Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

May 28th, 2012, 9:24 am #31

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]The argument from those who are opposed to New Testament specifications is that because the Scripture does not say "not to" use instrumental music in the assembly, it means that its use is permissible.

I'm just trying to follow the logic of the change agents, which is fallacious:[/color]
<ol>[*]Scripture does not say specifically "not to use" the trumpet or the piano while singing in worship.
</li>[*]To the change agent, "not to" authorizes and gives permission; therefore, blowing the trumpet while singing in worship is not prohibited; rather, it is permitted
</li>[*]Scripture does not say specifically: "Thou shalt not worship Mary, 'Mother of God.'"
</li>[*]Following the logic of the change agent means that worship of the "Virgin Mary" or offering prayers to "God's Mother" is not prohibited; rather, it is authorized or permitted.
</li>[*]But yet the change agents are INCONSISTENT and have the "pick-and-choose-theology" mentality:
</li>[*]------ The change agent opts for musical idolatry [instrumental music];
</li>[*]------ The change agent does not opt for non-musical idolatry [Virgin Mary].</li>[/list][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Matt. 4:10 is a great passage; however, it still does not say "not to" worship or pray to "God's Mother."

Besides, the Lord was speaking to the Big Devil. You would not consider yourself as a little devil, would you?[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

B
B

May 28th, 2012, 11:25 am #32

<em>B (no login)
Posted May 27, 2012 7:22 PM

When God speaks about a matter, the debate is indeed OVER. Since we are forbidden to ADD to or take from any of God's existing commands, then WE ARE NOT COMMANDED, WE ARE NOT FREE to add instruments to the vocal music that God has explicitly commanded.

You should learn to follow the Word of God AS WRITTEN in the New Testament instead of corrupting God's commands with your personal preferences and traditions. To sing without adding instruments is to follow God's command AS WRITTEN. To ADD instruments is to follow man's tradition.

Brian evidently denies that God forbids us to add to or take from His explicit commandments.</em>

Silence neither permits nor forbids. When God prohibits or permits, He speaks to the matter. Scripture is silent on the use of instrumental music to accompany singing. If it violates your conscience to sing with instrumental accompaniment, don't do it. However, that does not give you leave to bind your conviction on your brethren to the point of calling down judgment on them. That's not your place.
People call judgment upon themselves when they violate God's commands by adding more to them than what He explicitly specifies within His commands.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

May 28th, 2012, 2:04 pm #33

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]The argument from those who are opposed to New Testament specifications is that because the Scripture does not say "not to" use instrumental music in the assembly, it means that its use is permissible.

I'm just trying to follow the logic of the change agents, which is fallacious:[/color]
<ol>[*]Scripture does not say specifically "not to use" the trumpet or the piano while singing in worship.
</li>[*]To the change agent, "not to" authorizes and gives permission; therefore, blowing the trumpet while singing in worship is not prohibited; rather, it is permitted
</li>[*]Scripture does not say specifically: "Thou shalt not worship Mary, 'Mother of God.'"
</li>[*]Following the logic of the change agent means that worship of the "Virgin Mary" or offering prayers to "God's Mother" is not prohibited; rather, it is authorized or permitted.
</li>[*]But yet the change agents are INCONSISTENT and have the "pick-and-choose-theology" mentality:
</li>[*]------ The change agent opts for musical idolatry [instrumental music];
</li>[*]------ The change agent does not opt for non-musical idolatry [Virgin Mary].</li>[/list][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Matt. 4:10 is a great passage; however, it still does not say "not to" worship or pray to "God's Mother."

Besides, the Lord was speaking to the Big Devil. You would not consider yourself as a little devil, would you?[/color]
Mt 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Mt 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain,
and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

Mt 4:9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee,
if thou wilt fall down and worship me.


See, Al-Brian does not even know that visible worship means to FALL DOWN in submission: now that's what the peoplewho HELD their harps (or Apprehended the Word) did: they did NOT, NEVER,. EVER play these "harps of God."

<font face="arial" size="4">Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written,
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Mt 4:11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.


He cannot READ that worship is IN THE SPIRIT instead of IN THE FLESH Philippians 3: that would be the way to MARK and EXCLUDE the concision or dogs or Cynics who identified themselves with an OLD STYLE PRAISE SINGING.

That is why the BEAST in Revelation is defined in a spiritual sense as "A New Style of Music or Drama." Since these people have MARKED THEMSELVES and attack those who do not take the MARK with such violence.

Only those who BOW DOWN to the Word of God with "nothing to the cross they bring" engage in SPIRITUAL (place) worship.
</font>
Quote
Like
Share

B
B

May 28th, 2012, 3:17 pm #34

God does not speak to the wise or Sophists: Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites named by Christ in Ezekiel 33 as self-speakers, singers and instrument players. God IS silent because Jesus said that God HIDES from them. God sends them strong delusions and makes them foolish

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.57.The.Law.odddf Silence.html

http://www.piney.com/CENI.Commands.Exam ... ences.html





The Spirit OF [preposition] Christ defined the future Ekklesia or Church of Christ both inclusively and exclusively in the prophets. In Isaiah 57

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.57.The.Law.of.Silence.html

In Isaiah 50 Christ defined the future MOCKING and SMITING of Messiah in a musical sense by the Levites

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.50.Smitten.Plucked.html

In Isaiah 55 Christ outlawed spending ou money for the Free Water of the Word. Beginning in the wilderness the only ROLE is to read the word for its' comfort and doctrine. Equating the Word and Spirit is universal.

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.55.Word.Spirit.html

In Isaiah 58 Christ outlawed speaking our own words or seeking our own pleasure.

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.58.html

That doesn't prevent Rick Atchley from using buffoonery to mock the Law of Silence.
2. Since honoring the commands of Christ for the future reign of Christ defined inclusively and exclusively to MARK those who mock His word.
3. The Spirit OF Christ in Jeremiah 23 says that is blaspheming the Holy Spirit of Christ

http://www.piney.com/Rick.Atchley.Law.of.Silence.html







The New Wineskins Magazine builds on the foundation of Al Maxey, Edward Fudge and others. This was part of the Jubilee movement--from Nashville a city set on seven hills--when Rubel Shelly, Max Lucado, Rick Atchley and others thought the time was right to RESTRUCTURE all Churches of Christ into defacto Christian Churches or Baptist Churches.

http://www.piney.com/New.Winskins.Magazine.html

H. Leo Boles proving that the Christian Church invented the Law of Silence.

http://www.piney.com/Unity.Boles.html

Boles:
"Areas of silence," "liberty of opinion," and "the realm of expediency" are trite phrases used by leaders in the "Christian Church" and have been coined and put on a par with the teachings of the New Testament. It is just another way of saying that the opinions of men may guide the people of God, and that some of the people of God should submit to the opinions of men. There was unity with God's people so long as they respected the slogan, "Where the scriptures speak, we speak; and where the scriptures are silent, we are silent"; but when brethren began to claim the authority to speak where the New Testament is silent, and impose their opinions upon other brethren, division and separation were the inevitable results.

W.R. Walker, in Christian Standard, May 27, 1939, said: "There are two areas in our religious living in which the authority of Christ must be recognized. The first embraces all his teaching and that of his inspired followers, the `vocal area' ; but there is another area, the `area of silence."' He further said:

"I am persuaded that Christ has authority in the `areas of silence.'
Christ, by his silence, in every situation concerning which
he has left no direct teaching,
has bestowed on me this authority to act for myself."


Boles: Here are the two standards or rules recognized
.....by many in the "Christian Church,"
..........namely, that of "walking by faith,"
..........and that of "walking by opinion."

W.R. Walker calls the opinions of man in the "areas of silence" "the authority of Christ." This is tantamount to saying that man's opinions in the "areas of silence" are of equal force with the word of God.

I join issue with him on this point. There can be no unity in the "area of silence," as there can be no unity on opinions when each man claims the authority to do what is right in his own eyes. This would violate every scripture that God has given instructing his people to be "of the same mind, the same judgment of one accord."

Proponents of instrumental music "justify" it by stating that when God forbids something, He ALWAYS explicitly forbids it by name. They mistakenly reason that if God did not want something in Christian worship, like instrumental music, He would have explicitly forbidden it in the New Testament.

Apparently the proponents of instrumental music don't realize that God forbids in more than one way. At times, God indeed forbids by being explicit, as in "Thou shalt not kill," but He is NOT ALWAYS explicit. At other times, He generalizes. A prime example of general forbidding is God's command that we neither add to nor take from any of His commandments. God specifies singing (vocal music), and that's as far as He goes. That's as far as any of us may go if we want to follow His directive properly. If we go over, above, and beyond what God has specified within that command or any other command, we sin. God doesn't have to say, "You sin if you add to or take from my commandments." To violate anything that God has explicitly or generally commanded or forbidden is to sin. Therefore, it should be clear to discerning Christians that if we ADD instrumental music or any other kind of music to vocal music, we sin.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that everything God forbids MUST be mentioned explicitly by name. We have clearly shown that God does NOT always work that way.



Quote
Share

Joined: February 16th, 2012, 8:07 pm

May 28th, 2012, 6:39 pm #35

<em>B (no login)
Posted May 28, 2012 11:17 AM

Proponents of instrumental music "justify" it by stating that when God forbids something, He ALWAYS explicitly forbids it by name. They mistakenly reason that if God did not want something in Christian worship, like instrumental music, He would have explicitly forbidden it in the New Testament.

Apparently the proponents of instrumental music don't realize that God forbids in more than one way. At times, God indeed forbids by being explicit, as in "Thou shalt not kill," but He is NOT ALWAYS explicit. At other times, He generalizes. A prime example of general forbidding is God's command that we neither add to nor take from any of His commandments. God specifies singing (vocal music), and that's as far as He goes. That's as far as any of us may go if we want to follow His directive properly. If we go over, above, and beyond what God has specified within that command or any other command, we sin. God doesn't have to say, "You sin if you add to or take from my commandments." To violate anything that God has explicitly or generally commanded or forbidden is to sin. Therefore, it should be clear to discerning Christians that if we ADD instrumental music or any other kind of music to vocal music, we sin.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that everything God forbids MUST be mentioned explicitly by name. We have clearly shown that God does NOT always work that way.</em>

The why do you add the requirement that music must be vocal only? God is silent on the use of musical instruments. Do you not see the double-standard?
As for the warning not to add or take away, those warnings are applicable only to the books they were written in, Deuteronomy and Revelation. No similar warning is found in the books that contain your proof-texts.Thus, again, you add to the scripture in order to bind your preference.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

May 28th, 2012, 7:25 pm #36

You keep calling the Spirit of Christ a liar. That's fine: you may be predestinated.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

May 28th, 2012, 7:34 pm #37

Deuteronomy 5:32 Ye shall observe to do therefore as the LORD your God hath commanded you: ye shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left.
Deuteronomy 17:11 According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall shew thee, to the right hand, nor to the left.
Deuteronomy 17:20 That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left: to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.
Deuteronomy 28:14 And thou shalt not go aside from any of the words which I command thee this day, to the right hand, or to the left, to go after other gods to serve them
Joshua 1:7 Only be thou strong and very courageous, that thou mayest observe to do according to all the law, which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest prosper whithersoever thou goest.
Joshua 23:6 Be ye therefore very courageous to keep and to do all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, that ye turn not aside therefrom to the right hand or to the left;
2Kings 22:2 And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, and walked in all the way of David his father, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left.
2Chronicles 34:2 And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, and walked in the ways of David his father, and declined neither to the right hand, nor to the left.
Proverbs 4:27 Turn not to the right hand nor to the left: remove thy foot from evil
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

May 28th, 2012, 9:16 pm #38

God does not speak to the wise or Sophists: Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites named by Christ in Ezekiel 33 as self-speakers, singers and instrument players. God IS silent because Jesus said that God HIDES from them. God sends them strong delusions and makes them foolish

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.57.The.Law.odddf Silence.html

http://www.piney.com/CENI.Commands.Exam ... ences.html





The Spirit OF [preposition] Christ defined the future Ekklesia or Church of Christ both inclusively and exclusively in the prophets. In Isaiah 57

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.57.The.Law.of.Silence.html

In Isaiah 50 Christ defined the future MOCKING and SMITING of Messiah in a musical sense by the Levites

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.50.Smitten.Plucked.html

In Isaiah 55 Christ outlawed spending ou money for the Free Water of the Word. Beginning in the wilderness the only ROLE is to read the word for its' comfort and doctrine. Equating the Word and Spirit is universal.

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.55.Word.Spirit.html

In Isaiah 58 Christ outlawed speaking our own words or seeking our own pleasure.

http://www.piney.com/Isaiah.58.html

That doesn't prevent Rick Atchley from using buffoonery to mock the Law of Silence.
2. Since honoring the commands of Christ for the future reign of Christ defined inclusively and exclusively to MARK those who mock His word.
3. The Spirit OF Christ in Jeremiah 23 says that is blaspheming the Holy Spirit of Christ

http://www.piney.com/Rick.Atchley.Law.of.Silence.html







The New Wineskins Magazine builds on the foundation of Al Maxey, Edward Fudge and others. This was part of the Jubilee movement--from Nashville a city set on seven hills--when Rubel Shelly, Max Lucado, Rick Atchley and others thought the time was right to RESTRUCTURE all Churches of Christ into defacto Christian Churches or Baptist Churches.

http://www.piney.com/New.Winskins.Magazine.html

H. Leo Boles proving that the Christian Church invented the Law of Silence.

http://www.piney.com/Unity.Boles.html

Boles:
"Areas of silence," "liberty of opinion," and "the realm of expediency" are trite phrases used by leaders in the "Christian Church" and have been coined and put on a par with the teachings of the New Testament. It is just another way of saying that the opinions of men may guide the people of God, and that some of the people of God should submit to the opinions of men. There was unity with God's people so long as they respected the slogan, "Where the scriptures speak, we speak; and where the scriptures are silent, we are silent"; but when brethren began to claim the authority to speak where the New Testament is silent, and impose their opinions upon other brethren, division and separation were the inevitable results.

W.R. Walker, in Christian Standard, May 27, 1939, said: "There are two areas in our religious living in which the authority of Christ must be recognized. The first embraces all his teaching and that of his inspired followers, the `vocal area' ; but there is another area, the `area of silence."' He further said:

"I am persuaded that Christ has authority in the `areas of silence.'
Christ, by his silence, in every situation concerning which
he has left no direct teaching,
has bestowed on me this authority to act for myself."


Boles: Here are the two standards or rules recognized
.....by many in the "Christian Church,"
..........namely, that of "walking by faith,"
..........and that of "walking by opinion."

W.R. Walker calls the opinions of man in the "areas of silence" "the authority of Christ." This is tantamount to saying that man's opinions in the "areas of silence" are of equal force with the word of God.

I join issue with him on this point. There can be no unity in the "area of silence," as there can be no unity on opinions when each man claims the authority to do what is right in his own eyes. This would violate every scripture that God has given instructing his people to be "of the same mind, the same judgment of one accord."

Mr. Cruz said..."Matt. 4:10 is a great passage; however, it still does not say "not to" worship or pray to "God's Mother." "

Matthew 4
10 Get out of here, Satan, Jesus told him. For the Scriptures say,
You must worship the Lord your God
and serve only him

Mr. Cruz, when you see the Scriptures say "and serve ONLY him....exactly what would you consider "serve ONLY him" to mean?
Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

May 28th, 2012, 10:29 pm #39

<ol>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]I know what "only" means -- that is not the issue at this time and I'll be glad to discuss that later; the issue is the change agents looking for a "THOU SHALT NOT" in Scripture.[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]But I am trying to follow the change agents' argument: the literal and SPECIFIC "thou shalt not" as in "thou shalt not use musical instruments";[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]And I am also using another parallel to the change agents' argument with: "thou shalt not worship the Virgin Mary, 'Mother of God.'"[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]You cannot find either "thou shalt not" directive in Scripture;[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]But the change agents would ADD musical idolatry to worship -- remind you that the Roman Catholic Church originated the use of musical instruments, as well as the CHOIR BOYS. The change agents love the RCC teachings in this regard.[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]But the change agents would not ADD the Virgin Mary idolatry, but destroy their own faulty and inconsistent logic of "thou shalt not."[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]CONCLUSION: The change agents' argument that "where there is no 'thou shalt not,' the Scripture does not prohibit; instead, Scripture permits" ... is a MAJOR fallacy.[/color]</li>[/list]
Quote
Like
Share

B
B

May 28th, 2012, 10:47 pm #40

<em>B (no login)
Posted May 28, 2012 11:17 AM

Proponents of instrumental music "justify" it by stating that when God forbids something, He ALWAYS explicitly forbids it by name. They mistakenly reason that if God did not want something in Christian worship, like instrumental music, He would have explicitly forbidden it in the New Testament.

Apparently the proponents of instrumental music don't realize that God forbids in more than one way. At times, God indeed forbids by being explicit, as in "Thou shalt not kill," but He is NOT ALWAYS explicit. At other times, He generalizes. A prime example of general forbidding is God's command that we neither add to nor take from any of His commandments. God specifies singing (vocal music), and that's as far as He goes. That's as far as any of us may go if we want to follow His directive properly. If we go over, above, and beyond what God has specified within that command or any other command, we sin. God doesn't have to say, "You sin if you add to or take from my commandments." To violate anything that God has explicitly or generally commanded or forbidden is to sin. Therefore, it should be clear to discerning Christians that if we ADD instrumental music or any other kind of music to vocal music, we sin.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that everything God forbids MUST be mentioned explicitly by name. We have clearly shown that God does NOT always work that way.</em>

The why do you add the requirement that music must be vocal only? God is silent on the use of musical instruments. Do you not see the double-standard?
As for the warning not to add or take away, those warnings are applicable only to the books they were written in, Deuteronomy and Revelation. No similar warning is found in the books that contain your proof-texts.Thus, again, you add to the scripture in order to bind your preference.
Does God's command that we not add to or take away apply ONLY to Deuteronomy and Revelation? I can just hear New Age preachers saying to their congregations, "Hey, listen up! God forbids that we add to or take from His commandments, but that's only found in Deuteronomy and Revelation. That means we can do anything we want with the rest of the Bible! We don't have to obey or follow anything God says in the rest of the Bible if we don't want to. We can add to, take away, or completely change all of the Bible EXCEPT Deuteronomy and Revelation! Hurray!"

Brian seems to be advocating a "Christianity" based on creating a bunch of loopholes in the Bible. True Christians, however, are not eager to create loopholes and will obey and follow God's commandments AS WRITTEN in the New Testament.
Quote
Share