Musical Instruments in Worship

cougan · Feb 14, 2003

11th February 2003 at 01:21 AM Azeotroper said this in Post #199

Hi Cougan!!

Admittedly, I am usually slow to catch on.  I thought that by "ADDING" our own traditions to the law we would be taking a written law of God and "ADDING" some stipulation to it.  What I mean is......you are right in that the new testament does not mention harps or cymbals or pianos or bass guitars or zithers in praise to God though, of course, some of them are mentioned in the old testament.  Where you are adding to God's Law is by saying musical instruments cannot be used simply because they are not mentioned, or somehow authorized by the new testament. 

Seriously, can members of your church not speak into a microphone to praise God in testimony because microphones are not authorized by the new covenant?  And are you guilty of sin if you praise the Lord while typing on your computer because it was not authorized by the new covenant?  And is the Church of Christ minister who broadcasts on Sunday morning TV (In Search of the Lord's Way is the name of the show) guilty of sin because he is not only praising God with a non-authorized camera recording the event, but also sending out the sinful act over the airwaves to be viewed on my non-authorized television?  And are the people (who are dutifully singing praise to God acapella) on this TV broadcast unwittingly guilty of sin for being associated with the whole sordid mess?

Azeotroper I am glad to see that you recognize that the NT does not mention the use of musical instruments to praise God. I know that your time is precious to you so I searched through this thread and found where I dealt with this very issue that you bring up. I hope that you will find time to follow the links below and read what  I wrote and see what you think about it.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/32231-7.html #62 ff
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/32231-14.html #132

Cougan

cougan · Feb 15, 2003

Let's recap the argument. I stated my argument about Psalms and what was fulfilled within the context. You never provided a counter-argument, but went off on a straw man. My point still stands, and there is no reason for me to say it again...but I will.

What part of the Law was fulfilled? All of it.

What part of the Prophets and the Psalms was fulfilled? The prophecies concerning Jesus Christ. Jesus himself said so. (Luke 24:44)

You say that I never provided a counter-argument but went off on a straw man. Well, thats quite interesting Scott but it just is not true. Maybe you dont remember my basic arguement below.

Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me."

This one verse takes away your arguement that shows that Jesus fulfilled not only the things of the Law of Moses and the prophets by the Psalms as well.
The book of Psalms is a part of the Law.
1. John 10:34 / Ps 82:6
2. Jn 12:34 / Ps 110:4
3. Jn 15:25 / Ps 35:19
4. Rom 3:10-12,14,19 / Ps 14:1-2, 53:1-2

Here is the answer I provided in response to your thing you called a straw man.

You might as well give me the psalm arguement to. I listed all kinds of verses that show the Psalm being part of the law and even you agree that we are not under the law. That was a lame arguement you put above about "I wonder wy he adds after Psalms "concerning me" Maybe it will help you see the problem with your quibble if I post the verse.

Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me."

He is not saying in this verse that only those things written in the psalms about him no he saying what the verses is clearly stateing that all the things must be fulfilled in the law of moses and prophets and psamls concering me. Do you get it Scott the concerning me includes all 3 things mentioned here. I knew you smarter than this Scott. Why are making such a simple mistake. Go ahead and hand this one over to me to you know you need to.

Now I want to make this even clearer for you Scott. You are trying to magically seperate the book of Psamls from the Law and make it magically be used as something that we can get authorization for the use of musical instruments. The Psalms also mention animal sacrifice so we should under your view be able to do animal sacrifice today. What you keep refusing to accept is that the Psamls were part of the law. Look up these verses below and read them carefully and you will see that the Psalms are part of the law.

The book of Psalms is a part of the Law.
1. John 10:34 / Ps 82:6
2. Jn 12:34 / Ps 110:4
3. Jn 15:25 / Ps 35:19
4. Rom 3:10-12,14,19 / Ps 14:1-2, 53:1-2

You can try and argue against this if you will but you will be arguing against the what the word of God plainly teaches my friend. The 10 commandements, the 600 + laws, and the Psalms are all part of the law and the law was nailed to the cross and replaceced with an new law under Jesus Christ. We are no longer under the old convanant but under the new. You can not use those things in the old law that were used for worship to God to justify those things not mentioned in the new law. We are commanded and authorized to sing to one another Eph 5:19 Col 3:16. This is what God wants and this is what we should do. If he had wanted us to use musical instruments in worshiping him he would of commanded it in the new covenanted like he re stated 9 out of the 10 commandments for us to follow in the new covenant.

One last thing since this seems to be hard for you to grasp. I want to put this into a modern day situation. Lets say that under the current law of OK its ok for you to smoke in public. Then some changes are made and a new law comes out that replaces the old law and now it states that its illegal to smoke in public. Now how far do you think you would get with the judge if you fined for smoking and you said well it was in the old law so its ok for me to do it? The judge might laugh at you and explain that when one law is replaced with another law the old law vanishes away and no longer is binding. Its really that simple Scott.

And here is a simple syllogism for you, that you never answered:

1. Paul says to use Psalms

2. Psalms includes uses of instruments

3. Therefore, Paul must agree that instruments may be used in worship.

Scott if you dont mind and you have the time please expound on this arguement. I want you to list the verses you are refering to. I have by the way answered this arguement. We had a discussion about the word zammar or something like that and I went into great detail on that topic. But I want you to clearly spell out all the verses you are refering to where Pauls tells us to use Psalms. We have already had an indepth discussion about the word Psalms and how the word changed its meaning during differing time periods and how during the NT time not ONE SINGLE document has ever been discovered that used the word PSALMS during the NT TIME which was used in a manner of using a musical instrument but instead simply meant to sing. That is fact and one you have not been able to disprove nor have you even tried to state a source of a document during that time period that used the word psalms as being used as musical insturment.  Now if you arguement has something to do with Paul simple quoting a Psalm does this mean that if he quotes something from law that we should do animal sacrfice. A psalm in the OT could simple be read or sung or be accompannied with a musical instrument. I am looking forward to a more devolpoed arguement on this so I can try and see what kind of point you actually trying to make.

And you RIP another passage completely out of context. Christ is talking about salvation here. Why must you constantly misspeak what the Word says to make a point?

This is your favorite thing to say. If you want to be techinically any verse that is posted by itself is out of context. There is nothing wrong with what I quoted and how I used it. I could of used any numerous of things to show the majorty is not always right. In passage I used only small number will enter into the narrow gate but MANY will enter the wide gate that leds to destrution.

And in the baptism link, I show from Scripture evidence of the Holy Spirit leading in people's lives.

1. If the Holy Spirit leads someone do to something, it will not contradict the Word of God.

2. Let us assume the Bible is silent on an issue.

3. The Holy Spirit will lead a person as to whether that issue is right or wrong.

4. If the Holy Spirit is leading a person that the issue is right, it is not contradicting the Word of God.

Number 1 contridicts number 4. If the HS leds someone in a direct way on something the word does not say then he would be adding to the word. The word is complete 2Tim 3:16-17. Eph 5:19 and Col 3:16 tells us what God wants us to do, he wants use to sing praises unto him which teach and admonish. A musical instrument cannot do any of these things and to say that one is led by the HS to use musical instruments would be an addtion to the word saying that well you can sing or you can play. This is not only an addition but also a contridition to what is authorized in these verses.

So upon the new covenant being implemented, the physical characteristics of heaven and the angels somehow changed? Where is the proof?

You've dropped the idea of what the NT authors understood as Scripture. You've placed a strawman on the Psalms argument.

----

Questions to help me clarify your perspective on the Holy Spirit...

Do you think that God can speak to you, or are you confined only to what the Bible says? How does He speak to you? How does he draw a person to salvation? What is the role of the Holy Spirit today in the life of the believer?

I still dont understand your arguement. I never said that heaven or angels changed? I have not even spoken of what heaven does or does not do. The covenant wa made with man not angels. I did not drop my arguement on what was consisdered as scripture. I showed with clarity that the inpired writtings which came from God are scripture. Both the Old and the NT are scripture they are writting that are inspired by God. There is no denying this. I even showed you how in Timothy that it affirms that the book of Luke was scripture and pointed out how the commentary that you used to show that is might be possible for it to be a quote for a know proverb or something how the writter of the commentary in his opinon belived that it was indeed quoteing that which was written by luke as scripture.

On the last part of your question I have answered this before especial in the post I made in the baptism thread which I gave a link to earlier. I find it interesting that you ask me if I am confined to only what the bible says as if that is a bad thing. I have pointed out over and over again that everything we need to know for salvation and live the christian life is found within the word of God and not to sound like a broken record the word fully furshishes us and makes us complete 2tim 3:16-17. The word of God is living and powerful Heb 4:12. God speaks to me loud and clear through his word. The word calls a person or draws them 2Thes 2:14. Rom 1:16. Faith comes by hearing the word of God. Rom 10:17. The HS convicts, leads, directs and edifies only through the word. 

 
 

cougan · Feb 15, 2003

Yesterday at 11:13 AM Boxer said this in Post #201

I think music to us is different than music to God. For example, me singing in my car may sound like music to me but to someone else it may think it sounds like ****. The Bible tells us to make a joyful noise unto the Lord, as long as I sing joyfully unto Him then its music to God. Music could be anything as strumming a tune on a guitar or even a whistle. Therefore I think using instruments with a joyful heart unto the Lord is a beautiful thing to Him.

Ephesians 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

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.Its really simple boxer the music were are to make is in our hearts the way we are to do it is speaking and singing which is vocal and is the ONLY way a person can teach and admonish. A Musical Insturment CANNOT speak, sing, teach or admonish. The insturment is named that we are to use and that is our hearts. If you feel comfortable adding to this command the use of muscal insturments which are not commanded nor is the one single example of them being used in the new convenant then you are one brave soul. We are to walk by faith 2Cort 5:7 Faith comes by the hearing of the word. Rom 10:17 If it is not by faith it is a sin Rom 14:23. If the NT does not authorize it it cannot be done by faith. When we speak it is supposed to be the oracles of God 1Peter 4:11.

ScottEmerson · Feb 15, 2003

I suppose what it boils down to is this: You are convinced that II Timothy 3:16 is referring to the entire NT and the entire OT, and that no person can add to this word (as a result of what John says in Revelation.)

I say that Paul is referring only to the OT (which is held by by virtually all scholars) and that John is not referring to the entire Canon, but to the book of Revelation itself (which is held by virtually all scholars).

Everything else is secondary, really. We will never agree on the Holy Spirit, since you apparently have replaced the Holy Spirit with the Bible. (We could talk about Bible-worship, but I think others on the board have already noticed that about you, but I digress).

If II Timothy 3:16-17 is talking about all Scripture and if John is talking about all the Canon instead of his particular book, you win the argument.

If II Timothy 3:16-17 is talking about just the Old Testament OR John is referring only to his own book, then I win the argument.

Let the people decide. I have the evidence of the vast majority of scholarship on this one. I have the evidence of the Holy Spirit on this one.

Can we start the woman speaking in church thread now? Might as well go three for three...

cougan · Feb 15, 2003

Ok if your ready stop the discussion that is fine with me but I must clarify a few things first.

First of all I dont belive the passage in Rev 22:18 is refering to the whole cannon but is talking about the book of revelation itself. What I am saying that this is the priciple that is set out in the word of God. If it is sinful to add to book of revelation it would also be sinful to add to any of the other 65 books. (Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Prov. 30:6; John 12:48; 1 Cor. 4:6; 2 John 1:9-11 and Gal 1:8-9). Gods word is not to be added to.

2tim 3:16-17 is so easy my friend. Scripture is a writing which is inspired by God. The Old and NT are writings which are inspired by God so they are both scripture. I showed where the OT made nothing perfect/complete Heb 7:19. It is simple to see that the old which is for our learning Rom 15:4 and the new which is the power to save rom 1:16 together make a person complete.

I have in no way replaced the HS with the bible or in anyway implyed the bible is the HS. The HS works through his inspired word and is not the bible itself. Its funny you keep talking about the majorty of scholars say this or that what I want to know is what the bible says about it. I can list many scholars as well that hold the view I do but this within itself proves nothing. Yes let us let the people decide that is fine by me.

If you are ready to start the women speaking in church thread I will be ready to discuss the topic with you. Once again, I am sure we will be found at odds with one another and once I back you into corner again you will just start saying well the HS leads me and tells me its ok. I guess we will just have to see.

Cougan

ScottEmerson · Feb 15, 2003

First of all I dont belive the passage in Rev 22:18 is refering to the whole cannon but is talking about the book of revelation itself. What I am saying that this is the priciple that is set out in the word of God. If it is sinful to add to book of revelation it would also be sinful to add to any of the other 65 books. (Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Prov. 30:6; John 12:48; 1 Cor. 4:6; 2 John 1:9-11 and Gal 1:8-9). Gods word is not to be added to.

Deuteronomy 4:2 - Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. (In other words, if God gives you a command, then do not add to it or subtract it. I would imagine that the Holy SPirit would qualify as God here.)

Deuteronomy 12:32 - See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it. (See above.)

Proverbs 30:6 - Do not add to his words,
or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar. (Doesn't say The Word, it says His words. See above)

** And why all these OT references if they've come to pass and are now somehow irrelevant due to the Old Covenant?

JOhn 12:48 - There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day. (And how does this relate to your point? It doesn't.)

I Corinthians 4:6: Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man over against another. (I have addressed this before. The quote is a saying of the time, not God-inspired Scripture)

II John 1 9Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work. (So where does Paul come in here? Jesus never spoke about homosexuality, but we consider that a sin according to Paul, right? Anyway, understanding the context, John is talking about people who say that Jesus never came into the flesh, so it has nothing to do with what you say it does.)

Galatians 1 - Do you NOT remember that you never refuted the idea of what "gospel" means here. It does not have ANYTHING to do with SCripture - that idea came later. It literally means "good news." Remember, when Galatians was written, we didn't have any of the first four books of the NT!

2tim 3:16-17 is so easy my friend. Scripture is a writing which is inspired by God. The Old and NT are writings which are inspired by God so they are both scripture.

And that is so easy to say since you live in a time where we have both of the writings! But you have to udnerstand what was Scripture back then, for them! Unless you can understand that, you will remain locked into your misunderstanding of the Word.

I have in no way replaced the HS with the bible or in anyway implyed the bible is the HS. The HS works through his inspired word and is not the bible itself. Its funny you keep talking about the majorty of scholars say this or that what I want to know is what the bible says about it. I can list many scholars as well that hold the view I do but this within itself proves nothing. Yes let us let the people decide that is fine by me.

If you take the body of believers, scholars, and theologians across the world - those who are less learned and more learned than you or I - you will understand just how minute the percentage is that sides with you. Is this not evidence that you just may be wrong?

If you are ready to start the women speaking in church thread I will be ready to discuss the topic with you. Once again, I am sure we will be found at odds with one another and once I back you into corner again you will just start saying well the HS leads me and tells me its ok. I guess we will just have to see. 

The sad part is that you think this is what actually happened. I suppose you are using the same lens-driven mode to read this debate as you use to read the Bible.

I will begin the thread. We may come back to this - but I think we both realize that it is time for something else.

Search

Search

Musical Instruments in Worship

cougan

Senior Member

More options

cougan

Senior Member

More options

cougan

Senior Member

More options

ScottEmerson

I Like Traffic Lights

More options

cougan

Senior Member

More options

ScottEmerson

I Like Traffic Lights

More options

Similar threads