OT Elemental use of musical instruments ceremonial and gone in NT or not?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just so I understand your take a little more cleary (based on how you interpreted the Psalm), do you believe we are commanded (required) to use instruments in worship proper today?

No, just as syllabic/melismatic, four-part/chant makes no difference, praise is praise whether or not accompanied by instruments. To require their use would be to make it ceremonial. Psalm 149 is not telling the saints they cannot praise God unless they have certain instruments, but rather to praise God with everything they have!
 
Absolutely not. If you think so, please note where that is commanded by such.

Please answer my post #49.

You're missing my argument. I'm not arguing that the use of all musical instruments was in relation to temple worship. Only the Levites were permitted to use them in temple worship.
 
You're missing my argument. I'm not arguing that the use of all musical instruments was in relation to temple worship. Only the Levites were permitted to use them in temple worship.

Please answer my post #49 as I am still confused by some of you and Richard's remarks.
 
You're missing my argument. I'm not arguing that the use of all musical instruments was in relation to temple worship. Only the Levites were permitted to use them in temple worship.
Earlier you said "in public worship". Could you explain what that is, if it is not temple worship?
 
I'm confused by those who are okay with musical instruments in corporate worship (Tim or Richard, I suppose), are they allowed in public worship or are they commanded? What were they in the OT, allowed or commanded? If there's been a change where do we see that?

Commanded in temple worship, permitted in non-temple worship. Permitted in NT worship.
 
Earlier you said "in public worship". Could you explain what that is, if it is not temple worship?

We have examples of OT use in private worship. If permissible in private, then public is also permissible unless we make a private/public distinction in what God accepts as praise, which I don't.
 
We have examples of OT use in private worship. If permissible in private, then public is also permissible unless we make a private/public distinction in what God accepts as praise, which I don't.
You mean OT use of instruments in private worship? Where exactly? I'd appreciate a Scripture reference. Thanks.
 
Churning up some more mud: If ceremonial clothing was once commanded as an element of worship, must we now eschew clothing entirely as a circumstance of worship? I, for one, could not comfortably engage in public worship without clothes.
Why should clothing be considered different than instruments? Once an element, now a circumstance.
 
I likely won't be able to post over the next few days due to my schedule. It also is probably a good thing since I'm not sure I can substantially add much more to the thread-- it seems to have run its course.

Blessings!
 
We have examples of OT use in private worship. If permissible in private, then public is also permissible unless we make a private/public distinction in what God accepts as praise, which I don't.
Tim,

Then why does my logic not follow? You claim that there are OT examples of instrument use in private worship. I will take your word for it for the sake of what follows. You then say what is permissible in private is also permissible in public from OT evidence. So then I would say true, in the OT, instruments may have been permissible in private and were commanded (thus permissible) in public. However, since we see them as not acceptable any longer in the NT (ceremonial), then we are no longer required or permitted to use them in worship proper (corporate, private, secret). We are not any more permitted to use them than we are to use candles, bowls, and incense as methods of worship proper (corporate, private, secret). Just my :2cents:. Where is the NT evidence of the “permissibility” ? Since we both would agree that the OT speaks to instruments largely being ceremonial and and largely restricted to Levitical use, would we not need a NT command since the ceremonial aspects of our worship are cleary abrogated in the NT (in Christ Jesus)?

P.S. I am glad your still pushing back as this has been fruitful. Enjoy your Friday and have a good weekend brother!:detective:
 
Last edited:
Tim,

Then why does my logic not follow? You claim that there are OT examples of instrument use in private worship. I will take your word for it for the sake of what follows. You then say what is permissible in private is also permissible in public from OT evidence. So then I would say true, in the OT instruments may have been permissible in private and were commanded (thus permissible) in public. However, since we see them as not acceptable any longer in the NT (ceremonial), then we are no longer required or permitted to use them in worship proper (corporate, private, secret). We are not any more permitted to use them than we are to use candles, bowls, and incense as methods of worship proper (corporate, private, secret). Just my :2cents:. Where is the NT evidence of the “permissibility” ? Since we both would agree that the OT speaks to instruments largely being ceremonial and and largely restricted Levitical use, would we not need a NT command since the ceremonial aspects of our worship are cleary abrogated in with NT verses (in Christ Jesus)?

P.S. I am glad your still pushing back as this has been fruitful. Enjoy your Friday and have a good weekend brother!:detective:

I'm not ready to say that all aspects of OT worship were ceremonial unless seen in the NT just like I'm not ready to say that we must have an example of infant baptism for us to baptize infants.

I'm sure this won't settle everyone, but it'll have to suffice.
 
Churning up some more mud: If ceremonial clothing was once commanded as an element of worship, must we now eschew clothing entirely as a circumstance of worship? I, for one, could not comfortably engage in public worship without clothes.
Why should clothing be considered different than instruments? Once an element, now a circumstance.
Hopefully the question is sincere, thus I will try to answer:

Because we have NT evidence that types of modest apparel and clothes were worn and commanded for the NT church during corporate worship. So we should not require the ceremonial commanded clothes as worship proper, but we should most definitely wear modest apparel to worship proper for the sake the NT commands and for the love of our brothers and sisters in Christ.:detective:
 
Last edited:
Tim, I made the point that Psalm 149 and Psalm 150, from where you seem to be getting your assertion that musical instruments were played in the worship of God outside the temple, both begin with reference to the public worship of God. There were no musical instruments in the synagogue, which stands for the model of worship in the NT. Could they have played musical instruments in the synagogues, in their homes, for worship? My view would be that they wouldn’t have dared. But historically, we know that they did not in the synagogues. There’s no reason to speculate that they did so in their homes in their family or private worship. In fact, it’s contraindicated by the fact that the playing of instruments is expressly part of the sacrificial system, and it was tied explicitly to the temple.

I’m surprised at your assertions here that the playing of instruments was done in worship in Israel outside the temple. I don’t know if you’ll interact any more with the thread but this assertion is an important facet of your argument, you’re evidently hanging a lot on it, and seems like you’d want to provide some background for where you’re getting it.
 
Churning up some more mud: If ceremonial clothing was once commanded as an element of worship, must we now eschew clothing entirely as a circumstance of worship? I, for one, could not comfortably engage in public worship without clothes.
Why should clothing be considered different than instruments? Once an element, now a circumstance.
Is this intended as a serious rejoinder?
 
@timfost,
I have to agree with Jeri. I am not satisfied with your assertions that worship was conducted with musical instruments outside of temple worship. The support you've offered for your position, from several verses in the psalms, is, from where I'm standing, quite weak.
 
I shall add one historical point.

The use of musical instruments has historically been the domain of a class of musicians, or entertainers, or religious men or women. This is true of Israel's history as well as of other cultures. Musical instruments were often expensive, and often took a lot of training to learn. In the days of Calvin, for example, we find fairly little discussion of the use of musical instruments. They were used, it is true, in the courts of great nobles and in wealthy cathedrals. But musicians were rare and expensive then, compared to today, so it couldn't become a major issue.

We need to adopt an appropriate historical perspective. In modern times musical instruction is so widespread that we often miss that. If you say, for example, that ancient Israelites employed musical instruments in private worship, you're going to need to offer some rather concrete support for it.
 
Last edited:
Commanded in temple worship, permitted in non-temple worship. Permitted in NT worship.

Is there any reformed scholar or published author that holds this position that I could read?

I have never heard of such a view in Christianity.
 
Some stray thoughts that I don't have time pursue or depth to draw out an argument or rebuttal. I just find Tim's attempt to bring a new argument outside any corpus of Reformed authors I'm familiar with to be problematic. It avoids the established Reformed distinctions of element and circumstance distinction in favor of a new thing that may or may not be done, that may or may not be just to aid the singing, that is elementalish, and like OT worship the instruments themselves are used to express praise. Instruments do not just alter the human voice or how it is employed but as some stated on the other thread, add a voice. Also, one often cannot play instruments and sing at the same time; if they are used and a player does not sing, that would seem to go against performing the established duty of singing. See this 2006 thread (https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...ulative-principle-of.14597/page-4#post-190754 and if this thread keeps going it will beat the 5 pages of this old thread). Psalm 149:3, "Let them praise his name in the dance: let them sing praises unto him with the timbrel and harp." I don't know if Keil and Delitzsch are right, that these last psalms 147-150 regard the victory of the Maccabees, but it concerns national Israel and is a call to them to praise God in everything they do, i.e. at all times. They are to praise God as they war with the nations with swords in their hands, on their beds at night, in their civil rejoicing with musical instruments and dance like in Exodus 15:20. Any argument that makes 149:3 normative for NT public worship brings in dancing. Similarly with Psalm 150. I don't know why if Psalm 150 as many commentators state regards the worship of the temple, that dance is mentioned (there is disagreement in both psalms if dance should be pipe). K&D focus not on the setting but a structure of ten Hallelujahs, in which case they say the seventh invites to the festive dances of the nation. Stray thoughts, and apologies in advance they are not well thought out.
 
Churning up some more mud: If ceremonial clothing was once commanded as an element of worship, must we now eschew clothing entirely as a circumstance of worship? I, for one, could not comfortably engage in public worship without clothes.
Why should clothing be considered different than instruments? Once an element, now a circumstance.
This isn't quite right. Cermonial clothing is still eschewed entirely as much as the instruments. Ordinary clothing does not enter into the worship of God neither am I sure that it is properly speaking a circumstance of the worship of God but is part of public modesty based in the 7th commandment, which undoubtedly the OT congregation also observed. Even if clothing was considered a circumstance, it is necessary that something be worn to obey the 7th commandment (and 3rd, since we are meeting with God in worship), but instruments are not necessary for singing God's praise, so they are not circumstances. Neither are they prudential arrangements of circumstances (except in unusual edge cases), as I argued in the other thread.
 
Last edited:
In fact, it’s contraindicated by the fact that the playing of instruments is expressly part of the sacrificial system, and it was tied explicitly to the temple.

I don't think that's true. Psalm 137.2 specifically tells us that, during the Exile, the Israelites took their lyres to Babylon with them, where there was no Temple.
 
I don't think that's true. Psalm 137.2 specifically tells us that, during the Exile, the Israelites took their lyres to Babylon with them, where there was no Temple.
Have you read the Psalm? Your statement is amazing. Grieving for Jerusalem they hung their harps away, saying how can we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land?
 
Have you read the Psalm? Your statement is amazing. Grieving for Jerusalem they hung their harps away, saying how can we sing the Lord’s song in a strange land?

Yes, they hung them up, in protest against a specific request by the Babylonians. However, the did take them to Babylon (a considerable distance from Israel, you'll recall). They didn't lug those lyres all the way to Babylon only to not use them. The psalmist is just recounting a specific situation in which the Israelites refused to use them.
 
The psalmist is just recounting a specific situation in which the Israelites refused to use them.
Exactly and you using this as evidence that they used the instruments outside the temple for worship is very foreign to the actual passage you cite. This would be Eisegesis 101 in my opinion. A plan reading of the text gives no warrant for what you alledge. These instruments were ceremonial and holy (set apart).... so it makes perfect sense why the OT Church would carry them with them.
 
Exactly and you using this as evidence that they used the instruments outside the temple for worship is very foreign to the actual passage you cite. This would be Eisegesis 101 in my opinion.

So why, in your opinion, did they go to all the trouble to take their lyres all that distance? Just for entertainment purposes?
 
So why, in your opinion, did they go to all the trouble to take their lyres all that distance? Just for entertainment purposes?
Richard,

Instruments can be used outside of worship to do many things. Gill is quoted below, but to be crystal clear Psalm 137 makes no mention of instruments being used to Worship outside the temple.

Gill:
These were musical instruments, used in the temple service by the Levites, who seem to be the persons here speaking; who took care of them, and preserved them from the plunder of the enemy; and carried them with them to Babylon, in hope of returning with them to use them as before, or to solace themselves and others in captivity; though now they had no heart to make use of them, their sorrow was so great, and therefore hung them upon the willows as useless things: these willows grew upon the banks of the rivers where they were, as such trees usually do; hence called willows of the brook F24, and willows by water courses, ( Leviticus 23:40 ) ( Isaiah 44:4 ) ; and particularly upon the banks of the river Euphrates, which ran through the midst of Babylon, with which the phrase here agrees; and therefore Babylon itself is thought to be called "the brook", or "valley, of the willows", ( Isaiah 15:7 ) . And, according to Ovid F25, not only reeds and poplars, but willows, grew on the banks of the Euphrates. Now the state of these people was an emblem of the case of the backsliding children of God; who, through the prevalence of corruption, the force of temptation, and the snares of the world, are brought into a kind of captivity to the law of sin and death, though not willingly; nor is it pleasing to them when sensible of it, ( Romans 7:23 Romans 7:24 ) ; who, though they are called out of the world, and are not of it; yet sometimes are so overcome with it, and immersed in the things of it, that they are as it were in Babylon. An emblem of this world, of the confusion in it, as its name signifies; of the fading glories of it, and the wickedness and idolatry it abounds with: and here they sit by the rivers of carnal pleasures in it for a while, till brought to themselves; and then they weep over their sins, and lament them; especially when they remember what opportunities they have formerly had in Zion, and what a low condition she is now in through the conduct of themselves and others: these make use of their harps when Zion is in good and prosperous circumstances, ( Revelation 14:1-3 ) ( 15:1-3 ) ; but when there are corruptions in doctrine, neglect or abuse of ordinances, animosities and divisions prevail, declensions in the life and power of religion, and the lives of professors disagreeable; then they hang their harps on willows, and drop their notes.
 
Well first- the “I’s“ and the “we’s” in the Psalms are prophetic; either David or others commissioned or included in the writing of the song book. In this case it may be a prophet from among the Levites. Private persons in non-offices didn’t write the Psalms. I went to John Gill, one of the best commentators on the Psalms and a master of Hebrew and history:

“‘We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof’. These were musical instruments, used in the temple service by the Levites, who seem to be the persons here speaking; who took care of them, and preserved them from the plunder of the enemy; and carried them with them to Babylon, in hope of returning with them to use them as before, or to solace themselves and others in captivity; though now they had no heart to make use of them, their sorrow was so great, and therefore hung them upon the willows as useless things.”
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top