Leroy, Richland Hills, and Instrumental Music
Leroy Garrett has written this wonderful essay about the decision at the Richland Hills Church of Christ to add an instrumental service. I’m using it with Leroy’s gracious permission.
INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN CHURCHES OF CHRIST
It is significant that the Richland Hills Church of Christ in Fort Worth recently announced that it would soon have a service with instrumental music in addition to its usual services where the traditional practice of acappella singing will be preserved. It is significant not only because Richland Hills is one of our largest congregations, if not the largest, but also because it is one of our most influential churches, if not the most influential.
Unlike some of our avant garde churches, Richland Hills has been cautious and moderate in the changes it has made through the years. A number of churches have “progressed” beyond the point of any identity as Churches of Christ, and have more or less disclaimed any connection. They have not only gone “instrumental” completely, but they have taken some generic name in place of Church of Christ. They say that name is an impediment to their mission. And yet their leadership and membership are largely from Churches of Christ, and they are likely to practice communion and baptism as before. They are particularly “grace-oriented.”
When I discussed this with Rick Atchley, senior minister at Richland Hills, he said being “Church of Christ” was no problem to them. He appeared to agree with what I have long said: We should be busy being what we believe a true Church of Christ should be – unsectarian, unity-minded, Christ-centered, and faithful to our heritage both in Scripture and to our Restoration tradition. That is what reformation/restoration is about – not leaving and becoming rootless, but staying and effecting renewal from within.
This is what makes Richland Hill’s decision to go instrumental for even one service historic. It is something of an exemplary congregation, one that has kept its balance amidst decades of change, and it has remained loyal to its heritage in Churches of Christ. It has in fact through the years conducted workshops for our leaders on “how to do church.” Are they now showing their penchant for leading the way by going (partly) instrumental?
While there are several Churches of Christ that still wear that name that are now instrumental in one service, it is not yet a trend – perhaps no more than six or eight congregations. The Jenks Church of Christ in Tulsa has the unique arrangement of simultaneous services, one acappella and one instrumental, one upstairs and one downstairs. They supposed that the instrumental service would be for the youth, but to their surprise a number of oldsters attend as well.
The Farmers Branch Church of Christ in the Dallas area also has simultaneous services Sunday a.m., a “contemporary” service in the Family Center that uses instruments, and a traditional acappella service in the sanctuary. There is a second acappella service on Sunday morning.. There is also a contemporary service on Saturday p.m., with instruments. These contemporary services use keyboard, guitars, drums. The four weekend assemblies total upward of 1500 in attendance. Considering its background as a non-Sunday school congregation (It still has no Sunday school!), Farmers Branch is a phenomenon among Churches of Christ, with dynamic leadership.
As might be expected, this innovation of having even one instrumental service is viewed with concern, if not dismay, by many in Churches of Christ. It is probable that for the foreseeable future most of our churches will remain uncompromisingly acappella. But there will almost certainly be a continuation of some congregations –the larger and the more progressive – going instrumental for one or more services. Now that Richland Hills is among that number the pace could accelerate.
Churches of Christ have such a rich tradition of acappella singing that it is unlikely that it will ever be completely abandoned. Even our most progressive congregations will almost certainly continue to do some singing without instruments. And for good reasons, one being that we often do it well. It is common for visitors to our services to comment that we don’t need instruments. We can also believe that acappella music is more in keeping with the simplicity and beauty of New Testament worship.
Nor are Churches of Christ uniquely acappella, except in some American communities. Throughout the history of the church there has been a substantial presence of acappella singing, sometimes acappella only, as in the great Orthodox churches, the most ancient of denominations. All churches sometimes sing acappella, and some of the great choirs of the world use only the human voice. The Presbyterian Church of Scotland not only objects to instruments but to man-made hymnals as well. They use the hymnal that is in the Bible, the Psalms. The only scriptural hymnal! I don’t know how we missed that one!
This is why I questioned the thesis of a publication by a professor at Abilene Christian University some years back on The Case for Acappella Music. I pointed out that no case has to be made for acappella singing, for reasons noted above. Beside, insofar as Churches of Christ are concerned that is not the issue. The professor’s book should have been on The Case for Making Acappella Music a Test of Fellowship.
No one faults us for singing acappella. That has not been our sin. We erred when we made the use of instruments a test of fellowship and allowed it to be a divisive issue. We went wrong when we moved acappella music from being an opinion or preference to being an essential. We took it from our small t traditions, where it properly belongs, and made it part of our capital T tradition, the core gospel which we share with all believers.
And that, thank God, is what is changing – not in a trickle, but massively. Instrumental music is a dead issue in most mainline Churches of Christ. Many churches – that will adamantly remain non-instrumental — have gone on record of no longer making it a condition of fellowship. Even those who view it as a sin should they sing with an instrument no longer apply that judgment upon others.
It does not matter all that much whether Churches of Christ remain acappella or whether they become partly or completely instrumental. The church catholic has long labeled such questions as adiaphorous (matters of indifference). In our own Restoration heritage we have it in the motto: “In essentials, unity; in opinions, liberty; in all things, love.” We got off track and betrayed our own heritage when we turned opinions and methods into essentials.
What is important, whether we are acappella or instrumental or something of both, is that we love and accept all other believers as equals in Christ. How they sing in their assemblies, or how they otherwise “do church” is adiaphorous, so long as they are devoted to Christ and hold to the essentials of the faith.
History could do an irony on us, a benevolent one. Churches of Christ could end up with both instrumental and non-instrumental churches, while we remain united. That would put us where our Stone/Campbell heritage was 150 years ago. For an entire generation we had “organic” and “inorganic” congregations without a rupture in fellowship. This was the case until editor-bishops appeared who insisted that “It can be only one way,” and divided us.
This transition we are going through – and remember the “law of change” is the “law of God – isn’t really about instrumental music. It goes much deeper and is much more complicated. It is the old issue of “form and substance” that goes back to the ancient Greek philosophers. Is reality and truth in the form (anything material or outward) or is it in the substance (the ideal, or what’s in the heart)? Or s it somehow both? Plato, for instance, held that material things are but a shadow of reality, which is mind or idea.
We are all exposed to this problem in one way or another. We know that unless baptism is a “circumcision of the heart” (Col. 2:11-12) one only gets wet. And we agree with Shakespeare in reference to prayer that “words without thoughts never to heaven go.” And unless it is an act of heart and conscience the Lord’s Supper is in vain. Form must have substance, and substance must have priority. Errors of the heart are far more serious than flaws in the form.
Our people are becoming more spiritually discerning, and this includes being more aware of what matters most, the heart. If the heart is right (substance) the form might be adiaphorous – or at least matters on which we can differ. Not that form is unimportant, for it is sometimes ordained of God, but our sincere responses to form might differ in detail. Foremost, God looks upon the heart, not outward appearance.
So, just how we do music — hymnals are only the Psalms, shaped notes or round notes, choirs or solos or congregational singing, acappella or instrumental – may not be that big a deal with God so long as the music is from the heart and glorifies Christ. And so we are to unloose and renounce the old fallacy that “It can be only one way.”
Very few English versions translation word “BAPTIZO” as “IMMERSE.” We know it should be translated that way because that is what ‘BAPTIZO” (in all of its forms means) means.
The Amplified New Testament translators consulted 27 translations and versions of the New Testament in whole or in part. They also examined the greatest lexicographers of all times. The Greek text of Westcott and Hort was pursued with meticulous care. Two aims of this translation were these: (1) That it should be tue to the original Greek. (2) That it shuld be grammatically correct.
This is Ephesians 5:19 in the exhaustive Amplified New Testament of 1958:
‘”Speak out to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, offering praise with voices [AND INSTRUMENTS] and making melody with allyour heart to the Lord.”
The translators drew upon Berry’s “Greek-English NewTestament Lexocon” to emphatically acknowledge that PSALLO always included instruments in the period of the earliest church.
Thishas been a great discussion by those who have deep convictions. Let no one doubt the sincereity of each person who has responded. Such discussions help us to grow.
Ray and other Brothers:
I agree. Let’s always keep the lines of communication open. We grow through dialog but only when ourhearts are open to our brothers.
Doctrinal uniformity is not the distinctive mark of the New Testament Church. Jesus defined that too clearly to miss:
“By this shall all men know you are my disciples by the way you love one another.”
How we treat each other, as fellow brothers in our Father’s family, seems to be far more important than how we understand (or misunderstand) certain Scriptures which may seem a bit ambiguous anyway. How many of us have NOT changed our understandings (or misunderstandings) of how we drew conclusions on Scriptures at different stages of our lives in the Lord. Thank the Lord, most of us see things in a much clearer and more gracious light that when we first believed. This, in my judgment, is a sign of spiritual maturity, perhaps the evidence of ”Christ being formed in us.”
In our zeal to engage in the discussion of differences and to win folks over to our way of thinking may we not be like those whom the Apostle Paul had to chastise in Galatians 4:17-20: “Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them. It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!”
I’m sorry but I must go back several days, since we lost access to the internet.
Kieth, I notice that you included Vine’s definition of psallo, but you didn’t go far enough. Here is what Vine says of psallo from New Testement “in the NT ‘to sing a hymn, sing praise’” probably taken from Thayer. I believe AT Robertson agrees. Your list of universities is extensive and I’m fairly confident that they are using the classical, or is it called Attic, definition.
I believe that you are correct when you say that Paul is not telling us to sing and sing. It is my understanding that in Eph 5:19 Paul is using psallontes as a participle of means in order to explain how the previous participle ‘adontes’ is to be carried out. This is similar to Matthew 28:19 where baptism is a participle of means explaining how disciples are to be made. In this case psallo retains it’s classical definition because Paul is adding an instrument to singing, which is the heart. Paul made a similar statement in I Cor 14:15 using psallo to add the instrument, spirit and mind, to his singing. But still the instrument in every case is identified by Paul.
You’re inclusion a statement from Clement advocating instruments is interesting. Did you get that from the lectureship at Freed Hardeman?
Many people believe that that statement was used out of context. Clement said that we are the instrument to sing praise to God. Here is another statement attributed to Clement “He who sprang from David and yet was before him, the Word of God, scorned those lifeless instruments of lyre and cithara.
Could he possibly have had a schizophrenic moment like Calvin?
Mitch:
I received no information from or about the discussion at Freed Hardeman. Was the discussion taped or printed out?
We are certainly in agreement that “ado” and “psallo” does not mean SING and SING but includes instrumentation, SING and PLAY something!
(1) In one case, the interpretation of the passage is allegorical: insisting that the instruments called for are the “heart” NOT the “harp,” “spirit” NOT “cymbals,” and “mind” NOT the “multiple instruments” mentioned in the Psalms.
(2) In the other case, the interpretation of the passage is literal: permitting both the “harp” AND the “heart,” “cymbals” AND “spirit,” and “multiple instruments” AND the “mind.”
The safest way to interpret a Scripture is to take it literally unless to do so does injustice to the over all thought.
Look especially to Colossians 3:16—from this we recognize that the Lord calls for believers to let the Lord’s word dwell so richly within their hearts that out of the abundance of their hearts they teach, counsel and praise the Lord.
The human “heart, mind and spirit” are NOT the instruments BUT the source of our praise to the Lord! It is not the “heart” but the lips and vocal cords which teach, counsel and praise the Lord. Their message, whether teaching to other believers or praise to the Lord, springs from the source of a deeply devoted heart.
The Reformer Ulrich Zwingly was more consistent than we in wresting with the two Pauline passages (Ehesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16). He concluded that the “heart” was the instrument for both the ado and the psallo portions of the praise. Therefore, he silenced both voices and instruments in congregations he served. To Zwingly in Paul’s writings, praise was to originate in the heart, mind and spirit and stay in the heart, mind and spirit—just between the worshipper and the Lord.
The adverbial phrase “in/by/with the heart” most likely modifies both the ado and the psallo portion of the Ephesian passage. This becomes even clearer in the case of the Colossians passage which states, “sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs … in/by/with your hearts to God.”
We can skip Paul and go right to Jesus himself. Jesus used a term which means “make music” in his parable of the prodigal son. The Greek word employed is sumphonia which meant and means a “unison of sound; i.e., a concert of instruments.” Luke 15:11-32 (especially vv. 22-23, 31-32) calls for vibrant celebration when prodigals come home to the Father’s house and come to enjoy new life in the Lord’s family. The Father in the parable of Jesus is our Father. The Father insisted that in his house, his family, his children must celebrate and be glad for their salvation. The Father’s directive called for (or unequivocally permitted) the household to “make music” all the way up to a concert of instruments. The church of Jesus Christ is the house of God. A “red letter” New Testament and the words of Jesus hit me like a thunderbolt!
It is not easy for me to write these things because I spent many decades as a professional preacher feeling I had to do anything possible to support the a cappella doctrine of my church tradition. This meant that I combed thousands of pages of scholarly material by Christians throughout the centuries because I felt desperate to wring instrumental praise out of the fabric of New Testament Christianity. I was not dishonest nor was I insincere. I was rabidly sectarian until the Lord drove me to my knees to either support my tradition or His TEXT.
Through John the Revelator, Jesus is pictured as standing and knocking at the door of His congregation in Laodicea, He wants all believers to see their spiritual wretchedness, poverty, blindness and nakedness. He wants all of us to see that all of our self-righteous efforts leave us with nothing. He wants all of us to see that He alone must be “the beginning and end of our faith.” The Lord’s desire is that His grace and mercy alone be our spiritual defense and the basis for our bold confidence for all of life and eternity!
But you do not recognize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.
Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent.
Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.
(Revelation 3:17b-20, NIV)
As Jesus is helping me see my own spiritual wretchedness, poverty, blindness and nakedness, I pray for all my brothers and sisters in every place to let our blessed Savior tenderly reveal their own spiritual emptiness to them as well. I pray that all of us, as disciples of the Son of God, will become rich in grace and mercy. He wants to refine us as gold by His precious and costly death for us. I pray that the only cover-up we ever dare to put on is the white robe of his gift of righteousness. I pray that we can all see clearly (in our self-righteous, unkind, judgmental and divisive ways), how far we have departed from pure biblical Christianity. Pure and unadulterated faith means just following the Son of God. I pray that we can see and accept the Savior’s love and benefit from his many different ways of rebuking and trying to discipline us.
I praise Jesus for continuing to knock at my heart’s door, after all these years, calling me away from allegiance to religious movements, sects, cults, denominations and human systems of any kind. I now realize Jesus just wants to be my “all in all.” Jesus wants to be the only source and focus of my faith and trust. Jesus wants me just to walk in his footsteps. Jesus begged me to repent of my own sectarian pride, cultic exclusiveness and divisiveness which held other sincere believers and even sincere seekers at a distance from myself and (as a result) often at a distance from Jesus.
Jesus had to knock pretty hard to get my full attention. When I let Him in, Jesus whispered to my too often guarded heart, “I want to so fully come into your heart and life that you will find the ability to accept and love all of my disciples, those who deeply love me in every place. I know you will find great joy in touching more and more lives which I have touched. I commission you to communicate my prayer which brought sweat drops of blood from my body in the Garden of Gethsemane. It was my prayer for the community of faith in all ages!”
“My prayer is not for (the apostles) alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be ONE, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.
“May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be ONE as we are ONE; I in them and you in me. May they be brought to COMPLETE UNITY to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”
(John 17:20-23, NIV)
After failing to discover a biblical command, a binding example, or a necessary inference for the use of mechanical instruments in Christian worship, those who advocate the use of such music often (as a last resort) allege that the term psallo includes the use of instrumental music. Psallo is the Greek verb translated “making melody” in Ephesians 5:19, and “I will sing” in 1 Corinthians 14:15. The noun form of this term, psalmos, appears in such passages as 1 Corinthians 14:26, Ephesians 5:19, and Colossians 3:16. If one looks up psallo in a Greek lexicon, he probably will find the following definitions: to touch, pull, or pluck; to twitch the strings on a carpenter’s line; to pluck or strike the cords on a musical instrument; to sing praises. Upon reviewing these definitions, some claim that Paul’s use of psallo and psalmos implies the use of a stringed instrument in worship. They further assert that these words always convey the idea of instrumental accompaniment to singing, even if the instrument is not mentioned. Are they correct? If not, why not?
When one studies the etymology of this word, he will find that it is incorrect to say that every time psallo was used in antiquity, it meant to play an instrument. By studying reliable Greek lexicons (dictionaries) and various historical documents, one soon comes to understand that the term psallo has had a variety of meanings in different periods of its history. In fact, the evidence indicates that even before Christ came to Earth, psallo no longer meant to play instruments of music. Numerous scholarly sources could be cited to prove this point, but for the sake of space, three will suffice. First, Walter Bauer’s highly respected lexicon, revised by Frederick Danker in 2000, indicates that even in the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Old Testament that appeared about 250 years before Christ was born), it “is usually the case” that psallo is translated as only “to sing” (2000, p. 1096). In Henry Thayer’s often-quoted Greek lexicon, he noted that by the time the events recorded in the New Testament took place, psallo meant “to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song” (1962, p. 675). Finally, Sophocles, a native Greek and for thirty-eight years a professor of the Greek language at Harvard University, declared (after examining a plethora of secular and religious historical documents) that there was not a single example of psallo ever used in the time of Christ that involved or implied the use of an instrument; rather, it always meant to chant or sing religious hymns (see Kurfees, 1999, p. 47).
When one wishes to know the definition of a word from times past, he must inquire as to how the word was used at any particular time in history. For example, when one reads the word “prevent” in the King James Version (cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:15), he must understand that this word does not mean the same thing it did when this version was first produced in 1611. Then, it meant “to go before; to precede.” Today, it means “to keep from happening; to impede.” The word “idiot” was used in the seventeenth century in reference to one “in a private station, as distinguished from one holding public office.” Today, it is used to speak of “an unlearned, or ignorant person.” Just as these English words once had meanings that now are entirely obsolete, the Greek word psallo once meant “to pluck or strike the chords of a musical instrument.” But, before the beginning of the New Testament period, it had lost this meaning. In his well-researched book, Instrumental Music in the Worship, M.C. Kurfees noted that the word psallo never is used in the New Testament or in contemporaneous literature to mean anything other than to sing (1999, p. 45). The other meanings had entirely disappeared by the time the New Testament was written.
The fact is, however, even if this word had retained all of its original meanings (and the evidence shows that it clearly had not), the letters Paul penned to the Christians in Ephesus and Colossae specifically name the “plucked” instrument—the heart. Thus, a harp, piano, banjo, or any other kind of musical instrument is no more an integral part of psallo than the plucking of chicken feathers. The deceptive and misleading argument which suggests that in the New Testament psallo means “to strike the cords on a musical instrument,” is false to the core. It can be refuted simply by taking an honest look at all of the evidence availab
The rightness or wrongness of every doctrine and practice is to be determined by what God has said (authorized) about the matter. (Colossians 3:17.)
True, David used instrumental music, but he also offered animal sacrifices and burned incense in worship. We do not take our orders from David today. Christ is our lawgiver and guide. (Matt. 17:5; 28:18; Heb. 1:1-2). He has nowhere authorized instrumental music, the Holy Spirit-inspired apostles did not sanction it, no New Testament writer mentioned it in Christian worship, and no apostolic church practiced it. To engage in it is to fail to worship “in truth.” But God is pleased when one only worships in truth. Therefore, instrumental music is not pleasing to him.
First, it is imperative that we understand that the conscience is not the final authority in matters religious. It is possible for some, in following their consciences, to condemn that which God allows. Such is the case with those of whom Paul warned Timothy in 1 Timothy 4:1-4. These brethren were refusing to marry and commanding others to abstain from meat— actions which, in and of themselves, were perfectly acceptable to God.
On the other hand, some, in following the dictates of their consciences, have condoned that which God has condemned. We need only to be reminded of the life of Paul prior to his conversion to Christ. He consented to the stoning of Stephen. (Acts 8:1.) He persecuted the church, and thus persecuted the Lord. (Acts 8:1; 9:1-5; 22:4; 26:10-12.) Yet, in all of these sinful actions Paul only did that which his conscience allowed. (Acts 23:1.)
Clearly, the conscience alone is not a sufficient guide in religious matters.
Second, it is imperative to note what is and what is not a matter of conscience according to God’s word, not according to man’s feelings. Many brethren, in an attempt to defend or reject this or that practice, have relegated issues to the realm of conscience by simply stating: “Oh, that’s only a matter of conscience.” The statement is often made as if to say: “If your conscience allows it, that’s fine, If your conscience condemns it, then that’s fine too. Whatever your conscience dictates is right.” The problem occurs, however, when this sort of statement is made without regard to the specific nature of the issue under consideration.
There are, for example, those areas of Christian practice that are properly determined to be right or wrong based upon the dictates of the individual conscience. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 8, 10, and Romans 14, addresses some of those issues. More specifically, he taught that such actions as the eating of meats offered to idols and the keeping of certain days, were, in effect, matters of conscience, and thus to be determined by each individual in accordance with the dictates of that faculty. It is imperative, however, to note that both of these actions were right, in and of themselves, to be practiced before God, but also right to be avoided before God. (Romans 14:6.) Not every issue falls into this category.
There are many issues and practices that brethren seek to make matters of conscience, but which, in reality, are not at all parallel to the eating of meats offered to idols and the keeping of days. The marriage, divorce and remarriage question is not an issue that can be decided by the urgings of one’s conscience. The matter of fellowship, regardless of what men might say, is not merely a matter of conscience. Neither is the use of instrumental music in worship only a matter of conscience.
Third, though the conscience is involved in these, and other issues, they are really matters to be decided as right or wrong based upon biblical authority. The rightness or wrongness of every doctrine and practice is to be determined by what God has said (authorized) about the matter. (Colossians 3:17.) Even the matters of conscience that Paul addressed involved authority. If the eating of meats met God’s approval, and thus was authorized by God, then it would be wrong to demand that one abstain from meats as if abstention was the only practice demanded by the Lord. On the other hand, if God allowed (authorized) the eating of meats to be avoided, it would be wrong to force the eating of meats as if it were the only practice demanded by the Lord. The eating of meats and the keeping of days were both practices that were, in and of themselves, acceptable to the Lord, but which could also be avoided with the approval of the Lord. The marriage, fellowship, and music questions involve certain positions which are not, in and of themselves, acceptable to the Lord, and thus not parallel as matters of conscience to the questions of eating meats and keeping days.
Fourth, matters of conscience can be matters of opinion, but are not, of necessity, always, and only, matters of opinion. The issues discussed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 8, 10, and Romans 14 were matters of conscience in the sense that one could either involve himself in or abstain from a given practice and still be right in the sight of God based upon his conscience. There are, however, biblical doctrines and practices that, though they involve the individual conscience, are not, simply by virtue of the conscience’s involvement, only matters of opinion. Such has been intimated previously and will presently be discussed as the question of instrumental music is raised.
Fifth, the use of instruments of music in worship involves the conscience, but sixth, the use of such also involves authority. As previously mentioned, it is almost impossible to discuss a matter of conscience without also realizing that, whatever that matter might be, it also involves authority. An explanation is in order.
I am conscientiously opposed to the use of instrumental music in worship, not merely as a matter of conscience, but rather due to the fact that I know that the use of instruments of music in worship (o God is not authorized. I cannot, therefore, in good conscience, worship God with the use of instruments. My opposition is not based solely upon the promptings of my conscience, but primarily upon my knowledge of God’s word, which, I am convinced, provides no authority for the use of such in the New Testament.
Those who contend that the use of mechanical instruments of music in worship is only a “matter of conscience” or a matter of opinion’’ confound the issue. The issue is not one of “conscience” versus “opinion.” The issue is now, and always has been, centered around authority. The issue is “authority” versus “non- authority.” To be parallel to the issues discussed by Paul, both the use and non-use of instrumental music in worship must be authorized by God. Then, and only then, would a person’s decision about the issue be that of his conscience. But, such is not the case, for the use of instrumental music in worship is not authorized in the New Testament.
To suggest therefore, that the instrumental music question is only a matter of conscience, is to be most misleading. Such a position completely overlooks the fact that the instrumental music question is, first and foremost, a question of authority. It is not enough to say that “We can worship with the instrument because to us it is only a matter of opinion.” The question is not simply “Can we, in good conscience, use instrumental music in worship to God?” Rather, the crux of the matter centers on the questions “What does God, through the Bible, authorize?” and “Is our practice of worshipping God with/without instruments of music that which is authorized by God in the New Testament?
The issue is not mainly about music, but about a change in attitude toward Holy Scripture–from a high view–all of it fully God-inspired and all of it canonical, to a low view–fallible human inspired, non-normative. Many just have a one-sentence Bible now, “Believe in Jesus.”
However, I guess the liberals are right about us conservatives being ignorant: for the life of me I cannot understand how I, who cannot find mechanical music in the NT, can have fellowship with others at a Lord’s day assembly when they insist on adding whatever they want: musical appliances, etc. Neither do I understand why if I am excluded by the practices of others from having worship fellowship with them I am automatically assumed to have condemned them. Maybe an enlightened liberal can explain it so I can understand it.
I also grew up in the CoC, and just recently heard of the transitions that Richland Hills in TX and Quail Springs CoC in OKC made into having instrumental music in their churches…No matter what outsiders agree/disagree with on what they chose to do, leave them be…God called their hearts into doing something that they felt is what called them to do…This is a new day and age, and it’s time to do something different…It’s a higher calling of sorts, and it’s a good thing…I’ve always believed that instrumental music was a way of reaching into your soul, searching your inner self for God’s guidance…I don’t feel like I receive God’s guidance in the “old fashioned” way after graduating from high school/college, and now I feel closer to God with instruments…I feel myself growing closer to God in that way…
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article , Richland Hills, and Instrumental Music at PreacherMike, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
I love the word “mechanical” whenever it comes up in these discussions. I always picture these giant gears, wheels, and cogs. My Martin D-18 acoustic guitar just seems so ordinary in the shadow of these “mechanical” instruments or “appliances” (a term used a couple of comments ago). I absolutely love the insider lingo. And I’m aware of the fact that I’ve added absolutely nothing to this dialogue. And I did it months after the fact as well. So sue me.
I thank Richland Hills for stepping out of the so called church of Christ box. It is time that we get past all the petty things that those of us who call ourselves followers of Christ quarrel over.
It is imperative that we remember worship to the Lord is not just a Sunday morning service. Sunday morning should always be a time of communion, fellowship, and praise for the simple fact that through God’s infinite grace he delivered through his Son, empowered us through his Holy Spirit, and gave us another day. Worship is a Sunday through Saturday/24-7 life style. That is why Paul tells us in Romans 12 to be transformed into the likeness of Christ.
Paul also tells us in 1 Corinthians: ” 17Nevertheless, each one should retain the place in life that the Lord assigned to him and to which God has called him. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts.”
I have yet to find a command in any bible that states God does not look on us with love if we start using musical instrumetns. Keeping God’s command is what counts.
Remember 1 John 3:11 This is the message you heard from the beginning: We should love one another.
It doesn’t state if you prefer musical instruments love one another, or if you love accapella love one another. The command is “Love One Another.”
Many of you men are breaking my heart, not for me, but for Christ. Is there even one thing we do in our worship services that are exactly as they did them in the first century church. None of our “techniques” that we use in our worship services was specifically written out for us by God. The instructions for temple worship were tediously specific, but now we have freedom in Christ. Break yourselves from this bondage you are holding yourselves to. Yes, we have communion, yes, we pray, yes, we sing, yes, we read scripture, and we do it all in these beautiful buildings. Are these beautiful air conditioned buildings “scriptural”? We sing songs written by ordinary men. Is that scriptural? Richland Hills, I applaud you. You understand what freedom in Christ means. You’re growing because people are drawn to your church’s “heart”, not because you are trying to attract the denominations, as someone mentioned. Churches of christ are dying all over the country because they aren’t trying to attract these so-called denominations. Just listen to yourselves. The new contemporary christian instrumental music touches the soul and the heart to the core and you take this and make it into something ugly and sinful. Our teenagers are touched by it. Do you think they’re touched by anything you might say to them? You pick up your books and you do your “in-depth” studies and that’s all fine and good, but the only issue here is the “heart issue” and nothing more. I’m sure someone will say that it’s not this simple, but, yes, it is this simple. I can just see the Lord shaking his head and weaping and saying to himself, “After what I did for them, how did it ever come to this”.
“Errors of the heart are far more serious than flaws in the form”, when I read this sentence from brother Garrett’s article, I literally broke down in tears. My study of scripture has convinced me that our past prohibition of instrumental music is in error and is similar to Jesus’ struggle with the Pharisees over picking and eating grain on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1-3) and healing on the Sabbath (Luke 6:6-10) and many other issues. The Pharisees added to the “Law of Moses” and called it the “tradition of the elders” (Mark 7:5-8). We have added to the gospel of Jesus Christ and called it the “gospel truth”. Just as the Pharisees were practicing a law of unnecessary prohibition, so are we as it relates to the prohibition of instrumental music. Jesus quoted Isaiah to rebuke the Pharisees (Mark 7:6-8).
He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
” ‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.’ You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.”
We should take note of this rebuke.
Who gave you the authority to change worship service. Are we worshiping each other or is our worship to God. Are we to
now be a part of the have it your way religion. I thank God
I attend the East Baltimore Bible Institue and College, were
we in the northeast still do it God’s way, Book, chapter, and verse, ” For it is notin man that walked to direct his wown steps”
Andrea Lorick
church of Christ in East Baltimore
Maryland
As one raised in a church with instrumental music, namely the organ and the piano, I can plainly state that it was much easier to sing along with the music, the choir, and the song leader. You didn’t have to worry much about singing off key either. In addition, now we see guitars, drums, flutes, violins, the bass and any other instrument of interest utilized in our worship service to God. I myself play the harmonica (as limited as I may be) and I enjoy playing spiritual songs.
However, in true worship to God, it’s not about me, it’s not about the instrument player, the band, the song leader or the soloist or the choir singing one of the favorite hymns or something new. It’s about True Worship to our Father in Heaven. “in Spirit and in Truth” It’s about our Saviour Jesus Christ, and spiritual edification of the brethren. Worship to God is not about conforming to wordly ways, or compromise with others and the way they feel, or what they like or prefer.
Let us put our attention to where it belongs. On our God, our Saviour, and in the Spirit, worship our heavenly Father, “singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord” collosians 3:16
If you can’t hear the words over the loud musical instruments, what edification is there. The worship service is not to be a provocation to jealosy or envy, in who can sing the best, or who can play the best, who makes the choir, but I’ve seen it be just that with many. Jesus, and he alone should be on the pedistal.
We could all argue and never agree, concerning instrumental music to be pleasing or not to God. But we can all agree that singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord, is pleasing to God.
I am not an advocate for instrumental music in Worship to God, for several reasons. There is to much of a worldly tone with their use in the worship service to our Father. You think, that maybe God in his wisdom, knew where the use of musical instruments would help to create a decadent society.
Ehesians 5: 18, 19. …;but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord; …
Not as I was taught or raised, do I choose to worship God in singing and without the use of musical instruments. I find singing as Truth, without question.
As the redeemed, we’ll someday be in the midst of Gods Glory, we will All sing in praise to God. If playing a musical instrument is included, we will All sing and ALL play in praise to God.
Love to all the brethren.
I realize that this thread has fallen off back in January, however, I am reading it for the first time. I note the premise assumed by almost all if not all the writers of this thread. My observation is: the passages of Scripture cited for music in the corporate worship time are taken from Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16. Both of these passages of Scripture are cited to prove or disprove the use of instruments when the church gathers together and sings in worship to God. The problem I find in this argument is that the context of both are Christian living, not corporate worship. I would also suggest that if your conclusion is that we are not to use instrumentation in the public gathering of Christians, then – for the same reason – we ought not use it at any time in order to be consistent.
The main proposition made by those believing acapella is the only accepted form is from the silence of Scripture. The statement has been made, “If the Bible does not authorize it, it is not acceptable to God.” If this is true, then let us be consistent in all areas of life and not just in the corporate gathering. For example: The Bible gives specific uses for the offerings of the church. One was to supply the needs of the church (the people) both local and universal. Another use of the offerings was for the support of those who needed funds for the preaching of the Gospel. There is absolutely no authorization in the New Testament for the use of God’s money to pay building loans including interest and extra fees. There is not authorization to purchase air conditioners, heaters, fans, etc. and other things for our comforts. We do have authorization from the Word to fill needs of the church (people). We do not have authorization to fill our wants!
If we are to use certain reasoning to understand God’s meaning, then we need to be consistent in all areas. This is a great challenge for us when we present “creeds” or create demands on people to abibe by our reasoning. I would suggest to you that the statement, “If God does not authorize it, it is not acceptable.” is a statement of reasoning that comes from the mind of man and not from the written Word of God. Therefore, it is open for debate. If it is true, it will stand up to the debate. Those who believe it will hold consistent to it in all areas of thier Biblical hermaneutic.
I challenge each one, not to reason with your feelings. I challenge all not to reason from your own personal experience. When you do that you place yourself into the judges chair, and say I am right and you are wrong.
What I am not saying and what I am saying:
I am not saying that we are free to do whatever we want, whenever we want to do it.
I am saying: Whatever you do in Word or deed, do all in the Name of our Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.
(Col. 3:17 which follows the oft cited 3:16)
I am not saying that worship does not and cannot take place in a group setting.
I am saying that nowhere in the Bible is “our precious worship service”.
(John 4:23,24 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.)
I am not saying that the things we do on Sunday morning (or at other times the church assembles) are not a part of what we offer to God.
I am saying that the things we “do” are not necessary to God, but to us.
(John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.)
Becareful that we do judge the “righteousness” of one another, whether it be of instruments or meat. God has not authorized us to do so.
small correction to the text: 3rd paragraph, 3rd line: the word abibe should read “abide”.
The second to last sentence should read: Becareful that we do “not” judge the “righteousness” of one another, whether it be of instruments or meat.
Hello brothers
May the Lord bless you all. Please see my blog-site at:
http://cperez92763.blogspot.com
Please share it with the churches or christian that want to be part of this work. I will be posting twice a month new info, baptism, events, etc. to keep the churches informed. Thank you and may the peace of God be wiyh you.
In Christ
Carlos Perez
Evangelist
Leroy you have done a fantastik job uniting the local church in love. I hope all the churches of Christ see this great example of love and unity. The love of God go beyond any opinion we might have. Let the Bible and the love of God be our authority.
In Christ
Carlos Perez
Evangelist
Mark 16:16
‘Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not” worship correctly will be condemned.
But for the record, I oppose instrumental worship and feel ashamed that some in the brotherhood feel the need to be like other nations. What was written aforetime was, afterall, written for our learning. Let us then learn something from it.