bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Musical instruments fall in the same category.
You have to assume that because the New Testament never says or implies so.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Musical instruments fall in the same category.
Ben, thanks for typing this out. I think this is where I am currently if I had to reach a conclusion today. I am still a newbie in looking into much of this, so your explanation has helped me in my understanding.Gladly. Just as the printed split-leaf psalter is a circumstance, keeping everyone singing the same words, so an instrument aids in keeping people on key and on tempo. A circumstance is something that if be done without does not negate that worship happened. Preaching must happen: a pulpit is a circumstance. Preaching can still be done without a pulpit.
Even so, singing can be done without accompaniment and it is still singing. But the accompaniment keeps it in decent order. I'll be the first to admit that instrumental music is abused more often than not, and I'm with Chris in his loathing of clapping and of "performance," as though a performance could be worship. A choir, an offertory, a postlude--none of these are regulated worship, and if called worship, done so wrongly.
But a discreet way of keeping the tune and tempo and pitch in place I cannot object to, though I personally would greatly prefer it not to be needed or used.
An AOEP congregation we visited used a precentor to sing "la" before each psalm so that everyone started on the same note. The "la" was not a part of the psalm: it was not worship in itself: it was a circumstance, just like a piano.
What is it about musical instruments that they can change from an OT element of worship to a NT circumstance of worship, but incense cannot? Instruments don’t truly aid us in singing. They can certainly cover up off-key singing, but is that even desirable?I remain unconvinced, but thanks for your thoughts.
For me, it boils down to whether instruments are an element or circumstance.
Jeri,What is it about musical instruments that they can change from an OT element of worship to a NT circumstance of worship, but incense cannot? Instruments don’t truly aid us in singing. They can certainly cover up off-key singing, but is that even desirable?
You have to assume that because the New Testament never says or implies so.
Gladly. Just as the printed split-leaf psalter is a circumstance, keeping everyone singing the same words, so an instrument aids in keeping people on key and on tempo. A circumstance is something that if done without does not negate that worship happened. Preaching must happen: a pulpit is a circumstance. Preaching can still be done without a pulpit.
Even so, singing can be done without accompaniment and it is still singing. But the accompaniment keeps it in decent order. I'll be the first to admit that instrumental music is abused more often than not, and I'm with Chris in his loathing of clapping and of "performance," as though a performance could be worship. A choir, an offertory, a postlude--none of these are regulated worship, and if called worship, done so wrongly.
But a discreet way of keeping the tune and tempo and pitch in place I cannot object to, though I personally would greatly prefer it not to be needed or used.
An AOEP congregation we visited used a precentor to sing "la" before each psalm so that everyone started on the same note. The "la" was not a part of the psalm: it was not worship in itself: it was a circumstance, just like a piano.
Grant, yes, a piano can shorten the curve on learning a new tune. I use Psalm apps also for that reason. But the fact that we don’t know Psalm tunes is a result of the sad loss of the singing of them, not of the lack of pianos in public worship.Jeri,
I can honestly say that an instrument (piano in my case) has greatly aided me and my family as we have been trying to learn singing the Psalms both publically and even as we use the 1650 psalter app at home. Especially since we came from a contemporary SBC upbringing.
Please re-read my post. I've dealt with all of that.
There was special clothing in the OT that the priests wore. There is now no special clothing, but we still wear clothing when we assemble. The clothing that was elemental is done with. The clothing that is circumstantial remains. Some religions have special vestments that are elements of their worship. The Reformed reject that notion, but still wear clothes.What is it about musical instruments that they can change from an OT element of worship to a NT circumstance of worship, but incense cannot? Instruments don’t truly aid us in singing. They can certainly cover up off-key singing, but is that even desirable?
There was special clothing in the OT that the priests wore. There is now no special clothing, but we still wear clothing when we assemble. The clothing that was elemental is done with. The clothing that is circumstantial remains. Some religions have special vestments that are elements of their worship. The Reformed reject that notion, but still wear clothes.
I think we may be getting mixed up over meanings. I draw distinctions between public worship and other, perhaps spontaneous, occasions.
All you have shown is that musical instruments were used outside of temple worship. It has already been said that these were extraordinary occasions (not exceptions). These passages are descriptive, not prescriptive; surely you don't think David dancing in a linen ephod is prescriptive? But that is consistent with your argument. Such passages have no bearing on the prescribed worship of the New Testament.
Moreover, you haven't shown how musical instruments could be understood as optional.
Are you saying psalm-singing is Levitical? If that is the case, it would seem improper to sing them at all today, since the ceremonies have been fulfilled in Christ.
We’re to “make melody” (psallos, the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew zamar) in or with our hearts, according to the apostle. If one honestly looks at the whole testimony of the whole Bible, it’s hard to come away not seeing that the OT instruments were ceremonial and served as a type, and that NT worship is to retain a simplicity that is centered around the Word. The melody now comes from within hearts filled with the word of Christ. The things said in debate on this topic make me sad. Some good reading material has been suggested though, and I second especially John Price’s book Old Light on New Worship.
This is not my argument. If you carefully re-read my argument, you will see this to be the case. If you have questions, I will gladly answer.
We have one: sing Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs. I know, EPs believe these to be different categories of the 150 inspired Psalms, but the rest of us do not. We see it as a command to sing inspired psalms (which must not be be neglected), as well as songs of human composition. Certainly there are principles which guide the composition and selection of uninspired hymnody, but since the RPW requires that we do so, while we do it with carefulness and prayerful prudence, we must do it nonetheless.This thread has focussed mostly on a capella worship. What about exclusive psalmody? Do we need biblical warrant to compose new songs for worship? Is there any such biblical warrant?
Ben,We have one: sing Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs. I know, EPs believe these to be different categories of the 150 inspired Psalms, but the rest of us do not. We see it as a command to sing inspired psalms (which must not be be neglected), as well as songs of human composition. Certainly there are principles which guide the composition and selection of uninspired hymnody, but since the RPW requires that we do so, while we do it with carefulness and prayerful prudence, we must do it nonetheless.
I believe that there can be uninspired psalms. Maybe Jesus and the disciples sang a psalm from the Book of Psalms, which the writer called a "Hymn." We really aren't told what they sang, other than that they did. Just because we have begun the use the word "Psalm" to denote one of the 150 inspired psalms, doesn't mean the word "psalm" is limited to that. We are to sing songs of praise: psalms! hymns! sprititual songs! Nothing requires that they be all inspired, or that some of the 150 may not be called something other than "psalm."Ben,
Just so I understand your position, do you believe that these are three different categories of songs that we are to sing, one of which is inspired and two of which are not? What distinguishes a hymn from a spiritual song?
Also, where do you get your definitions of these terms?
Maybe Jesus and the disciples sang a psalm from the Book of Psalms, which the writer called a "Hymn." We really aren't told what they sang, other than that they did.
The burden of proof, I say, is on the EP to prove that the phrase in question is limited to inspired selections from the Psalter only.
These are some innovative views. It's known that the Hallel Psalms were sung as part of the Passover. Most commentators believe that "hymn" in Matthew certainly is referring to a Psalm of that collection.I believe that there can be uninspired psalms. Maybe Jesus and the disciples sang a psalm from the Book of Psalms, which the writer called a "Hymn." We really aren't told what they sang, other than that they did. Just because we have begun the use the word "Psalm" to denote one of the 150 inspired psalms, doesn't mean the word "psalm" is limited to that. We are to sing songs of praise: psalms! hymns! sprititual songs! Nothing requires that they be all inspired, or that some of the 150 may not be called something other than "psalm."
The burden of proof, I say, is on the EP to prove that the phrase in question is limited to inspired selections from the Psalter only.
With respect, brother, isn't that precisely what they do? They say that the phrase in question means inspired psalms only.Thats way too dismissive. That would be like an EP'er saying "Maybe Paul just meant the psalms in Eph and Col," and leave it that.
I believe that Tim Foster has already given a far more detailed word-study of this than I am qualified to do.What is the Regulative Principle?
If there is no positive command, then we are not to do it. "Psalms, hymns and spiritual songs" must be proven to include human compositions. That is the burden of the advocate of non-inspired songs in worship. If he cannot show that Paul is speaking of human compositions (in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16) then he must produce some other biblical warrant.