Calvin on Instruments in worship at Heidelblog
- Thread starter NaphtaliPress
- Start date
- Status
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Proof that Calvin wasn't always right! 
JohnGill
Puritan Board Senior
Proof that Calvin wasn't always right!
I agree. Though this isn't one of those times.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Proof that Calvin wasn't always right!
I agree. Though this isn't one of those times.
Proof that you're not always right, either!
JohnGill
Puritan Board Senior
Proof that Calvin wasn't always right!
I agree. Though this isn't one of those times.
Proof that you're not always right, either!
Nope, you've only proven that you're not always right.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Nope, you've only proven that you're not always right.
Well, I know that I'm not always right, because I'm such a naturally humble guy! On this topic, however, I'm right.
(How could I be wrong? I live in California!!)
JohnGill
Puritan Board Senior
Proof that you're not always right, either!
Nope, you've only proven that you're not always right.
Well, I know that I'm not always right, because I'm such a naturally humble guy! On this topic, however, I'm right.
(How could I be wrong? I live in California!!)
I believe there was a study done on a "Correlation Between Living in California and the Problem of Self-Deception".
Basically it proves you're self-deceived on this issue because you live in California.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Nope, you've only proven that you're not always right.
Well, I know that I'm not always right, because I'm such a naturally humble guy! On this topic, however, I'm right.
(How could I be wrong? I live in California!!)
I believe there was a study done on a "Correlation Between Living in California and the Problem of Self-Deception".
Basically it proves you're self-deceived on this issue because you live in California.
Ya know, I saw that study. I think I disagreed with it...
-----Added 3/1/2009 at 09:42:24 EST-----
Now that we've totally hijacked this thread...
JohnGill
Puritan Board Senior
Well, I know that I'm not always right, because I'm such a naturally humble guy! On this topic, however, I'm right.
(How could I be wrong? I live in California!!)
I believe there was a study done on a "Correlation Between Living in California and the Problem of Self-Deception".
Basically it proves you're self-deceived on this issue because you live in California.
Ya know, I saw that study. I think I disagreed with it...
-----Added 3/1/2009 at 09:42:24 EST-----
Now that we've totally hijacked this thread...
I thought there was more we could do to go
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Back to responding to the OP: I think Calvin would have a hard time proving his point from Scripture. Just to take the quotation from Psalm 150:3 - Calvin makes an assertion, and expands his opinion slightly, but doesn't prove his point, in my opinion, from Scripture. He just assumes that musical instruments are strictly an Old Testament phenomenon.
But, we've been down this road before here (several times) on the PB.
But, we've been down this road before here (several times) on the PB.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Since most Christians sing hymns, etc. in their worship services, I'd say most Christians disagree with Calvin. And that's a good thing, in this instance...
It's not as simple as disagreeing with poor Calvin on this issue. Pick any Presbyterian you like from circa 1850 and before and they held the position of Calvin; pick any member of the Westminster Assembly who drafted the historic documents of Presbyterianism, and they held this position. We have much of the worship we have now in Presbyterianism because of the decline of Presbyterianism into liberalism and the failure of any conservative movement to roll back all the declension. I'll stick with Calvin, Knox, the Westminster Divines (and practically any Puritan), Samuel Miller, Thornwell, Dabney, John Murray, and many many others. Not bad company.
OPC'n
Puritan Board Doctor
What is sinful about having instruments in worship? We use OT Scripture to get much of our doctrine on the RP of worship and if the OT used instruments then I don't see why we cannot incorporate them into our worship.
-----Added 3/3/2009 at 05:40:23 EST-----
Just one more thing with which I disagree with Calvin. Good thing they are small matters.
-----Added 3/3/2009 at 05:40:23 EST-----
Just one more thing with which I disagree with Calvin. Good thing they are small matters.
Tim
Puritan Board Graduate
Musical instruments in corporate worship were commanded by God and were only used by the Levites. The whole Levitical priesthood has passed away; taking with it the instruments. If we use the argument that simply because something was done in worship in the OT, then we would also be okay to also have incense. But most people would reject that as merely a shadow of things to come (i.e., incense = prayers, if I am not mistaken).
-----Added 3/3/2009 at 05:40:23 EST-----
With respect, Sarah, this is not a small matter. If the non-instrumental position is Biblical, then those who use instruments in public worship are guilty of offering worship to God that is not commanded. Nadab and Abihu were put to death by God for such an infraction.
No matter what your position is, the manner in which you approach the Lord God Almighty in worship is always a big deal.
Last edited:
Tim
Puritan Board Graduate
Yes, I understand that according to your position, it would be a small matter whether instruments would be used or not. But I guess my question is, given the testimony of the great number of theologians listed by Chris Coldwell, above, does it really seem like such a small matter, if they are saying that instruments are not Biblically permitted?
Basically, we have here some of the greatest theologians posthumously warning the vast majority of the modern church that it is worshipping God in a way that is not commanded. We ought to be saying, hey, this is a really important issue. We have to come to the right understanding on this one. This is one where we definitely don't want to get wrong.
Basically, we have here some of the greatest theologians posthumously warning the vast majority of the modern church that it is worshipping God in a way that is not commanded. We ought to be saying, hey, this is a really important issue. We have to come to the right understanding on this one. This is one where we definitely don't want to get wrong.
OPC'n
Puritan Board Doctor
However, if you think about it...the OT didn't give us directions to say our creeds in the worship service, it didn't tell us which songs to sing, it didn't tell us to say the Lord's Prayer etc. Those things are just known to be of God and David in the Psalms states for us to use many instruments. He wasn't of the Levitical Priesthood.
TimV
Puritanboard Botanist
And just like the extreme AVers, building a case in that way leaves the rest of us charged with having our name blotted out of the Book of Life, or put to death, etc...
Perhaps we should start a "does one need to take an exception to the WCF if one allows a piano to be played in church" thread. Then we can play out the practical ramifications of whether the rest of us are offering strange fire and are in danger of going to Hell for it.
Tim
Puritan Board Graduate
Sean's post gives more Calvin to read on the subject.
Calvin on Instruments: “Stupid Imitation” Heidelblog
Also Psalm 81:2: “with respect to the tabret, harp, and psaltery, we have formerly observed, and will find it necessary afterwards to repeat the same remark, that the Levites, under the law, were justified in making use of instrumental music in the worship of God; it having been his will to train his people, while they were as yet tender and like children, by such rudiments, until the coming of Christ. But now when the clear light of the gospel has dissipated the shadows of the law, and taught us that God is to be served in a simpler form, it would be to act a foolish and mistaken part to imitate that which the prophet enjoined only upon those of his own time.”
No; we won't. It is not a confessional issue addressed directly by the Westminster Standards.
Calvin on Instruments: “Stupid Imitation” Heidelblog
Also Psalm 81:2: “with respect to the tabret, harp, and psaltery, we have formerly observed, and will find it necessary afterwards to repeat the same remark, that the Levites, under the law, were justified in making use of instrumental music in the worship of God; it having been his will to train his people, while they were as yet tender and like children, by such rudiments, until the coming of Christ. But now when the clear light of the gospel has dissipated the shadows of the law, and taught us that God is to be served in a simpler form, it would be to act a foolish and mistaken part to imitate that which the prophet enjoined only upon those of his own time.”
No; we won't. It is not a confessional issue addressed directly by the Westminster Standards.
he beholds
Puritan Board Doctor
I do wonder, sincerely, why we would not have been explicitly told, "You are to no longer use instruments in worship. It was for the Levites alone." Also, I would think at least one church that Paul was writing to would have issue with this, but there hasn't been a word.
You guys may be right. And I am not blaming God for my misunderstanding--at all! But I do wish that we would have had a clear line on this issue, if there is such a clear line. How can so many faithful men and women not be clear on this?
Does the priesthood of all believers make us all into the Levites, or some other kind of priest?
I definitely do not think it is wrong to sing Psalms. Even to sing Psalms exclusively. If this is not really a law for our worship, though, I do think it would be wrong to call it one.
And why do some Psalms have,"...With stringed instruments," in the heading. That looks, to me, like directions.
And were the Levites the only ones that sang? Or were they just the only ones who played instruments while others sang?
OK. I think those are my only questions. Thanks. And please do not think I'm being rhetorical or even argumentative. These are real questions.♥
You guys may be right. And I am not blaming God for my misunderstanding--at all! But I do wish that we would have had a clear line on this issue, if there is such a clear line. How can so many faithful men and women not be clear on this?
Does the priesthood of all believers make us all into the Levites, or some other kind of priest?
I definitely do not think it is wrong to sing Psalms. Even to sing Psalms exclusively. If this is not really a law for our worship, though, I do think it would be wrong to call it one.
And why do some Psalms have,"...With stringed instruments," in the heading. That looks, to me, like directions.
And were the Levites the only ones that sang? Or were they just the only ones who played instruments while others sang?
OK. I think those are my only questions. Thanks. And please do not think I'm being rhetorical or even argumentative. These are real questions.♥
William Price
Puritan Board Freshman
I have a hard time contemplating this issue. Calvin speaks against the use of musical instruments within the Church setting for means of worship? Well, if this is so, then we must understand then how we should worship God under the New Covenant. Should we no longer sing as well? Singing was done in accompaniment with the use of musical instruments.
To me, and I may be wrong in this, the Bible gives us types and shadows of how we should do things, from Old to New Testament. They used instruments in the Old Testament, and this was also done prior to the establishment of the Levitical priesthood, when Miraim and others sung and played the tamborine unto the Lord.
On this issue, I have to disagree with Calvin's interpretation.
To me, and I may be wrong in this, the Bible gives us types and shadows of how we should do things, from Old to New Testament. They used instruments in the Old Testament, and this was also done prior to the establishment of the Levitical priesthood, when Miraim and others sung and played the tamborine unto the Lord.
On this issue, I have to disagree with Calvin's interpretation.
Dearly Bought
Puritan Board Junior
It is my understanding that a cappella singing was the status quo for synagogue worship at the time. This would explain the absence of controversies over this matter in the NT witness.
A non exhaustive and brief overview of musical instruments (choirs and psalmody etc.) can be found in the article below; it addresses scriptures such as Exodus 15:20.
Worship Song Regulated by Scripture: A Review of Benjamin Shaw's monograph Studies in Church Music
From: http://www.thebluebanner.com/pdf/bluebanner2-12.pdf
Worship Song Regulated by Scripture: A Review of Benjamin Shaw's monograph Studies in Church Music
From: http://www.thebluebanner.com/pdf/bluebanner2-12.pdf
TimV
Puritanboard Botanist
Exactly my point. And I couldn't help but notice that the first person to in this thread to show approval for the quote hold beliefs that would keep him from being even a Deacon in a church that subscribes to the opinions of
Those people were equally familiar with Baptists and Organs. Those people knew for a fact that organs were being played in Catholic churches, and if I'm not mistaken in Lutheran churches as well, and they didn't say a word in condemnation about them when they put together the WCF. They judged it a matter of Christian liberty.
Tim,
1. I am not EP.
2. I believe it is historically dishonest to state that leaving something out of a Constituional document implies that it is a matter of liberty. That's like saying that the founding fathers of the Constitution knew about infanticide and left it out of the Constitution with a clear eye to it being a matter of liberty. I take exception to the WCF on this point because I disagree with the WCF's intent on that point.
3. You will refrain from using insulting language to those who have scruples regarding this issue as a matter of conscience on the basis of their interpretation of the Scriptures. Referring to the EP position as "extreme" is unwarranted given it's historical position in Presbyterianism. This issue is a matter of exegetical disagreement. If you disagree then state your disagreements respectfully even as I require it out of those who hold to original intent.
1. I am not EP.
2. I believe it is historically dishonest to state that leaving something out of a Constituional document implies that it is a matter of liberty. That's like saying that the founding fathers of the Constitution knew about infanticide and left it out of the Constitution with a clear eye to it being a matter of liberty. I take exception to the WCF on this point because I disagree with the WCF's intent on that point.
3. You will refrain from using insulting language to those who have scruples regarding this issue as a matter of conscience on the basis of their interpretation of the Scriptures. Referring to the EP position as "extreme" is unwarranted given it's historical position in Presbyterianism. This issue is a matter of exegetical disagreement. If you disagree then state your disagreements respectfully even as I require it out of those who hold to original intent.
You need to unpack the first statement for me; I'm not following. As to the second, you are mistaken. The Westminster Assembly did not address the issue because it was the default position of the church; hence the goal to have the organs torn out of Westminster and St. Paul. If you had been there and asked if it was a matter of Christian Liberty, to a man I'm sure they would have said no.
- Status
