IM in the churches of Christ

[winky]

Other. Along the lines of what Bob said: \"There is no command regarding the specifics of music for those under the covenant of grace, other than it is to be from the heart.\"

As far as appropriateness - in some churches of Christ it may be an appropriate and uplifting way to worship. For many, however, it would cause more stumbling blocks than it would blessings.

My dad has said something to the effect that he believes that although IM is not a sin, it is not, in his opinion, the best or most appropriate way to worship, and that that's why it wasn't used in the NT. He says that it is not in keeping with the spiritual nature of worship, which is what the NT church was trying to do - make their worship more spiritual and less physical. Does anyone have thoughts on that? Charlie, feel free to tell me to start a new thread if you think this is too far off topic.  :D

Wendy

[Arkstfan]

Vessel I agree with you though not as strongly.

I love the acapella tradition. I don't care to see a push to go instrumental in the churches of Christ, though I would shout with joy if we could just reach the point of accepting that it is a matter of preference rather than law whether we use them or not.

I'd be happy with telling the Disciples that we were wrong for condeming them for having an organ and sharing a nice brotherly hug.

[winky]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Do you mind if I join you in naive optimism?[/quote]

Come on over! It's a pretty pleasant place to be, I must say! :)

Wendy

[kanham]

Winky,

If I thought people were advocating both then I wouldn't have said a word.

I am sorry, that is not what I read. The denoms have no problem with acapella so someone must. They don’t mind us having our acapella ways but can the same be said for us? That was not how I read the thread.

I am always open for correction even when I don’t sound like it.

Thanks and God bless.

[Jim Abb]

From this mostly lurker, I think we are really getting to the core issue here....that is...what is worship? The entire basis of the discussion on IM in worship is based on the assumption that there is a \"formal\" worship. In my growth away from the \"old paths\" mentality (really the \"same old rut\" mentality) to a more grace focused mentality many ideas once accepted have been re-examined and found wanting. One of the first was IM. But that gave way to a deeper question regarding worship. My position now is that anything not sinful can be a part of worshiping our Lord. If pure religion involves service, then service is itself a form of worship. The roofer who donates his services to a struggling family is worshipping God as much as a Sunday morning song of praise (perhaps even better!).

[marc]

meeting places--I see multiple examples of upper rooms.

times--Not sure about the start, but I see an approved example of meeting until midnight.

of course we would never say these examples were binding, only that they were expedient.  Yet we bind acapella singing based on a couple of verses that don't even deal with worship services, and which don't even mention acapella singing.

Just curious, could I get a chapter and verse reference to acapella singing in the New Testament?  I'm looking for a specific reference to acapella, not an assumption that this is what the scripture is talking about.

[marc]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]If in the Old Testament, scripture clarifies that one should sing and have instruments, why aren't the verses in the New Testament equally as clear? [/quote]

Is this the sentence you're asking why I'm not responding to?  This is the best argument against your position, not for it!  The New Testament contains no written books of law!  The OT lays out exactly what was acceptable and unacceptable in worship, showing that God indeed can write law when he needs to.  The New Testament does no such thing.  We are no longer under law but under grace (who said that?)  We have freedom in Christ!  We have a relationship to Him as sons and we now give him our whole lives, not just the works of our hands!  

btw, as to the extra-scriptural early church examples of acapella singing, I would suggest checking out the other recent threads on this topic.  There was a good discussion of this very thing.

[Trois]

Marc, Abs, et al...

Let's make sure this dialogue stays in the spirit of Christ and the spirit of seeking. Inorder to really give good answers we all have to first seek to understand what the other person is talking about.

I have no doubt that worship in the assembly of the NT church was acapella. I have only theories as to why they only sang. I have looked for IM music in NT worship. I haven't found any. Yet I am not willing to condemn those who don't see it as I see it. I see some holes in my own logic because I believe that worship in our Sunday assemblies need to remain as close to the original intent of the NT scripture as we can but I don't have any problem whatsoever with IM outside that context. I just hope that doesn't make me a hypocrite.

I still think this is a hermeneutical issue though. For example dgdodd listed several text from the OT and a couple from Revelation to say that IM is Biblical. Well if your hermeneutic says that the entire Bible (OT/NT) is our rule of faith then of course IM is acceptable. If on the other hand you believe that only the NT is our rule of faith then of course IM is unacceptable. My immediate challenge to that argumentation would be that you still don't find any positive evidence that God wanted IM in the worship assembly of the NT church. OT was OT and Revelation (depending on your interpretive view) was in heaven.

A challenge to the whole Bible hermeneutic could be then what about the fact that Jesus says the OT (incl. the Psalms) has been fulfilled in Him? Or how can you be consistent in saying that IM is acceptable if you don't include the other OT observances?

But there are also legitimite challenges to the other NT only Bible hermeneutic. Such as where do you get authority for your on extra-biblical activities? Such as were listed on several post. Things like song books, song leaders, pulpits, pews, communion cups, collection plates, church buildings, etc... etc... And how do we learn to worship w/out the deep heritage of the OT? Or why did God never say do your assembly just like this?

I believe we need to stick with our convictions on things the Bible clearly states and leave room for God's grace in those areas that get fuzzy. But let's keep conversing. Maybe if we keep searching together we can come to a better understanding of God's revelation. :noddingsmiley:

yikes :blush:
You're a yeller too, huh Arkstfan?
hmmm :wave:

[Arkstfan]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (Guest @ Jan. 28 2003,10:51)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]yikes :blush:
You're a yeller too, huh Arkstfan?
hmmm :wave:[/quote]
That was a re-enactment of the moment it finally hit me.

I grew up with the condemnation and then one day challenged I found myself struggling to defend what I had been taught.

When I asked others for help in the task this picture of a \"sneaky God\" emerged who would punish us not only for those things clear prohibitted but would allow some dangers to be obscured in the text demanding that I strain and make inferences to see that it is a sin because it is against God, it just isn't spelled out like the other stuff.

After wondering why God would be sneaky and not give us a clearer statement it finally dawned on me. There was a reason God left us this record of his word it was so we would know what he wants and what displeases him. He wasn't being sneaky he just didn't address it because when I sing with joy and love for God it doesn't matter if someone strums a guitar or not and if it did he would have said so.

[kanham]

We have a computer. My brother is a tech guy and he glued it together from three other systems. Our son loves the computer. I am constantly amazed at how quickly children pick up how to operate one.

He spends a lot of time playing games on the computer. We have only asked one thing from our son, that he turn the computer off when he is done.

I am often amazed at how he decides to turn it off. He has figured out that you can unplug the power strip from the wall, that will work. He has found that the power strip has a switch, that will work too. He also knows he can turn it off by reaching down and pushing the button on the front of the tower.

Should I be angry with him for not simply going to shut down on the computer?

Someone mention that this was not a discussion about IM, but attitudes around it, and I agree. To me it is a discussion about our heavenly Father and what kind of Father He is. It is a discussion on how we will allow God to be presented to our children, our neighbor and our friend.

I often wonder whose image we are made in if our Creator is the one that many paint him to be.

You may be thinking, why don’t you show your son the right way to turn the computer off. My answer would be, if it was that important, I would.

[charlie]

This poll measures two things:
1. do you think the OT and NT readers of the bible understood the passages relating to IM understood some of them as a binding command or an allowance

2. modern application of those principles (and others) in the worship of the churches of Christ. Sorry, but I really only want CoC members to vote on this one. We can do a more inclusive poll later.

If you pick \"other\" state so in a post on the thread and explain.

Also, if you have any other ideas, put them in a post also.

For those to whom this is a moot point and consider this whole business to be a waste of time let me say I agree, but I acknowledge the definitive nature of this issue to our brotherhood. Just because it ought not be so doesn't mean it isn't so.

[charlie]

For people who are so outspoken that this is a non-issue, you sure seem interested in this poll.

[marc]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]It is considered legalistic to refuse certain aspects of worship but is equally a legalism of the heart to demand that they be included. The love of Christ is concerned with the heart of your brothers over yourselves. As long as your brother's heart is closed to something as irrelevant as instruments, to force it on them is sinful. Not just to force the instruments themselves, but even the issue of IM on those who stumble by it.

[/quote]

While this is accurate as far as our relationships with our brothers and sisters inside the Churches of Christ goes, the opposite can be said for our relationships with our brothers and sisters outside the Big C Church of Christ.  Our refusal to use instrumental music becomes at times a judgment we make against them, and an obstacle that keeps us from fellowshiping them.  This is what makes this issue so difficult.

[Bocephus]

I didn't vote because I am not a part of the RM.  

However,

I wouldn't want to bind instruments on those that think they are wrong for I would be a stumbling block.

I also would not think it is right for someone to try to bind accapella on those who use instruments, for I would be a stumbling block.

It IS a preference.  A preference that can cause a lot of anger.

To say \"Wake up COC, join the 21st century would get people angry.\"  Just as it would to say \"You unity haters drop your instruments.\"