CofC adds instrumental worships and deems it right???

[bling]

Not a problem at all understanding that worship offered up to God based on the teachings of men is vain. On the other hand, worship offered up to God based on doing as He directs is acceptable, righteous worship (assuming that one is sincere i.e., not just going through the motions; characterized by a heart that loves and reverences God).

This may not define righteous worship since we use the word worship in the definition??

Okay, it seems you may have missed some of the previous discussions. Post # 72 on page 8 is one in particular I suggest you might want to consider. Especially note the comments on 2 Timothy 4:2. "Preach the word" is not a command given specifically for the assembly. Why not apply your reasoning to that passage and let's see where things go? For instance, does this passage apply to teaching just outside the assembly, or to both inside and outside the assembly? If not the assembly, then Timothy was at liberty to preach something other than God's word in the assembly. Wouldn't preaching something other than God's word in the assembly result in vain worship? Likewise, wouldn't singing something other than psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs in the assembly result in vain worship?

How/what can you do inside the assembly that is wrong outside the assembly?
I guess if a preacher got up and sang some of the words to some teen singer’s lyrics that showed how bad it has gotten and to show what we need to guard against, it would be alright.

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Not a problem at all understanding that worship offered up to God based on the teachings of men is vain. On the other hand, worship offered up to God based on doing as He directs is acceptable, righteous worship (assuming that one is sincere i.e., not just going through the motions; characterized by a heart that loves and reverences God).

This may not define righteous worship since we use the word worship in the definition??

Since "righteous worship" is your terminology, I'll let you worry about how it should be defined. I don't have a problem at all with the idea that worshipped offered up to God is acceptable to Him and righteous in His sight.

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Okay, it seems you may have missed some of the previous discussions. Post # 72 on page 8 is one in particular I suggest you might want to consider. Especially note the comments on 2 Timothy 4:2. "Preach the word" is not a command given specifically for the assembly. Why not apply your reasoning to that passage and let's see where things go? For instance, does this passage apply to teaching just outside the assembly, or to both inside and outside the assembly? If not the assembly, then Timothy was at liberty to preach something other than God's word in the assembly. Wouldn't preaching something other than God's word in the assembly result in vain worship? Likewise, wouldn't singing something other than psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs in the assembly result in vain worship?

How/what can you do inside the assembly that is wrong outside the assembly?

Are we agreed then that Ephesians 5:18a ("Do not be drunk with wine") applies to both inside and outside the assembly? Assuming that we are, then shouldn't we also agree that the same principle is applicable to verse 19? After all, they are in the same context, right? Therefore, verse 19 should also apply both in and out of the assembly, right? If not, why not? Why the change?

I guess if a preacher got up and sang some of the words to some teen singer’s lyrics that showed how bad it has gotten and to show what we need to guard against, it would be alright.

Is "guessing" the same as having authority for what is said and done per Colossians 3:17, which if you notice, directly follows a similar teaching in verse 16 to Ephesians 5:19? Anyway, taking the principle taught in Colossians 3:17, and applying it to to either Colossians 3:16 or Ephesians 5:19, wouldn't it be vain worship to follow the teachings/practices of men versus doing what God directs?

 

[bling]

DRA said:
Are we agreed then that Ephesians 5:18a ("Do not be drunk with wine") applies to both inside and outside the assembly? Assuming that we are, then shouldn't we also agree that the same principle is applicable to verse 19? After all, they are in the same context, right? Therefore, verse 19 should also apply both in and out of the assembly, right? If not, why not? Why the change?

Yes, we greet each other in or out of the assembly with: 19</SPAN>Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, or we do other stuff. But that is not the only thing we can do, we may bow or shack hands or kiss on the hand or hug or kiss etc. I am a little confused with what you are trying to say. Are you suggesting that if you do not do all three of these acts when you meet another Christian for even a short period of time you have sinned?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bling http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=44342187#post44342187
I guess if a preacher got up and sang some of the words to some teen singer’s lyrics that showed how bad it has gotten and to show what we need to guard against, it would be alright.

Is "guessing" the same as having authority for what is said and done per Colossians 3:17, which if you notice, directly follows a similar teaching in verse 16 to Ephesians 5:19? Anyway, taking the principle taught in Colossians 3:17, and applying it to to either Colossians 3:16 or Ephesians 5:19, wouldn't it be vain worship to follow the teachings/practices of men versus doing what God directs?

Will let me ask you if your preacher did a verse of a song that was not “spiritual” to make a point about the lyrics of songs in a lesson on how satan influences teen thinking would he have sinned?
Do you feel the Spirit has led you to your answer?

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Are we agreed then that Ephesians 5:18a ("Do not be drunk with wine") applies to both inside and outside the assembly? Assuming that we are, then shouldn't we also agree that the same principle is applicable to verse 19? After all, they are in the same context, right? Therefore, verse 19 should also apply both in and out of the assembly, right? If not, why not? Why the change?

Yes, we greet each other in or out of the assembly with: 19</SPAN>Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, or we do other stuff. But that is not the only thing we can do, we may bow or shack hands or kiss on the hand or hug or kiss etc. I am a little confused with what you are trying to say. Are you suggesting that if you do not do all three of these acts when you meet another Christian for even a short period of time you have sinned?

Originally Posted by bling http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=44342187#post44342187

Not sure how you got the word "greet" into Ephesians 5:19. Are you discussing that concept on another thread? Ephesians 5:19 is addressing what we do when we speak/sing by lifting our voices to God. Not about greeting our brethren. That concept is discussed in other passages.

Ephesians 5:19 authorizes the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual. I don't believe it means that we have to all three necessarily at the same time or within a relatively short period of time. Think of Acts 16:25 as an example of what Ephesians 5:19 teaches. Paul and Silas sang hymns. Considering the events that followed, I conclude that God was pleased with their actions. Therefore, I'd consider this an approved example of how Ephesians 5:19 should be applied. Is this really that hard to understand?

I guess if a preacher got up and sang some of the words to some teen singer’s lyrics that showed how bad it has gotten and to show what we need to guard against, it would be alright.

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Is "guessing" the same as having authority for what is said and done per Colossians 3:17, which if you notice, directly follows a similar teaching in verse 16 to Ephesians 5:19? Anyway, taking the principle taught in Colossians 3:17, and applying it to to either Colossians 3:16 or Ephesians 5:19, wouldn't it be vain worship to follow the teachings/practices of men versus doing what God directs?

Will let me ask you if your preacher did a verse of a song that was not “spiritual” to make a point about the lyrics of songs in a lesson on how satan influences teen thinking would he have sinned?
Do you feel the Spirit has led you to your answer?

Okay, let's say a preacher does this. He sings a verse of an ungodly song to point out its ungodly thoughts. Using your terminology, he sings this verse "to make a point about the lyrics of songs" (i.e., "how satan influences teen thinking"). Note Ephesians 5:19. It is discussing what we sing "to the Lord." Is the verse of the ungodly song being sung "to the Lord," or is it being sung with the idea of "preaching the word ... convince, rebuke, exhort" in mind - pointing our error in light of what God's word says per 2 Timothy 4:1-4? What you are describing is simply a method of teaching. Whether or not a verse is sung or read isn't the point, it would be about pointing out what is wrong with the song and its evil influences.

Has the Spirit led me to my conclusion? Yes, I believe He has.

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

I can see some wisdom in why it might be your last word about drunken behavior. There is an old saying to the effect: "When you find yourself digging a hole so deep you can't get out of, the first thing you should do is stop digging." With that in mind, I agree that you should stop digging.

It seems that you have completely misunderstood the meaning of my post. What I mean to say is that the loud and disconcerting worship style that we associate with Pentecostal churches bears more similarity to New Testament worship than the somber worship that you find in most RM churches (including mine). Our approval of that quiet and visibly orderly style comes from our culture, not the New Testament.

First, you promoted drunken-like behavior. Now, it's "loud and disconcerting worship." Perhaps you should stop digging ... the hole just keeps getting deeper.

Orderly worship is based 1 Corinthians chapter 14 - especially verse 40.

Originally Posted by - DRA -

Please allow me to point something out. Deuteronomy 6:16, in its context, is specifically discussed idolatry. Therefore, let's apply your reasoning. The command that God was not to be tempted by His people worshipping idols applied to the Israelites when they lived in the promised land. Therefore, the inference/implication is that it didn't apply if they didn't live in Israel.

Except that the Israelites thrown into exile because of their idolatry, and were told that faithfulness to the laws God gave them was necessary for their restoration. Thus, the exiles were to live as if they were in the promised land, which was their goal.

If you're going to talk about the importance of following the commands of Scripture, I would like you to explain a couple of things:

How do you determine which parts of the Law of Moses to follow, and which laws to ignore? How do you know which New Testament commands to follow, and which ones to ignore?

As for the law of Moses, I suggest considering Romans 15:4 and Hebrews 8:6-13.

As for the law of Christ, I suggest considering Luke 17:10 and Hebrews 5:9.

Originally Posted by - DRA -

I am familiar with 1 Corinthians 10. I have taught numerous lessons using the imagery of the chapter. In a sense, the Israelite fathers were baptized into Moses, but were not faithful. Therefore, they did not enter their promised land. The Corinthians are in danger of following in the unfaithful steps of the Israelite fathers.

In what sense were the Israelite fathers baptized into Moses? How did Paul conclude that this passage was related to baptism into Christ? How could we come to the same conclusions? What consistent law of interpretation is Paul using, and how do we apply it?

1 Cor. 10:1-2 (NKJV) says, "Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea."

How did this relate to the Corinthians? They were baptized into Christ per Acts 18:8 and 1 Cor. 1:10-16. The point? The Israelite fathers were delivered from Egyptian bondage by the baptism into Moses, and the Corinthians, and us today, were delivered from our sins by the baptism into Christ. However, unfaithfulness hindered the Israelites from entering the promised land. Likewise, it could hinder the Corinthians or us today from entering our promised land (heaven). Therefore, the Corinthians and we today would be wise to consider the example of the Israelite fathers (10:6,11).

Paul's interpretation (actually, the Lord's per Galatians 1:11-12) is that the deliverance of the Israelites from Egyptian bondage by Moses was a shadow, copy, or type of our deliverance from the bondage of sin by the gospel of Christ.

It seems to me that you continue to focus on details without considering the questions that really matter. There's no point in talking about interpretations of particular passages when we have such substantial disagreement on principles.

For example, when you say:

What really matters? Drunken-like behavior ... is that what matters? Loud and disorderly conduct in the worship services ... is that what matters?

As for applying biblical principles and biblical interpretation, I suggest learning from the Master (Matthew 4:5-7).

Originally Posted by - DRA -

following your reasoning, we can't forbid anything in the worship that God doesn't. Once again, you are failing to see the far-reaching consequences of your reasoning. This doesn't open the door for just instrumental music, but for anything and everything.

I don't fail to see the consequences of my reasoning at all. In the first place, the door isn't open to "everything." We know that we must not eat and drink the Lord's Supper without examining ourselves. We know we must gather without divisions. There are a number of other prohibitions too.

But in terms of the form of worship? There's nothing in Scripture to forbid multimedia presentations, 4-part harmony, native dance, hip-hop, or any number of other forms of worship that the apostles wouldn't even be able to imagine. Barring a word from God, we do not have the authority to forbid these things.

Colossians 3:17 says, "And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him." "In the name of the Lord" means to act by His authority. Thus, if not authorized, it is unauthorized - or wrong. Ephesians 5:19 tells what is authorized relating to this discussion.

With that said, I do agree that we need to think a lot more carefully about the consequences of what we do. I thought that DerSchweik made some good points about the vitality that can be lost when we spend time listening to music instead of participating in it, and I think we could have a fruitful discussion about how we are supposed to worship. That's where a forum like this can really do some good.

Alan

Okay, is this an inference or implication that doing what God said in Ephesians 5:19 is not good?

 

[spamking]

I've studied and discussed this issue in depth over the last few years. At the end of it all I just think the fact that this is an issue at all is such a tragic distraction and an unhealthy preoccupation for far too many.

Seriously - we waste way too much energy worrying about the form of the worship and not nearly enough on the worship itself. I say that about those who determine we mustn't have instruments at all to the point that it becomes divisive as well as those who through their practice place undue emphasis on their "worship team", determining that their services must be contemporary by placing their instrumentalists on a pedestal. Both sides are distracted from the truth in my opinion. Personally I could care less whether a congregation has no instruments, an old lady on a piano or a full rock band... as long as their worship is sincere and true. It's really not meant to be about the form.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[spamking]

I just wanted to comment on the great discussion on the very touchy (to some) subject.

I'm brand new to this site, but I hope I can add just a little to what I've already gained from here in the short time I've visited.

Thanks.

 

[JDIBe]

I just wanted to comment on the great discussion on the very touchy (to some) subject.

I'm brand new to this site, but I hope I can add just a little to what I've already gained from here in the short time I've visited.

Thanks.

Welcome to the forum. Jump right in anytime.

(Just don't spam us..... )

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by Splayd

I've studied and discussed this issue in depth over the last few years. At the end of it all I just think the fact that this is an issue at all is such a tragic distraction and an unhealthy preoccupation for far too many.

Seriously - we waste way too much energy worrying about the form of the worship and not nearly enough on the worship itself. I say that about those who determine we mustn't have instruments at all to the point that it becomes divisive as well as those who through their practice place undue emphasis on their "worship team", determining that their services must be contemporary by placing their instrumentalists on a pedestal. Both sides are distracted from the truth in my opinion. Personally I could care less whether a congregation has no instruments, an old lady on a piano or a full rock band... as long as their worship is sincere and true. It's really not meant to be about the form.

I couldn't agree more.

Okay ...

No problems with truth and sincerity. But, how do passages such as Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, James 5:13, and Acts 16:25 fit into the idea of truth and sincerity? For instance, are these passages not truth? And, who is sincere: the person that does what these passages teach, or the one that doesn't do what these passages teach?

 

[spamking]

Okay ...

No problems with truth and sincerity. But, how do passages such as Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, James 5:13, and Acts 16:25 fit into the idea of truth and sincerity? For instance, are these passages not truth? And, who is sincere: the person that does what these passages teach, or the one that doesn't do what these passages teach?

Ephesians 5:19 - how can one make music without instruments?

Can a musician not make music within their heart while playing an instrument?

Colossians 3:16 - sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God

I know it's been rehashed here many times over, but are some things not implied? i.e. singing the majority of the time is accompanied by musical instruments.

James 5:13 - Let him sing songs of praise . . .

See above.

Acts 16:25 - Do you think because Paul and Silas didn't have IM when they were singing in prison that it somehow closes the door on it completely?


Look, the last thing I want to do is step on someone's toes or cause someone to stumble in their daily walk. However, please consider that while Christ dying on the cross for us was the ultimate sacrifice and that we are no longer required to honor God with animal sacrifices, that I believe how we worship/praise Him was not changed His death on the cross. It changed the requirements of the written laws.

 

[spamking]

That's weird . . . my reply ended up above the post I replied to.

 

[ModestGirlsRock]

So, I haven't read this in months, but now that I have, let me just say it: WOW.

Ya'll have given me some major material to work with.

 

[ParsonJefferson]

Originally Posted by Splayd

I've studied and discussed this issue in depth over the last few years. At the end of it all I just think the fact that this is an issue at all is such a tragic distraction and an unhealthy preoccupation for far too many.

Seriously - we waste way too much energy worrying about the form of the worship and not nearly enough on the worship itself. I say that about those who determine we mustn't have instruments at all to the point that it becomes divisive as well as those who through their practice place undue emphasis on their "worship team", determining that their services must be contemporary by placing their instrumentalists on a pedestal. Both sides are distracted from the truth in my opinion. Personally I could care less whether a congregation has no instruments, an old lady on a piano or a full rock band... as long as their worship is sincere and true. It's really not meant to be about the form.



Okay ...

No problems with truth and sincerity. But, how do passages such as Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, James 5:13, and Acts 16:25 fit into the idea of truth and sincerity? For instance, are these passages not truth? And, who is sincere: the person that does what these passages teach, or the one that doesn't do what these passages teach?

Well... We've been down this road MANY times, but I'll restate some truth.

The cited passages of Scripture do not, in any way, support the anti-instrumental position. Psalms (psalo) were, by definition, songs accompanied by stringed instruments. In addition, the cited passages aren't even speaking about "corporate" or "congregational" worship.

But most of all, do we really view God as so capricious, nasty and vindictive that we believe He's going to send people to Hell for doing something He never said we weren't supposed to do?

Also, this "argument from silence" falls flat on its face, in light of the fact that if you're going to use that argument you also MUST use it across the board. You MUST apply it to the use of church buildings, pulpits, PA Systems, pews, printed hymnals, etc. Either we obey ALL SILENCE, or admit that we're picking and choosing, based on what we WANT to do.

 

[- DRA -]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

No problems with truth and sincerity. But, how do passages such as Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, James 5:13, and Acts 16:25 fit into the idea of truth and sincerity? For instance, are these passages not truth? And, who is sincere: the person that does what these passages teach, or the one that doesn't do what these passages teach?

Well... We've been down this road MANY times, but I'll restate some truth.

Agree that we've been down the road, but not sure where the "MANY" times comes from. I'll also take the liberty of restating some truth.

The cited passages of Scripture do not, in any way, support the anti-instrumental position. Psalms (psalo) were, by definition, songs accompanied by stringed instruments. In addition, the cited passages aren't even speaking about "corporate" or "congregational" worship.

My position/reasoning is the passages tell us what pleases God. Therefore, we should do as the passages direct ... if we sincerely desire truth.

As previously discussed, let's take the proposed definition for Psalms that you offer and plug it into the passages in the N.T. where the word is used and see if this really is the correct meaning. Previously, you balked at this idea. I believe it is evident your proposed meaning simply isn't true. Psalms simply referred to the book of Psalms or an excerpt from a Psalm.

Gotcha. Eph. 5:19, Col.3:16, James 5:13, or Acts 16:26 don't apply to corporate or congregational worship. Therefore, please direct us to the passages that do.

But most of all, do we really view God as so capricious, nasty and vindictive that we believe He's going to send people to Hell for doing something He never said we weren't supposed to do?

I don't describe God is the manner you've presented, but do indeed believe there are two perspectives of God we should keep in mind per Romans 11:22.

And, yes, I do believe everything doesn't have to be specifically mentioned to be wrong. Examples: 1.) Jumping from the top of the temple in Matt. 4:5-7. Deut. 6:16, which Jesus quoted, doesn't prohibit jumping from the top of the temple. But, it was indeed wrong. To deliberatly jump would have been to tempt God - which violates the principle taught in the passage. 2.) Note the use of "and the like" (NKJV) in Galatians 5:21. I believe that when God specifically tells us what He wants, it is sinful to deviate from His word.

Also, this "argument from silence" falls flat on its face, in light of the fact that if you're going to use that argument you also MUST use it across the board. You MUST apply it to the use of church buildings, pulpits, PA Systems, pews, printed hymnals, etc. Either we obey ALL SILENCE, or admit that we're picking and choosing, based on what we WANT to do.

Your "silence argument" falls flat on its face in light of Hebrews 7:13-14,8:4.

Your issues with the church building, pulpits, etc. reveal a lack of understanding of generic versus specific authority, and fails to discern between expediencies versus additions to God's word.

Let's be fair in our consideration of "picking and choosing." Is instrumental music the only issue where it's assumed to be acceptable because it isn't expressly forbidden, or is this reasoning being selectively used by folks trying to justify what they "WANT" to do? In other words, everything not expressly forbidden is acceptable, right?

 

[ParsonJefferson]

Originally Posted by - DRA -

No problems with truth and sincerity. But, how do passages such as Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, James 5:13, and Acts 16:25 fit into the idea of truth and sincerity? For instance, are these passages not truth? And, who is sincere: the person that does what these passages teach, or the one that doesn't do what these passages teach?

Agree that we've been down the road, but not sure where the "MANY" times comes from. I'll also take the liberty of restating some truth.

My position/reasoning is the passages tell us what pleases God. Therefore, we should do as the passages direct ... if we sincerely desire truth.

As previously discussed, let's take the proposed definition for Psalms that you offer and plug it into the passages in the N.T. where the word is used and see if this really is the correct meaning. Previously, you balked at this idea. I believe it is evident your proposed meaning simply isn't true. Psalms simply referred to the book of Psalms or an excerpt from a Psalm.

Gotcha. Eph. 5:19, Col.3:16, James 5:13, or Acts 16:26 don't apply to corporate or congregational worship. Therefore, please direct us to the passages that do.



I don't describe God is the manner you've presented, but do indeed believe there are two perspectives of God we should keep in mind per Romans 11:22.

And, yes, I do believe everything doesn't have to be specifically mentioned to be wrong. Examples: 1.) Jumping from the top of the temple in Matt. 4:5-7. Deut. 6:16, which Jesus quoted, doesn't prohibit jumping from the top of the temple. But, it was indeed wrong. To deliberatly jump would have been to tempt God - which violates the principle taught in the passage. 2.) Note the use of "and the like" (NKJV) in Galatians 5:21. I believe that when God specifically tells us what He wants, it is sinful to deviate from His word.



Your "silence argument" falls flat on its face in light of Hebrews 7:13-14,8:4.

Your issues with the church building, pulpits, etc. reveal a lack of understanding of generic versus specific authority, and fails to discern between expediencies versus additions to God's word.

Let's be fair in our consideration of "picking and choosing." Is instrumental music the only issue where it's assumed to be acceptable because it isn't expressly forbidden, or is this reasoning being selectively used by folks trying to justify what they "WANT" to do? In other words, everything not expressly forbidden is acceptable, right?

Same old same old...

If you want to believe that God is going to condemn people to an eternity in Hell, for doing something He never told us not to do, you're entitled to that.


Do you suppose there's anything else God forgot to tell us not to do, that He's going to condemn us to Hell for doing? Is He going to condemn us to Hell for using an indoor baptistry? Using a PA System in church? Or is it only the use of instruments in worship He's going to condemn us to Hell for?

 

[- DRA -]

Same old same old...

If you want to believe that God is going to condemn people to an eternity in Hell, for doing something He never told us not to do, you're entitled to that.

Do you believe we should learn from the Old Testament writings per Romans 15:4? I certainly do. Therefore, have you considered Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10:1-2? They acted without authority. In a nutshell, God told them what to do and they did something else. Read the story and see if you're left with the impression these men pleased God and were accepted by him. I certainly am not left with that impression. I am left with the definite impression that God was not at all pleased by what they did. Therefore, I conclude we should not imitate their behavior. Your choice concerning what pathway you choose to follow. God tells us what He wants in Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, and James 5:13. Look closely at the passages. They aren't about condemnation - but about what pleases God. Therefore, why not just do what the passages say and please God. Is it really that hard?

Do you suppose there's anything else God forgot to tell us not to do, that He's going to condemn us to Hell for doing?

Have you ever considered Hebrews 7:13-14 and 8:4. Concisely stated, the Levites were authorized to be priests under the law of Moses. God never said a word about those from the tribe of Judah serving as priests. However, He specifed the Levites. Therefore, were those from Judah authorized to serve as priests, or not? Specifically, according to the reasoning of this text, was Jesus authorized to be a Levitical priest? Using your reasoning, the conclusion would be that He was authorized (it wasn't condemned - therefore it was authorized). However, this isn't the conclusion the inspired word gives us. Jesus was NOT authorized to be a Levitical priest. Rather, He was called to be a priest after a different order ... the order of Melchisedek.

Conclusion: God specified what He wanted. That not specified was NOT authorized. Apply the principle to Eph. 5:19, Col. 3:16, and James 5:13. Do what God says and please Him.

Is He going to condemn us to Hell for using an indoor baptistry?

First things first. How about sharing with us the things God's word tells us about where we should baptized folks? Let's explore the topic before drawing any conclusions.

Using a PA System in church?

See previous point.

Or is it only the use of instruments in worship He's going to condemn us to Hell for?

I suspect God is concerned about all His commandments. Check out Luke 17:10. Experience has taught me that when folks are willing to depart from God's will on one issue, other departures will follow. Therefore, it really isn't a ONE issue thing. It's more of a mindset. One that I definitely believe is wrong.

By the way, I've got a 13-lesson study on Bible Authority I'd be glad to send you by e-mail. The offer is also extended to anyone else interested. Send me a P.M. if you are.

In the Lord's service,

... DRA

 

[ProfessorJ]

Just a couple quick thoughts: When Old Testament verses are brought up, alot of CoC people say they don't follow that law anymore. BUT WAIT- there are instruments in Heaven(Rev. 5:8).
Recently an elder of my church made a comment about "if the people don't like it here, they can go some place more entertaining." It's not about entertainment-it's about understanding the songs used in their worship service, and being bale to use them to praise God yourself. For instance, one line in the song "Hallelujah Praise Jehovah" mentions "and you floods above the sky." I have no clue what that means, and as such, I find it impossible to sing that song as praise.
BTW- look at the pitch pipe, if the osng leader uses one. 99% of the time they are labeled 'pitch instrument.' And really, they're just a round harmonica.

 

[champuru]

I think it's an honest rant. I feel the same way - there are unintended consequences to instrumental music - it makes it a show and not worship (in my opinion).

At my CoC we use a projector with the notes in SATB - I sing tenor, mostly............I'm not a good singer. But I try and I try my hardest and I try to become better. it is this want to get better, to improve, that I think the Lord enjoys. I think by having instrumental worship (even praise teams) there is no want or need to improve, the focus is taken away from the Lord.

I love acapella music - it is difficult to sing, but well worth it, in my opinion.

I think musical instruments are fine, but some you can see them act as if they want to be seen which takes away from worship. But I also see many singers act the same way (usually i notice them more often). Many churches have the instruments in a place not easily seen, which i think is a way to handle it if there are some disputes.

 

[Apollos1]

Professor –

Were you in the mood to quibble?

Just a couple quick thoughts: When Old Testament verses are brought up, alot of CoC people say they don't follow that law anymore.

True. This covenant was given to the Israelites only. After Christ died on the cross, His blood made possible a NEW covenant for ALL men everywhere, not just that one nation.

BUT WAIT- there are instruments in Heaven(Rev. 5:8).

And cherubim, and seraphim, and sights and sounds that can not be uttered, etc. So are these literal instruments or was John giving using a physical item as a symbolic representation in an attempt to express something spiritual?

IF it could be proven unequivocally that these “instruments” are actual mechanical music makers, it still does not give authority for the church to employ such in worship. Authority delegated from Christ (via NT scripture) is what rules and guides His church, not what may or may not be practiced in heaven above.

It's not about entertainment-it's about understanding the songs used in their worship service, and being bale to use them to praise God yourself.

The singing of the church is not for entertainment. That falls under scriptural purview – if you ask me.

For instance, one line in the song "Hallelujah Praise Jehovah" mentions "and you floods above the sky." I have no clue what that means, and as such, I find it impossible to sing that song as praise.

Do you not sing the parts that you understand? Have you investigated what it really means? (Start with Psalms 148…) Do you understand what the “song of Moses” (and the Lamb by and by) and “here I raise my Ebenezer” mean? If not, what prevents you from learning? Why make an excuse not to sing praise that can be readily and easily remedied?

BTW- look at the pitch pipe, if the osng leader uses one. 99% of the time they are labeled 'pitch instrument.' And really, they're just a round harmonica.

Does the song leader blow it during the psalm, hymn, or spiritual song?

Odd…

Barber shoppe quartets and similar groups all over America use “pitch pipes” and I have never heard a single one of these groups referred to as anything but a capella.
- - - - - - - - - -

I think musical instruments are fine…

And this thought is based upon what ?

 

[- DRA -]

Just a couple quick thoughts: When Old Testament verses are brought up, alot of CoC people say they don't follow that law anymore. BUT WAIT- there are instruments in Heaven(Rev. 5:8).
Recently an elder of my church made a comment about "if the people don't like it here, they can go some place more entertaining." It's not about entertainment-it's about understanding the songs used in their worship service, and being bale to use them to praise God yourself. For instance, one line in the song "Hallelujah Praise Jehovah" mentions "and you floods above the sky." I have no clue what that means, and as such, I find it impossible to sing that song as praise.
BTW- look at the pitch pipe, if the osng leader uses one. 99% of the time they are labeled 'pitch instrument.' And really, they're just a round harmonica.

Greetings professor.

Question ... Do you follow the old law (i.e., the law of Moses)? Or, do you oh so carefully follow bits and pieces of that law following the pick and choose methodolgy?

As for Revelation, are the harps in 5:8 literal or symbolic? Who played them? Are the golden bowls of incense literal or symbolic? Doesn't the passage give us the distinct impression the bowls of incense are symbolic? Why should we think the harps are any different? After all, the both the harps and the bowls are in the same context?

I relate "and you floods above the sky" to Genesis 1:6-7 and 7:11. As a follow-up thought to the floodwaters, you might want to consider 1 Peter 3:20-21.

I think I might still have an old pitchpipe around somewhere. You are right ... they are round. And, yes, they do work like a harmonica. However, all they do is help the songleader and perhaps those in audience get the song started off on the right note. So, in essence, its function is to aid in getting the song started right so everyone can sing together. It is not a part of the singing ... no more than the preacher who clears his throat before beginning speaking. Who would reason that particular action was a part of his sermon?

BTW, I'm formerly from the Mountain State ... and still a Mountaineer at heart. Mom and Dad are both buried in a rural family cemetary in Jackson County. Consequently, I tell folks my roots are in West Virginia.