/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>578277

See, the problem is that all worship is supposed to come from the Holy Bible, so it's good the pastor doesn't have vestments because they are not commanded to, but they shouldn't have a projector, organ, rock band or hymns because none of these were commanded by God either.

>>578281

hymns aren't biblical?

Matthew 26:30

And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

Colossians 3:16

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

>>578282

>What're you studying?

Physics. I go to a certain Jesuit college, but religion isn't really a huge part of things. It's not that different from a public university I guess other than the fact that there are crucifixes in the classrooms.

>Unfortunately not everyone brings a Bible to church

They have 6 of them in each pew, usually NIV (which I was raised with).

>There's definitely been a shift in the last decade or so from congregational worship to performance art.

This is a Lutheran church so in theory liturgy is supposed to be important (I've never been to a Baptist church but AFAIK I've never heard of you having liturgy). Instead, the typical sunday service my family went to growing up was just "contemporary." We sometimes went to the "postmodern" one which felt more like some new agey cult.

>>578285

The background for these is the Old Testament, not heathen religion. The LXX uses 'hymnos' exclusively of the psalms.

>>578287

>not heathen religion

But since Jesus we have a lot more to sing about. What's wrong with vid related?

>>578291

>But since Jesus we have a lot more to sing about

Their meaning can be found in the psalms

>What's wrong with vid related?

It wasn't commanded by God. Leviticus 10:1

>>578293

>sillyness

>exclusively the psalms

The people of God were commanded to worship before David et al wrote the Psalms, we're commanded to worship today with the fruit of our lips.

What is Song of Solomon?

>Hebrews 13:15 By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.

>>578281

>all worship is supposed to come from the Holy Bible

Point me to the book, chapter and verse that says anything not strictly commanded by God in the Bible is unacceptable for worship.

>it's good the pastor doesn't have vestments because they are not commanded to

The Aaronic priesthood was, and there’s equally nothing against wearing robes.

>they shouldn't have a projector,

Obviously impossible to be Biblical, but I don’t see how it would offend God (though really, powerpoints?)

>organ, rock band

Psalm 150

>hymns

Please be joking

>>578277

>be home from church today

>asked to come see some chorus singing at this other non-denom church

>my church isn't doing anything at that time

>travel sequence

>firmly grasp my KJV and go inside

>they have powerpoint

>their singing is still quite nice

>just one thing stands out

>the pastor never once says "the Christ" or "the Messiah,"

>he exclusively says "the Jewish Christ" and "the Juewish Messiah"

Where are they going with this? I am not a clever man.

>>578309

I feel like there's no rhyme or reason to non denoms.

>>578299

>The people of God were commanded to worship before David et al wrote the Psalms

Yes, and He also told them how to worship

>we're commanded to worship today with the fruit of our lips

Fruit of our lips, not of our minds

>>578302

>Point me to the book, chapter and verse that says anything not strictly commanded by God in the Bible is unacceptable for worship.

Exodus 20:4-6, Leviticus 10:1, 2 Samuel 6:6-7

>The Aaronic priesthood was

Ministers of the new covenant are not Aaronic priests

>there’s equally nothing against wearing robes

It is wrong to wear something to signify a clergy-laity divide that does not exist. If God wanted His ministers to wear vestments He would've commanded as such.

>I don’t see how it would offend God

It's willworship

>Psalm 150

Psalm 150 is about praising God in everything we do, it's not instruction in corporate worship. Instruments are like audible idols, it's a man-made object meant to be used for worship.

Anon, the True Presence of Jesus Christ is in every Catholic Church. Why not come and see?

>>578323

>Fruit of our lips, not of our minds

Matthew 21:16

And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?

Luke 6:45

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

>Exodus 20:4-6, Leviticus 10:1, 2 Samuel 6:6-7

Literally nothing there about singing or songmaking

>Psalm 150 is about praising God in everything we do, it's not instruction in corporate worship. Instruments are like audible idols, it's a man-made object meant to be used for worship.

Was David sinning in 2 Samuel 6:5?

And David and all the house of Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of fir wood, even on harps, and on psalteries, and on timbrels, and on cornets, and on cymbals.

Psalm 150 literally lists instruments to be used in the worship of God.

>>578328

Not him, but why are you so bothered by the whole thing? I think all kind of music that is reverent is fine. Now, I agree that modern rock style music is in most cases not fitting for liturgy. I'm not even a big fan of singing in churches, I think there's too much singing and too little prayer. Sadly, you can't really escape modern music in churches, only in Orthodox churches and Catholic ones that pray the old latin mass where there is no singing at all.

>>578330

Not bothered man, I've just never heard of this strange doctrine before and I want to see where he's coming from, Biblically.

I agree that there should be more prayer in church, but I don't think it should come at the expense of congregational worship or preaching. Unfortunately most churches operate on a schedule.

>>578328

>Matthew 21:16

Not seeing your point

>Luke 6:4

This has nothing to do with creating worship music, it is about the words of men revealing the truth of their hearts.

>Literally nothing there about singing or songmaking

You're right, it's about the worship of God, which is what we assemble together to do.

>Was David sinning in 2 Samuel 6:5?

Yes. On the 2nd attempt only the Levites played instruments, as God had commanded.

>Psalm 150 literally lists instruments to be used in the worship of God.

No, it says to praise Him by those intruments. Meaning, that even in secular endeavors things are to be done to the glory of God.

>>578330

>Sadly, you can't really escape modern music in churches, only in Orthodox churches and Catholic ones that pray the old latin mass where there is no singing at all.

Not true. There are still good psalm-singing Puritan churches.

>>578339

Colossians 3:16

>Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

So if we are to teach and admonish one another in psalms and hymns, and if some of those Psalms instruct all to sing praise and furthermore to sing unto the Lord "with the harp, and the voice of a psalm" (Ps. 98:3-5), then why is that act in itself crossing against what the word of God teaches? Are you the tree guy?

>>578339

>You're right, it's about the worship of God, which is what we assemble together to do.

And when we assemble, we take the example of Christ and His disciples, and Paul's instruction to the Colossians, and sing psalms and spiritual songs, singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord.

You still haven't provided any scripture saying we're limited to using the words in the Psalms when we worship. Do you pray solely in quotations too?

>This has nothing to do with creating worship music, it is about the words of men revealing the truth of their hearts.

So as soon as those words of men are set to a melody, Luke 6:4, Matt 12:34, 21:16 is no longer in effect, because Christians aren't qualified to write lyrics to the glory of God?

>only the Levites played instruments, as God had commanded

In your last post you said that instruments were audio idols, now you admit that their use was commanded of God.

>Psalm 150

If a harp is an idol, but you're glorifying God by playing one in a secular context, then does prostrating yourself before a bhudda or a statue of mary glorify God also?

Psalms 33

1Rejoice in the Lord, O ye righteous: for praise is comely for the upright.

2 Praise the Lord with harp: sing unto him with the psaltery and an instrument of ten strings.

>>578349

>Colossians 3:16

Anon, the Septuagint uses hymnos of the psalms. Paul is talking about the psalms.

>why is that act in itself crossing against what the word of God teaches?

Because we are not to offer strange fire before the Lord, which He commanded not.

>Are you the tree guy?

What "tree guy"?

>>578352

>You still haven't provided any scripture saying we're limited to using the words in the Psalms when we worship.

Yes I have, when it says we are to worship according to the prescription of God, not practicing willworship.

>In your last post you said that instruments were audio idols, now you admit that their use was commanded of God.

By the same logic, we may put images in churches and use them in worship, because God commanded cherubim on the ark. Yes, God did command instruments, but like the cherubim of the ark they were part of the sacrificial system of the old covenant, and are likewise no longer for use by Christians.

>If a harp is an idol

Obviously, instruments are not idols, but I likened them to idols because when used in worship they are like idols in many ways, such as arising out of fallen man's unwillingness to worship God in spirit and truth.

>but you're glorifying God by playing one in a secular context, then does prostrating yourself before a bhudda or a statue of mary glorify God also?

Neither instruments nor images are superstitious when used secularly. You do not glorify God merely by playing an instrument or making an image, rather, you are to do these to the glory of God.

>>578367

>Paul is talking about the psalms.

I know. Exactly. You haven't understood why I quoted that verse.

That verse is why I said, according to Colossians 3:16, which says in the New Testament that we should teach and admonish according to those very Psalms. Therefore, according to this, you and I should also instruct people today to follow Psalm 98:3-5; which says (to the whole earth) to sing unto the Lord with the harp, and the voice of a psalm. Not only a capella but also with these instruments. And that doing so is considered singing.

>Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise.

>Sing unto the LORD with the harp; with the harp, and the voice of a psalm.

>With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the LORD, the King.

>>578372

Absolutely, we are to exhort all to follow that, which means to always glorify God.

Here, I think this is a very good article on the subject

http://presbyterianreformed.org/2014/04/instruments-worship/

>>578339

>There are still good psalm-singing Puritan churches.

>Puritan churches

Mystery solved.

>>578379

> The Second Commandment declares how God is to be worshipped. Forbidding the use of any images of God in worship, it also forbids the use of any other inventions of man not expressly commanded by God; all other options are forbidden.

<"You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments."

> it also forbids the use of any other inventions of man not expressly commanded by God; all other options are forbidden.

It doesn't say this though.

His examples aren't supporting his point either. God was worshipped with instruments in the OT, so how does this prove we can't use them in worship today?

> Instrumental music, therefore, was merely one part of ceremonial worship, symbolic of Christ’s sacrifice and typical in nature, pointing as a shadow to the reality to come.

No, the sacrifices were the prefigurements, but the instruments weren't. The scripture he cited doesn't prove instruments can't be played today, but only that they must be played in an appropriate manner.

>Worship offered to the Lord must always be done “in spirit and in truth” (John 4). The Lord “searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts” (1 Chron. 28:9), and desires truth in the inward parts, that is, in the heart or soul of man. (Ps. 5:6) This is just what instrumental music represented.

First off, the idea that instrumental music just represents the heart or soul as some outward appearance and is therefore not just unnecessary but forbidden is a leap of logic he takes no time to prove. Secondly, the hinge of his argument is this

>Today every believer is called to be filled with the Spirit of God, “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.” (Ephes. 5:19) The heart is the instrument every believer plays before the Lord in worship, making melody within to the Lord and expressing it with the voice of praise to the glory of God.

His whole argument boils down to that statement, that it says making melody "in your heart", therefore you can't use instruments because it wouldn't be in your heart but from your heart or something else. The phrasing "in your heart" does not exclude the extension of that melody into instruments. He does great leaps of logic with this inward/outward stuff, really reading into the text quite a bit, and never really proves anything he claims, but it sure does sound nice if you are already a presbytrerian.

Ultimately, his article failed to do anything he set out to do to convince anybody who didn't already agree with him. He could have stopped writing when he said

>Those who have argued for the inclusion of instruments have taken the opposite understanding based on the practice of the Roman Catholic Church, called the Normative Principle of Worship. This approach turns the Regulative Principle of Worship on its head,

In fewer words

>Some people are doing what the ROMAN CATHOLICS do and not what our prophet Calvin said so stop

>>578386

>It doesn't say this though.

The decalog is a summary of the whole law. The 2nd Commandment is essentially 'this far no farther'.

>God was worshipped with instruments in the OT, so how does this prove we can't use them in worship today?

Because that was the OT. We are in the new covenant. Should we sacrifice beasts in church too?

>The scripture he cited doesn't prove instruments can't be played today, but only that they must be played in an appropriate manner.

The appropriate manner of worship is God's command. Uzzah was killed for adding to God's command, not for failing to do so in an "appropriate manner" (whatever that means, by what standard do you define what is and is not appropriate?).

>The phrasing "in your heart" does not exclude the extension of that melody into instruments

If you are using an instrument, that is what you are making melody with, not the heart. The command to make melody in our hearts implicitly rejects instruments because you cannot obey that command with a harp. And to retort that it does not say we can't make the melody with an instrument instead, is to say this command may be rejected at will, it has no relevance, it is of none effect.

>>Some people are doing what the ROMAN CATHOLICS do and not what our prophet Calvin said so stop

Epic strawman, but that a thing is popish in origin is a relevant consideration for those who wish to be biblical.

>>578395

>The 2nd Commandment is essentially 'this far no farther'.

The 2nd commandments doesn't say anything except don't worship idols. It doesn't say to sing either, are the psalms now forbidden? Now, you'll say that the psalms are said to be okay later on, however that invalidates the "Not in the 2nd commandment not allowed" argument, since following you would have to discard the psalms, actually everything, since the 2nd commandment doesn't say to read scripture for worship, or to go to a church or anything like that.

>Should we sacrifice beasts in church too?

Sacrifice of beasts is condemned by the NT. Where does the NT condemn playing a piano or harp? It doesn't. You just assume that because something was used or done in the OT it shouldn't be done in the NT. Going to church was done in the OT, does this mean you shouldn't go to church? Some things are forbidden now, some things aren't. It's entirely unproven instruments are in the forbidden category and not the allowed category.

>The appropriate manner of worship is God's command. Uzzah was killed for adding to God's command, not for failing to do so in an "appropriate manner"

Scripture tells us why Uzzah was killed, it was because

> And when they came to the threshing floor of Chidon, Uzzah put out his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled. 10 And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and he smote him because he put forth his hand to the ark; and he died there before God

Literally nothing to do with the use of instruments. Since the use of instruments wasn't the cause of his death, it is not proof instruments aren't allowed.

>The command to make melody in our hearts implicitly rejects instruments because you cannot obey that command with a harp

You make a melody in your heart and you express it with singing and instruments. If you take this to forbid expressing the the melody in your hearts, you have to similarly forbid singing in church entirely since the text says

>Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;(I cite the KJV here since the RSV has a different rendering of the text. This rendering of the text is inline with what the article cited.)

You don't reject singing in the church though, because it's a ridiculous position that this text doesn't support, and neither does it support forbidding instruments.

>Epic strawman

And then you go to exactly say what I said.

>Prophet calvin says pianos and harps aren't biblical anymore, if you say otherwise you are following popish idolatry

>>578400

Oh, and one last thing

>And then you go to exactly say what I said.

>>Prophet calvin says pianos and harps aren't biblical anymore, if you say otherwise you are following popish idolatry

My point was that the fact a thing is popish is to be taken into account if we wish to be biblical, because popery rarely is.

>>578405

>The 2nd commandment is that we are not to worship God according to our own imaginations, but how He tells us to.

And doesn't say "harps and pianos are now forbidden"

>Seeing as sacrifices are abolished, why not the whole sacrificial system, of which instrumental worship was a part?

Going to church was a part of it as well, worshipping God was a part of it as well, singing psalms was a part of it as well, are all these things now forbidden too?

>Where does the NT prescribe it?

Psalms use instruments, if singing psalms is to be done(which it is) then you have to use instruments. The article did some "inward/outward" stuff to try to explain this away but it can't because it didn't make any sense and was largely "My theology says this is inappropriate so these verses must mean it is inappropriate".

>instrumental worship

Which is also not peculiar to the ceremonies of the old law. You're stating that because songs were used in ceremonies songs were only used for those ceremonies which are forbidden now and therefore the songs are forbidden as well. Of course that fails since it has never been demonstrated that songs were used only in ceremonies of the old law. It can't be demonstrated either, because it's wrong.

>Uzzah was killed because they did not seek the Lord God according to His prescribed rule, but according to human will. Willworship is a serious sin.

This is talking about how the levites were supposed to carry the ark, which is clear when it says

>14 So the priests and the Levites sanctified themselves to bring up the ark of the Lord, the God of Israel. 15 And the Levites carried the ark of God upon their shoulders with the poles, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the Lord.

Literally nothing about the use of instruments. You're just conflating two separate things now. Who gets to carry the ark is entirely different from "Is using instruments lawful for a christian?". You haven't, and can't, demonstrate it is unlawful for a christian to use them because you haven't, and can't, demonstrate God forbids them.

>Thus we are to speak to each other in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, making melody not with an instrument as is common to man but with the heart

But the rendering of the text used by the article, and by the KJV and various other translations, says to "sing and make melody in your heart". You don't forbid singing out loud, so why do you forbid the use of instruments to demonstrate the melody the same as using the voice demonstrates the melody?

>>578406

>My point was that the fact a thing is popish is to be taken into account if we wish to be biblical, because popery rarely is.

So it wasn't a strawman at all?

>>578408

refer to this >>578409

this would never fly at a Catholic parish

>>578408

I wish the Catholic parish in my area were like that. We have acoustic guitars and crappy modern songs, novus ordo, hand holding during the Lord's Prayer, etc. It's depressing.

>>578410

>And doesn't say "harps and pianos are now forbidden"

Never claimed it did

>Going to church was a part of it as well, worshipping God was a part of it as well, singing psalms was a part of it as well

Instruments weren't commanded outside of the sacrificial system.

>Psalms use instruments

You're going to have to rephrase that in the form of proper English grammar

>You're stating that because songs were used in ceremonies songs were only used for those ceremonies which are forbidden now and therefore the songs are forbidden as well

Would you kindly show a command to use instruments outside of the sacrificial system?

>This is talking about how the levites were supposed to carry the ark

Yeah I know. What's your point? Do you even know what my point was?

>Literally nothing about the use of instruments. You're just conflating two separate things now. Who gets to carry the ark is entirely different from "Is using instruments lawful for a christian?"

Evidently you didn't understand my point. My point was that this proves we are to worship God only in the way He commands, and since we are not commanded to use instruments, they are forbidden.

>But the rendering of the text used by the article, and by the KJV and various other translations, says to "sing and make melody in your heart"

"Singing" is one thing and "making melody in your heart" another. He is showing a difference with heathen religion, that while their voices are joined with the music of lyres and flutes, ours are only with the new creation.

>so why do you forbid the use of instruments to demonstrate the melody the same as using the voice demonstrates the melody?

The melody is a spiritual nature, the voice may 'demonstrate' it but no more than mere preaching.

>So it wasn't a strawman at all?

It still is. Papacy isn't a deciding factor against a thing, but it is cause for suspicion.

>>578420

>Never claimed it did

Glad everyone can agree there is nothing in the Law that forbids worship with music instruments

>Instruments weren't commanded outside of the sacrificial system

Completely wrong because as the other anon was saying, psalms always involved the use of music instruments in worship, several of the psalms explicitly calling for musical accompaniment (mostly stringed instruments but also pipes in Psalm 5). If you want to argue that worship with musical instruments is abrogated by the NT, logically Psalms must be inappropriate for Christian worship.

>Evidently you didn't understand my point. My point was that this proves we are to worship God only in the way He commands, and since we are not commanded to use instruments, they are forbidden.

Your point involves several huge leaps of logic to get from "non-Levites were specifically disallowed by God from touching the Ark and God punished Uzzah for transgressing this commandment by death" to some supposed negative commandment that forbids all worship that isn’t explicitly commanded in the Bible (which not being explicitly found anywhere in the Bible is a self-defeating and ludicrous proposition). And again, Psalms are specifically written to be sung with musical backing, so even supposing God actually said as much there is no such violation.

>while their voices are joined with the music of lyres and flutes

What, like those Heathen psalms numbered 4, 6, 8 and 67?

>The melody is a spiritual nature, the voice may 'demonstrate' it but no more than mere preaching.

So can you or can’t you praise God with trumpets and lyres?

>Papacy isn't a deciding factor against a thing, but it is cause for suspicion.

Considering the quality of evidence in favour of your position, it’s coming across very strongly as a kneejerk reaction more than anything else.

>>578408

My mom's family is Catholic, I've been to a few masses for baptisms, funerals, etc. She always told me how "lucky" I was to not be raised Catholic. I honestly don't remember much of the liturgy when I went, it was a while ago.

I go to a Jesuit university and we have a chapel with mass a few times each week, plus there's a beautiful church in the neighborhood.

I used to go to an episcopal church about two years ago. They're more liberal than most people on here would like, but people tell me the liturgy is extremely close to the Catholic Church. It felt a million times better than my Missouri synod Lutheran upbringing.

I've also considered orthodoxy.

>>578425

>psalms always involved the use of music instruments

Only by the Levites, with the sacrifices

>several of the psalms explicitly calling for musical accompaniment

For their use at the sacrifice

>Your point involves several huge leaps of logic to get from "non-Levites were specifically disallowed by God from touching the Ark and God punished Uzzah for transgressing this commandment by death" to some supposed negative commandment that forbids all worship that isn’t explicitly commanded in the Bible

It's not a leap in logic, it's seeing that God does not accept willworship, so we should not offer it. Worship is God's way or the highway. We don't get to just make up our religion as we go along.

>Psalms are specifically written to be sung with musical backing

Not all of them, and those which were were written for use in the sacrifices.

>So can you or can’t you praise God with trumpets and lyres?

Not in corporate worship.

>>578434

What did your mom think of you moving back to the Church?

>>578680

Which church? Lutheran? Episcopal? Catholic?

She was fully in support of me being raised Lutheran (she converted after marrying my dad).

I mentioned how I would go to that Episcopal church while it was a thing for me, but I never "went back" to Lutheranism. I've not told her how I feel drawn to catholicism, either.

My view right now is that I'm not religious, but if I were I'd certainly be Catholic, Anglo-Catholic, or Orthodox.

>>578277

Beginning service was more traditional at my church though second service was exactly what you described.

I'm converting to Orthodoxy soon, it seems far more authentic and reverent.