Music in worship

[Aaron]

There's a punchline here involving another beast of burden, but I'll just leave it alone...

Har dee har har. In the absence of a scholarly reply, scoffing is the next best thing.

 

[DHK]

What? Where in the world do you get that idea?

1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

None of these things were wrong in and of themselves. The way they were doing them caused confusion. They were not being done in order, or one by one.
Now what is a psalm?
From Stong's

qalmoV psalmos psal-mos'

from 5567; a set piece of music, i.e. a sacred ode (accompanied with the voice,
harp or other instrument; a "psalm"); collectively, the book of the Psalms:--psalm.

--There is not much to suggest here that the "Psalm" is without instrumentation; in fact there is a great deal to indicate that the psalms were accompanied with instruments.

 

[Amy.G]

--There is not much to suggest here that the "Psalm" is without instrumentation; in fact there is a great deal to indicate that the psalms were accompanied with instruments.

Absolutely. All you have to do is read the Psalms and there is plenty mentioned about instruments. And since Paul was a Jew, he surely would have taught that instruments shouldn't be used if in fact that were true. He certainly made a big deal out of circumcision and why it shouldn't be done under the NC. If using instruments should be stopped, why didn't he mention it?

 

[Darron Steele]

There's a punchline here involving another beast of burden, but I'll just leave it alone...

Har dee har har. In the absence of a scholarly reply, scoffing is the next best thing.

It is pretty apparent that Rbell was just enjoying an opportunity for light humor.

I do not think s/he was scoffing to mock you. S/he has good reason to think this is funny.

There is nothing "scholarly" about the premise that this thread was posted to advance. It is way beneath being viewed as a "scholarly" thing.

Let us face it: the premise is not only that musical instruments should not be used in worship, but that it is actually a sin to use them in worship! This is despite the fact that Scripture portrays the practice favorably from the Old Testament to Revelation.

If we were not Christians bound to a higher calling, we would have occasion to be laughing and ridiculing such an idea and its advocates to scorn! I am not trying to be hurtful, but it looks like there are some unrealistic expectations, and apparently some directness is merited.

When I was in college, the lady in my life and I were going to assembly with someone identifying with the Churches of Christ, and the place was adamantly vocal-only. When our friend at that time told us that it was not out of preference that they do not use musical instruments, but a belief that musical instruments in worship was wrong, we both thought it was at the top of the craziest things we had ever heard.

I have seen it posited that non-mention means a ban -- but that rule is not followed by those who posit it. Practices that Scripture does not mention at all -- favorably or unfavorably -- are being done by the same people who advocate a non-mention ban on what Scripture portrays favorably from the Old Testament to Revelation.

I have seen it posited that the New Testament has an Old Testament-like worship code in it. Well, if it is in there, it is not explicit like it is in the Old Testament. God evidently hid it, and left it to those lucky enough to have a complete New Testament to dig it up. There is no evidence for this -- but on the basis of this unproven assumption, a ban on musical instruments is proposed.

I have seen it posited that the entire New Testament-era church refrained from using musical instruments. Never mind that it is a stretch to assert that not even one congregation had someone bring in a harp to play as they sang. It is asserted that the whole New Testament era church did not use musical instruments -- and the reason for this was an unrecorded command that they never, ever be used. Never mind that even if the whole New Testament-era church refrained from using musical instruments -- a stretch in itself -- it does not automatically follow that it was not by common preference, rather than by command. It is a stretch to assert that not even one congregation had someone bring in a harp to play as they sang; it is an even bigger stretch to claim that not only was this so, but it was so because of an unrecorded command -- a command that would go against how the Bible explicitly portrays the practice.

Further, the Bible portrays worship with musical instruments positively from the Old Testament to Revelation; the idea that those who do such have to justify doing such is crazy. Rather, there is no justification for asserting a ban on what God in His written Word portrays positively from the Old Testament to Revelation.

Even the best-informed in the Churches of Christ are accepting that use of musical instruments in worship is not a sin. Those that influence or lead vocal-only congregations to stay that way due so because there is no reason to change.

I am all for congregations whose leaders disdain worship with musical instruments refraining from using them, especially given how it goes too far too often. Deciding `We are not going to use them because it is our consensus that we do not want them' is perfectly okay. Musical instruments have been disdained as an unneeded luxury by church groups other than the Churches of Christ. There are congregations that could probably benefit from taking suspending all instrumentalists from their stage and limiting them to the pews to get them to refocus on Whom we assemble for. There are perfectly good reasons for choosing to refrain from using musical instruments in worship.

However, the idea that the Bible teaches that no one should use them in worship is ridiculous. I rarely say that about any church group's precepts, and I certainly have no wish to hurt anyone's feelings, but the idea that Scripture opposes musical instruments in worship is ridiculous.

If I was to try to convince others of a premise
a) for which there is no evidence, and
b) which runs contrary to all evidence,
I would have absolutely no right to insist that it be dignified as a "scholarly" discussion. In fact, I would be rightly viewed as a fool if I persisted, and if people could not always keep themselves from treating me like it, I would have no right to blame them.

If you and a few others seriously want to do exactly that and persist in such, you need to `lighten up.' I do not plan to get involved much in this thread, as I have too many things to do other than try to change the minds of those resolved to hold and advocate ridiculous premises, but I did want to give that advice. You are going to be taking things harder than intended if you do not `lighten up.' Rbell was probably taking advantage of an opportunity at harmless light-hearted humor.

 

[RAdam]

One thing that interests me concerning the musical instruments debate is this: before the 19th century most denominations, including the baptists, did not have musical instruments in their church service. In fact, if I am not mistaken, both the Wesleys and Andrew Fuller weren't too keen on bringing in musical instruments. Again, this is an interesting point to discuss.

 

[rdwhite]

Absolutely. All you have to do is read the Psalms and there is plenty mentioned about instruments. And since Paul was a Jew, he surely would have taught that instruments shouldn't be used if in fact that were true. He certainly made a big deal out of circumcision and why it shouldn't be done under the NC. If using instruments should be stopped, why didn't he mention it?

As a matter of point, there was a council held at Jerusalem in which very specific items were discussed and it was determined that no other burden be placed upon the churches.

Nothing is mentioned of abstaining from musical instruments. If musical instruments were to be excluded from worship, this is when it would be been done.

Acts 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

Since I find no exclusion of musical instruments, I will use my musical instruments to praise and worship my God, using my talents and abilities for his honour and glory.

 

[RAdam]

No, the verse is not addressed to a congregation. The verse teaches principles. Here is the verse, and here are the principles:

Colossians 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

1. Let the word of Christ dwell in richly in all wisdom.
--How is this best accomplished? It is best accomplished by memorizing God's Word, which is best done on a personal level, not sitting in a congregation. We are commanded to memorize God's Word, to let it dwell in us richly; and to let it dwell in all wisdom, which gives the added effect of meditation. We cannot meditate properly on God's Word unless we have it memorized.

It doesn't say the place. The congregation may be applicable here. That is incidental. It is not excluded. There is one interpretation but many applications. Applying to learning in a congregation is simply a minor application. The command is for all Christians to let the Word of Christ dwell in them richly, thus the plural pronouns.

2. teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs
--We are to teach and admonish one another. That is the principle. The place is not given, nor was ever intended to. It is a timeless principle. Again: One interpretation, many applications. It would be a minor application for this to be done in a congregation, and wrong to say that the application is exclusively congregationally when it can be accomplished much better on a one to one basis within the family, or using teachers. There are other applications to this verse outside the congregation of the church.
--We are to teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs. How many of our hymns and the songs that we sings actually do that? How much do you get admonished by the songs sung in the church. Is that where we are taught? And yet that is the purpose of the song service in the church. This is better accomplished outside of the congregation than inside. In the first century singing was a major tool of teaching.

3. singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
--As in all places what use is our singing if it is not done with grace, and if it is not done in our hearts to the Lord. This applies to every place--not just: once-a-week-Christians.

Now look at an interesting note on some of the terms involved as defined by A.T. Robertson.

It is likely that musical instruments were used.

If the verse is not addressed to a congregation but to an individual, how do you explain the plural pronouns? Obviously Paul was talking to the Colossians as a whole and not individually.

As far as not getting any kind of instruction and admonishment from the songs sung in your church, I would say the error there is in the songs selected to be sung there. The old hymns provide plenty of education, instruction, and admonishment. I would make a safe assumption that the songs sung in Paul's day did as well. To limit the application of this text because modern church singing is void and empty is to assume that it has always been so when evidence clearly exists that says that as little as 50 years ago this wasn't the case, and still isn't the case in some churches today. I've learned a lot from those old hymns and some like "did you think to pray" convict me.

 

[steaver]

If we start doing whatever we want because the bible does not speak of it, before youknow it we will be doing all kinds of crazy thing and calling it worship, oh too late. I suppose if God wanted them He would have told us.

You say the NT tells us to sing ONLY. You declare that adding music to the singing would violate scripture since scripture does not say sing WITH MUSIC. This doctrine in itself is refuted by scripture, but let's use your standard and apply it to prayer.

The NT tells us to pray. Where does it tell us to pray AND close your eyes and bow your head? Do you ever close your eyes or bow your head when praying? If so, why? The bible does not say to close your eyes and bow your head while praying.

btw, prayer is worship.

Actually, the bible tells us to lift up our hands while praying. Is this what you do while praying? Or do you close your eyes and bow your head, an unfounded practice in scripture.

:jesus:

 

[steaver]

1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

None of these things were wrong in and of themselves. The way they were doing them caused confusion. They were not being done in order, or one by one.
Now what is a psalm?

From Stong's; qalmoV psalmos psal-mos'
from 5567; a set piece of music, i.e. a sacred ode (accompanied with the voice,
harp or other instrument; a "psalm"); collectively, the book of the Psalms:--psalm.

--There is not much to suggest here that the "Psalm" is without instrumentation; in fact there is a great deal to indicate that the psalms were accompanied with instruments.

Irrefutable :thumbsup:

There is nothing to suggest here that the psalm is without instrrumentation. And David, a man after God's heart, played the harp while singing his psalms.

:jesus:

 

[DHK]

If the verse is not addressed to a congregation but to an individual, how do you explain the plural pronouns? Obviously Paul was talking to the Colossians as a whole and not individually.

As far as not getting any kind of instruction and admonishment from the songs sung in your church, I would say the error there is in the songs selected to be sung there. The old hymns provide plenty of education, instruction, and admonishment. I would make a safe assumption that the songs sung in Paul's day did as well. To limit the application of this text because modern church singing is void and empty is to assume that it has always been so when evidence clearly exists that says that as little as 50 years ago this wasn't the case, and still isn't the case in some churches today. I've learned a lot from those old hymns and some like "did you think to pray" convict me.

Most of our hymns are intensely personal. Take for example:

This hymn was written after two major traumas in Spafford’s life. The first was the great Chicago Fire of October 1871, which ruined him financially (he had been a wealthy businessman). Shortly after, while crossing the Atlantic, all four of Spafford’s daughters died in a collision with another ship. Spafford’s wife Anna survived and sent him the now famous telegram, “Saved alone.” Several weeks later, as Spafford’s own ship passed near the spot where his daughters died, the Holy Spirit inspired these words. They speak to the eternal hope that all believers have, no matter what pain and grief befall them on earth.

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll;
Whatever my lot, Thou has taught me to say,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.


It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.


Though Satan should buffet, though trials should come,
Let this blest assurance control,
That Christ has regarded my helpless estate,
And hath shed His own blood for my soul.

This was the only hymn that Spafford ever wrote.



Others give similar testimonies:

Haldor Lillenas was born in Norway in 1855, but his family emigrated to America when he was a young child.2 He was trained at Deets Pacific Bible College in Los Angeles, and became a pastor in the Church of the Nazarene. He received his musical training through personal study and correspondence courses. Eventually, Lillenas would obtain more renown through his musical endeavors than through his pastoral ministry. In 1925, while pastor of the First Church of the Nazarene in Indianapolis, he founded the Lillenas Publishing Company, which was later purchased by the Nazarene Publishing House, and became its music division. Over his lifetime Lillenas wrote more than 4,000 hymn texts and tunes, many of which are still in use today both by the Nazarene and by other denominations.
While at first glance "Wonderful Grace of Jesus" may seem to be simply a general song of praise to God for His grace, several of its phrases make it clear that the author understands not just the term but the substance of the grace of God. In the first stanza and the chorus, the surpassing nature of God’s grace is set forth with the phrases "greater than all my sin" and "Broader than the scope of my transgressions, greater far than all my sin and shame" (Rom 5:20). It is grace, Lillenas proclaims, that takes away the burden of sin and liberates the captive soul.

Wonderful grace of Jesus, greater than all my sin;
How shall my tongue describe it, where shall its praise begin?
Taking away my burden, setting my spirit free,
For the wonderful grace of Jesus reaches me!


Wonderful grace of Jesus, reaching to all the lost,
By it I have been pardoned, saved to the uttermost;
Chains have been torn asunder, giving me liberty,
For the wonderful grace of Jesus reaches me!


Wonderful grace of Jesus, reaching the most defiled,
By its transforming power, making him God’s dear child.
Purchasing peace and heaven for all eternity;
And the wonderful grace of Jesus reaches me!


http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1997i/Ward.html


Whether the pronouns are singular or plural doesn't make a difference.

 

[Aaron]

1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

None of these things were wrong in and of themselves. The way they were doing them caused confusion. They were not being done in order, or one by one.
Now what is a psalm?
From Stong's

--There is not much to suggest here that the "Psalm" is without instrumentation; in fact there is a great deal to indicate that the psalms were accompanied with instruments.

Puh-leeze! The Psalms were regularly sung in synagogue, yet without instrumentation.

 

[rbell]

Har dee har har. In the absence of a scholarly reply, scoffing is the next best thing.

You could not be further from the truth.

Scoffing is the best thing.

 

[rbell]

Puh-leeze! The Psalms were regularly sung in synagogue, yet without instrumentation.

Yes...all the musical notations and allusions were placed there in the Scriptural account by seventh-century BC Hebrew Boy Bands, after the fact...

Oh, dang. I just scoffed. Again.

 

[JSM17]

Having psalm does not imply always the playing an instrument.

The point has been made already about how instruments were slowly introduced in churches long after the first century.

Just do a historical study of worship, what about the church father, did they say anything about this?

I just need one example of someone in an assembly in the N.T. church (scripture) here on earth playing an instrument.

As for the lights and the pulpit being an example of extra biblical items aligned with the idea that they fall under the same line of thinking when it comes to adding instruments is foolish.

The N.T. is our example it directly tells us to sing to one another, if you think you can add all kinds of extras then show me the biblical authority.

Now how we worship God is a secondary issue?

 

[sag38]

I'll show you the Biblical authority when you show me where it specifically says that I can't have a piano, etc. in a New Testament church worship service?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I'll show you the Biblical authority when you show me where it specifically says that I can't have a piano, etc. in a New Testament church worship service?

It won't and since the piano wasn't invented when the NT was writen you just won't have it. A better question is where in the NT says that worship with instruments is forbiden. You don't have that either. In fact, a simple view of scriptures as a whole revelation of God means that the OT and its practices show God's desire just as the NT. Many things aren't said in the NT because it was taken for granted. Common Jewish practice was to worship with instruments. Why would they all of a sudden stop with the emergin NT church? If there was a departure don't you think someone would have addressed it? But we don't have that. So it seems there was no departure.

 

[Amy.G]

A question for those who believe musical instruments are forbidden in worship:

Why would God forbid them? What would be His purpose for doing so? What sin is committed by using instruments in worship?
Show us from scripture that God is displeased with instruments being used in worship.

 

[DHK]

Having psalm does not imply always the playing an instrument.

The point has been made already about how instruments were slowly introduced in churches long after the first century.

No, that point hasn't been made at all. I find it odd that you ignore my post when I do make an irrefutable point how instruments were played in the Corinthian Church, or at least cannot be proven that they weren't. Did you purposely ignore this post?

1 Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

None of these things were wrong in and of themselves. The way they were doing them caused confusion. They were not being done in order, or one by one.
Now what is a psalm?
From Stong's

qalmoV psalmos psal-mos'

from 5567; a set piece of music, i.e. a sacred ode (accompanied with the voice,
harp or other instrument; a "psalm"); collectively, the book of the Psalms:--psalm.

--There is not much to suggest here that the "Psalm" is without instrumentation; in fact there is a great deal to indicate that the psalms were accompanied with instruments. __________________

Just do a historical study of worship, what about the church father, did they say anything about this?

I just need one example of someone in an assembly in the N.T. church (scripture) here on earth playing an instrument.

As for the lights and the pulpit being an example of extra biblical items aligned with the idea that they fall under the same line of thinking when it comes to adding instruments is foolish.

The N.T. is our example it directly tells us to sing to one another, if you think you can add all kinds of extras then show me the biblical authority.

Now how we worship God is a secondary issue?

The above comes from Post # 62, a post which you conveniently ignored.
It seems quite evident that instrumental music was being used in the Church at Corinth just by using the principle of sola scriptura. The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine as it should be, and the Bible itself indicates that in the NT instruments were used.

 

[Eric B]

In otherwords, babes might like them, but those who are spiritually mature have put away childish things.

I know you used to employ this argument in the old contemporary vs traditional debates, to circumvent the implications of Psalms 150. Yet you really believed instruments were OK; just as long as the music was plain.
So now, have you become consistent with this and gone a-capella (like the CoC)?

Careful what you call goofy. Better men than you have come to the same conclusions:

The apostles never commended the practice, and all historical evidence available indicates that instruments were first brought into Christian worship centuries later through Rome.

Aaron has made some good points, the very point that Mechanical instruments were brought in long after the first century church shows the progression through time for man to do what he wants and not what God has commanded.

So? Men of the calibre that were quoted have a reputation for gravity and sound doctrine. If they, with one accord, protest the use of instruments in worship, one should not assume it is simply because of an argument from silence, nor glibly dismiss it. Not one of them made the argument from silence.

Well, they didn't make the argument from any Scriptural statement; only their opinion of what "mature" worship is!

These are the some of the same fathers Catholics/EOC cite as proving "Real Presence" and baptismal regeneration. Does that become Biblical too? (Maybe so, since basically, the "ban" on instruments does amount to an "oral apostolic tradition" just like the Catholics argue!)

As for Revelation and worship, how do you account for the differences that are shown between the apostles and inspired writters on earth with what you find in the book of Revelation. How will you determine symbolism and reality for instruction for worship today here on earth verses in heaven?

If you mandate mechanical instruments because of the O.T. then I can see how one would feel that they could include heaven worship as instruction as well. Yet we are not following the ways of the O.T. Christ fullfilled the old covenant and brought forth the new covenant, and in the new covenant we have no example, command, or implication that they used mechanical worship in the assembling of the saints on earth.

Plowing isn't worship, but Christ uses it to symbolize discipleship.
Blowing trumpets isn't worship, but Paul uses the symbol to illustrate proper and improper uses of the gift of tongues.

Using your reasoning one could well hitch a team of oxen and drive a plow of the center aisle and call it worship.

As Darron said, the connotation of instruments is still positive in the NT. Other Heavenly symbols dran from the OT are shown to be symbolic (praise=sacrifice, etc). Never is this done with instruments.

 

[DHK]

Having psalm does not imply always the playing an instrument.

Having psalm does not imply not playing the instrument. Your argument is from silence. In fact you employ a logical fallacy that cannot be proved. As Darron in a lengthy response to you pointed out:

Unless you can go to all the churches throughout every nation of all the world during the first 15 centuries, you cannot conclusively prove that: no musical instruments were used in the early churches, can you? Have you done that kind of research? Is it possible for anyone to do that kind of research. You have employed a universal negative--NO music, in ALL the churches in ALL the centuries, EVERYWHERE. PROVE IT!

The point has been made already about how instruments were slowly introduced in churches long after the first century.

That point cannot be proved. I have just demonstrated that. Have you evidence that even in Paul's day in over 100 churches that he started that not even one church out of the 100 plus churches did not use a single musical instrument? Where is your evidence?

Just do a historical study of worship, what about the church father, did they say anything about this?

No, this the time the onus is on you. You make the wild accusations, the illogical statements, the universal negatives. You prove that there were no instruments. I have already proved that were. 1Cor.14:26 demonstrates that there were.

I just need one example of someone in an assembly in the N.T. church (scripture) here on earth playing an instrument.

1Cor.14:26

As for the lights and the pulpit being an example of extra biblical items aligned with the idea that they fall under the same line of thinking when it comes to adding instruments is foolish.

Do you worship in a building? With electricity?

The N.T. is our example it directly tells us to sing to one another, if you think you can add all kinds of extras then show me the biblical authority.

Now how we worship God is a secondary issue?

Perhaps how is a secondary issue.
As, alone, in our houses, in the car, with an instrument or without an instrument, etc. Yes, they are all secondary issues compared to the command to sing with grace in your hearts. So why make instruments the primary issue?