Re: Amos 6:5
|April 13 2014, 10:32 PM |
David worshipped God under the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant, with all the religious rites thereunto appertaining. Christians worship God under the New Covenant. Now despite the fact that Christ nailed the Old Covenant to His cross (Col. 2:14), is there a command, example, or inference in the New Testament that tells us the first-century Christians continued the practice of having instruments in the assembly and, hence, we are to continue that practice today?
Re: Amos 6:5
|April 13 2014, 11:47 PM |
The above message seems to suggest that under the Mosaic Law, the use of instrumental music during singing was commanded by God. I don't see any evidence of God COMMANDING His people under the Old Covenant to worship Him with singing AND playing instruments of music.
Re: Amos 6:5
|April 14 2014, 12:37 AM |
I didn't say that God commanded the use of musical instruments. Yet people under the Old Covenant used them in worship. Now some Christians are saying that, because David worshipped with instruments, we should do the same. So again, is there a command, example, or inference in the New Testament that tells us the first-century Christians continued the practice of having instruments in the assembly and, hence, we are to continue that practice today?
Re: Amos 6:5
|April 15 2014, 2:40 AM |
I understand your entire post with the exception that your first sentence, in response to my assertion, is incomplete and, therefore, misleading. You missed the critical part of my question, and that is: "... in the Old Testament."
Your first sentence should have said: "I didn't say that God commanded [His people] the use of musical instruments [under the Old Covenant/under the Mosaic Law/in the Old Testament]."
Re: Amos 6:5
|April 13 2014, 11:22 PM |
Since you have properly studied what you have heard, do you know which specific musical instruments did David invent? (No, of course, Amos 6:5 does not put David down.) Interestingly, certain instruments were invented by others. Here's an example:
Genesis 4: And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.  And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.  And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. (KJV)
We can spend countless hours discussing the unauthorized use of musical instruments in "Christian worship," even misinterpreted evidences of their uses in the Old Testament "divine worship."
... Not without considering the primary uses of instruments of music throughout the O.T. dispensation -- used frequently at festivals and celebrations not connected to worship; used for man's pleasure; used during the various feasts; used to order the movement of the camp; used as a "bell call" to the assembly; etc.
What about the difference between "temple worship" and synagogue worship"? [I think I know what your preference is.]
There's no abuse of Scripture by citing Amos 6:5.
Re: Amos 6:5
|April 14 2014, 8:56 AM |
Servant seems to imply that, since David worshipped God with instruments, and since God did not rebuke David for doing so, then Christians may also worship God with instruments, if they so choose. I'm asking Servant if there is a command, example, or inference in the New Testament that says Christians may imitate David and use instruments in the assembly.
Re: Ukraine Viewing
|April 13 2014, 10:15 PM |
Don't be surprised that there are probably no living "scholars" or preachers who can grasp that the Law of Moses and the Laws of David is a history of the Hebrew and other people: it is not a pattern for worship. In all nations the Civil-Military-Clergy (yes) were what God abandoned the Israelite people to because of MUSICAL IDOLATRY. The godly people NEVER participated in the temple sacrificial system which the True One God the Father never commanded (Hear Christ in Isaiah 1 or Jeremiah 7). Clergy is still a Civil-Institutional operative helping to keep the sheep in line. Christianity has NO clergy and no pay for them. The School of Christ has TEACHERS of His Word only: Logos is the OPPOSITE of performance speaking, singing, playing instruments or pretending to be Jesus or even God today.
If Jacob told you NOT to go whining to the Tribe of Levi or the Kings; and God turned both Levi and Kings over to REPLACE Him then not being able to comprehend is the mark of being tricked into delusions by God Himself.
There are many Eloyhim but there is only ONE JEHOVAH. The Israelites called the golden calf their GOD.
Donnie, you called David "the inventor."
5 That chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of musick, like David;
That verse does NOT call David an inventor. "like David" only refers to the fact that he used instruments, and not an inventor. Since you are so big on the use of the prepositions and specifically "of," then the "of" pertains to "instruments of musick," not the invent. You should know better. You DO know better.
Yes Donnie, you did abuse the citing of Amos 6:5, no matter what you claim.
You have continually, time after time, put down David for his association with music and his worship of God with those instruments. You can ask if there was a command for OT worship with instruments until you are blue in the face. The fact is, David did worship with instruments, and if it did not please God....God would have let us know. Was there any rebuke or discipline in regard to David's playing instruments when he worshiped God? God allowed the praises to continue, in Psalms and other books, and there was no rebuke. Since you understand that silence is golden, then you KNOW that a command wasn't needed.
Dancing, Musical Instruments, Nudity, Burnt Offerings
|April 15 2014, 3:29 AM |
In essence, the verse says: "Like David THEY invent musical instruments."
So, there's that differentiation between: (1) David and (2) "they."
PREMISE: They invent musical instruments like David.
DEDUCTION: David invents musical instruments.
DEDUCTION: They [those guys] invent musical instruments [like David].
God's "people" are known to do "godly" things [they think].
Here's a narrative for you concerning David (II Samuel 6:
 And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod.
 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the trumpet.
 And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart.
 And they brought in the ark of the LORD, and set it in his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched for it: and David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD.
 And as soon as David had made an end of offering burnt offerings and peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of hosts.
 And he dealt among all the people, even among the whole multitude of Israel, as well to the women as men, to every one a cake of bread, and a good piece of flesh, and a flagon of wine. So all the people departed every one to his house.
 Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel to day, who uncovered himself to day in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovereth himself!
 And David said unto Michal, It was before the LORD, which chose me before thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the LORD, over Israel: therefore will I play before the LORD.
 And I will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base in mine own sight: and of the maidservants which thou hast spoken of, of them shall I be had in honour.
 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.
|April 15 2014, 9:46 AM |
Continually fixating on a word like "OF
" blocks all reasoning with issues like the "Spirit OF God" and "instruments OF musik." In other words, one cannot see the forest because one is minutely examining the bark of a single tree.
BTW, I'm wondering what all this talk of David and instruments has to do with the original topic of this thread: Ukraine Viewing. Have the Ukrainians expressed a special interest in discussing this?
|April 17 2014, 1:24 AM |
The preposition "of" is very significant. For example, "the spirit OF God" means "God's Spirit."
Another example: "Grieve not the holy spirit OF God" (Eph. 4:30) simply means "Grieve not God's holy spirit." Either way, it debunks the notion or perception that God's holy spirit is a separate [the third] "person" apart from God. This is a case of not being able to see a particular tree because of the forest.
Knowing the significance of the word "of" does not block but rather clarify and solidify reasoning.
|April 17 2014, 4:43 PM |
Since you regard "OF
" as the most important word in the entire Bible;
Since the first word you learned to say was "OF
" and you've fixated on it from then on;
Since you have made it your life's mission to study and know everything in the universe about "OF
" (to the virtual exclusion of everything else);
Then it's high time you received appropriate recognition for your exhaustive efforts and were awarded the following honorary degree: OF
.D.--Doctor of OF-ology
Doctor Ludy Cruss, president of the University of Minutiae, has approved this degree. It is printed on recycled bathroom tissue and is suitable for framing in that location. Doctor Cruss also offers you the post of chairman, Department of Special OF
Studies, at his University.
|April 18 2014, 12:33 AM |
Thanks, Dr. Bill Crump.
You may be the next one to learn "OF" (but not to the virtual exclusion "of" [Oops!] the other words in the expression).
I can hardly wait to receive it by same-day delivery.
|April 18 2014, 11:42 AM |
Having a good sense of humor is very healthy, so here's something to improve your health: Your one-sided take on "OF
" would find its best application in File 13.
|April 18 2014, 12:06 PM |
Too bad that you failed to negate that one side or that you were too old  to learn new tricks. I have no problem with your File 13; let others learn.
|April 18 2014, 1:21 PM |
The sense of humor continues: Your romantic and idealistic notion that throngs of people from all over the world are "learning" from this site would also find its best placement in File 13.
Bill, we've heard plenty from you regarding this site. You have a problem. We're not discussing your attitude and complaints here. So, please deal with it yourself.
|This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 22.214.171.124 on Apr 18, 2014 1:47 PM|
|April 18 2014, 3:17 PM |
Donnie, I think I can help you find something that you seem to have lost: YOUR SENSE OF HUMOR.
Bill, I haven't lost my sense of humor at all.
The issue is your continual targeting of CM as your OBJECT of humor and derision. Have you considered being a regular contributor of your humorous comments at the ex-churchofchrist website? I think you might find many troubled ex-members there where your psychoanalytical support may be needed.
|This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 126.96.36.199 on Apr 18, 2014 7:29 PM|
Re: Ukraine Viewing
|April 14 2014, 12:03 PM |
A Momentary Lapse of Reason?
|April 14 2014, 2:17 PM |
2 Timothy 3:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
|April 14 2014, 6:00 PM |
Where do you stand on biblical inspiration? I believe that the Bible is the plenary, verbally inspired word of God (theopneustos).
Question: "What are the different theories of biblical inspiration?"
Answer: Inspiration is one of the most important doctrines in Christianity for the sole reason that we hold the Bible to be inspired by God, and as such is our infallible rule for faith and practice. If that rule of faith and practice is not God-breathed but is simply the work of the human imagination, then there is no compelling reason to follow its doctrines and moral guidelines.
The reason we hold the Bible to be our rule for faith and practice can be summed up in one biblical passage: All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17; NASB). We notice two things regarding Scripture from this verse: 1) It is "inspired by God" and 2) It is "profitable" for Christian living. We can come up with definitions for the various things Scripture is profitable for (reproof, correction, etc.). What really needs to be defined is what is meant by "inspired by God?"
There are four ways to look at inspiration:
1. The neo-orthodox view of inspiration
2. The dictation method of inspiration
3. The view of limited inspiration
4. The view of plenary verbal inspiration
The neo-orthodox view of inspiration is based on their view of the transcendence of God. Neo-orthodoxy taught that God is so completely different from us (i.e., utterly transcendent) that the only way we could ever know Him is through His revelation to us. This view of the transcendence of God is so restrictive that it denies any concept of natural theology (i.e., that God can be known through His creation). Furthermore, it denies that the Bible is the Word of God. Rather, the Bible is a witness, or mediator, to the Word of God, which is God Himself. The words in the Bible aren't God's words, but God can use them to speak to individuals. Other than that, the words in the Bible are fallible words written by fallible men.
From what we can see, the neo-orthodox view of inspiration is no view of inspiration at all. If the Bible is the fallible product of fallible men, then it really has no value at all, at least not any more than any other book written by men. God could very well "speak" to us through works of fiction as He could through the Bible.
The dictation method of inspiration sees God as the author of Scripture and the individual human agents as secretaries taking dictation. God spoke and man wrote it down. This view has some merit as we know there are portions of Scripture in which God essentially says, "Write this down" (e.g., Jeremiah 30:2), but not all Scripture was created that way. The Pentateuch is essentially a pre-history and chronicle of the Jewish people prior to settling in the Promised Land. While Moses is believed to be the primary author, much of it is the editorial work of Moses and later redactors who finalized the finished product. Luke states in the preamble to his Gospel that he performed detailed research into the events of the life of Jesus before writing his work (Luke 1:1-4). Many of the prophetic books read like journals of the prophets' lives. The bottom line is that the dictation method only explains certain portions of Scripture, but not all of it or even most of it.
Limited inspiration is sort of the opposite view of dictation. Whereas dictation sees Scripture as primarily the work of God with the human agent reduced to being a secretary, limited inspiration sees Scripture as primarily the work of man with "limited" inspiration from God. God guides the human authors, but allows them the freedom to express themselves in their works. This view asserts that while there may be factual and historical errors in the Bible, the Holy Spirit guided the authors so that no doctrinal errors resulted from their works. The problem with this view is how one can trust the Bible in doctrinal concerns when it is prone to error in its historical accounts? The reliability of the Bible is called into doubt in this view, and if we can't trust a literary work to get mundane details right, how can we trust it for weightier issues? This view also seems to ignore the fact that while the Bible is a story of redemption from Genesis to Revelation, it is a story told against the backdrop of human history, the doctrine being interwoven within the history. One can't just arbitrarily say that this account is factually inaccurate yet state it contains a kernel of doctrinal truth.
The final view, and the view of orthodox Christianity, is the view of plenary, verbal inspiration. The word plenary means "complete or full," and verbal means "the very words of Scripture." So plenary, verbal inspiration means that every single word in the Bible is the very word of God. The passage quoted above (2 Timothy 3:16-17) uses a unique Greek word, theopneustos, which literally means "God-breathed." Scripture is literally "breathed out" of the mouth of God. Furthermore, in another biblical passage, we see that no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21).
This passage gives us a clue as to how God inspired the human authors. We see that men spoke (or wrote) "as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." The verb "carried along" is used to speak of a sail being filled by a wind and carrying a boat along the water, which is fitting since the Greek word for "spirit" is also used for "wind." When the human authors were putting pen to paper, the Holy Spirit "carried them along" so that what they wrote were the "breathed-out words of God. This means that while the actual writings retain the personality of the individual authors (and that is obvious if you read the works of Paul compared to James or John or Peter), they contain the actual words of God.
In closing, it should be noted that there are some things that inspiration is not:
1. Inspiration is not robotic dictation (not to be confused with the dictation method mentioned above). The personality of the human authors is present in each of the writings.
2. The fact that individual personalities are present in the writings does not mean that God's "control" over them was not perfect. The Holy Spirit superintended the process so that the words written were the exact words God wanted, despite the fallibility of the human authors.
3. Inspiration is limited to the original writings (autographs) not the process of transmission. We know there are minute transmission errors in the copies of manuscripts, but these errors are more grammatical than substantive.
4. The inspiration of Scripture, as we said, is to the verbal level, meaning that it's not just the ideas or thoughts that are inspired, but the very words. Moreover, we don't speak of inspiration of Scripture as we would the inspiration of a great work of literature or a work of music.
5. Finally, inspiration is limited to the specific works of the authors that are included in the biblical canon. Paul wasn't inspired, but Romans was. Furthermore, not all letters of Paul were inspired, but only the ones the Holy Spirit chose to preserve (e.g., see the Corinthian letters in which reference is made to two additional letters to this church of which we have no existing copies).
Biblical inspiration, in a nutshell, is the orthodox view of the church which says that the Bible is the plenary, verbally inspired word of God.