I'm not sure if you're the person I'm supposed to send this to, but your email was at the bottom of the page. I'm a member of the church and in regards to one of the Question and Answer posts on the La Vista Church of Christ web site the response to one of the questions was (in my opinion) insensitive. The question dealt with instrumental music in worship: God wanted instrumental music before, so why not now? The response (in addition to having some minor typos) seemed a bit blunt to me.

Now the question goes on for a long time and I only read a 1/3 or so of it and briefly skimmed the rest. The person who typed the question could be considered as being defensive. But the answer has lines in it like: 

"Amazing. Twenty years without learning the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament."

"After twenty years, I would have thought you would have learned how to establish authority. You claim "We are commanded to praise God with instruments." Where? The Jews were commanded to use instruments. Where were the Christians commanded to do so?"

"It also appears that you missed learning about the scope of authority since you make the foolish argument that there is no permission for microphones, song books and the like."

"The laughable thing is that there is no division in the church over instrumental music. The church stands by the Bible and doesn't add what God has not authorized. There are people like you who are wanting to cause division by adding unauthorized acts to the worship and the foolishly think you can turn the tables and claim that the group staying with the Bible is the one at fault. How naive in your thinking! No, you don't have a common goal with faithful Christians. Read II Peter 2 some time."

I have no idea who wrote the article, but to me it doesn't seem like an appropriate response to someone who's starting to question or defend one of their core religious beliefs. To me it seems like the post needs editing or to be taken down and the problems with the author need to be worked out appropriately. 


I readily admit that in answering many questions each day, I spend more time focused on getting the answer out than in reviewing the grammar. I do have several people who kindly let me know when I have made a mistake, so I can make corrections.

I've re-read the question and I don't know why you concluded that the person writing the question was defensive. He is advocating a false doctrine which he clearly spent a good deal of time thinking about and coming up with arguments from a variety of directions. I understand that you don't like how I phrased my response, but I suspect that you would probably scold John the Baptist for his remarks as well. "So he began saying to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"" (Luke 3:7). Different people require different approaches. "And have mercy on some, who are doubting; save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh" (Jude 22-23). There isn't one perfect approach that will work will all or even most people. I agree, I tend to be blunt. It works particularly well with young people and it shakes up people who think they know more than others. "Answer a fool as his folly deserves, that he not be wise in his own eyes" (Proverbs 26:5).

The person who wrote the question claimed to be a long standing member of the church and yet offered arguments that demonstrated a lack of understanding of basic principles. He thought to make his point by using a double-barrel shotgun of arguments to overwhelm opposition. He even took a stance on an issue that has been addressed repeatedly going back to the 1800's by using the same old arguments that have been answered. He didn't consider the opposition to his points. It really wasn't a question but a lecture on why his view was superior. Thus, I pointed out that his years in the church had not benefited him.

Therefore, the question and answer remains. It demonstrates both the warped thinking that creeps into the church and one method for dealing with false teachers.

P.S. I hope you don't mind that I cleaned up the grammar in your rebuke.