Statement on Worship: Biblical?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My understanding is that the musical instruments were associated with and used in prophesying and praise. At least some Puritans wrote that David's ministry to Saul when he was troubled by the evil spirit was that of prophesying and praising upon the harp, because musical instruments were always connected to the ministry of prophecy.

1 Chronicles 25:1

Moreover David and the captains of the host separated to the service of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and with cymbals

2 Chronicles 5:13:

It came even to pass, as the trumpeters and singers were as one, to make one sound (qowl) to be heard in praising and thanking the LORD; and when they lifted up their voice (qowl) with the trumpets and cymbals and instruments of musick, and praised the LORD, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever: that then the house was filled with a cloud, even the house of the LORD...

And in 2 Chronicles 7:6:

And the priests waited on their offices: the Levites also with instruments of musick of the LORD, which David the king had made to praise the LORD, because his mercy endureth for ever, when David praised by their ministry; and the priests sounded trumpets before them, and all Israel stood.

Psalm 71:22

I will also praise thee with the psaltery, even thy truth, O my God: unto thee will I sing with the harp, O thou Holy One of Israel.

And there are other Scriptures showing how this is the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I find it interesting how the use of instruments were used in worship in the temple for special events which now have passed, and may have only appeared at those events at that time.
 
The OP shows a lack of understanding of the RPW.
It also opens the door for anything that can be imagined by man including clowns with kazoos or three gay men doing ballet calling themselves the Holy Spirit.
If this is a confessional church, it is showing not only a lack of respect but a willingness to go against the clear teaching of the Confession.

**being a confessional church means you adhere to the COF with no exceptions **

We have seen this all before, A church makes an exception to the COF but with good intentions and a strong resolution to go this far and no farther and that lasts for 10 years or so and then the next generation makes another exception.
 
Something else that disturbs me about the original statement is the lack of awareness that New Covenant worship is without any ceremony or shadow, unlike Old Covenant worship. I know it's a short statement, but the ground used for the short argument is that there is precedent in Old Covenant worship.

As believers who are free to worship God in spirit and truth, you'd think that we would want to be most meticulous in not reintroducing ceremonial worship. You'd think that searching the New Testament and the practices of the apostles would be forefront on our minds, so as not to be guilty of worshipping God by shadows.

Instead, as @TylerRay has already pointed out, this statement begins by openly acknowledging there is no New Testament prescription for choirs and special music, but then proceeds to reason from Old Covenant worship practices. How does this person know that these things are not ceremonial by nature?
 
and given that EP types say the instruments are typical of the sacrificial system (I'm not really sure how that follows, but I'll pass on it)

Just a tiny bone to pick, brother. I've never heard someone argue that the instruments had a specific relationship to the sacrifices (though, as I recall, one of the times that they played them was during the sacrifices). Rather, the issue is that the instruments were played only as a function of the Levitical office, and only in the temple service.
 
I find it interesting how the use of instruments were used in worship in the temple for special events which now have passed, and may have only appeared at those events at that time.

Your statement is confusing. The first clause says the instruments were used in worship, but the second clause backtracks and says they might not have been used. Which begs the question, "Why did David even mention them?"
 
Your statement is confusing. The first clause says the instruments were used in worship, but the second clause backtracks and says they might not have been used. Which begs the question, "Why did David even mention them?"

You are assuming that David is saying to use such in the official or dare I say synagogue worship. I am with Tyler above in what he said about the temple service.
 
You are assuming that David is saying to use such in the official or dare I say synagogue worship. I am with Tyler above in what he said about the temple service.

I never said David said to use it in Synagogue worship (though my own thoughts about the origin of the Synagogue is different, but that's another thread). I thought you were denying that they were to be used in Temple worship. No one, even EPers, makes that claim.

Now, I did deny that David said to use it in the Temple specifically, since the Temple wasn't built in David's time. That's why I qualified it to mean Tabernacle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top