The Instigator
Ahijah
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
MrCarroll
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points

The Bible teaches: mechanical instruments of music are approved by God in the New Testament church

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/2/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 7,909 times Debate No: 16256
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (40)
Votes (4)

 

Ahijah

Con

Is anyone here willing to try and prove this proposition? I am new here, this would be my first debate. I feel as though I could argue better from the negative. Any constructive help or advice will be welcomed.
MrCarroll

Pro

Good evening, I would first like to thank my opponent for allowing me to accept this debate. When most say this, I'm not sure they entirely mean it, yet I think I do in this case. I can understand that someone would be rather skeptical of a kid. I certainly would, so I will do my best to not be an idiot. With that said, let us move on.

Definitions:

mechanical instruments of music (musical instrument) – any of various devices or contrivances that can be used to produce musical tones or sounds. [1]

New Testament church a.k.a the Early Church – the church described throughout the New Testament prior to 325 A.D. [2]

The New Testament does not explicitly condemn nor approve of instruments in the church. There are no examples of the church using instruments or commands to do so. Still, it can be derived from the New Testament passages that God does in fact approve of musical instruments in worship. I will present my case with two separate arguments.

First argument:

a1. Instruments were encouraged and used throughout the Old Testament with approval by God
a2. The New Testament church establishes the Old Testament as God's Word
a3. Therefore, instruments are approved by God in the early church

a1. Instruments were encouraged and used throughout the Old Testament.

Then David spoke to the chiefs of the Levites to appoint their relatives the singers, with instruments of music, harps, lyres, loud-sounding cymbals, to raise sounds of joy. (1 Chronicles 15: 16)

4,000 were praising the LORD with the instruments which David made for giving praise. (1 Chronicles 23:5)

in unison when the trumpeters and the singers were to make themselves heard with one voice to praise and to glorify the LORD, and when they lifted up their voice accompanied by trumpets and cymbals and instruments of music, and when they praised the LORD saying, " He indeed is good for His lovingkindness is everlasting," then the house, the house of the LORD, was filled with a cloud, (2 Chronicles 5:13)

Here we even see God being present showing an obviously approval of instruments.

David was clearly a talented songwriter and harp player, as well as being “a man after God’s own heart.” Psalms and various other passages are very clear that God approves musical instruments.

Praise Him with timbrel and dancing; Praise Him with stringed instruments and pipe. (Psalm 150:4)

a2. The New Testament church establishes the Old Testament as God’s Word.

Paul clearly explains in 2 Timothy 3:16, that “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;” This in itself should be enough to confirm my contention. If my opponent needs more, Christ quotes the Old Testament numerous times.

a3. Therefore, through substitution we may conclude that God approves of musical instruments in the church.

Second argument:

b1. Instruments are approved by God elsewhere in the New Testament (Revelation)
b2. Instruments are not condemned in the early church
b3. Therefore, instruments are approved by God in the early church

b1. Instruments are approved by God elsewhere in the New Testament (Revelation).

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. (Revelation 5:8)

(Revelation 14:2)

And I saw something like a sea of glass mixed with fire, and those who had been victorious over the beast and his image and the number of his name, standing on the sea of glass, holding harps of God. (Revelation 15:2)

In these passages we see use of musical instruments in Heaven. The fact that there are musical instruments described in Heaven, symbolic or otherwise, means that God approves of musical instruments since there cannot logically be anything in Heaven unapproved by God.

b2. Instruments are not condemned in the early church.

b3. From this we may conclude that because God approves of musical instruments, He approves instruments in the early church. This would be different if God specifically told the church not to play instruments, but this is not the case.

From these two arguments, I think I have shown that mechanical instruments of music are approved by God in the New Testament church. I anxiously await Con’s response.


[1] http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
Ahijah

Con

I would also like to begin this discussion by giving thanks to my opponent and to the readers of this debate. Knowing that, what is to be posted here will be forever spoken by the debaters, forever read on the world wide web and forever in the mind of all involved.

Also, I want to assure all the readers, of the ability of the young man in the affirmative position. I have done a brief study of some of my opponent's prior debates and I find him very capable of defending the pro-side of this and any argument. On the contrary notwithstanding the position my opponent has taken cannot be upheld to be the truth found in the Bible. This being said I will undertake to disprove my opponent's affirmative arguments using the standard of faith and religious practices, that standard being the Bible. My opponent and I have agreed that this truth is to be found only in God's written word. To this, then, let us begin the debate, listen well and judge amongst yourself, what is God's truth, written in the Bible. Again thanks to my opponent and all who read this debate.

I concur with the definitions my opponent provided.

So, let us began with my opponent's first argument. He says that:
"a1. Instruments were encouraged and used throughout the Old Testament with approval by God"

I agree on this line of reasoning and have no argument up to this point in his reasoning.

He goes on to state
"a2. The New Testament church establishes the Old Testament as God's Word"

God's word found in the Old Testament was given to different people that practiced a different worship service to God. I don't deny "the Old Testament as God's Word" But, if we are going to take into our worship service the use of mechanical instruments music and say this is God's desire, because "The New Testament church establishes the Old Testament as God's Word" We will also have to take into our worship burnt offerings and incense, these are also part of that Old Testament law. Psalms 66:13, reads: I will go into thy house with burnt offerings: I will pay thee my vows, 14 Which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble. 15 I will offer unto thee burnt sacrifices of fatlings, with the incense of rams; I will offer bullocks with goats. Selah. (KJV) Are we willing to obey this scripture? No! This same book, Psalms, were my opponent took mechanical instruments of music to be used by New Testament church! So if we are to include mechanical instruments, we will have to burn incense and offer up animals. Is this what my opponent is saying? I say, if we take part of the old law, we will have to take all of it. What we need to do is leave the Old Law to the Jews of the Old Covenant and listen to the words in the New Covenant. The male Jews went to Jerusalem three times a year under the Old Testament worship. Exodus 23:17 Three times in the year all thy males shall appear before the Lord GOD. (KJV) Do we want the men in the New Testament church today, go to Jerusalem three times a year? No!

The Old Testament has been abrogated, blotted out. As we read in the New Testament we will see the following.
(1)Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; (KJV)

The laws in the Old Testament were nailed to the cross, alone with mechanical instruments.

(2)Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; (KJV)

(3)Rom 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. (KJV)

We are free from the law of the Old Testament and mechanical instruments!

So my opponent's argument has been greatly damaged by the fact we do not use all of the Old Testament worship in the New Testament church. We find in the New Testament God's Word for Christians today, not His will for the Jews of the Old Testament. When Jesus took Peter, John and James to the mountain of transfiguration (Luke 9:28-36) we read about two men that were manifest there with Jesus, Moses and Elias. Moses the law giver, Elias the Old Testament prophet. But notice in verse 35, we read: This is my beloved Son: hear Him. The Bible said: "hear Him" hear who? Hear Jesus! We do not get our instructions from the Law of Moses or the prophets of the Old Testament. We receive our commands from Jesus and His inspired Apostles.

My friend, states "Paul clearly explains in 2 Timothy 3:16, that "All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;" This in itself should be enough to confirm my contention. If my opponent needs more, Christ quotes the Old Testament numerous times."

Me, con, your opponent does need more, for me to confirm your contention! You say, "Christ quotes the Old Testament numerous times." This is true and of the hundreds of times He speaks of the Old Testament and Psalms, He never refers to mechanical instruments of music. Doesn't this seem strange? Out of all the passages Jesus could have referred to, He never said a word about mechanical instruments of music! What does the proposition say? "The Bible teaches: mechanical instruments of music are approved by God in the New Testament church" This is what my opponent affirmed when he signed up for this debate. Not mechanical instruments in the Old Testament church, not in heaven to come.

Speaking of heaven to come and to answer my opponent's argument. Notice the following.

A. If there will be any instruments of music in heaven, it will be because God has willed it. The reason we do not have them in the worship of the New Testament church is because God has not willed it. He never told us to play an instrument.

B. Note the A.S.V on Rev 14:2 "And the voice which I heard was the voice of harpers with their harps".

C. Rev 5:8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. (KJV)

Speaks of incense being in heaven; we also read of a white horse being there. We don't ride horses in worship! Well most of us don't :)

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. (KJV)

We recognize that these are figures of speech. Such is also the case with the harps in Rev 14:2. We find many symbols in the book of Revelation. But none of which gives us the authority to use Mechanical instruments of music in the New Testament church.

I look forward to my opponent's next argument. I hope that he will begin to argue the proposition as stated. And let the Jews in the Old Testament and the Angels in heaven worship as direct by God. And show us, his hearers where we are to use mechanical instruments of music in the New Testament church.
MrCarroll

Pro

My opponent claims I have not adequately argued for my position, which is, the Bible teaches: mechanical instruments of music are approved by God in the church. It must be understood that the New Testament does not specifically say whether it is approved or not. Nor does it specifically say that instruments were or were not used in the New Testament church. Therefore, it is necessary to search throughout the Bible to find if God approves musical instruments and then prove that He would approve of instruments in the early church. This is what I have been aiming to do.

I will now go over Con’s response to my first argument.

There are no qualms over the first statement. God does in fact approve of instruments in the Old Testament. I do not know why my opponent would believe that God would change His mind on instruments, as there is nothing to say He did. When Christ died, did God change His opinion on right and wrong? Did God change His nature? Of course not.

My opponent has issues with the second contention, claiming that, “God's word found in the Old Testament was given to different people that practiced a different worship service to God.” I ask my opponent, what is worship? I would define it as: “to have intense love or admiration.” [1] Obviously, the Bible makes it clear we can worship other things besides God, even if we aren’t singing to whatever we are worshiping. In fact, the Bible does not define worship as purely musical. Rather Paul says, “Therefore I urge you brethren, by the mercies of God, to present you bodies a living sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.” (Romans 12:1) This is much broader than simply singing songs to Jesus.

My opponent basically insists that “if we are going to take into our worship service the use of mechanical instruments music and say this is God's desire, because ‘The New Testament church establishes the Old Testament as God's Word’ We will also have to take into our worship burnt offerings and incense, these are also part of that Old Testament law.Firstly, playing instruments is not part of Old Testament law anymore than singing is part of that law. Did God command us to sing to Him? No, He commanded us to worship Him, and continues to do so in the New Testament.

Secondly, my opponent quotes the Colossians 2:14 which is (I prefer NASB) “having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” This does not say “The Old Testament has been abrogated, blotted out” but rather that the set of ‘decrees’ and specific laws such as sacrifice have been blotted out. Why sacrifice animals when Christ made the ultimate sacrifice? Christ rendered animal sacrifice useless. Worship and instruments are not remotely a part of these decrees and ordinances. Unlike the Law of Moses–stoning adulterers and such–God’s nature has remained unchanged. Thus it is still wrong to commit adultery. So Con’s statement that, “if we take part of the old law, we will have to take all of it” is quite irrelevant since worship is not a part of the “old law” referred to in Colossians 2:14. My opponent pretends as if the Old Testament does not apply to New Testament people any longer, but 2 Timothy 3:16 explicitly speaks to this. It is merely the laws and ordinances of Moses that don’t apply any longer.

of the hundreds of times [Jesus] speaks of the Old Testament and Psalms, He never refers to mechanical instruments of music. Doesn't this seem strange?” Yes, and I think this supports my position. It seems God’s approval of instruments has not changed since Jesus is in fact God.

So what we have is God approving of musical instruments and there is no evidence of any change of his approval throughout the New Testament, which brings a new challenge upon Con. Since he conceded that in the Old Testament God approves of musical instruments, my opponent must show that God has changed His mind and disapproves of musical instruments. There is only evidence to the contrary. After all, if God did not approve of musical instruments in the early church, He would have made it clear because it would be contrary to what is seen in other parts of the Bible.

Now on to my second argument,

“A. If there will be any instruments of music in heaven, it will be because God has willed it. The reason we do not have them in the worship of the New Testament church is because God has not willed it. He never told us to play an instrument.

Does God have to explicitly command something for it to be permissible by Him? God never said we had to brush our teeth.

We don't ride horses in worship!

Nothing says incense is required for worship, but I don’t think God would disapprove of incense in worship services. Likewise, this means instruments are not required for worship. Neither is singing as I have already explained. Does God approve of riding horses? Yes. Is the horse being used as worship? Not to my knowledge, so this is irrelevant.

We find many symbols in the book of Revelation. But none of which gives us the authority to use Mechanical instruments of music in the New Testament church.

Can my opponent explain why God would symbolize the act of worship with a harp if He didn’t actually approve of its use?

Third argument

Perhaps this is unnecessary, but I thought of a different perspective on all this.

Again, realize that God never says, “I approve of instruments in the church.” Does this mean He doesn’t approve of instruments in the church? Certainly not. And we may conclude from other passages that God does approve of instruments in the church. The greatest commandment as told by Jesus was, “Love the LORD your God.


c1. If by playing instruments, one may praise and therefore love God, then it is in fact approved by God.

David clearly did so; the Psalms are testament to this.

c2. It is possible to praise God by playing instruments in the New Testament church. (Self-evident)

c3. Therefore, God approves musical instruments in the New Testament church.

A similar example could be that God never commanded His people to play sports, but if one loves and honors God through playing sports, then God obviously approves it.

Through these simple arguments taken from different sections of the Bible, I think I made it clear that God does approve of musical instruments in the New Testament church.

[1] http://www.praise-and-worship.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Ahijah

Con

Good day again, MrCaroll and readers.
I will start with a brief reply to my opponents opening statement. He states: "My opponent claims I have not adequately argued for my position, which is, the Bible teaches: mechanical instruments of music are approved by God in the church."
This is the problem we seem to be having. He wants to defend the use of mechanical instruments of music in the church. He said "approved by God in the church." Again this is NOT the proposition. The proposition states "New Testament church" not "the church" I know my opponent is having a terrible time trying to find any scripture to uphold his position. He keeps going back to the laws and ordnances under the Jewish dispensation (Old Testament). He even will travel out of this world and journey to outer space into heaven and bring to us the golden harps and bowls of incense that represented the prayers of the saints, this is an avoidance of the question at hand. I am not going to allow this type of maneuver. He has agreed to defend the proposition as stated. So let him find scripture were we as Christians living in the "New Testament church" we have the authority to use mechanical instruments of music. I know he is having a problem and I feel sorry for him. But this pig belongs to him. He will have to find a way to put the makeup on it. Now, let me move to answering the points my opponent has brought before us.
My opponent says: "the New Testament does not specifically say whether it is approved or not" This has been my objection all alone! My opponent has hit the nail on the head! The New Testament church does not show "approval" for the use of mechanical instruments! And when we do not have the approval from God to perform an act of worship, any worship that we arbitrarily perform is man's invention. This is what we call "will worship" A good example of this is found in Matthew chapter, 15:1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,
2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
3But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? (KJV)
Notice the disciples of Jesus were not following the traditions of the scribes and Pharisees. The Pharisees had put in place, as a religious tradition the washing of hands. God as a religious practice did not approve of this tradition. So Jesus said, the scribes and Pharisees were transgressing the commandment of God. My point being that God did not say to the scribes and Pharisees. Wash your hands as a worship act. They were transgressing the commandment of God by practicing hand washing and offering it as worship act to God. The same way some in the church today use mechanical instruments and offer it as worship to God, with out God's authority. This is "will worship" and it is a transgression of the commandment of God.
(Will-Worship)
In Paul's letter to the saints at Colossae, he condemned the practice of "will-worship," a disposition which is "after the precepts and doctrines of men" (Colossians 2:22-23).
Vine defines will-worship as "voluntarily adopted worship, whether unbidden or forbidden" (1962, 236).
We have no difficulty in understanding what it means to do that which is "forbidden." But what does it mean to do that which is "unbidden"—if it is not doing that about which the Bible is silent?
Noted lexicographer J. H. Thayer described will-worship as "worship which one devises and prescribes for himself" (1958, 168). Everett Harrison commented that "will-worship" is that which "is not prescribed by God but only by (the will of) man" (1971, 72).
Here is the issue: if one may, with divine approval, operate in the realm of silence, why can't he "devise and prescribe for himself" whatever pleases him? And yet, it is this very thing being censured."
(The above was copied from an article at the Christian Courier Website)

When we as Christians have faith that means we believe in something. Examples:
(1)We believe Jesus was the only Begotten Son of God. This is faith in Jesus as God's Son.
(2)When we have faith in the Bible, this means we believe what the Bible says.
(3)When we have faith in heaven. This faith tells us heaven will be our home after awhile.
The Bible says: without faith it is imposable to please God, Hebrews 11:7. Lets look at something else. Go with me to the Bible, the book of Romans 10:17 we read,
(1)"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." So this tells us when we read the word of God we obtain faith. This says, faith comes from hearing God's word.
(2)Romans 14:23 the Bible says: "And he that doubteth is dammed if he eats, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Here the Bible says whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
(Conclusion) So if we can not read were the New Testament church used mechanical instruments of music in worship, we know from these two passages playing mechanical instruments in the worship service is sin.
The Bible does not say thou shall not "baptize a baby", "Thou shall not sprinkle for baptism", "Thou shall not use corn bread and buttermilk on the Lord's table" etc. We cannot permit these in worship. Even though they are not said to be forbidden?
Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. (KJV) How can we use mechanical instruments in the name of Jesus? We cannot, because it is not by faith.
I believe I have demonstrated well, all of the breaches in my opponent's arguments. Now I will show the readers why MrCarrol wants to run back to the Old Testament and try and use Jewish Law for the worship services in the "New Testament church"
If you have a Bible handy, I want you to go with me and read every one of the instances in the "New Testament" were we are told about how to praise God in song. You will notice the screaming silence on mechanical instruments of music.

A. Matt 26:30 And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
B. Acts 16:25 And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: and the prisoners heard them. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
C. Rom 15:9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
D. 1 Cor 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
E. Eph 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
F. Col 3:16 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. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
G. Heb 2:12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
H. Heb 13:15 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. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!
I. James 5:13 Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms. (KJV) No mechanical instruments here!

This is why my opponent wants to go back to the Jewish Law and bring mechanical instruments into the New Testament worship service. He cannot find the examples in the New Testament church spoken of in the Bible.
Again, I want my opponent to answer the stated proposition about the use of mechanical instruments in the "NEW TESTAMENT church". Thank you for your time and attention.
MrCarroll

Pro

Let us get right into the matter. Ahija’s argument, appealing at first, is not logically sound. In fact, the whole idea of disallowing musical instruments in the church is actually the precise thing Christ spoke against in His ministry. I will now explain why.

By the way, I do understand the proposition and acknowledge that I accidentally left out “New Testament” in that sentence. I insist that my arguments have not been contrary to the resolution.

“ ‘the New Testament does not specifically say whether it is approved or not’ This has been my objection all alone! My opponent has hit the nail on the head! The New Testament church does not show "approval" for the use of mechanical instruments!” Stop there. I worded that statement very carefully; the New Testament does not specifically say whether it is approved or not. This does not mean we cannot look at the New Testament and other verses and logically conclude that God would approve instruments in the church.

And when we do not have the approval from God to perform an act of worship, any worship that we arbitrarily perform is man's invention.” This is a bad argument, as this is not written anywhere in the Bible. This whole concept of “will-worship” is not a Biblical concept as far as I know. I’ve never heard of it honestly. My opponent takes Matthew 15:1 out of context, even though it seems to be supporting Con’s position. Here Jesus shows how the Pharisees have their own rules and command others to obey them even though they are not found in the Bible. However, no one is commanding anyone to play instruments. I would ask my opponent, is it a law in the Bible that Christians must sing?
Really, this passage speaks more to the opposite case, condemning instruments in the church without the authority to do so. In addition, there is no passage to be found that condemns instruments in the church, and we could argue according to Con's logic that instruments should not be condemned.


Will worship
Again, I’ve never heard of this concept, and the only example presented is not actually talking about will worship. My opponent takes Colossians 2:22-23 out of context as well. Paul is not talking of worship but rather religious laws and commandments that are man-made, such as washing one’s hand before eating bread. Using instruments in worship is not a commandment. “Noted lexicographer J. H. Thayer described will-worship as ‘worship which one devises and prescribes for himself" (1958, 168).’ ” If this is the definition of “will-worship” then it is not what Con has been saying at all. Worshiping on behalf of one’s own fulfillment is certainly un-Christian. As I have already expressed, worship is for God alone.

Here is the issue: if one may, with divine approval, operate in the realm of silence, why can't he "devise and prescribe for himself" whatever pleases him? And yet, it is this very thing being censured." The Bible is silent on a multitude of specifics such as, can we brush our teeth? But where is the Bible silent on what is wrong? The Bible makes it clear what is sinful. We cannot "devise and prescribe for himself whatever pleases him" because that would clearly be not biblical. This argument is negated.

Con’s argument:
(1) Faith comes from hearing God's word.
(2) The Bible says whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
(3) Therefore, since instruments in the New Testament church are not found, it is sin.

But to show the illogic of his conclusion, we could just as well say, “therefore, since brushing teeth is not found in God’s word, it is sin.” While the conclusion is wrong, the first two contentions are correct to a certain extent. The interesting thing is in the first contention that “faith comes from hearing God’s word.” Guess what? Musical instruments are found in God’s word, even if it is not in the New Testament church. When Romans was written (and still today) the Old Testament was considered God’s word and that is what is being spoken of in Romans 10:17. This argument proves my position more than it proves my opponent’s!

Responding to my third argument, Con quotes Colossians 3:17: “Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father.” My opponent goes on to say, “How can we use mechanical instruments in the name of Jesus? We cannot, because it is not by faith.” I would like my opponent to prove this is the case; he hasn’t so far. The Bible does not say we should wear a collared shirt for church. Can we wear a collared shirt for church in the name of Jesus? I think we obviously can and it would surprise me if Con didn’t wear a collared shirt to church on Sunday. Likewise, there is no reason whatsoever to believe we cannot use mechanical instruments by faith in the name of Jesus. My third argument still stands.

You will notice the screaming silence on mechanical instruments of music.” Simply because the New Testament church does not apparently use instruments in worship does not mean that it would be sinful to use instruments. That’s like saying someone walking into the early church with a dress shirt and tie would be sinning because there were no ties and dress shirts in the New Testament church.

This is why my opponent wants to go back to the Jewish Law and bring mechanical instruments into the New Testament worship service. He cannot find the examples in the New Testament church spoken of in the Bible.” I think this was obvious when starting the debate. While my opponent has made this clear, my opponent has not adequately explained why the Old Testament no longer has any legitimacy in the New Testament. Obviously we are not talking about Old Testament law, which is in fact no longer legitimate. Also, with regards to the Revelation passages, there is nothing to say that we cannot confirm something is acceptable in the early church by looking at a passage in another part of the New Testament. Thus my first two arguments still stand.
Debate Round No. 3
Ahijah

Con

I want to start by saying I have enjoyed, very much the time the readers and my opponent have extended to me in regards to this debate. My heart felt gratitude goes out to each and everyone. The facts in this debate have been laid out for all to consider. These things are spiritual and are not to be taken lightly. The Bible was written to give instruction to tell men of the sacrifice of God's Son, Jesus Christ and to offer a man a way thorough Jesus to obtain eternal salvation. We as men were separated from God through our sins. And to make light of any sin, no matter how small we believe it to be will cause us to loose our salvation. I read were God gave a man the sentence of death for the disobedient act of eating a type of fruit. Any act of willful disobedience will cause a man to loose his home in heaven after awhile. This includes being disobedient in our New Testament worship service.

I will use this time and offer thoughts on some of my opponent's last arguments. My opponent says he does understand the proposition. But I don't see how he is able to understand the debate on mechanical instrument in the New Testament church. And then make his argument from the Jewish Law in the Old Testament. Briefly, here are the facts stated in the New Testament that concern God's commands for our music service in worship.

A. Matt 26:30 And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives. (KJV)
B. Acts 16:25 And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: and the prisoners heard them. (KJV)
C. Rom 15:9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. (KJV)
D. 1 Cor 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. (KJV)
E. Eph 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; (KJV) F. Col 3:16 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. (KJV
G. Heb 2:12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. (KJV)
H. Heb 13:15 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. (KJV) I. James 5:13 Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms. (KJV)

That's it! I am sorry this is all my opponent has to work with. But this is our mandatory command in the New Testament church as far as music in the church. So let my opponent show us mechanical instruments in these passages. If he can, I will concede this debate to him. When we are given a specific way to worship. Every other way is excluded and becomes will-worship. I am sorry that my opponent has not heard this term used before. "(1958, 168). Everett Harrison commented that "will-worship" is that which "is not prescribed by God but only by (the will of) man" (1971, 72)." This man is a Bible scholar. And if my opponent does not agree with this man's definition let him submit his on definition of will-worship. But don't say I have never heard this term therefore it does not apply to the argument. And Matt. 15:1 most certainly is in context of will-worship.

I can't believe my opponent ask the following question.

"I would ask my opponent, is it a law in the Bible that Christians must sing?" What? I listed every New Testament verse chapter and book. Pleases take the time and respond to these verses. He did not answer one of these verses! And then he says the New Testament does not command singing in worship. I could not believe my ears. As I said, I listed every one of the scriptures that have anything to do with music in the church. Let him answer these, please. YES, the Bible commands us to sing in the New Testament church. I will ask you the question, where do you find in the Bible a command for playing? Show me the Book chapter and verse in the New Testament for playing a mechanical instrument in the worship of the church.

My opponent said, "Worshiping on behalf of one's own fulfillment is certainly un-Christian." He also said sometime in his last argument that is telling. I will quote him,
"A similar example could be that God never commanded His people to play sports, but if one loves and honors God through playing sports, then God obviously approves it."
Here is the problem; we do not play sports during worship in the New Testament church. When the saints assemble on the first day of the week for worship to God we only do what pleases God. And we find this information in the Bible. If we want to be New Testament Christians we understand that Jesus and His apostles told us "specifically" how to do this in the New Testament. If we want to play sports we need to go play sports and keep this practice of playing sports, burning incense, the animal sacrifices and mechanical instruments out of the New Testament church. Let us follow the example given in Heb 2:12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.

Brushing teeth, wearing collared shirts and playing sports are not a part of worship. These are things we do outside of the worship service. And we play mechanical instruments of music outside of the worship service just as these other unauthorized activities. We only do what God requires of us when we come before His Mighty Throne. Worship service is a time in our life we set aside the things that please us and do the things we are commanded in New Testament Christianity every thing else is sin. The Bible says," for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."

One more thing and I will rest this in the heavens and let the readers and God decide. My opponent said, and I quote, "my opponent has not adequately explained why the Old Testament no longer has any legitimacy in the New Testament." And I say to my good friend and worthy opponent, you had the obligation to prove the argument that mechanical instruments are to be found in the New Testament church. And you have not adequately explained were the New Testament authorizes mechanical instruments of music. I only hope in your last and final post hear you will give me and the readers one, just one example of the New Testament church using mechanical instruments of music. If you can site one example of this in the New Testament were the church used mechanical instruments the debate is yours. To close, if I have not answered any of my opponents questions it was not by design. And if he or anyone else will post them in the comment section I will gladly answer all of your concerns. And again, I want to thank my opponent and the readers of this very important debate topic. It is a truth; all that was said here will be remember throughout the ages. Goodbye for now and God bless each and everyone!
MrCarroll

Pro

I would also like to thank my opponent for this debate. I knew when I saw the topic that it would be a very interesting debate. In fact, I hadn’t really personally known anyone who actually was against instruments in worship service before this. My opponent makes clear, however, that this is a serious matter, even implying we could lose our salvation. I’m not sure if that’s true, but that’s a different topic.

My position as described by the resolution
I don't see how he is able to understand the debate on mechanical instrument in the New Testament church. And then make his argument from the Jewish Law in the Old Testament.” I asked why the Old Testament holds no legitimacy.


My opponent’s answer: “you had the obligation to prove the argument that mechanical instruments are to be found in the New Testament church.

Actually this is very incorrect. Look at the resolution: The Bible Teaches: Mechanical instruments of music are approved by God in the New Testament church. This does not say whether instruments are present in the New Testament or not. Perhaps they didn't even have the money to buy any or maybe they didn't use instruments for cultural reasons. Rather, I had to prove that if there were instruments in the New Testament church, they would be approved by God. Hence I used other parts of the Bible to show this. For example, in a book we may be wondering if murder is wrong in chapter 4. If the book says murder is wrong in chapter 2, and there is nothing to say that the writer has changed his opinion, we can know that murder is wrong in chapter 4 even if chapter 4 doesn’t touch on the subject. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with using other parts of the Bible to confirm the approval of instruments in worship. After all, the resolution explicitly begins with, “The Bible teaches.” This does not specify what part of the Bible. I think my opponent does not actually know his own resolution. Thus, my first argument and consequently my second argument have not been adequately refuted. The fact still remains that the Old Testament is still good for teaching and correction as expressed in 2 Timothy 3:16.

Is it a law in the Bible that Christians must sing?
My opponent seems a little stunned when I proposed the question, much to my expectations. He immediately points out the verses he has previously described. My opponent answers with a resounding “YES, the Bible commands us to sing in the New Testament church.” So, these verses are actually a law that must be followed. But this brings a dilemma.

Not everyone can speak, let alone sing. If literally singing is a command in the New Testament, then frankly, the mute will not reach Heaven. How do we explain this dilemma? Well, these verses are not simply telling us to literally sing. Rather, they are telling us to praise God. Look at this verse: “[be filled with the Spirit,] speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; (Eph 5:19).” The command here is to sing to the Lord from the heart not just the voice. The point in this passage (and all of my opponent’s other passages) is not the rules of how we worship, but that we should worship and do so from the heart. It doesn’t say, “Worship like this and not like that.” But if we sing, it should be only for the Lord and not for men. I would say that these verses are encouraging us to sing, but they are not commanding it or else the mutes would be sinners.

Worship
My opponent went back to my statements about playing sports, something not found in the Bible (although we find references to sports). My opponent responds, “we do not play sports during worship in the New Testament church.” We may, however, worship God while playing sports. Remember Colossians 3:17: “Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father.” This means, everything we do should be an act of worship. “If we want to be New Testament Christians we understand that Jesus and His apostles told us "specifically" how to do this in the New Testament.” Correct, Paul says exactly how we must worship in Colossians 3:17. Really, brushing our teeth, wearing collared shirts, and playing sports should all be acts of worship. We brush our teeth because our bodies are a “temple of the Holy Spirit.” We wear collared shirts out of respect for God. I don’t know why else my opponent would wear a collared shirt to Sunday service. If it is merely for other people or for tradition I don’t think this would be godly. I can’t emphasize Colossians 3:17 enough here. I think it will be my new life verse. This runs contrary to Con’s statement, “Worship service is a time in our life we set aside the things that please us and do the things we are commanded in New Testament Christianity.” Whatever we do should not be to “please us” but to please God. Worship isn't just on a Sunday morning singing songs; our lives should be worship. Remember what worship actually is: “Therefore I urge you brethren, by the mercies of God, to present you bodies a living sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.” (Romans 12:1)


Will-worship
On the whole matter of will-worship, my opponent has not shown it to be Biblical. The only example is Matthew 15:1, which I have already explained as misinterpreted by my opponent. If this is really will-worship then my opponent is misusing the word, “will-worship.”

My opponent basically argues that anything not found in the Bible is sin. But as I said in the last round, the Bible is not silent on what is wrong. My opponent has not responded to this. I am basically saying that the Bible covers every sin. Instruments in worship are not described as sinful anywhere. And again, this argument is not Bible derived.

Other arguments:
Note that my opponent has not responded to his own argument, which I in fact turned on him to my own argument. He has proceeded to entirely drop it.


My third argument still stands as well. Con has not really directly responded to it. Any qualms he had with it I think I have already responded adequately.

Conclusion:
All three of my main arguments are legitimate and have not been refuted by my opponent. I think the main discrepancy besides the legitimacy of the Old Testament was between what was a command and not a command. Physical singing was not a command; rather we must make melody and praise in our hearts. The command is to worship. Praise God how you would like as long as it is for the Lord and not men. The very Greek word “psalmo” used in Ephesians 5:19 actually implies instruments. Really, none of these verses Con has provided condemn musical instruments, and that is why I didn’t really respond to them much. From all the information gathered and arguments presented, I think it is safe to say that God would approve of mechanical instruments of music in the New Testament church. I thank my opponent for his time and efforts, and I thank the readers for reading.
Debate Round No. 4
40 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by KeytarHero 6 years ago
KeytarHero
So is legalism. There is no Biblical foundation for removing instruments from worship.
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
Here a demonstration of what God will accept in worship singing. Anything more is sin!
Posted by KeytarHero 6 years ago
KeytarHero
No. I keep receiving notifications that people are still posting here. I decided to respond to Dan's comment.
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
By the way, why are you posting on this old debate? You learning about mechanical music in the church?
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
I am not trying to rush you. You take you time. I want you to make the best arguments that can be made. I will do the same. If you have any post concerns about the question and answers. Please let me know. I want to be honest in my answering your questions.
Posted by KeytarHero 6 years ago
KeytarHero
I'm not worried about my votes. And I do have an argument due, but I'm not just going to rush into it. I'm going to give it thought because it's a topic that requires it.
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
Don't you have an argument due?
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
Seems to me you need to worry about your votes. And let Dan worry about his business.
Posted by KeytarHero 6 years ago
KeytarHero
I did not indicate that he was, just that whether you win or lose a debate should have nothing to do with your stance on it, it has to do with your conduct, and arguments and rebuttals presented. In other words, just because someone loses doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong, just that they didn't present stronger arguments than their opponent.
Posted by Ahijah 6 years ago
Ahijah
Hey, KetarHero, Dan did not vote on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by kohai 6 years ago
kohai
AhijahMrCarrollTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious
Vote Placed by MontyKarl91 6 years ago
MontyKarl91
AhijahMrCarrollTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Who said religious people are incapable of debating? This was a very well run debate without a clear winner in my mind. I am no expert on Biblical knowledge, but MrCarrol convinced me. Ahijah, for future reference, try not to use such arrogant and condescending language in your arguments. Pro tackles the issues while you seem to tackle him in every opening. It serves to turn readers off and puts you at a disadvantage. But great debate nonetheless.
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 6 years ago
ReformedArsenal
AhijahMrCarrollTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I have to disagree with Cliff on this one... since the NT Church held the OT as authoritative, anything approved in the OT is also approved in the NT. This includes instruments. Also, Con loses Source vote for using KJV which is widely held as an outdated translation.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
AhijahMrCarrollTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Semantic debate around "approved" nice resolution by Con, it woulhave been useful to see approved defined. Solid defense by Pro but not enough to refute the Position on Con especially because the pont was "approved" not "not forbidden" or "can be inferred"