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.

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.

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?

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)

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?

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 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.”