The Instigator
MarioWatsonBeasley
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
FuzzyCatPotato
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Mechanical Instruments Are Not Authorized For Use in Christian Worship

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
FuzzyCatPotato
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/10/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,032 times Debate No: 64909
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (15)
Votes (3)

 

MarioWatsonBeasley

Pro

Arguments will begin in second round. First round will be used for the challenge and acceptance.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

I accept.

I would love to hear where in the Bible it is prohibited to use musical mechanisms in church.
Debate Round No. 1
MarioWatsonBeasley

Pro

The first thing we must understand folks, is the importance of Bible authority. Bible authority is the power, right, or permission for an individual to perform a certain act or duty, according to the Holy bible.
According to Matthew 28:18, Jesus has all the authority in Heaven and in earth.
According to Colossians 3:17, what ever we do in our conversation or action, needs to be authorized or within the authority of Jesus
According to Revelation 22:18-19, we aren't to add to His authority, nor take from His authority.
According to John 8:31-32, the only way of knowing that you're a true follower or disciple of Jesus, you must continue in His word or authority.
According to Acts 10:34, these verses apply to any and everyone.
So, to sum it up, If it's not written in the Bible then there's no authority or permission to perform the act.

Now, I said that, to say this, there's no authority for using mechanical musical instruments in the church.
The first century church did not use mechanical musical instruments.
The word "accapella", which means without musical accompaniment, is a compound Latin word which means, "according to chapel, or church." There was a time when everyone sung at church without musical accompaniment.
Martin Luther (Protestantism-Lutheran Church), John Wesley (Methodism-Methodist Church), and John Calvin (Reformed Church) are all famous denominational scholars who did not use mechanical musical instruments in their worship. The foundation of these churches date back to the 1500's. The first appearance of instrumental music in church worship was about the sixth century A.D. The exact date of its introduction varied in different localities; but it can safely be concluded that there was no general practicing of it until after the eighth century, and even after this date it was long resisted by leading religions.

The following list includes references to the type of music which the early New Testament church used in worship to God. An examination of these Scriptures make plain the kind of music which God designed for His church.

1) And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God - Acts 16:25.

2) For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name - Romans 15:9.

3) I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also - 1Cor 14:15.

4) Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord Eph 5:19.

5) Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord - Col 3:16.

6) In the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee - Heb 2:12.

7) Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms - James 5:13.

Where in the inspired record of the New Testament church is there found a single reference authorizing mechanical musical instruments in worship? Nowhere! The most careful, meticulous investigation of the New Testament will not produce a single word in favor of this practice. One may search the New Testament in vain for either command, example, or inference for the use of musical instruments in worship service.

The Lord's church is a New Testament institution, and the New Testament tells the items of worship the Lord put in it. It has been shown that the New testament is silent concerning mechanical musical instruments in the worship. It is evident that those who do use musical instruments in the worship service do without Bible authority.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

REBUTTALS

---

AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE

Not to nitpick or anything, but using the Bible to assert the authority of the Bible is circular and fallacious [1].

Instead, prefer my proof of the authority of the Bible:

P1: Whatever Morgan Freeman believes is true.
P2: "Morgan Freeman is Christian" [2], and thus believes in the Bible.
C1: Therefore, the Bible is true.

---

HISTORICAL USE OF MUSIC IN CHURCH


Pro states that there are many instances in which churches did not use musical instruments in worship. This iss irrelevant.

The only source of truth in this debate is the Christian God, and, by extension, the Christian God's revelations through the Bible.

The Fallible actions of Man fail to Achieve the Gloriful Truth of God.

---

SINGING IN THE BIBLE

As hard as it may seem for Pro to believe, it is possible to have both singing and mechanical music occurring simultaneously. Simply because people praised the Christian God verbally does not mean that they did not praise him with music.

---

CONTENTION ONE: THE BIBLE USES MUSIC TO PRAISE GOD

As Wikipedia states [2], "The Bible mentions many uses of music including songs of praise, songs of victory, songs of mourning, and above all the Psalms. .... [V]ery elaborate musical services in the Temple, described in the Bible, were important parts of worship. There are, for instance, descriptions in the Bible of an orchestra consisting of nine lutes, two harps, and a cymbal."

Consider that instruments are frequently mentioned in the Bible [3]:
Exodus 19:16: "[O]n the third day ... there were ... a very loud trumpet sound."
Exodus 20:18: "[P]eople perceived the ... trumpet[.]"
Leviticus 25:9: "You shall ... sound a ram's horn abroad on the tenth day of the seventh month; on the day of atonement you shall sound a horn all through your land."
Revelation 5:8: "When He had taken the book, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each one holding a harp and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints."


Several verses explicitly mention praising God with music:
Psalms 43:4: "Then I will go to the altar of God, To God my exceeding joy; And upon the lyre I shall praise You, O God, my God."
Psalms 81:3: "Blow the trumpet at the new moon, At the full moon, on our feast day."
Psalms 98:4-6: "Shout joyfully to the LORD[:] ... Break forth and sing for joy and sing praises. Sing praises to the LORD with the lyre, With the lyre and the sound of melody. With trumpets and the sound of the horn Shout joyfully before the King, the LORD."
Psalms 149:3: "Let them praise His name with dancing; Let them sing praises to Him with timbrel and lyre."

Psalms 150:3-4: "Praise Him with trumpet sound; Praise Him with harp and lyre. Praise Him with timbrel and dancing; Praise Him with stringed instruments and pipe."
2 Chronicles 15:14: "Moreover, they made an oath to the LORD with a loud voice, with shouting, with trumpets and with horns."

Furthermore, the Biblical period, which we seek to emulate, frequently used instruments [4].

---

CONTENTION TWO: I'M GOD, AND I AUTHORIZE MUSIC IN CHURCH

P1: FuzzyCatPotato is the only being that exists.
C1: Therefore, whatever FuzzyCatPotato believes is the only truth in existence.
C2: Therefore, whatever FuzzyCatPotato believes is truth.
P2: FuzzyCatPotato believes that FuzzyCatPotato is God.
C3: Therefore, FuzzyCatPotato is God.
P3: FuzzyCatPotato likes being praised with music, because singing is really bland.
C4: Therefore, music is authorized by God.

---

REFERENCES
[1] http://www.logicallyfallacious.com...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...;
[3] http://bible.knowing-jesus.com...;
[4] http://www.musicofthebible.com...
Debate Round No. 2
MarioWatsonBeasley

Pro

Why wouldn't I use the Bible to assert the authority of the Bible, when the authority of the Bible comes from the Bible.
Christian worship is based on the instructions and acts of worship instituted by God found in the Bible. I was illustrating what it meant, according to the Bible, for a Christian to have the authority to do something. I've come to discover that alot of individuals don't understand how important it is to accept God's word as it is and be obedient unto it.

I stated names and denominations of churches who branched off somehow, from the first century church of Christ, and
didn't use musical instruments in worship. Who also profess to practice the worship of the Christian God.
These individuals not using musical instruments in worship even after their falling away, implies that the reason for this was because they didn't believe that the Bible authorized it. That had to have split for some type of disagreement and obviously that wasn't one of the issues. So that point was highly relevant.

It's not hard at all for me to believe that you can have both singing and mechanical or instrumental music occurring
simultaneously. My wife and I are musicians ourselves. I never said that the early church didn't praise god with music, I
said they didn't praise Him with mechanical or instrumental music, which is a different kind of music than singing.

Here's where Bible authority comes into the picture. When God gives a command, we can't add to it or subtract from it.
We must do specifically what He says. If god told Con to SING the song "Amazing Grace", I'm pretty sure that Con, if he/she
is a believer in Christ, would begin to verbally recite the song in some type of tune. He/She wouldn't use an instrument to
SING the song. Likewise, If God told Con to PLAY the song "Amazing Grace", He/She would play a musical instrument to a
tune of the song or press play on a media device containing the song. Why, because singing and music from instruments
are two different types of music.
God wasn't mistaken or He didn't forget to add music of instruments to His worship. He is
very clear about what He wants. When God commands men to do anything specifically, everything else in the related
category is excluded. For example: a) Bread and fruit of the vine are the elements God has ordained for the Lord's Supper,
according to Matt 26:26-39. The specific divine requirement for these elements excludes everything else. No one would be
foolish enough to insist upon adding meat and potatoes to the Lord's table because the New Testament doesn't expressly
prohibit their use for this purpose. b) When God commanded the children of Israel to use a lamb for the Passover feast
(Exodus 12:3), every other kind of animal was automatically excluded. God did not have to expressly mention all the
animals that were not to be used; the kind specified excluded all others.
There are two kinds of commands in the Bible: specific and generic. For instance, Make thee an ark of gopher wood (Gen 6:14) is a specific command. God specified the wood, and that settled the question of the kind of wood. God did not say, "Thou shalt use no other kind of wood;" but the fact that God limited the wood to gopher wood forbade use of any other kind. Now if God had said, "Make thee an ark of wood," the use of any kind of wood would have met this generic command.

If the New Testament had simply said, "Make music," the commandment could have been complied with by making
either vocal or instrumental music, or both. God, however, did not say that. He said sing, and that restricts the music to
vocal music. The specification and limitation is as clear here as it was in the command to build an ark out of gopher wood.

I know that the Bible mentions many uses of music. I never said it didn't, the question that I asked was, "Where in the
inspired record of the New Testament church is there found a single reference authorizing mechanical musical
instruments in worship?" All of the scripture that you've submitted regarding the use of, or mention of instruments are
listed in the Old Testament. Unfortunately, the church didn't began until the book of Acts, which is in the New Testament.
Like I said in my first argument, the most careful, meticulous investigation of the New Testament will not produce a single
word in favor of this practice. One may search the New Testament in vain for either command, example, or inference for
the use of musical instruments in worship service.

Yes, the JEWS did use instruments of music in the OLD TESTAMENT but, CHRISTIANS did not use instruments of music in
WORSHIP in the NEW TESTAMENT. Instead they sung to perform acts of praise in the assembly.

In Ephesians 5:19, the Bible says, "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.
-Well in order for everyone to speak to ourselves we would all have to be speaking.
-We are to speak to ourselves in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.
-While doing the above, we are to sing while making melody in our hearts to the Lord.
-None of the above requires instruments of music

The Greek translation for the word melody is the word Psallo (NT was written in Greek). According to he Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Psallo means to rub or touch the surface: to twitch or twang,play on a string instrument, make melody, sing(psalms).
Now, lets apply the different definitions to the verse in Ephesians
-Singing and rubbing or touching the surface of your heart
-Singing and twitching or twanging your heart
-Singing and playing on a string instrument in your heart
As we can see, that even with the Greek definitions of the word melody, there's no implications that we're to use musical instruments in worship.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Thank you, Pro.

---

REBUTTALS

---

AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE

Pro states: "Why wouldn't I use the Bible to assert the authority of the Bible, when the authority of the Bible comes from the Bible."

This argument, in logical form, goes as follows:
P1: Whatever the Bible says is true.
P2: The Bible says that whatever the Bible says is true.
C1: Whatever the Bible says is true.

This is, again, circular logic and fallacious [1]. Thus, you cannot use Pro's logic to affirm the resolution.

Prefer my Morgan Freeman proof.

---

HISTORICAL USE OF MUSIC IN CHURCH

Pro states: "[C]hurches ... from the first century ... [often] didn't use musical instruments in worship. Th[is] ... implies that ... this was because they didn't believe that the Bible authorized it."

Some Christians don't eat meat, ever. Some Christians do not and cannot drive. Does that mean that they don't eat meat and/or don't drive because they think that the Bible doesn't authorize eating meat? No. It is impossible to tell why these people did not use instruments in Church. Via Pro's logic, one may believe that 1st-Century Christians didn't take frequent baths because they felt that the Bible didn't authorize it, which is ridiculous.

---

SINGING IN THE BIBLE

Pro states: "[T]hey didn't praise Him with mechanical or instrumental music, which is a different kind of music than singing."

Again, Pro fails to demonstrate that early churches solely praised the Christian God with via voices, or that the early churches are the "correct" churches and should be emulated.

---

SPECIFICITY OF GOD'S COMMAND

Pro states: "When God gives a command, we can't add to it or subtract from it. .... Bread and [wine] are the elements God has ordained for the Lord's Supper[.] ... The specific divine requirement for these elements excludes everything else."

Where does the Bible specifically command that Christians use only vocal praise? Nowhere. In fact, the Bible commands exactly the opposite, as I prove in Contention ONE.

As bible.ca states [5]: "The Bible, indeed, never condemns the use of instruments of music in worship, but neither does it command their use. Many things we know to be wrong are not condemned by name in the Bible. Thus, we can never assume that we have God's approval to do an act when no scripture teaches against that act."

---

CHRISTIANS SHOULD ONLY CARE ABOUT THE NEW TESTAMENT

This is false. As the Restored Church of God states [6]: "Some falsely claim that the Old Testament is not relevant to God’s Church today. Christ Himself stated, in Matthew 4:4, that man ought to live “by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.” He showed that the Old Testament is indeed a valid part of God’s Word (Luke 24:44). In II Timothy 3:16, the Apostle Paul wrote that Scripture is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Keep in mind that, when Paul wrote this, there was, as yet, no New Testament. The Bible consisted only of the Old Testament writings."

---

CONTENTION ONE: THE BIBLE USES MUSIC TO PRAISE GOD

Pro states: "In Ephesians 5:19, the Bible says, 'Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord.'"

First, again refer to my point that there is no implication in the Bible that musical instruments were not used. Simply because one verse in thousands only mentions vocally praising the Christian God, that does not mean that musical instruments were not used or not part of correct worship.

Second, refer to my numerous (10 verses) references to the use of music in the Bible, of which 6 explicitly mention using music to praise God. Clearly, it does not "add" to the Christian God's command to use what the Christian God explicitly recommends.

Third, as the Restored Church of God states [6]: "God’s Word plainly teaches that using musical instruments in the course of praising God is appropriate."

This proves beyond a doubt that the Bible is pro-Church-music.

---

CONTENTION TWO: I'M GOD, AND I AUTHORIZE MUSIC IN CHURCH

Pro offers no rebuttal to Contention Two. Do not let Pro bring up any new responses to this point in the 4th Round, because Pro has completely dropped this point. This is terminal offense on Pro's case: Because I'm God, and Christians must obey God, and because I command that some sweet tunes be made in church, Christians must make sweet tunes.

---

Back to Pro.


---

REFERENCES

[5] http://www.bible.ca...
[6] http://rcg.org...
Debate Round No. 3
MarioWatsonBeasley

Pro

Con claims that my using of the Bible to argue the authority of the Bible is fallacious.

While giving much thought to this idea, I would say maybe so in most cases, but not when it's being used to argue against the addition or subtraction of the authority being used, it's not fallacious.

Con claims that I stated that churches from the first century "often" didn't use musical instruments in worship.

That is false, I've never stated that. What I actually said was this,

["The first century church did not use mechanical musical instruments.
The word "accapella", which means without musical accompaniment, is a compound Latin word which means, "according to chapel, or church." There was a time when everyone sung at church without musical accompaniment.
Martin Luther (Protestantism-Lutheran Church), John Wesley (Methodism-Methodist Church), and John Calvin (Reformed Church) are all famous denominational scholars who did not use mechanical musical instruments in their worship. The foundation of these churches date back to the 1500's. The first appearance of instrumental music in church worship was about the sixth century A.D. The exact date of its introduction varied in different localities; but it can safely be concluded that there was no general practicing of it until after the eighth century, and even after this date it was long resisted by leading religions."]
This is what I said implies, that the reason for the branched off denominations non use of musical instruments, was because they didn't believe the bible authorized it.
Con continues to twist my words and ignore the point of my arguments.

It is not impossible to tell why the denominations, after branching off from the original church, did not use instruments in worship!!!

The denominations became denominations because they disagreed with certain original practices of the early church or another denomination. Now, one can imply, if a denomination rejects the use of musical instruments after separating from the church, that the rejection of use of musical instruments in worship was not one of the practices that they were in disagreement about.

Con states that, "I fail to demonstrate that the early churches solely praised God through voices, or that the early churches are the "correct" churches and should be emulated."
Solely- not involving anyone or anything else; only.

That also is false!! I've given you every verse that references to the type of music which the early New Testament church used in worship to God. Which all SOLELY included singing!!!

1) And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the Mt. of Olives - Matt 26:30; Mark 14:26.
2) And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God - Acts 16:25.
3) For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name - Romans 15:9.
4) I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also - 1Cor 14:15.
5) Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord - Eph 5:19.
6) Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord - Col 3:16.
7) In the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee - Heb 2:12.
8) Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms - James 5:13.

Can't speak on all of the early churches, only the one I read about in the Bible(church of Christ, Romans 16:16), who by the way, did not use musical instruments in worship.

Con inquires about the specific command that Christians use ONLY vocal praise, and claims that the Bible commands exactly the opposite, as he proves in Contention One.

I've given Con the specific command but I will post the command again.
In Ephesians 5:19, the Bible says, "SPEAKING to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, SINGING and making melody in your heart to the Lord.
-Well in order for everyone to speak to ourselves we would all have to be speaking.
-We are to speak to ourselves in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.
-While doing the above, we are to sing while making melody in our hearts to the Lord.
-None of the above requires instruments of music
Hebrews 13:15 even says, " By him therefore let US offer the sacrifice of PRAISE to God continually, THAT IS, the fruit of OUR LIPS giving thanks to his name.

Umm Con, did you pay any attention to the last part of your "As bible.ca"post??

Con states that the statement of, "Christians should only care about the New Testament", is false. I agree
I've never said anything different. What I said was,
[All of the scripture that you've submitted regarding the use of, or mention of instruments are
listed in the Old Testament. Unfortunately, the church didn't began until the book of Acts, which is in the New Testament.
Like I said in my first argument, the most careful, meticulous investigation of the New Testament will not produce a single
word in favor of this practice. One may search the New Testament in vain for either command, example, or inference for
the use of musical instruments in worship service."]

Christians need to yield to or "care about" all of the written word of God. Instructions for church worship are instituted in the NEW TESTAMENT. There aren't any Christians in the Old Testament(Acts 11:26)!! If you find one let me know.

Con claims that, " one verse in thousands only mentions vocally praising the Christian God. This, as well as many of Con's other claims, is also false.
First, Con must not be reading my posts, because I've given him a numerous amount of verses that "only mentions vocally praises of the Christian God." I'm sure you all have read them.
Second, the debate isn't titled, "Mechanical Instruments Are Not Authorized For Use in The Bible". It's actually titled, "Mechanical Instruments Are Not Authorized For Use in CHRISTIAN WORSHIP".
Once again, none of the verses you've submitted pertain to the New Testament church!! So you still haven't proven that the Bible is pro-Church-music when it comes to Christian worship.

Con, I suggest that you consider this:

We need not pay attention to what the Lord didn't say in His word if He has already given instructions on the matter in his word. Please keep in mind, that just because God didn't forbid it in His word doesn't mean it's ok. Just because it was allowed for a certain period of time doesn't mean that it is allowed in a future or present period. Let me illustrate with the bible.
There's a particular incident in the Bible where Moses did something that God didn't forbid him from doing but, God hadn't authorized either.
In Exodus 17:5-6, the Bible says, 5 "And the Lord said unto Moses, Go on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel; and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine hand, and go."

6 Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.
So here God tells Moses to smite the rock and he did.

In Numbers 20:6-12, the Bible says, "And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and they fell upon their faces: and the glory of the Lord appeared unto them.

7 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
8 Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes; and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock: so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink.
9 And Moses took the rod from before the Lord, as he commanded him.
10 And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?
11 And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also.
12 And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them."
Then here, God told Moses to speak to the rock but he smoted the rock.

So in the first incident, god authorized Moses to smote(strike) the rock.
In the second incident, god authorized Moses to speak to the rock.
God never authorized Moses to smote the rock in the second incident even though he authorized it in the first incident.
Due to Moses doing something that God hadn't authorized at that current time, even though God had authorized it before, God didn't allow for Moses to see the promise land.

The same standards apply to God's commands for the New Testament church.
In the OT, God authorized the use of musical instruments as praise in worship.
In the NT, God Authorized singing as praise in worship.
God never authorized the use of musical instruments in the NT.
God is no respecter of persons(Acts 10:34), so I believe he would punish those who use musical instruments in worship because he didn't authorize it, just like he punished Moses and might not let them see the promised land. Will anyone of today's church consider themselves more righteous then Moses? Probably not.

Questions that Con is obligated to answer:

Where in the inspired record of the New Testament church is there found a single reference authorizing the use of mechanical musical instruments in worship?(Never been answered even though I posted it in first argument.)
Are there any Christians in the OT? If so, who and where?
Does Jesus have a church in the OT?

I just want to thank Con for accepting and participating in this debate! I would like to thank all voters for their votes and insight.
FuzzyCatPotato

Con

Thanks, Pro.

---

REBUTTALS

---

AUTHORIY OF THE BIBLE

Pro states: "Con claims ... using of the Bible to argue the authority of the Bible is fallacious. ... [N]ot when it's being used to argue against the addition or subtraction of the authority being used, it's not fallacious."

Pro's claim is that the Bible proves the Bible: "[T]he authority of the Bible comes from the Bible."

This is clearly fallacious.

Again, prefer my Morgan Freeman proof.

---

HISTORICAL USE OF MUSIC IN CHURCH

Pro states: "Con claims that I stated that churches from the first century "often" didn't use musical instruments in worship. .... I actually said[:] ... "The first century church did not use mechanical musical instruments. .... Con ... twist my words[.]"

Pro considers adding "often" to be "twist[ing]" Pro's words. I'll let the voters decide.

Pro states: "The denominations became denominations because they disagreed with ... practices[.] ... [O]ne can imply, if a denomination rejects ... musical instruments after separating ... the rejection ... was ... one ... they were in disagreement about."

First, as I've said, it's possible that music was disagreed over, though Pro has not proven that this is necessarily true, making this a very weak point already. (Consider that they might have been socialist churches and donated everything to the poor, or simply have been poor and unable to afford instruments.)

Second, as I've said, Pro fails to prove that these churches are correct. It's entirely possible to create a new subset of a religion anad interpret your religion's holy book entirely wrongly. This is especially important when considering Contention One, which points out that the Bible supports music in worship, suggesting taht these denominations

---

SINGING IN THE BIBLE

Pro states: "[Con states that I f]ail to demonstrate that the early churches solely praised God through voices[.]" .... I've given you every verse that ... SOLELY included singing!"

First off, simply because the Bible says something doesn't mean the people actually did it.

Second off, again, see Contention One. The Old Testament is holy, Biblical Scripture and referrences using music to praise God, meaning that Pro's verses simply ignored any instruments present.

---

SPECIFICITY OF GOD'S COMMAND

Bible.ca points out that many things aren't approved or disapproved of by God, simply because they are not mentioned in the Bible. Because Pro argues that musical instruments are disapproved of, and yet no evidence of this exists, we cannot assume so.

---

CHRISTIANS SHOULD ONLY CARE ABOUT THE NEW TESTAMENT

Pro states: "[T]he church didn't began until the book of Acts, which is in the New Testament. Like I said in my first argument, the most careful, meticulous investigation of the New Testament will not produce a single word in favor of this practice."

First, this is incorrect, as gotquestions.org states [7]: "Ephesians 5:19 declares, "speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord." The phrase "making melody" comes from the Greek word "psallontes" which means "to rub or touch," "to twitch or twang." It was commonly used in Greek to refer to playing a stringed musical instrument." Pro contests this verse, arguing that twanging occurs in the heart. This is ridiculous and is pure exegesis (where does the text mention "in the heart"?), which cannot be allowed.

Second, this is irrelevant. As pointed out earlier, the Old Testament is just as valid as the New. To only use the New is to avoid more than half of Christian holy text.

Pro states: "There aren't any Christians in the Old Testament[!]"

Again, irrelevant. Christians obey the Old Testament also.

Pro states that: "[T]he debate isn't titled, "Mechanical Instruments Are Not Authorized For Use in The Bible". It's actually titled, "Mechanical Instruments Are Not Authorized For Use in CHRISTIAN WORSHIP". Once again, none of the verses you've submitted pertain to the New Testament church!! So you still haven't proven that the Bible is pro-Church-music when it comes to Christian worship.

Again, Pro fails to consider the fact that Christians must obey the words of the Old and New Testament. Christian worship therefore includes the Old Testament use of instruments.

Pro states: "Just because God didn't forbid it in His word doesn't mean it's ok."

Yes. However, as I have proven, God exhorted the use of music to praise Him, so it's definitionally OK for Christians.

Pro states: "In the OT, God authorized the use of musical instruments as praise in worship. In the NT, God Authorized singing as praise in worship. God never authorized the use of musical instruments in the NT."

Again, this is irrelevant. Not only does the New Testament state that the Old Testament is a valid part of God's word that must be obeyed, but God DID authorize the use of musical instruments in the New Testament.

---

QUESTIONS

"Where in the inspired record of the New Testament church is there found a single reference authorizing the use of mechanical musical instruments in worship?"

Apparently I failed to answer this question. Considering that Pro used this question as a rhetorical device ("Where can you find it? NOWHERE!"), I couldn't be reasonably expected to answer the question, so this should not be held against me.

Furthermore, Ephesians clearly supports musical instruments.

Furthermore, the NT supports the OT, which supports musical instruments.

"Are there any Christians in the OT? If so, who and where?"

No... ? This isn't relevant.

"Does Jesus have a church in the OT?"

No... ? This isn't relevant.

---

CONTENTION ONE: THE BIBLE USES MUSIC TO PRAISE GOD

Considering that both the New and Old Testaments support the use of music to praise God, that the New Testament supports the Old Testament, which supports the use of music to praise God, and that there are no restrictions on music in worship whatsoever, it's clear the Bible gives an AOK to music in worship.

This is sufficient reason to negate.

---

CONTENTION TWO: I'M GOD, AND I AUTHORIZE MUSIC IN CHURCH

Pro never responded to this argument. This argument, which proves that Pro is incorrect, must be thus accepted as true. This is terminal offense against Pro; thus, Con must win.

---

SUMMARY

Spelling: No difference.

Conduct: No difference.

Arguments: Con. Con has won that the Bible supports music in church, and that Con is God and approves of music in church.

Sources: Con. Pro has only cited the Bible; Con has cited 7 additional sources other than the Bible.

---

REFERENCES

[7] http://www.gotquestions.org...;
Debate Round No. 4
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ShikenNuggets 2 years ago
ShikenNuggets
I said nothing about the car being in the assembly, I was just referring to driving a car in general.
Posted by MarioWatsonBeasley 2 years ago
MarioWatsonBeasley
By God's logic it is prohibited. That was also a poor example.(The one about the car in the assembly)
Posted by ShikenNuggets 2 years ago
ShikenNuggets
I guess what I'm trying to say is that just because he did not explicitly allow something doesn't mean we can't do it. I used the example with the car (which you clearly didn't completely understand) to justify what I'm saying. Since God did not explicitly say that we are allowed to drive a car (or ride a bike, fly on a plane, etc.), by your logic it is prohibited.
Posted by MarioWatsonBeasley 2 years ago
MarioWatsonBeasley
How is it a minor if God didn't give you permission to do it. Not only that, but He gave you instructions on what he wanted. You only know what God wants if He tells you. Did he tell you to play musical instruments in the worship service???
Posted by MarioWatsonBeasley 2 years ago
MarioWatsonBeasley
Why would you drive a car in the assembly??
Posted by ShikenNuggets 2 years ago
ShikenNuggets
OK, I noticed your main argument was that, because it doesn't explicitly say to worship with mechanical instruments it is prohibited. The Bible never says we can drive cars so therefore we shouldn't drive?
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Like I said, majoring on minors. Is it any wonder Jesus said your traditions makes God's word have no effect.
Posted by MarioWatsonBeasley 2 years ago
MarioWatsonBeasley
The authority to use mechanical musical instruments in worship service of a Christian or professing to be Christian Church is what the debate is about. Whether it's OK according to God's word or not. ShikenNuggets
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I went to a church once that did not use instruments. The preaching was just as flat.
Posted by ShikenNuggets 2 years ago
ShikenNuggets
I'm a bit confused, what exactly is being debated here?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by UchihaMadara 2 years ago
UchihaMadara
MarioWatsonBeasleyFuzzyCatPotatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments to Con because Pro dropped Con's second argument about himself being God and authorizing the use of mechanical instruments in Christian worship. All it would have taken was a couple of sentences to refute it, but Pro consistently failed to even mention it throughout the course of the entire debate. Sources to Con because he was the only one who used any. S&G to Con because he had much better formatting; Pro's was very unorganized.
Vote Placed by LDPOFODebATeR0328 2 years ago
LDPOFODebATeR0328
MarioWatsonBeasleyFuzzyCatPotatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
MarioWatsonBeasleyFuzzyCatPotatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30