Musical Instruments in Worship

Are Musical Instruments Forbidden in Worship?


  • Total voters
    85
Status
Not open for further replies.

Coram Deo

Puritan Board Junior
Are you lying when singing Psalms containing incense, or sacrifices? How about blood of goats and bulls?


So, here is a question regarding consistency...

Most of the people today who are opposed to instruments in worship are also advocates of EP. Now, understanding that the subtitles to the Psalms are not inspired, how can you advocate exclusive psalmnody when some of the Psalms were written specifically "to the chief Musician" who would have been an instrumentalist and some are written specifically for instrumentation like Psalm 84? And aren't you lying when you sing Psalms that talk about praising God with certain instruments when you have no intention of using instruments?

In a previous post, I brought up continuity in the covenants on purpose. We Baptists often get accused of having discontinuity in our views because we believe that since Baptism of infants isn't commanded in the NT and only Baptism of those who profess faith is obvious in the NT. But when you come along and believe that instruments in worship isn't commanded in the NT and only singing without instruments is obvious in the NT, you consider it continuity. I tend to think it seems a bit arbitrary.
 

Calvibaptist

Dallas Cowboys' #1 Fan
Are you lying when singing Psalms containing incense, or sacrifices? How about blood of goats and bulls?
First of all, up until last week, we never sang Psalms in church. We would read them as God's word calling us to worship him, but we never sang them as a part of our response to Him, which is what worship is. I like the idea of singing Psalms in worship (since it is commanded), but find it difficult to sing those things that pertain specifically to Old Covenant worship. We sang Isaac Watts rendition of Psalm 115 last Sunday and in it there is a line about God blessing the priest. Obviously, that must be interpreted as referring to Christ, I would assume. So would the sacrifice and incense references. But I still don't see how the musical instrument references refer to Christ.

Second of all, you only answered one of my questions. I'm honestly not trying to pick a fight. I just don't understand either the EP position or the no instruments position. I asked these questions because they popped into my head and I was curious.
 

Coram Deo

Puritan Board Junior
I am in a class right now... I will try to answer more later tonight unless someone else picks it up before I get home and after I rest......

Are you lying when singing Psalms containing incense, or sacrifices? How about blood of goats and bulls?
First of all, up until last week, we never sang Psalms in church. We would read them as God's word calling us to worship him, but we never sang them as a part of our response to Him, which is what worship is. I like the idea of singing Psalms in worship (since it is commanded), but find it difficult to sing those things that pertain specifically to Old Covenant worship. We sang Isaac Watts rendition of Psalm 115 last Sunday and in it there is a line about God blessing the priest. Obviously, that must be interpreted as referring to Christ, I would assume. So would the sacrifice and incense references. But I still don't see how the musical instrument references refer to Christ.

Second of all, you only answered one of my questions. I'm honestly not trying to pick a fight. I just don't understand either the EP position or the no instruments position. I asked these questions because they popped into my head and I was curious.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
thunaer said:
He (Josephus) also states that it was restricted to temple worship and that synagogue worship was without musical instruments....
I went here and searched for several musical terms - no results, so can you help me understand the specifics of the Josephus reference?

I used the google site search tool - here is my specific query.
 

SEAGOON

Puritan Board Freshman
Hi Doug,

Good to hear from you as always brother.

Clearly, merely using an instrument to accompany singing was not inherently sinful in the Old Testament, or I might add, the New:

"Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying: "You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth."
(Rev. 5:8-10)
Andy, if you are going to use Revelation 5:8-10 as an instance of harps being an authorized part of New Testament worship, then you will also have to maintain that the burning of insense continues under the New Covenant.
No, I was simply making the point that there is nothing inherently sinful about the use of instruments to accompany the singing of the praise of God's people. Yes the harps are partially symbolic (although I have no doubt that there will be harps in the heavenly worship, where the reality will be greater and not less than what is represented symbollically), but it is simply not possible that something inherently forbidden in worship, as say an idol, an image of God, or a temple prostitute, would be part of the heavenly worship. While I am not about to argue that our worship on earth should be organized according to the heavenly worship rather than the model given to us in the Apostolic church, it is worth noting that eventually in heaven we will all indeed be participating in worship in which new songs and instruments will be our worship. One may argue that A Cappella Psalmody is the way to worship here on earth, but every regenerate A-EPer will someday be singing songs not found in the Psalter to musical accompaniment (Rev. 14:2-3).
 

SEAGOON

Puritan Board Freshman
Dear Rob,

Greetings:
All is at peace between our spirits. I wish I could express at times the same Christian humility that you have. Blessings brother!
Thank you for your gracious reply, I truly appreciate it and may it ever remain so.

Now, how about those chairs? :D
 

dcomin

Psalm Singa
Hi Doug,

Good to hear from you as always brother.

Clearly, merely using an instrument to accompany singing was not inherently sinful in the Old Testament, or I might add, the New:

"Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying: "You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth."
(Rev. 5:8-10)
Andy, if you are going to use Revelation 5:8-10 as an instance of harps being an authorized part of New Testament worship, then you will also have to maintain that the burning of insense continues under the New Covenant.
No, I was simply making the point that there is nothing inherently sinful about the use of instruments to accompany the singing of the praise of God's people. Yes the harps are partially symbolic (although I have no doubt that there will be harps in the heavenly worship, where the reality will be greater and not less than what is represented symbollically), but it is simply not possible that something inherently forbidden in worship, as say an idol, an image of God, or a temple prostitute, would be part of the heavenly worship. While I am not about to argue that our worship on earth should be organized according to the heavenly worship rather than the model given to us in the Apostolic church, it is worth noting that eventually in heaven we will all indeed be participating in worship in which new songs and instruments will be our worship. One may argue that A Cappella Psalmody is the way to worship here on earth, but every regenerate A-EPer will someday be singing songs not found in the Psalter to musical accompaniment (Rev. 14:2-3).
Good to hear from you also, brother. :cheers:

Actually, what you said was that the reference to the harps in the hands of the 24 elders in Revelation 5:8-10 demonstrates that the use of musical instruments is not inherently sinful in New Testament worship. We're not talking about idols or temple prostitutes - which are clearly inherently sinful. We are talking about the weak and beggarly elements of the ceremonial worship (i.e., incense, altars, sacrifices, and yes, musical instruments) - which were once commanded by God to be employed in His worship, but have now been fulfilled in Christ and are to be discontinued. To bring these shadows back into the worship of the New Testament church would be to deny their abrogation through Christ's fulfillment. The references to harps and incense in Revelation 5:8-10, therefore, do not establish that the use of harps and incense is acceptable to God in the worship of the New Testament church. They merely use the types of the OT shadows (which were perfectly acceptable in that dispensation) to picture the anti-types which have now come to light in Jesus.

As for Revelation 14:2-3, I believe this is also highly symbolic language. I treat this passage at length in my book, Worship From Genesis to Revelation, but don't have time to deal with it in detail at the moment.

Have a blessed evening and greet the saints in North Carolina for me! :handshake:
 

JBaldwin

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by Calvin and Hodges
Can you show me a passage in Scripture where the word "psalmos" is used to mean a musical instrument? When a musical instrument is referred to in the fashion that you are mentioning I believe the word is "psaltery." Sometimes at Renaissance fairs there is a vendor who sells "psaltery's" if this is the same instrument described in the Bible, then it is a very beautiful sounding instrument. I intend to pick one up someday and learn how to play it (though not in a worship service).
I never said that it was to translated to mean play a musical instrument, as I explained in my second post, it means to sing to accompaniment:

Vines says, "Psalmos" primarly denoted a striking or twitching with fingers (on musical strings); then, a sacred song, sung to musical accompaniment, a psalm." From this definition, we get both possibilities.
In other words, the meaning of the word, "psalmos" in Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, and I Corinthians 14:26 (according to Vines) means a sacred song, sung to musical accompaniment. This is where I got this definition. Further, as I explained in my first post, there is another word, "psallos" which literally means (according to Strongs) to twitch or twang, i.e. to play on a stringed instrument (celebrate divine worship with music and accompanying odes). It is the Greek word translated "melody" in Ephesians 5:19. This word "psallos" is also used in James 5:13 "Is anyone merry, let him sing psalms."

"psalmos" is never translated to "psaltery". The word for "psaltery" is the Hebrew word "nebel" and has no New Testament equivalent that I can find.

By the way, the psaltery is a lovely instrument. I would like to learn to play one myself. Do you suppose my cello would fit into the definitino of "psallos"?

JBaldwin
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
I never said that it was to translated to mean play a musical instrument, as I explained in my second post, it means to sing to accompaniment:

Vines says, "Psalmos" primarly denoted a striking or twitching with fingers (on musical strings); then, a sacred song, sung to musical accompaniment, a psalm." From this definition, we get both possibilities.
In other words, the meaning of the word, "psalmos" in Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, and I Corinthians 14:26 (according to Vines) means a sacred song, sung to musical accompaniment.
This is generally known as the etymological fallacy. Etymology might provide some clues as to the history of a word, or even of a base definition, but cannot determine semantic variations or the way the word is used in different contexts.
 

Calvibaptist

Dallas Cowboys' #1 Fan
I never said that it was to translated to mean play a musical instrument, as I explained in my second post, it means to sing to accompaniment:

Vines says, "Psalmos" primarly denoted a striking or twitching with fingers (on musical strings); then, a sacred song, sung to musical accompaniment, a psalm." From this definition, we get both possibilities.
In other words, the meaning of the word, "psalmos" in Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, and I Corinthians 14:26 (according to Vines) means a sacred song, sung to musical accompaniment.
This is generally known as the etymological fallacy. Etymology might provide some clues as to the history of a word, or even of a base definition, but cannot determine semantic variations or the way the word is used in different contexts.
So, what is the point of having dictionaries? I mean, Thayers shows that Euripides and others used this word to describe the plucking of a musical instrument as its primary usage. It was used in the LXX for the book of Psalms, presumably because many of them were written by David, who (go figure) played a harp. Many of them were also accompanied by musical instruments that involved plucking. Lidell and Scott has as its first definition the plucking of a musical instrument. The second definition is a song sung to a harp, a Psalm. THERE IS NO OTHER DEFINITION LISTED.

So, if all the definitions of two of the major Greek dictionaries involve a musical instrument, why should we not assume that the singing of Psalms mentioned in the NT would involve musical instruments. Would they not have used another word that did not have the plucking of an instrument involved in its usage if they absolutely meant for there to be no instruments involved?
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
Thayer writes under psallw, "to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song, Jas. 5:13;" and under psalmos, "hence a pious song, a psalm ... one of the songs of the book of the OT..." Quite clearly the words take on different connotations than the etymology suggests.
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
This thread is interesting, in that it demonstrates, once again, how difficult it is for the no-instruments folks to make their case. Most of the no-instruments folks make their case from history, not from Scripture. And it's not hard to see why.

The simple fact is that nowhere in the New Testament will you find a ban on the use of musical instruments, either expressed or implied. In fact, music and musical instruments are rarely mentioned in the New Testament. Why? Because it's not the New Testament's burden to speak of such things. The burden of the New Testament is to spread and explain the gospel of Jesus Christ in the various places and cultures in which it finds itself.

The Old Testament is given over, broadly speaking, to describing the establishment of the nation of Israel and that nation's worship of God. Israel was a self-contained entity, with its worship contained, of course, within the confines of the nation. If outsiders wished to know about the one, true God, they needed to leave where they were and go to Israel, where they could see Israel's worship firsthand and have it, and the one true God which was the focus of Israel, explained to them. Hence, the detailed discussions of the Temple, the sacrificial system, and all the related accouterments, including music.

Now, the New Testament describes just the opposite situation. Instead of people having to come to one central location (Israel and the Temple) to learn about the one true God, this information, in the form of the gospel, now spreads outward to the wider world, through the apostles and their spiritual descendants. Instead of being confined to the culture and society of Israel, the gospel goes out into all kinds of societies and cultures ("and to the uttermost parts of the earth"). The gospel penetrates into regions with many different kinds of cultural traditions - including musical ones. The lack of a ban on musical instruments in the New Testament is a recognition of the fact of this changed situation. People are simply free, in whatever situation they find themselves, to use musical instruments in the public worship of God. This is because, again, the situation of Old Testament Israel no longer obtains. (How the notion that the use of musical instruments has been fulfilled in Christ and, hence, are to be banned on this side of the Cross has never been satisfactorily explained, in my opinion - from Calvin on down. One certainly can't prove anything like that from Scripture.)

It is obvious that there were musical instruments in New Testament times, just as there were in the Old Testament. And I have no doubt that they were used in the worship of God - the fact that musical instruments are rarely mentioned in the New Testament cannot be used as "proof" that they were not used in worship. Paul and the other New Testament authors had plenty of opportunity to ban their use. It is significant that they did not do so.

As for types of instruments used, well, based on those found in the Bible, there would be more justification for the use of trumpets (and other brass instruments), guitars, and drums than there is for the use of pianos and organs, for which there are no equivalents in the Bible.

So, the no-instruments folks have to do some mighty fancy dancing in their attempt to demonstrate their point from Scripture. All such attempts are failures, in my opinion.

As long as the focus in worship remains on the actual worship of God, we are free to use whatever instruments we may have. They are not forbidden.

As to the fear that the congregation might be entertained: well, that can't be avoided, frankly. It's just part of the nature of music to appeal to the intellect and the emotions of those who hear it. And that will be true even in the most God-centered worship one can find. That's just part of what music is. That is how God designed music to be. But, again, as long as there is a conscious effort to make sure that the singing (yes, including soloists!) and the instrument-playing is focused on God's glory, the "entertainment" factor will be kept in its place.

That's my 3-1/2 cents.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
The simple fact is that nowhere in the New Testament will you find a ban on the use of musical instruments, either expressed or implied.
That's where the RPW comes in. Such a principle means "silence" as to positive institution is significant.
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
That's where the RPW comes in. Such a principle means "silence" as to positive institution is significant.[/QUOTE]

Why can't such silence merely indicate that musical instruments are part of the adiaphora - those things that are indifferent?
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
Why can't such silence merely indicate that musical instruments are part of the adiaphora - those things that are indifferent?
Because they were used as ceremonial elements of worship under the OT they can't be used indifferently. The Apocalypse clearly teaches that instruments have ceremonial significance, together with incense, altars, etc.
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
Because they were used as ceremonial elements of worship under the OT they can't be used indifferently. The Apocalypse clearly teaches that instruments have ceremonial significance, together with incense, altars, etc.
Then, when musical instruments are used in worship services today, that use makes them a part of the ceremony of worship. Therefore, they are allowed in worship by your own analogy from the Old Testament and the Book of Revelation.

Case closed. You owe me $38.50 (you can use Australian money if you want). ;)
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
Because they were used as ceremonial elements of worship under the OT they can't be used indifferently. The Apocalypse clearly teaches that instruments have ceremonial significance, together with incense, altars, etc.
Then, when musical instruments are used in worship services today, that use makes them a part of the ceremony of worship. Therefore, they are allowed in worship by your own analogy from the Old Testament and the Book of Revelation.
So you think it is lawful to use OT ceremonies in NT worship, which are specifically said to be a wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles which Jesus tore down by His death on the cross?
 

sotzo

Puritan Board Sophomore
When are we gonna make use of the debate forum on the PB to have a person from each side of this issue put forth their best defense? I've tried to sort through the myriad of threads pertaining to this issue, every time feeling like Charlie Brown who only got rocks in his trick or treat bag during the Great Pumpkin episode.

Here's a proposed statement to be affirmed / denied that could be used in the debate forum:

The Regulative Principle, and the Scriptures from which that Principle is based, precludes use of instruments and extra-Psalmic hymnody in corporate public worship.

Thoughts???
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
So you think it is lawful to use OT ceremonies in NT worship, which are specifically said to be a wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles which Jesus tore down by His death on the cross?[/QUOTE]

That gets us back to someone else's remark on this thread that the use of musical instruments in the Old Testament was fulfilled in Christ. The question was asked, what exactly does that mean? So far, there hasn't been an answer, unless I missed it.

My point is simple (kinda like my brain): instruments were used in the Old Testament, and there is no prohibition of them in the New. We are open to use them. And no one has yet, in my opinion, been able to prove from Scripture that they are forbidden to us.
 

MW

Puritanboard Amanuensis
My point is simple (kinda like my brain): instruments were used in the Old Testament, and there is no prohibition of them in the New. We are open to use them. And no one has yet, in my opinion, been able to prove from Scripture that they are forbidden to us.
Ditto for altars, incense, and a whole host of shadowy ceremonies which deny Christ has come in the flesh.
 

CalvinandHodges

Puritan Board Junior
Greetings:

Bookslover:

Post # 38 has both a Scriptural and an historical argument against musical instruments. Please read it and reply.

jBaldwin:

Thank you for that clarification. I think you have missed the point a bit. In Synagogue worship the people sang the Psalms without musical accompanyment. This was the style of worship that the Church engaged in from the First Century all the way to the mid-1800's.

When Paul would go into the Synagogues on the Sabbath - he would hear and sing the Psalms without instruments. Thus, when Paul talks about the Psalms in Eph. and Col. he would most likely be talking about them without instruments.

I read your profile, and I understand your bias on this matter. However, I ask of you to consider that instruments are not warranted in the worship of God. I would ask you to read post #38, and ask of the Lord through prayer for knowledge, wisdom, and faith on this matter.

May God richly bless you,

-Rob Wieland
 

AV1611

Puritan Board Senior
Ok, now really?

Can you talk without a microphone? If so, does that make a microphone an element? Can you preach without a pulpit? If so, does that make a pulpit an element?

Did you really mean to make such a spurious argument?
In the Old Testament music was commanded hence it becomes an element of worship. Rev Brian Schwertley writes in his Musical Instruments in the Public Worship of God:

Others who object to the thesis of this book will claim that the use of musical instruments in public worship is a discretionary matter—that is, it is just a mere “circumstance of worship common to human actions and societies.” Such an assertion must ignore the whole Old Testament where it is clearly established that the use of instruments in worship was by divine authority. The use of musical instruments, their very design, and the various Levitical families who played them all were appointed by express commandment. This point is unquestionable. But, it is argued, could not the use of instruments be of divine appointment for the temple and be discretionary for the public worship in the synagogue and the Christian assemblies? No. The regulative principle was never limited to the temple (cf. footnote 104). Furthermore, something incidental to worship by nature is incidental or discretionary in all circumstances. The fact that the Jews in biblical times (indeed until 1810) regarded musical instruments as needing divine warrant for the synagogue should dispel the music-as-circumstance argument. “If, as some imagine, the apostles employed instruments of music in public worship, their instruments must have been buried along with them. They had a considerably protracted entombment, for they had no resurrection until at least seven or eight centuries afterwards. They did not reappear in Christian worship until the dark ages of Popery when, by unauthorized additions to the worship of the Church, men had greatly marred the divine beauty and simplicity of pure New Testament worship.”​
 

AV1611

Puritan Board Senior
I like the idea of singing Psalms in worship (since it is commanded), but find it difficult to sing those things that pertain specifically to Old Covenant worship.
Sing with understanding! My suggestion would be to preach upon the psalm and show forth its true meaning and then have the congregation sing it. :handshake:

Gill's commentary on the psalms can be found here.

Have a gander at this also.
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
When are we gonna make use of the debate forum on the PB to have a person from each side of this issue put forth their best defense?
I"m working on that; we are closer to doing it than when I started.;) Nearly have everyone on board that we need. More soon hopefully.
 

JohnOwen007

Puritan Board Sophomore
My point is simple (kinda like my brain): instruments were used in the Old Testament, and there is no prohibition of them in the New. We are open to use them. And no one has yet, in my opinion, been able to prove from Scripture that they are forbidden to us.
Ditto for altars, incense, and a whole host of shadowy ceremonies which deny Christ has come in the flesh.
A building (the temple) was used in OT worship, so is it now forbidden for believers to gather in a building?

The (positive) NT principle for the gathering of believers is edification (1 Cor. 14:26). If instruments can help in that they may be used, and if not they shouldn't be used.
 

JBaldwin

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Calvin and Hodges said:
Thank you for that clarification. I think you have missed the point a bit. In Synagogue worship the people sang the Psalms without musical accompanyment. This was the style of worship that the Church engaged in from the First Century all the way to the mid-1800's.
It is not entirely true that the style of the early church to the mid-1800s was to sing psalms exclusively. Jesus Himself, our prime example, sang a hymn with His disciples at the last supper (Matthew 26:30; Mark 14:26) (And please don't tell me that was not worship so it doesn't count. We celebrate the Lord's table in our worship so it does count. And again, don't tell me that the Spirit of God was so vague as to chose the word hymn and that we are somehow to figure out that He really meant Psalm since I have not run across a Greek scholar interpreting this word to mean psalm in this context.) We also have existing examples of hymns (not psalms) that were sung in the church that date back as far as the church fathers (late 200s), both Eastern and Western churches and on through history. (A History of Western Music, Grout)

On the issue of musical instruments. It is true that throughout history, it was the practice of the churches to sing without instruments. We do not know whether or not the early church prior to the 200s used instruments, there is no proof one way or the other. We know that they met from house to house. In the time of the early church, musical instruments were not as easily available to the average person as they are today, so it is likely they didn't use them simply because they weren't available. Another reason they did not use instruments was because of the association with Greek and Roman idol worship. The scriptures do not teach that using musical instruments in worship is sinful. We merely have the few words "psalmos" and "psallos" that Paul used in Ephesians and Colossians, and the words used by James (chapter5).

When Paul would go into the Synagogues on the Sabbath - he would hear and sing the Psalms without instruments. Thus, when Paul talks about the Psalms in Eph. and Col. he would most likely be talking about them without instruments.
It is true that Paul would have heard and sung the psalms accapella in the Synagogue according to Jewish tradition, and of course, this would have been the style he was familiar with. But can assume that Paul imitated everything done in the Synagogue since he eschewed anything that smelled of the Judaizers? How do we know that the practice of singing accapella psalms exclusively was approved by God? God did not approve Synagogue worship. It was a tradition started when the temple was destroyed, and Jesus and His disciples met there because it was where everyone worshiped. We also know that the reason many of the early Christians (at least from the mid 200s on) shunned musical instruments in worship was not because God told them not to, but because they feared they would look to much like Pagan Greece and their worship. Is it at possible that the Apostle Paul used words like psallos and psalmos that have to do with the use of musical instruments in order to let the early Greek Christians to whom he was writing know music instruments were allowed?

I read your profile, and I understand your bias on this matter. However, I ask of you to consider that instruments are not warranted in the worship of God. I would ask you to read post #38, and ask of the Lord through prayer for knowledge, wisdom, and faith on this matter.
I reread post #38, and I still cannot see a Biblical reason why we should not use musical instruments in worship. Going back to the temple and tabernacle only convince me that God loves His people to praise Him with musical instruments (Psalm 150), and He would not have included so many of David's instrumental songs in the Book of Psalms if He thought they were wrong since He knew we would be using them throughout the remainder of Christian history. As far as the church fathers go, they are not infallible.

If I am wrong, I am certain that eventually the Spirit of God will teach me. I trust He will do so.

For a further point, and perhaps this actually should be the beginning of a different thread. My understanding of worship is that we worship all the time, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. When we come together, I see the New Testament instructing us to meet together for teaching, admonishing with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, preaching, encouraging one another, prayer, fellowship, Lord's table, baptism (though we are not commanded to meet for that purpose, it makes perfect sense). When the early synagogue met, they met for readings from the Torah, psalms, hymns, prayers and almsgiving. Though many of these things cross over, why are we using the synagogue as a model for worship as your above post implies instead of using the NT guidelines?

Respectfully,

JBaldwin
 

Calvibaptist

Dallas Cowboys' #1 Fan
I like the idea of singing Psalms in worship (since it is commanded), but find it difficult to sing those things that pertain specifically to Old Covenant worship.
Sing with understanding! My suggestion would be to preach upon the psalm and show forth its true meaning and then have the congregation sing it. :handshake:

Gill's commentary on the psalms can be found here.

Have a gander at this also.
Thanks, I will check these out.
 

panta dokimazete

Panting Donkey Machete
An exhaustive study of the word "psallo" and the historical usage of musical instruments in the Christian church and the synagogue can be found athttp://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/mckurfees/index.htm

It's a lengthy treatment of the subject, but those who have a serious interest in this question will find it helpful.
excellent resource, thanks!

I am much more of a mind to consider instruments "circumstantial" - that is - one may practice the Scriptural mandate with or without, just as one may preach the word with or without instruments, amplification, lights, seats, buildings, etc...the device circumstantially facilitates the elements - when the use of the device in circumstance (instruments, amplification, lights, seats, buildings) obfuscates or supersedes the ordained element - that is forbidden by the RPW.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top