on the line you have a word that you see that cannot be changed because you know what is being thought of the word that is put down
The difference between our bowel and then and bowing that goes on now is that we were personally showing our imperfection and need for help now we have it and there's no need to go through those Acts
Real worship is love of God's word and right doctrine.
@@ishiftfocus1769 Real worship is Colossians chapter 1 verse 10.
Loved this message until he claimed that Christians never Proskuneo (34:38). Luke 24:51-53 states:
51 While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven. 52 Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. 53 And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God.
The word worship here is Proskuneo. This act of Proskuneo is NOT a greeting, as the speaker claims. Jesus has left the scene. Moreover, it signals some emotional response, for when they finished with their Proskuneo they left with joy and praised God.
I have to question this research when the author makes such simple errors. Please be more scholastic and explain what the text says. Give more analysis rather than opinion.
I think it's rather ironic that some churches criticize others for "kneeling during worship."
I have experienced that it’s far easier to pray kneeling, head down on the floor.
Worship is a part of the law which reminds people over and over no matter how they perform this act they cannot do it perfectly the body in all its contortions demonstrates in act that comes up short every time thereby reassuring that person who is taught correctly that no matter what they do they need a savior
PLEASE PROVIDE LINK TO THE DISSERTATION.
Send me an email, and I'll send it. You can find me at tomwadsworth.com.
I wonder why he didn't stick to the word prostrate in the explanation of Christ's encounter with the Samaritan woman. The word "worship" was used a few times between Christ and the woman.
He talks about this passage at the 35:35 min mark
The issue here is not that there is no need or reason for worship in Christian but what is the purpose and how is this purpose fulfilled. Is it fulfilled by through physical means e.g. dancing, offering, jumping, singing, prostration, Kneeling down. Reading the NT, how die the early church perceive worship, is our gathering for worship or for fellowship. God is everywhere and He can be worship anywhere why gathering then to worship God that could be worship anywhere by anyone?
Thx, many may be deceived, thinking they won't "worship" the beast per the English, but merely willfully submitting to antiGod policies is worshipping the beast.
This right here would be an awesome subject to study. It seems everybody’s waiting for a very obvious antichrist and a very obvious bowing of the knee and a very obvious mark on the forehead and right hand, but it seems that this is not the case.
I’m looking for a church like this in north Dallas Texas area.
Good luck!
Are you in the Dfw area?
Good luck.
26:20 That puts a whole new complexion on Judas kissing Jesus - doesn't it?
I was thinking the same thing...
Wouldn't the first century Christians not fully understand the vertical, because they were used to others doing that for them? I believe during the time of both the first and second temple, these functions did happen, as well as during all the time that there has been Jewish Synagogues, which is believed by historians to have existed in BC days or in that era. And, as you talked about, there was the separation of priests and non-priest duties/functions, many of the "lay" people would not have participated in these. And definitely still, in the first century AD time frame, as that is when the pharisaical mentality was happening. Pursuing a vertical, where you are now the priest (the veil to the Holy of Holies was ripped/torn) and our bodies/hearts are the temple, understanding and exhibiting that would have been a new thing. I doubt very seriously they understood this fully that fast.
I too am frustrated with the modern organized church context, but I think we are placing the first century Christians on a pedestal they never actually lived on themselves. Jesus had brought a whole new thinking to His plan of Salvation. Well, new to the Jewish community, and of course to the gentiles, He never has been confused about any of it. We are the ones trying to understand it all.
I got to hear a pastor say the church will worship the way he wants to.
Loud music.
Standing with hands up.
Lots of lights.
Repetitive lyrics.
Lots of adrenaline and drums.
People standing enjoying the show.
Why not? They practiced hard.
This has got me willing to dig deeper and ponder how we got off track.
One example is in Romans when Paul said some false belief stands by fayth Noah Webster standardized this word to Faith but Paul said these people had a false faith and he spelled it with the letter Y instead of the letter i . This is an example of variant spellings which are extremely necessary because these people had the wrong faith
Great explanation on worship. I know I have been confused about the meaning. In the past, I have had Catholics tell me it is okay to worship Mary because they do not worship her as a god. So I thought that was interesting. But I believe that some do actually fall on their face and nose to Mary also. So I don't know how they can explain that. But I have also read the Catholic bible, Douay Rheims. In that, it uses the word 'god' to mean anything from a historical biblical character, to an engraved image or idol, and also current leadership. And even in our modern Bibles it speaks of "there are many gods" which points to leaders and historical figures too.
So by the real meaning of worship, I'd say worship of other gods would also include leaders, pop stars, historical figures, or any gods from the various established religions.
And as to "looking God in the eye," all the OT instances of the appearance of the Angel of the Lord, a theophany--some of which include patriarchs and others saying, "I have seen God and not died"-- the subjects of the appearances look at the Lord. The whole point of the theophany was to be able to see and interact with God in a form enabling a person to encounter God and not die.
...and I have no idea why a phrase above posted with a cross-out in it. Sorry.
Overkill discussion to the point of monotony and boredom. DO NOT THINK YOU WILL BE HEARD FOR YOUR MANY WORDS. Excellent research, thorough discussion, and thankfully amendable to 1.75x playback speed. Thank you.
I totally agree.😇
contextually in the Tenach it is usually just suggesting to bow or lower one self, suggesting submission, the obligationis always centered upon the intent of the heart and not the actual physical manifestation.
If in your heart you know that you are but dust, then dust would assume it's rightful place Face to the dust.
Is the movie "Anchorman" a movie that Christ would approve of us watching???
1x(8/25/24)……….0…….55:00……1:01:00…….done thank you excellent
Could you please explain what Jesus means when He says, " Those who worship God must worship Him in spirit and truth.
Thanks for asking. I think the verse is wrongly translated when it uses the word 'worship.' Proskuneo--in its 260-some occurrences in the NT and LXX--never means "worship" in the sense that we use the word today. When the word is used in a temple context, as it is here in John 4, it routinely refers to the obligatory ritual act of prostrating oneself before the deity. Jesus is not here trying to refine how prostration was done, but he is calling for spiritual sincerity ("in spirit and truth" vs. 23-24), not just the rote performance of a religious duty. Jesus called for the same spiritual sincerity in his teachings about fasts, prayers, vows, donations to the poor, loving enemies, etc., in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-6).
Jesus' ultimate point in John 4:20-24 is that sacred places (temples), whether in Gerizim or Jerusalem ("in this mountain or in Jerusalem" v. 21) are soon to be obsolete. He makes the same point explicitly in Matt 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.
It should be noted that the context of John 4 says nothing about Christian assemblies, and none of the NT epistles ever applied John 4:24 to Christian assembly activities. Even in the 2nd-4th centuries, early Christians did not apply the verse to assembly behavior. They applied the verse as I described it above.
In November I will be publicly making the case that "Proskuneo Does Not Mean 'Worship'" at the annual Evangelical Theological Society Conference in San Antonio.
I think it does mean worship. I think it is the average Christian's understanding of the word worship that is wrong.@@tomwadsworth
Worship must come from the heart and be based on the Word of God
If the word worship means posture/bowing one’s physical body just how the Old Testament talks about people bowing the knee to Baal, then wouldn’t worship in spirit and truth mean the same thing? That we spiritually and truthfully bow in submission and reverence to the Lord God by following his commandments and reverencing Him and no other? Isn’t this the first commandment to Love the Lord God with all your heart mind soul and strength. And the second would naturally follow, which is to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, which are found in the 10 Commandments and all throughout Gods statutes and ordinances. I pray the Lord lead us into all truth and understanding 🙏❤
How can he say Christ used the Greek old testament. The scroll of Isaiah that Christ read in the synagogue is most likely to be either Aramaic or Hebrew.
Agreed
The Septuagint translation was in common use in Christ's time. Which was written in Greek
So we know what the Greek words translated as worship, my question is what would be the word worship in Greek? I mean if what Greek word exactly means worship? Or is this word even exist in Ancient Greek or Hebrew?
Great question!
The Greek word σέβω might be the closest Greek term to our English term 'worship'. When I studied every time σέβω is found in the Septuagint and in the New Testament, the word mostly connotes the idea of "revering."
Jesus uses the word in Matt 15:8 when he quotes Isa 29:13:
"‘This people Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
And in vain do they worship (σέβω) Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”
Here, σέβω is used synonymously with the idea of "honoring."
Paul uses a form of the word in Acts 17:23 in reference to the Greeks' "objects of worship" : "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship (σεβάσματα "objects of reverence"), I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.’ Therefore, what you worship (εὐσεβέω) in ignorance, this I proclaim to you."
Remember: the word σέβω is not used in the New Testament to refer to what Christians did in their assemblies. The reason? I think it's because first century Christian assemblies had no sacred items or representations of the deity to revere in their assemblies. Christianity was odd to the surrounding culture; it did not match up with anyone's idea of a "religion" (see Jas 1:26-27). Christianity was a "Way" (Acts 9:2; 18:25-26; 19:9, 23: 24:14, 22), not a "religion" with sacrifices, altars, statues, priests, and temples. In this way, the Jesus movement was vastly different from anything that Jews or pagans understood or practiced.
@@tomwadsworth Ok, makes a lot sense. Thank you for taking time to answer my question. God bless you.
Not to be critical but I listened to one of your videos about worship and I had to listened to the whole thing to understand one point and you could have told it in a couple paragraphs. The question once what was worship back then and all you had to say was what it was . I hate listening to a whole thing to find out I could have understood it in like 10 minutes yes the other stuff was informative about what worship was back then but if you would have just explained what it was and THEN explain why you believed that it would have been better I hate people give tiny bits and pieces as. Then keep us wandering right to the very end I don’t have that tension span. In other words get point and then tell why you believe that
Good input. I needed that.
Okay, Tom, I'm with you. But if we're to be rigorous about consistent translation, should we translate John 4:23-24 using "prostrate" rather than "worship"? And if we do, are we saying that Jesus was simply picking up on the word used by the woman at the well, going with it, and making his point about genuine spirituality, but not suggesting that God wants us to prostrate ourselves -- ever? You seem to have hurried away from this passage without fully stating how it fits with all the other instances of προσκυνεύω.
Like The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem
They are standing. They don't have their knees on the ground and their faces to the ground.
Seems to me the basic point of bowing down is to show surrender. "Present your bodies as living sacrifices, which is your rational worship."
So, how do we understand the Psalms in the Old Testament, the doxologies in the New Testament, or Paul's instructions to the church in Ephesians 5? David is celebrated for his deep, worshipful adoration of God, and Jesus is called the King of Judah, or the King of Praise. This perspective on worship seems to overlook the full spiritual experience that the Bible's history and theology present. It reflects a Eurocentric, Westernized view of worship.
What is confusing about this presentation, and the one before it, is that it is not clear how Dr. Wadsworth is defining the English word "worship." Is he saying that when we gather in our assembies that we should not engage in prayer, or sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs? And that we should not be doing these things with a deep sense of reverence and respect for God? And what did Jesus mean when He told the Samaritan woman that we are to worship God in Spirit and in truth?
Defining the English word 'worship' is a meaningless task. After all, none of the NT writers (or Jesus) ever used the English word 'worship'. As I explain in the videos, the key issue is not to define 'worship'.
The key issue is to define the Greek words that are translated as "worship." As it turns out, the five Greek words that are translated as "worship" are not synonymous; they all refer to different aspects of behavior done for deity. Video #2 explains this, and it answers your question about the Samaritan woman.
In addition, none of these Greek "worship" words are used to describe what Christians did in their meetings. In addition, even though we have massive volumes of Christian writings from the second and third centuries, these later Christians also did not use "worship" words to describe their assemblies. Why is that?
Video #6 shows how 4th century Christianity began to use ancient "worship" language in reference to Christian assemblies. In essence, today's widespread idea that "we gather to worship" is a flawed idea that has no basis in NT Christianity.
@@tomwadsworthBut what about the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs? What about the Lord's Table? What about baptism? And what about what our Lord called the first and greatest commandment, to love the Lord our God with all our soul, heart and might?
I should mention that I was a part of a house church a few years ago, and understand that the early church would have functioned quite differently from our modern, institutionalized church. But we did sing hymns in our group, and we would have someone deliver a sermon of sorts, as I was called upon to do from time to time.
None of the Greek words for "worship" are ever used to describe any of those activities (singing, Lord's Supper, baptism, or sermons). They don't qualify as "proskuneo worship," "latreuo worship," "leitourgeo worship," "sebomai worship," or "threskeia worship." Watch Video #2. Having said that, it's clear in the NT that the early church gatherings certainly included singing and the Lord's Supper.
The early assemblies certainly included "teaching," but the idea of "preaching sermons" is not. Watch Video #4. The word "sermon" is not found in the Bible ... not even in the "Sermon on the Mount." The term is only found in subheadings that were added by the Bible publisher.
I should add that baptism is never depicted as an assembly activity.
Here's the bottom line. Our penchant of describing our meetings as "worship" and describing our assembly activities as "acts of worship" is foreign to the NT.
We should be asking, "What was the purpose of these gatherings?" Paul couldn't be clearer when he identifies "edification" as the purpose of the assembly and as the purpose of all assembly activities. "Let all things be done for edification." (1 Cor 14:26)
If we truly want to pattern today's assemblies after biblical assemblies, we should stop trying to justify what we do. Instead, we should open our Bibles and let it instruct us. Truth is, our assemblies are patterned after centuries of errant thinking, not after the clear teaching of the Bible.
I guess that the main reservation I have about your presentation is the antithesis that you posit between the "horizontal" and the "vertical." I think that, biblically speaking, the horizontal exists precisely because it is grounded in the vertical. All true believers share a mystical union with Christ, and should share a common devotion to Him, which, in turn, should draw us together as one body in Christ.
Jesus did not tell the Samaritan woman that worship was abolished. Rather, He said that "true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers." We first begin by presenting "your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship" (ten logiken latreian - Rom. 12:1). "Through Him, then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name" (Heb. 12:15). And this, in turn, means that in our assemblies we are to speak to one another in "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father . . ." (Eph. 5:19,20).
And believe it or not, the word "sermon" actually does occur in the Bible! In Acts 20:7, describing an assembly gathering in a private home on a Sunday evening, Luke tells us that Paul protracting his "ton logon," which is translated in the Latin Vulgate as "sermonem."
@@robertwheeler1158 (1) I never said that the horizontal wasn’t grounded in the vertical. The point still stands: The lion’s share of NT assembly activities are clearly and indisputably horizontal activities that are directed to “one another.” Modern assemblies, by their own explicit admission, are “worship services” that are vertically directed to God.
(2) Concerning John 4, you have missed the essential point: proskuneo, whenever it is used in a temple context in the LXX and the NT, refers to prostration. In the first 300 years of Christianity, proskuneo is never used in reference to what Christians do when they get together. It again strongly appears that you have not listened to the presentation.
(3) Concerning Rom 12:1, Paul uses the term latreia, which does not mean “worship” in the modern sense. In the NT, latreuo and latreia never refer to Christian assembly activity. If you listened to the presentation, you would know what latreia means.
Please … before you critique the presentation, spend the time to listen to the presentation.
Acts of the Apostles: the disciples met for communion feasts. AKA the Holy Mass. As Ireneus tells us.
The law was still in force even though Jesus was born prostration and worship was expected
You lost a bit of credibility when you said "Sunday/Friday Salaam" refers to prostration. It never has. Salaam is a greeting. It means peace. A muslim's Friday salaam is a holy day greeting, not a prostration.
Look it up: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/salaam
If the word worship means posture/bowing one’s physical body just how the Old Testament talks about people bowing the knee to Baal, then wouldn’t worship in spirit and truth mean the same thing? That we spiritually and truthfully bow in submission and reverence to the Lord God by following his commandments and reverencing Him and no other? Isn’t this the first commandment to Love the Lord God with all your heart mind soul and strength. And the second would naturally follow, which is to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, which are found in the 10 Commandments and all throughout Gods statutes and ordinances. I pray the Lord lead us into all truth and understanding 🙏❤
The Priests worshiped as they worked their specific functions.
Why I say this, is not the Hebraic word for worship & work have a commonality?? Again just asking!
But I appreciate the challenge on what we call worship!
Singing praises has its place, adoration too has its place! So I guess praising with adulation could be considered worship 😮🙌🎶
I know this is confusing. But remember: The challenge is NOT to define the English word 'worship'. That endeavor accomplishes nothing.
The challenge is (1) to define the Greek words that are translated as 'worship'. And since the NT does not use "worship language" to describe Christian assemblies, the challenge then is (2) to determine why the early Christians met, what did they do, and how did they describe what they were doing.
Your first premise: "The priests worshiped as they worked their specific functions" needs to be challenged. What do you mean by "worship"? How did you determine what you meant by "worship"? Does the Bible actually support your premise?
The OT (LXX) and the NT use a very specific word to describe what the Jewish priests did in the temple: leitourgeo/leitourgia. The word is used 150 times in the OT, and it refers to "priestly work." The word has no reference to what the priests were "feeling" as they worked.
Greek and Latin are easily interpreted through English letters but now all we have are just plain letters and when it comes to the Bible the English letters correct the Greek and Latin that have strayed through individual in private interpretations when we use the English letters in the first edition 1611 Bible all languages have a seat at the table through Greek and Latin the proper thought is lined up with the proper word therefore the words that are put in front of you cannot stray and cannot be changed but when your teachers refuse to notice the engrossed intrinsic properties of the language in English letters they can rewrite the scripture however they choose it is unheard of for thinking to be in language but thinking has been in language since its Inception and at the height of its use it was put in the 1611 first edition because it was being done everywhere it was hushed out of existence from 1800 forward the Constitution of the United States of America was the last best example of a major undertaking so no one could change what they put on paper the United States Constitution is highly engrossed with words Incorporated inside of words which is called oyer Terminaler when you take the thinking from the words it's called oyer determiner.
I seriously am concerned that The Master & his disciples used the Septuagint. As they were in the Temple or Synagogue which had Torah scrolls from which they would have read from. Aramaic was the common language amongst the people, Hebrew the Religious language of the Hebrew Temple & its priests; Greek apparently the business lingo. What reference is there that the 70 Rabbi’s who did the translating bought back their own copies to Israel in particular to Jerusalem? Just asking bcos it does not make sense! Thanks
Good questions, nicely asked.
When Alexander the Great conquered the countries around the Mediterranean basin, he injected the Greek language wherever he went. The pervasive Greek culture that he spread is called Hellenism, and it engulfed the land of the Jews in the first century.
So, the Greek language was quite widespread, even among the Jews. That's why all of the earliest NT manuscripts that we have are in Greek. None are in Hebrew or Aramaic.
Try doing a Google search for, "Did Jesus use the Septuagint." In the results, look for a source that you respect, then read what it says.
I'm not trying to be combative or argumentative. I'm just trying to help.
I attend the Church of Christ, I'd like to know, are we close? I formally attended Baptist or non denomination
Short answer: Not close. See Worship #7 What Do We Do Now? ua-cam.com/video/CGPSQVoZrMg/v-deo.html
@tomwadsworth I watched it. My church, assembly combined with Sunday school seems maybe as close as I can get. Our preacher gives short sermons mostly about application of the Gospel to life, our Sunday school has a lot of back and forth, and our praise music is nothing like a concert. What do you think? I know every church is different, even within the Church of Christ
@@jondeauxman I don't want to be the Judge of anyone's assembly; I simply want to point out Paul's emphasized directives. In 1 Cor 14, Paul focused on whether "all things" were done for edification (v. 26). His directive can be achieved in many different settings. But when the stated focus is on "worshipping God," the edification directive can get lost.
I've summarized this lecture here: ua-cam.com/users/shortsgkKehzk5dEc
Lee Linda Allen Helen White George
If we know anything about Magi we knew that they bowed down and did worship the baby Iesus.
Serious question, In NT times, at what point is "modern tithes and offerings" idol worship of Money. In other words for example, prosperity gospel....
Tithing isn’t in the New Testament. It’s isn’t a biblical concept for the church (the body of Christ)
Jesus kissed Jesus on the cheek. If that's the greeting for near-equals, that seems arrogant.
But you have to have a reason for prostrating yourself in worship is how it was supposed to be identified good or bad in this case bad because those men weren't beleeuers.
Worship is OBEDIENCE.
One would think
I am sorry, I don't see you point about prostration. In many, if not all of the cases where people fall on their faces and prostrate themselves before God, are they not worshipping God? That might not be how you or I typically 'worship', but it emphasises how meaning has been sucked out of the word. 'Worship' that is merely singing a trite ditty about how 'I' feel towards God is not true worship.
Why does my NASB say ministered in Act 13:2 when you are displaying it as serving in your NASB?
The NASB of 1995 says "ministered" in Acts 13:2. The new NASB of 2020 says "serving" in Acts 13:2. www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+13%3A2&version=NASB
To minister means to serve.
57:30 Sorry, but it is literal. We are to present ourselves as a living sacrifice. I agree not a cow or sheep. Living sacrifice as in physical repentance. That is our reasonable worship. Rom 12:1
If it is literal, you would be literally dead. Your literal blood would be splattered on a literal altar. And a literal priest would be presiding over the literal burning of your literal dead body.
When Paul adds the qualifier λογικὴν, he makes clear that λατρείαν in Rom 12:1 is not to be understood literally. Thanks to the literal once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus, you can respond to his literal sacrifice with a metaphorical sacrifice of offering your life in obedience.
Worship of YHWH was something that happened at the Temple with blood sacrifice. We see in Acts that the Apostles continued to worship at Temple even after Christ was resurrected. And most of the Bible was written prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70AD. So after the destruction of the Temple, worship and sacrifice had to take new forms in both the synagogues and the Christian churches. Seems natural and logical.
Are you saying that the apostles were sacrificing animals in the temples in the New Testament and the book of acts? If that’s what you are saying then that is incorrect. The apostles went to the synagogues to preach the gospel. Acts 17 (Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ.”)
There was only one final sacrifice that was Jesus Christ. Hebrews 10 (When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.)
I think you are incorrect. Daily sacrifices were performed at the Temple in Jerusalem, with a lamb sacrificed every morning and every evening. The priests performed these rituals on the behalf of all the worshippers at the Temple. All attendees.
And Acts 21:26 shows Paul performing Temple rituals as usual:
"The next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he went to the Temple to give notice of the date when the days of purification would end and the offering would be made for each of them."
This verse shows that Paul participated in Jewish purification rituals at the Temple in Jerusalem, even many years after Jesus' crucifixion.
It demonstrates that the early apostles, including Paul, continued to engage in some Jewish religious practices and attend the Temple, while also spreading their new faith in Jesus as the Messiah.
You are very wrong imo
It's right there in the Scripture.
I'm not making anything up.
Read the book of Hebrews again...
Maison means mansion in French is a language feminine language in my father's house are many mansions the Mason goes around building temples of worship they deny their body as being a house of praise Maison's met in houses they dropped the eye out of Maison and dropped God the modern Mason cannot claim antiquity their founding day is June 26th 1717 at that point they were building temples of worship they believe that this Earth is going to be a place where a kingdom is going to be set up they don't believe it's going to be burned up. In my father's house are many mansions Maisons
Love your presentation and your thesis, but you pronounce Προσκυνεω as if it was Πρwσκυνnω. thanks much.
The issue of the "correct" pronunciation of NT Greek terms has been an ongoing debate for centuries. See the excellent recent work by Benjamin Kantor, "The Pronunciation of New Testament Greek" (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2023).
@@tomwadsworth One of the tools I have used is to have a conversation with a current greek person living in Greece, asking about meanings and pronunciations. Modern Greek is still very similar to koine, and the pronunciations are still very intact. omicron and omega are still very different sounds, as are episilon and ata.
@@jimyoungblood1687 I've been to Greece several times, and my experience (with omicron and omega) was not the same as yours. Kantor's book also says that Koine and Modern Greek pronounce omicron and omega the same way.
All that aside, we all tend to pronounce Greek the way we learned it. Right or wrong, I learned it in 1972 from J. Gresham Machen's grammar, which also pronounces omicron and omega the same way.
Ultimately, we can't allow pronunciations to divide us or to make us despise other pronunciations. (I'm not saying you're doing this.)
But Kantor's recent scholarly deep-dive into the issue is a helpful resource.
@@tomwadsworth Tom, I apologize and do not mean to bring discord. My third year greek prof who we called "Doc: was a stickler for pronunciation, and would often use humiliation to bring us in line when we strayed. So, following strict rules rather than loose rules of pronunciation was drummed into us. By the way, I loved Doc, and later in his life we were best of friends. Blessings to you.
Only time i saw a Christian protrate on a floor was in a dubious seeker friendly church - ironic
A doula is supposed to be a midwife
Prostrating yourself before another human is so paganistic… but before another higher “ Religious person” is pure idolatry.
Yes, it seems paganistic to us to prostrate before another human. But in the Bible, it was common to prostrate before another human. In these dozens of cases, the person is often not a pagan, and is usually prostrating before an honored human or a superior, such as a king or a prophet.
@@tomwadsworth Sorry I should have qualified it better. I meant post Jesus coming to us. And can fully understand it in Old Testament times. The kings and prophets were Gods anointed that wielded enormous power on behalf of God. But not so know.
Why teaching Jewish children to do catholic style worshi was so heinous.
This is a good analysis of the meanings of the various Greek words. However, I think you must define “worship” because that’s the word that has some meaning to us. It comes from the English “worthyship”. This means to give people their due respect. Humans have been called “your worship” as recognition of their status and doesn’t have anything to do with deity. The problem is using the term worship for these different Greek words. The mostly Protestant translators brought in their preconceptions into the translations they made.
I have to disagree with his conclusions. Leitourgeia is used in Acts because a priestly function was being indicated. It is where we get the term liturgy. So, he’s wrong that liturgy is not mentioned in the NT. Christian “worship”, latreia and leitourgeia, is the liturgy and this involves sacrifice. It is not metaphorical. Sure, it means offering ourselves to God but it means more. The Eucharist is a sacrifice. It is offered to God. It is consumed like sacrifices in the OT. The Jewish sacrifice (Korban) was a means of drawing near to God. The Jewish tradition said that all sacrifices would cease when the Messiah came except the Thanksgiving sacrifice. The Todah, or Thanksgiving sacrifice, was observed using bread, not unleavened bread. See Leviticus 7. The a reformers rejected the Roman Catholic understanding of sacrifice because they interpreted it as a reactive of Christ. They did not know the Eastern Orthodox view. The Orthodox have a correct understanding of sacrifice. The Eucharist is a sacrifice, an offering for drawing near God and, interestingly, it means “thanksgiving”. It is the sacrifice instituted by Christ that survived the destruction of the earthly Temple. People object and say we do it to remember Christ. This is a misunderstanding. A “memorial” is a sacrifice in that tradition. So, the Eucharist is a memorial, Thanksgiving sacrifice to God.
Oh, the Orthodox do a lot of prostrations during a leitourgeia (liturgy), when they enter, when they are present, when they leave.
The old understanding has been preserved in the Eastern Orthodox. Faith.
Thanks for your comments. I think you have presented a good explanation of the Eastern Orthodox view. With all due respect, I would disagree on some key points.
(1) From my close study of the 165 times that λειτουργέω is used in the LXX and NT, I came to the conclusion that λειτουργούντων in Acts 13:2 cannot be taken literally as "priestly service." The five "prophets and teachers" were certainly not "priests," nor did they perform any activities that would typically be identified as the work of "priests" in the first century. Historically, the term "priest" would not be applied to Christian ministers for another 200 years. So, λειτουργούντων in Acts 13:2 must be taken metaphorically. In short, it seems clear that Luke is using λειτουργούντων as a flattering way to depict the special ministry of these five in prophesying and teaching. λειτουργέω and its cognates would not be commonly used in reference to Christian "liturgy" until the fourth century.
(2) The idea that the Lord's Supper is a sacrifice did not emerge for another century or more. As you may know, the Reformers such as Luther and Zwingli adamantly rejected the idea that it was a sacrifice. Zwingli even included this denunciation as one of his 67 "theses" (#18), when he expressly said, "The mass is not a sacrifice."
We can agree to disagree on this. But I ask you to watch video #6 "How the Later Church Developed Worship Services." It contains the fruit of my research into second, third, and fourth century Christian literature, in my attempt to discover when, how, and why "worship" terminology began to be applied to the Christian assembly. ua-cam.com/video/4CfNZbjK6Sg/v-deo.html
Thanks again for watching and commenting.
@@tomwadsworth Thank you, Sir, for your kind and thoughtful reply. I love your videos so far even if I disagree with some things you say. It is a worthy subject on which to present. I'm currently listening to your video No. 3 in this series and intend on watching all of them. BTW, I was raised in the Churches of Christ. It's been a long trek to the Orthodox Church. I do agree that we will disagree on some things, but I do really appreciate your focus on the subject of worship and the Temple. I agree that these are key to understanding the early Church and its “worship”. Unfortunately, we are kind of stuck with this word in English because I don’t think anything else is going to catch on. :-) But there’s nothing wrong with explaining it though!
As for disagreements, do think that the Eucharist as a sacrifice is expressly referenced by the earliest Christian writers. In the first century, both the Didache and 1 Clement reference the Eucharist as a sacrifice. Ignatius of Antioch at the turn of the first century does too. Justin Martyr and St. Irenaeus both do in the 2nd century. This is clearly present very early.
I think the misunderstanding of the reference to priests comes from the use of different terms like ἱερεύς and πρεσβύτερος. IIRC, the English word “priest” comes from πρεσβύτερος. I think it has been connected to ἱερεύς because a πρεσβύτερος will exercise the activities of a ἱερεύς, but does other things too. A believer is, in a way, called to be a ἱερεύς. St. Ignatius’ letters clearly present the bishops, presbyters and deacons as performing priestly liturgical functions related directly to the Eucharist; this is right at the turn of the 1st century and he had been doing it for some time. The difficulty in understanding these expressions and use in the early Church by reading the NT is that the NT was not written to explain these things. Attempting to extract the answer from the NT text may be asking for something it was not designed for. The Church existed decades before the NT was completed and it wasn’t written as an instruction manual to build Church communities for those not connected to the Church. I agree with you that a good amount of information can be gleaned but, as you point out, context must be the controlling element. Looking at the extra-biblical records helps with understanding the context. This applies to house churches as well.
I do really appreciate your focus on the Temple. I don’t yet know where you’re going with it but the Tabernacle/Temple imagery is a significant feature of early Christianity. This imagery passes right from the Jews into the Church. The Church truly saw itself as the Assembly, the Kahal Israel. Of course, while we have the earthly Church and its worship, we have a heavenly one as well and they are connected. You correctly point out that phrases like “household of God” are Temple references. I don’t understand why you don’t apply this to the Church though. St. Paul expressly calls the Church the “household of God”. (1 Timothy 3:15). St. Peter ties it all together “you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ”. (1 Peter 2:5).
The problem with the Reformers is that their worldview was shaped by Roman Catholicism. Their agreements and disagreements are all within that context. Most Western Christians have maintained that same paradigm, either for or against Rome. The early Church’s viewpoint was different.
I am not posting this to be contentious. I truly appreciate you addressing this subject. It’s close to my heart. I look forward to watching your other videos.
May it be blessed.
@@colum6 You're right and I'm wrong about "the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice didn't emerge for another century or more." The concept was indeed present in the Didache 14:1-3; Ignatius, Philadelphians 4, but less so in 1 Clement 44:4.
Yet, the concept (that Lord's Supper = sacrifice) is certainly lacking in the NT documents. Few would disagree that many inappropriate developments took place in the post-NT era; it behooves us to cling more closely to the NT documents rather than the later literature. As I spent much time in these later documents, it seemed to me that the church (inappropriately) reverted to sacrificial concepts that were prevalent in the surrounding pagan and Jewish culture. The danger of viewing the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice is the assumption that it is a sacrifice that must be continually offered for forgiveness. Hebrews (7:27; 9:12; 10:10, et al.) repeatedly emphasizes that Jesus's "once for all" sacrifice eliminates the need for recurring sacrifices.
My study has also made me strongly aware of the modern tendency to view the NT anachronistically, assuming that our modern assembly practices (whether Orthodox, Catholic, or Protestant) were somehow present in the first century. If we study the NT with a "clean slate," I think it's very difficult to conclude that (1) they viewed their assemblies as "worship," (2) they viewed the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice, and (3) their meetings were liturgical in nature. All these are later developments that became firmly entrenched in the Christian culture.
Please reply when you can. I'm greatly enjoying your input and our exchange.
If the church already screwed things up by the time of the didache and Ignatius, then there isn't much point in trying to emulate the Apostolic religion, because that would mean it's obviously very unstable in theology and practice, unable to endure past the first generation. Either those sources clarify the practices of the apostles, or else there is no reason to value the practices of the apostles.
@@johnbahler In some respects, the church had already screwed things up in the NT era. Many of the apostles' admonitions and correctives in the NT era were issued because "the church had already screwed things up." The challenge is to compare the (first century) NT writings with the writings of the later era to see when variances began. Check out my video, Worship #6 How the Later Church Developed Worship Services, at ua-cam.com/video/4CfNZbjK6Sg/v-deo.html.
We are not under the law of Moses, brother, and we are not under your "law" of worship. If God blesses people through praise and worship teams, what's it to you?