Worship through music

Ravindran said:
May be the problem is equating Church and Synagogue? I firmly believe they are quite different. Synagogue was the physical tent where presence of God was. The place where God dwelled. Today He dwells in us. Church is nothing but the body of believers in whom Jesus dwells. I don't think Church as a building compared to Synagogue. Just my take. While orderly corporate worship is so important, there are no legalistic rules for Church worship or order of service. If OT saints danced in joy before the Lord outside of synagogue, the same should be acceptable if a believer today does the same inside Church building.
Click to expand...
That's an important distinction to draw, between the synagogue and the Church. We need to take that distinction further, and discern the difference between the earthly system of worship associated with an earthly tabernacle system, and the heavenly worship of the saints of the assembly, as is fitting for a heavenly system. I don't believe it should be a matter of prohibiting things - we shouldn't have to go about making rules to keep elements of Jewish worship out of the Church. We should be so caught up with the heavenly things we have to do with, that nothing earthly has any sway with us! "Remember not the former things", says God, "neither consider the ancient things: behold, I do a new thing; now it shall spring forth: shall ye not know it?" (Isaiah 43:18-19). Shall we not know it? Shall we be too much occupied with types and shadows, "the former things", to behold what God is doing NOW? "I do a new thing" - doesn't that speak of such vital freshness? It isn't that God changes, or that He gives up any of His plans and counsels, no. Yet He does a new thing, He brings in something fresh, so as to make us forget the old.
 
Grant Melville said:
The radical interpretation of the word 'psalmos' is very popular, for sure. We have to assume that it is popular, brethren, because on it lies the whole case for musical instruments in Christian worship in the New Testament. However, every expert in Greek will tell us that the word didn't having the meaning that was later put on it at the time the apostles and the early fathers were writing. For example, the Greek-American scholar, lexicographer and professor of Greek at Harvard, Sophocles, said that he hadn't found a single example of the word having any other meaning than the one that scripture gives it: to sing, and to celebrate the praises of God in song. Sophocles is the author of a Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine periods.

Poverty and persecution may have been reasons for not using instruments in worship at the beginning, but that reason would presumably disappear once the Church rose to favour under Constantine. We have the testimony of history that musical instruments were not from the first and weren't introduced into Christian worship for some 700 years in the Christian era. I think I'm right in thinking that the European branch of the Eastern Orthodox Church has never used musical instruments in the 1800 years of its existence.

It's been said that disapproval of music instruments is denominational thinking, or the creed of one particular sect. Well, John Wesley, one of the most famous Methodists in the history of the testimony, was opposed to the use of musical instruments in church. The Reformer John Calvin (in his commentary on Psalm 33), says: "Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting up of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the law." Charles Spurgeon, Baptist evangelist, used no musical instruments in his services. Alexander Campbell, founder of "Disciples of Christ", rejected musical instruments in the church.

I was reminded today of Acts 2:42: "They continued steadfastly in the apostle's doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking bread, and in prayers." This is a high commendation of the brethren. These were contending for the faith once delivered to the saints, and didn't go after novelties or innovations.

Is instrumental music a novelty or innovation in Christian worship?

1. It's never commanded, commended, or even mentioned in any of the apostolic teaching regarding the Church.
2. It was absent from Christendom for 700 years, and some parts are still free of it today.
3. The use of musical instruments in church has been condemned by a significant number of men across the breadth of the major Protestant denominations, men who are regarded as spiritual and evangelical.

Do we know better, brethren?
Click to expand...
I did not know Strong's Concordance was not reliable.
Doctrines have been known, and it is easy to cite examples, to be based on man's tradition. It would only take 2 or 3 generations of the lack of instruments (based on poverty and/or persecution) to cause a tradition among the brethren. 700 years of tradition goes by until someone questions the doctrine. Prove all things y'know.
I found a site that says much of what you have. What they cite as well known scholars all just say that the word psalmos or psallo has changed from the original meaning of plucking strings to singing with instruments to generically singing hymns. To me, that in no way means exclusion of instruments, just that the word has become more general in meaning.
 
Big Moose said:
I did not know Strong's Concordance was not reliable.
Doctrines have been known, and it is easy to cite examples, to be based on man's tradition. It would only take 2 or 3 generations of the lack of instruments (based on poverty and/or persecution) to cause a tradition among the brethren. 700 years of tradition goes by until someone questions the doctrine. Prove all things y'know.
I found a site that says much of what you have. What they cite as well known scholars all just say that the word psalmos or psallo has changed from the original meaning of plucking strings to singing with instruments to generically singing hymns. To me, that in no way means exclusion of instruments, just that the word has become more general in meaning.
Click to expand...

Strong's Concordance is reliable enough, and broad enough to include the radical interpretation.

Doctrines based on man's traditions invariably bring something in that wasn't from the beginning, rather than continue to leave out something that wasn't from the beginning. Musical instruments used in worship was never part of the teaching of the apostles, or the faith once delivered to the saints. Jude's epistle makes it clear that there was a full exposition of Christianity by the apostles. We must prove all things, and if we look to the scriptures, the only sort of proof we have is a radical interpretation of one Greek word, which history shows wouldn't have been applied in that way by the apostles, since there were no instruments used in the early church.
 
Grant Melville said:
But why...? Worship isn't restricted or stifled if we don't happen to have musical instruments or any other props to hand. Why do we even need them, if that's the case?
Click to expand...

Condemning anything that comes from the heart from God toward God is a condemnable behaviour. It hurts the heart of God, and it can easily quench the Holy Spirit.
 
Grant Melville said:
But is the Holy Spirit being allowed freedom? That's a whole different question, I know, but it does bear on this.
Click to expand...

Yes, complete freedom, in a congregation that allows Holy Spirit free reign, not denying any gift He offers, and holds Jesus Christ to be their lead pastor.
 
Euphemia said:
Condemning anything that comes from the heart from God toward God is a condemnable behaviour. It hurts the heart of God, and it can easily quench the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
If it came from the heart of God, wouldn't the apostle Paul have mentioned it? Or perhaps John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, who leaned upon His breast? Or Peter, whose love was tested and strengthened and drawn out by the Lord? These apostles, who were so uniquely acquainted with what was in the heart of God, who were instrumental in the first building work of the Church... their ministry leaves out anything of the art or science of man. They were wholly occupied with another Man altogether.
 
Grant Melville said:
If it came from the heart of God, wouldn't the apostle Paul have mentioned it? Or perhaps John, the disciple whom Jesus loved, who leaned upon His breast? Or Peter, whose love was tested and strengthened and drawn out by the Lord? These apostles, who were so uniquely acquainted with what was in the heart of God, who were instrumental in the first building work of the Church... their ministry leaves out anything of the art or science of man. They were wholly occupied with another Man altogether.
Click to expand...

Why would Paul have to mention something that we all know from the full measure of the word? It's enough that Holy Spirit speaks it to us, personally. All pure worship, in all its various exp0ressions, comes from Him and goes to Him.
 
Euphemia said:
Why would Paul have to mention something that we all know from the full measure of the word? It's enough that Holy Spirit speaks it to us, personally. All pure worship, in all its various exp0ressions, comes from Him and goes to Him.
Click to expand...
We should be governed by the word of God as to what's pure worship - which would be in spirit and in truth. Not with the hands, or the feet, or with any of the musical instruments mentioned in the Psalms. It should be noted that the psalmist "praised" God with these things, not "worshipped" Him with them. Praise and worship are different things, though worship would lead to praise. Praise is the outward expression, and the outward expression of Christian worship is different from Jewish worship, on account of our having the Holy Spirit indwelling us and making intercession for us with our prayers, and so on. The Holy Spirit does not encourage the believer to attempt to add to His work in drawing out worship to God with works of any kind. We ought to be intelligent so as to discern between the movement of human emotion and the movement of the Spirit of God. As believers we experience both, because we aren't divorced from nature, but we ought to be able to discern them. We cannot offer an emotional response to God in worship, it has to be a spiritual response.
 
Euphemia said:
Absolutely, and I thank God for churches in this world that allow Him free reign. God is blessed.
Click to expand...
I mean the conditions I was describing above, when the service of God is orchestrated and planned, and structured so as to incorporate musical recitals and pre-written sermons. That is not truly the service of God at all.
 
Grant Melville said:
We should be governed by the word of God as to what's pure worship - which would be in spirit and in truth. Not with the hands, or the feet, or with any of the musical instruments mentioned in the Psalms. It should be noted that the psalmist "praised" God with these things, not "worshipped" Him with them. Praise and worship are different things, though worship would lead to praise. Praise is the outward expression, and the outward expression of Christian worship is different from Jewish worship, on account of our having the Holy Spirit indwelling us and making intercession for us with our prayers, and so on. The Holy Spirit does not encourage the believer to attempt to add to His work in drawing out worship to God with works of any kind. We ought to be intelligent so as to discern between the movement of human emotion and the movement of the Spirit of God. As believers we experience both, because we aren't divorced from nature, but we ought to be able to discern them.
Click to expand...

Those who are guided and motivated by Holy Spirit in worship AND praise, are called to any manner of expression. The voice alone is good, but there is more, and God encourages us in it. Human emotion is not evil. it is good and the expression of emotion in worship and praise is desired by God. It is error to consider it sinful, because God has created us like Himself , with a full set of emotions. It is a mistake to think one is discerning spiritually, when in actuality, one is judging religiously by the flesh.

We cannot offer an emotional response to God in worship, it has to be a spiritual response.
Click to expand...

This is most definitely NOT the truth. Our born again spirits gain utterance through our personality, including emotions, and in the expression through the use of our physical bodies...and that includes singing, as well as all the other forms of expression.
 
Grant Melville said:
I mean the conditions I was describing above, when the service of God is orchestrated and planned, and structured so as to incorporate musical recitals and pre-written sermons. That is not truly the service of God at all.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with planning. Holy Spirit influences people to plan, in order that Jesus Christ have first place and that Holy Spirit can move upon His people. He moves in and out of man's plans, and it is beautiful.
 
Grant Melville said:
I mean the conditions I was describing above, when the service of God is orchestrated and planned, and structured so as to incorporate musical recitals and pre-written sermons. That is not truly the service of God at all.
Click to expand...
I have seen very few pastors preach without notes pre-written. The only ones are on TV pastoring mega-churches. All songs and hymns any congregation sings have been written beforehand with a predetermined melody. And those songs were written with the help of an instrument to sort out proper chords, even if you are singing a capella. Worship is directed to be in order, which must be predetermined. The Holy Spirit should be present when any of these planning phases are happening.
 
Grant Melville said:
Not with the hands, or the feet, or with any of the musical instruments mentioned in the Psalms. It should be noted that the psalmist "praised" God with these things, not "worshipped" Him with them.
Click to expand...
When the psalmist says "I will praise You in the assembly"(paraphrased) that is part of worship. Praising God is an element of worship.
 
Grant Melville said:
Strong's Concordance is reliable enough, and broad enough to include the radical interpretation.

Doctrines based on man's traditions invariably bring something in that wasn't from the beginning, rather than continue to leave out something that wasn't from the beginning. Musical instruments used in worship was never part of the teaching of the apostles, or the faith once delivered to the saints. Jude's epistle makes it clear that there was a full exposition of Christianity by the apostles. We must prove all things, and if we look to the scriptures, the only sort of proof we have is a radical interpretation of one Greek word, which history shows wouldn't have been applied in that way by the apostles, since there were no instruments used in the early church.
Click to expand...
I would be interested in how you define the three related exhortations of singing songs listed in Eph 5:19 "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs"
and Col 3:16 "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs"
What are the differentiations?
 
Euphemia said:
Those who are guided and motivated by Holy Spirit in worship AND praise, are called to any manner of expression. The voice alone is good, but there is more, and God encourages us in it. Human emotion is not evil. it is good and the expression of emotion in worship and praise is desired by God. It is error to consider it sinful, because God has created us like Himself , with a full set of emotions. It is a mistake to think one is discerning spiritually, when in actuality, one is judging religiously by the flesh.



This is most definitely NOT the truth. Our born again spirits gain utterance through our personality, including emotions, and in the expression through the use of our physical bodies...and that includes singing, as well as all the other forms of expression.
Click to expand...

I know that if something is of me, what I am naturally, then it isn't acceptable as an offering to God. That's the simple fact of the matter. I stand before God as in Christ Jesus, not as in myself or my own worth. My emotions and personality are not what God looks on and finds pleasure in - He sees and takes delight in features of Christ as formed in me.
 
Euphemia said:
There is nothing wrong with planning. Holy Spirit influences people to plan, in order that Jesus Christ have first place and that Holy Spirit can move upon His people. He moves in and out of man's plans, and it is beautiful.
Click to expand...
"For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them." - Matthew 18:20

This is the treasured promise of the Lord Jesus. It doesn't convey any idea of planning or orchestration, of man's plans and schemes: it's simplicity itself. Two or three believers, those who've given Him the first place in their hearts, coming together. That's all that's required for Him to come in among them, believers gathering to His blessed Name. The Holy Spirit has complete freedom in a gathering like that. Christ is the Centre, He personally has attracted the saints to Himself, gathered them. There are subject hearts there. We find stringed instruments here, many souls occupied with the same object of praise and adoration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top