Sgt. Fury said:
I'm not suggesting every congregation follow the same order of worship. There are five acts of worship presented in the New Testament: preaching/teaching, singing, praying, giving, and observing the Lord's Supper (Acts 2:42; 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2; Eph 5:19; Col 3:16). It doesn't matter what order they're done in, so long as they are done. Determining the order of worship is up to the elders.
Determining an order for any of these things is done without the express statement of Scripture. We would have to make determinations of order without being told what to do from Scripture.
As I indicated, if we were going to go only with what is explicitly stated in Scripture for congregation meetings, we could not have them. It does not tell us everything about them. We would have to do things that are not mentioned.
For instance, it does not tell us whether the song leader is supposed to go to the front from the congregation, or to already be seated up front. How is the offering to be taken, because it does not say whether or not we are to go to the baskets or the baskets brought to us. Appointing someone to `lead us in prayer' or `direct our thoughts' during congregational prayer is an activity that Scripture never mentions. Remember, in the view you are presenting, nothing can happen in assembled worship that is not stated in Scripture.
As for the "five acts of worship," you left out a couple that James 1:26-7 tells us to do, plus one mentioned by Paul in Romans 12. As for your selection of five, do we know all five of these things happened every meeting? You seem to assume that they did. I believe that is an assumption that would have to be proven.
I'm not sure what you meant by not being able to have meetings. Like business meetings?
Any congregational meeting at all.
And I'm unfamiliar with the idea that the Bible is given primarily as a handbook on how to run congregations. Maybe you could spend less time assuming you know what I believe and just participate in calm, rational discussion.
I have not knowingly misrepresented your view. I am getting my impressions of what you believe from what you write.
As you make clear from your posts here, you do believe that any action in assembly that is not mentioned in Scripture is an addition and a failure to obey. This reflects a view that the New Testament has for a primary purpose to be a handbook of congregational operations.
From the looks of things, it appears that perhaps you are the individual who is getting into a huff. I got my impressions of your view from the things you write.
Are you now denying that the Scriptures are meant to be an instructional handbook of how congregational worship is to be done? If so, what is your continued opposition to musical instruments based on? After all, if it is not, then the non-mention of musical instruments in congregational worship would mean exactly what I think it does: nothing.
The reference to harps in Rev 5 is part of a book written in symbolic language (Rev 1:1 - "signified"), which speaks of a vision of things taken place around the throne of God. It is not a description of a worship assembly of the church on earth.
Agreed on the fact that some parts of Revelation are symbolic. However, "signified" (KJV) in this case means to communicate something; in more modern English it is "show" (ESV, NASB).
However, the worship of Revelation 5 did occur during the New Testament era, and John was present, and he did not record it with a future tense. Further, πρεσβυτεροι were holding harps while they sang. That Greek word is transliterated "presbyters" and translated "elders" and refers to congregation leaders in the New Testament.
Therefore, the passage shows that during the New Testament era, use of musical instruments in worship was expressly approved by God.
Explaining this passage away is easy in the Churches of Christ. However, outside of them, I believe few would be convinced that God approved of musical instruments in the past, and still does in Heaven -- but suddenly not on the earth, when He never said so.
And the instances where Paul and company visited the synagogues in various cities do not lend themselves to the idea that they were "going with the flow" while they were there. Paul was preaching the gospel to these people. They all met together on the Sabbath for worship, so if Paul wanted to preach to them, he had to be there with them. Half the time riots followed.
To the Jews, Paul became as a Jew, that he might gain the Jews (1 Cor 9:20). His being there does not necessitate his approval of everything they did, nor that all of their actions were under the authority of Christ.
Paul did not become as a Jew: Paul was a Jew.
He makes that clear. Acts 21 reports where Paul himself was following the Judaic Law. In Acts 23:8, Paul identifies himself as a Pharisee.
Paul was a Jew. Paul was a Jewish Christian, like others. Acts 21 indicates that there were Jewish Christians -- they continued to follow the customs of the Judaic Law, but knew Gentiles were not bound to do so. Jewish Christians continued to go to synagogue and the temple for worship, and this would have involved musical instruments.
Under the 1 Cor 4:6 precept, one does not have to add a ban on the instrument. The ban is in place already in that they are not commanded. The only authorized accompaniment is in the heart (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16).
Again, you are assuming that non-mention universally condemns.
That is an assumption that would have to be proven. Scripture never states it.
To mandate that non-mention is always equal to a ban would be to mandate where Scripture has not spoken, in violation of the precept at 1 Corinthians 4:6.
