Review of LU and the philippine church: Instruments in OT.November 13 2009 at 2:27 PM
|Ken Sublett (no login)|
from IP address 18.104.22.168
Eusebio Tanicala: 13 Steps to a Better Understanding Why the Use of Mechanical Instruments of Music in Christian Worship Lacks New Testament Authority In Bible Study Lessons, Features on January 29, 2009 at 5:35 am
However, what he proves is that the OLD TESTAMENT had absolute authority and that Christian Worship simply LACKS AUTHORITY which would be a command, example or inference. Both the Old and New Testaments are filled with word meanings which repudiate music in the not commanded sacrificial system and identifies it with the always-perverted pagan religions.
Eusebio lists several steps from the Old Testament to PROVE that God commanded and approved instrumental music in worship. Why are we not surprised when most preachers in the CONSERVATIVE church of Christ teaches and believes the same things. Men of NOTE will hurt you real bad if you suggest that this was not the old legal PATTERNISM. HOWEVER, God has changed His Mind and given us a NEW LAW OF WORSHIP which does nothing more than simply OMIT naming instruments.
Those wanting to impose instruments will never be convinced by the claimed LACK OF EVIDENCE. Christ speaks through the Prophets and not the Scribes whom he identified as hypocrites by naming speakers, singers and instrument players.
This material is published for the Filipino Brethren.
Do only IGNORANT FOOLS believe that Amos condemned instruments?
|November 15 2009, 4:50 PM |
DID GOD COMMAND INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC AS WORSHIP IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. Jesus warned that doctors of the law have the purpose driven goal to "take away the key to knowledge." That is why they deliberately ignore God's use of religious music as the MARK of Satan from Genesis to Revelation. No historic scholar was so ignorant that they would claim what the THOUGHT LEADERS who have infiltrated churches of Christ to DIVERT them claim as scholarly.
1. It is safe to say that all of the "conservative" preachers in the Church of Christ believe and teach that GOD COMMANDED INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC as worship under the OLD LAW.
2. But, because we live under a NEW LAW and instruments are not commanded as part of that Law.
3. We do not use instruments because it is simply NOT COMMANDED
* It is also safe to say that most preachers, the theological scholars at once-Christian colleges and even the Greek and Hebrew scholars believe and teach
* That even with the long list of the ACTS including the use of singing with instrumental music in the temple was not wrong within itself (since it was, they believe, commanded by God).
* However, God just condemned their bad mental attitude.
Are people who think that Amos condemned the FACT of singing and instruments in the temple just ignorant fools?
Part One 13 Steps to understand the the use of Instruments
Part Two: Insisting that God COMMANDED the use of instrumental Music under the Law
Part Three: Question on Amos 5:23
By Eusebio Tanicala
To my brethren and especially members of the PBC alumni association, please open your Bible to Amos 5:23.
Please open your eyes and your mind.
What is the first part of v. 23? It says,
Take away from Me the noise of your songs.
If v. 23 prohibits the use of stringed instruments,
should not singing also be prohibited.
Both Amos and the Classics repudiate singing AND playing an instrument at the same time: that would be for the women and effeminate in most societies.
But why do you sing in your worship time? Why do you sing in your birthday celebrations? Why do you sing during funeral services? Why apply prohibition on the second part of the verse but not in the first part of the verse.
Indeed, those who know the context of Amos and consistency as well as simple logic would only laugh at Churches of Christ preachers who use Amos 5:6 in arguing against the use of instruments of music.
I plead with fellow preachers and church leaders to STOP using Amos 5 and Amos 6
as proofs against the use of instruments of music in worship.
Using them as proofs against instrument of music in worship
would only reveal ignorance and would help perpetuate wresting of scriptures.
Further, a foolish and weak argument against a practice removes the sting of ones advocacy. ( Eusebio Tanicala, Ph.D.)
How then should we interpret Amos 5:21-25 and Amos 6:4-6? Are the items enumerated prohibited? How do we interpret You sing idle songs to the sound of the harp, and you fancy yourselves to be great musicians, as King David was? (NLB)
Second, we should be consistent. Look at the context. If the portion, I will not hear the melody of thy viols (5:23). were a prohibition on the use of instruments of music at the time of Amos, then to be contextually consistent, all others in the context disliked by Yahweh, like feast days, solemn assemblies, burnt offerings, meat offerings, peace offerings, drinking with the use of bowls, eating fatted cows, lying on soft beds, ..
AS FAR AS I CAN DETERMINE THAT MAKES ALL RECORDED COMMENTATORS IGNORANT FOOLS.
......"we recognize the same elements: the sacrifices and libation, the cultic feast in which the congregation gets a share of food and drink after it has been blessed by the king, and the merry-making, now in the form of instrumental and vocal music. But the central act of the ritual, which was performed by the king, is called literally 'drinking' the god (Gurney, O. R. Some Aspects of Hittite Religion, p. 33-34, Oxford University Press, 1977)
......"Sacrifices, rituals, festivals honoring Yahweh abounded, but these rites were tangible evidence of lack of knowledge, for they expressed the popular belief that Yahweh could be pleased and pacified by cultic ceremonies.
......"The condemnation of cultic rites introduced in 4:4 f. and 5:4 f. is picked up again with new vehemence. It has been argued that Amos was not opposed to cultic ritual per se but condemned the mind set of the people by which responsibility to Yahweh was performed perfunctorily and without relationship to daily life and society.
"If we take Amos' words as they stand, there seems to be little doubt that he condemned the entire religious pattern--feasts, sacrifices, ritual music, offerings, tithes--everything. Gerald LaRue, History of the O.T
......NO command of God was ever so ascribed to man. The use of the instruments of music in the Old Testament were of man, not of God." (Tract on music, Lipscomb).
......"Doubtless they sounded harmoniously in their own ears; but it reached no further. Their melody, like much Church-music, was for itself, and ended in itself. 'Let Christian chanters learn hence, not to set the whole devotion of Psalmody in a good voice, subtelty of modulation and rapid intonation, quavering like birds, to tickle the ears of the curious, take them off to themselves and away from prayer, lest they hear from God." (Barnes, Albert, Amos, p. 300)
"Surely these inspired statements are sufficient to show that David made, invented, and commanded the use of instruments of music in divine worship. Where does revelation explain that God made, invented, appointed, or commanded the use of instrumental music in ordained worship of that age? On the basis of plain declarations, the contention that David introduced the idea is founded; in the absence of such testimony that God is the author, we reject the opinion that God authorized the practice." (L.O. Sanderson, p. 350).
......"From the beginning, then, it was not so. Neither is it a part of or aid to Christian worship. Since there is no record of God ordaining the practice, he must have simply tolerated or indulged it, just as he did regarding some ignorance, kings, divorces, and polygamy" (Sanderson, p. 351).
"It was by the hand or commandment of the Lord and his prophets that the Levites should praise the Lord; for so the Hebrew text may be understood:
"and it was by the order of David that so many instruments of music should be introduced into the Divine service." (Adam Clark, Commentary on 2 Chron. 29:25).
Then Clark says:
......"But were it evident, which it is not, either from this (2 Chron. 29:25) or any other place in the sacred writings, that instruments of music were prescribed by Divine authority under the law, could this be adduced with any semblance of reason that they ought to be used in Christian Worship? No..." (Adam Clark, Commentary, Vol. II, PP. 690-691).
"I believe that David was not authorized by the Lord to introduce that multitude of musical instruments into the divine worship of which we read; and I am satisfied that his conduct in this respect is most solemnly reprehended by this prophet; and I further believe that the use of such instruments of music in the Christian church is without the sanction and against the will of God; that they are subversive of the spirit of true devotion...if there was a woe to them who invented instruments of music, as did David under the law, is there no woe...to those who introduce them?" (Adam Clark, Commenting on Amos 6:5).
......"It is foreign also to the piety of Clement that the (song) instituted for drinking companies, to be sung in the convivial feasts of the Gentiles... As if he [Clement] did not know that Psalms, not 'wine songs,'... were recited at the close of the Supper... I say that so great a profanation of the Psalms is most severely condemned by God in the third [commandment] of the Decalogue and Amos 5:23; 6:5" (Joseph Bingham, Antiq. of the Christian Church, Vol. 2, p. 485 quoting Clement).
......"...Scriptures do condemn the use that David made of the instruments in worship--Amos 6:5: 'Woe to them... that chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of music, like David;' and Amos 5:23: 'Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols.' The condemnation of the instruments of music in this passage turns on the phrase like David--it does not say like David's, which could refer only to the instruments, but like David is the use that David made of the instruments. David did not invent the musical instrument--Jubal invented the instruments (Gen. 4:21)--but David invented them for worship--they were David's innovation." (Wallace, p. 177).
......"Amos, we are told, is the sharpest critic of musical instruments in pre-Christian times. through him God expresses a preference for justice and honesty over bloody sacrifice and its attendant music of song and instruments. This sentiment, we are told, was revolutionary, making part of a similar change felt over the civilized world... And overall view of the evidence, McKinnon thinks, reveals a relationship between the three elements: a higher conception of God, a rejection of sacrifice, and a rejection of musical instruments." (Green, William M, Pepperdine College, in Restoration Quarterly, v. 19, 1966).
......"To hear a man's or woman's voice sing Handel's solo... beats through one's chest with some sort of a throb depending on how well he or she is singing, and how much you respond to this kind of music. But no matter how much you may 'enjoy' Handel's solo, the words are not meant to be entertainment." (Schaeffer, Edith, Christianity is Jewish, p. 1)
...... "Amos stressed "that violations of the moral law could not be remedied by means of festive rites, offerings, or liturgical indulgence on the part of the sinner. In point of fact, God was already standing beside the altar (Am. 9:1ff), poised and ready to shatter it. No ritual, however, elaborate and symbolic in nature, could possibly substitute for the sincere worship of the human spirit, grounded in high moral and ethical principles." (Harrison, p. 895).
...... "Not surprisingly, most Israelites declined the prophet's invitation to enter into a dialog with Yahweh. They preferred a less demanding religion of cultic observance either in the Jerusalem Temple or in the old fertility cults of Canaan. This continues to be the case: the religion of compassion is followed only by a minority; most religious people are content with decorous worship in synagogue, church, temple and mosque. The ancient Canaanite religions were still flourishing in Israel... the Israelites were still taking part in fertility rites and sacred sex there, as we see in the oracles of the prophet Hosea, Amos' contemporary." (Armstrong, Karen, A History of God, p. 47).
F. B. Bruce is one of the best known modern writer and one might expect that he would defend the denominational practice. However, he like most who rest on their scholarship tell the truth. He wrote--
......"The Holy Spirit, uttering His voice by Amos, pronounces the rich to be wretched on account of their luxury: 'Those that drink strained wine, and recline on an ivory couch,' he says; and what else similar he adds by way of reproach. Especial regard is to be paid to decency (as the myth represents Athene, whoever she was, out of regard to it,
......giving up the pleasure of the flute because of the unseemliness of the sight). (Clement of Alexandria, p. 245).
"...these same people were punctilious in their religious observances. Never did such abundant sacrifices smoke to Yahweh from the altars at Dan and Bethel and other sanctuaries in Israel; and the note of praise rose regularly and loudly from tongue and harp. Was not this the worship in which Yahweh delighted? So they thought, but the voice of Yahweh through His prophet told a different story." (F.F. Bruce, Israel, p. 58).
Bruce shows, along with the LXX, that (1) music was used as worship, (2) they thought that God would delight in it, but (3) God condemned it. This refutes those who deny that Amos said anything about music and it supports the clear statement and context of the book of Amos.
Most ancient scholars not only condemn music as worship but show that it had its origin in pagan superstition and was the product of the poets (songs as magical incantations)--
......"It was only permitted to the Jews as sacrifice was, for the heaviness and grossness of their souls. God condescended to their weakness, because they were lately drawn off from idols; but now, instead of organs, we may use our own bodies to praise him withal." (Chrysostom on Psa. 149, Vol. iii, p. 634).
"I say that so great a profanation of the Psalms is most severely condemned by God in the third [commandment] of the Decalogue and Amos 5:23; 6:5, 5" (Joseph Bingham, Antiq. of the Christian Church, Vol. 2, p. 485 quoting Clement)
"It is foreign also to the piety of Clement that the (song) instituted for drinking companies, to be sung in the convivial feasts of the Gentiles... As if he [Clement] did not know that Psalms, not 'wine songs,'... were recited at the close of the Supper... I say that so great a profanation of the Psalms is most severely condemned by God in the third [commandment] of the Decalogue and Amos 5:23; 6:5" (Joseph Bingham, Antiq. of the Christian Church, Vol. 2, p. 485 quoting Clement).
"This passage (Amos 5:23-24) shows us that Amos was opposed
......to the forms in which people acted out their worship of God,
...... and other passages strengthen this impression.
......Turning back to the Mosaic period, Amos asks the rhetorical question: 'Did you bring to me sacrifices and offerings the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?" (5:25). He is merciless in his attack on the shrines, especially the royal shrine of Jeroboam II at Bethel (3:14; 7:7-9, 10-17; 9:1). It is very doubtful, however, that he intended a wholesale abolition of the system of worship. Rather, Amos was probably demanding that the cult be purified, for it had become so contaminated by pagan thought and practice that the people had become indifferent to the true worship of Yahweh and the demand of his torah... He demanded that everything be swept away that did not conform to the proper worship of Yahweh." (Anderson, Bernard, Understanding OT, p. 277).
...... "The prophets were singularly unimpressed by all this religious busyness. They asserted that the people had abandoned the true God for heathen idolatries and that their much-frequented sanctuaries were sinks of iniquity. Recent archaeological discoveries go a long way towards confirming their condemnation of popular religion. It is significant, for example, that on the ostraca from eighth-century Samaria, the proportion of names compounded with Baal suggests that no less than a third of the population practiced some form of Canaanite religion." (Heaton, E. W., Everyday Life in the Old Testament, Scribners), p. 231).
......You have lifted up the shrine of your king, the pedestal of your idols,
the star of your god -- which you made for yourselves. -- Amos 5:26
...... Yea, ye took the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Raephan,
the image of them which ye made for yourselves." Amos 5:26 LXX
......"The neighboring gods of Phoenicia, Canaan, Moab--Baal, Melkart, Astarte, Chemosh, Moloch, etc--were particularly attractive to Jerusalem, while the old Sem calf-worship seriously affected the state religion of the Northern Kingdom...the worship of the sun, moon, stars and signs of the Zodiac became so intensely fascinating that these were introduced even into the temple itself (2 Ki. 17:16; 21:3-7; 23:4, 12; Jer. 19:13; Ezek. 8:16; Amos 5:26)" (Int Std Bible Ency., Idolatry, p. 1448).