Church of Christ Question

Frank,

The new Testament says to sing psalms. One of the psalms says that it is good to sing praise to the Lord with the sound of the harp and the ten stringed lyre. Would you agree that it is right to sing this psalm? Do you think the words should be changed to 'It is bad to sing praise to the Lord to the sound of the harp and the ten-stringed lyre?"

If it is good to sing praise to the Lord to the sound of the harp, can you condemn it as sin?

In the Bible, we see that the saints, including elders, sing music to the accompaniment of harp music before the throne of God, as recorded in the book of Revelation. John saw this in his heavenly vision. Jesus told us to pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." If saints gathered together sing to God with musical accompaniment in heaven, how can you condemn it when saints do the same on earth?

If you make melody on instruments, you can make melody in your heart at the same time.

Sin is breaking the commandments of God. Where does the Bible command believers not to use instruments in their church meetings?

Where does the idea of not having instruments in church come from? From tradition. In the second century, churches had accapella music. It was this way for hundreds of years. Church meetings at this time were greatly influenced by synagogue liturgy. Instruments were taken out of the synagogue as an act of mourning over the destruction of the temple in approximately 70 AD. If you research this on the Internet, you can see this. There were instruments in the temple, and in the synagogue, before 70 AD. Are you mourning the destruction of the temple?

Jesus and Paul likely sang to instrumental accompaniment in the synagogues. They also participated in the temple, which had instrumentally accompanied singing. The early Jerusalem church met in the temple compound, where people sang to God with musical accompaniment according to the teaching of the Old Testament.

 

Link:

1. Your premise that things in heaven are the same on earth is false. There will be no giving of our temporal blessings as commanded by God. ( I Cor. 16:1,2). There will be no need to preach the gospel as commanded here. ( Mat. 28:18-20). Therfore, worship in heaven will not be as is commanded on earth. When and if you get to heaven , then argue with God about using the instrument.

2. You have not supported your claim of using mechanical instruments in worship to God with scripture. Therefore,it is an unsubstantiated assertion on your part. However, the bible does say that VOICES were heard harping in heaven. ( Rev. 14:2).

3. I do not use the Old Testament as authority because Jesus has all power. ( Mat. 28:18-20). The law of Christ, not Moses, commands us to sing. If one keeps the old law, he is bound to keep all of it. ( Gal. 5:3). Therefore, he must also burn incense, go to Jerusalem three times a year, offer the blood of bulls and goats, wash in a basin and in case you have not noticed, only the levites could serve in the temple. Are you a Levite? And, how do you know? The inspired Peter says all Christians are to serve as priests. ( I Pet. 2:9). I am thankful the old law and temple worship have been removed from me under the law of the savior. (Hebrews 10:1-5, Romans 6:17,18, Col. 2:14, I Cor. 9:21).

4. God never grants permission to act by SILENCE. In fact, he condemns such practice. ( Leviticus 10:1-5, I Samuel 15:1-3, 15-24). God never breaks his law because of silence. God did not specifically say Jesus and Judah could not serve as high priest on earth. However, he did authorize Aaron and his sons to serve on earth in this capacity. (Exodus 28:42, Hebrews 7:14; 8:4). Where has Christ authorized the use of instruments in the worship of the church?

5. Opinion and liberty do not grant the right to act.(I Cor. 8:9,13). Paul rejected the notion that his liberty granted him license to act.

There is no sanction by God for the practice of using them in true worship to God. The practice of using the instrument in the assembly was unheard of in the origin of the church. (Acts 2:42, Col. 3:16, Eph. 5:19, I Cor. 14:15, Hebrews 2;12, John 4:24).

 

Charles:

Belief and baptism are connected by the coordinating conjunction and. This requires two ideas be linked together in necessity of thought and, in this case practice. But is a conjunction of contrast. It requires the phrases to be different. In short, your interpretation of the text makes Jesus and illiterate using redundancy.

As for the contention about God accepting the use of instruemnts in worship and your confession only salvation plan, your unsubstantiated opinion is noted.

 

Smoky:
The context of the whole book is about the Jews returning to Judaism and God forbidding it. Therefore, Paul is directing the Jews to the superior covenant. He reminds them of the temporal old law and it's high priest and disconnects Christ from the old law.( Hebrews 7:14;8:4, 7:15-17, Hebrews 2:1-4). The context of the book and the words themselves teach Christ was not a high Priest nor could he be under the law they wished to return. Why? because had already made those provisions through temporal men through the expressed will of God.( Exodus 28:42). God had been SILENT on Christ being the high priest on earth under the law as Jews knew it. The principle has always been SILENCE IS PROHIBITIVE. ( Leviticus 10:1-5, I Samuel 15: 1-3, 14- 35). As the ole preacher once said, " It is un get overable or get aroundable."

 

Frank,

Look again at John 3:16, Romans 10:9, and Acts 16:30!!

3 nice (and cohesive) explanations of what salvation requires. In the Acts verse Paul is even ASKED DIRECTLY what one must do to be saved!!

What does he say??

Be baptised?

Join the COC?

Ban instruments?

NO, NO, and NO.

So Frank, are Jesus and Paul correct and complete in their answers - or do the 19th and 20th century COC elders know more then Jesus and Paul?

 

Frank wrote,
***2. You have not supported your claim of using mechanical instruments in worship to God with scripture. Therefore,it is an unsubstantiated assertion on your part. However, the bible does say that VOICES were heard harping in heaven. ( Rev. 14:2) .***

Look up 15:2, where the saints have the harps of God.

Frank wrote,
***3. I do not use the Old Testament as authority because Jesus has all power. ( Mat. 28:18-20) . The law of Christ, not Moses, commands us to sing. If one keeps the old law, he is bound to keep all of it. ( Gal. 5:3) .**

First of all, I notice that you quote from Leviticus later to try to back up your point, so you do use the law, apparently, in your arguments. Also, keeping the law does not bind one to the law. Paul says “That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit….” Those who tried to be justified by the law were obligated to keep all of it.

** Therefore, he must also burn incense, go to Jerusalem three times a year, offer the blood of bulls and goats, wash in a basin and in case you have not noticed, only the levites could serve in the temple. Are you a Levite? And, how do you know? The inspired Peter says all Christians are to serve as priests. ( I Pet. 2:9) . I am thankful the old law and temple worship have been removed from me under the law of the savior. ( Hebrews 10:1-5, Romans 6:17,18, Col. 2:14, I Cor. 9:21) .**

First of all, as a Gentile who lives in Indonesia currently residing in the United States, if I had lived in either of these places 2,500 years ago, the Law of Moses would not have required me to go to Jerusalem three times a year, etc. It did imply that Gentiles should abstain from blood, from things strangled, from meat offered to idols, and from fornication.

Btw, I don’t go to the Jerusalem temple. I go to church meetings, which are not the same thing. The temple in Jerusalem is related spiritually and conceptually to the temple which is Christ’s body. I don’t consider church buildings to be like the Jerusalem temple. Those who do need to consider the Old Testament warnings against setting up high places.

Secondly, Christians are not forbidden from doing things in the Law, particularly Jewish believers. Paul told those who were called as circumcised not to seek to become uncircumcised. I doubt he was talking about a reversal operation for circumcision. It seems more likely he was encouraging Jews to continue living as Jews.

Early Jewish Christians in Jerusalem continued to participate in temple activities, like giving offerings. Priests had many duties like offering animals sacrifices in the temple. Many of the priests, Acts tells us, became obedient to the faith. These people were saints of God, justified by faith in Christ. No doubt the participated in the temple activities that included instrumentally accompanied singing. It is likely that Solomon’s porch, an early meeting place for believers according to Acts, was filled with the sound of instrumental praises of God at times. Paul even participated in temple ceremonies. He was probably on his way to offer some kind of animal sacrifice when he was arrested. He was going to do this to demonstrate, among other things, that he wasn’t teaching the Jewish believers not to circumcise their children.

**God never grants permission to act by SILENCE. In fact, he condemns such practice. ( Leviticus 10:1-5, I Samuel 15:1-3, 15-24) . God never breaks his law because of silence. God did not specifically say Jesus and Judah could not serve as high priest on earth. However, he did authorize Aaron and his sons to serve on earth in this capacity. ( Exodus 28:42, Hebrews 7:14; 8:4) . Where has Christ authorized the use of instruments in the worship of the church?***

Here you are not being silent where scripture is silent. You are making a law where scripture is silent, forbidding what scripture is silent about.

To address the specific scriptural points you mentioned, the sons of Aaron used fire they were not commanded to use. It is likely some fire was prescribed for them to use. I have no idea what your point is from I Samuel, since Saul sinned by not utterly destroying the Amalekites as commanded. Verse 3 specifically shows that God commanded that the livestock be killed as well.

It is interesting, here, that you rely on the Old Testament law. _ Liberty_ is one of the characteristics of New Testament Christianity. I don’t see that in your interpretation of scripture that if something is not specifically allowed, it is forbidden.

My experience with many ‘Restoration Movement’ people that oppose the use of instruments is that they are completely inconsistent on this principle of interpretation they use that that if something is not specifically allowed it is forbidden. Some of the issues have already been mentioned.

For example, I Corinthians 14:26 teaches us that when we come together, the saints are to sing psalms, give teachings, speak in tongues interpret, and share revelations in an orderly manner. The passage goes on to instruct the congregation to let the prophets speak two or three, and gives other instructions, including ‘for ye may all prophesy one by one.’

But what do you see when you go to your typical Restoration Movement church? Often the congregation sings a few hymns, the ‘pulpit minister’ ( ‘evangelist’, or ‘pastor’, for example) will give a sermon, holy communion will be served with tiny portions, and after some songs, with some prayers thrown in here or there, the participants go home. In this respect, the RM usually follows Protestant tradition rather than scripture. In the Bible, we see ‘regular believers’ speaking in meetings, using their gifts to edify one another. We see the command “Let the prophets speak two or three.” These are direct commands of scripture, and as Paul points out, what he taught about church meetings were commandments of the Lord.

What is strange to me is that many anti-instrumental RM people will make a mountain out of a molehill, arguing that instruments are forbidden simply because the NT doesn’t specify whether they are to be used in church meetings, but they think nothing of the fact that the meetings follow the ‘one-man show’ tradition of Protestantism, rather than scriptural commands. I realize this isn’t true of all people in the RM, as I have run across some who recognize some of these Biblical truths about meetings.

**There is no sanction by God for the practice of using them in true worship to God.**

Since the words most often translated ‘worship’ in the NT and OT refer to bowing down, then I would think it unlikely that most people would use instruments while ‘worshipping.’ It would be more difficult to prostrate toward the ark of the covenant holding a harp.

In the other sense of ‘worship,’ the Old Testament commanded the use of instruments in worship, and there is no reason for us to suspect that the worship of David or Christ, or Peter and Paul after their conversions in the tabernacle or temple was not true ‘worship.’ One of the words translated ‘worship’ is used to refer to temple service after all.

**The practice of using the instrument in the assembly was unheard of in the origin of the church. ( Acts 2:42, Col. 3:16, Eph. 5:19, I Cor. 14:15, Hebrews 2;12, John 4:24) .**

None of the verses you refered to show that the use of instruments was unheard of in early church assemblies. James 2:2 refers to Christians gathering in synagogues. Either he is referring to a church gathering or location as a ‘synagogue’ or writing about Christians participating in Jewish synagogues that weren’t Christian meetings. We can research history and find that, during this time period, instrumental music was used in the synagogue. Paul and Christ both participated in synagogues. ( What kind of witness would Paul had been if he had refused to sing the Psalms because they were, ( as ‘psalm’ etymologically indicates) accompanied by instruments?

 

Charles:

Why stop at verse 30 of Acts 16? Read all of the account. read verse 31-34.

Paul was fasting praying when the preacher found him. However, his sins were washed away when he was baptized, not before. Try reading the account in Acts 9 and 22. Get all the evidence before making conclusions.

The Eunoch was joyous after he was baptized, not before. So much for outward sign of an inward grace.( Acts 8:39,40).

If one studies all the accounts of conversion inthe book of Acts, he will find grace, faith, belief, repentance, confession and baptism connected to salvation of the alien sinner.

You obviously do not understand the role of elders among many other things being discussed on this thread. Elders are to teach sound doctrine.( Titus 2:1,2). They are to lead by example. (I Pet. 5:1-5). They are to shut the mouth of the false teacher.( Titus 1:9-11). Elders are to admonish. ( I Thes. 5:12). They are to feed the flock.( Acts 20:28). Elders are duty bound to keep watch over the souls of the flock.(Hebrew 13:7). Their faith is to be followed.( Hebrews 13:7).

Unfortunately, you do not seem to use the rational approach to the study of the scriptures.
You prefer to name call, make unsubstantiated assertions, and build the mythical straw man to conquer. Truth is irrelevant for you.

 

Now Frank,

"Unfortunately, you do not seem to use the rational approach to the study of the scriptures.
You prefer to name call, make unsubstantiated assertions, and build the mythical straw man to conquer. Truth is irrelevant for you."

That's not very nice! I don't recall calling you any names - but maybe I could think of a few!

Sounds like you're running out of answers!!

Like I said...

Acts 16:30,31

"...Sirs what must I do to be saved? And they said unto him, go thou unto a deep body of water and be immersed therein, then join a church which calleth not itself baptist and playeth not instruments, then maintain thyself separate from other brethren. If thou doest this thou shalt be saved."

Oh wait - it doesn't say that.

"...Sirs what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."

Frank - yes or no - is Paul's statement wrong or incomplete?????

 

Link:

Revelation 15:2,3 says they were to sing the song of Moses. It does not say the harp was literal and was to be played. The act is still singing. The word play, make noise or bang shang alang is not in the text. You have forced that meaning.

Yes, the old testament is for our learning. Romans 15:4. If one does not learn from the old testament he misses many PRINCIPLES of GOD.(ie. grace, faith, obedience). These three have never changed and never will. I also used Hebrews 7:14 and Hebrews 8:4 which demonstrates the same principle as the LAW OF SILENCE. It demonstrates the consistent harmony of God in rejecting man acting apart from his expressed will. This was true under all dispensations. NO EXCEPTIONS! NONE! You may not like it, but you cannot refute the truth.

Link, provide one verse under the law of Christ where Christians assembled and played instead of, or in conjunction with, singing. You cannot do it. Why? It was not heard of, nor was it practiced in the church for hundreds of years. Josephus, the jewish historian, acknowledged this fact. The problem is yours. I have produced ALL EIGHT scriptures in the new tesetament that speak to this issue and not one of them teaches us to play. There was no practice of it because there is no divine commandment to do so. It was unheard of and not practiced for some 600 years.

The Old Testaement was for Jews only.( Deut.5). So , since you are a gentile why appeal to a law for authority that was never meant for you? I use it for learning about the eternal principles of God, not as a means of authority for teaching or practice or even justification for salvation. There is a difference.

The Law of Christ specifically states what is to be done. It is to sing. There are eight verses that speak to this. This law is written is not silence. I am appealing to that which is written. It is you who has made a feeble attempt to prove your contention with silence. I just exposed you!! I used that which is written to prove that God does not authorize without his expressed will. The words that "he commanded them not" are real simple english. In other words, God did not say to do it. IMPLICATION! GOD was silent.

God has decided this is no mole hill or mountain. However, approaching God in an unauthorized way, is vain and usesless.( Mat. 15;8,9).

God authorizes in three, and only three ways: Command, Approved example, and or Implication. I have used all three in demonstrating the truth of the position. By the way, these are the only three ways langauge works.

Jmaes 2:2 uses the term assembly. The context has nothing to do with singing. In the context, the respect of persons is the issue being discussed.( verse 3).

You claim about instruments at the temple at all times cannot be substantiated and is a violation of the Law of Christ as per the eight scriptures that addresses this issue.

You said, "But what do you see when you go to your typical Restoration Movement church? Often the congregation sings a few hymns, the ‘pulpit minister’ ( ‘evangelist’, or ‘pastor’, for example) will give a sermon, holy communion will be served with tiny portions, and after some songs, with some prayers thrown in here or there, the participants go home. In this respect, the RM usually follows Protestant tradition rather than scripture. In the Bible, we see ‘regular believers’ speaking in meetings, using their gifts to edify one another. We see the command “Let the prophets speak two or three.” These are direct commands of scripture, and as Paul points out, what he taught about church meetings were commandments of the Lord."

The new testament,not protestantism, has clearly defined for the church what is to be done. The scriptures teach the following:
1. Prayer. I Thes. 5;17,I Tim. 2:8;2;1-3).
2. Lord's Supper. Acts 20:7.
3. Giving. I Cor. 16:1,2.
4. Preaching. Acts 20:7.
5. Singing. Hebrews 2;12, I Cor. 14:15.

I believe Paul was a preacher of much education and would not be considered by your definition a regular believer.( Phil.3:4-6).

You should study a little more before making your assertions about what is to be done in worship. The scriptures teach all those things you dislike are to be done. Furthermore, your reference to I Cor. 14 was written to correct a problem. They were not doing things decently and in order. ( I Cor. 14:40). If you want two people to speak on the first day, I have no problem with it. I preach at lecturues where this is done.

 

It's not "all those things" he dislikes. The point he was making, is that the Church of Christ does put the Protestant tradition spin on those things, not doing it exactly the way they were done in NT imes. Note the reference to the "Small portions" of the communion. (Do we really think in the NT they took crackers and crumbled them, and gave shot glasses of the wine?)). Also, while there were elders, still they did not get all the focus in the NT as they did in the later church.
So all that happened, is the CoC grew out of Protestantism, and began saying "how can we be different?" Let's just be "Christians", instead of all those denominational names. This was a more noble ideal I can agree with. But it apparently was not enough. So a bunch of other doctrines had to be invented to separate oneeself, and one of the best ways to do this is what is called "arguments from silence". Just make up a bunch of rules that the Bible does not discuss, but since it is not mentioned there, we can find a prooftext to show this must have been the pactice and everything else forbidden, and all based on the premise. So we choose instruments, Sunday as "commanded" in Acts 20:7, and communion to be every week. Others use Old Testament practices; with many who accept instruments, it's style, others it's translations, degrees of separationism, degrees of Calvinism, etc. All under the premise of "original New Testament practice/teaching". But what we failed to take into account was all the other practices we picked up from tradition, we didn't think of.
So now, we can't admit we're wrong on those, so we must come up with a loophole, called "expedience". But this is exactly the concept used by those who use things we think are forbidden. It's exactly what we condemn others for saying. But only what we say is allowed as expedience.

Basically, it's just vain strife and argumentation. Just about veryone is doing it, and this group is no different from any other sectarian.

 

Eric:

1.Your contention the observance of the Lord's Supper is protestant in nature is a blatant falsehood.
Q: How much bread and frut of the vine is to be consumned during the Lord's Supper based on the church of the first century? Book, Chapter and Verse will suffice to prove your contention.

2. The Bible is clear that God NEVER allows man to act without his expressed will.( Hebrews 7:14;8:14, Leviticus 10:1,2). This was not invented but the principle is found in both the old and new testament. Prove it is wrong. Book, Chapter and verse will suffice.

3. Apparently you have not read I Cor. 6:12. Let me quote it for you. The inspired text says, 1 Corinthians 6:12  ¶All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
The only thing made up is the thought of your imagination that they do not exist.

4. The church of the new testament did not use instruments, knew nothing of Calvinism, did not and does not use the old testament as their authority for practice.

5. I accept the traditions handed down by the new testament writers.( II Thes. 2:15).
I know of a large number of people who do the same. However, it is irrelevant to truth as to who does and does not keep it. The truth does not change no matter how many, or who keeps it or teaches it.

 

So Frank,

I'll ask you again...

"...Sirs what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."

Frank - yes or no - is Paul's statement wrong or incomplete?????

Remember this is Paul answering and not me!

 

So one does not have to repent to be saved? Since Paul doesn't seem to mention it here to the Philippian jailer, I guess not.

 

Isn't that what believing in Christ is? The point is that the COC and some other denominations insist on adding rituals or works to salvation. Paul clearly stood against this.

 

Perhaps baptism is not an addition of "ritual" or "work" to salvation, but is in fact the initial act of faith as the believer is identifying--indeed, participating--with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection in faithful obedience.

 

There is no reason for a Christian NOT to be baptised - but the baptism is not saving itself.

What if a person gave his/her life to Christ and scheduled a baptism in a week before the church. The next day he/she was killed in a car wreck. Saved or not?

Obviously yes!!

 

Hypothetical exceptions like that do not disprove the "rule" that baptism is a normative part of salvation. Early in church history there was what was considered "baptism by blood" or "of desire" for those martyrs who died before they were baptized through no fault of their own. Yet these same Christians still maintained that it was normatively in water baptism that one was forgiven of sins and was buried and resurrected with Christ. (They saw no dichotomy between regenerative baptism and salvation by faith.) The point is that while God is not bound by baptism, we are. While God certainly can save folks in the situations such as you describe, this doesn't excuse the indivudual who has the opportunity to be baptized but refuses to do so. If such an individual as that refuses that simplest of obedient acts, how "can faith save him?" (James 2:14)

 

DT,

"If such an individual as that refuses that simplest of obedient acts, how "can faith save him?" (James 2:14)"

Do you really think that someone who accepts Christ would refuse baptism?

The basic problem is the COC guys insist that a person be baptized (no real problem here), join their denomination, and forego instrumental music. This is addition to the gospel and is false doctrine. If a COC member suggests that these things are good, or are recommendable - well good for him. But he cannot add to the gospel!!!!!

 

I think it's very possible, especially if one hears a watered-down gospel that all you have to do is believe certain facts about Jesus and pray a sinner's prayer and you're saved forever(!). Sadly, that's what many are hearing today when they are told to "just accept Christ", when what they should be told that "faith without works is dead".

 

DT,

I agree with your LAST post. Someone who makes a confession but whose life yields no fruit PROBABLY doesn't really have true faith in Christ. Good works will follow true faith.

But you cannot tie the gift of salvation to works.

And indeed the works of which James speaks are good actions and Christ-like behavior - not the legalistic, nonscriptural demands of the strict COC.