Good question, huh?

__________________
Pastor Nathan Eshelman, Los Angeles, CA
Reformed Presbyterian Church
PRESBYTERIAN THOUGHTS
Los Angeles Reformed Presbyterian Church
RPCLA Sermons Online
Puritan Reformed Seminary

Panta?

__________________
Benjamin P. Glaser, M. Div, Licentiate, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church
Member Fairmount ARP Church
Pittsburgh, PA

Deo Vindice

Why? because we should use them and their argument is found wanting

__________________
Richard W. Roldan "Ricky"
Member and Teacher of Iglesia Presbiteriana Reformada Berea (PCA)
Winter Haven, FL./ Under Care of the Southwest Presb.(PCA)

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,...” Jesus

" I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel," Paul

That is profound

at work, but in brief - argumentum ad nostalgium

__________________
-JD

I know I said "man I got to get real deep on this one" lol

Because 95% of the church either does not know the case for unaccompanied psalms only or has not been presented with a case that is provably biblical.

__________________
In Christ's love and service

Mr. Tim Cunningham,
BMus. (Trombone Performance), University of Toronto
Dip. CS, Regent College, Vancouver
Member, First Baptist Church
Vancouver, BC
------------
"I once sat in darkness, and waited for the moon to rise.
I once sat in darkness, and waited for the sun to shine.
I once sat in darkness, when all the light I'd waited for was gone.
Then Jesus came, and now the only true light, ever, shines in me."
– John Deacon -

Historical questions.
When did organs first appear in Presbyterian Churches in the North America?
When did organs first appear in old school / old light Presbyterian Churches in North America?
When did organs first appear in Dutch Reformed Churches in the North America?
When did organs first appear in German Reformed Churches in North America?
When did organs first appear in Congregationional hurches in New England?
When did organs first appear in Baptist [other then free will and missionary] Churches in the US?
When did organs first appear in Episcopal Churches in the US?
I suspect that the acceptance of organs is a post second great awakening phenomena. I wonder what the historical facts are.

__________________
Thomas Yeutter,
Mason, MI
Member St. Patrick's Anglican Church, Comstock, MI

Ezra 7:10 For Ezra had set his heart to study the law of the Lord and to do it and to teach its statues in Isreal.

When that proof comes, we'll have to see what happens

__________________
Tim Vaughan
Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
Santa Maria
California

I know that Cotton Mather saw the organ coming into New England as a way for the Anglicans (no offense to you sir) to steal away the Puritan youth, much like the rock band in the church has stolen away many of today's youth from 'traditional' worshiping churches!

Here is the quote:

"Attempts to propagate the Church of England among us, by a most conspicuous and marvelous blast of heaven upon them, do very much come to nothing. Even the organs introduced into the chapel in this metropolis of the English America, signify very little to draw over our people unto them." -Cotton Mather, in a letter to John Stirling, 1714.

I would say it's a lot more than 95%.

__________________
Davidius
Husband of Emily
Member of All Saints Anglican Church - Chapel Hill (AMiA / Anglican Church of North America)
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German and Classics

It is fascinating to hear that organs were in Anglican Churches in the Americas that early.
An early historian of the Episcopal Church in Maryland viewed organs and the singing of hymns as a Methodist or Lutheran infection.

How often in Israel's history did they have worship right? How often were we told that a King did what was right in the sight of the Lord, but the high places were not removed? How often were they removed? Not very many.

It seems we are not doing much better than OT Israel.

__________________
Traci
Lynnwood OPC
"I have taken all my good deeds, and all my bad deeds, and cast them through each other in a heap before the Lord, and fled from both, and betaken myself to the Lord Jesus Christ, and in him I have sweet peace."--David Dickson

I will respond to this question as I would a new member to the PB!

or

__________________
Joel Batts
Christ Presbyterian Church (PCA) - Memphis, TN

I believe that many would find that the heart sings unbidden while they are working their way through a tough bit of theology with a pipe in their teeth and a pencil in their hand. - CS Lewis

I bet it is a lot LESS if we included the Eastern churches as well as many of the African churches.

In the US and Europe it is probably 98-99%

African churches use drums...a lot

As does Latino churches

Bottom line is Davidius came through again with his unusual insightfulness. The 95% figure is way too low; I should have thought of that myself. I don't believe I've ever seen or heard of any African church that didn't use instruments, after 9 years there, and there sure aren't many US churches that don't.

David Hume's naturalistic fallacy. Because something is the case, absolutely does not mean it ough to be the case. This is like me asking: "If we aren't supposed to murder babies, why do so many people have abortions?" The "is" and the "ought" are completely severed metaphysically. They have no hold on each other except that the "is" sometimes pursues the "ought."

__________________
"Peace if possible, truth at all costs." (Martin Luther)

David G. Suggs Jr.
New Covenant, PCA
Anderson, South Carolina

Sounds like you are arguing for the PCA to get back to roots of acapella worship?

Yeah, I would say about 99%

Edit:
Yes, if you include the Eastern churches than the ratio probably changes. But still more than 90%

__________________
Mark Maney
Edmonton Chinese Baptist Church
Master of Theological Studies
Master of Arts (Cross Cultural)
Trinity Western University, ACTS Seminaries
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Good question, don't know. I'd suspect that the piano came before the organ, but that's not your question.

BTW, I highly don't that my church will ever have an organ. We do use a piano though.

__________________
Ivan R. Schoen, B.A., M.A., M.L.I.S.
Pastor of Maranatha Baptist Church (SBC)
Poplar Grove, IL, USA
http://maranatha-sbc.org

The organ probably came first since the piano wasn't invented until the 1700s. There have been portable organs in existence since the middle ages.

__________________
J Baldwin
Keowee Presbyterian Church, PCA
Pickens, SC
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.” Luke 10:27

Check Out My Blog: http://reflectjoy.blogspot.com/

I'm not arguing either way, I just get bugged by fallacious reasoning

I read on one website that "a magnificent organ was added in 1834" in the Baptist church in Providence, RI, being the church that Roger Williams started in the 1600's. That's all I've found so far.

Ah, yes, that makes sense.

And then there was Mozart!

Thread title: If We Should Not Use Instruments: Then Why Does 95% of the Church Use Them?

If this is the justification for having musical instruments, then can we also conclude that Athanasius was wrong? Or to put another way, since when does consensus determine practice within Christian churches?

So, no, it is a bad question. Fallacious questions always are.

__________________
Chris Thomas | SBC-Founders | Fairbanks, AK

"Whatever the cause, the Calvinists were the only fighting Protestants. It was they whose faith gave them courage to stand up for the Reformation. In England, Scotland, France, Holland, they,... did the work, and but for them the Reformation would have been crushed... If it had not been for Calvinists,... and whatever you like to call them, the Pope and Philip would have won, and we should either be Papists or Socialists." ~ Sir John Skelton

Actually, there was no fallacious reasoning in the OP.

To be fallacious, there must be an improper movement from premise to conclusion. There was no conclusion in the OP, only a question.

It's interesting to see how several people have jumped to their own conclusion, assuming that the OP is using an appeal to majority to assert that instruments are good.

In fact, if you clicked the link and read it, you would know the author is actually pointing people in the opposite direction.

__________________
Charlie Johnson
Downtown Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, student

The answer is: because 95% (or more) of the church is right.

__________________
Richard T. Zuelch, M.Div
Ruling Elder, OPC (not currently serving)
Westminster Presbyterian Church, CA (OPC)
www.alexandermaclaren.wordpress.com
www.reiterations.wordpress.com
www.spurgeonswords.wordpress.com

Devout souls do not take offence at the depths and difficulties of God's Word, but are, thereby, drawn to intenser contemplation of them. - Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910)

Except for all of the Westminster Divines, of course, right?

Where does the WS prohibit instruments?

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


"Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/do-w...salmody-16682/

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Dad
Christ Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, RPCGA
Facebook - The Calvinist Vent
Board Rules - Signature Rules - Suggestion Box

It is God that multiplies our sorrows.... God, as a righteous Judge, does it, which ought to silence us under all our sorrows; as many as they are, we have deserved them all, and more: nay, God, as a tender Father, does it for our necessary correction, that we may be humbled for sin, and weaned from the world by all our sorrows; and the good we get by them, with the comfort we have under them, will abundantly balance our sorrows, how greatly soever they are multiplied. - Matthew Henry

Majority doesn't mean correct but it does say something else. If 95% of the church uses instruments then there must be a legitimate argument out there for using them. Even though Arius was wrong, he was making an argument that at face value made a lot of sense (it would have had too, 95% of the church was convinced!). But alas, Arius did not have the BEST argument, because it didn't best account ALL the biblical data, unlike Athanasius' trinitarian argument which eventually won the day.

So the question that has to be asked is why RPW and EP is not really all that convincing to a majority of Christians, even reformed typed Christians.

Either RPW's argument is weak (Arius), or those who are making it aren't being heard (Athanasius). What do you guys think is the crux of the problem? Or is it just a rebel heart that prevents people from embracing RPW? But why would so many Christians have such a rebellious heart on such an important issue unless you want to say that only those who practice RPW are true Christians. But then you would be adding to the Gospel. So that brings it back to the start of this paragraph: Either RPW's argument is weak (Arius), or those who are making it aren't being heard (Athanasius). Which is it?

"The Fallacy of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment in Interrogative Theory"

I was responding to the question not the linked site.

This is an interesting comment. I am just going to take a step back from the specific subject of the OP and make an observation.

I am becoming increasingly convinced that people adopt a certain theological position by default. That is, they have never even heard that there is a debate on that particular issue.

So, if you go to a certain church and ask, why do you not use instruments (***EDIT: should read "why do you use instruments"***), you will not get this:

"Well, I have given this matter a great deal of thought. I have studied the continuity and discontinuity between the OT and the NT, I have studied the function of the Levitical priesthood and the regulative principle of worship, the early practices of the church, the Westminster Divines, Calvin, Girardeau, etc. And have come to the conclusion ________"

No, instead you will likely get a blank stare. They will also likely never have been taught the regulative principle of worship and how it is demonstrated from scripture.

I have recently sought to introduce a church elder and church piano player to the RPW. They were just never taught this, so I am trying to do it kindly and charitably, just as those who showed me this did for me when I first learned about reformed theology.

__________________
Tim Lindsay
member, Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, Halifax, NS, Canada
Living in Cape Town, South Africa
"under the Southern Cross, at the foot of Table Mountain, not far from the Cape of Good Hope"

This is a good point in favour of "Athanasius" syndrome.

Personally, I think people have lumped together the snotty people who were against new worship songs as opposed to the classic hymns with the people who actually have a biblical argument to make with the RPW and EP.

The presumed scholar of the moment on the subject of Westminster and exclusive psalmody/musical instruments in worship is Nick Needham. He concedes the historical point that not just the Westminster Assembly, but Puritanism in general were opposed to instrumental music in worship. As far as his views on EP and some faults in his handling of musical instruments, see the forthcoming review by Matthew Winzer in The Confessional Presbyterian volume 4 (2008). I believe Matthew's work will challenge the presumption, and very much smashes Needham's conclusion that the Assembly allows for anything but psalms in the documents they produced.

__________________
Chris Coldwell, Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Dallas, Texas.
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• Westminster Letter Press
• The Confessional Presbyterian Journal
• The Blue Banner Archive

The Regulative Principle: The Scriptures are the “only infallible rule of faith and practice, no rite or ceremony ought to have a place in the public worship of God, which is not warranted in Scripture, either by direct precept or example, or by good and sufficient inference” (Samuel Miller).

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? Joining PB's Politics & Government Forum