A response to Dr. CrumpNovember 18 2006 at 10:35 AM
|harry (no login)|
from IP address 220.127.116.11
Dr. Crump and I have been discussing doctrinal
matters on the "efforts better serve thread"
and I decided to start a new thread to keep
each topic separate.
Pet Doctrine #1 Instrumental Music
Response: I have to admit that the points
I make on this issue are not original. About
15 years ago I attended a neighborhood party
(pretty boring I might add) and I met my
neighbor's uncle who was a Professor of
Philosophy and Religion at either Boston College
or Boston University. He also taught Logic and
Critical Thinking at the graduate level. He is
from what I consider an expert on Religion and
also rational thinking. I asked him about the
churches of Christ doctrine on instrumental
music and he told me that he was quite aware of
the denomination as there were several in the Boston
area and he has a friend who is a member of the
churches of Christ. He brought out two points
which convinced me that the churches of Christ are
wrong on this issue. First, he told me that you
cannot get a positive statement out of silence
or emptiness. Nothing is exactly that, nothing.
He said look at mathamatics. Multiply anything
times zero and you get zero. Add zero to zero and
you get exactly zero. He said only in the churches
of Christ do you come up with a doctrine with the
complete absence of scripture. It defies any kind
of logic and reasoning. He went further to add that
if that is the criteria for determing church doctrine
than an individual can dictate their own doctrines
and justify it through the "silence of scripture".
So that is where I come up with if the churches of
Christ come up with a doctrine that playing
instrumental music in an assembly is a sin, then
it is manufactured in the human mind and not based
on scripture. There is no scripture that you can
find where instrumental music is a sin.
His second point is that through all his studies of
not only Christianity, but Islam, Budhism, etc. he
has not encountered even one instance of a religious
sect forming a doctrine from their sacred writtings
based on the absence of reference in their sacred
writtings. To his knowledge the churces of Christ
stand alone in using this type of interpretation
of scripture. Let me ask you Dr. Crump: If this
principle is a legitiment use of scripture do you
not think that there would be at least one other
religious group that would do the same. He even
mentioned that not only in religion and sacred writtings
he cannot find one single instance of even secular
writtings where this principle is used. He even
told me that arguing with members is useless as
they cannot break free from their delusional thinking
even when the facts say otherwise.
It sounds to me that you, Dr. Crump and the rest of
the people of the churches of Christ are all alone
on this way of interpreting scripture and if I were
in your shoes I'd feel fairly uncomfortable thinking
that I am right and the rest of the world is wrong
which in all honesty, is not the case.
Pet Doctrine #2 The Lord's Supper
Response: In your quotes of John Waddy (whoever he
may be) you mentioned two passages of scripture that
reference the breaking of bread: Acts 2:46 and
Acts 20:7 and even admitted that the phrasing of
both passages are exactly the same. Then, in one passage,
Acts 2:46 you call it a daily meal together and in the
reference of Acts 20:7 it is a sacred rite to be done
only on the first day of the week. You may not have
realized this as you were formulating your response
to my original but you have arbitrarily interpreted
two exact phrases in the Bible to justify your
argument. If both passages say the exact same thing
then, they mean the same exact meaning.
The second point I'd like to bring out is the original
Lord's Supper occurred on a Wednesday evening in the
midst of a Passover meal. If taking the Lord's Supper
on any other day of the week except the first day is
inherently wrong then, wasn't Christ wrong when he
instituted it on a wednesday evening ??
The truth is Paul states in I Corinthians 11 that as
often as you take communion "Do this in rememberence
of Me" The whole point is that the Lord's Supper is
a celebration of Christ's Ressurection and that cannot
be celebrated too often. If a believer is so appreciative
of their salvation in the Lord that they are led to
take it every day I see nothing wrong with that.
Pet Doctrine #3 Spiritual Gifts
Response: I use the New Living Translation version
of the Bible as I believe that is the most straight
forward version of scripture and I'll quote with
a few interjections:
I Corinthians 1:4-8 states, " I can never stop thanking
God for ALL the generous gifts he has given you(those he
mentions in chapter 12),now that you belong in Christ Jesus.
He has enriched your church with the gifts of eloquence and
knowledge. This shows that what I told you about Christ is
true. Now you have every spiritual gift (including tongues,
healing, and miracles) you need as you eagerly wait for the
return of our Lord Jesus Christ (this event has yet to occur).
He will keep you strong right up to the end, and keep you free
from all blame on the great day when our Lord Jesus Christ
returns. (it is immaterial as to whether the readers believed
whether the event would occur in their lifetimes or later
in church history the doctrine still stands).
You first erronously separate Corinthian christians from
other christians without any justification. Paul meant for
his letters to be passed around to other churches. At the
end of the Letter to Colossians he tells them to circulate
the letter to the church at Laodicea and they in turn give
the Letter to Laodicea to the believers in Colosse. I believe
that the whole Bible is relevant for today not just the parts
we like or set doctrine over parts we feel comfortable with
and ignore the rest. If you do this I'd say you are taking
liberties with Bible interpretation.
Your next fallacey was an erronous interpretation of I Corinthians
13:10. The Greek of the end or the complete (to telion) is neuter
not masculine or feminine. It just simply doesn't fit with book
(Biblios-masculine) or revelation (apocolypsis- masculine). BUT,
isn't it intersting that the passage I mentioned earlier I
Corinthians 1:4-8 uses the adjective form of To Telion to
refer to the return of Christ. Paul was actually talking about
the return of Christ in I Corinthians 13:10 not revelation.
Second, the Greek of passing away is middle imperfect which
means that the object causes itself to disappear on its own.
A better translation of I Corinthians 13:10 would be " When
the End comes (Christ's Return), the special gifts will become
obsolete." And when you think about it thats a good fit
theologically speaking. We still need miraculous gifts today,
but when Christ returns we will be completely healed and
have no need for the gift of healing. When Christ returns
we will have full knowledge and have no need for the Spritual
Gift of knowledge. Doesn't that make sense ??
Look around you do you not see disease, death, ignorance,
conflict, and confusion ?? If you don't see these in the
world you are blind. Do we need Spritual Gifts today ??
Absolutely. To say there is no more need for Spritual
Gifts for today is just being blind to the world around
Pet Doctrine #$ Premillennialism
Responce: People who believe in only one return of Christ
(Amillennialism) have a huge hermenutical problem that
they cannot avoid. Scriptures refer to two different
types of the appearence of Christ in the clouds.
These two passages are so much different that the only
explanation is that they are two different events separated
by time. The first appearence is Matthew 24:30-31
and I Thessalonians 4: 15-18 where at the sound of a
trumpet call Christ is alone in the clouds and call up
all who are faithful whether currently living or from
the grave and then, takes the followers up to heaven
with him. At that time there is no immediate judgement
on the unbelievers. Revelation 19 has Christ with his
ones with him (Christians) ready to cast Satan in prison
for a thousand years. These are two events with a time
lapse in between. The thousand years is literal (no good
reason to interpret otherwise) and at the end of the thousand
years is the judement of the unbelievers. Zechariah 14:4-13
sates that the Messiah (Jesus Christ) will set foot on
Mount Olives and literally be on this Earth.
Another problem of Amillennialism is the interpretation
of Satan being bound in the present age. Come on. If that
isn't hilarious I don't know what is. To say that Satan
is currently bound up is to not look around and see that
this world is not only influenced by Satan but, I would
say they are in his grips and the only salvation or hope
anybody has is their Faith in Christ Jesus.
Looking forward to your response,
|November 18 2006, 1:13 PM |
Harry you should start with the new covenant that God made with "all" people, i.e., both the Jew and the gentile.
The old covenant was to the Jew only, by the way are you Jewish? If not why not began studying the covenant of the New Testament?
In the New Testament you find a new institution - the church. The Church of Christ. This church was purchased by the blood of Jesus. If this church was purchased by the blood of Jesus then this church could not have existed before! It is New Testemant only! Jesus said "I am the Door!" We need to find that Door and enter into the body of Christ, i.e., the Church of Christ.
Harry, if you have not done this then why discuss how the Church that Christ built should worship? If you have entered into the body of Christ then you must abide in His word.
Now, what does His word say about these things of which you speak? What does the New Testament say about mechanical instruments in His Church? If it says "nothing about the matter" then were is the problem with doing "nothing about the matter?"
Why and from whence do you get the authority to add or change the way His church has worshipped Him for years and years?
If you feel like you have the authority to change the Church that Jesus purchased with His blood; If you feel like you have the authority to change the Church in which Jesus set the Apostles as the ones who had Spiritual authority and wrote the epistles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; If you feel like you have the authority to add commandments to the written word of God, then go to it!
Harry, one must remember that when you change the Word you also change the Head! There can be no 2 faced, 2 headed, double tongued Church of Christ! No longer is Jesus the Head of the church were the Word has been changed but Harrry becomes the head!
That's rather scarrry to worship the commands of Harrry! Moses could have added 4 or 5 of his commandments to the 10 commandments that God gave to the Jews like "Its okay to strike a rock if you are thirsty." But Moses paid the price for changing God's Word and striking the rock. (Remember this when you discuss the silence of the Scriptures.)
Re: Pardon me...
|November 18 2006, 6:31 PM |
Harry, I would encourage you to spend some time studying the history of instrumental music in worship. First, Churches of Christ are not the first or only religious group to reject instrumental music. History is clear that for hundreds of years following the first century, there were no instruments in worship. Study that and then let's talk some more.
PARDON ME TOO Part One
|November 18 2006, 6:50 PM |
Dr Bill can handle it but PARDON ME TOO
Harry, because the church universally repudiated instruments in the modern sense when the Campbells and others just LEFT various denominations without FOUNDING a new institution, and because everyone knows that when you introduce them you deliberately sow discord, and because instruments destroy the very DEFINITION of ekklesia or synagagou or school of the Bible, and because those who INTRUDE something not required are defined as HERETICS or SECTARIANS, those who do so are under the burden to PROVE the utility of deliberately separating peaceable churches into factions on a local CONGREGATIONAL basis when they know that families will be broken.
The almost universal historical meaning of worship to EXCLUDE the concept of MUSIC during CLASS or PRAYER--including Muslims and still most of the world's worshipers--DOES NOT REQUIRE inventing any kind of LEGALISM or LAW to NOT BEGIN to do something you have NEVER done in these 2,00 years. Those who COMMIT the most heneious sins we have listed by INTRODUCING instruments using the LAW OF SILENCE meaning "the Bible DOTH NOT SAY thou shalt NOT use instruments" are the ONLY ONES who use the LAW OF SILENCE. Churches of Christ do NOT use the Law of Silence because we are told WHAT to do in very explicit terms. I have listed the definition of SPEAK which includes a LAW in the Greek Resources to mean OPPOSED TO MUSIC. Therefore, for your "professor" the word SPEAK by common sense and authoratative dictionaries EXCLUDES instruments.
THOSE WHO ADD INSTRUMENTS (the definition of heresy) PRODUCE SCHISM AND MUST PROVE THAT THEY (not the instruments) ARE the SINNERS. The SECTARIANIZING or divison between friends and families PERSISTS as long as you DO MUSIC which offends Bible disciples and people of taste. The term SELF-PLEASING in the synagogue (Rom 15) is outlawed: the word means "creating mental excitement" this was usually "produced" by loud singing and instruments. The "lifting up" in order to USE people is called "heresy." As long as you manipulate people's private parts with music and charismatic--what Paul called madness--activities you violate the direct command for the church in the wilderness, the approved example of Jesus, the direct command of Paul and the practice of the historic church.
Pet Doctrine #1 Instrumental Music Response: First, he told me that you cannot get a positive statement out of silence or emptiness. Nothing is exactly that, nothing. He said look at mathamatics. Multiply anything times zero and you get zero. Add zero to zero and you get exactly zero
The word SPEAK to one another IS NOT a "silence word." However, the law of silence in the Greek languague EXCLUDES music. Do all in the Name of the Lord (for we arithmatic grade) means DO NOT do all in the name of Lucifer (the singing and harp playing prostitute). WALK means "do NOT run." SIT means "do NOT stand." UP means NOT down. RIGHT means NOT left. SHUT UP in court means DO NOT speak.
1 ≠ 0; 0 ≠ 1
0 (silence) + 1 (noise) ≠ 0 (silence) [The Bible calls what instrumentalist do "NOISE"
UNDER THE LAW AND PAGAN SACRIFICIAL SYSTEMS
0 (Rest) + 1 (laded burden) = silencing Jesus Christ.
Jesus invited us to come to HIM to REST and LEARN: that began in the church in the wilderness where loud instruments and "making a joyful noise to the Lord" was excluded because THAT was reserved for tribal actions and movements such as war. That has never changed. Laded burden means "creating spiritual anxiety through religious rituals." If you have the gift of UNKNOWN TONGUES God wants you in the mission field: if you are charismatic then Paul wants you to get relief from those BURDEN LADERS who are USING you.
0 (silence) + 0 (silence) = 0 (silence) [What Jesus called REST, PAUO means "stop the instruments."]
When God INCLUDES that means that God EXCLUDES or God would NOT bother to speak. The BIBLE and all historical scholars USE the Law of Silence to EXCLUDE what has been INCLUDED by the command of a superior authority.
However, the INSTRUMENTALISTS are the only ones who NEED to use the LAW OF SILENCE and they have so RECORDED that law: The Bible DOES NOT SAY do NOT play instruments so WE gonna play instruments 'SPITE OF HELL.
|Dr. Bill Crump|
Re: A response to Dr. Crump
|November 18 2006, 7:04 PM |
Since I've already refuted the alleged "pet doctrines" that Harry Smith levied against the church of Christ, it is futile to continue hashing arguments when it is clear that both sides believe they are correct. Further arguments will go nowhere. And was there a need to start yet a NEW thread to try to hash over old arguments further?
I will say that Smith's "religious" professor friend (whoever that may be) takes a typical stance in trying to rationalize God and make God think like man. It should be clear to the faithful that the silence of God is not permissive in matters of doctrine and worship, especially when God has already laid down specific guidelines about certain matters. Singing and making melody in the heart is just one of them. Again, go back to the matter of cocaine in worship. God is silent about snorting cocaine in worship. Does His silence thus grant us permission to snort cocaine in worship? If snorting cocaine were legal, given its foul effects when it's abused, would God's silence still grant us permission to snort cocaine in worship? Of course not! God speaks of singing through the apostle Paul but is silent about mechanical instruments. Does God's silence thus grant us permission to use mechanical instruments in worship? Of course not! And that should satisfy the faithful, who aren't looking to satisfy themselves with worldly pleasures in worship.
Frankly, if preferences be had, I would very much like to have services with a giant pipe organ. In fact, I was foolish enough to have been organist for a Southern Baptist church for a few years, until I saw the light. But as I said before, if God had never specified the type of music Christians are to give Him in worship, then we would have been free to do as we please and have all the instruments, praise bands, rock groups, Broadway performances, and chorus girls we wanted. But since He HAS given specific directives about music through the apostle Paul, then we are NOT FREE to use any kind of music that we please. To go beyond what God has specified is rebellion and second-guessing Him. Talk about removing God from His throne, those who insist on having instruments in the Christian age do just that; they put themselves ahead of God and are not content to follow exactly the mandates as laid out in the New Testament. Of course, liberals and the rebellious typically call this "legalism," but in reality it is merely their way of saying, "We don't want to be obedient, because we are 'free,' we hates rules, and NOBODY's gonna tell us what to do, let alone some stuffy New Testament!"
Well, I've gone on far more than needed. I've said before that I post not so much to convince the liberals and the rebellious of anything, for their minds have already chosen the "wide path." I post more for the "silent reader" who is sitting on the fence and who just may be convinced to take the narrow path from the truth that I write, for it is solely based on the New Testament. And as far as the other issues that Smith wanted to hash over, I stand by what I have previously written.
|Dr. Bill Crump|
A Few Other Things
|November 23 2006, 10:26 PM |
I did notice a few other flaws in Smith's essay, so I'll elaborate on two of them for the sake of our "silent readers":
(1) Smith implied that since Christ supposedly instituted the Lord's Supper on a Wednesday, then He was wrong to do so if Christians are to take it on the first day of the week. Smith forgets that Christ had to observe the Passover on the allotted day, because He was bound by the statutes of the Mosaic Law until after His death, burial, and resurrection, which laid to rest that Law. The Passover then became a useless ritual for Christians, who were no longer bound to observe anything under the Mosaic Law. The same can be said about an argument for instrumental music because instruments were used in the Temple in Jerusalem during the earthly life of Christ. Again, Christ's death, burial, and resurrection fulfilled and laid to rest the Mosaic Law. A new form of music was dictated in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16.
(2) Smith also implied that churches of Christ should look around to see what other faiths are doing and perhaps consider that, because everybody else is doing something different [that is, contrary to what the New Testament stipulates], then churches of Christ are wrong. Smith forgets that, contrary to democracy, Christianity is not a democratic society. Christ is the sole authority, and Christians are to follow the mandates of Christ and those He delivered to the apostles or find themselves in rebellion. Christians have no authority to decide what parts of the New Testament to obey and what parts to discard. ALL of the New Testament is binding upon Christians today, just as it was upon the first-century Christians. There is no "majority rules" policy when it comes to the New Testament and Christian doctrine. It is Christ's way or the highway.
|Dr. Bill Crump|
And Speaking of Instruments...
|November 18 2006, 7:29 PM |
Here's an excellent essay by John Waddey, editor of Christianity: Then and Now:
WHY WE REJECT INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN WORSHIP
Dear Fellow-Christian: Today's lesson deals with the central issue of the change movement. Change agents have decided that we are wrong in insisting on a cappella music in our worship. Some of them are ready to embrace the use of instruments of music in worship and the rest see no harm in so doing. The lesson following explains why we and our predecessors in the faith have rejected them. Please share this lesson with your friends and neighbors in Christ.
- John Waddey
WHY WE REJECT INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN WORSHIP
"Bro. Waddey: If Jesus did not condemn the use of instruments in worship, how can we?"
The conclusion we reach will depend upon the concept we hold about how God authorizes a thing. Luther, with others following, argued, "I can do anything the Bible does not condemn. Zwingle and others correctly argued, "we can only do what God has authorized in his word. Churches of Christ have followed the Biblical approach of Zwingle. Those who became the Christian Churches and accepted such items as instrumental music in worship followed Luther's concept. Zwingle was right since the Bible lays down that proposition. Note the following:
Jesus instructed us to teach disciples to "observe all things whatsoever (he) commanded" the apostles to do (Matt. 28:20). Anything he taught them, personally while here or through his emissary the Holy Spirit, I am authorized to teach. That which he did not command, I cannot teach with his approval. I can read where we are instructed (thus authorized) to sing unto God, but I cannot read a line about the use of instruments of music in worship. (See Eph. 5:19 and Heb. 2:11-12).
If I abide in the teaching of Christ, I enjoy the blessings of the Father and his Son. If I go beyond that doctrine in my teaching and practice I have not God (II John 9). I can sing praises in worship within the boundaries of Christ's teaching, but to add instrumental accompaniment, I must go outside the teaching of Jesus for my authority. Notice how some go to the Old Testament, some to tradition, some to human wisdom. But no one can find its authorization in the New Testament of Jesus.
Paul warns us in 1 Corinthians 4:6 "not to go beyond the things that are written" in our religious practices. If I abide by his instruction, I can only sing in worship, for that is all that is written. We freely grant that the New Testament nowhere forbids by name the use of instruments, but it does not approve or authorize the practice by the principles stated above.
To argue for instrumental accompaniment on the grounds that it is not specifically forbidden proves too much. Scripture no where forbids me to use soft drink for the communion or catsup on the holy bread. Yet all would immediately take exception if I did so. Why? Because Scripture plainly tells us what to use; bread and fruit of the vine (Matt. 26:26-29). If I should not go beyond what is written in the communion worship, on what grounds should I go beyond what is written in the song worship?
Remember, Christ did not condemn instrumental music, burning incense, counting beads, holy water, infant baptism, sprinkling for baptism, clerical uniforms and a hundred other items of humanly originated religious practices. If that justifies us in the use of musical instruments, then it must of necessity approve the other items as well. Few would follow this logic to its end.
As to the matter of church buildings and song books, we must remember that God authorizes things in two ways: (1) Specifically, and (2) Generically. When He instructed Noah to build an ark we see both of these illustrated. The ark, its dimensions and materials were specified. Noah was not free to change the number of decks, windows and doors, not to use any other material than gopher wood (Gen. 6:14-16). The kind of tools, the number of helpers and the schedule of work were not stated. God left this to Noah's judgment. He was authorized to use whatever tools, helpers and schedule he needed to fulfill the general command to build the ark. In like manner, the charge to assemble and worship authorizes Christians to secure a suitable place so as to comply with the command. The command to sing authorizes such incidentals as songbooks, song leaders and pitch pipes.
God's command to build an ark could not be stretched to cover building a permanent temple. It took another command to do that. The authorization to sing cannot be construed to cover a different kind of music such as the instrumental variety.
Of course, since we are under the New Covenant of Christ, the fact that the Hebrews were authorized to use instruments in their temple worship is of no consequence to us. Their use of instruments is in the same category as their use of animal sacrifices, incense and the Levitical priesthood. All were authorized by a former law not currently binding upon us.
Faithful Christians are committed to doing what Christ authorized, in the way he prescribed and for the reason he gave. That is the meaning of restoring New Testament Christianity.
- John Waddey
The Islamic Fallacy
|November 18 2006, 9:21 PM |
His second point is that through all his studies of not only Christianity, but Islam, Budhism, etc. he has not encountered even one instance of a religious sect forming a doctrine from their sacred writtings based on the absence of reference in their sacred writtings. To his knowledge the churces of Christ stand alone in using this type of interpretation of scripture. Let me ask you Dr. Crump: If this principle is a legitiment use of scripture do you not think that there would be at least one other religious group that would do the same. He even mentioned that not only in religion and sacred writtings he cannot find one single instance of even secular writtings where this principle is used. He even told me that arguing with members is useless as they cannot break free from their delusional thinking even when the facts say otherwise.
A doctrine is a positive teaching. Therefore, your TEACHING is as Dr. Bill has made very clear, to obey the commands and examples to use a speak type of singing in order to TEACH the Word. That is what churches of Christ use for DOCTRINE and no SILENCE is used. YOU, on the other hand ENFORCE a law based on the fact that you hallucinate that God has been SILENT. He has not: music is condemned because it DISABLES your ability to see the universal association between music and ignorance.
Because instrumentalists have a congenital habit of infiltrating and diverting peaceable churches, it is NORMAL to say that THEY cannot make a LAW which they enforce out of SILENCE. Non instrumentalists are not in a position to make a law for INSTRUMENTALISTS but insist on teaching the Biblical facts.
The PROFESSOR cannot find a historical Christian writer who DOES NOT honor God's silence; just common decency, eh?
As a matter of fact, the Bible and the UNIVERSAL UNDERSTANDING was that a positive command by a father, teacher or a "god" EXCLUDED anything BUT what had been commanded. Common sense means the doctor has none. That is why Athenian law PROHOBITED sending as heralds (kerusso=preachers or presbyters) philosophers or "poetes" meaning any one who put prose into performance language which is defined by the word HYPOCRITE. Our Islamic scholars take note of that fact.
When Paul says "don't get drunk with wine" he used a common expression where MOST pagan religions got drunk on SOMETHING. The word Paul used is often seen in Greek literature as "getting fluted down with wine." That means getting DRUNK with passion and pride WHILE drinking wine
which then and now demands music to make the poison go down. The deliberate manipulation of your private being and other parts is INTENDED to "get you drunk" as the prophet says WITHOUT WINE. Of the Muslims which "prof" knows so well:
Sama' (Arabic: "listening"), the Sufi (Muslim mystic) practice of listening to music and chanting to reinforce ecstasy and induce mystical trance. The Muslim orthodox regarded such practices as un-Islamic, and the more puritanical among them associated the Sufis' music, song, and dancing with drinking parties and immoral activities. The Sufis countered such attitudes by pointing out that Muhammad himself permitted the Qur'an (Muslim scripture) to be chanted and that the adhan (call for prayer) was also chanted in order to prepare for worship....An individual must be pure in heart and strong in character before indulging in sama'; otherwise music and song would arouse his base instincts instead of elevating his spirituality. Some Sufis reject the practice of sama' altogether. Britannica Members
"Perhaps Islam does not see right to remain indifferent to music because it knows how delightful music is to our nature and how strong it is on our feelings.
Our religion has an exceptionally good view in any case,
in discovering the hidden dangers which
might be inherent in the sweetest and most pleasurable things.
Indeed, a heavenly religion should lead to the
truths which are unattainable by man himself,
as this is expected in the guiding nature of the religion.
Paul outlawed SELF-PLEASURE which prohibits wine, music or the body worship which drives people into madness where they gibber. The "tongues" Paul practiced were "minor dialects" of which there were 70 known.
Islam taught exactly what Jesus exampled, Paul commanded and the historic church practiced before performance flowed in from the pagan cults along with the still-pagan priests. The word for speaking the WORD excludes MUSIC: there is NO silence. You cannot intend to speak "that which is written" or "Scripture" with one MIND and one MOUTH to educate, glorify God who wrote the songs and sermons and KEEP THE UNITY and add musical performance while God is speaking through His Word.
If music is to be applied with its rules and techniques to the recitation it would violate the rules of tajweed. So, this kind of music with notes and rules, like composed pieces, is not allowed in the recitation.However, if a person recites the Quran, associated with the beauty of his natural tunes, this is commendable.
This way is very reasonable considering the fact that an abuse of the Quran with music must be avoided. That is why a piece of music is listened to for appreciation of its musical value, without necessarily understanding its words, for the most part.
Although the meaning of the words in some pieces of music can be realized to some extent,
the composers usually have to fill the gaps with "la la"s to balance the piece of music. Obviously, such a practice in the Quranic recitation is out of the question.
Natural "singing" meant reciting with the normal inflections of the human voice.
We don't NEED a law if we respect the WORD of God! You will note that long before recent mega churches began to add "musical worship teams" knowing that they would introduce instruments they PUBLICALLY DECLARED that they did not believe that the Bible was authority because OUR culture has changed. A local elder said "I don't care WHAT the Bible says."
That was the historical fact of the first organ added at Midway Kentucky by one trained in what they called "German liberalism" and he assuredly DID NOT believe that you even WENT to the Bible for authority. For that reason, it was only in 1878 that those who made "union" or meeting together impossible by ADDING organs KNOWING that discord would follow and saying as they say today "get over it or get out" that they hustled up the word PSALLO as authority for the destruction they had already produced to ATTRACT the "largest miscellaneous crowd." Do you believe $5,000.oo salary for a professional organist in the 1860s?
They STILL use as proof texts ALL of those ancient texts where PLUCKING the harp universally meant preparation for PLUCKING young boys.
Music and its INDUCED Charismata is OUTLAWED!
|November 19 2006, 4:41 PM |
When Paul had the gift of tongues it was to speak a MINOR DIALECT and not some insane jabbering. However, the "uncovered women prophesiers" around Corinth went into a music or drug induced charismatic fit which Paul identified as madness. The charismatic women of the pagan temples were gladly called MAD WOMEN. Rarely and only in disturbed people could males have this dissociation induced. That is why Paul said that he WOULD NOT speak these tongues or little-known dialects IN CHURCH where Koine Greek could normally be understood or translated.
On the other hand, the professional "prophesiers" or charismatic sorcerers usually delivered their message in a foreign language to give them more "importance." This still happens in most Catholic churches which use Latin and in "christian" Devil worship in Iraqu where the songs and sermons are memorized from a foreign language. These "tongue speakers" have always known to be criminals collecting money by driving weak minds into momentary madness which can have lasting effects.
The Iamblichus See also Arnobius II
There are some, however, who suppose there is likewise, the subject-race of a tricky nature, artful, and assuming all shapes, turning many ways, that personates gods and dæmons and souls of the dead like actors on the stage; and that through these everything that seems to be good or bad is possible. They are led to form this judgment because these subject-spirits are not able to contribute anything really beneficial as relates to the soul, nor even to perceive such things; but on the other hand, they ill treat, deride, and often impede those who are returning to virtue.
They are likewise full of conceit, and take delight in vapors and sacrifices.
5. Because the begging priest with open mouth attempts in many ways to raise our expectations. Note 13
13. The agurtes or begging priest generally belonged to the worship of Rhea [ZOE] or Cybele, the Mother. He is frequently depicted in a most unfavorable light. Apuleius speaks of a company of these emasculate priests in the eighth book of the Metamorphoses. They are also described in the Republic of Plato:
"Agurtæ and Mantics frequent the houses of the rich and persuade them that they possess a power granted by the gods to expiate,
by sacrifices and chants any unjust act that has been committed and that they induce the gods by blandishments and magic rites to help them. They collected money in this way, and they also followed the selling of nostrums and telling of fortunes."
G726 harpazÿ har-pad'-zo From a derivative of G138 ; to seize (in various applications): catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).
A. collector, esp. begging priest of Cybele, Gallois
2. vagabond, kai manteis
Gallos, ho,A. priest of Cybele, II. eunuch. USED WITH: Pempô, 2. pompên p. conduct, or take part in, a procession, chorous move in dancing procession, phallos Dionusôim
Jesus cast out the musical ministers "like dung" and repudiated the doctors of the law for "taking away the key to knowledge." The clergy "piping" hoping Jesus would sing and dance proves that the doctrine TAUGHT BY Christ repudiated the emotionally and sexually abnormal have the "talent" and propensity to live like wolves or dogs.
Max Weber warned: Of even greater importance is charisma, which stands in absolute contrast to tradition. In its simplest form, charisma is defined by Weber as "a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities" (Weber 1978: 242)
The extraordinary figures who inspire such unreasoning devotion are imagined by Weber to be, in their typical form, berserk warriors, pirates and demagogues. They reveal their capacities through a highly intensified and emotionally labile state of consciousness that excites and awes the onlookers, and jolts them from the everyday
6. The primary type, from which the others spring, is the epileptoid magician-shaman who can incorporate the Gods and display divine powers primarily through convulsions, trembling and intense effusions of excitement (Weber 1972: 327, 1978: 401) 7. Through his capacity for epileptoid states, the shaman served both as an exemplar of ecstasy and as the leader in the rituals of communal intoxication and orgy Weber took as the original sacred experience (Weber 1978: 401, 539).
Paul told the men to lift HOLY PALMS without ORGY. He knew as in Corinth it was the women who could enduce this state or control her "emasculated priests" or "worship team."
Why would anyone want to get intoxicated on ignorance and let someone derange their minds to PROVE that the Spirit person is inside. The Spirit has a name: Jesus Christ the Righteous and HE put His Spirit and Life into His WORD where LOGOS means "a RATIONAL discourse."
Her. What do you say of edone (pleasure), lupe (pain), epithumia (desire), and the like, Socrates?
The PLEASURING Paul outlawed in Romans 15 has the same meaning as HEDONE: Hedone.
The leader of the vulgar, charismatic religion as a "spiritual" army:
Dêmagôgeô, to be a leader of the people, turannôn, tais d' euergesiais dêmagôgôn Id.10.37 ; cf. dêmagôgei: stratêgei,
Turanneuô: to be a turannos, an absolute sovereign or despot, and in aor. to become such, Hdt., etc.: to be a prince or princess, Eur.
The dêmagôgeô continued: 2. c. acc. pers., d. andras curry favour with, to be won over, conciliated by popular arts,
hêdonê , 3. Pl., desires after pleasure, pleasant lusts, X.Mem.1.2.23, Ep.Tit.3.3, al. dêmêgorein
For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. Tit 3:3
Hedone (g2237) hay-don-ay'; from handano, (to please); sensual delight; by impl. desire: - lust, pleasure
History of tongues proves that when you FALL OUT with the "demagogue" -- and it usually happens -- you will cease speaking in tongues. Why would anyone try to impress others by telling them that he has a very weak nature?
Max Weber continue: They reveal their capacities through a highly intensified and emotionally labile state of consciousness that excites and awes the onlookers, and jolts them from the everyday .
The primary type, from which the others springis the epileptoid magician-shaman who can incorporate the Gods and display divine powers primarily through convulsions, trembling and intense effusions of excitement (Weber 1972: 327, 1978: 401)
Note: 6 See Weber 1978: 242, 400-3, 535-6, 554, 1112, 1115. 1972: 279, 287 for the relationship between charismatic revelation and ecstatic states of excitement.
This is exactly what Paul OUTLAWED when the "ekklesia" or "synagogue" meets:
Rom 15:1 WE then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves
Aresko (g700) ar-es'-ko; prob. from 142 (through the idea of exciting emotion); to be agreeable (or by impl. to seek to be so): - please.
Airo (g142) ah'ee-ro; a prim. verb; to lift; by impl. to take up or away; fig. to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind); spec. to sail away (i.e. weigh anchor); by Heb. [comp. 5375] to expiate sin: - away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, take (away, up).
LATIN which Paul condemns with a DIRECT COMMAND:
Rom XV. debemus autem nos firmiores inbecillitates infirmorum sustinere et non nobis placere <>
This had the same meaning of EXTERNAL SINGING:
Aoidê 1. art of song, autar aoidên thespesiên, spell, incantation, thing sung, song, whether of joy or sorrow,
Aeidô sing,.hence of all kinds of vocal sounds, crow as cocks, hoot as owls, croak as frogs,; hoi tettiges chamothen aisontai, crowing too soon. <>The tettiges are the LOCUSTS which are the MUSES serving Apollo, Abaddon or Apollyo
Areskô I. of pers. only, make good, make amends, spondas theois aresasthai make full drink-offerings to the gods, please, satisfy, be Lord and Master.
IV. areskei is used impers. to express the opinion or resolution of a public body, also of prevailing opinions; ta areskonta the dogmas of philosophers
please, satisfy, despozô 2. c. gen., to be lord or master of, h.Cer.365, Hdt.3.142 as law-term, to be the legal proprietor,
Heredotus 3. I always disliked it that Polycrates or any other man should lord it over men like himself. Polycrates has fulfilled his destiny, and inviting you to share his power I proclaim equality.
Placeo to please, to be pleasing or agreeable, to be welcome, acceptable, to satisfy (class.).
1. In scenic lang., of players or pieces presented, to please, find favor, give satisfaction: scenico placenti
Scaenicus I. of or belonging to the stage, scenic, dramatic, theatrical
I. Lit.: poëtae, dramatic poets, ludi, stage-plays, theatrical representations, : fabula, a drama, ORGANA Suet. Ner. 44 : coronae, id. ib. 53 : habitus, id. ib. 38 : gestus, Cic. de Or. 3, 59, 220 : modulatio Comedy. Orator
The SELF PLEASING is opposed to pleasing-by-education is OUTLAWED by Paul. He uses Jesus Christ as the approved example. The word speaks of SINGING to create mental excitement: this is the "spiritual anxiety by religious rituals" as the laded burden (legalism) which Jesus died to REMOVE. The word REST is dedicated to stopping the "free speaking, singing and instruments." The Latin word OUTLAWS any kind of theatrical performance: Jesus pointed to the prophetic to identify speakers, singers and musicians as HYPOCRITES. This theatrical performance used the "clanging brass and tinkling cymbals" as musical instruments. The law against self PLACEO specificially outlaws the Pipe Organ.
Organum Vitr. 10, 1.--Of musical instruments, a pipe,. Gen. 4, 21; id. 2 Par. 34, 12 et saep.--Of hydraulic engines, an organ, water-organ: organa hydraulica,
This is the same ORGAN used in Ezekiel 33 which identifies the PERFORMING and LISTENING hypocrites. It is also the organ in the Latin version used by Jubal who is defined in The Book of Enoch etc. as the one used by SATAN to seduce with music.
Gen 4:21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.
The word HANDLE has a sexual connection and means that Jubal handled musical instruments WITHOUT AUTHORITY.
H8610 manipulate, figuratively to use unwarrantably:--catch, handle, (lay, take) hold (on, over), stop, X surely, surprise, take.
This is the same word for the drum or tambourine or cymbals. Therefore, just as Lucifer came into the garden of Eden with "wind, string and percussion" instruments, Cain (from a musical note) produced a family who USED them WITHOUT AUTHORITY:
H8608 taphaph to drum, that is, play (as) on the tambourine:taber, play with timbrels.
<>H8611 tôpheth to'-feth From the base of H8608 ; a smiting, that is, (figuratively) contempt:--tabret. MEANING HELL
Isaiah who defines the HYPOCRITES as agents of Lucifer also explains the REASON hell was prepared: it was PREPARED for Satan and ALL he/she could seduce with wine, women, music and "putting on of apparel." God will DRIVE them to the place of burning using Wind, String and Percussion Instruments. In Revelation 17 these are UNDER the mother of harlots and John said that the "theatrical" performers were SORCERERS who deceived the whole world: that is because they are fallen angels.
If you respond, 'Well, God didn't tell ME not to use instrumental music which drives you into madness" they you should "eat, drink and make Mary" because you have LOST the right to hear the Word (Hebrews 6 spells it out).
instrumental music question
|November 30 2011, 4:32 PM |
Arguments from silence and from history (generations after the apostolic era!) do not seem like grounds for Christian doctrine. When did instrumental music become wrong in worship? Is it imagined that Paul did not worship with instruments when he visited the temple as a Christian? Was it wrong the day after the day of Pentecost? Was it wrong when the ink was dry on the book of Revelation and it was realized there were no commands/examples re: instruments? Of course there is the example of heavenly harps....is his will "on earth" different than "as it is in heaven" on this matter?
I personally love a capella singing. I don't want instruments personally. But I loathe the insistence on it as the only way to worship rightly. THAT has caused grief and division and harmed the cause of the restoration of the NT gospel. Nobody needs to buy a guitar or piano, but please re-think the whole notion of acapella singing as an "identifying mark of the NT church". That strains credulity.
Re: instrumental music question
|November 30 2011, 7:43 PM |
Arguments from silence and from history (generations after the apostolic era!) do not seem like grounds for Christian doctrine.
I agree with that: The Disciples / Christian churches invented the law of silence in a distorted way. They insisted that if there was not a LAW which said "thou shalt not use musical instruments" then WE intend to impose musical instruments knowing that it would sow discord. That makes imposing instruments based on LEGALISM.
Christ, the Rock, ordained the qahal, synagogue or Church of Christ in the wilderness: it consisted of
REST which meant being quarantined from the sacrificial systems to which God abandoned primarily the Levi tribe because of their musical idolatry at Mount Sinai.
READING the ekklesia or synagogue in the Greek sense could not INVENT any material. Something from a higher authority was READ, discussed and a decision reached.
REHEARSING: the Word of God was for use in the SCHOOL OF GOD. The assembly intended only for people to learn and understand a portion of Scripture. Then, they could sing and meditate about that all week long.
EXCLUDED "vocal or instrumental rejoicing" which was OUTLAWED for the generaly assembly.
Saying that instruments are not outlawed as MARKS of people refusing to listen to the word is the MARK of people whom God has made delusional because they have no love for the truth.
When did instrumental music become wrong in worship?
Christ in the prophets says that Lucifer represented by Tyre and Babylon brought musical instruments as the "singing and harp playing prostitute in the garden of Eden." Jubal "handled" instruments meaning "without authority." Laban wanted to get Jacob drunk again with a musical going away party to steal all of His property." Miriam ESCAPED with the women and performed as a Soothsayer with a noise making instrument." The Levites made noise to warn you that you would be executed if you can NEAR any holy thing or into any holy place. The Levites performed as SOOTHSAYERS with instrumental accompaniment to WARNING to stay outside the gates.
Instruments were invented by David for use by the Levites under the KING and COMMANDERS OF THE ARMY. The assemblies of LEVI were outlawed by Jacob in Genesis 49. If you blow 120 ram's horns (not commaded) during animal slaughter with harpers SMITING their harps the Bible calls that NOISE and never music. The godly people were quarantined to their local area (about 700 feet) and were to REST, READ AND REHEARSE THE WORD. That is the ONLY thing defined as "worship" in the New Testament. The REST day was never for godly worship and the WORK outlawed even ministers of God from going outside their area.
Is it imagined that Paul did not worship with instruments when he visited the temple as a Christian? Was it wrong the day after the day of Pentecost?
Yes: Paul NEVER went into the Temple or the inner court where animals were once slaughtered while the Levites (parasites) made loud noise "to make the lambs dumb before the slaughter." Not even Jesus could go near or into any holy place. They assembled in the outer court NOT on the Sabbath because that is where the people were: they in fact were EVANGELIZING the Jews and Paul was denouncing the method of ceremonial cleansing and preached about baptism and risked his life to do so. The Jewish sacrificial system ended shortly after the Return and the Temple was operated by HIRELINGS: the temple was for Jupiter and called HEROD'S TEMPLE.
There is no record of any kind of "instrumental noise" in the outer court or marketplace.
Was it wrong when the ink was dry on the book of Revelation and it was realized there were no commands/examples re: instruments? Of course there is the example of heavenly harps....is his will "on earth" different than "as it is in heaven" on this matter?
No one PLAYED instruments in heaven or IN THE AIR over Jerusalem. The SOUNDS LIKE were all devoted to creating panic. It was a mark of JUDGMENT and the second angel did not command "make music" The command WHEN YOU HEAR this panic-driven sounds is to PREACH THE GOSPEL: time is short. All of the Biblical Instruments are WARNING about Burning Times. For instance, the speakers, singers and instrument players were called SORCERERS: John said that THEY will be cast alive into the lake of fire.
The Kingdom of God does not come with OBSERVATION: that means Religious observations. So if you can hear, see or smell them they are NOT the kingdom of God.
I personally love a capella singing.
See, they have lied to you again. A capella was the Pope's Castrated opera singers from france because instruments could not be used in the Pope's official Mass. They imitated the Pipe Organ and therefore sang "organum." The deceivers call it Acappella as a worship team. Capella was the smelly goat reprsentative of a constellation they worshipped.
The fact that there is NO command to SING in the Bible. The direct command is to use "that which is written for our learning" and the elders are to teach that which has been taught. The word SPEAK is the opposite of poetry or music. SPEAKING and SINGING uses opposite sides of the brain as proven by Gabby Giffords.
Singing as an ACT was imposed and sowed discord in the year 373: too late to be Biblical.
Since the command was to SPEAK the Word of Christ (Spirit) and NONE of the Bible is metrical, no one sang congregationally until after Calvin. Then some Psalms(only) were recomposed and set to a simple melody to be sung in UNISON (only): that's what Paul commanded in Romanbs 15.
I don't want instruments personally. But I loathe the insistence on it as the only way to worship rightly. THAT has caused grief and division and harmed the cause of the restoration of the NT gospel.
That's true: the Disciples / Christian churches IMPOSED the organ (only) in their own congregations: The Church of Christ was never at any time in history remotely related to the Disciples/Christians. Churches of Christ never USED machines in what the Campbells called "A School of Christ" where worship was only "Reading and Musing the Word of God." That is what Christ commanded back in the wilderness. Those who NEVER used instruments at any time in history being accused of sowing discord is what we call A Bald Faced Lie which all of the discorders love to tell.
There is no command, example or inference that Jesus commanded a Worship Service: Worship in the New Testament is SOLELY reading and understanding the Word of God: the Lord's Supper is another TEACHING activity. That never changed from the Wilderness onward: Jesus stood up to READ the assigned text and then SAT DOWN. He attended the Christian "synagogue" on two first days of the week and there was NO singing as indeed it had been outlawed for the synagogue.
The NT Gospel cannot be restored: the Restoration movement followed John Calvin who wanted to RESTORE THE CHURCH OF CHRIST by REMOVING all of the superstitions imposed by the Catholics.
Nobody needs to buy a guitar or piano, but please re-think the whole notion of acapella singing as an "identifying mark of the NT church". That strains credulity.
There was NO singing in any of the church events in any writings by the Apostles or by Jesus: the Word SPEAK has no musical concept. Bot singing and PSALLO type melody were IN THE HEART (a place) because in the external sense both spoke of enchantment or sorcery: someone trying to dabble with people's mind. So, maybe a better attack would be to figure out how to insist that preachers be able to read the Word of God.
ALL of the division could cease and all of the collection plates burned if preachers could grasp that church is A SCHOOL (only) OF CHRIST (only) defined by the Prophets and Apostles upon which the church is edified or educated: Christ in the prophets RADICALLY condemns musical instruments as the MARK that people were telling God to shut up.
If all recorded history including the Bible treats instrumental noises as SORCERY or WITCHCRAFT because it seeks to manipulate your brain through external means to fleece the lambs, why would anyone think that they should try to SUBVERT the Word of Christ by scrambling it in sermons and using witchery by music?
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 18.104.22.168 on Nov 30, 2011 8:09 PM|