FreeInChrist
Active Member
Well, I wish I could use the idea of non-biblical to get our church away from the choir.
And the Piano and Organ... and the misc odd instruments through out the year.
Our choir is dreadful.
Are Musical Instruments Forbidden in Church Meetings?
- Thread starter dwight92070
- Start date
And the Piano and Organ... and the misc odd instruments through out the year.
Our choir is dreadful.
Seabass
Active Member
Paul did not direct Christians to play instruments but commanded Christians to sing. The only "instrument" Paul mentions is the human heart....make melody in your heart...hence the heart is the instrument the Christian "plays" when singing.
In writing the congregation at Ephesus, Paul wrote:
Eph 5
18 - And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
19 - Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
20 - Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
21 - Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
Paul prefaced verses 19-21 with the command to "be filled with Spirit". How does the Church obey the command to be filled with the Spirit? Paul enjoined the explanatory plural participles speaking, singing, making melody, giving and submitting as how the Christian is to be filled with the Spirit. These participles themselves become imperatives for the Christian. It therefore is necessary each Christian to speak, sing, make melody, give and submit to be filled with the Spirit. One Christian cannot obey these participles for another and be filled with the Spirit for another Christian. So each individual Christian is commanded to speak, sing, make melody, give and submit. If "psalms" carried the idea of playing an instrument (which it does not) then each Christian would be required to play an instrument to be filled with the Spirit, for again, one Christian cannot play for another Christian no more than one Christian speak, sing, make, give or submit for another Christian....no proxy worship, no proxy being filled with the Spirit.
Furthermore, since each Christian must be filled with the Spirit by obeying these participles that leaves no room for soloists or choirs. A soloist or choir cannot by proxy sing for me thereby be by proxy filled with the Spirit for me. Each individual Christian must do his own singing. Hence with each Christian is obeying Paul's command, then the end result is the church as a whole is singing, congregational singing.
In verse 19 the phrase "to yourselves" (KJV) "one another" (NKJV) is reciprocal, reflexive pronouns...an interchange of action...I sing to you, you reciprocate that action back to me by singing back to me. Hence the end result is each person is singing to all others and all others are reciprocating and singing back...congregational singing..no soloist or choirs. Again, if psalms includes playing (which it does not) then each person must play an instrument and all others reciprocate that action by playing a musical instrument back.... end result ALL the congregation is playing an instrument.
further reading:
Are Choirs and Solos Authorized for the Church Assembly?
Is performance singing with praise teams, choirs or solos acceptable in the worship of Christ's assembly? What are the arguments for and against this modern movement?
christiancourier.com
Seabass
Active Member
see my post #62 above.....ALL are to sing in order to obey the command to be filled with the Spirit....no proxy worship. One person cannot sing for another no more than one person can speak, make melody, give or submit for another and thereby be filled with the Spirit by proxy for another person. Singing is reciprocal...one sings to others and all others reciprocate that action back and the end result is CONGREGATIONAL singing..... no soloists or choirs.
Seabass
Active Member
The misunderstanding many have between the OT and NT...
Should the Ten Commandments Be Posted?
Why do some want the Ten Commandments posted in public places, when the New Testament teaches that the law was a ministration of death?
christiancourier.com
Should the Ten Commandments Be Posted?
Why do some want the Ten Commandments posted in public places, when the New Testament teaches that the law was a ministration of death?By Wayne Jackson | Christian Courier
“If the Ten Commandments were a ‘ministration of death,’ as the New Testament affirms (see 2 Cor. 3:7), why are so many people clamoring for these commandments to be posted in public places all over the country?”
There are several issues in connection with this question that require some attention.
---The Ten Commandments were given by God to the Israelite people following their exodus from Egyptian bondage. These laws embodied both religious and moral obligations. There was nothing intrinsically evil about the Decalogue. It’s weakness lay in the fact that it possessed no permanent remedy for those who broke the commandments, hence, who were deserving of death. The Mosaic regime had only the “blood of bulls and goats,” which, in an ultimate sense, could never take away sins (Heb. 10:1,4).
---These commandments really were merely the core of the larger body of legal regulations of the entire Mosaic system. They were never intended to be the Law as a whole. To separate the “moral” law from the “ceremonial” law, as modern Sabbatarians have attempted to do, is both arbitrary and artificial. Why is it that Seventh-day Adventists contend that only the Ten Commandments remain an obligation today, and yet oppose the consumption of pork — which has nothing to do with the Decalogue?
---The death penalty was attached to each of the Ten Commandments (see Num. 15:32ff). If the Commandments are binding yet, where are the penalties, e.g., death for breaking the Sabbath?
---The Scriptures clearly teach that the Law of Moses, including the Ten Commandments, was abrogated by the death of Christ (Rom. 7:4,6-7; Eph. 2:15; 2 Cor. 3:3ff). The most cursory examination of the books of Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews reveals the preparatory, thus temporal, nature of the covenant that came through Moses (cf. Gal. 3:24-25).
---The fact that today’s world is not bound by the Ten Commandments does not imply that man is free to practice idolatry, steal, murder, etc. The law of Christ (cf. Isa. 2:3; Jer. 31:33; 1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2; 2 Pet. 2:21) has both religious and moral restrictions that circumscribe human conduct.
Does anyone who migrates from England to New York imagine that he is free to commit murder simply because he has become a citizen of the United States, and thus is subject no longer to the “crown”? One law may supercede another, or, in principle, overlap many of the same functions.
Having made these points, we must observe this. Those who wish to see the Ten Commandments posted on courthouses or in other public places, etc., do so because they are alarmed at the accelerating rate of crime and immorality in the nation. They believe that the visible presence of these laws will serve as a reminder of the obligation every person has to the Creator. It reflects a sincere effort to restore some sense of moral sanity to the nation.
Most people have little concept of the differences between the Old Testament religious scheme, and that which is obligatory today — namely the reign of Christ through New Testament law. But the Christian should know better. And he has more valuable things to do with his time and resources than to get on a “band-wagon” to have the Ten Commandments posted publicly — as well-motivated as the underlying goal may be.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Well, due to an infiramty I catch my service on the web. When they have the music the lyrics are on the screen.
I sing. I believe I have the worst voice ever and would certainly want no real person to hear me.
But I do sing with the others
civic
Active Member
there is no such thing as N.T. worship in the church.
