instrumental music in worship?

Big words relating to interpreting the Bible and the study of *how* we determine what God wants us to do.

Moderator: grand_puba

Post Reply
User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

instrumental music in worship?

Post by email » Thu May 05, 2005 11:34 pm

Greetings,

A friend of mine recommended your web-site to me. Do you have any particular view about use or non-use of musical instruments in worship?

I would appreciate your response.
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

more questions from email

Post by email » Thu May 05, 2005 11:35 pm

Specifically, I have 3 questions.

1) Is it a command from God to sing only, with no instruments?
2) Is singing only, with no instruments a matter of salvation?
3) Is singing only, with no instruments a matter of fellowship, that is, is it acceptable with God to worship with people who use musical instruments in worship?

I'll be looking forward to your answers.
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

follow-up question

Post by m273p15c » Thu May 05, 2005 11:36 pm

These are good questions. I do have one follow-up question to make sure that I understand the first one:

There is no verse that says "thou shalt optionally have instrumental music in worship", or "thou shalt not have instrumental music in worship". This is part of what makes it a more challenging question to answer. However, other commands, examples, and principles exist which I believe necessarily lead to a specific conclusion. Would this count as a "command"? Or, are you specifically looking for phrasing like, "thou shalt", or "thou shalt not..."?

User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

more specifically...

Post by email » Thu May 05, 2005 11:39 pm

Thanks for your response. There are many stated commands in the N.T. By stated I mean the word command is in the specific verse or context. Examples:

In John 15:12, Jesus said,
"This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."
In Acts 17:30, we read,
"And the times of this ignorance God winked at, but now commands all men everywhere to repent."

In 1 Thess. 4:11, we read,
"And that you study to be quiet, and to do your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you.
Here are 3 examples of many where the word command is in the specific verse or context.

The Bible is inspired of God and around 50 times God has specifically commanded some action. If God has not specifically commanded some action or behavior how can we?

Is every statement the same as a command? We read four times in the N.T. that we are to "Salute one another with a holy kiss." God could have commanded that we do this. He didn't so how can we?

My question is, if God has not specifically commanded a certain action or behavior, how can we? If we make some statements commands and do not make other statements commands are we not taking it upon ourselves to decide what is and what isn't a command of God? Wouldn't it be better to let God make the decision about what is a command, like He already has around 50 times in the N.T. Doesn't God know what should be specified as a command and what is not?

This should give you an idea about what I was meaning when I asked if singing without musical instruments is a command of God?

I'll be looking forward to your response.
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Re: more specifically...

Post by m273p15c » Sun Jun 12, 2005 2:21 am

email wrote:My question is, if God has not specifically commanded a certain action or behavior, how can we? If we make some statements commands and do not make other statements commands are we not taking it upon ourselves to decide what is and what isn't a command of God? Wouldn't it be better to let God make the decision about what is a command, like He already has around 50 times in the N.T. Doesn't God know what should be specified as a command and what is not?
It has been a long time coming, but four different articles have been written and posted on the main site. They are:

http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles/music.html
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... story.html
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... ments.html
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... ences.html

Please let me know what you think. They appear to need more proofreading and some polishing, but maybe it will be enough to communicate a worthy response.

User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

Post by email » Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:42 am

I read the article on "Worship through Music." In that article, in the first paragraph of the conclusion you state New Testament saints were "commanded" to be involved in "teaching and admonishing one another...singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

My concern is your use of the the "commanded." The word "command" is not in the verse (Col. 3:16) or context. God, through inspiration, used the word "command" or "commandment" over 50 times to guide saints in their beliefs, behavior and practices. God apparently knows when He wants to make a belief, behavior or practice a "stated command" and when he chooses not to. A stated command is when the word command or commandment is in the verse or context.

If God has not directly stated a belief, behavior or practice as a command, HOW CAN WE? Wouldn't this be a major, major addition to the word of God to state a belief, behavior or practice as a command of God when God hasn't?

So, my question, is "by whose authority do you state that singing is a command of God? How do you arrive at this con-clusion?
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Post by m273p15c » Wed Jun 15, 2005 1:13 am

My understanding from Scripture is that a passage does not have to contain the specific word, "command" to be understood as a command. Let me come at this from a few different ways:

1) Crux #1 - The Bible instructs to obey things that are not commands - like examples:
Paul wrote:"Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern. ... The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you." (Philippians 3:17; 4:9)
From the above passage we learn that not only are "commands" binding, but we are required to follow even the approved apostolic examples! Other good passages showing and substantiating that we should follow and obey the pattern set forth by examples include: II Thessalonians 3:7; I Corinthians 4:17; 7:17; 11:1; Hebrews 6:11-12; III John 1:11; I Thessalonians 2:14; II Timothy 3:10, 14. An article is available that explains this even further:

http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles/examples.html

2) Crux #2 - A command is based on grammatical structure, not the presence of the word "command":

Any time God, Jesus, or one of His apostles, says "do ...", "let yourselves...", or speaks in any imperative form it is a command. This is just basic English comprehension, even though Greek also has an "imperative" tense (both verbs in Ephesians 5:17 are: imper pres pass 2nd per pl). Paul gives explicit and imperative instruction in both passages. For example:
Paul wrote:"And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, submitting to one another in the fear of God." (Ephesians 5:17-21)
Albeit a long sentence, it contains two primary imperatives, or commands:
a) "do not be drunk with wine"
b) "be filled with the Spirit"

The following phrases modify, or further elaborate on how one is to be filled with the Spirit. Consequently, they carry the same weight as the verb they modify. Again, this is basic English skills - no hocus pocus. Please allow me to illustrate:

If when you were a child, your mom said to you, "Clean your room", but you continued to play outside, when she came to scold you, would you say, "But, you didn't say, 'I command you to clean your room'"?

Furthermore, if your Dad said, "Clean your room, picking up your shoes, making your bed, and putting your toys back in the closet", would you fail to grasp that "picking up your shoes" and the other phrases were also part of this command? Would you leave your shoes out and expect your Dad to be satisfied with, "But, you didn't say, 'I command you to pick up your shoes'"?

Would not these statements generally be considered an order, a direction, an imperative, a command - all without the use of the word, "command"?

Moreover, in English, we have a special form where a sentence does not even need a subject for the imperative case. "You" is to be the understood subject of all such commands, like "[You clean your room". Would anybody question that this is a command?

Finally, if God, through the Holy Spirit, through the apostle Paul, says: "be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord", will we be able to excuse ourselves on judgment day with "But, you didn't say, 'I command you to be filled with the Spirit, speaking.... singing and making melody ... giving thanks ... submitting'"?

When God says to do something, should we not do it? Here's some divine commentary on our point:
Matthew by the Holy Spirit wrote:"These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans." (Matthew 10:5)
Jesus did not explicitly state that this was a command; however, the Holy Spirit said that it was a command. Was it not? The Bible is its own best commentary, example, and authority for interpreting itself. Here's two more examples on interpreting commands from the New Testament:
Matthew by the Holy Spirit wrote:"And Peter answered Him and said, "Lord, if it is You, command me to come to You on the water." So He said, "Come." And when Peter had come down out of the boat, he walked on the water to go to Jesus." (Matthew 14:28-29)
Did Jesus misinterpret Peter's question? Did he fail to issue a command, even though Peter requested one? Did Peter fail to recognize that Jesus really hadn't issued a command? However, Peter was able to follow Jesus' command, at leat initially...
Matthew by the Holy Spirit wrote:"Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?" Jesus said to him, " 'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 22:35-40)
The Old Testament does not call these commands. The passages do not contain any direction that these are commands. However, Jesus says these are the commands upon which the entire Old Testament rests.

Other similar examples proving that command is inherent in the grammatical construct and not the presence of the word, "command" include: Matthew 15:3-9; 17:9; 21:1-6; 28:18-20... etc.

3) Consistency:

No where in any of the gospels, Acts, or Paul's epistles is belief or faith commanded - not explicitly. How did all those people from the 1st century, who read those books, know that they had to believe? Do you believe it is necessary? Could someone go to God on judgment, not having belief, and be acceptable, because God did not command it?

Well, eventually it was "commanded", according to your definition, but not until the writing of I John 3:23, one of the later books in the Bible. But was that verse required for us to know that we must believe and have faith in Jesus? And, what about all the people who believed before that verse was written?

Now, we have baptism being commanded in Acts (Acts 10:48), but I cannot find faith, or belief, being commanded anywhere in the gospels, Acts - or even John, whose purpose of the entire book was to generate belief (John 20:30-31). Could the entire book have been written to substantiate, direct, and create faith, but yet, it not be commanded?

Another good test-point for consistency:
Paul by the Holy Spirit wrote:"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also:" (I Corinthians 16:1)
This passage does not say that this is a "command". Instead, Paul just gave orders to the Galatians; and he says that the Corinthians were compelled to do it also ("you must do also"). Were they not commanded, since it does not expressly state that this was a "command"? Order, direct, instruct - all these words are synonymns with the word, "command". If a synonym is valid, then why is the grammatical construct that is the definition of a command also be a valid?

If the proposed principle of interpretation is followed consistently, it will force adoption of many positions, which will likely be unacceptable to the thoughtful reader. If you need more proof of this, please let me know.

4) The command to accept it as a command:
Paul by the Holy Spirit wrote:"If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant." (I Corinthians 14:37-38)
Paul instructs us to acknowledge his writings as "commandments of the Lord", which would include his epistles containing the passages under question. Now, either Paul was misleading us, in which case all of his writings come into doubt, or we have to take his writings as commandment. In the latter case, our question is answered.

Either of these 4 ways should answer the original question, although the second answer seems to be the crux of the matter, and the technically correct answer.

User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

Post by email » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:16 am

There is a lot of your reply that I need to comment on. I'll just comment on one paragraph right now. You made the following statement:
m273p15c wrote:Paul instructs us to acknowledge his writings as "commandments of the Lord", which would include his epistles containing the passages under question. Now, either Paul was misleading us, in which case all of his writings come into doubt, or we have to take his writings as commandment. In the latter case, our question is answered.

Are you saying that all of Paul's writings are "commandments?"

If so, does that mean that the 4 times Paul writes: "Salute or greet one another with a holy kiss" is a command from God?"

Do you greet one another with a holy kiss?

We'll take these questions about your comments one at a time.
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Post by m273p15c » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:33 am

Thanks for your good question.

The answer to your first question is "yes and no". Yes, every order, dictate, command, and issuance from Paul had the authority of a commandment of the Lord, as it did for every apostle and prophet. No, not everything Paul wrote was a command. Some of it is narrative. Other parts have questions. Not every sentence is a command. But, every imperative from Paul is grammatically defined as a command, and therefore, it is a commandment ultimately given by the Lord (I Corinthians 14:37-38). This is the rule. If you are aware of passages supporting another rule, which would also correct my understanding of this passage, I would be happy to learn of them.

The exceptions to the rule are always clearly marked. For example:
Paul by the Holy Spirit wrote:"(NOTE: Rule being followed, because not excepted -> commandment from Lord) Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

"(NOTE: Exception clearly marked -> Paul's personal advice and judgment, not commandment) But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

"(NOTE: Back to the rule -> commandment from Paul = commandment from the Lord) Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband...."

"(NOTE: Continuing rule through verse 17 -> commandment of the Lord) But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches...."

"(NOTE: Back to exception again in verse 25 -> advice and supposition of Paul because of "present distress") Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment[/b/ as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy. I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress -- that it is good for a man to remain as he is ..."

"(NOTE: Exception continuing through verses 32 and 35) But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord -- how he may please the Lord. ... And this I say for your own profit, not that I may put a leash on you, but for what is proper, and that you may serve the Lord without distraction...."

"(NOTE: rule mentioned as parenthesis during exception, but context is exception; Paul's judgment concluded at end of chapter with Spirit's approval; resume rule -> commandment of the Lord) A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. But she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my judgment -- and I think I also have the Spirit of God. Now concerning things offered to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies...." (I Corinthians 7:1-8:1)

Now, it seems the alternative position supposes that Paul is generally giving advice, the exception being a command ("only 50 times"). However, this does not fit I Corinthians 14:37-38, neither does it fit this passage. Why did Paul take such care to clearly annotate his judgment as opposed to the Lord's command, if Paul was typically giving advice? He clearly treats this incident as special, but why, if he does it all the time? Moreover, why does he feel compelled to annotate the beginning of the "advice" (7:6) and the end of the "advice" (8:40), but he never marks the beginning and ending points of the encapsulating "commandment section" (1:1-7:5; 8:1-24 - including 14:37-38)? It is assumed that the remainder of the book was understood as commandment! The exception is to advise, not offer commandment. The rule is to command, not advise. Otherwise, how can we explain the reversed encapsulation of the "exception" markers?


These passages, along with all the other examples and commands that were provided in the last post, establish a consistent rule of interpretation - sanctioned and authorized by Scripture. Now that being said, please excuse me, while I speak plainly, "as a man": In asking about the "holy kiss", you may have identified a problematic passage for my rule, but that does not change the fact that I Corinthians 14:37-38 breaks your rule. From I Corinthians 9:14 through the end of the book (16:24), the word "command" is nowhere to be found. However, Paul, and the Spirit, expected us to understand that Paul's commands had the authority of "the commandments of the Lord". This breaks your rule! The context of I Corinthians 14 has "commandments of the Lord", but using your rule, they cannot be found! However, I can find them with my rule: Look for sentences in the grammatical form of a command, imperative, direction, issuance, orders, ordainment, etc. (these words are all synonyms). Using this rule, I can identify the following commands from the verses of I Corinthians 14:
  • 1 - "pursue love and desire spiritual gifts"
  • 12 - "let it be for the edification of the church that you seek to excel"
  • 13 - "let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret"
  • 20 - "do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes"
  • 26 - "let all things be done for edification"
  • 27 - "let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret"
  • 28 - "no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and God"
  • 29 - "let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge"
  • 30 - "let the first keep silent"
  • 34 - "let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak"
  • 35 - "let them ask their own husbands at home"
According to your rule, none of these are commands. They must be Paul's judgment, advice - considered wise but certainly optional. However, Paul says that "which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord". Again, how would you identify these commands, or any commands from this context, since the word "command" is not found?

Just because you think you broke my rule, does not change the fact that your position is unsustainable. In the worst case, we both need to look for new positions, but that does not solidify your rule of interpretation.

Technically, I should not have to answer the "holy kiss" argument, but I want to do so to facilitate a full understanding:

Please observe that the 4 passages, which you mentioned, are all addressed to 3 churches in the Italian/Macedonian geography, which would be strongly influenced by the related culture (Romans 16:16; I Corinthians 16:20; II Corinthians 13:12; I Thessalonians 5:26 - see also, I Peter 5:14). In the closing greetings of other epistles, which contains a "commandment" to greet one another, there is no reference to this "holy kiss" (Titus 3:15; Hebrews 13:24; III John 1:14 - "greet by name"). Moreover, there are countless passages, which show "greetings" expressed over long distance (see opening and closing of almost every epistle). This point, along with the prior point, indicate that the "holy kiss" was not a necessary part of a greeting, whether immediate or "long-distance". Moreover, history shows that the "kiss" was already an established, common form of greeting in the Italian and Greek cultures. Therefore, I conclude that Paul is not legislating a kiss to be used in greeting, but he is instead commanding that they use a "holy kiss". He is legislating the manner of their kiss, not that they kiss. Their culture was already given to kiss during an immediate greeting; however, we may suppose that some were using this as an opportunity to exercise their lewd thoughts, or work some other unholy motive (Matthew 26:49). Again, Paul is commanding a manner of kissing, not kissing in general. They were already kissing - so he could not command that.

As in all things, we must be careful of taking any passage out if its context. Also, we must consider and harmonize all that Scripture presents. Any interpretation applied without checking its consistency with all of God's revealed truth is dangerous at best. Remembering to do this with the "holy kiss" verses answers this question. Historical insight does not hurt either.

Additionally, I apologize for my plain use of "you", "your", "I", and "my" in the preceding paragraphs. Positions should not be personalized; neither should disagreements be taken personally. I trust that you are truly seeking the truth, even as I am. I switched to a lower form of speech, because I felt that it conveyed the real point of disagreement much more succinctly than a more polite and thoughtful expression would. I hope that I have not mistreated you in doing so. Please understand that I respect your conviction and earnestness, and I intend no disrespect in disagreeing with the proposed position.

I look forward to hearing your response to these points as well as to the previous ones. Taking them one point at a time is wise. I respect and prefer that.

User avatar
email
Non-Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:23 pm
Location: ether
Contact:

THE WRITINGS OF PAUL

Post by email » Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:35 pm

THE WRITINGS OF PAUL:
  1. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE A CONCESSION.
    1 Corinthians 7:6 (NKJV)
    6But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.
  2. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE A PERSONAL JUDGMENT.
    1 Corinthians 7:25 (NKJV)
    25Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy.
  3. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE WHAT PAUL SUPPOSED (THOUGHT).
    1 Corinthians 7:26 (NKJV)
    26I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is.
  4. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE THE LORD’S COMMAND.
    1 Corinthians 7:10 (NKJV)
    10Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband.
  5. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE ORDAINED, COMMANDED, ORDERED. (The words ordain, commanded and orders below are all translated from the same Grk. word “diatasso.”
    1. 1 Corinthians 7:17 (NKJV) 17But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches.
    2. 1 Corinthians 9:14 (NKJV) 14Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.
    3. 1 Corinthians 11:34 (NKJV) 34But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment. And the rest I will set in order when I come.
    4. 1 Corinthians 16:1 (NKJV) 1Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also:
  6. SOME THINGS WERE OBLIGATIONS. (Grk. word “opheilo” – to owe).
    1 Corinthians 11:10 (NKJV) 10For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
  7. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE MANDATES. (Word translated “must” from Grk. “dei” signifying, “it is necessary” or “one must”).
    1. 1 Corinthians 15:25 (NKJV) 25For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.
    2. 1 Corinthians 15:53 (NKJV) 53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
  8. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE EXHORTATIONS. (Grk. word “parakaleo” translated to urge, to exhort).
    1. 1 Corinthians 16:12 (NKJV) 12Now concerning our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to come to you with the brethren, but he was quite unwilling to come at this time; however, he will come when he has a convenient time.
    2. 1 Corinthians 16:15,16 (NKJV) 15I urge you, brethren—you know the household of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves to the ministry of the saints— 16that you also submit to such, and to everyone who works and labors with us.
  9. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE TO SHAME. (From Grk. word “entrope” to cause negative inward feelings).
    1. 1 Corinthians 6:5 (NKJV) 5I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?
    2. 1 Corinthians 15:34 (NKJV) 34Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; for some do not have the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame.
  10. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE EXCLUSIONARY. (Specific behavior that excludes one from the kingdom of God).
    1 Corinthians 6:9,10 (NKJV) 9Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
  11. SOME THINGS WRITTEN WERE SIMPLE REQUESTS. (NOT A CONCESSION, PERSONAL JUDGMENT, COMMAND, OBLIGATION, MANDATE, EXHORTATION, SHAME OR EXCLUSIONARY.
    1 Corinthians 16:20 (NKJV)
    20All the brethren greet you. Greet one another with a holy kiss.
1 Corinthians 14:37 (NKJV) 37If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.

It is difficult for me to understand that this scripture is telling us that everything Paul wrote were the commandments of the Lord when some things he wrote were concessions, his own judgments, some things commands of the Lord, some things mandates, obligations, exhortations, to shame and exclusionary. Could Paul be saying that the commands he states are commandments of the Lord and not commandments of men? There were those who did not accept what he stated as commands as commands of the Lord.
The above presented views do not necessarily represent any specific individual, registered on this forum or otherwise.
Who is "email"?

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Post by m273p15c » Sun Jun 26, 2005 3:54 pm

Thanks for your good research on this topic. I appreciate the examples that you provided. I agree with your point in part: Not everything Paul wrote was a commandment! In fact, my last post contained some of the very examples that you provided from I Corinthians 7; however, as is born out by your work, each of these verses provided "markers", or some phrase that indicates the passage's optional nature. I believe this furthers my point, which is that optional direction contains some phrasing to indicate it as such.

To clarify, our disagreement is not over the clearly marked verses, which contain "supposed" or "commanded", but our disagreement is how to interpret directives that do not contain such clear indicators. "What is the default mood, or interpretation we should place on imperatives?" "Should we assume that non-identified text is the writer's opinion? Or, should we assume it is the writer's commandment from the Lord?" I think this is the fundamental question.

To answer this, I would ask you to reconsider a past question from our previous correspondence, as well as consider an additional question:

1) I agree with your conclusion of I Corinthians 14:37 - The commandments of Paul have the authority of commandments of the Lord! However, we disagree on the conclusion that follows that statement. This question should illuminate: "What commandments had Paul issued in the context of I Corinthians 14?" More directly, we may ask, "What rule of interpretation will we use to identify the commands from I Corinthians 14?" Clearly, there are some commands embedded in the context of I Corinthians 14; otherwise, it was frivolous to challenge them to recognize the authority behind Paul's commands, when Paul was in fact, only issuing optional advice. Sure there are commands in the context, so where are the commands in this text, and how will we identify them?

2) If the rule of interpretation is granted that directives should generally be considered optional, unless the context states otherwise, then we will have to interpret ALL of the following directives from the context of Colossians 3 as being optional, since they are provided in imperative format, but without clear identification as commands:
  • 3:1 "If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above..."
  • 3:2 "Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth...."
  • 3:5 "Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry..."
  • 3:8 "But now you yourselves are to put off all these: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy language out of your mouth."
  • 3:9 "Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds..."
  • 3:12 "Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering;"
  • 3:13 "bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do."
  • 3:14 "But above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfection."
  • 3:15 "And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful."
  • 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."
  • 3:17 "And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him."
  • 3:18 "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord."
  • 3:19 "Husbands, love your wives and do not be bitter toward them."
  • 3:20 "Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is well pleasing to the Lord."
  • 3:21 "Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged."
  • 3:22 "Bondservants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing God."
  • 3:23 "And whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not to men, ..."
From the context under examination, which of these are commands and which are optional? Why or why not? Is it optional to "set your mind on things above"? Is it just Paul's judgment that should "obey your parents in all things"? Is it up to us to decide whether or not we should "do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God"? Does God require "Husbands, love your wives and do not be bitter"? Or, is "forgiving one another" the only command in the entire chapter, because it alone contains the phrase, "so you also must do"?

I appreciate your concern and interest on this matter. I am happy that we have been able to identify the exact point of our difference; however, I will be thrilled if with the Lord's blessing, we are able to resolve it. As you wisely mentioned earlier, we should take these arguments one point at a time. Before we leave this, I agree that we should resolve our disagreement on this rule of interpretation; otherwise, the rest is in vain, since we are building on different foundations.

Clearly, it is an overstatement on my part to state that everything Paul wrote was a command. For that overly aggressive assertion, I apologize. However, I still contend that imperative sentences are commands, by definition. If this is not the case, then we will have difficulty finding the commands in I Corinthians 14, which are necessitated by I Corinthians 14:37, and we will have trouble consistently accepting the "optional" nature of all the imperatives of Colossians 3.

Thanks again for your good thoughts on this question. I look forward to hearing your response.

sid
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:04 pm
Location: Granite City, IL

Worshipping God

Post by sid » Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:30 pm

1) "Your will be done on earth as in heaven" - Mt 6.10b.

2) Worship In Heaven:
"Now when He had taken the Scroll [New Covenant; Rev 6.1-11.15], the Four Living Creatures and the 24 Elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a Harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" - Rev 5.8.

sid
The New Covenant Is In Revelation

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Re: Worshipping God

Post by m273p15c » Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:53 pm

sid wrote:1) "Your will be done on earth as in heaven" - Mt 6.10b.

2) Worship In Heaven:
"Now when He had taken the Scroll [New Covenant; Rev 6.1-11.15], the Four Living Creatures and the 24 Elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a Harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" - Rev 5.8.
Sid, I believe you have applied these verses outside of their context. Jesus was not recommending that we pray for the earthly realm to conform to the heavenly realm in every way. If that is the case, we must wrestle with several absurd conclusions - for example:
Matthew by the Holy Spirit wrote:"Thererefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her." Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. (Matthew 22:29-31)
Marriage is a relationship limited to earth. Do you advise that we abolish all marriages to make earth reflect the heavenly state? Gender is also apparently limited to this realm ("but are like angels of God"). Would you mandate a genderless sate for all?

Heavenly truths, as depicted symbolically in Revelation, also contained incense, altars (sacrifice), and trumpets. Would you advise the restoration of these other forms of worship from the Old Testament?

In addition to these absurd conslusions, please see the following article for further Scriptural discussion of this point:

http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... revelation

Feel free to raise questions on the above article in this thread...

One must offer justification for the literal application of Revelation to first prove that the verse represents literal worship in heaven, then he or she needs to justify usage of Matthew 6 to apply to all heavenly references, not just man's submission to God's will, which is how the kingdom spreads ("thy kingdom come...").

sid
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:04 pm
Location: Granite City, IL

Reply to m273p15c -- The Pattern

Post by sid » Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:32 pm

Hello:

1) NO MARRIAGE: This was commanded with stipulatiions to be for the purpose of saving the people grief when the Roman War would begin to kill them off in great numbers. But then, this was a temporary message until the resurrection in AD 77.
See: "Three General Resurrections" - 1Cor 15.22-24.
I am sad to inform you that every church member who has discussed the subject with me, proclaims that "God can not count to three."
In fact, two preachers, Preston and Lockwood had a public debate about "God cannot count to three"; in 1992.

2) Should we restore incense, altars, trumpets?
What made you think that they ever ceased?
Jesus described them in Third Heaven, the Eternal Abode of God.

3) You should provide literal proof of worship in heaven.
"I say unto you, that likewise joy will be in heaven over one sinner that repents ..." - Lk 15.7.
Do you consider that worship/

11/2/2005 - 3:36PM - **Edited by grand_puba to remove tangential info**
The New Covenant Is In Revelation

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

Re: Reply to m273p15c -- The Pattern

Post by m273p15c » Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:59 am

Hello Sid,

Let me kindly suggest that you did not address the underlying logic of my questions
sid wrote:1) NO MARRIAGE: This was commanded with stipulatiions to be for the purpose of saving the people grief when the Roman War would begin to kill them off in great numbers. But then, this was a temporary message until the resurrection in AD 77. ...
I Corinthians 7, which contains Paul's advice to remain as they were until the then "present distress" was ended, is not related to my above question.

You argued that worship in heaven should be replicated on earth. I responded with the question, "Why?" Not everything in heaven is to be replicated on earth, for example, marriage. In heaven, there is no marriage. In fact, there is no gender (see above post). That will not change no matter how many distresses come and go here on earth.

Would you require ceasation of all marriages here? If not, then you must concede that earth is not intended to replicate heaven exactly, otherwise we must cease all marriages and all gender!
sid wrote:2) Should we restore incense, altars, trumpets?
What made you think that they ever ceased?
Jesus described them in Third Heaven, the Eternal Abode of God.
Again, you failed to address the heart of my question: Incense, sacrifices upon altars, trumpets, and other forms of carnal worship - these all ended with the close of the Old Testament. These are used as symbols in the book of Revelation (Revelation 1:1-3). Again, as a call to consistency, if you use the book of Revelation as a pattern for earthly worship, you authorize incense, altars, and trumpets for current, earthly worship. Do you think we should offer animal sacrifices and incense, as pictured in Revelation? If you cannot be consistent, then your use of Revelation is invalidated.
sid wrote:You should provide literal proof of worship in heaven.
"I say unto you, that likewise joy will be in heaven over one sinner that repents ..." - Lk 15.7.
Do you consider that worship
You misquoted me pretty badly on this point. Fortunately, we have my original post, so there can be no doubt:
m273p15c wrote:One must offer justification for the literal application of Revelation to first prove that the verse represents literal worship in heaven, then he or she needs to justify usage of Matthew 6 to apply to all heavenly references, not just man's submission to God's will, which is how the kingdom spreads ("thy kingdom come...").
Notice that I asked you to justify the "literal application of Revelation", not that there is worship in heaven. I have no doubt that there is worship in heaven. However, I do doubt these points in your case:
  1. Revelation should be understood literally
  2. All things on earth should be just as they are in heaven.
You must prove that Revelation is to be understood literally, instead of figuratively, before you can use it to prove mechanical instruments are even used in heaven! Then, you must prove that worship on earth is to be patterened after this instrumental worship, in spite of God's previous instruction in Ephesians and Colossians.

JSM17
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 5:16 pm
Location: Hoffman Estates, Illinois

Post by JSM17 » Sun May 14, 2006 8:41 am

Does the N.T. specifically say to use Musical instruments?

It does say to use one instrument "The heart", to sing with the heart!

If the bible is silent on any particular issue why do we feel obligated to fill in the blanks.

What is the pattern for N.T. worship when it comes to worshiping GOD.

When we add things most of the time it is for our entertainment or our pleasure.

If we were to add specific instruments to our worship than God would have told us to or given us examples of.

User avatar
m273p15c
Posts: 2788
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 1999 10:45 am

good points

Post by m273p15c » Sun Oct 01, 2006 3:23 pm

JSM17 wrote:Does the N.T. specifically say to use Musical instruments? It does say to use one instrument "The heart", to sing with the heart! If the bible is silent on any particular issue why do we feel obligated to fill in the blanks. ... If we were to add specific instruments to our worship than God would have told us to or given us examples of.
These are good points. Thank you for highlighting them, JSM17. However, please consider these two minor, technical points:
  1. Silence? - Is God really silent on the topic of musical instruments? As you have already noted, God commanded the use of specific instruments - our voice and our hearts. Therefore, is this really a question of absolute "silence"? Traditionally, it has been called that, simply because God did not forbid musical instruments; however, I consider that a ploy and polemical trickery to let someone call that "silence". God was not silent! He specified His desire. The true question is, "Do we have a right to add to God's commands?" Obviously, I think not...
  2. Requirement for Specific Authority? - It is an easy argument to demand either a specific example to authorize a practice. Certainly, that is sufficient. However, is specific example and command the only bases for authority? No. Remember, God often provides broad authority, which covers many specifically unstated things. Choosing specifics within these broadly authorized areas are matters of judgment and expediency. Therefore, let us be careful not to require too much - more than we are able to satisfy.
In regards to authority and silence, I believe the argument is best stated this way:

God has not generically authorized musical praise, leaving the selection of musical instruments open to human judgment. In fact, He has specified vocal praise - the instrument, the heart. Who are we to add to God's command?

http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... _forbidden

Post Reply