Posted on 10/24/2006 8:23:05 AM PDT by Dumb_Ox
"Nothing in the OT is binding upon a Christian."
Really? That isn't what Jesus said. He released Christians from some things, but did not abandon the Law. It sounds to me like you are taking a very narrow stance on this.
In your view, even the 10 Commandments have no force for Christians. I doubt very much if that is the intention of Jesus' teachings.
What you appear to be doing is taking Paul's instructions to the early church and applying them whether they agree with Jesus' own teachings or not. What is not prohibited is allowed, and instrumental music was used, even in David's time. I doubt seriously if Jesus would have objected to Bach's B-minor Mass. Nope.
We are commanded to sing praises to God. And as a matter of fact, we are further commanded to speak to one another. The command is for all those involved in the worship, not just some of them.
As I have already stated, the practices under the old covenant are not binding on Christians.
Hmmm. Don't forget this passage:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." - Matthew 5:17-18
So it's not true to say that the requirements of the Law do not apply to Christians; rather, it's better to say that the requirements of the Law are met on the Christian's behalf by the sacrifice of Christ. Thus we understand that the Law is still in effect, and yet we can have pork chops for dinner.
Yet, this does not appear to remove the "authority" of OT writing. Considering the above quote from Jesus the Christ, it is difficult to imagine that he would agree that "...the Old Testament is to be used 'for our learning' but it does not serve as our authority."
The 10 commandments, as a set of rules, were only given to the children of Israel. And those ordinances were done away with by Christ on the cross.
"As I have already stated, the practices under the old covenant are not binding on Christians."
Nor are they forbidden. It is clear, even from Paul's teachings, for example, that circumcision is not required of Christians. There is no teaching that it is not allowed, however.
Similarly, pork may be eaten by Christians, as Paul taught, but he did not teach that it must be eaten.
You appear to be a member of some denomination that is dominated by Paul's teachings....too dominated, perhaps.
Paul said nothing about NOT using musical instruments in worship. There is no prohibition.
Except that Jesus Christ, by his own declaration, is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets.
If they have no authority, then neither does Christ.
"The 10 commandments, as a set of rules, were only given to the children of Israel. And those ordinances were done away with by Christ on the cross."
You are twisting what I am saying. As Christians, we are under the law of Christ. We are no longer bound by the law of the Old Covenant. Yes, Christ fulfilled the Old Law. However, it is erroneous to claim that we can use worship practices under the Old Law as examples of authority for their use in the church.
I am not a member of any denomination. I am a member of the church that was founded by Christ. I was added to that church, by God, on the day that I obeyed the Gospel of Christ. I do not base my beliefs only on the writings of any inspired writer. I base them on the Word of God.
Though many of their contemporary adherents don't realize it, the sects that believe that instrumental music is forbidden to the church use the writings of the church fathers (Athanasias, John Chrysostom, etc.) as precedent. It was the practice of the early church not to use instruments...hence the term "a capella," or "as the church," for voice-only music...but this precedent should by no means carry the weight of a scriptural prohibition.
I have been part of a church that attempted to re-create "the first-century church." They succeeded very well. If you'll notice, though, Paul and others spent much of their writing time addressing horrible problems in the first-century church. So if you successfully replicate it, you get it warts and all...
"However, it is erroneous to claim that we can use worship practices under the Old Law as examples of authority for their use in the church.
"
It is equally erroneous to take two verses from one of Paul's letters and state that musical instruments should not be used in worship. Nowhere did Paul write any such thing. Indeed, no prohibition on instruments appears anywhere in the New Testament.
Christian doctrine is not that what is not specifically permitted is not allowed. Paul encourages singing in worship. He does not prohibit the addition of instruments.
Your doctrine on this issue is too narrow...by far.
No. What you are saying was twisted before I ever got to it.
Let me ask you a question. If I were to suggest that we add a hamburger and a shake to the Lord's supper, what would you say?
I would ask for french fries to go along with it.
If I could find one, I'd attend it so fast it would make your head spin.
It was be an immense relief and an enormous blessing to find just one place where I wouldn't be pelted with aural garbage week after week after week...
Are you willing to answer the question seriously?
They do exist. If you are truly interested, I can help you locate one.
[snicker] Now, any good student of the Torah would know that the fat portions were reserved to be burned on the altar!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.