Why acappella only?

[- DRA -]

Contempt? No. Sadness more than anything.

I DO apologize, however, if offense has been taken by anything I've posted. I've not meant to offend or give the impression of contempt.

I suppose it comes across that way because the arguements are the same and I don't really see the purpose in continuing on in the arguements. They always end up in the same place. I will make an attempt to not be so snarky in my posts from here on.

I will say that the pattern of condescending to those who don't believe as you do is also quite old.

If I were as lost as you seem to indicate here, do you think your words here would really cause me to want to turn back?

What I have to say is that I haven't left Christ, that I'm a true believer and that I'm growing more spiritually right now than I've grown in years. I've not undermined God's word, but rather have begun to really understand what his grace is really about. It's as if the scales have really fallen off of my eyes and I am beginning to see clearly for the first time. That has allowed me to be Free in Christ in a way I did not know freedom before. I am awed at what Christ has done for me---a meager and undeservng sinner, who has been saved! I am spurred on to do what HE wants me to do and to share with others about HIS great and awesome power. I am excited and revitilized, but at the same time, see how foolish I was before, for pursuing foolish arguements that meant nothing to Him.

No...no contmept. More than anything, I wish you could see and know I what I do now. That's all. The simple gospel of God's unfailing love, his undeserved grace and righteous judgement.

Contempt? Yes! And, to declare/infer/imply that it is following the traditions of men to do what passages such as Eph. 5:19, Col. 3:16, and James 5:13 teach is to undermine God's word.

I have said before and will say again for the sake of any that are new to the discussion, studying an issue like singing versus mechanical instruments of music is more about how we handle God's word than just the issue at hand. I fully understand where the "Free in Christ" mindset leads. By the way, is this a reference to the book by that title by Cecil Hook? If so, I have a copy - and I have read the book. Plus, I've studied with several who parrot Hook's reasoning (Hookians, as I refer to them). Even if the book/movement isn't what you meant, I am confident the mindset is similar, if not the same. Tired of having to find scriptural authority for what is believed/practiced. Tired of having to be different from the "mainstream" Christian movement (i.e., those of the Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant churches). So tired of so many things ... but yet somehow forgetting the church the Lord promised to build (Matt. 16:18), the church that He built (Acts 2:47), and the unity that characterized His church (Eph. 4:1-6). Even passages such as Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, and Romans 6:3-11 are pushed to the back of the mind and forgotten to accommodate folks with varying beliefs on what it takes to be saved under the gospel of Christ. These are first principle topics (note the latter part of Hebrews 5 and the discussion that continues into chapter 6).

As for how "my words" will impact you, I suggest taking things to a higher level. How 'bout assuming that it really doesn't matter what either of us says or thinks, but the emphasis needs to be on what God says. By all means, don't take my word for it. Check out Romans 3:4. The words came from the apostle Paul, who said he got them directly from the Lord (Gal. 1:11-12). I certainly can't speak for you, but I sure don't want to challenge Paul's (actually, the Lord's) teachings as Elymas did in Acts 13.

Ever seriously considered Rev. 3:1 (the latter part of the verse)? It's a sobering thought. To think one is alive and faithfully serving the Lord ... but isn't in the Lord's eyes! Sobering indeed. On a personal level ... it could happen to me, and it could happen to you. So, how do we ensure it doesn't? The only way I know is to be faithful to God's word. Not just the warm and fuzzy side where we talk about God's love, grace, mercy, and goodness. You know, where everybody's saved that says they are, and everybody goes to heaven regardless of the church they go to? Forget about the "other" side of God, right? Forget about the contrast in Romans 11:22 between the goodness and severity of God. Trust me. Those aren't my thoughts. However, I do believe them. Both aspects.

Just a few thoughts that you might find a little out of the norm.

I'm not afraid to step out of the box.

 

[cremi]

Wow...you assume much and are so incorrect, about what I meant or what I believe. It's been a long and painful journey for me, DRA---to leave the church of Christ--but not Christ and not the church. My husband and I have not taken our decision lightly, nor have we flitted about with every wind of doctrine. I've not heard of Cecil Hook, nor have I read any books about any particular movement, except for the bible, so I'm not sure what mindset you think I have.

I'll suffice it to say that only by reading and studying the bible have my husband I come to the conclusion that we were wrong about a great many things. I could go on and explain in depth and detail, but you have your own mindset about what is right and wrong. At this point, it seems you'd not even consider anything I have to say to be anything other than babble. You've gone as far as implying that I only think I am saved, but I'm only fooling myself. I have no doubts and my salvation is secure in the Lord's hands.

If you are wondering, Romans especially has been one of my favorite books of study over the last few years. Romans 8:1 - 4 speaks very well to what I'm talking about here. I could copy and paste verses all day long, but I'll leave it to these four verses for now.

Romans 8:1-4 (NIV)
1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

There is nothing further to add or to defend. The Lord is my defender and it is Him that you have maligned. I will not return to this particular discussion, but I do not leave in anger. (lest anyone assume I'm stomping off here) I will continue to lift you in prayer. May the Lord be with you as you continue to study.

 

[- DRA -]

Wow...you assume much and are so incorrect, about what I meant or what I believe. It's been a long and painful journey for me, DRA---to leave the church of Christ--but not Christ and not the church. My husband and I have not taken our decision lightly, nor have we flitted about with every wind of doctrine. I've not heard of Cecil Hook, nor have I read any books about any particular movement, except for the bible, so I'm not sure what mindset you think I have.

First, let me begin by pointing out something out: “To leave the church of Christ—but not Christ and not the church,” implies or infers the church of Christ is not the Lord’s church, or something other than the Lord’s church. Perhaps you can explain why the church Jesus promised to build (Matt. 16:18) isn’t His, why the church He established (Acts 2:47) isn’t His, and why the church He purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28) isn’t His. Clearly, there shouldn’t be any disagreement over whether or not the church of Christ is a scriptural name for His church. Since the book of Romans has been one of your favorite books of study, you must be familiar with 16:16, right? Of course you are. So, please try to help me understand what’s really on your mind. How is the church of Christ of today unlike/unscriptural/etc. the church we read about in the New Testament? I am assuming you believe that Jesus actually established the church that He promised, and that he did it in the first century, and that it’s the one we read about in the New Testament. If I’m mistaken, please set the record straight, because it is not my intent to misrepresent you in any way.

The mindset that concerns me is the one described in Ephesians 4:14 – “that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting.” I firmly believe that God’s word does just what 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, therefore, it’s where I go so I won’t be “carried about.” No doubt, we all must be aware of deception and the potential for apostasy (e.g., Romans 16:17-18, 1 Timothy 4:1-4). It can affect me … and it can affect you. Plus, there’s the mindset to consider that characterizes those who don’t have a love for truth. Simply stated, folks that want things their way will find exactly what they are looking for per 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. The problem is the result is not desirable - destruction. To me, this is one of the most sobering texts of Scripture. I think of it as an honest reality check that I must continually do while studying and contemplating God’s word. It’s not about what I want or about being right in doctrine or practice per se, but about being fair with God’s word and understanding it the way He would have it understood. Without such a love for truth, the door is wide open for error in its many forms. Cecil Hook’s teaching is just one of many out there.

I'll suffice it to say that only by reading and studying the bible have my husband I come to the conclusion that we were wrong about a great many things. I could go on and explain in depth and detail, but you have your own mindset about what is right and wrong. At this point, it seems you'd not even consider anything I have to say to be anything other than babble. You've gone as far as implying that I only think I am saved, but I'm only fooling myself. I have no doubts and my salvation is secure in the Lord's hands.

I never said anything about your thoughts being babble. What I addressed was your contempt for the church of Christ that continually comes from your writings.

As for salvation, you and I can think what we want. The bottom line is whether or not our reasoning is in accordance to God’s word. Matthew 4:5-7 is an example I like to use to illustrate Jesus’ teaching on discerning truth. In that text, the devil quotes Psalm 91:11-12. He quotes it accurately and applies it correctly to Jesus. However, his understanding of this Psalm is that God will deliver Jesus from harm if Jesus deliberately jumps from the top of the temple. Jesus counters with Deuteronomy 6:16. To deliberately jump from the top of the temple would be to tempt God – the principle in Deut. 6 God’s people are warned about. So, in a nutshell, we have two understandings of Psalm 91:11-12 before us. According to the Lord, one is wrong because it doesn’t harmonize with other passages. With these things in mind, a lot of folks claim salvation though the blood of Christ. Sadly, “many” have been deceived and will not be accepted by the Lord per Matthew 7:21-23. I am certainly not above being deceived. To ensure I’m not, my salvation is based upon the teachings of New Testament – particularly the conversions in the book of Acts, and other relevant passages that directly discuss salvation. I firmly believe the truth on any subject can only be found when harmony exists among the Scriptures. To illustrate, John 3:16 isn’t a sole passage that discusses salvation, but an understanding derived from that passage, first, should be considered in its context, and then harmonized with other relevant passages (e.g., Acts 8:12, Acts 16:30-34).

Now, let’s assume we are agreed concerning how one is saved under the gospel of Christ. Then, the issue at hand is remaining faithful to enter the promised land. I use that language with 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 in mind. It is a stern warning to both the Corinthians and us today to be careful to NOT follow the unfaithful example of the Israelites who came out of Egyptian bondage. Long story made short, they sinned, died, and did not enter the promised land. The point? The Corinthians were in danger of following in their footsteps. You are I are no different. We need to heed the warning. I say these things because I firmly believe your path of separation from the Lord’s church is leading you away from God. If, as you say, we (those in the church of Christ) are wrong about a great many things, then you could indeed do us a great justice by pointing out the things that are amiss.

If you are wondering, Romans especially has been one of my favorite books of study over the last few years. Romans 8:1 - 4 speaks very well to what I'm talking about here. I could copy and paste verses all day long, but I'll leave it to these four verses for now.

Romans 8:1-4 (NIV)
1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

Thanks for posting these passages. However, I fail to see how they support your premise. The passage teaches God’s people are no longer condemned (have their sins forgiven or taken away e.g., Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16), and are no longer under one law (the law of sin and death) but under a different law (the law of the Spirit of life – synonymous with the law of Christ in Gal. 6:2 and the perfect law of liberty in James 1:25). On a similar note, you might want to consider Romans 6:16-23. However, God’s people still have to serve God faithfully in accordance to His will. Going back to your original premise, if those who are members of the church of Christ today are not faithfully serving God, then please help us see what we are missing/lacking/etc.

There is nothing further to add or to defend. The Lord is my defender and it is Him that you have maligned. I will not return to this particular discussion, but I do not leave in anger. (lest anyone assume I'm stomping off here) I will continue to lift you in prayer. May the Lord be with you as you continue to study.

I disagree. I see nothing amiss from what I believe or practice in light of Romans 8:1-4 to make me change a thing. I have NOT maligned the Lord. I am simply questioning why you have done what you have done, and why you do what you do now.

Not returning to the discussion is your choice. No hard feelings if you don’t. Frankly, we are “slightly” off-topic, but I hoped our time would be profitable because it really gets more to the heart of the matter about why we don’t see things eye-to-eye.

If you should desire to study more, contact me. I sincerely would like to know which particular passages you have in mind that you have studied and led you away from the church of Christ.

I appreciate being lifted up in prayer. Thank you. Likewise, I will pray to God on your behalf.

 

[wmssid]

Hello, Cremi:

Chapter 7, of Romans, is about the futility of living without the supernatural Spirit of the Living God.

Chaper 8, ia about "walking ... according to the Spirit."

Here is a short discourse of the Spirit (which the churches do not teach).

Spirit of Wisdom and Understanding (One Spirit; #1), Counsel (One Faith; #2), Might (One God; #3). Knowledge (One Hope; #4), Fear of He Is (HWHY) (One Dipping; #5), Judge {-ment] (One Lord; #6), Righteousness (One Body; #7) - Isaiah 11.2-4; Eph 4.4-6.

Read James 1.5-8, telling how hard these spirits are to receive by prayer.

wmssid

 

[dharma66]

Dare I ask a question?

Three passages were mentioned repeatedly early on in this thread, and it seems to me that the purpose of mentioning them was to suggest scriptural restriction against the use of instrumental music in worship. If that understanding is incorrect, please ignore the rest of this post.

Assuming I do understand correctly, the three passages are (from NRSV):

Ephesians 5:19
"as you sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs among yourselves, singing and making melody to the Lord in your hearts,"

Colossians 3:16
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom; and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs to God."

James 5:13
"Are any among you suffering? They should pray. Are any among you cheerful? They should sing songs of praise."

What I don't understand is what it is about these passages that can be taken to mean that no instruments should be used. Surely its not just because no instruments are mentioned? Taking that approach we could say that as melody is mentioned explicitly, but harmony is not, then we should not sing with harmony. Or rhythm, for that matter.

Also, most peoples understanding of 'song' is something that includes instruments. I suspect that this was as true two thousand years ago as it is now? Maybe not? If the people to whom these words were originally spoken counted 'songs' as being generally a cappella, then maybe the assumption of the speaker is that a cappella would be understood?

 

[Caleb4387]

Basically it comes down to chapter and verse. Can you dind a verse that specifficaly bans instruments?

 

[graciesings]

I like to have an organ or piano to keep the singers on-key. But I am very against the contemporary music movement because of the rock-star thing.

Lutheran churches used to always put the choir and instrumentalists at the back of the church. I feel like in a way that is a good solution to making sure that they don't get too much attention. Unfortunately, many Lutheran churches are getting more and more liberal/contemporary, and the musicians are almost always in the front now

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Back in the early '90s there was a poll taken among the Non-Instrumental CofC churches in the Dallas Area, and ONE of the questions was: Do you think Acapella music is a "Church Tradition", or a Biblical Imperative.

The Majority of the respondents felt it was nothing more than a "denominational tradition", but that it was their "Personal preference" for music in church, and one that they would continue - at LEAST in the immediate future.

Up in the Northern tier it's more common to find Instrumental Churches of Christ, although the Non-Instrumentalists are also present. Here in Dallas, most CofC folks aren't aware that there IS an "Instrumental CofC Denomination" as well. And, of course the "Disciples of Christ"/"Christian" denominations carry a full liturgy with Instrumental music in service.

I'm in a Bluegrass Band with a group of Non-Instrumental CofC folks, who are also the music ministers in their church. And when we do CofC Fellowships and pot-lucks, we're NOT to play any "gospel music" or Hymns - to avoid causing trouble with the "older members".

It turns out that with two exceptions, Nobody in the band can actually sing Harmony without instrumental support, so adding them to the set has proven difficult -

The CofC in Midlothian, TX has it in their Property deed that "Instruments of music" WILL NEVER Be allowed on the premises. They also had a split a year or two ago over the formation of an Acapella Quartet within the congregation - because they felt that was was "Performance" rather than "Worship". Some groups wear their "Religion" so tight, you wonder how they can breath at all -

 

[Bob Carabbio]

In the OLD Testament, Instrumental music is classified as "Prophetic Ministry", and of course ALL the modern CofC arguments against it are nothing more than "Arguments from silence" since the NEW Testament DOesn't address the issue AT ALL.

Campbell's "directive" was: We speak when the Bible Speaks, and we are SILENT when the Bible is silent.

Unfortunately, the "Doctrinally Pure" branch of the CofC doesn't honor that, and makes all sorts of legalistic rules and regulations in the ABSENCE of Biblical instruction.

 

[Clickster]

Instruments doesn't bother me for the most part. I am a CoC member and I visit CoC's that use a piano frequently. My home CoC doesn't use instruments. It just isn't a big deal for me. I know for some it is.

However, I will admit that a congregation singing without the use of instruments is a very beautiful thing.

 

[savedgirl10]

Instruments doesn't bother me for the most part. I am a CoC member and I visit CoC's that use a piano frequently. My home CoC doesn't use instruments. It just isn't a big deal for me. I know for some it is.

However, I will admit that a congregation singing without the use of instruments is a very beautiful thing.

I was baptized in non-instrument CoC in 2010,then went to a different non-denominational church for a few years which had a full band on stage and spent a lot of focus on the music worship. This coming weekend I am returning to the CoC and I am looking forward to just plain singing ...I can not sing and don't claim to have that gift...but ya know what? It is ALL beautiful to God! I feel some how more of a connection in worship when it is just voices lifted toward Heaven.
These are just my own feelings and I don't claim to know more about the subject, but for me ..this is what I like..my husband will NOT go with me because he prefers the music. And that is his choice.

 

[DerSchweik]

I was baptized in non-instrument CoC in 2010,then went to a different non-denominational church for a few years which had a full band on stage and spent a lot of focus on the music worship. This coming weekend I am returning to the CoC and I am looking forward to just plain singing ...I can not sing and don't claim to have that gift...but ya know what? It is ALL beautiful to God! I feel some how more of a connection in worship when it is just voices lifted toward Heaven.
These are just my own feelings and I don't claim to know more about the subject, but for me ..this is what I like..my husband will NOT go with me because he prefers the music. And that is his choice.

That's pretty much my sentiment as well.

Music is fine - for entertainment, but there's simply nothing so uplifting and worshipful as voices singing His praises.

 

[Angelquill]

Hi. Welcome.

The analogy is not completely accurate. There are no earliest church writings decrying the use of Bibles or Holy Scripture (in fact, the earliest church fathers had a great respect for the Scriptures...). That is NOT the case with IM. They didn't use it. They told us WHY they didn't use it. It wasn't introduced until 700 years later (and then with great dissention) and actually not even common among Protestant churches until the 1800's.

Since you've already read the "official position", I don't want to turn this thread into a "why we don't use IM" one, but I'm sure someone will be along shortly to disagree with me.

But quite a few of us prefer to pass on instruments in worship.

I thought the point was that the bible is supposed to be silent on the issue of instrumental music...there is no verse that either indicates that the church used music or that it did not, so the assumption is that it did not.
"where the bible speaks, we speak, where the bible is silent, we are silent."
Did I misunderstand?

 

[Angelquill]

We have a non music CoC where I live that used to broadcast their services on our local radio station. Unfortunately, the station had to discontinue the broadcast...people called in complaining.
Voices raised in praise of God CAN be a beautiful thing...unless you get a bunch of people who, Lord love 'em, just can't sing....

 

[RedPonyDriver]

My home church is an instrumental Christian church...I hate the "worship band" concept with a passion. I'm usually late to church to avoid it. Fortunately, we also have a traditional service available that plays only hymns and a capella singing. I try to go to that service as much as possible. I think my problem is with the word "worship" that seems to be always associated with music. I don't need music to worship my Lord...it may also be from my utter dislike of any and all CCM.