1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Instrumental Music In Worship???

Discussion in 'Christian Theology Forum' started by Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;, Sep 27, 2007.

  1. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    72
    It is ok elmo this guy is all messed up he has taken scripture out of context and tried to make it say something it does not, do not pay attention to him
     
  2. elmo

    elmo New Member

    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    thankyou for clarifying that because I was raised in church with instruments and singing, and I think it is a good thing because even the kids take joy in instruments and I truly believe kids at my church would rebel against the church after so many years of instruments and that can't happen (or shouldn't happen) because the kids are the future of the Christian world and if the kids turn away from God there's no telling what the future would be like (although it's gonna get worse anyways)
     
  3. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    sorry I haven't replyed in several days, i was at a bible camp retreat all weekend and i have been busy the past couple of days.(elmo;19354)
    I understand now that God never changed but the way he deals with us changes but why give people in the old testament the right to have instruments in church and yet it is not okay any more?
    as you will read in the following, the old testament was very physical, focusing on the outward show of things, but the new testament focuses on the spiritual things of God.IV. Instruments Do Not Fit New Testament Emphasis on the Spirit. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------A. Instrumental Praise Suited the Outward Emphasis of the Old Testament.The Old Testament involved many rituals and ceremonies that emphasized physical, outward show.* Heb. 9:10 describes these as "carnal (fleshly - NKJV) ordinances imposed until the time of reformation." * The law had a physical nation, an earthly kingdom.* People were born into this nation by a physical birth. * The covenant relationship was physically symbolized by fleshly circumcision.* Worship was offered in a physical temple with emphasis on the physical beauty of its furnishings. * Worship was led by a physical priesthood (earthly descendants of Aaron).* It consisted often of offering physical animal sacrifices. All these had spiritual significance, but they greatly emphasized outward ritual and detailed physical requirements. Praising God by instruments and dancing fit such a ritualistic, ceremonial service. Instruments lend themselves to outward ceremony, emphasis on physical sound and beauty, and admiration of the technical skill of the musicians. All this is described in the Old Testament references to instruments. People who use instruments today likewise emphasize the outward beauty of the sound. They invent great rituals involving them, they deliberately invite and honor talented players, they create theatrical productions to attract crowds, etc. The end result is an effort to please the carnal, fleshly desires of the people for physical beauty. This is inherent in the nature of instruments, not just an abuse of them. Where they are used, this will eventually invariably happen, because instruments have no spirit! They are physical objects used simply for the outward effect of physical sounds. There is no other purpose for them. They take the emphasis off inner, spiritual qualities and put it on the outer quality of the physical sound. By their very nature, they always have and always will emphasize that which is outward and physical.In short, instrumental praise was well suited to a period of "carnal ordinances." They do not suit the "time of reformation" now that it has come. B. The New Testament Emphasizes Spiritual Worship.The New Testament is a spiritual covenant with spiritual emphasis, especially in our worship.In the Bible, spiritual is the opposite of physical. It is that which relates to God, eternal life, and salvation from sin. It is based on obedience to God's word. And the gospel, especially regarding worship, repeatedly tells us to maintain spiritual emphasis and avoid bringing in physical emphasis. While the New Testament worship involves some outward activities, the emphasis is on the inner man. See Matthew 6:1-18,19-34; 16:23-27; Colossians 3:1,2; John 6:27; Romans 8:5-8; 2 Corinthians 10:3,4.Specifically, the New Covenant involves:* A spiritual law - John 6:63,27,68; Ephesians 6:17; Romans 2:28,29; 7:6.* A spiritual (holy) nation - 1 Peter 2:9.* A spiritual kingdom - John 18:36; Romans 14:17* A spiritual new birth - John 3:3,5; 1 Peter 1:23.* A spiritual circumcision - Romans 2:28,29* A spiritual temple or house, the church - 1 Peter 2:5; Ephesians 2:21,22; 1 Corinthians 3:16.* A spiritual (holy) priesthood - 1 Peter 2:5,9* Spiritual worship (to a spiritual God) - John 4:23,24; Matthew 15:8,9; Philippians 3:3; Romans 1:9.* This worship involves spiritual sacrifices, i.e., the fruit of the lips - 1 Peter 2:5; Hebrews 13:15; 1 Corinthians 14:15; Ephesians 6:18* Specifically, it includes spiritual songs - 1 Corinthians 14:15; Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16.Notice how singing fits this spiritual emphasis. We sing because God wants spiritual songs, speaking to one another and making melody in our hearts to the Lord (Eph. 5:19). We sing because God wants spiritual songs, teaching and admonishing one another, with grace in our hearts to the Lord (Col. 3:16). We sing because God wants spiritual sacrifices of praise offered by the fruit of the lips (1 Peter 2:5; Heb. 13:15).Sometimes people think instruments are spiritual because of the emotions they produce: "It just makes me feel so spiritual." No, instruments do not make you feel spiritual. They may make you feel emotional, but that is not the same as spiritual. Emotions can be entirely physical, as when you receive a present, attend a ball game, or see a pretty girl. In worship God wants spirituality, not just emotions.Spiritual-minded people, who offer spiritual sacrifices in the spiritual temple of God, will not allow the spiritual worship that God designed to be turned into carnal, fleshly entertainment. Yet that is what inevitably happens whenever mechanical instruments of music are added to the worship.Consider 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 as an inspired illustration.Corinth was firmly rebuked because they turned the Lord's supper into a banquet. This involved two errors: (1) they used unauthorized elements (different kinds of foods from what God specified), and (2) they emphasized satisfying physical appetites instead of spiritual edification and praise. This is exactly what happens when people put musical instruments in worship. Using instruments is just like adding roast lamb to the Lord's supper. (1) Both were authorized in the Old Testament (lambs were eaten in the Passover), but neither is authorized in the N.T. (2) Neither one conveys an understandable message, and neither one is spiritual. When we understand why Paul forbade Corinth to turn the Lord's supper into a common meal, we will understand exactly why the Lord does not want instruments of music added to our worship!SummaryThe three required elements of New Testament worship are truth, understanding, and spirit (John 4:24; 1 Corinthians 14:15). Singing in worship fits all three, but instrumental music fits none of them. (1) Singing is authorized in the truth of the New Testament. Instruments are not. (2) Singing promotes understanding, but playing hinders understanding. (3) Singing promotes spiritual mindedness, but playing hinders spirituality and promotes carnality and fleshly entertainment.
    ...I was raised in church with instruments and singing, and I think it is a good thing because even the kids take joy in instruments and I truly believe kids at my church would rebel against the church after so many years of instruments and that can't happen (or shouldn't happen) because the kids are the future of the Christian world and if the kids turn away from God there's no telling what the future would be like (although it's gonna get worse anyways)
    what I am understanding from this is that children won't rebel as much if they use instrumental music in worship. from personal experience, I have found that far more children that grow up in the church, without instrumental music, say faithful. I was raised a freewill baptist, until I was 15 years old. and all most every teenager including all of my cousins except one have already pretty much turned their back on religion. now this is just my personal experience, other "demonimations" besides freewill baptists might be different. but this is not my point. I'm not trying to say that if you use instrumental music in worship that all of the children will rebel and leave. I want to say that our objective is not to please the children to get them to stay or to please people in general to get them to come to worhsip or anything like that. our object is to worship God In SPIRIT and In TRUTH.(John 4:24) we are required to worship him in spirit and according to the truth, which is his word (John 17:17)With Love In Christ our savior,Dustin Humphreys
     
  4. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Also, I would like to point out that throughout history since Chirst established the church, that instrumental music wasn't used until the 6th century and it was met with great outcry. it wasn't widely accepted until the 18th century and it was still met with outcry. Its interesting that most people who belong to a certain "demonination" doesn't know that origianlly most "denominations" condemned or taught against using instrumental music in worship.For example Charles Spurgeon a great baptist preacher who never once allowed instrumental music in worship where he preached.SPURGEON "Praise the Lord with the harp. Israel was at school, and used childish things to help her to learn; but in these days when Jesus gives us spiritual food, one can make melody without strings and pipes. We do not need them. They would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument like the human voice." (Commentary on Psalms 42:4) "David appears to have had a peculiarly tender remembrance of the singing of the pilgrims, and assuredly it is the most delightful part of worship and that which comes nearest to the adoration of heaven. What a degradation to supplant the intelligent song of the whole congregation by the theatrical prettiness of a quartet, bellows, and pipes! We might as well pray by machinery as praise by it." (Spurgeon preached to 20,000 people every Sunday for 20 years in the Metropolitan Baptist Tabernacle and never were mechanical instruments of music used in his services. When asked why, he quoted 1st Corinthians 14:15. "I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the understanding also; I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also." He then declared: "I would as soon pray to God with machinery as to sing to God with machinery." (Charles H. Spurgeon, Baptist)POSEY "For years the Baptists fought the introduction of instrumental music into the churches...Installation of the organ brought serious difficulties in many churches" (Wm. B. Posey, Baptist, The Baptist Church In The Lower Mississippi Valley). NEWMAN "In 1699 the Baptists received an invitation from Thomas Clayton, rector of Christ Church, to unite with the Church of England. They replied in a dignified manner, declining to do so unless he could prove, "that the Church of Christ under the New Testament may consist or . . . a mixed multitude and their seed, even all the members of a nation, . . . whether they are godly or ungodly," that "lords, archbishops, etc., . . . are of divine institution and appointment," and that their vestments, liturgical services, use of mechanical instruments, infant baptism, sprinkling, "signing with the cross in baptism," etc., are warranted by Scripture." … "It may be interesting to note that this church (First Baptist Church of Newport, organized in 1644 cf. p. 88) was one of the first to introduce instrumental music. The instrument was a bass viol and caused considerable commotion. This occurred early in the nineteenth century.(Albert Henry Newman, A History of the Baptist Churches in the United States, American Baptist Publication Society 1915, p. 207, 255)another is from the presbityrian doctrinePRESBYTERIAN "Question 6. Is there any authority for instrumental music in the worship of God under the present dispensation? Answer. Not the least, only the singing of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs was appointed by the apostles; not a syllable is said in the New Testament in favor of instrumental music nor was it ever introduced into the Church until after the eighth century, after the Catholics had corrupted the simplicity of the gospel by their carnal inventions. It was not allowed in the Synagogues, the parish churches of the Jews, but was confined to the Temple service and was abolished with the rites of that dispensation." (Questions on the Confession of Faith and Form of Government of The Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, published by the Presbyterian Board of Publications, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1842, pg. 55.) COLEMAN "The tendency of this (instrumental music) was to secularize the music of the church, and to encourage singing by a choir. Such musical accompaniments were gradually introduced; but they can hardly be assigned to a period earlier than the fifth and sixth centuries. Organs were unknown in church until the eighth or ninth centuries. Previous to this, they had their place in the theater, rather than in the church. they were never regarded with favor in the Eastern church, and were vehemently opposed in many places in the West." (Lyman Coleman, a Presbyterian, Primitive Church, p. 376-377)Martin Luther was noted for saying,LUTHER "The organ in the worship Is the insignia of Baal… The Roman Catholic borrowed it from the Jews." (Martin Luther, Mcclintock & Strong's Encyclopedia Volume VI, page 762)MethodistJohn Wesley (the father of Methodism)-"I have no opposition to the organ in our chapel provided it is neither seen nor heard." CLARKE "I am an old man, and I here declare that I never knew them to be productive of any good in the worship of God, and have reason to believe that they are productive of much evil. Music as a science I esteem and admire, but instrumental music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music, and I here register my protest against all such corruption of the worship of the author of Christianity. The late and venerable and most eminent divine, the Rev. John Wesley, who was a lover of music, and an elegant poet, when asked his opinion of instruments of music being introduced into the chapels of the Methodists, said in his terse and powerful manner, 'I have no objections to instruments of music in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen.' I say the same." (Adam Clark, Methodist) John Calvin was noted for saying,CALVIN "Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the law. The Papists therefore, have foolishly borrowed, this, as well as many other things, from the Jews. Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us by the apostles is far more pleasing to him. Paul allows us to bless God in the public assembly of the saints, only in a known tongue (I Cor. 14:16) What shall we then say of chanting, which fills the ears with nothing but an empty sound?" (John Calvin, Commentary on Psalms 33)Joseph Bingham from the church of EnglandBINGHAM "Music in churches is as ancient as the apostles, but instrumental music not so." (Joseph Bingham, Church of England, Works, vol. 3, page 137)I not saying that instrumental music in worship is wrong because these men say it is. What I am trying to say is that I have found from study with other people that they just assume that instrumental music has been used in Christian Worship since Christ was here. And the FACT is that it wasn't, it was stongly condemned. Like I said earlier it wasn't even introduced until the 6th century and some scholars think that it might not have even been introduced until the 8th century, and it was met with great outcry.Most early Christians were Jews first, they knew of instrumental music in worship, but why didn't they use it. they are noted in seveal documents singing praise but never is intrumental music mention. Why?With Love in Christ out Savior,Dustin Humphreys
     
  5. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    72
    Well see thats the whole thing men say we deal in what God says here. Men make religions out of all kinds of things. We study Gods word here. We are not trying to rude but we are students of the Word. We have little use for mans words/traditions. We welcome you to study with us but we will not allow any ridiculous teachings of men to go unchallenged. We have shown you scripture where you make your mistake of thinking the Law is null and void without that argument your conclusion is not in Gods Word it is not biblical.If you insist on still hanging on to it then you are more interested in your ideas and being right than Gods Word. If thats so then there is not much more to say.
     
  6. tim_from_pa

    tim_from_pa New Member

    Messages:
    1,656
    Likes Received:
    11
    I f I may just chime in here for a moment, what many people do not realize is that there are many covenants in the bible---- Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Davidic, Mosaic, New, etc. All of them are in full force except the manner of the Mosaic Covenant that had laws to keep for one's relationship with God. The right or wrong aspect of that has not changed, but the manner of approaching God has. The "old covenant" that the NT apostles say is gone has to do with the Mosaic covenant now being fulfilled in Christ. The other covenants were not affected.But what I have seen happening, especially with replacement theologians, is they assume that the "old" covenant meant ALL the covenants of the OT. No, it was only to do with the Law of Moses. The manner of worship, in this case with musical instruments, is not wrong because it was allowed then, and that was not any covenant that was done away with.In this person's case, he went further and applied the "doing away with" to all the Old Testament. That is quite unbiblical, but I would say that if that's the case, then might as well truncate our bibles---- they'd be a lot lighter without the Old Testament.
     
  7. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    (kriss;19433)
    Well see thats the whole thing men say we deal in what God says here. Men make religions out of all kinds of things. We study Gods word here. We are not trying to rude but we are students of the Word. We have little use for mans words/traditions. We welcome you to study with us but we will not allow any ridiculous teachings of men to go unchallenged. We have shown you scripture where you make your mistake of thinking the Law is null and void without that argument your conclusion is not in Gods Word it is not biblical.If you insist on still hanging on to it then you are more interested in your ideas and being right than Gods Word. If thats so then there is not much more to say.
    I know, Like I said in the post, I was trying to post a reply to show that this isn't just some kind of new belief and just the church of Christ is the only group of people who don't use instruments of music in worship.you all have shown me one scripture and I have shown you several regarding the Law and it being taken away.But I will address the verse you all gave that "proved" the point that the law is not taken away. You will find in fact that this verse supports hebrews and the rest of the bible when it says that the law is taken away.
    I had to agree with Kriss. The scripture says it.Matthew 5:17-18 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.So the Old Testament is so valid even today.Lovest ye in Christ Yahshua our Lord and Saviour.
    lets look at this verse and what it is saying,Think not that I come to destroy,... but to fulfill.so he is saying that he is not going to destroy the law but fulfill it its pretty straight forward. Jesus Christ had come to fulfill the covanent that God had made with Israel.For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.you are saying that it says," the law will not pass until heaven and earth pass away". But, you are missing the last part of the verse. till all be fulfilled.it says that nothing will pass away from the law until all is fulfilled. He is basically saying that it is easier for heaven and earth pass,(luke 16:17) than the law being destroyed until all is fulfilled. and That is what Christ did he came and fulfilled the old covanent. once it is fulfilled the old law is done away with, and we received a better covanent.
     
  8. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    also here is a grear article explaining Matt. 5:17-18.Did Christ Abolish the Law of Moses?March 5, 2002by Wayne Jackson Did Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, claim that the law of Moses (including sabbath observance) would last till the end of the world?“Some teach that Christians are not under obligation to keep the Sabbath day in this age. If that is the case, how is Matthew 5:17-18 to be explained? Did not Christ say that the law would not be destroyed; that it would last as long as heaven and earth?”In Matthew’s record of what is commonly called, “The Sermon on the Mount,” these words of Jesus are recorded:“Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets; I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished” (Mt. 5:17-18).It is frequently argued that if Jesus did not “destroy” the law, then it must still be binding. Accordingly, such components as the “sabbath day” requirement must be operative still, along with, perhaps, numerous other elements of the Mosaic regime. This assumption is grounded upon a misunderstanding of the words and intent of this passage.We may confidently affirm that Christ did not here suggest that the binding nature of the law of Moses would remain perpetually obligatory. Such a view would contradict everything we learn from the balance of the New Testament record. Consider the following points.1. Of special significance in this study is the word rendered “destroy.” It translates the Greek term kataluo, literally meaning to “loose down.” The word is found seventeen times in the New Testament. It is used, for example, of the destruction of the Jewish temple by the Romans (Mt. 26:61; 27:40; Acts 6:14), and of the dissolving of the human body at death (2 Cor. 5:1). The term can carry the extended meaning of “to overthrow,” i.e., to “render vain, deprive of success.” In classical Greek, it was used in connection with institutions, laws, etc., to convey the idea of “to deprive of force” or to “invalidate.” 2. It is especially important to note how the word is used in Matthew 5:17. In this context, “destroy” is set in opposition to “fulfill.” Christ came ”...not to destroy, but [alla—adversative particle] to fulfill.” The meaning is this. Jesus did not come to this earth for the purpose of acting as an adversary of the law. His goal was not to frustrate its fulfillment. Rather, he revered it, loved it, obeyed it, and brought it to fruition. He fulfilled the law’s prophetic utterances regarding himself (Lk. 24:44). Christ fulfilled the demands of the Mosaic law, which called for perfect obedience or else imposed a “curse” (see Gal. 3:10,13). In this sense, the law’s divine design will ever have an abiding effect. It will always accomplish the purpose for which it was given. 3. If, however, the law of Moses bears the same relationship to men today, in terms of its binding status, as it did before Christ came, then it was not fulfilled, and Jesus failed at what he came “to do.” On the other hand, if the Lord did accomplish what he came to accomplish, then the law was fulfilled, and it is not a binding legal regime today. 4. If the law of Moses was not fulfilled by Christ, and thus remains as an obligatory legal system for today, then it is not a partially binding regime; rather, it is totally compelling system. Jesus plainly said that not one “jot or tittle” (representative of the smallest markings of the Hebrew script) would pass away until all was fulfilled. Consequently, nothing of the law was to fail until it had completely accomplished its purpose.“But,” some surmise, “does not the text affirm that the law would last until ‘heaven and earth’ pass away?” No, only that it would be “easier” for the universe to pass away than for the law of God not to fulfill its mission (cf. Lk. 16:17).And so, if one contends, on the basis of Matthew 5:17-18, that Moses’ law is still binding as a legally required regime, he must take all of it—including its bloody sacrifices, annual treks to Jerusalem, purification rituals, etc. As Paul later will argue—if a man receives one portion of the law [as binding for justification], he is a debtor to do all of it (Gal. 5:3). This is the logical consequence of the misguided “sabbatarian” view of this important text.5. In addition to the points listed above, Paul clearly argues, in his letter to the Ephesians, that the “law of commandments contained in ordinances” was “abolished” by the death of Jesus upon the cross (2:14-15). The Greek term for “abolished” is katargeo, literally suggesting the idea of reducing something to a state of inactivity. Paul uses this term twice in Romans 7:2,6—showing that just as a wife is “discharged” from the law of her husband when he dies, even so, through the death of the body of Christ, men were “discharged” from the obligations of the Mosaic law. That the law here contemplated is the law of Moses, including the ten commandments, is demonstrated by the reference to the tenth commandment in Romans 7:7 (cf. Ex. 20:17).The harmony between Matthew 5:17-18, and Ephesians 2:15, is this: The purpose of the law of Moses was never to come to naught; its original design would be perpetual. On the other hand, as a legal code, it would be abolished, being cancelled by the Savior’s sacrificial death (cf. Col. 2:14ff.).And so, a consideration of all the facts leads only to the conclusion that Matthew 5:17 does not afford any support to those who maintain that the observance of the sabbath day is a divinely-required obligation for this age.
     
  9. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    72
    We have explained this to you over and over this has nothing to do with instuments it is a not in Gods word posting studies of men changes nothing musical Instuments ARE NOT AGAINST GODS WORD PERIOD
     
  10. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    (kriss;19457)
    We have explained this to you over and over this has nothing to do with instuments it is a not in Gods word posting studies of men changes nothing musical Instuments ARE NOT AGAINST GODS WORD PERIOD
    with all due respect, I have been doing my best to show you through the bible that the old law has been done away with and even answered your questions and used the bible to back it up. and all you all are doing is saying you are wrong, and use no biblical support what so ever. We need to be grounded in the Truth, not what people think.
    musical Instuments ARE NOT AGAINST GODS WORD PERIOD
    I have given many, many reasons why we shouldn't use it. you all have given no defence except that the old law is not done away with. which I have explained that the law has been fulfilled and has been done away with. the only other "argument" you all have is the "your wrong" argument. I would love to dicuss God's word, if we could use the bible as our standard and not our opinions. Of course I am not trying to come off as rude or anything. I say these things with all of the love in my heart, and with all due respect.
     
  11. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    72
    And we have given you scripture to show you are wrong the Law has never been replaced only the ordinancescan you read Jesus's wordsMatthew 5:17-18 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.but you still insist men are right and Jesus wrong
     
  12. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    (kriss;19461)
    And we have given you scripture to show you are wrong the Law has never been replaced only the ordinancescan you read Jesus's wordsMatthew 5:17-18 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.but you still insist men are right and Jesus wrong
    I have already explained this verse but I guess you chose not to read my post or something, but thats okay I'll explain it again.[​IMG]In verse 17 he is telling us that he did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. He came to fulfill the covanent that God made with the Children of Israel.In verse 18 he says that one jot or one tittle will pass from the law UNTIL all be fulfilled. the word until is a condition. it means that the law will not pass until something happens and that thing is the old covanent being fulfilled.But one might wonder: “Does not the passage affirm that the law would continue ‘until heaven and earth pass away’?” It absolutely does not. The text simply announces that the law would remain intact until such a time as it is fulfilled.This fulfillment is the very thing Jesus declared he came to accomplish! If he did not fulfill the law, then the Savior did not do what he came to do, hence, failed in his mission. If he did do what he came to do, the law was fulfilled, hence, does not remain an obligatory system today.Compare Luke’s parallel: “But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tittle of the law to fall” (Luke 16:17). When the Son of God “fulfilled” the law, it had not failed, fallen, or been destroyed; it had been completed. Thus it no longer was a law to which the Jews, or anyone else, were obligated to obey as a legal system. To fail to recognize this truth is to overlook one of the most fundamental propositions of biblical literature.I can read Jesus' words and they are very clear, the law will not pass until all is fulfilled. and the old covanent has been fulfilled therefore the old covanent has passed away.
     
  13. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    72
    In verse 18 he says that one jot or one tittle will pass from the law UNTIL all be fulfilled. the word until is a condition. it means that the law will not pass until something happens and that thing is the old covanent being fulfilled.{quote}This is just plain twisting the word same as your instrument argument do you know what the word ALL mean? All prophecy's all things this is speaking of the end of this age Rev.22:6 He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. Luk 24:44 And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.Luk 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Jhn 7:49 But this people who knoweth not the law are cursedRom 7:12 Wherefore the law [is] holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
     
  14. tim_from_pa

    tim_from_pa New Member

    Messages:
    1,656
    Likes Received:
    11
    ("God's Word Is Truth")
    In verse 18 he says that one jot or one tittle will pass from the law UNTIL all be fulfilled. the word until is a condition. it means that the law will not pass until something happens and that thing is the old covanent being fulfilled.
    Well, what about Ezekiel 27, and the end chapters of Ezekiel concerning the land allotment of the tribes, the priests, temple, etc when Christ returns one day?I don't think you read my earlier post. The part supposedly "done away" with was the Mosaic Law fulfilled in Christ.But other covenants, such as the Davidic Covenant is in full force yet. If God's word is true, there must be an earthly descendant of David yet ruling over the people of Israel here on this earth until Jesus comes to claim the throne, and that's the reason for his second coming.The point in bringing that up is that it is not proper exegesis to merely say ALL of the Old Testament was fulfilled or not in effect any longer, and just as improper to say that something is not permissible just because the New Testament does not mention it as both Jesus and His disciples quoted the OT in their teachings.
     
  15. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    (tim_from_pa;19490)
    Well, what about Ezekiel 27, and the end chapters of Ezekiel concerning the land allotment of the tribes, the priests, temple, etc when Christ returns one day?I don't think you read my earlier post. The part supposedly "done away" with was the Mosaic Law fulfilled in Christ.But other covenants, such as the Davidic Covenant is in full force yet. If God's word is true, there must be an earthly descendant of David yet ruling over the people of Israel here on this earth until Jesus comes to claim the throne, and that's the reason for his second coming.The point in bringing that up is that it is not proper exegesis to merely say ALL of the Old Testament was fulfilled or not in effect any longer, and just as improper to say that something is not permissible just because the New Testament does not mention it as both Jesus and His disciples quoted the OT in their teachings.
    supposedly you say the davidic covanent is still in effect but in Acts 2:25-36 we find where peter quotes david in saying,25. For David saith concerning him, I beheld the Lord always before my face; For he is on right hand, that I should not be moved:26. Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced; Moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope:27. Because thou wilt not leave my soul unto Hades, Neither wilt thou give thy Holy One to see corruption.28. Thou madest known unto me the ways of life; Thou shalt make me full of gladness with thy countenance.29. Brethren, I may say unto you freely of the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us unto this day.30. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins he would set [one] upon his throne;31. he foreseeing [this] spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was he left unto Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption.32. This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses.33. Being therefore by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath poured forth this, which ye see and hear.34. For David ascended not into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,35. Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet.36. Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly, that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified.I don't even need to explain the scripture here because it can speak clearly for itself. the davidic covanent was fulfilled.
     
  16. tim_from_pa

    tim_from_pa New Member

    Messages:
    1,656
    Likes Received:
    11
    (God's Word Is TRUTH!!!;19508)
    supposedly you say the davidic covanent is still in effect but in Acts 2:25-36 we find where peter quotes david in saying,25. For David saith concerning him, I beheld the Lord always before my face; For he is on right hand, that I should not be moved:26. Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced; Moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope:27. Because thou wilt not leave my soul unto Hades, Neither wilt thou give thy Holy One to see corruption.28. Thou madest known unto me the ways of life; Thou shalt make me full of gladness with thy countenance.29. Brethren, I may say unto you freely of the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us unto this day.30. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins he would set [one] upon his throne;31. he foreseeing [this] spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was he left unto Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption.32. This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses.33. Being therefore by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath poured forth this, which ye see and hear.34. For David ascended not into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,35. Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet.36. Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly, that God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified.I don't even need to explain the scripture here because it can speak clearly for itself. the davidic covanent was fulfilled.
    And may I add, Jesus has to come back to take the Davidic Throne (Luke 1:32), and the stipulation of the Davidic throne is that David would have descendants to reign on it for all generations. The Davidic throne is an Earthly throne. Since Jesus is not now on this throne, somebody has to be around to reign from it.The verses you stated does not contradict what I have said. Now, I hope you really believe Jesus is coming back and are not one of these preterists that say he returned already---- we had our go arounds with that on this forum and concluded it as false doctrine.And if Jesus returns, then the rest of the OT prophecy has to be fulfilled e.g. the Ezekiel passage I quoted that you did not really answer.I get this gut feeling you just want to truncate the OT.Back to musical instruments. You can believe what you want, its a free country, but the NT absence of mentioning musical instruments in worship does not mean anything one way or the other. As for me, I know its not wrong or a sin to use them since the OT people of God did.
     
  17. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    (tim_from_pa;19532)
    And may I add, Jesus has to come back to take the Davidic Throne (Luke 1:32), and the stipulation of the Davidic throne is that David would have descendants to reign on it for all generations. The Davidic throne is an Earthly throne. Since Jesus is not now on this throne, somebody has to be around to reign from it.The verses you stated does not contradict what I have said. Now, I hope you really believe Jesus is coming back and are not one of these preterists that say he returned already---- we had our go arounds with that on this forum and concluded it as false doctrine.And if Jesus returns, then the rest of the OT prophecy has to be fulfilled e.g. the Ezekiel passage I quoted that you did not really answer.I get this gut feeling you just want to truncate the OT.Back to musical instruments. You can believe what you want, its a free country, but the NT absence of mentioning musical instruments in worship does not mean anything one way or the other. As for me, I know its not wrong or a sin to use them since the OT people of God did.
    here is a good article I found that talks about the davidic covanent and how it has been fulfilled. it is an article against premillenialiststs.Also in this thread we started talking about instruments of music in worship, then we kinda got sidetracked on the covenants discussion, but the covenant discussion is a big part of the instrumental music discussion. the law that I am mainly trying to prove that has been done away with is the mosaic law, yes there are other covenants I would ask you to start a new thread so we can discuss these other covenants. but in this discussion the only covanent of laws that involved instrumental music in worship is the mosaic law. so i would please ask that you start another thread, and if you could please list all of these covanents and what they are because I am very interested in discussing them.here is that article.As we examine the premillennial view of the kingdom, one of the most important things for us to consider is the throne of David.From the following statement by premillennialist Hal Lindsey, we can see that the premillennial teaching has Christ, after his return, setting up a thousand year kingdom of God on earth. It is claimed that Christ will rule from the throne of David at Jerusalem. "Most ministers and religious leaders today reject even the possibility that Christ will establish an actual physical kingdom of God on earth. Many who believe in a personal return of Christ reject that he will establish a thousand year kingdom of God and rule mortals from the throne of David out of Jerusalem after his return" Hal Lindsey, 'The Late Great Planet Earth', chapter 13. We are going to look generally at David’s throne in prophecy, then concentrate on three particular prophecies that make it impossible for Jesus to reign on David’s throne on earth. The Throne Promise in ProphecyThe Old Testament certainly prophesied that Jesus would rule on David’s throne. There is no question about that.The prophecies can be found in... Psa 132:11 Lke 1:31-32 Psalm 89:3-4 2Sm 7:12-13 Isa 9:6-7 and other places Fulfilled at Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension not at his Second ComingThe question that must be raised is not what these prophecies say (that Christ would sit an David’s throne) but when and where were they to be fulfilled. The answer to this question and the fulfillment of the throne promise is found in Acts 2:25-36. In verse 30, you will notice that Peter ties in prophecy about Christ sitting on David’s throne with prophecies about Christ being raised from the dead.Peter says that because David knew God had sworn to him with an oath that he would seat one of David’s descendants an David’s throne therefore David looked ahead and prophesied of the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:30-31).Do you notice the significance of that? David, with the throne promise in mind, spoke not of the second coming of Christ but of the resurrection of Christ. It is the resurrection of Christ and his ascension to the right hand of God that fulfills the throne promise. I did not say that. The inspired apostle Peter did. That is not my interpretation of the throne prophecies. That is the inspired interpretation.The throne promise was fulfilled when? At the resurrection of Christ. The throne promise was fulfilled where? In heaven. This is confirmed in Daniel’s vision (Dan 7:13-14). The vision pictures Christ coming before the Ancient of Days. This is a clear reference to his ascension, furthermore the event takes place in heaven not on earth. The vision goes on to describe Christ being given the kingdom.Premillennialists say the throne promise will be fulfilled at the second coming of Christ and it will be fulfilled on earth. Acts 2:25-36 says it was fulfilled at the resurrection of Christ and it was fulfilled in heaven. Which do you believe? David’s Throne and the Lord’s ThroneJesus was able to say, "I have sat down with my Father in his throne" (Rev 3:21).The premillennialist makes a distinction between God’s throne and David’s throne. But it can be simply demonstrated that this is a false distinction.In parallel passages describing exactly the same event, we read..."Solomon sat on the throne of David" (1Kg 2:12). "Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord" (1Ch 29:23). We see therefore that David’s throne is the Lord’s throne not a different throne. "God raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realm, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come, and he put all things under his feet in subjection, and gave him headship over all things to the church which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all" (Eph 1:19-23) That is the throne promise fulfilled to the ultimate. So it is strange to think that Jesus is going to be demoted to a throne here on earth.Now we will look at three prophetic statements which Christ would break if he were to reign on David’s throne in earthly Jerusalem. He is a priest on his throne but he cannot be a priest on earth. He is a descendant of Jehoiachin and no descendant of Jehoiachin can prosper on David’s throne in Jerusalem. He is to reign when David is asleep with his fathers, and David won't be asleep in the milennium. 1. A Priest on His ThroneHaving observed that the throne promise was fulfilled in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus (Acts 2:25-36), we are now going to look at a simple fact that could not be true if Jesus is going to sit on David’s throne on earth.Fact: the Messiah was going to be both a king and a Priest on this throne, not a king only.There are two prophecies that make this fact clear. First let us look at those two prophecies then we will see how they preclude a reign of Christ on an earthly throne.The first prophecy is...Psa 110:4 "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedec."Melchisedec was king of Salem and a priest of God (Gen 14:18). When the Psalmist likens the Messiah to Melchizedec he is saying that Messiah will be both king and priest.The second prophecy is...Zec 6:12-13 "He will be a, priest on his throne." At the time this was spoken the king was Zerubbabel and the priest was Joshua. As In all of Israel’s history the offices of king and priest were held by different persons. But the Branch (the Messiah) would fill both offices. He would be a priest on his throne. He would be both priest and king.The Hebrew writer has much to say about this matter of Christ being, after the order of Melchisedec, both a king and priest in Hebrews chapters 5 to 8. His conclusion is that "if Christ were on earth he would not be a priest" (Heb 8:4).The reason for this conclusion Is very simple. Christ was of the wrong tribe to be a priest on earth! He was of the tribe of Judah. To be a priest on earth he would have to be of the tribe of Levi. Jesus was not a Levite, so he could not be a priest an earth.If Christ could not be a priest an earth, yet had to be a priest on his throne It follows that his throne could not be on earth.It’s simple matters like this that the premillennialist overlooks. But now let me show you another simple fact that again makes impossible an earthly throne of Christ . Jehoiachin’s DescendantsThere is a prophecy concerning the throne of David which addresses king Jehoiachin (Coniah), the second last king to sit on David’s throne.The prophecy about Jehoiachin (Coniah) is...Jer 22:28-30 "No man of his descendants will prosper sitting an the throne of David or ruling again in Judah" King Jehoiachin (also called Jeconiah and Coniah) was the last king but one to sit on David’s throne in Jerusalem. He was one of the wicked kings and so the Lord says that none of his descendants will prosper sitting on the throne of David or ruling again in Judah.Jehoiachin was subsequently carried off with his people into captivity by the Babylonians. They put his uncle Zedekiah on the throne, prior to their destroying Jerusalem. When the remnant of Judah returned to Jerusalem after the 70 year exile, Jehoiachin’s grandson Zerubbabel led Judah. However Zerubbabel did not restore David’s throne or sit on it. He was not in any sense a king. He is called "governor of Judah" (Haggai 2:2). Now Jesus was a descendant of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah) through Shealtiel and Zerubbabel . You can see that fact in his genealogy in Matthew 1:12 or Luke 3:27.Do you see the significance? Jesus is a descendant of Jehoiachin (also called Jeconiah or Coniah). No descendant of that man could prosper on the throne of David in Jerusalem. So if Jesus reigns on David’s throne in Jerusalem he cannot prosper. It is so written in Jeremiah, and the scripture cannot be broken.The only way that Jesus can sit on David’s throne and prosper is to reign on that throne in heaven, and that’s exactly what he is doing right now. When David SleepsOne final fact, and this one will be very brief...A prophecy about David is...2Sm 7:12-16 "When... you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your descendant after you... I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever".This shows that Christ would reign while David was asleep with his fathers. In the Millennium (say the premillennialists) David is not going to be dead, but alive and well as one of the resurrected Old Testament saints.If Christ is to reign while David is dead, and David will not be dead in the Millennial kingdom, then it stands to reason that Christ will not reign in the Millennial kingdom. His reign is in heaven.
     
  18. Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33;

    Godamp;#39;s Word Is TRUTHamp;#33;amp;#33;amp;#33; New Member

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    now about the law of moses... I would like to pose a question, are you one of the Children of Israel or the house of jacob? if not then according to the old testament you are not involved in this covanent.Ex. 19:1 “In the third month, when the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they [into] the wilderness of Sinai. 2 For they were departed from Rephidim, and were come [to] the desert of Sinai, and had pitched in the wilderness; and there Israel camped before the mount. 3 And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel; 4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and [how] I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself. 5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth [is] mine: 6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These [are] the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. 7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. 8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.” There are two very important observations that a careful student of God’s Word will notice in these verses.1. The Ten Commandment was a covenant that God made ONLY with the children of Israel.Verse 1 “children of Israel”, verse 2 “Israel”, and in verse 3 “the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;” It is clear that God is making this covenant with only one group of people, Israel! No gentile nations or people are even mentioned or hinted at in this passage. God is singling out one nation out of the entire world and making a covenant with them exclusively. Deuteronomy 5 even claims that the covenant of the Ten Commandments was not even made with the forefathers of Israel but to them alone. Therefore many men of faith such as Abraham, Noah and Jacob and his children which are the fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel were not included in the covenant of the Ten Commandments. Did these men know what sin was without the aid of the Ten Commandments? Yes! Where some of these men able to live lives pleasing to God without the aid of the Ten Commandments? Yes! How? By walking in faith (Heb. 11).
     
  19. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    72
    Well maybe that's where you lost track we are of the 10 lost tribes of Israel that crossed over the caucasus mountains into Scotland, Britain and eventually the U. S. the majority of the U.S. and Britain are the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh
     
  20. Nova

    Nova New Member

    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dustin, regarding the original question about whether musical instruments are okay. Yes, they are fine. I agree, we are freed from the strictures of the law. As Jesus said "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."Does praising & worshiping God with instruments meet this command? Yes. Praising God in any form is good. Maybe for you, instruments aren't the way you want to express praise. But don't make the mistake of adding strictures that aren't in the Bible. Nothing in the Bible supports the idea that worship with music is wrong, evil or ungodly. Just isn't there. Each person is free to praise God as they are led in their hearts.
     
Loading...