Why Have Denominations?

These are the same proof-texts "prohibitvists" always use, and most of them have already been answered on other threads already (and then, the discussion ends after that, with no further answers from your side)

Yes, by FAITH; not by type of sacrifice! For plant sacrifices had their place in the OT system, too. Both brothers brought what they raised; else; then, it must have been a sin to be anything other than a farmer of sheep.
It seems the empasis on Abel bring the first of his flock is what the difference was. So it has nothing to do with "adding anything left unspoken". Amazing how we read things into these passages!

We don't have much detail, other than the type of wood used (which noone is sure of), and to cover it with pitch. So if God gave him minute intructions, and left nothing "unspoken", then of course, Noah could not change it. But if God grants us today permission to add our own "expedients", then He could have with Noah as well. What you are still not getting is that your "we cannot add things left unspoken" directly contradicts you "expedients" logic! All of your "expedients" were left unspoken! They may be able to "help us carry out the command", but it is still "unspoken". Now make up your mind which standard we follow.

The so-called "strange fire" was connected with the incense, commanded in Exodus 30. God had commanded that the censer was to be filled with "sweet" incense (v.7), so any other type of incense would have been the "Strange incense" (v.9) that would have made up "strange fire". So there is your "explicit command" in that instance. (Once again, nothing "left unspoken").

Once again; you are talking about a physical tribe, that excludes all others. Not something that can be done. To bring these analogies into music worship, it would be cloer to comparing "singing" with "talking" or "humming", or making some other "noise" with our vocal chords.

You people are so slick! But this can be refuted, because if He did "command" it; it would contradict His first Commandment. Other gods are not wrong because they were BOTH "forbidden" AND "not commanded", as if they could possible have been both "forbidden" and "commanded" at the same time!
They were "not commanded" BECAUSE they were explicitly "forbidden"; because God was NOT "silent" on, it not because He was "silent" on it! Once again; your argument would rule out your so-called "expedients".

What was supposed to be "beyond the things that are written", there? Following Apollos or Paul instead of Christ? Once again, that would contradict following Christ. You follow one Master. Just like one tribe, one way to build one ark, and carry the other ark, and one way to carry our voices.

The definition of "will worship" I have seen is what the passage is describing--"works" of legalism and asceticism, which like "wisdom" give off a "show". (Why would anyone "show off" some practice just because it was "unwritten"?). If anything; this silly argument on instruments falls right into the category, in either definition! You are "showing off" your "plainness" of worship music, and there is nothing commanding that anywhere!

That is not silence either! God has only ONE "only begotten "Son"; excluding all others. If people exalt angels as Son, they are clearly contradicting Christ's unique position; not simply adding something "unwritten".

Onc again, answered long ago. Naming one tribe excludes all others. If you are going to have one Messiah come out of one tribe, it can't be the others too. So they are excluded, not simply because they "weren't mentioned"; but because the ONE tribe had been specified.

Those things mentioned ARE forbidden "in principle"! Hashish", for instance, is a mind altering drug. That is "pharmakia" or "sorery"! Many of the RCC practices are pagan, and therefore to be avoided. Gambling comes from covetousness. What does ANY of this have to do with instruments, that would also not exclude the rest of your "eedients such as song books and microphones? You and your authors are shure putting a lot of energy into non-sequitur arguments, themselves based on "silence"!

--but only when YOU want it to be! (you all decide for us what is "expedient") THAT is Blakely's argument. It is not HE who believes that silence is prohibitive; he is only using it to show how your own argument cancels itself out! (and disproving the "proofs" of the principle above; it stands that God WAS silent on this "prohibitive" principle! You all consistently take these analogies that just DO NOT FIT! All of them! You all are so desperate at one-upping everybody. Note in your 1 Cor.1:12 example, he was even criticizing a faction claiming to follow "Christ"! We had this silly nonsense even back then! (Hey, perhaps that WAS a NT reference to the CofC! )

All your "prohibitive" logic has been debunked; so you are the one who must find a scripture that teaches that an instrument somehow cancels out "sing" (and in the NT only at that, when apparently it didn't in the OT! Did the laws of nature change?). Else; by FAITH in the Word; I am not required to follow this silly rule!

 

What type of music has God authorized for N.T. worship?

How do we know what God wants?

We must worship God in spirit and in truth. How do we worship in truth? What is truth?

Where does faith come from?

Can we have faith in what God has NOT said?

Man did not add instruments to their Christian worship until many centuries after the church was established.

Instrumental Music in New Testament Worship - Is it from man or from God?

The only reason this has ever been an issue is because man wants them, plain and simple.

When we worship, is it to please man or God?

Why do we give of our means? God said so.
Why do we partake of the Lord's supper? God said so.
Why do we pray? God said so.
Why do we preach/teach? God said so.
Why do we sing? God said so.
Why do you use instruments? Man likes it.

 

In the old testament God's people were to make a joyful noise to the Lord with stringed instruments. Now, look at the overall picture. God's chosen people were a nation with it's ensuing protections. Jesus's disciples and christians in the Roman Empire had to maintain a low profile even to the extent of hiding in the catacombs. For many years there was not a practical environment for playing music to the Lord. The reason there is silence is because of the predicament Christians found themselves in and God understood this. Abortion is arguably found in the old testament but because the N.T. is silent on it, of course, does not mean we ignore it. The N.T. does not necessarily cover every nook and cranny of what God wanted us to be concerned about in the old testament but we understand that many of those things still please God. I find no substantial evidence to conclude that music should not give praise to God as it did in the old testament. A lot of this quiet and low-keyed silent character of the church is a result of the offensive-yet- defensive low-keyed nature of the church in those early centuries. Today, in our wonderfully blessed environment, at least where freedoms are concerned, we should fully praise God according to all scripture.

 

Good points.
And the reason why this has become an issue is because man's pride wants to put down others, pure and simple.

Why do we give of our means? God said so.
Why do we partake of the Lord's supper? God said so.
Why do we pray? God said so.
Why do we preach/teach? God said so.
Why do we sing? God said so.
Why do we use song books? Because it's "expedient"?
Why do we shun instruments? To prove we are somehow better than others.

 

If one doesn't like instrumental music then fine - don't use it. But there is not prohibition on it. Evidently this was not a big enough issue for Paul to have emphasized it for the churches.

The heart of the matter is this. Jesus was no legalist. To say that somehow the use of an instrument makes worship unacceptable is completely foreign to the description of worship that God wants, pure hearted worship, not worship according to laws.

Thus making a big deal out of instrumental music reflects a deeper problem, namely a fundamental misunderstanding of Christ's message. In this way, unfortunately the CoC is very much an Old Testament church.

 

ughh. What a reductionist view of the sacraments you have. This is what happens when Enlightenment era church leaders become the standard for what is and isn't 'New Testament Christianity'.

Dean

 

That is not very logical. Why do you shun killing animals in worship? Because pride wants to put down others and to prove you are somehow better than others who may practice this.

Why do you shun dancing to the Lord in your worship the way David did? It doesn't say not to, but you just want to prove you are better than everyone else who may practice this.

Why don't you serve roast lamb with the Lord's supper? That was part of the passover meal. You just want to show you are better than everyone else.

I want to worship the way they did in the first century according to God's instuctions.

Since God's ways are not our ways and his thoughts our thoughts, how do we know what God wants in our N.T. worship?

Ridicule it all you want, but the simple matter is that it would never have been an issue if man had left his "wants" and "likes" out of the equation.

Surely you understand the difference in carrying out a command and adding to a command. I can sing with a song book or without a song book, but when I am finished, I still have only the authorized music, singing. I can sing from a padded pew or outside under a tree, but when I am finished, I still have only the authorized music, singing.

The authorized music in worship is singing. There is no doubt that singing is acceptable.

 

ughh. What a reductionist view of the sacraments you have. This is what happens when Enlightenment era church leaders become the standard for what is and isn't 'New Testament Christianity'.

Dean </font>[/QUOTE]How do you know what God wants? Is it based on your likes and what pleases you?

Is there a standard?

 

There is not a prohibition on killing goats either, but I don't think either of us would think that is acceptable, just because someone might like to do that and it would help them worship.

Paul didn't place emphasis on it. That's right. It was not a problem. It was not added by man for nearly 7 centuries following and then for only a few. It did not become widespread until several centuries after that.

Acts 20:20,27 - Paul preached the whole counsel of God, keeping back nothing that was profitable. Nowhere in there was anything about instrumental music, therefore, it was not part of the counsel of God and it was not profitable.

When Jesus said (John 4:23-24) that the true worshipers MUST worship in spirit and in truth, where does the truth part come in? What is truth? How do you determine truth? Isn't God's word truth (John 17:17)?

Funny you should mention the CofC as an old testament church. The old testament used instrumental music. If your group uses instrumental music, you are more of an old testament "church". Instruments of music are outward, physical and borrowed from the Old Testament. New Testament worship is inward and from the heart.

 

New Testament worship is inward and from the heart.

You hit the nail on the head here.

The CoC is probably right that NT services didn't use instruments. Today instruments are commonplace, available, and not associated with pagan rituals.

You can have instrument-less services - that's fine.

My concern with CoC doctrine is that they are so hung up on points like instrumental music, "denominations", and baptism in Jesus' name - that they miss Jesus' message.

If one believes that the presence of instruments in worship makes it unacceptable to God then his concept of worship is NOT an "inward, from the heart" one - rather it is an OT legalistic one, suggesting that whether or not an instrument is involved is more important than what is in the heart.

 

When Jesus said (John 4:23-24) that the true worshipers MUST worship in spirit and in truth, where does the truth part come in? What is truth? How do you determine truth? Isn't God's word truth (John 17:17)?

 

Understanding the message of Jesus requires a digestion of the entire NT. Jesus was not a legalist. There's just no other way to say it.

If you really believe that God rejects worship if it involves instruments or if it comes out of a building that has the word "baptist" on it then you see Jesus as a legalist and as such have a fundamental misunderstanding of the gospel.

 

The New Testament clearly shows and tells us that animal sarifieces passed with the sacrifice of Christ. They were directly shadows of that. It never instructs us any such thing regarding instruments, yet you come and add this "instruction" out of nowhere but your own premises. Obviously your thoughts are not our thoughts, but then neither are your thoughts God's thoughts either.

It never would have become an issue if man had left his "wants" for one-upmanship out of the equation. But it was inevitable (1 John 2:19).

You can sing with instruments, and at the end, you no less have the singing, anymore than you do, if you are singing and reading, or you have the vocal music, and printed sheet music befre you. The issues are exactly the same!

It was explained why it probably wan't mentioned. Now, for the church afterward, which became a big institution that no longer had to worship in hiding, to make a doctrine out of a-capella, shows that this doctrine was what was "added by man", and when you look at their reasoning, it was gnostic influence. They wanted a somber worship, because they though something more lively was bad. But I thought the CofC was aiming for the 1st century. In those centuries after that, when this doctrine developed, they had already begun adding the Catholic doctrines on Communion, Mary and Church leadership. Now you don't follow them on those, do you?

 

So, how does a mute person worship God with music?

This focus on the externals of "singing" vs "instrumental w/singing" neglects the fact that one's view of this issue MUST include any and all persons. So how do the deaf "acceptably" worship God in song? Or the mute (as I already mentioned)? Or the blind since they can't "see" the words and notes in your song books?

Evidently, worship is a personal matter between one person and God. This is ultimately the crux of the matter. What is "acceptable" for one MUST be "acceptable" for all, according to the CoC. Therefore, explain this paradox you have constructed with your "accapella only" position.

How do the deaf, blind, mute "acceptably" worship God in song? Especially focus on the mute, please.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Blind people can sing with their voice, no problems there.

But to focus on the mute, as you said.

Eph 5:19 - speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord,

The mute speak with their hands, the sing with their hands. There is a deaf man where I worship. He sings from the heart.

Romans 10:10 says, "For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

Since he can't use his mouth to make a confession, he uses his hands. He doesn't use a piano or trumpet to make his confession.

Since he uses his hands to "speak", he also uses his hands to speak to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in his heart to the Lord.

 

Revelation 5:8-9 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

Matthew 6:9-10 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

What is God's will concerning music? Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. He uses instruments in heaven, therefore...
DHK

 

Blind people can sing with their voice, no problems there.

But to focus on the mute, as you said.

Eph 5:19 - speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord,

The mute speak with their hands, the sing with their hands. There is a deaf man where I worship. He sings from the heart.

Romans 10:10 says, "For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

Since he can't use his mouth to make a confession, he uses his hands. He doesn't use a piano or trumpet to make his confession.

Since he uses his hands to "speak", he also uses his hands to speak to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in his heart to the Lord. </font>[/QUOTE]Then there is nothing wrong with him "using his hands" to play the piano to convey the "melody" in his heart!



In HIS service;
Jim

 

Are there no harps in heaven? What are harps symbolic of?
Is there no singing in heaven? What is singing symbolic of?
Is there no worship in heaven? What is worship symbolic of?
Is there no God in heaven? What is God symbolic of?

Really? Is everything to be taken symbolically just because it is in the Book of Revelation? Do you seriously believe this? Are you an atheist? Is there a God in heaven (in the Book of Revelation)?
What about Jesus Christ? Shall we deny his existence too, just because we ought to take the book symbolically?
DHK

 

It is obvious from the context and the use of the word as and the coordinating conjunction and that the use of the word harps is a metaphor.
How does one know when the use of a term is symbolic or metaphorical? Who believes the chain, dragon, key and pit are literal in Rev.20.
Is there a literal water of life clear as crystal flowing out of the throne of God? Rev. 22. 1. Are the frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon literal? Rev. 16: 13. In order for one to properly interpret the book of Revelation he must understand the usage of the many symbols that are used and found to a large extent in and from the Old Testament.