Sectarianism: Church of Christ adds anti-instrument law

Olan Hicks on A Law of Silence: Instrumental Music in Worship

Kenneth Sublett, Piney.com, Hohenwald, Tennessee

"When Jesus was on earth He worshipped at the temple where instruments were used and said nothing."

However, Jesus identified the Jews as playing fertility rites of funeral and wedding and even trying to "triumph over" him musically as Psalm 41 prophesied when they "piped" trying to get him into the feminine or effeminate Dionysus choral dance and singing the "Lament" which would have confessed that the Jews had defeated Him.

See the Music and CENTERING deep mediation at Lipscomb 2008

See Al Maxey on the law of Silence

See Al Maxey on instrumental music

When the "musical mourning team" (religious) tried to help Him heal the girl, He cast them out "more or less violently."

He refused to go up to the opening ceremonies of the Feast of Tabernacles when all of the "men of note" or on the performance circuit competed. Jesus knew that while they were engaged in a giant fertility ritual they were saying "we will not listen to Jesus but we will murder Him." His unbelieving brothers wanted Jesus to go up and demonstrate his "magic" which would surely win the day and make Jesus famous.

Jesus inspired Paul to define the Christian "sacrifice" as the fruit of the lips and as the "Spirit saying to the churches" Jesus identified music with the end-time Babylon Harlot worship.

Sure, harps in Revelation? Predictable. Symbolic of the peace and lack of responsibility of the DEAD. For the "living" the angel came to "preach the gospel." The LIVING bring the harps to the DEAD as seen on the tombstones, but the LIVING are never playing the harps. Only the DEAD hold the harps.

Judas Bag at right on flutecase: Dionysus, New Wineskin Symbol: Dealing With Doctrinal Issues: Romans 14-15 and Instrumental Music. 10/20/01 Intro added

Rubel Shelly: Today's Sermon Today 10/14/01 10/20/01: John used "Philosopher's Sifters" to explain Jesus? The Bible is a product of Narrative Theologians with their personal agendas?

Sermon Part Two: Jesus made, drank wine? This is the slander of the Jews "anxious" to mar the holy image of Lord Jesus Christ.

Feedback Notes By Clicking Here.

Olan's comments will be in Red, our's will be in black and other quotations in blue.

BFL05-99 A "Law of Silence"?

"You can read remarks by Olan Hicks about "the law of silence" on this web site. The "law" of silence is an invention of men who suppose that God speaks best by what He chooses to NOT say.

We respectfully submit that this interpretation is made up out of "silence" and is not the view of churches of Christ about instrumental music which seems to be the focus of a revival of interest in how churches of Christ arrive at its view of music. This view did not originate with churches of Christ but represented the prevailing views of those who constituted the Restoration Movement.

And yet, Jesus said that God is silent to those who do not love the truth. He said that He spoke in parables "from the foundation of the world" to hide the truth from misuse (Matthew 13; Isaiah 48). The Israelites were blinded at Mount Sinai as a result of musical worship they had learned in Egypt. In return, the law given "because of transgression" is silent about the people worshiping with congregational singing and instrumental accompaniment.

Music in a ritualistic sense was added to the Temple but the temple was capital of the civil state and was primarily a "muster" place for mature males three times a year.

But the Temple was a concession to David (Acts 7) for the "like the nation's" civil state after Israel's elders repudiated God's rules and demanded a king "like the nations."

But God warned that the kings would lead Israel into destruction and within five years of Solomon's death, the slavery driven by the musical Levites as "overseers" or "excellers" caused civil war and the Egyptians got all of the gold hoarded in the temple.

First, this "law of silence" is well documented in the Bible along with "direct commands and examples." Furthermore, all of the early church Fathers knew that even God has the right to express His will by direct statements or approved examples. And they all knew that God's silence is not a "divine oversight" which must be corrected by our wisdom. All of the known founders of denominations were motivated by the absolute need to let God do the talking and let us do the listening. It is dangerous to read God's mind, it is unnecessary and it always sows discord.

Legalism demands a law which says "thou shalt not worship me with instruments." However, if we are going to enjoy Christianity "without laws"

> we have to be led by looking for what God has soundly condemned with examples.

> We see music as a "marriage partner" to animal sacrifices but then only for dedication or purification animal sacrifices in or around Jerusalem or for national convocations with sacrifices.

> And we must be dissapointed that God has never commanded music nor expressed any appreciation for it.

The non-instrumental position has a host of witnesses in its favor which most people have never researched but which were well recognized and documented by the early writers. Paul insisted that we can "all speak the same things" but only if we speak the Words of Christ or Spirit in the Romans-Ephesian-Colossian parallels.

The Essenes left a record showing the non-temple people understood musical instruments which, according to Numbers 10 were to signal war or panic the enemy. Therefore, in the Intertestament period "instruments" are allegorazied as they seem to be in many psalms. Notice the Parallel With Paul's only comments about "teaching" which is interpreted as "singing."

An unbeliever would replace the Word of God with His/Her own song. They would violate the example of Jesus, the command of Jesus, the example of Paul and the commands of Paul. They would violate the universal practiceof the church for hundreds of years and they would be repudiated by the ancient scholars.

A legalist would make this into an organized PRAISE SERVICE. They would then qualify as "Lord, Lord sayers"

A Pharisee would rewrite it, organize a group and SELL CDs--right there in the most holy place! They would even sell their "gospel" in exchange for a widow's mite.

There is not a hint of silence about the nature of praising God with the "harps and pipes" He has given to everyone not of the sect of the Sadducees, at the Temple, in accordance with animal sacrifices, performed by politically selected priests.

If we "hear" the silence when it doesn't exist and then fill in the "silence" with our own messsages in song and sermon, the sowing of discord is automatic and pre determined.

Second, the law of silence is somehow not permitted for God but is for us.

> I tell Johnny to go buy a new hammer and put it on my credit card number.
> Johnny comes come home with a hammer and a new Edsel and I get huffy.
> But Johnny pleads: "You said buy a hammer. You did not say: 'thou shalt not buy a new Edsel.'"

That is the meaning of silence. If Johnny was a faithful son he would not even think of buying a new ball bat without express authority of his beloved father. Christianity is not about what we can get by with and have it covered by "grace."

If Johnny uses his father's silence to divide the family and "offend many of these little ones" we would have reason to lock little Johnny up.

Third, the non-use of instrumental music is not remotely based on the law of silence. On the other hand, the use of instrumental music is based on silence and no one attempted to defend it with the Bible or history until about 1878 after the pro-instrumentalists confessed that if instruments were part of the worship they were sinful. Click for the evidence. They used the "legalism" that the instrumental music was not a part of the worship.

Of course, a judge really insisted that instruments were part of the worship. However, he had no authority to prevent the instrumentalists from taking over the church property. That still happens where the "law of silence" speaks so loudly that instrumentalists will sow discord, divide the church, take over church property and then, as historically proven, blame the division on those whom they have just defeated.

After that, the psallo argument was adduced to prove that God actually commanded singing with instruments.

What follows are our quick take on Olan Hicks view of the Law of Silence. Again, Olan in RED, me in BLACK and other quotations in BLUE.

---

That is a fact: I used my Bible search looking for "law of silence" and I couldn't find it either!  However, it is pretty easy to see that the Spirit OF Christ outlawed "vocal and instrumental rejoicing" on the Sabbath day when they held a holy convocation or synagogue or church in the wilderness.  When the Israelites PROFANED the Sabbath the word is:

2490.chalal, khaw-lal´; a primitive root (compare 2470); properly, to bore, i.e. (by implication) to wound, to dissolve; figuratively, to profane (a person, place or thing), to break (one’s word), to begin (as if by an “opening wedge”); denom. (from 2485) to play (the flute):—begin (x men began), defile, x break, defile, x eat (as common things), x first, x gather the grape thereof, x take inheritance, pipe, player on instruments, pollute, (cast as) profane (self), prostitute, slay (slain), sorrow, stain, wound

We know that when they rose up to PLAY that this was musical idolatry:

"The triumphal hymn of Moses had unquestionably a religious character about it; but the employment of music in religious services, though idolatrous, is more distinctly marked in the festivities which attended the erection of the golden calf." (Smith's Bible Dictionary, Music, p. 589).

For this, they lost the covenant of Grace and were abandoned to worship the starry host:

But, let's not give up. Silence is found in the strangest places. The "familiar spirit" of the witch of Endor was an empty, hollow, dried-up wineskin. The translators took the "empty bottle which gave a hollow echo for the ventriloquest, connected that to the witch, and translated it familiar spirit."

After I was forced to get ripped off buying hearing aids I heard so much "silence" that I just plug 'em in and turn 'em off.

The familiar spirit as the home and voice of the "divining demon" has the same meaning as the "nebel" (a filthy thing) or the harp as well as the "sounding brass" of 1 Cor. 13. All musical instruments were the "homes" of the spirits or demons used to get a better message from God than the one written in His Word. That was Saul's problem prophesied by the musical prophesiers from the Philistine high place.

This is why God had Isaiah warn:

And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter:

should not a people seek unto their God?

for the living to the dead? Isaiah 8:19

The name for the serpent in the garden of Eden is derived from the "whispering" voice of brass wind instruments used by the Assyrians as "the tallest tree in Eden."

XIV. TO THE MOTHER OF THE GODS (This was Eve or Zoe)

"Now Rhea, as Ceres, in Hymn XIV, is called 'brass-sounding' and 'drum-beating'. This has reference to the mystical results of certain sounds and rhythm, part and parcel of what the Hindus call Mantravidyâ.

And sometimes by means of melodies without words they cured certain affections and diseases, and this they said was the real means of "charming".

And it is most probable that the word "charm" (epode) came into general use from them. It was thus, then, that Pythagoras established a most salutary system of
........... regenerating the morals by means of "music"

[Mantravidyâ].' (Op. cit. Kiessling's text, pp. 245, 246; see also Taylor, Iamblichus on the Mysteries, 2nd ed., pp. 130, 131, n.)

"Music and Mantras, therefore, were used by the Orphics
........... to attract, or call down, the influence of the Mother of the Gods,
........... (G. R. S. Meade, The Orphic Pantheon)

The Mother of Harlots worship will revive in the end times:

Rev. 18:22 And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee;
Rev. 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
Rev. 18:24 And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

This is why Paul wrote Romans 14 and why he prescribed teaching the revealed Word with "one voice" and not with "music."

Click to see how Singing Praises DOES THE WORK on earth like in heaven.

Speaking directly to the "mantic" behaviour of music and speaking in tongues in Corinth, it is noted from the Classical writers that:

"The spirits were thought to speak in murmurings or piping sounds (Isa 8:19), which could be imitated by the medium (witch or ventriloquist)...most spiritual and popular was the interpretation of dreams.

"It also was the case that mediums intentionally would convert themselves into a semi-waking trance. In this way the suitable mediums attained to a certain kind of clarvoyance, found among various peoples.

"This approaches the condition of an ecstatically aroused pseudo-prophet.. In Greece, too, oracles were pronounced by the Phythian prophetess who by vapors and the like was aroused to a practice of the mantic art. (Int Std Bible Ency, p. 2466)

[Burning poppy seed or chewing laurel leaves to make them appear insane. This was what Paul condemned in 1 Cor. 14)

Mutter gave rise to the musical term:

Higgayown (h1902) hig-gaw-yone'; intens. from 1897; a murmuring sound, i. e. a musical notation (prob. similar to the modern affettuoso to indicate solemnity of movement); by impl. a machination: - device, Higgaion, meditation, solemn sound.

Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery; upon the harp with a solemn sound. Psalms 92:3

Thou hast seen all their vengeance and all their imaginations against me. Lam 3:60

Thou hast heard their reproach, O Lord, and all their imaginations against me; Lam 3:61

The lips of those that rose up against me, and their device (h1902) against me all the day. Lam.3:62

Behold their sitting down, and their rising up; I am their musick. Lam 3:63

A satire from:

Nagan (h5059) naw-gan'; a prim. root; prop. to thrum, i. e. beat a tune with the fingers; espec. to play on a stringed instrument; hence (gen.) to make music: - player on instruments, sing to the stringed instruments, melody, ministrel, play (-er, -ing..

Messiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls:

They have overtaken me in a narrow pass (gap) without escape

And there is no rest for me in my trial.

They sound my censure upon a harp

and their murmuring and storming upon a zither." Ps.41:11

Now, it is still a fact that one cannot find a legalism which says: "Thou shalt not use mechanical devices to worship Me."

But wouldn't the "Spirit of Christ" lead us not to need to be legalistic and demand it?

The musical rituals (daily) in Israel performed the same "rising up to play" which lost Israel the Covenant and imposed the Law. Rising up to play was musical idolatry just as they had worshiped in Egypt and would continue to in Canaan. These were "feast for and with dead ancestors" and "there is no other tradition" but that Satan taught mankind how to take the glory from God and His Word with instruments. The Book of Enoch quoted by Jude eloquently explains this clar fact.

Therefore, God issued a form of "the law of silence" when He warned:

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isaiah 8:20

God's silence gives us legalistic authority to say anything we want to say or play any instrument we wish to play. However, "religion" or preaching or singing is done "in the name of Christ" or by the authority of God. The Scriptures clearly do not give us that liberty.

If I speak as an ambassador for George Bush then I have no liberty to change the message which I deliver as his ambassador or "herald."

In pretty clear language, God said that if He has not spoken then we should be silent. Now, He didn't say that He was going to send them to hell. However, He warned us that when the law of silence is not observed it is because there is no light in the speakers.

The Scriptures Leave No Silence Loop-holes About Music

Now, in detail: First, a lot of the New Testament is devoted to teaching what is true and rejecting what is not revealed by Christ.

Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things John 8:28

And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do alway those things that please him. John 8:29

As he spake these words, many believed on him. John 8:30

The "law of silence" was observed by God Incarnate to teach us not to go beyond what is written. Furthermore, once we claim that we are not bound to speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where it is silent then no one is going to believe us. Why should they? Dr. Rubel Shelly, for instance subscribes to the Post-Denominational or Post-Modern view. He makes the essentials five facts about Jesus. All of the rest is inconsistent opinions of confused apostles. This provides a truly large "silence" which the Post-Moderns are not reluctant to fill. However, the Core Gospel was preached in Corinth simply because they still need milk and were still carnal. As far as we know, the church of Corinth never truly turned to Christ and were never able to "eat meat."

To speak from silence means that you have to "speak of yourself." However, Christ said:

For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. John 12:49

And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak. John 12:50

Now, we dare approach Jesus and say: "Silly man, you know that there is no law of silence." No. Jesus said, where the Father is silent you simply have nothing to say in a spiritual sense.

> God has not spoken in the affirmative about instrumental music. Therefore, it is to speak with the law of silence to claim that God wouldn't really mind if we took more authority than the Son.

> However, God has defined music in many negative passages and we are not left with silence. Scripture and the Dead Sea Scrolls show music as the way to "get God" and defeat his commands so that we can speak our own songs and sermons. This is the definition of a Pharisee.

> Paul defined in a positive way the use of Psalms to teach or preach, and he defined the first-choice "instrument" as the human voice. Going further, he restricted the melody (grinding you to bits) to the heart.

> Therefore, to add instruments you have to reject Paul's first choice of the first meaning of instrument in the word psalmos as the "voice." Going further, you have to substitute a mechanical instrument for the "harp of God" which He gave us for that purpose.

> > Therefore, adding instrumental music uses the "law of silence" to substitute for what the Holy Spirit has clearly specified.

We are left with "but He established no law which said: 'thou shalt not offer me spiritual worship with a mechanical device.'" But this is not the way Jesus handled God's Word.

Once we begin to listen to someone tell us what Christ should have said, he or she becomes the center taking the place of Jesus. Then, we get into battles over who is the Top Gun Preacher of the Brotherhood. Rather than looking for loopholes shouldn't our spirit be like that of Paul whose spirit automatically accepted the words of God:

"We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written,

I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak; 2 Cor 4:13

Isaiah 58 defined the true Sabbath which was not the "traditional" Sabbath.

If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour him,
........... not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own
........... pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Isaiah 58:13

There are lots of clear statements of The Law of Silence by clicking here.

The instrumentalists were the first to use the Law of Silence in order to add instruments knowing that they were sowing discord. However, it is not possible to compete with buildings as phallic symbols with steeples (Asherah poles) promoting personal and civic price. Here is how the Law of Silence is used by Instrumentalists. Non-Musical people do not see Scripture as silent!

The Corinthians tended to make favorite men into idols and this led to them going beyond what is written:

"Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit,

so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying,
Do not go beyond what is written then you will not take pride in one man over against another." 1 Corinthians 4:6

The problem was not respect of persons totally but that respect of persons led others to believe whatever they said. For instance, fans of Brother Hicks will use that respect to believe that the church Fathers approved of instrumental music. But that is the danger. However, if we just read the church Fathers we will understand that they were 100%, as far as we have been able to grasp, opposed to the appeal to the flesh for authority in worship. They base their opinion on the nature of instruments in paganism and in the Jewish Monarchy which is clearly defined as a "like the nations" system of a people who "fired God."

There is little "singing" in the fathers as we know it but the general message is that the church used only the Biblical text for teaching and admonishing one another.

The only way around this is to be totally skeptical about sermons and web pages and understand that human opinion always floats to the top. Therefore, if we just remain silent about what God has been silent about we will have no trouble.

However, the Bible is assuredly not silent about instrumental music. The ability to make the statement that the God commanded instruments for 'congregational worship under the law' proves that the "theology" has been gleaned from like-minded people and not from a minimal study of the Word of God. The people's congregation did not "sing congregationally with instrumental accompaniment." If you want to burn a bull calf then it might be acceptable but Jesus died once for all and there is no longer any sacrifices except the "fruit of the lips" or the "calves of the lips."

We don't have to look for absolute "laws" and establish a legalistic anti-silence law. All we have to do is listen to Paul's commands. They were not to sing and therefore they did not call for instruments. The command was to "teach or preach" and instruments are automatically excluded. Instruments speak "an unknown tongue" and Paul excludes that from the assembly.

Paul was very explicit by commanding speaking and went further, as the Old Testament does, to define the instrument of melody. That instrument inherent as the first meaning of psalmos is the human voice.

Psallo at that time excluded instruments perhaps because the universal idea in the Greek world was of the "Judas" characters trying to pervert the "worshipers" with singing, dancing naked and playing the flute or harp. Remember that the Jews "piped" trying to induce the Dionysus song and dance into Jesus.

Therefore, the Holy Spirit went beyond the word "psalmos" to be very explicit in proving that the mechanical instrument was excluded.

All church fathers agree with this along with all modern lexicons and dictionaries. Nevertheless, people still quote an outdated Arndt-Gingrich who spoke of the Attic Greek and not the Koine.

We don't have to go legalistic and demand a "law of silence" when the principle is so clear. It seems that when the whole Bible excludes as necessary and Jesus established the "pattern" of the law of silence that would be good enough.

But then, it is the instrumentalistic who says "the Bible does not say don't use instruments" who absolutely need the Law of Silence to introduce instruments. There is no "law" which says: "sing and make melody with a harp" therefore, the law of silence is essential to the use of instruments.

But, the question is whether silence "permits" us to do something without an expression of the Will of God. We know what Paul said: 1) speak to one another with the Word of Christ to teach and admonish and, 2) leaving the singing and melody in the heart. In the Romans 14-15 story this is to prevent judging or despising by those who may not agree with our human teachings or songs.

So, Paul has told us explicitly what we are to do with one another.

It remains for the instrumentalists to use the "Law of Silence" to add instruments even when it is known beforehand that it will "sow discord" and divide the church. This becomes a truly heavy-handed Law which is so important that it must be obeyed at the risk of violating Paul's use of the Word for "singing" to make sure that the unity is not destroyed.

The Law is so powerful that it not only forces instruments into churches and takes property but is always accompanied with non scriptural text. For instance, modern "praise songs" which are an outgrowth of what is believed to be an "instrumental praise service" under the law are sentimentally silly and often erotic.

It is a fact that instrumental music is the unspecified detail supplied when the entire Bible associates instruments with telling God: "We will not hear you."

This is not a pro-legalistic or anti-legalistic issue. The point is that there is not never was a MUSIC concept which was not connected with Satan or some evil, destructive effect or to telling God "we will not listen to your words."

Blowing 120 trumpets with all of the shouting is not music. It was intended to "break the ears" and create such a noise that the entire city could hear and fall on their face.

Music was not a part of the "people's" worship and they were excluded from the temple precincts during sacrifices.

Music was not a part of the synagogue (school) and was not a part of the "church" where the people did 'synagogue' and not 'ekklesia' when they met. Teaching and admonishing one another cannot take place if the assembly falls into the madness and sense of lostness implied by loud noise being made "in the holy place."

We know of one group which forced instruments in a church by distorting the Word and all of known history. Then they removed the Lord's Table to give moving room and visibility to the Musical Worship Team. However, using a plate, a wooden board or a silver chalice does not change the meaning. We don't eat the "plate" even as we DON'T DRINK THE CUP BUT THE CONTENTS.

We will see below that it is elementary that adding instruments adds something called WORKS to the singing. Having an Acoustics background it is simple that when you add two sounds you get four loud tones and dozens of lesser "voices." The oringinal voice is distorted by instrumental sounds.

When the musical groups tried to forcefully evangelize the non-musical churches in the South following the uncivil war, they confessed to the Judge that "if the instruments are part of worship then they are sinful." The judge considered it pretty silly to argue that the instruments were just an aid. Therefore, when instruments are now used a part of the worship their own ancestors brand them as sinful.

The "Spirit of the prophets" (1 Peter 1:11) was the Spirit of Christ. The Sabbath was a type. Jesus defined the spiritual nature of the day of rest which was not a day of worship. Jesus was not teaching the law of liberty to violate the law even though emergencies were part of the law. After Israel's ELITE fell into musical idolatry at Mount Sinai God turned them over to worship the starry host (Acts 7).  Numbers 10 defines the Qahal or synagogue or Church in the wilderness INCLUSIVELY to rest, read and rehearse the Word of God. It was EXCLUSIVE of vocal or instrumental rejoicing. That never changed as the spiritual people attended synagogue to hold a holy convocation and were quarantined from the later curse of the sacrificial system.

h4774 MIQRA as a DIRECT COMMAND.

The Law of the Sabbath was to serve the people. It restricted them because the common Babylonian system kept the Sabbath as a day of rest for the "gods" but the people were forced to work to feed, clothe and house them. The "fathers" had added many restrictions when the Sabbath always recognized necessities. Jesus had the authority to define the spiritual nature of the Sabbath but we do not have the authority to redefine His Word.

We quoted part of Isaiah 58 above which defines the spiritual Sabbath in opposition to the Sabbath type.

If Jesus tells us that we can fill in the "hole in the donut" of His divine oversights then we might be justified is making Paul's very loud command silent in order that we might add instruments by filling in with a new silence which turns into what the Old Testament identifies as "noise." Jesus couldn't do that without violating the fact that as Spirit He would guide the Apostles into all truth. He guided Paul into defining away "lifeless instruments" and defining a new, spiritual form of "music."

Jesus also said:

But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the childrens bread, and to cast it to dogs. Matthew 15:26

Do we now have the liberty of identifying those not of our "sect" as dogs? I believe not.

When the woman gave the correct answer, Jesus said:

Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour. Matthew 15:28

Jesus also said that He didn't speak to the people except in parables. We do not believe that Jesus used the Law of Silence to change His own will but to test the woman. If this is not true then Jesus meant it when He implied that the Gentiles were dogs. The prophecy was that He would come for all nations. Paul quoted Joel on the day of Pentecost to that effect.

Jesus defined the Pharisees and Scripes by:

> They followed the law of silence and quit following the will of God in the Bible.

> They did this in order to get people to follow their own "doctrines taught by men."

> Their method was to make long ceremonies out of prayer which Jesus said should be private or in the closet.

> They did this in order to take money including taking the houses of widows.

> Non-instrumentalists do not use the law of silence but just do what Scripture commands.

> They do not substitute songs and instruments "made by human hands."

> There is actually a financial dissadvantage NOT to use instruments.

> > > Therefore, not playing instruments as "the doctrine of men" simply does not qualify one as being a Pharisee.

But Jesus told them to take care of the weightier matters but not leave the minor items undone. Not even the Pharisees ever fell for the temple worship or its instrumental music. Jesus used the Pharisees to say that the most spiritual people can be hypocrites but they were mortal enemies of the Temple system which, for its entire history, had been political capital of the nation. The synagogues did not have instruments or "praise service" so they understood the universal meaning of the people's assembly for the general population who were not permitted in the temple.

---

WE have not been able to find The Law of Silence in the Sommer documents. We believe that this may have been in the Supreme Court's ruling.

The architect had done business in peace since 1834 as The Church of Christ although when the brick building some became architects and put The Christian Church on the building. The wrecking crew began in the late 1800s to join others who were "going up town" by attempting to attach the lean-to of denominational organization with local sunday school controlled by an outside agency and by adding instrumental music. Their innovations were truly based on The Law of Silence.

What he said was that unless it is in the Bible we can't know that it is the will of God and therefore have to INFER :

"But on the other hand, whatever is not revealed in the divine testimony no one can possibly believe to be the divine will. In other words, whatever the word of God declares with approbation we can believe has been or now is the will of God;

but whatever the word of God does not thus declare we not only DO NOT but we CANNOT believe has ever been or now is the will of God.

This discrimination between testimony and inference, and thus between faith and opinion has been the peculiar strength, clearness and power of the position occupied by the disciples of the Christ, as every disciple present today will doubtless confess.

In respect to the organ, he assigned the use of INFERENCES and undoubtedly SILENCES to those who added the organ knowing that it would deliberately sow discord.

"I read 1 Cor. 8:12, "But when ye sin so against the brethren and wound their weak conscience ye sin against Christ." I also refer you also to Matt. 25th chapter where the Savior said, "Inasmuch as ye did it unto the least of these my brethren ye did it unto me."

This shows beyond controversy that multitudes are in danger of being finally rejected because in this life they have persistently sinned against Christ in sinning against his brethren.

In conclusion on this point I mention again that in favor of the organ in the worship there may be inferences, opinions, views, nothings, preferences

but there is not faith that it is the will of Christ that it should be used in connection with the worship. But "whatever is not of faith is of sin."

Daniel Sommer and others insisted on "direct commands" to keep the peace and repudiated The Law of Silence. If he was an architect it was in resisting The Law of Silence as authority to add old Roman appendages to the "building" even when they knew that it would drive out those who did not obey the new legalism: The Law of Silence.

Daniel Sommer is not the authority for anyone I have ever known and David Lipscomb, speaking for those who would resume the historic name Church of Christ used throughout church history, repudiated division and most people don't know who Sommers was. Perhaps attitudes were hardened when the innovators used the same psychology they used on Calvin and others: only the ignorant would reject our views:

"But this is not all. If those who are offended at the organ were the weakest, most ignorant and least to be esteemed in the church (which they are not), yet even then it would be a sin to offend them by

making an unauthorized instrument a test of fellowship, as is done whenever the organ is put into the meetinghouse and used in connection with the worship,

since none can then worship there without seeing it and hearing it-

I say, when such a course is pursued, even if those opposing the organ were the least and the most ignorant, yet that course would be sinful in the sight of heaven." An Address

His arguments were based on the fact that the innovators USED THE LAW OF SILENCE to introduce things they could never gain by faith.

Do not infer that I mean it has been abandoned by them in every particular, but rather in relation to their innovations.

While dealing with their religious neighbors they declare the difference between testimony and inference, and the difference between faith and opinion.

But when they come to the worship and work of the church they make matters of inference, and thus matters of opinion,

tests of fellowship by thrusting them in upon peaceable churches, so that none can worship or work with them except by practically adopting their devices.

They have in some instances even gone so far as to exclude men and women who would persist in opposing their matters of opinion."

It seems that the Church of Christ believed that the Christian Church faction preached "direct commands" but when it came to their own worship they decided that "inference" or opinion was good enough to force the introduction of instruments.

I will correct if I have not read the evidence correctly.

You can take a look for yourself

According to the Supreme Court ruling in favor of the Church of Christ who had remained unchanged against the Christian Church who had tried to force a denominational structure using inference or The Law of Silence to add--

such as to the propriety of having instrumental music in the church during church services, the employment by the congregation of ministers of the gospel for a fixed time and for a fixed salary, the organization of missionary societies and Sunday schools as separate organizations outside the regular church organizations, the raising of funds for the support of the gospel by holding church fairs and festivals, and perhaps in other matters of a similar character

The innovators and progressives created the sect and then sued to take over the church property even though they were in the minority.

The Illinois Supreme Court understood it:

When the members of a religious congregation divide and one faction breaks away from the congregation and forms a new organization,

the title to the property of the congregation will remain in that part of the congregation which adheres to the tenets and doctrines originally taught by the congregation to whose use the property was originally dedicated.

Sand Creek congregation and the lawful owners of said property (Church of Christ);
and the plaintiffs (Christian Church) in error having seceded from the Sand Creek congregation

and effected a new organization where the innovations are taught and practiced,
were properly held by the court to have abandoned all interest in the property which belonged to the Sand Creek congregation
........... at the time they left the organization and effected a new organization.

Doesn't this sound like the Christian Church faction disfellowshiped the non-instrumental group and left?

It should come as no surprize that we rebel against those who intend to rule or ruin. Because we weren't there it is impossible to be the judge and overturn the Supreme Court and brand the Church of Christ (known as such since 1834) as the sowers of discord rather than the Christian Church sect. From the beginning the church had "done business" as The Church of Christ.

The view that the innovators and progressives are the sectarians has perhaps a universal historical precedent: The Supreme Court of Illinois thought so, so I won't try to retry the the case and brand those who still resist instruments as somehow the spawn of Daniel Sommer.

Jack Guess, Baptist, The Argument From Silence is Used by Instrumentalists

"Some, in trying to get around the plain New Testament teaching on the type of music to be used in the church, have endeavored to argue from silence.
"According to this method, because the New Testament does not say,

"Thou shalt not use the instrument,"

and since there is no express condemnation of the practice,

it must be acceptable to God.

"This is a false conclusion derived from the erroneous premise that the silence of the word of God is as much a guide for men as its positive commands. In other words, some wrongly believe that a thing is all right for worship unless explicitly forbidden. But it can easily be demonstrated that this type of reasoning will not work.

---

But, then, Sommer didn't invent the view:

Tertullian of Carthage (Quintus Septimius Florens Terullianus, b. 155 - 160 Carthage - d. 220? AD)

"Fortified by this knowledge against heathen views, let us rather turn to the unworthy reasonings of our own people; for the faith of some, either too simple or too scrupulous,

demands direct authority from Scripture for giving up the shows,
and holds out that the matter is a doubtful one, because such abstinence is not clearly and in words imposed upon God's servants.

"Well, we never find it expressed with the same precision,

"Thou shalt not enter circus or theatre, thou shalt not look on combat or show; "
........... as it is plainly laid down, "Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not worship an idol;
........... thou shalt not commit adultery or fraud." Ex. xx. 14.

"But we find that that first word of David bears on this very sort of thing: "Blessed," he says, "is the man who has not gone into the assembly of the impious, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of scorners." Ps. i. 1.

Though he seems to have predicted beforehand of that just man, that he took no part in the meetings and deliberations of the Jews, taking counsel about the slaying of our Lord,

yet divine Scripture has ever far-reaching applications:

after the immediate sense has been exhausted, in all directions it fortifies the practice of the religious life,
so that here also you have an utterance which is not far from a plain interdicting of the shows. Tertullian, De Spectaculis

Gregory of Nyssa on Scripture as Authority

b. c. 335, Caesarea, in Cappadocia, Asia Minor [now Kayseri, Turkey]

d. c. 394, feast day March 9

And in this assertion they do not go beyond the truth; for we do say so.
But the ground of their complaint is that
........... their custom does not admit this,
........... and Scripture does not support it. What then is our reply?

We do not think that it is right to make their prevailing custom the law and rule of sound doctrine.
For if custom is to avail for proof of soundness, we too, surely, may advance our prevailing custom;
........... and if they reject this, we are surely not bound to follow theirs.

Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and
........... the vote of truth will surely be given to those
........... whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words.

John Locke in The Reasonableness of Christianity noted that:

He that any one will pretend to set up in this kind, and have his rules pass for authentic directions,

must shew, that either he builds his doctrine upon principles of reason, self-evident in themselves, and that he deduces all the parts of it from thence, by clear and evident demonstration;

or, must shew his commission from heaven, that he comes with authority from God, to deliver his will and commands to the world.

In a Letter of Toleration Locke wrote:

But since men are so solicitous about the true church, I would only ask them here, by the way, if it be not more agreeable to the Church of Christ
........... to make the conditions of her communion consist in such things, and such things only,
........... ........... as the Holy Spirit has in the Holy Scriptures declared, in express words,
........... ........... to be necessary to salvation; (Thomas Campbell D&A compare with John Locke)

By some twist of logic this engineer's brain cannot follow, this it turned around and made to say that if WE have already "imposed" theatrical performance to our worship, you are too late to take the high ground. Now, if YOU try to impose the NON-use of instruments on US then you are adding that which is not necessary to salvation. Therefore, YOU shot Cock Robin even though the arrow came from our twanging bowstring!

Don't you get it? NOT playing instruments is NOT necessary to salvation. Therefore, from now 'till evermore, NOT playing instruments violates the the freedom of those who are just trying to EXPERIENCE music as a GIFT OF GOD. For instance, Dr. Rubel Shelly asks:

"Have we sometimes overextended our worship practice

so as to violate the freedom of our members to experience and enjoy instrumental music as a gift from God? Yes.

But to IMPOSE SOMETHING you have to ADD something which does not exist and which you know sows discord because you are doing it with a high hand over the objections of others.

If you have never USED instruments then it is illogical to think of IMPOSING something which has the Bible and all of church history to support its view.

Overextend: "to extend beyond reasonable limits or beyond one's capacity to meet obligations or commitments." Webster

I would interpret this to mean that if we don't allow our members in their worship service to enjoy musical instruments if they so desire to mean that we are not complying with God's Will that WE "enjoy" as a way to worship HIM.

Because WE don't "mole into" instrumental churches and try to impose our worship practices perhaps God will not burn us!

Locke continues to defend your rights not to play instruments:

I ask, I say, whether this be not more agreeable to the Church of Christ

than for men to impose their own inventions and interpretations upon others as if they were of Divine authority,

and to establish by ecclesiastical laws, as absolutely necessary to the profession of Christianity, such things as the Holy Scriptures do either not mention, or at least not expressly command?

Whosoever requires those things in order to ecclesiastical communion, which Christ does not require in order to life eternal, he may, perhaps, indeed constitute a society accommodated to his own opinion and his own advantage;

but how that can be called the Church of Christ which is established upon laws that are not His,

and which excludes such persons from its communion as He will one day receive into the Kingdom of Heaven, I understand not.

Imposing instruments excludes from fellowship those who disagree. And those who have used stealth techniques and false teaching to impose instruments without a doubt exclude others from ever teaching against instruments again in your-now-our church house.

In D&A Thomas Campbell noted: 11. That (in some instances)

a partial neglect of the expressly revealed will of God,
and (in others) an assumed authority for making the approbation of human opinions and human inventions a term of communion,
by introducing them into the constitution, faith, or worship of the Church,

are, and have been, the immediate, obvious, and universally-acknowledged causes, of all the corruptions and divisions that ever have taken place in the Church of God.

---

The unstated fact is that the pro missionary society and pro instrumental music group sent out evangelists to forcefully introduce the society even taking churches to court to take their property. The goal was to get everyone signed up to the Missionary Society, not for missions but for a headquarters to define faith and practice, send out selected preachers just like the methodists and in general to establish, according to J. H. Garrison, a society to "include all of Christendom." It was based on aggressive and forced conversion to the society and instruments which created the reaction.

The instrumental group at Sand Creek tried to take the property from those who had never--for 1800 years--ever believed that instruments could be used to worship IN SPIRIT or to worship a Spirit God. Therefore, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed that the INSTRUMENTALISTS could not steal the property from the non-instrumentalists. The instrumentalist became SECTARIAN and legalistic by claiming that music helped there worship. However, in a Tennessee court case the instrumentalists confessed that IF the instruments were part of the worship then it would be sinful. The AID agrument rejected by the Judge was a LEGALISTIC DODGE.

See the findings of the Illinois Supreme Court which shows why Sommers might have been happy to get rid of the stealers of "church houses of widows."

> Inconsistencey does not violate all views held. For instance, I might reject drinking alcohol and even preach against it.

> However, I might be a caffeine addict and upset my physical health and nerves.

> You cannot negate my view against alcohol and thereby give yourself authority to drink just because I am inconsistent.

Another for instance:

> I might reject instrumental music and preach against it without sending the thought police to get you for trying to worship a Spirit God with a machine.

> However, I might violate Paul's many-pronounced commandments that the "singing" is really teaching the revealed Word of God. I might not like a 200 horsepower pipeorgan damaging my body but I might enjoy "four different groups singing four different sets of words at four different times to four different tunes." And I just hang the logo "Christian" on it.

> While MY practice violates the letter and spirit of Paul's direct commandments, my practice does not give you aid and comfort.

It is also a fact that this was primarily a tussle between all churches in the North. David Lipscomb did not agree with the decisions of Sand Creek and spoke against it.

Of course, once the mess was stirred up it was common to blame those who would not surrender to the world-wide denominational movement for causing the problem. They still do that in politics.

The musical churches originally sought no Scriptural authority. They simply wanted to add instruments in order to compete with other churches. Churches of Christ depended on clear statements of Scripture and did not change what it had believed for almost two thousand years.

The Disciples claimed in court, and probably under oath before a judge at Newbern, Tennessee that if "instrumental music was used AS worship then it would be sinful." But they, legalistically, claimed that it was only an AID. The Judge ridiculed the idea but had NO power to keep them from stealing the "church house of widows." Therefore, no one in history according to David Lipscomb and confirmed by our search ever tried to justify music by the Bible prior to 1878. The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia still confirmed that fact and urged the return to congregational singing.

Lipscomb wrote as late as 1878 that:

We do not think anyone has ever claimed authority from Scriptures to use the organ in worship. They only claim it is not condemned. It is used as an assister in worship...Prayer, praise, thanksgiving and making melody in the heart (mind) unto the Lord are acts of worship ordained of God, but no authority do we find for for the organ." Sounding Brass and Clanging Cymbals, J. E. Choate and William Woodson". (p. 78).

That does not make it immune from demanding a "handle" because everyone knows that a one cup has one handle. However, that has nothing to do with the illogic of adding that which appeals to every nerve ending in the body as substitute for the "peace and quiet" Jesus died to give as "gospel."

One suspects that Christ will permit us to remember Him in the Supper and not get worried that our brother wants individual cups.

However, that does not mean that Christ accepts as honoring Him the singing of our shallow, sentimental poetry. Nor does He accept ignoring His Words in teaching. Nor, would Jesus appreciate it if He stood up to read the Scriptures and you insisted that "I" must gild the lilly by accompanying Him with a Rock Band.

Division resulted when instruments were forced into congregations, the non-instrumentalist were forced out because they were not as well funded or aggressive and therefore the division over music was caused by the instrumentalists.

Again, most of this happened in the north which was never a hotbed of non-instrumental churches of Christ. Rather, this was a battle brought about by the "high church" movement inherited from Anglicanism.

However, we understand the politics for blaming the guy just mowing his yard for getting run over by a bus. J. W. McGarvey had to leave his own group and was branded as sowing discord because he could not continue to worship after instruments were added. They were so insensitive that they played the organ at his funeral.

But, we have to repeat the clear Biblical and historical facts: Even if you ignore the universal association of instrumental music with paganism including the "like the nation's" temple God allowed Solomon, Paul's directions are not silent. They clearly define one way of teaching or preaching as the chanting or cantillation of the inspired poetic text written in metrical form. The melody which defines the instrument define "the human voice and heart."

If Paul had defined the "instrument" inherent in psalmos as a harp he would have excluded the human voice. But the "voice" is the only instrument which was ever allowed in the Holy Placees where we come boldly before the throne of Grace. Paul assuredly knew that any levitical musician who tried to enter that sacred precinct would have been killed. And yet musicians according to Dr. Rubel Shelly "help lead us into the presence of God." I hope they are ready for blood.

If the first instrument of choice is specified by a direct command, there is no silence needed for the non-instrument churches of Christ.

You have to use the Law of Silence to go beyond what is written and add the second instrument of choice inherent in psalmos.

The "law of silence" only has value to the instrumentalists who claim: "But Paul didn't say not to use mechanical instruments." Since the law, the temple and its ceremonies were abrogated there is no "biblical evidence" for restoring instrumental music which was an integral part of animal sacrifices. While there is no law which says "don't burn animals on the Lord's Table" some people use the silence to add music as an integral component of spiritual human sacrifice if they keep pretending to be the ushers into the Most Holy Place.

On the contrary, the LAW OF SILENCE is used by instrumentalists who claim that: "God hath not said THOU SHALT NOT USE INSTRUMENTS therefore we will use instruments even if it sows discord."

Perhaps sacred to the untaught but not to anyone who can read Paul as consistent with the entire Old Testament association of music with pagan idolatry and the "like the nation's" worship in Jerusalem which is identified as spiritual "Sodom." (Rev 11:8). Literate Bible readers use the direct command to sing the inspired Test accompanied with the "voice" as the "instrument" and the melody specified as in the heart. The Old Testament usually specifies the "melody as upon a harp" or other instrument.

One doubts that modern attempts to justify instruments do not exist which does not say GOD HATH NOT SAID 'THOU SHALT NOT USE INSTRUMENTS.' That is the Law of Silence. Non-instrumentalists do not do what faithful churches have not done for 2,000 years and do not depend on the law of silence.

However the Law of Silence was pronounced by God throughout the Bible and was defended by most theologians before the latter day prophets of our century. Commands, examples or inferences have always been the way to identify God's will just as it is necessary to understand your will. But does God not have a will?

Again, we note that it will "not fly" to try to place the "blame" on the non-instrumental group for inventing the strange notion that God is inadequate in communicating with His creatures. Again, this was always the universal view of Bible-based religions such as Christianity.

This writer knows of no exception. However, if we take the earlier Attic Greek word "psalmos" it means:

A song or ode which may be accompanied by:

The human voice
The harp
or other instruments.

This defines a song: but to say "sing a song" does not demand a mechanical instrument. Furthermore, Paul defined the ALWAYS FIRST INSTRUMENT OF CHOICE which is the human voice and heart.

The rule of the Hebrew is that when a mechanical instrument is intended, it is named. For instance:
........... Sing and MAKE MELODY upon a harp.

The fathers knew that instrumental music was introduced by Lucifer to the King of Tyre and of Babylon. Any scholar worth his salt knew the Babylonian connection or the Canaanite connection with music. Jubal is Genun a composite figure in many ancient documents which, like the Book of Enoch, ascribe mixed-sex choirs and instruments to Satan. A liberal, modern theologian notes that "instruments were introduced by demons or demi-gods; there is no other tradition." And there is none.

The root meaning of every musical term and every musical instrument named in the Bible has its roots embedded in the work of the devil, polluting, prostituting, twanging bowstrings, plucking out hair, grinding something lik SOP into a fine powerr or to kill you. One can twang you to death with Psallo or psallo your head off with a sword. "Melody" in Hebrew is related to "pruning your vine to take your inheritance" or the music of the religious prostitutes such as in Amos 5, 6, the king/queen of Tyre and the king/queen of Babylon as Lucifer.

We have looked up the idea of Twanging in the Classics to give you an idea of its meaning. Blowing wind instruments, twanging on bowstrings along with musical harps and "making a joyful noise before the Lord" was a war cry. One called down God upon the head of the enemy and hopefully they would panic and turn coward. Or you could "sing to the Gentiles" like David as you praised God for allowing you to put your boot on the neck of the enemy. David shed the blood OF the Gentiles and for that he praised which meant "to make self vile" acting like a fool. However, Christ died FOR the Gentiles and He sings when we teach them.

The church fathers preached against instrumental music "out of church" in all of society because it "unleased" the inhibitions just as wine does. In that condition people did things they would not do "not under the influence." On "going to church" there was no argument based on "we don'ht have instruments" or "the pagans are doing it." They were literate and understood that "music" was not a Jehovah word in connection with worship in the Old or New Testaments.

The scholars also knew that the people didn't worship with singing and instrumental accompaniment in the temple. They knew that this was a "like the nations" temple with like the nations worship which ultimately destroyed the nation. God made a law to keep the common people away from the horrors of animal sacrifice to which instrumental "noise" was attached.

There was no instruments and NO PRAISE SERVICE IN THE SYNAGOGUE. Therefore, there was no culture of the common people 'worshiping God with instruments' or even with singing which was a secular activity.

Synagogue was never pagan worship center. Rather, it was school for the common people and a place for in depth study for scholars. To have had a "praise service" in the synagogue would have been as outrageous as taking up most of the time in Physics class with the "team" singing and exposing their talent teaching about Chemistry. No "Law" just no logic which the common people could grasp. That is why we don't have the early churches clamoring for "praise services." It would have been as unseemly in Campbell's words as "a cowbel in a concert." No law. Put Jack Daniels in the "individual cups" and God will not punish you for the "act." What He looks at is "Why you would play the trumpet when I am trying to tell you about the deep Spiritual mysteries."

All Jews knew that it was universally associated with pagan temples with the prophetess revealing words to fill in God's "silence" and offering further services in the back room.

Instrumental music was not within most Reformation churches. Therefore, Campbell did not disapprove instruments: he simply had never used nor approved them. At this early date most people couldn't grasp that sectarians would use the law of silence to introduce instruments and sow discord. Campbell knew as well as others that there was no Biblical role for "music" in either the Old or New Testament.

The Septuagint consists only of the Old Testament. It was a Greek translation perhaps 250 years before the time of Christ. The Greek was of Alexandria and not of Jerusalem which used Koine. However, the Septuagint is much more abusive to instruments than the KJV which was translated by musical proponents.

When Jesus is quoted he speaks from the Septuagint: when Matthew wrote he spoke from the temple scrolls and understood Koine Greek along with Paul.

One: Perhaps the Septuagint is no longer used because it almost universally couches all of the instrumental music passages in negative or paganistic terms. The Septuagint does not defend the instrumental music component in singing unless an instrument is specified. Click for Clear proof.

The word "psalm" simply means "praise." The word "psalm " is not part of the text of the Psalm but of the heading added with musical notations. This is a Greek word and not a Hebrew word.

Augustine of Hippo (354-430) Book II noted the common understanding

"It was not Jupiter, therefore, that begat the nine Muses, but three artists created three each. And the state had originally given the order for three, not because it had seen them in visions, nor because they had presented themselves in that number to the eyes of any of the citizens,

but because it was obvious to remark that all sound,
........... which is the material of song, is by nature of three kinds.
........... > For it is either produced by the voice,
........... ........... as in the case of those who sing with the mouth without an instrument;
........... > or by blowing, as in the case of trumpets and flutes;

> or by striking, as in the case of harps and drums, and all other instruments that give their sound when struck.

Contrary to the claim, Augustine did not reject instruments because they were used by pagans. Pagans used instruments to INDUCE a charismatic state of frenzy in which they claimed--and charged for--bringing the people into the god's presence often culminated by sexual or perverted ACTS of worship:

In the Greek the word is:

Psalmos (g5568) psal-mos'; from 5567; a set piece of music, i.e. a sacred ode
........... accompanied with the
........... ........... voice,
........... ........... harp or
........... ........... other instrument;

a "psalm");

collect. the book of the Psalms: - psalm. Comp. 5603.

Ode (g5603) o-day'; from 103; a chant or "ode" the gen. term for any words sung; while 5215 denotes espec. a religious metrical composition, and

5568 still more spec. a Hebrew cantillation): - song.

Two: When an instrument is intended it is named. For instance, "sing and make melody with a harp."

Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. Amos 5:23

This was the "song of the prostitute" for the king of Tyre, Lucifer's agent:

Take an harp, go about the city, thou harlot that hast been forgotten; make sweet melody, sing many songs, that thou mayest be remembered. Is.23:16

Three: Paul told the church to "teach" or "speak" which means "preach." The material was the inspired Biblical text where "psalms, hymns and spiritual song" are all included in the Septuagint as the Book of Psalms. The result would be "teaching and admonishing" one another. The spiritual result would be "singing and making melody with an instrument." We noted that the first noted instrument to accompany a Psalmos was the human voice. The Christian sacrifice is "the fruit of the lip" and not the noise of a harp.

In Hebrews, Paul speaks of "the unforgivable sin." He then identifies the sacrificial system as being made obsolete. Those bodies were "burned outside the camp" and the "musical" noise-making Levites never entered the holy place (church) or the Most Holy Place (heaven itself: the throne room). Spiritual worship is in my spirit or mind (nous) which is the new holy place (naos).

The animal-burning music was valid only in Jerusalem and in connection with animal sacrifices.

Therefore, Paul said that our "sacrifice" is in the inner spaces where the Levitical musicians could never go and, consistent with David before the Temple service, the sacrifice must be the "fruit of the lips." And the 'melody' must be in the heart or mind or spirit. Musicians go there at their own peril.

Will musical teams who claim to be "mediators between man and God" and even "escort" you into the Throne Room commit an unforgivable sin just as would the Levitical musician? No! The sin was committed by the PRESUMPTION to be your mediator and THE IMAGE OF WHAT GOD WANTS WORSHIP TO BE (Willow Creek, Saddleback Community Church Seeker Systems modeled after that of Apollo (Abbadon, Apollyon)

Not remotely factual: Men living when people taught by Apostles were still living sang the Psalms because you don't "play" unless an instrument is named. Justin Martyr showed that they sang or really chanted the psalms but they did not use instruments. Therefore, they did not believe that instruments were inherent in Psallo.

MARTYR, Justin: "Simply singing is not agreeable to children (Jews), but singing with lifeless instruments and with dancing and clapping is. On this account the use of this kind of instruments and of others agreeable to children is removed from the songs of the churches, and there is left remaining simply singing." (Justin Martyr, 139 AD)

"Justinus , he observes, saith that the use of instruments was granted to the Jews for their imperfection, and that therefore such instruments have no place in the church. We [Bellarmin and the Catholics] confess indeed that the use of musical instruments agreeth not alike with the perfect and the imperfect, and that therefore they began but of late to be admitted into the church. Belarmin lived from 1542 to 1621." (Girardeau, George, p. 65)

This "because of transgression" happened at Mount Sinai when Israel rose up to play in musical idolatry. Then and there God "turned them over to worship the starry hosts" which always included instruments (Acts 7)

When they "fired" God and demanded a king like the nations it was so that they could worship like the nations. Therefore, God again turned them over and gave them kings to lead them into captivity.

The book of Ecclesiasticus or Ben Sirach notes of Elijah:

48:5. You who raised a corpse from death and from Hades, by the word of the Most High;
48: 6. who brought kings down to destruction, and famous men from their beds;
48: 7. who heard rebuke at Sinai and judgments of vengeance at Horeb;
48: 8. who anointed kings to inflict retribution,
........... and prophets to succeed you.

O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help. Hosea 13:9

I will be thy king: where is any other that may save thee in all thy cities? and thy judges of whom thou saidst, Give me a king and princes? Hosea 13:10

I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took him away in my wrath. Hosea 13:11

Men like Augustine knew that instruments in Psalm 150 were allegorical because only "instruments" with breath could praise God. Furthermore, some of the instruments named could not be used in the temple. The "organ" is identified with the musical prostitute and in Ezekiel 33 with telling God "we will not obey your words but we will come before you like we would a musical prostitute: to be entertained."

Psalm 41 prophesied that Judas would not triumph over Jesus and the fathers knew that "triumph" meant to play instruments and make a joyful noise to the Lord. These were exclusively actions of warfare because the Levitical musicians were under "the commanders of the army."

The Dead See Scrolls interpret Psalm 41 as a musical attack upon Messiah. The musicians with an army to which they were attacked "stood in the gap" to panic Jesus into disqualifying Himself.

A preacher's forum at Freed Hardeman University where the "neutral" speaker was actually a pro-instrumentalists shows how the church Fathers are misused to defend instrumental music. We know of no church father who supported instruments.

The best way to refute Olan Hicks' claim is to let you read some of the history:

 

Aquinas, Thomas - God Praised With Lips - Not Instructed

Aquinas, Thomas - Songs not theatrical and no instruments

Arnobius on Instrumental Music

Augustine Psalm 41 Judas Will Not Triumph Over Jesus

Augustine Psalm 149 Literal Musical Warfare Replaced

Basil the Great (329-379) - De Spiritu Sancto - Spiritual Worship

Calvin, John

John Chrystostom Paul Not "singing" but "teaching and admonishing."

John Chrysostom the MARK of the Law imposed because of musical Idolatry.

Chrystostom, John Homily I, Worship Drama, Music, Dance or Christ?

Clement: Instrumental Music, Dance and Drama Effeminate Worship

Clement: Recognitions, the Post Flood Beginning of musical idolatry

Clement of Alexandria - Exhortation to the Heathen - Singing, Drama and Idolatry

Clement of Alexandria Against Heresies

Cyprian Epistle LX to Euchratius about an Actor

Ephraem Hymns of

Hippolytus - Musical Heresy - Soothsaying

Irenaeus - Musical Worship - Wine Women and Magic

Luther, Martin

Tertullian, The Shows, or De Spectaculis, Modern Religious Drama and Music

 

The late Development of Harmonic Singing - Encyclopedia Britannica

Boethius - Consolation of Philosophy 1 - Music or the Truth

You don't have to speculate that John Calvin rejected music because he was a madman as some instrumentalists claim. Click for some of his views based on the Bible.

However, it is a fact that the Catholics never worshipped with congregational singing and organ accompaniment. The ogan was not installed by priests but often rich people for use in public performance by  professionals. The organ was more of a "pitch pipe" than a musical instrument.

None of the Psalms were metrical and could not be sung with or without instruments if your life depended on it.  Not Calvin, but others removed the organs from the buildings because they made holding "church" impossible.  Psalms were not SUNG musically until Calvin agreed that some of them could be REWRITTEN in a metrical form. 

See the views of Martin Luther.

Since all musical instruments were treated as idols, the Catholics baptized them and gave them names. Why not, then, drag their BODIES out into the streets and beat them to prove that they WERE NOT GODS nor HOMES OF THE GODS. 

One cannot discredit John Calvin's considerable scholarship by attributing his motives to "hate." Nor can you gain any points by making him seem quite insane by beating up on the organs. The "idol burning" did not come from John Calvin.

Because, like all pagans, the Catholics believed that the instrument had some holy virtue, they were given names and baptized. In all of paganism the instruments were the idols or the homes of the "gods" and the "voice" was believed to be the voice of the demon or god.

Therefore, the best way to prove that the instruments were not divine beings was to destroy them and melt down the pipes and make flagons out of them.

If you can pick up and handle a pewter cup and drink out of it then you know that you have power over the organ-demons and bell-demons. However, John Calvin did not personally have a hate-mongering fit whipping up on organs. Calvin could just read Paul and thought that he issued a direct command for congregational singing:

"Like most religious reformers, Calvin relied on song by the people, and discourages musical instruments which he compared to childish toys which ought to be put away in manhood. So deeply did his teaching sink into the Genevans, that three years after his death they melted down the pipes of the organ in his church, to form flagons for the communion. And his principle were adopted widely in Britain." (W. T. Whitley, Congregational Hymn-Singing (London: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1933, p. 58).

Organs are still "dedicated" and some are "sprinkled."

Of course, Calvin knew that officially the Catholic church used instruments only for certain events and not for the liturgy. They were never used in the presence of the Pope. By Calvin's time, the churches belonged to the civil state and were more "venue" for professional performers than for "worship."

David tried to "awaken his lyre" often but God says:

Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it. Habbakuk 2:19

But the Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him. Habbakuk 2:20

There is a "law of silence." You cannot worship "in spirit" or God's dwelling place when someone else is trying to arouse a dead congregation with a pipe organ.

All early Reformers rejected instruments and therefore COULDN'T hesitate to stop their use. Therefore, the blame cannot be shifted to Scottish Presbyterianism. The Catholic church in a theoretical sense and all of church scholarship rejected instruments which even modern, liberal scholarship identifies as having only one source: the demons or demigods. The Bible claims Lucifer in the garden of Eden.

The church of England had also tried to stop the use of instruments. Speaking for almost all but the latter day "scholars" in the Restoration Movement, Hislop noted that that only legalists look for law while Christians look for the Mind of Christ:

1. The worship of the Christian Church has not been left to be determined by the mere judgments and imaginations of men. There are principles laid down, there are precepts given, there are examples recorded,

which show the mind and will of Christ in this matter; and the statements of Paul, in regard to "will-worship" (Col. 2:18-23), decisively prove that those who violate the purity of Christian worship,

are not only those who introduce practices which God has forbidden,
but those who introduce what God has not authorised, or commanded.

There can be no meaning attached to the term, "will-worship," but that such "worship" rests, not on the "will" of God, but on the mere "will" or fancy of man.

Now, in opposition to the divine enunciation in regard to "will-worship," the Church of England has admitted into its articles this principle,

that it belongs to "the Church," of her own authority, to "decree rites and ceremonies" (Article XX).

As a matter of historical fact, this principle was never agreed to by the Convocation that adopted the Thirty-nine Articles;

this sentence being found neither in the first-printed edition of the Articles, nor in the draft of them that passed the Convocation, and which is still in existence, with the autograph signatures of the members;

but is believed to have been surreptitiously inserted by the hand of Queen Elizabeth herself, who had much of the overbearing spirit of her father, Henry VIII., and who, as Head of the Church, which the English Constitution made her,

was determined to have a pompous worship in that church, under her ecclesiastical control. Alexander Hislop, Against Musical Instruments, 1858

Alexander Campbell who did not live to see the full destructive force of instrumentalists wrote:

The argument drawn from the Psalms in favor of instrumental music,

is exceedingly apposite to the Roman Catholic, English Protestant, and Scotch Presbyterian churches, and even to the Methodist communities.

Their churches having all the world in them--that is, all the fleshly progeny of all the communicants, and
........... being founded on the Jewish pattern of things--baptism
........... being given to all born into the world of these politico-ecclesiastic communities--

I wonder not, then, that an organ, a fiddle, or a Jews-harp, should be requisite to stir up their carnal hearts, and work into ecstasy their animal souls,
........... else "hosannahs languish on their tongues, and their devotions die."

And that all persons who have no spiritual discernment, taste, or relish for their spiritual meditations, consolations and sympathies of renewed hears, should call for such aid, is but natural.

So, we see that Alexander Campbell understood that instruments derived from a politico-ecclesiastical kingdom. Therefore, they had no place in spiritual worship/

Baptists, Methodists and Presbyterians as well as all of the New England forms rejected instruments because they were exclusively devoted to animal sacrifices in Jerusalem.

If our little band decided to meet on the grounds of a great Catholic Cathedral which had a 500 horsepower organ, we would not be accused of continuing to worship with the Catholics. Or would we? Would we reject the Catholic "temple," move outside and then sing while hitchhiking on the back of the pipe organ.

There is another, non-legalistic way to determine the will of God:

If we see that musical idolatry in Babylon, Egypt and Canaan was counteracted by the revelation of Moses.

If Israel lost the Covenant at Mount Sinai because of instrumental idolatry.

That God turned Israel over to the worship of the pagans.

That there are numerous examples associating instrumental music with telling God: "We will not listen to your Words." (That needs no proof)

That "noise making" instruments were added to the up to 120, unison-tuned shofars during the animal burning times in Jerusalem and outside of the holy precincts. It is never called "music.'

There is no musical word connecting the worship of God which does not occur with burning animals. "Music" speaks of a secular festival where to the Greeks "music" most often meant "singing and dancing." It is also connected with the end-time harlot worship

That Psalm 41 prophesied that the "triumph over" Jesus will be the musical triumph or alarm reserved for the Army and for signalling.

That Jesus at least twice spoke eloquently by action against the musicians.

That music will be part of the end-time Babylon Harlot worship.

That, by all of the rules of use in the Old Testament and in the Classics, when you intend an instrument you specify the instrument.

Paul specified the "first instrument of choice" in rendering a poem.

Instruments accompanying the voice meant "no teaching here" and was the practice of children playing games (against Jesus) or of the prostitute (male and female).

Now, what scholar would need a LAW COMMANDING OR PROHIBITING?

Jamison-Fauset-Brown 1 Cor 3:16 note that:
........... Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and
........... that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 1 Cor 3:16

God . . . Spirit--God's indwelling, and that of the Holy Spirit, are one;

therefore the Holy Spirit is God.
No literal "temple" is recognized by the New Testament in the Christian Church.
........... The only one is the spiritual temple,
........... the whole body of believing worshippers in which the Holy Spirit dwells
........... (1 Corinthians 6:19, John 4:23,24).

The synagogue, not the temple, was the model of the Christian house of worship.
........... The temple was the house of sacrifice, rather than of prayer.

Prayers in the temple were silent and individual (Luke 1:10, 18:10-13), not joint and public,
........... nor with reading of Scripture, as in the synagogue.

The temple, as the name means (from a Greek root "to dwell"), was the earthly dwelling-place of God, where alone He put His name.

The synagogue (as the name means an assembly) was the place for assembling men.

God now too has His earthly temple, not one of wood and stone, but the congregation of believers, the "living stones" on the "spiritual house."

Believers are all spiritual priests in it. Jesus Christ, our High Priest, has the only literal priesthood (Malachi 1:11, Matthew 18:20, 1 Peter 2:5) [VITRINGA].

Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach Behold, it is laid over with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it. Hab 2:19

But the Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him. Hab 2:20

There was NO PRAISE SERVICE IN THE SYNAGOGUE.

In fact, there was NEVER any music as worship IN THE TEMPLE. The instrumental NOISE MAKERS stood outside the temple beside the altar. They made a loud crashing sound during sacrifices even as the Jewish clergy musically mocked Jesus as He was being tried and sacrificed.

The common people were EXCLUDED from the temple when the instruments sounded as a SIGNAL ONLY.

The instruments were NEVER in the holy place as a type of the church nor of the most holy place as a type of our spirit and heaven itself.

Therefore, there is not a jot or tittle of the use of MUSIC as worship in the Jewish or any other LIKE THE NATION'S temples.

The Synagogue was a SCHOOL OF THE BIBLE even as T. Campbell called the church THE SCHOOL OF CHRIST.

Jesus nor any non-Levi person ever entered into the "temple" or the inner precincts. Rather, the "trumpets" used to collect money and the places of merchandise were outside in the courts:

And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves. Matthew 21:13

Oikos (h3624) oy'-kos; of uncert. affin.; a dwelling (more or less extensive, lit. or fig.); by impl. a family (more or less related lit. or fig.): - home, house (-hold), temple.

Not being of the tribe of Levi Jesus could not participate in the rituals in the temple proper. He and the masses gathered on Solomon's porch or "in the fellowship hall."

Furthermore, they would be removed from the sacrificial ritual with the loud noise because the people's congregation never "sang congregationally with instrumental accompaniment."

The court to which Jesus and the disciples could enter was the:

Hieron (g2411) hee-er-on'; neut of 2413; a sacred place, i.e. the entire precincts (whereas 3485 denotes the central sanctuary itself) of the Temple (at Jerus. or elsewhere): - temple.

Naos (g3485) nah-os'; (to dwell); a fane, shrine, temple: - shrine, temple. Comp. 2411

Hieros (g2413) hee-er-os'; of uncert. affin.; sacred: - holy.

Similarly, the mind where Christ dwells is:

Dianoia (g1271) dee-an'-oy-ah; from 1223 and 3563; deep thought, prop. the faculty (mind or its disposition), by impl. its exercise: - imagination, mind, understanding.

Nous (g3563) nooce; prob. from the base of 1097; the intellect, i.e. mind (divine or human; in thought, feeling, or will); by impl. meaning: - mind, understanding. Comp. 5590.

That Christ may dwell in your hearts (Kardia, Mind, feelings, thoughts) by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, Ep.3:17

Cella: Greek NAOS, in Classical architecture, the body of a temple (as distinct from the portico)

in which the image of the deity is housed.

"In early Greek and Roman architecture it was a simple room, usually rectangular, with the entrance at one end and with the side walls often being extended to form a porch. In larger temples, where the cella is open to the sky, a small temple was sometimes placed within.

In the Byzantine architectural tradition the naos was preserved as the area of a centrally planned church,

including the core and the sanctuary, where the liturgy is performed." Peter A. Michas

Musical performers in this area of the church are "standing in the holy place" and sooner or later claiming that we are "mediators" or in Dr. Rubel Shelly's words, "they can help lead you into the presence of God." Therefore, they fit the definition of one Abomination which brings Desolation.

Where ever animal sacrifices were offered it was not in the presence of God or throne room where believers now go to offer the sacrifice of the lips:

And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomons porch. John 10:23
And as the lame man which was healed held Peter and John, all the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomons, greatly wondering. Acts 3:11

And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomons porch. Acts 5:12

"The other Greek word, naos or naon, refers to the sanctuary of a temple, where the deity resided. (It corresponds to the altar of modern day church buildings.)

Vine notes: "Christ taught in one of the courts, to which all the people had access.. Christ, as being of the tribe of Judah, and thus not being a priests while upon the earth (Heb 7:13, 14; 8:4), did not enter the naos."

Don't you grasp it? Not even Jesus Christ could lead you into the holy place in a literal sense. His temple is not literal and He is already there when He invites us to "come boldly before the throne" to meet Him. Only one at a time and not even in the most carnal sense could musicians enter into the earthly symbols of the church and of heaven. In the Maccabee period when temple became "gymnasium" and pagan worship center. The musical tyransts "stood in the holy place" and unless you would participate in THEIR religion which involved eating pork, they would torture you (Heb 11:35) by pulling your limbs out of joint, stretch you on a "drum frame" and use a baton to make you into a musical instrument and "psallo" you to death. And when the roman banner was spread it would have been lead triumphantly with the musical warriors.

---

The Jewish "people's congregation" was never allowed in the temple when noise was made and animals were slaughtered. If they caught Christians in the area carrying on Christian singing to the temple "music" they would think them insane. Trumpets were used to signal the beginning and ending of sacrifices. Even incidental bystanders had better fall on their face and not get caught "tripping the light fantastic across the podium area which was the "holy place" in cathedrals.

See the symbolism of the temple to prove that THERE NEVER WAS MUSIC in the "church" or even in heaven except by those perfected ones already free of any EARTHLY RESPONSIBILITY while the message to the LIVINGS was to "preach the gospel."

The loud "musical" instruments made a great, crashing, confusing sound during sacrifice. It was truly not musical in our sense.

As Jesus noted, if you want to find Him He will be "outside the camp" and not in the Temple where Jesus could not go not being of the tribe of Levi. Jesus was chosen to disconnect Him from the Temple clergy. In all "like the nation's" temples, only the king, clergy and, with the Jews, the stationary men representing the various tribes.

Next, we note that Isaiah 30 especially in the Septuagint has God warning the Israelites about their daily, musical processions to Jerusalem which had become the burning place of Molech. God warned Israel by warning that the Assyrians would be destroyed to the beat of instrumental music.

Paul Woodhouse also claims that the Christians sorta "hitchhiked" on the backs of the temple musicians. Therefore, the early church worshiped with instruments. Not true.

Jesus soundly condemned the temple as "a den of thieves or a house of merchandise." He promised that the temple would be taken down stone by stone and it was. All of its clergy and instruments "went into Sheol" or the burn pile just like the king of Babylon as a million of their "congregation" was destroyed because of the pagan leadership of its clergy. Jews are still looking for the instruments as necessary for the next temple but they "went into sheol with the king."

The synagogue was not for "worship." The synagogue was school to fulfill the ancient demand to teach the Word of God to the people. It had no instruments and it had no praise service.

The church had the same function as the synagogue. Therefore, Jesus repudiated the temple and its worship and clergy and endorsed the best part of the synagogue. However, He said that alms should be privately delivered and prayer should be in the closet. That leaves the Synagogue as school which performed like our modern elementary schools beginning at age 5.

Expedite for whom? The Bible does not speak of "music" which is considerably expedited "teaching one another with the melody in the heart." Praise can never be an organized "ritual" without being a legalistic attempt to "ascend up to Christ to bring Him down."  Worship is not a LEGALISTIC act you can ENHANCE. It is a fact that a musical instrument is defined as "a machine for doing hard work, mostly in making war or the shock and awe of religious rituals."

Paul commanded that we NOT engage in self pleasure "or creating mental excitement" and then hold what he calls a synagogue to "use one mind and one mouth" speaking "that which is written." This is the only way to glorify God or praise Him, educate, comfort with scriptures and keep the unity (Rom 15).

In fact, singing PRAISE SONGS to the gods to somehow influence them is one of the world's oldest, most superstitious, leagalistic things known to mankind.

The DIRECT COMMAND was to assemble (synagogue) to give heed to the Word as Paul's UNIQUE worship word. The best way to GLORIFY God is to use one MOUTH and one MIND to speak "that which is written."

Expedite how? By the works of human hands. But God cannot accept that as "worship." Musical performance is one of the most works-intensive things one could do and call it worship. One literally must have devoted their lives to be so "talented" as to be able to expedite what God wants.

Someone has called this "The Idolatry of Talent."

Rhythm? Rhythm is the voodoo component without which "music" would not perform its mind-altering work.

Harmony? Melody is not harmony. Harmony in the Greek world was the normal rise and fall of the voice.

Ancient Greek was a pitched language, so melody had to be an outgrowth of the natural inflections of the spoken language.

Greek vowels had long and short values that corresponded to long and short notes in the musical settings. Thus musical rhythms were derived from metric forms, and melodic movement was governed by the natural rise and fall of the text.

The exact nature of the accompaniment style is unknown, but since no evidence of counterpoint or harmony appears in contemporary accounts,

the accompaniment probably played a version of the melodic line, occasionally adding two-note plucked chords. Britannica Members Online

The "fruit of the lips" comes from the "harp of God." There is no way to expedite what God provided and commanded with nerve-frazzling harmony.

We have noted that God wants praise but praise isn't singing secular or even erotic "praise songs" trying to dance or get in bed with God. Praise can never be a ritual. If I admire Stan the Mennonite for his carpentry then I tell Stan and others: "If you want a good carpenter, get Stan."

The people's congregation under the law had no "praise service" with or without instruments.

David did not hold "worship services" with instrumental music:

I will meditate in thy precepts, and have respect unto thy ways. Ps.119:15

Princes also did sit and speak against me: but thy servant did meditate in thy statutes. Ps.119:23

My hands also will I lift up unto thy commandments, which I have loved; and I will meditate in thy statutes. Ps.119:48

Siychah (h7881) see-khaw'; fem. of 7878; reflection; by extens. devotion: - meditation, prayer.

O how love I thy law it is my meditation all the day. Ps.119:97

I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. Ps.119:99

The synagogue had no praise service.

The church had no praise service. God doesn't want, cannot use, "Lord, Lord" sayers.

One can probably do anything they wish to express themselves to God. However, they have no right to impose that on other people who may just gag on what the performer thinks is "expedited" or "supercharged" worship.

The use of song and instrument in the Bible make a clear disconnect: singing is one thing but playing is another and singing and playing at the same time is still a third thing. In the classics one of the outrages was the children or effeminate "singing" and "playing" simultaneously. Among the Hebrews, the harp was to mark emphasis and they did not "sing with instrumental accompaniment." In the movies, David recites a stanza of his private praise and then strums down the strings for emphasis. In fact Selah is now thought to mark that interlude given to contemplate the verse.

Singing to Paul was "speaking" to teach the revealed Word of Christ. You cannot teach or preach while a band is playing and no preacher is going to allow it. Yet, while Christ is trying to speak to us in the "whispered silence" of His Word, we are so arrogant that we will play. Yes, playing makes a radical difference. Acoustics 101 knows that instruments enhance the singing or it would not be used. "Enhance" means to change it.

The bread with a cow chip under it is not something different to the bread without a cow chip under it!

Olan Hicks would argue with the "one cuppers" that the "cup" is the container and the fruit of the vine is the content. Therefore, Christ commanded the "container" for the fruit of the vine and therefore made it "legal" to use a plate to hold the bread. The container does not change the content. However, any musical note added to a vocal note produces something entirely different (acoustics 101a). If that wasn't true then the music would not be added because the "singing" part remains the same.

What we want is the complex harmony of, for example, would add some real Christian Brothers intoxicating wine to the fruit of the vine. It is no longer grape juice: it is diluted but intoxicating wine.

Singing does not readily induce "endorphins" or "Morphine-Within" to give us the high. By adding instruments to the voice we produce "harmony" which has no Biblical reference and this induces morphine into our bloodstream and we feel expedited. But, when the high wears off, we feel worse than when the musical worship team "injected" us with a dirty needle.

If you "expedite" the bread with leaven or blackberry jam you destroy the meaning of the unleavened bread.

The bread with applesauce is still bread. And yet, it is a third thing. It is different. If it is not different we would not put applesauce on the bread. The instrument is not the "plate" for our "bread." Rather, it scientifically or physically changes the very notes coming out of our mouth so that what we speak is mixed up and radically different to the hearer a few pews removed.

Making External Melody Adds Human Works and Creates Something Different:

The plate is neutral but music is the most ancient and powerful mind-control devices known to mankind and it is highly addictive. Plato Republic asks:

Or do you not know that they repeat the same procedure in the case of harmonies?

They transfer it to hearing and measure audible concords and sounds against one another,
expending much useless labor just as the astronomers do."

"Yes, by heaven," he said, "and most absurdly too. They talk of something they call minims and, laying their ears alongside, as if trying to catch a voice from next door,

some affirm that they can hear a note between and that this is the least interval and the unit of measurement,
while others insist that the strings now render identical sounds,
........... both preferring their ears to their minds.

"You," said I, "are speaking of the worthies who

vex and torture the strings and rack them (Note on the pegs; but--not to draw out the comparison with strokes of the plectrum and the musician's complaints of too responsive and too reluctant strings--I drop the figure, and tell you that I do not mean these people, but those others whom we just now said we would interrogate about harmony.

Augustine Psalm XCVIII.

If thou speakest to thyself, unto thyself art thou healed; if His right hand hath healed thee for Him, speak thou unto Him for whom thou hast been healed.
"Sing, rejoice, and make melody."
5. "Make melody unto the Lord upon the harp: on the harp and with the voice of a Psalm" (ver. 5).

Praise Him not with the voice only;
take up works, that ye may not only sing, but work also.
........... He who singeth and worketh,
........... maketh melody with psaltery and upon the harp.

Melody does not mean harmony and is not related to it. The pipe and reed organ came first. This taught composers that they could imitate the pipe organ with many human voices. However, modern melody speaks more of "unison and unity." Indeed, the context of Paul's message to Ephesus, Rome and Corinth is that unity is necessary and is improved by collective singing. Melody means--

"The organization of successive musical sounds in respect of pitch... without the aid of harmony which removes it into another category.

"Melody as 'tunefulness' belongs to the 19th century and depends on symmetries of harmony and rhythm which seldom occurs in music written before the 16th century...

By the beginning of the 20th century a melody was considered to be the surface line in a series of harmonies. Harmonic rationality and symmetrical rhythm thus combined to produce a tuneful melody that helped to generate the sonata form." (Brittanica, Melody, 1965) (A sonata is: "a major work, a symphony or concert music.")

Making external melody is a WORK OF HUMAN HANDS and makes something entirely different from simple singing. Therefore, Paul left no doubt that "Christian music" was speaking the revealed Word of Christ with the melody internal in the sense of mediatating to allow it to teach and correct the spirit.

Sumphonia (g4858) soom-fo-nee'-ah; from 4859; unison of sound ("symphony"), i.e. a concert of instruments (harmonious note): - music.)

Music is the word "sumphonia" and normally meant "singing and dancing" impelled by the WORKMEN "stretching your hide" with sound. It is used only of a secluar feast and of the end-time Babylon Harlot worship which included musical instruments.

But, the Bible later identifies Lucifer as the singing and harp playing prostitute in the garden of Eden. The Music used by the cursed sacrificial system was called exorcism.  Throughout the prophets they radically condemn the whole monarchy and specificially show that the INSTRUMENT is the mark of people having no intention of giving heed to the Word of God.  Jesus cast out the musical ministrels like dung and consigned the pipers, singers and dancers to the other pollutants in the marketplace.

One might add blackberry jam to the unleavend bread without being damned. Perhaps the damning would come from our "expeditible" view of God's stated intention. If you add peanut butter to my diet because you like peanut butter and everyone likes peanut butter and peanut butter is good for you, you are likely to make me seriously upset or MURDER ME.

If you add either salmon or peanut butter to my diet you have added a poison. Therefore, I am not divisive if I leave your kitchen and find another one. And if you follow me and accuse me of dividing your restaurant then you just are not being rational.

Peanut butter is not necessary for good health: salmon is not necessary. Therefore, if you know that it is a poison and deliberately add it to every dish then you have deliberately said to me: "Remain and die or leave and divide the clientele."

It won't sell!

To a Bible student, music is not a disputable matter. Romans 14 warns about division caused by the "Vegetarian" sect and the "Meat Eating" sect in Rome. Both sects were "musical." Therefore, in Romans 15 Paul repeats the "singing" message of Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3. The way to prevent judging or despising one another is to use the revealed Word of the Bible as the only singing or speaking resource. As a result, no one is offended.

In theory based on all of the church Fathers and the Catholic Encyclopedia, the church had rejected instruments for all of church history. And still does as the ideal among Catholic scholars.

The Baptists, Methodists and Presbyterians did not use instruments based upon how they saw the musical issue in the Bible and its connection with animal sacrifices, prostitution or idolatry. It had no "spiritual" background except that claimed by the witches or soothsayers who would get you into contact with a "god" using music. For a price, of course.

The Catholics readily admit under "candles" that Rome borrowed music like many other things from the pagans in order to attract them. It never makes a Biblical defense for instruments but adds them because they claim the "high church" authority to change the law but they do not claim silence as their authority.

Primarily after the civil war among Baptists, Methodists and Presbyterians Instruments were added in the "rich from the war" big northern cities with not a shred of Biblical evidence. They were added to compete with the Anglican based churches who were attracting all of the money by restoring a Jewish system of clergy and worship.

Churches of Christ never deviated one inch to the left or right when some Disciples began to force instruments into churches. Therefore, those who added the instruments created a musical sect, sowed discord and created the division.

While we deny that music is a "disputable" issue, it is the musical churches who have chosen to "go out from us" and there is nothing we can do about that. Now, to insist that we fellowship instrumental churches or be branded Judases or brother killers or racists is just blowing smoke and covering up the real problem: that the Bible excludes any mechanical or carnal method of worshiping in spirit and in truth.

Olan Hicks, P. O. Box 1253,

Searcy, AR 72145-1253

The examples preserved by God are explicit. The Israelites lost the Covenant of Grace when they engaged in musical idolatry at Mount Sinai. The "law given because of transgression" was given because the Israelites could not tolerate a "too close" approach to God and His covenant of grace. Therefore, He gave them the Levites to kill them if they ever again tried to get too close to the "throne of Grace."

God sent the musical prophesiers from the Philistine high place to mark Saul or pervert him to earn him contempt from his soldiers. God then destroyed the wheat crop and promised that the kings would destroy them. God turned Saul into a self-glorifying warrior and not into a spiritual person.

Of Elijah, Sirach notes of Israel:

"who heard rebuke at Sinai and judgments of vengeance at Horeb; Ecclesiasticus 48: 7.
........... who anointed kings to inflict retribution, and prophets to succeed you. Ecclesiasticus 48: 8.

I will be thy king: where is any other that may save thee in all thy cities? and thy judges of whom thou saidst, Give me a king and princes? Hosea 13:10
........... I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took him away in my wrath. Hosea 13:11

Of David's Original Covenant in a spiritual sense:

He placed singers before the altar, to make sweet melody with their voices. Ecclesiasticus 47: 9.

For the full story, Click Here.

David added the Levites under the commanders of the army to add glory to his new "like the nations" temple which God tore down within five years of Solomon's death.

Jesus was subjected to the musical triumph over by the clergy and Judas when they piped and wanted Him to sing and dance the effeminate Dionysus choral dance of the catamites. The Judas Bag was "for carrying the mouthpieces of wind instruments." It is made up of "speaking in tongues" and "of the world." You can see him on many Greek vases.

Jesus put the "musical mourning team" out "more or less violently" before He healed the young girl.

Jesus commanded that the Word be preached to the untaught. They "hymned" a psalm at Passover which means that they recited it.

In 1 Cor. 10 and Romans 10 Paul noted the musical idolatry at Mount Sinai as that which destroyed the nation and that which both the Romans and Corinthians were slipping into.

Paul used Romans 14-15; Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3 to define the act as "speaking" the Word with the singing and melody being internal. This was the only thing which could enable Orphic vegetarians who used music to worship with Dionysic wine drinkers and meat eaters who used instrumental music to meet without judging or despising one another. The moment anyone tried to fill in the blanks of silence, the unity would be destroyed.

The Book of Revelation uses the common Greek method of associating instruments with the "dead" who had no earthly responsibility. The living visiting the tombstones to give a harp to the dead are never shown playing it. However, the task for the living was to "preach the gospel." There is never a command to sing the gospel.

Revelation 18 reconnects with the Babylonian king/queen who would go into sheol with her harp and rot on a bed of maggots, and the king/queen of Tyre who is called the "harp-playing" prostitute. In the end-times, this Babylonian form of external efforts to climb up to God will cease along with the musicians.

One does not need a hearing aid to hear the Word of God from the garden of Eden to the end of the book of Revelation. God is there and He is neither silent nor deaf.

The primary liberty of the gospel is freedom from the "laded burden." This is defined in the Greek as "spiritual anxiety created by religious rituals." The rest Jesus came to give us as "gospel" means, in my words: "Just cool it. Come aside with me as we sit by still waters and just rest." You see, the world's religions were founded on the Babylonian principle that mankind was created by the lazy gods as "labor saving devices" to do their own work. This meant to fead, clothe, house, entertain and supply sexual partners to them." This burden meant that mankind becomes "slaves to the watchtower."

The greatest gift God had to offer is not a "punched ticked to heaven" but freedom from religion in the institutional sense. God only seeks those who will worship in spirit or in the mind where He dwells and devoted to truth--His words.

Religionists have restored the Sabbath principle and believe that they are "ministers by the sovereign grace of God" to provide you a "platform" upon which God lands and the "musical worship team" always comes to believe and some claim that "we are mediators between God and man."

Now then sit down and write these words on a tablet, and in a book, for these things shall be for many long day, and even for ever. Isaiah 30:8 LXX

For the people is dlsobedient, false children who would not hear the law of God: Isaiah 30:9 LXX

who say to the prophets Report not to us; and to them that see vislons, Speak them not to us, but speak and report to us another error, Isaiah 14:10 LXX

and turn us aside from this way, remove from us this path, and remove from us the oracle of lsrael. Isaiah 30:11 LXX

They send forth their little ones like a flock, and their children dance. Job 21:11

They take the timbrel and harp, and rejoice at the sound of the organ.Job 21:12
They spend their days in wealth, and in a moment go down to the grave. Job 21:13

Therefore they say unto God, Depart from us;
for we desire not the knowledge of thy ways. Job 21:14

Also, thou son of man, the children of thy people still are talking against thee by the walls and in the doors of the houses, and speak one to another, every one to his brother, saying,Come, I pray you, and hear what is the word that cometh forth from the Lord. Ezekiel 33:30

And they come unto thee as the people cometh,

and they sit before thee as my people,

and they hear thy words,

but they will not do them:

for with their mouth they shew much love,

but their heart goeth after their covetousness. Ezekiel 33:31

And, lo, thou art unto them as a very lovely song of

one that hath a pleasant voice,

and can play well on an instrument: for they hear

thy words, but they do them not. Ezekiel 33:32

Just say no to a cappella legalism and instrumental legalism. The Lord is in His Holy Temple, let all the earth keep silence before Him. That is the only way to hear Him.

Olan Hicks has adduced most of the anti-non-instrumental arguments. However, the Mind of God can be summarized by knowing that the word MUSIC is not a word related to anything in connection with the worship of God in either the Old or New Testament.

Main Article Review

You are invited to comment but you should be specific.

E-mail Followup

Discussion of Non-Instrumentalists as Pharisees

Musical Worship Index

Home Page

Counter added 12.18.04 1:30p 2902