Though the use of mechanical instruments of music in worship are common in both the Catholic and Protestant communities of "Christendom, " most people do not realize that this function was unknown to the churches of the apostolic age. Rather, the practice was an innovation that came centuries after the establishment of Christ’s church, and such was wholly without New Testament authority. Noted scholar William Woodson discusses this digression in this month’s Feature article.
Over the years, some of those who support the use of mechanical instruments of music have appealed to what is known as the psallo argument.
May one contend that while the “law” was abolished by the death of Christ, nonetheless, the Psalms remain; and the Psalms provide authority for worshipping God with instruments of music?
Did the first-century Christians employ mechanical instruments of music in their worship of God? If so, where is the evidence of such? If not, why did they refrain from such when instruments were readily available in that era?
Does Amos 6:5 censure David’s introduction of instrumental music in worship — even under the old covenant? Does the text hint that musical instruments in the Old Testament were something God tolerated, like polygamous marriage, rather than being his ideal?
Jesus declared that “worship” must be consistent with revealed “truth” (John 4:24), namely God’s word (John 17:17). This includes the musical engagement of the church.
In the past we have published several articles dealing with the innovation of using mechanical instruments of music in Christian worship. These essays have generated a flood of critical responses. We have categorized these defensive arguments, and in this article we offer our rebuttal.
Does this passage authorize the use of mechanical instruments of music in worship to God? Many erroneously contend that it does. Study this important issue with us.
A sincere Christian wants to know: “Why don’t churches of Christ use instruments of music in their worship?” The issue comes down to the matter of authority. Take a look at this theme with us in this week’s Question and Answer.
Some Christians argue that clapping, to accompany singing in worship, is merely an inconsequential mode of providing some zest to the service. What are the facts? Is this a violation of scriptural principle?
Is the “silence of the Scripures” authoritative. The Bible itself states that it is.
All new things are not always better. Many of the “new” ways of interpreting the Bible are merely designed to keep you from truly understanding the Scriptures.
Is new always better than old? Not always. Some modern trends have had a negative impact on the church.
A reed is a symbol of instability; a pillar signifies a solid, immovable foundation. The church of today must ask: “Are we a ‘reed shaken in the wind’ or are we the ‘pillar and ground of the truth’”?
The “Salvation Army” is an organization that is applauded by most in our society. Undeniably, this group does implement numerous acts of benevolence among the needy. But is this all there is to Christianity? Do good deeds substitute for doctrinal soundness? Read this article carefully and put this issue in balance.
Division “contrary to the doctrine” of Christ is wrong (Romans 16:17); but division, consistent with the Lord’s teaching, is not. Let faithful men and women work for a church that is united—but united upon the basis of biblical truth, not sectarian compromise (John 17:17).
What is “will-worship”? Why did Paul, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, condemn it? Study carefully this article.
If the church sings to the accompaniment of an organ, those thus participating have added something to what the Lord prescribed.
It is surely an oddity of modern liberalism within the body of Christ that some would appeal to the authority of Bible precedent to establish the premise that one needs no authority for what he practices in religion. This article addresses some of these current efforts.
What is a missionary society? Some Christians carelessly throw that designation around, labeling perfectly legitimate works with this pejorative expression.