THE MUSIC
GOD HAS COMMANDED
Matthew
26:30; Mark 14:26 (ESV):
And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the
Acts
16:25 (ESV):
About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and
the prisoners were listening to them,
Romans
15:9 (ESV):
…and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. As it
is written,
"Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles, and sing to your
name."
1
Cor. 14:15 (ESV):
What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind
also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.
Ephes.
5:19 (ESV):
…addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,
singing and making melody to the Lord with all your heart,
Col.
3:16 (ESV):
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one
another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with
thankfulness in your hearts to God.
Hebrews
2:12 (ESV):
…saying, "I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of
the congregation I will sing your praise."
James
5:13 (ESV):
Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him
sing praise.
Rev.
14:3 (ESV):
…and they were singing a new song before the throne and before the four
living creatures and before the elders. No one could learn that song except the
144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth.
Rev.
15:3 (ESV):
And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the
Lamb, saying, "Great and amazing are your deeds, O Lord God the Almighty!
Just and true are your ways, O King of the nations!
INSTUMENTAL MUSIC IN
CHRISTIAN WORSHIP
IS A DIRECT VIOLATION
OF THE WORD AND WILL OF GOD.
Many
champions of change in the Lord’s church today who want Jesus’ one New
Testament church to be “like all the denominations around them”, (see 1st
Samuel 8), are advancing every conceivable explanation, excuse, and then some,
to once again violate the will and word of God, by contaminating and
supplementing His specifically desired, demanded, and designated form of worship
music-singing only, with man-made instruments (Matthew 15:7-9).
They claim that it is not a “salvation issue”, but purposed disobedience to
the will of God in order to fill our pews and offering plates, or to please
ourselves or anyone else, instead of God alone, is always about
salvation, no matter what the “issue” is (Matt. 7:13-27, John 14:15, Acts
20:28-30, Gal. 1:6-10, Heb. 10:26-31, 2nd Peter 2 & 3). Others,
particularly our teens and new converts, perhaps because they have never had a
complete and in-depth study of the topic, might see adding instruments to our
worship assemblies as “no big deal” (Hos. 4:6; Acts 17: 30-31), while still
others may need a refresher course in what they learned years ago, so that
upcoming generations can be taught the great truths of walking faithfully in the
obedience of the “old paths” (Jer. 6:16). But no matter what the situation,
this study will clearly show that, according to God’s specifically stated
instructions and commands, INSTUMENTAL
MUSIC IN CHRISTIAN WORSHIP IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE WORD AND WILL OF GOD.
PART 1: WHEN GOD HAS SPECIFICALLY STATED, WHAT
HE SPECIFICALLY WANTS, THE ‘SILENCE’ OF THE SCRIPTURES ON WHAT IS
SPECIFICALLY, EXCLUSIVELY PROHIBITED, IS NONETHELESS, EXCLUSIVE AND PROHIBITIVE!
Some
today claim (quite erroneously as we shall see in our discussion of “psallo”
and “psalmos” later on in this study) that because a practice (or in this
case, THE practice of using instruments in worship) is supposedly not expressly
and specifically forbidden in the Bible, then it is acceptable to God. This is
referred to as the silence of the Scriptures being “permissive”. If that
were the case, then the addition of rosary beads, candles, incense, dancing, and
instruments of music, as well as whole host of other “aids” to prayer and
worship, would be welcome additions to worship, with God’s approval. Certainly
one can see where this permissiveness would inevitably, invariably, and
eventually lead (Does “Disciples’ Fellowship; Rules for Church” ring a
bell?). The Bible Itself however, bears out that the silence of the Scriptures
is very, very
“prohibitive”. In other words, when God tells us specifically what He does
want us to use to carry out a specific action, that excludes everything
else that could be added, subtracted, and/or substituted, in the practice of
that specific activity. So, for the purposes of this study, let it be noted that
the term, “silence of the Scriptures”, is defined as, “When
God/Jesus/Spirit, Who have all power and authority, have specifically stated how They want
something done, Their ‘silence’ as to all the ways that They do
not want it done, is included in the exclusive statement of how They
do.”
For
example, let us consider when Nadab and Abihu offered “unauthorized
fire before the Lord, which He had not
commanded them” (Lev. 10:1-2; ESV), He killed them-HE
KILLED THEM; not because they had offered fire that He had
specifically forbidden, but because they had offered fire other than what He
had specifically commanded. The silence of the Scriptures is
so prohibitive, that it cost them their very lives. As the July 2006 issue of
the “Spiritual Sword” with the
theme, ‘What Is The
“The
actual issue is ‘Does the silence of the Scriptures prohibit?” Both the Old
and New Testaments abound in examples of those who walked by faith as well as
those who walked by opinion. The earliest example is Cain and his offering to
God. The writer of Hebrews states his brother offered his sacrifice by faith
(Heb. 11:4). As a result, God commended Abel but rebuked Cain (Gen. 4:6-7). In
light of other examples in Hebrews 11, we can conclude that Abel obeyed God
exactly as commanded. He acted ‘by faith’ which came from hearing God’s
word. The direct command of God to these two did not allow any other act of
obedience. Cain, on the other hand, offered what he wished, instead of what God
required. Cain walked by his own opinion and was rejected.
Nadab
and Abihu were sons of Aaron serving as priests at the tabernacle. They offered
‘strange fire,’ i.e., fire not taken from the altar of sacrifice (Lev.
16:12) and were destroyed by God. What was their crime? The inspired text states
that they offered ‘that which [God] had not commanded them.” To express it
in another way, ‘They offered unauthorized fire before the Lord’ (Lev. 10:1,
ESV). This direct command from God did not allow any deviation; His silence on
any other kind of fire proved to be authoritative.
A
further illustration of this principle is found in David’s moving the Ark of
the Covenant. The Philistines had captured it but sent it back to
He
later called all of
When
David discovered the prescribed way to move the ark, he did not hesitate to obey
exactly (Dt. 10:8). For the ark to be carried by the Levites was walking by
faith. To move it by cart was much easier, was more convenient, and had a
historical precedent. Yet, to do so was walking by opinion.
This
principle is stated in the book of Jeremiah. God instructed him to stand in the
gate of the temple compound and urge the nation to ‘Amend your ways’ (Jer.
7:3). Their transgressions were numerous but one was ‘they have built the high
places [centers of idol worship] of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son
of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded
not (Jer. 7:31). A comparison of this passage with the original law forbidding
idolatry plainly shows that a practice which the Lord has not commanded is
equivalent to an explicit prohibition!
Perhaps
the clearest teaching on silence is found in the book of Hebrews. The writer
affirms that Jesus Christ could not function as a priest (Heb. 8:4). This is
because He was of the tribe of
Walking
by faith can bring certainty to our spiritual lives. If the principle of the
restoration movement, ‘Speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where
the Bible is silent,’ was true 200 years ago, why is it still not valid today?
Walking according to our own opinions is clearly forbidden in the Holy Bible. (Keep
this statement in particular in mind when we discuss the Carolina
Messenger article at the end of this study-DED) Though
one like this may claim to be following the Lord, he must realize there is still
a question. (‘Far more than a “question” according to Titus
1:10-16-DED.)
Let
us all be members of the church you can read about in the Bible. Let us walk by
faith and declare a return to this great principle. Let us call Bible things by
Bible names and do Bible things in Bible ways…Let us walk by faith!”
To
briefly re-state and re-examine his final point for just a moment; we see the
silence of God as absolutely prohibitive in Heb. 7:12-14, where it says: “For where there is a change in priesthood, there is necessarily a change
in the law as well. For the One of Whom these things are spoken belonged to
another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. For it is evident
that our Lord was descended from
God’s
Word does not have to explicitly condemn, in order to absolutely exclude. The
Lord used fruit of the vine and unleavened bread in instituting the “Lord’s
Supper” and said “Do this…” We
understand therefore, that coffee and donuts, despite their possible appeal to
the people assembled in the morning for worship, or roast lamb despite its
possible theological significance, are excluded. And despite any possible,
potential, personal preferences of today’s people, we cannot replace or
supplement the fruit of the vine and unleavened bread with coffee and donuts,
any more than we can change the day we are to partake, and still remain faithful
to God. Why? Because God specifically told us all
the things not to use and all the
days we are not to partake? No!
But specifically because, He told us specifically what to use, and by example, when (Luke
22:7-20, Acts 20:7)! And those who are willing to live a life of true submission
to their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, are content with simply, and only, doing
the specifically-stated, and explicitly exclusive will of the Father, which is
the only way that will lead them to Heaven, while excluding those who rebel and
refuse to follow (Matt. 7:13-27; John 4:23-34, 6:60-66, 7:16-18, 8:31-47,
14:15-24, 15:1-16:15; Phil. 2:1-16).
Aren’t
the lessons from Scripture clear enough in such places as 1st Samuel
15, regarding King Saul, and 1st Kings 12:25-14:20 regarding King Jeroboam?
Jeroboam, because of his personal agenda, changed what the Lord had commanded in
the areas of who and what God was, where to worship, which tribe the priests
were to be from, what feast days were to be observed and when, as well as other
changes, “that he had devised in his own heart” (1st Kings
12:33); and he paid the price for his arrogant disobedience too; read and see!
And
how many times in Scripture has God specifically warned His people not to add
to, take from, turn to the left, or to the right, from what He said? (Our 2006
Wednesday night evangelism class covered this completely in the early stages of
our study. For those of you who have it and need to refer back to it, please do
so!) And how many times does He have to tell us to choose obedience over
disobedience and why (Deut. 28 for example)? Obedience is truly “Priority
One” with the God who said “sing”!
PART 2: OLD COVENANT REQUIREMENTS AND
PRACTICES ARE NOT TO BE BOUND ON, OR FOUND ACCEPTABLE TO, NEW TESTAMENT
CHRISTIANS, UNLESS EXPRESSLY STATED WITHIN THE NEW COVENANT ITSELF!
Another
reason often advanced for the use of instrumental music in worship is the one
advanced by those who either do not understand, or are unwilling to accept for
personal preferences’ and agendas’ sake, the differences between the Old and
New Covenants. Neither Catholicism, which borrows certain practices such as the
priesthood, robes, incense, hierarchy, etc from the Old Testament; nor some of
today’s denominations which meet on Saturday for worship, having re-instituted
a sad semblance of the Old Testament Sabbath; nor most major Protestant
denominations (and sadly, some of our own uninformed, unstudied, and/or
unwilling brethren) which point to the thief on the cross as an example of
“baptismless conversion”; understand the differences between the Old and New
Covenants (see Hebrews 7-10, but particularly for our purposes here, 9:15-17).
Yes,
instruments were used in the Old
Testament and particularly noted in “Psalms” to worship God; they obviously
and certainly were a part of God’s
Old Testament people’s expression of their belonging to God. (An incredibly
detailed and specific list is found in the absolutely excellent resource book
entitled, “The Instrumental Music
Issue” by Everett Ferguson, Jack P. Lewis, and Earl West; © 1987,
Gospel Advocate Company) ‘But so were animal sacrifices, tithing, Sabbath
worship, Temple worship services, the Menorah, the Altar of Incense, the Day of
Atonement, the Feast of Tabernacles, the Levitical priesthood, and circumcision,
to name a few. But that these practices are no longer in effect for God’s New
Testament people to follow (that is, Christians-Romans 4:16-25, etc.) is made
repeatedly apparent throughout the New Testament, and particularly in the Book
of Hebrews as previously stated (see especially chapters 7-10).
And
be sure to take another look at the resounding and scathing rebukes of the
Holy-Spirit-inspired apostle Paul, to those of the 1st century
congregation of the
And
the Holy Spirit, speaking through Paul, specifically said:
“Look:
I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no
advantage to you. I testify again to
every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.
You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have
fallen away from grace.” (Galatians
5:2-5)
PART 3: BIBLICAL DOCTRINE AND HISTORICAL
DOCUMENTATION:
‘So
much for the introduction. The rest of this body of work is taken largely from a
tract received from a local congregation/church of Christ (Rom. 16:16) by an
unlisted author, as well as an absolutely fabulous resource book from Yeomen
Press in Chikasha Oklahoma, entitled “Directions
For The Road Ahead: Stability in Change Among Churches of Christ”,
which is a MUST READ for anyone interested in the preservation of the precious
bride of Christ in their area (other fabulous resources abound and are available upon request from Doug as well).
One
of the first things that many people notice about our worship services is the
beauty of the singing and the absence of a piano or organ. No, it’s not
because we can’t afford them; it’s because of God’s commands. “What command!?!?” you may ask. I’m glad you asked!
Many
people are surprised to learn that instrumental music in so-called
“Christian” worship is generally less than 200 years old in the Protestant
movement and less than 1,000 years old even in the Catholic Church. The
introduction of the instrument into the Lord’s church was at a congregation in
Midway Kentucky in 1859 (only
148 years ago, and some
1826 years AFTER Christ’s church was established in 33 A.D., where
instrumental music in worship was never used or practiced by the first
centuries’ church), by a very liberal brother named Dr. Lewis L.
Pinkerton, who caused much division in the brotherhood by not only this, but by
several other departures from the apostle’s doctrine as well (See Spiritual
Sword, Volume 37, No. 3, April 2006, pgs. 15-18). Compare these instrumental
music facts and dates with almost 2,000 years of church history, and this
worship innovation becomes a clear departure from long-standing church tradition
and doctrine, as set forth by the apostles, and carried forward by those
faithful to their (God’s) teaching (Romans 16:17-18; 1 Thess. 4:1-8; and
etc.).
And
this historical bias toward a cappella singing in the church (singing without
musical instruments) wasn’t because musical instruments didn’t exist or no
one knew how to play them. In fact, note the following from brother Milo Richard
Hadwin in the absolutely fantastic resource book entitled: “Directions
For the Road Ahead: Stability In Change Among Churches Of Christ”; © 1998,
Yeomen Press (pgs. 55-56):
“For
many centuries before the church began, Jews and pagans used instrumental music
in worship to God. For several centuries after the church began, neither Jews
nor pagans who became Christians used instrumental music in worship to God.
Although professing Christians disagreed on virtually every doctrine in the
Christian system, one belief and practice that was universal was that the music
offered to God in worship was to be singing unaccompanied by instrumental music.
Nothing less than a command of God would have been sufficient to account
for such a radical reversal in belief and practice. Such commands are found in
Ephesians 5:18-20 and Colossians 3:16-17…The New Testament is not silent
concerning instrumental music, contrary to what often has been presumed. It is
argued here that the earliest Greek-speaking readers of the Greek New Testament
understood the words ‘psallo’ and ‘psalmos’ as used in these passages,
explicitly to exclude and forbid the use of instrumental music. This, and this
only, accounts for the universality of the teaching and practice of the church
on this matter. The meaning was clearly understood as embedded in the words
used in these commands. It was only among people centuries later who lost sight
of the meaning of the words or the authority of Scripture that instrumental
music was introduced. But among Greek-speaking people, even into this century,
instrumental music has been excluded from worship to God. God used language in
the New Testament that clearly prohibited the use of instrumental music in
worship to Him, and Christians who do so are violating the will of God.” (Emboldening/Underlining
Mine-DED).
This
was the stand taken by the churches from the first century through the first one
thousand years, because of Biblical teaching. In both Eph. 5:19 and Col.
3:16, where some very specific words were chosen by the Holy-Spirit-inspired
apostle Paul, the Greek word “ado”,
(“sing”), which excludes the use of instruments, was used. And, in
fact, in other New Testament passages, there are no statements or commands that would allow musical instruments to be
included in Christian worship. Proof of this is how the Greek Orthodox Church ,
which still reads from the Greek
text, has historically interpreted, and
continues to this day, to understand the
Bible to prohibit musical instruments in its worship services.
Additional
proof of the historic nature of singing only, in “Christian” worship, is the
literal meaning of the Latin phrase “a
cappella” which we use today in English to mean “singing
without instrumental accompaniment”. The
Latin phrase actually means “to
sing in the manner of the church”, reflecting the manner of over ten
centuries of church music tradition (in contrast to the rest of the musical
world which all used instruments.) Again, brother Hadwin in “Directions”:
“Virtually
every point of Christian doctrine was disputed in the first centuries of the
Christian faith. But one point on which there was unanimity, uniformity, and
universality, was that the form of music employed in Christian worship was
singing unaccompanied by instrumental music. Every effect must have an adequate
cause. Surely nothing less than the most powerful and demanding cause could
account for pagans and Jews , who for centuries had employed instrumental music
in their worship, to suddenly cease their use on becoming Christians, and for
centuries more to employ nothing but singing in the music they offered to God.
So striking is this fact, that it created a new term in our language, “a
cappella”, a term that refers to singing without instrumental accompaniment,
“according to the chapel (church)”.
What
cause could have been powerful enough to have made such an astounding change...
what reason is powerful enough to account for the dramatic and immediate change
in Jewish and pagan practice regarding instrumental music on their becoming
Christians? Only a belief that the use of instrumental music in Christian
worship was sinful could have abruptly changed such a deeply ingrained and
centuries-long practice. And only a command of God could have produced such a
belief. Do such commands exist? Twentieth century opponents of instrumental
music base their opposition on commands contained in Ephesians 5:18-20 and
Colossians 3:16-17. An examination of the evidence indicates that the earliest
writers who professed faith in Christ based their practice on these commands as
well. (Emboldening/Underlining
Mine-DED)
Five
different writers who lived as adults in the second century
(Justin Martyr, approx. 150 AD; the writer
of 2 Clement 9:10, between 120 and 140 AD; the writer in Book VII of the
Sybylline Oracles about 180 AD; Tertullian; and Clement of Alexandria, about 190
AD-see “Directions”, pgs 59-60: DED) gave reason why they sang in
worship to God. In each case they either explicitly quoted these commands or
stated that their reason was because they had been ‘instructed’, it was the
‘will of my Father’, or they had been ‘commanded’, with evidence that
these biblical commands were in mind.”
Moreover,
in addition to ancient church authorities, some very recognized Catholic and
Protestant theologians were also very strongly opposed to suggestions that
instruments might be brought into congregational worship of God. A few examples:
“Only one instrument do we use, the word of
peace wherewith we honor God, no longer the old psaltery, trumpet, drum, and
flute.” –Clement (an early Christian
writer)
“I have no objections to instruments of
music in our chapels provided they are neither heard nor seen” –John
Wesley; founder of the
“David
formerly sang in psalms, also we sing today with him; he had a lyre with
lifeless strings, the church has a lyre with living strings. Our tongues are the
strings of the lyre, with a different tone, indeed, but with a more accordant
piety.”-Chrysostom (a Catholic Church authority)
Martin
Luther (“founder” of the
“Musical instruments, in celebrating the
praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the
lighting up of lamps, the restoration of the other shadows of the law. The Papists, therefore, have foolishly borrowed this, as well as many
other things from the Jew. Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that
noise: but the simplicity which God recommends to us by the apostles is far more
pleasing to Him”
–John
Calvin (theologian behind much Baptist, Presbyterian, and present-day Protestant
doctrine)
“I
am an old man, and an old minister; and I here declare that I never knew them to
be productive of any good in the worship of God; and have had reason to believe
that they were productive of much evil. Music, as a science, I esteem and
admire; but instruments of music in the house of God I abominate and abhor.” -Adam
Clark (Adam
Clark’s Commentary, Volume 4, page 686)
“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. I would as
soon pray to God with machinery as to sing to God with machinery.”
-Charles Spurgeon
But
as in view of brother Hadwin’s statements above, that, “It
is argued here that the earliest Greek-speaking readers of the Greek New
Testament understood the words ‘psallo’ and ‘psalmos’ as used in these
passages, explicitly to exclude and forbid the use of instrumental music.
This, and this only, accounts for the universality of the teaching and practice
of the church on this matter. The meaning was clearly understood as embedded in
the words used in these commands.” let us consider some of his earlier
considerations such as Clement of Alexandria about 190 B.C.:
“About
190 A.D. Clement of Alexandria listed eight musical instruments used by ancient
peoples and said: ‘We, however, make use of but one instrument, the word of
peace alone by which we honor God, and no longer the ancient psaltery, nor the
trumpet, the tympanum, and the aulos, as was the custom among those expert in
war and those scornful of the fear of God who employed string instruments in
their festive gatherings, as if to arouse their remissness of spirit through
such rhythms. (Paedagogus, Book 2, chapter 4).’
The
essay in which this statement is made is especially important because it
contains the first known argument by a professed Christian writer against
instrumental music and in favor of Christians worshipping without instrumental
accompaniment. As Clement developed his argument, he quoted Colossians 3:16-17
at the center of his case…Clement quoted Colossians 3:16-17 in the course of
his argument against instrumental music and in favor of vocal music. This is
especially significant, since this passage contains the word ‘psalmos’. If
that word meant ‘a song sung to instrumental accompaniment’, Clement’s
argument would have been destroyed. But Clement felt no need to explain anything
about ‘psalmos’. The word clearly and obviously had no instrumental
association in his mind. Otherwise he would have been using a scripture that
required or permitted instrumental music to sustain his opposition to it!
The
words ‘psallo’ (“make melody”; DED)
and ‘psalmos’ (“psalms”;
DED) were continually used by writers from
the second century onward in contexts where opposition to
instrumental music was being expressed or unaccompanied singing was being
advocated. For example, in about 325 A.D. Eusebius wrote the first history of
the church. But he also wrote a lesser-known commentary on the psalms. In
commenting on Psalms 91:2-3 he said, ‘Of old at the time those of the
circumcision were worshipping with symbols and types it was not inappropriate to
send up hymns to God with the psalterion and kithara,…….We render our hymn a
living psalterion and a living kithara, with spiritual song. The unison of
voices of Christians would be more acceptable to God than any musical
instrument. Accordingly, in all the churches of God, united in soul and
attitude, with one mind and in agreement of faith and piety, we send up a unison
melody in the words of the Psalms. We are accustomed to employ such psalmodies
and spiritual kitharas because the apostle teaches this saying, ‘in psalms and
odes and spiritual hymns’.
Several things are noteworthy in this passage from Eusebius. First, this
writer, intimately acquainted with the history of the church from its beginning,
matter-of-factly and unselfconsciously reflected the contrast between the
ancient Jewish practice of using instruments with the universal Christian view
of their unacceptability. Second, Eusebius said the reason they sang
unaccompanied by instruments was because of the command of Paul in Ephesians
5:19 concerning ‘psalms and odes and spiritual hymns’. His statement is
nonsense if ‘psalms’ (psalmos) even permits instrumental music, much
less requires it.”
In addition to these examples, in their exquisite and previously noted
work, “The Instrumental Music Issue”
by Everett Ferguson, Jack P. Lewis, and Earl West; © 1987, Gospel Advocate
Company; the following are also helpful in historically validating the early
churches’ leaderships’ understanding of the apostles’ doctrine, and
unflinching obedience to, the Biblical command as originally put forth in the
Greek language, which they used:
“Niceta, bishop of Remesiana in
what is now Yugoslavia, wrote one of the first treatises on church music.
Apparently, some had such a ‘spiritual’ view of worship that they considered
thoughts alone (‘silent singing’) the proper activity in worship and would
have banished singing along with other outward ceremonies from the Old
Testament. Niceta responded to them:
It is time to turn to the New Testament to confirm what is said in the
Old, and particularly, to point out that the office of psalmody is not to be
considered abolished merely because other observances of the Old Law have fallen
into desuetude. Only the corporal institutions have been rejected, like
circumcision, the Sabbath, sacrifices, discrimination in foods. So too, the
trumpets, harps, cymbals, and timbrels. For the sound of these we now have a
better substitute in the music from the mouths of men. The daily ablutions, the
new-moon observances, the careful inspection of leprosy are completely past and
gone, along with whatever else was necessary only for a time-as it were, for
children. Of course, what was spiritual in the Old Testament, for example,
faith, piety, prayer, fasting, patience, chastity, psalm-singing-all has been
increased in the New Testament rather than diminished.
The anonymous treatise, ‘Questions and Answers for the Orthodox’, is
now ascribed to Theodoret, bishop of Cyrhus in
107: Question: If songs were invented by unbelievers to seduce men, but
were allowed to those under the law on account of their childish state, why do
those who have received the perfect teaching of grace in their churches still
use songs, just like the children under the law?
Answer: It is not simple singing that belongs to the childish state, but
singing with lifeless instruments, with dancing, and with clappers. Hence the
use of such instruments and the others that belong to the childish state is
excluded in the singing of the churches, and simple singing is left. For it
awakens the soul to a fervent desire for that which is described in the songs,
it quiets the passions that arise from the flesh, it removes the evil thoughts
that are implanted in us by invisible foes, it waters the soul to make it
fruitful in the good things of God, it makes the soldiers of piety strong to
endure hardships, it becomes for the pious a medicine to cure all the pains of
life. Paul calls this the ‘sword of the Spirit,’ with which he arms the
soldiers of piety against their unseen foes, for it is the word of God, and when
it is pondered and sung and proclaimed, it has the power to drive out demons.
The common perspective between Niceta and Theodoret, in two different
languages and parts of the empire, is notable. Instrumental music, along with
other ritual practices of the Old Testament, had been abolished for Christians.
The singing of Psalms of the Old Testament was continued in the church.”
(For
some Biblical insight into the immediately preceding paragraphs, see Amos
5:18-23, 6:4-6)
PART 4: THE GREEK WORDS “PSALLO” &
“PSALMOS”
So why do many today claim that the Greek word “psallo” (“make
melody”) can be used to allow
instrumental music in worship to God, and be acceptable to God today? In CLASSICAL
Greek, the meaning of the word “psallo” did
include the idea of playing or plucking (like a bow string, a hair, or a harp
string) on something. But that the word in the ‘koine’ Greek (common Greek
of the day which the Bible was written in) carried no such meaning, is borne out
repeatedly by a vast multitude of documented references, only a sampling of
which are noted above. It’s being used and understood to exclusively mean
“sing” and “sing” only, is inarguably and incredibly clear, as seen in
the way those who heard and used it in those times did so.
However, despite the fact that the Greek Orthodox church of today, the
overwhelming majority of church of Christ scholars of the past 200 years, nearly
every Protestant reformer of the 1500’s-1700’s, early Christian writers of
the first few centuries who certainly understood their own language-the one in
which the Bible was actually written-far better than we, ALL used passages such
as, and explicitly including, Eph. 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, to show that
instrumental music in Christian worship is, was, and always will be a sin-a
direct violation of the Word and Will of God, some today want to cling to an
obscure, Classical Greek meaning, of “pluck”, for “psallo”, in order to
keep their instruments in worship. The ridiculousness of this position is
clearly shown in the following:
Romans
15:9: “…and SING (psallo) to your name.”
1
Corinthians 14:15: “…I will SING (psallo) praise with my spirit, but I
will SING (psallo) with my mind also.”
James
5:13: “Let him SING (psallo) praise.”
The Bible is indeed It’s own best translator.
And that Bible translates “psallo” as “sing”, period.
Whatever
Eph. 5:19 contains, it COMMANDS. It is
a Divine Directive written to the whole Ephesian congregation (see Eph. 1:1).
Eph. 5:15, 5:16, 5:17, 5:18, 5:19, and 5:20, are all written, to the whole
congregation - to everyone in the church there. Whatever they contain, they
COMMAND. ALL are to “address
one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs”. ALL are to “sing”. And ALL
are to “make melody to the Lord with all their heart”, whatever that
may be proven to mean. It is not optional. IF
the “plucking” definition were correct and true, then all of the
following statements would of necessity, also, be absolutely correct and true:
-Even
this definition would not satisfy those who clamor for it, as only stringed
instruments would be allowed still, as one cannot “pluck” a wind or
percussion instrument. Drums, horns, etc, would still be in violation, as only
instruments that could be “plucked”, would be acceptable.
-EVERY
member of the congregation, in order to comply with the Divine Instruction, as a
matter of obedience, would have to “pluck” (i.e., play a stringed
instrument) in worship-every, single, one of us. To NOT do so, would be to
violate the passage, and worship in vain (Mt. 15:7-9). Again, this would not be
optional, but essential. (How’s your
guitar-plucking these days?)
-If
“pluck” is the true definition and explanation of the word “psallo”
here, then it is not an option, but a requirement, for
worshipping in spirit and truth. And not only so, but by extension and
application, that would mean that every worship service that we, or any of those
faithful Christians we have ever known have ever attended, wherein each of us as
individuals had not played or plucked a stringed instrument, was “in vain”.
Think about that. You can’t have it both ways. It’s not optional. If it’s
contained in the passage, it’s commanded by the passage. Whatever “make
melody to the Lord with all your heart” means, any time we didn’t, or
don’t do it now, is disobedience to the word and will of God. (How’s your
harp-playing holding up?)
But
even
if one were to have
used the term “psallo” in its classical meaning of “plucking” (which it
is obvious they didn’t in New Testament times by the preceding arguments); but
even if they had, God still specified what
was to be
“plucked”, and we cannot, must not, replace or amend God’s specific desire for
“plucking or making music” with
the heart,
for ours or anyone else’s desire to make music with the harp, etc, or we are
indeed “playing with fire.”
That
instrumental music in Christian worship is a direct violation of the Word and
will of Almighty God is also evident from the fact that it is shown to be what
Col. 2 considers “will-worship”, which is the sin of putting our own will
above His…
Please
note the following excerpted article:
DISREGARDING
THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST (by
Wayne Jackson)
From “The Spiritual Sword” of Jan, 2003;
Getwell church of Christ.
(For “End-Note”
references, see Spiritual Sword article)
The
bumper sticker on the passing automobile admonished: “Question Authority!” I
could not but be reminded of the philosophy of the 60’s “hippie” movement,
when authority of every sort was resisted. In that era of “every man [and
woman] did that which was right in his own eyes” (cf. Judg. 21:25),
“authority” became a hiss and a by-word. And so an earlier generation sowed
to the wind, and we are reaping a whirlwind (cf. Hos. 8:7). Authority is sneered
at by many today-and not in the “world” alone; that attitude has found a
home among many in the family of God.
The
most common word for “authority” in the Greek New Testament is exousia
(sometimes translated as “power”-esp. KJV). The term, with a variety of
uses, occurs some 102 times in the inspired documents. The word implies the right
to act, specifically to forbid certain activities, or to impose obligations,
upon others. There are two major categories of authority-absolute and delegated.
Only Deity possesses absolute authority. All other rightful authority is
delegated by God.
In
speaking of our Creator, Paul affirmed that a potter has a “right” (exousia),
over the clay (Rom. 9:21; cf. Luke 12:5; Acts 1:7; Jude 25). After he was
disciplined by Jehovah, Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, humbly conceded that
“all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; and He [the Lord]
does according to His will in the army of Heaven and among the inhabitants of
the earth; and none can stay His hand or say to Him, ‘What are you
doing?’” (Dan. 4:35).
Prior
to the incarnation (when the eternal Word was manifest in the flesh-cf. John
1:14), Christ operated on a level of “equality” with Jehovah. By His own
voluntary submission, however, Jesus “emptied Himself” of the independent
exercise of absolute authority, thus becoming a servant (Phil. 2:6-7), seeking
not His own will, but that of the Father (John 6:38). After His earthly sojourn,
as He re-entered heaven, a new level of authority was bestowed. With the
exception of that power retained by the Father (1 Cor. 15:27), when the Lord
Jesus was enthroned, “all authority”, both in heaven and on earth, was
bequeathed to Him (Matt. 28:18; Eph. 1:20-23; Rev. 1:13).
Christ
also bestowed a certain level of authority upon the apostles and prophets (cf.
Eph. 2:20). To reject the teaching of an apostle (or other inspired person) is
to repudiate Christ Himself, and the Father as well (Luke 10:16). There are no
authoritative voices speaking directly from God today-papal claims, Mormon
“apostles”, and church-infected Diotrephian rulers to the contrary not
withstanding (III John 9).
Finally,
it must be observed also that there is a sacred authority that is resident in
the inspired, written documents that were produced by those whom God selected
for that noble task (II Tim. 3:16-17; II Pet. 1:20; 3:1-2). This reality-that
the Scriptures inhere divine authority-is well illustrated by Christ’s
admonition to the Sadducees: “…have you not read
that which was spoken unto you by God?” (Matt. 22:31; emp. added). Further,
when Paul argued the case for the financial support of elders who labor so as to
be worthy of “double honor”, he appealed to both the Old Testament and New
Testament Scriptures as containing authoritative precedent (1 Tim. 5:17-18; cf.
Deut. 25:4; Luke 10:7).
It
is, therefore, a manifestation of arrogance of the highest order to ignore, to
deliberately flaunt, or to in any way oppose the authority of the Son of
God-either directly or indirectly. And yet, there are numerous examples that
illustrate flagrant breaches of this Biblical truth. They exist both in the
larger community of “Christendom”, and, unfortunately, within the
Will-Worship
In
the same epistle wherein Paul demanded that the Christian’s teaching and
practice must be “in the name of the Lord” (Col. 3:17), the apostle
condemned a perversion he characterized as “will-worship”. He described the
traits of an evolving Judaistic/proto-Gnostic heresy, as evincing a “show of
[human] wisdom in will-worship” (Col. 2:23).
The
Greek term, ethelothreskeia, is interesting.
W.E. Vine contended that the word signifies “voluntarily adopted worship,
whether unbidden or forbidden.” J.H. Thayer described
the transgression in this fashion: “worship
which one devises and prescribes for himself, contrary to the contents and
nature of the faith which ought to be directed to Christ.” Balz and
Schneider call it “self-chosen worship.” In
short, will-worship is a worship wherein one substitutes his own preference for
that which is authorized by the Lord. (emph. added)
Where,
then, does this leave those who offer prayers to Mary or to the saints, or who
burn incense, and count rosary beads as aids to their supplications? What shall
be said of folks who, in the absence of any authority from Christ, contaminate
their hymns of praise with the clattering noise of carnal instruments-without a
semblance of New Testament authority for such? Why have so many churches turned
periods of devotion to the Almighty into circus-like arenas of entertainment
where Christian “performers” vie for the loudest applause? And why is it
that a growing number of our brethren over the past few decades have abandoned
even a threshold consciousness of the authority of Christ concerning their
worship-some going so far as to contend that there are no rules, absolutely
none, that regulate New Testament worship? Such a claim would justify even the
Texas woman of some while back, who did a “belly-dance” in her church,
alleging that the exercise was but an exhibition of her “God-given” talent?
Additionally, as brother Hadwin closes his excellent chapter in “Directions”:
“The
argument being used in this chapter is not that instrumental music is wrong
because writers in the early centuries said so. They are not authoritative for
doctrine; only the Bible is. But to understand the words used in the bible, one
sometimes has to go to the literature of the period to see how the words were
used at the time. Meanings of words are determined by their use in context…
It is clear from the writing of those who professed to be Christians in
the centuries immediately following the writing of the New Testament, that those
Greek-speaking people who read the Greek New Testament saw no instrumental
association in the words ‘psallo’ and ‘psalmos’. In fact the contexts
in which they used those words indicated they believed those words as used in
the New Testament excluded instrumental music. If those words did exclude
instrumental music, then its use is explicitly condemned in Ephesians 5:18-20.
Certainly these words provide no authority for using instrumental music in
church worship. The fact that the Greek-speaking church never used instrumental
music and opposed its use is further confirmation of those points.” (Underlining
mine-DED)
As
has been repeatedly shown throughout this study, God requires the unconditional
obedience of His people, even to those commands that we might be tempted by
satan to consider as “non-salvation issues”, or “unimportant details”;
God cares about the details and especially
about the heart attitudes towards Him when one either chooses to obey, or
disobey them. To continue down a course of deliberate disobedience, after having
received the knowledge of God’s truth, causes any child of God, to become an
enemy of God (Heb. 10:26-31). And Hebrews, the book which contains many such
warnings about disobedience and apostasy, reminds us once again in chapter 5,
verses 5-9, that Jesus is the Source of eternal salvation “…to all who obey Him.”
(Emphasis mine; DED).
Many religious groups are convinced that their singing without
instruments would sound terrible; and many of them might be right (although you
never know unless you try for a while). But in saying this, they miss a very
important point: God doesn’t care about the musical appeal to the masses of
the music offered; He cares about the faith, the loyalty, and the praise of the
heart completely committed to obeying Him in all things, no matter what (1 Sam.
15). The Bible doesn’t command that we sing well; just that we sing-a good
thing for some of us!
Now it so happens that the congregational singing done at the churches of
Christ is generally so good that most visitors from the community are pretty
impressed with it. But even if the singing were absolutely horrible, the command
would be the same, as would our response to it (Hebrews 13:15). Additionally,
human observation seems to reinforce the truth, that God knows what He’s doing
(Go figure!!!). Without instruments people tend to sing better, pay attention to
the words better, and generally get more encouragement internally from the
singing portion of the worship service. With instruments, people tend to listen
to the instruments rather than sing, ignore the words of the song, and come away
with only an appreciation of the pretty music, or an inflated sense of pride in
the performers. But whether humans can make good sense of God’s commands
really isn’t the point; God has commanded and we dare not refuse and rebel. We
must worship in spirit and truth if our worship is to be acceptable to God; and
instrumental music is a vivid violation of both.
One
reason that this study is so very necessary right now, is due to the efforts of
some very dynamic, emotionally-appealing, and well-polished brethren, such as
Max Lucado, Rubel Shelley, and Jeff Walling et al, who are doing everything in
their power to “get around” the teaching of God on this matter (to which our
obedience is as vital to our salvation as it is with every other command of
God), and lead as many of our children and the children of God whom we love,
into this disobedience with them* (See
Many more Biblically-accurate and detailed studies of this topic, as well
as numerous well-documented exposés on some of these men’s contrarian
efforts, are available upon request, originating from such fine and
always-Biblically sound resources as the “Firm
Foundation”, “Spiritual
Sword, and others. (The year 2006 has been an absolute blockbuster for
the Spiritual Sword publication, having produced the three themes to this point:
“A Century of Controversy” (April 2006); “What is the
Although
as the apostle Paul said, “…there must be factions among you in order that
those who are genuine may be recognized” (1st Cor. 11:19), let us
determine to pray for these currently misled and misleading brethren who are
leading in the teaching of this false doctrine, that if they are doing this in
full knowledge of what God has commanded, that they might repent therefore of
this wickedness of theirs and that, if possible, the intent of their heart may
be forgiven them (Acts 8:20-24). If, on the other hand, they are just perhaps
ignorant of what God has specifically commanded, let us determine to educate any
and all that we can, for souls are at stake.
But
either way, let us
determine, to never, ever, EVER
compromise, on any command of God; to SING His praises, to Him, and to one
another, as we worship Him, and Him alone, according to His desire alone, as He
specifically stated in His Word.
In
the Love of God and His Eternal Truth, your servant for His sake;
Douglas
E. Dingley;
Evangelist
for the
Brother
Walling’s long-standing, Biblically-contrary opinion, according
to his own lips, is extremely well-documented in both orally recorded
tapes and word-for-word transcripts going as far back as 1981; it is, I believe,
even more easily found than the practices of the church for which he preaches in
fact. The validation of that early event and subsequent ones spanning the last
25 years since, are noted below, and in reality, meant only and honestly to
inform, in exactly the same type of effort as Biblically put forth in the
eternal Record by Paul regarding Hymenaeus, Philetus, and Alexander, who had
“made shipwreck of their faith”, “swerved from the truth”, and etc (1
Timothy 1:19-20; 2 Timothy 2:16-18, 4:14), and as put forth by John (the
oft-called “apostle of love”) about Diotrephes and other false teachers of
his day who refused to abide “in the teaching of Christ’, as put forth by
the apostles (2 John 8-11, 3 John 9-10).
WALLING’S WORDS FROM
1981:
“Jeff
Walling of the Providence Road church in Charlotte, NC has been making this
argument for years. For example, as far back as 1981 he publicly took such a
stand. That year the
WALLING’S WORDS FROM
1995:
Jeff Walling And The 1995
Campus Minister's Conference
(Don Blackwell)
I have in my hand a copy of a
tape of Jeff Walling's presentation at the 1995 Youth Minister's Conference held
in
I have set out to review this
tape. I believe the best way to expose Walling and his error is to do so with
his own words. For this reason, I have listed various headings indicative of the
Change Movement, and
then typed quotations from
Walling's presentation. I have also added some words of review.
The bad thing about an article of
this type is that you can not hear the laughter in the auditorium and the
various silly voices that Walling does during his presentation. I assure you
that even after reading the article, you will not have gotten the full effect
until you hear the tape. It is not my intention to misrepresent Jeff Walling,
and lest anyone think I have, I would be willing to send you a copy of the
tape so you can hear it first
hand.
THE NON-IMPORTANCE OF
DOCTRINE
One very obvious area that is
attacked by the Change Movement is Doctrine. If it is going to be changed
without opposition, it must first be relegated to a position of non-importance.
Notice the way Walling does this through the use of humor. He says...
And
then somebody says, "Will you come and speak to the, you know, the
ministerial conference, with the senior ministers?" We don't call ‘em
that, but, you know, the preachin' guys. And that always gives you a headache
‘cause they want to ask you all these questions about stuff that nobody else
cares about, you know what I mean? "What's your position on this?" and
I feel like saying, "When was the last time a lost person asked you that
question, you know?"
ATTACK ON MUSIC
A second prominent area that is
being attacked by Walling and others with the same agenda is music. The trend is
to make our worship in song more modern and contemporary. One way in which this
is being done is through the use of "praise teams." Praise Teams are
nothing more than a group of men and women who are talented singers who stand
before the congregation and "lead" the song service (A direct
violation of 1 Timothy 2:8-15-DED). Notice Walling's comments on the
"praise teams" at this function:
...two
fantastically gifted praise teams have reminded me how much things have changed
in the last few years. I mean, I remember coming to Campus Ministries' Seminar
when we thought it was cool that one song leader used overheads. Whoa, whew,
cutting edge man, look out! And now, Lordy, I walked in the back door late, and
thought I'm in the wrong building here. I mean, you know? I have to admit
though, the last group had something; you
guys were fantastic, but the last group had something you guys don't have, and
that is one of the best looking Christian sister singers that I have seen
anywhere.
THE ROLE OF WOMEN
A third area that is attacked by
the Change Movement is the role of women. The change is toward women having a
more prominent role in the leadership of the church. See if you notice this
tendency in Walling's remarks below.
It
is exciting to be here at a place where the ability and the gift of a number of
Christian ladies is recognized, and their contribution to what's happening to
the brotherhood worldwide. Now, I'm happy to say that specifically coming from
California, cause right up the road from me, I know that you see Scott Lambert
up here, and the one you didn't see up here is the one that makes Scott look so
good, and that's my good sister and friend, and one of the "ministers"
of the Malibu church of Christ, Luoana Gill, and I know she's not alone. I know
there are a number of other ladies, who whether they call you
"minister," or call you "women's counselor," or call you,
"oh that gal that helps," whatever title they give to you, praise God
for the fact that we are able to tap into the wonderful gifts that God has
given, the ladies that He's placed all around us. Amen? Amen! And we need to,
let's praise God for that. That's 'propriate to do.
(Round of applause goes up.)
WALLING'S VIEW OF THE CHANGE
MOVEMENT
Very little needs to be said
about this section. It seems quite evident that Jeff Walling is well aware of
his role as a leader in changing the church of our Lord. The fact, however, is
that on the Divine side, the Lord's church is perfect. Those who are a part of
"the cutting edge of change" will tell you they are seeking to change
those imperfections on the human side. The problem with that is that many of the
areas being changed are areas that are unchangeable -- areas on the Divine side.
Walling said:
But
I need to tell you, I really believe this is an awfully exciting and important
time to be where you are. It's an exciting time to be involved in
this
is the Golden Age. I don't feel like this is the Golden Age. I do feel like this
is the virtual age of, of some kind of virtual reality in churches of Christ,
where things are happening so quickly around us.
Where
the tension level is zooming, as those who would call themselves part of the
cutting edge,...you know there's like lots of people out in our brotherhood who
would like to take a cutting edge to the cutting edge. Do you understand what
I'm talkin’ about here? There is a great deal of tension, which makes this an
exciting time. It makes it an exciting time because things are changing, old
habits are being questioned, old tradition, I mean we've got the most sacred of
cows being trodded through butcher shops all over this country in churches of
Christ where people are willing to ask questions that would have been heresy to
even voice before. And I'm not saying that we have lots of sacred cows that need
to be slaughtered, but every now and then it's just good to check the herd to
make sure you don't have a few goats in there, if you know what I'm sayin’.
PROGRESSIVE CHANGE
It is clear from the following
excerpt that brother Walling understands that change must be progressive. He
understands that all of the "desired" changes can't be made overnight.
People will see through that and rebel against it. If one is going to change a
congregation, it must be done slowly. No doubt, this is why they are often very
successful. Walling sympathizes with these youth ministers:
...and
you are struggling with how do I meet the needs of these young people? How do I
help them to understand? How do I be cutting edge, and new wave, avant garde,
and progressive, without losing my job? ‘And making everyone else in the
congregation really irritated with me...I have to wonder if you're at a place in
your ministry where you don't have to go to the
VULGARITY
Vulgarity, per se, is not a trend
of the change movement, but a lack of respect toward those things traditionally
considered appropriate is. This movement is very much reflective of our society
as a whole. Things once considered taboo are now embraced with arms wide open.
The following vulgarity makes the point. Walling continues,
...Jesus
does have a way for us to keep our balance, and it is only found in him. You
see, right in there is where Paul's big "but" comes in. Mark it down
in your notes and then turn to Second Corinthians chapter 2 verse 14 to find it.
Those of you later reading the transcript of this will not enjoy that near as
much as those in the audience did. As you'll note, there's only one
"t" in the word that I was referring to out of verse 14...and I'm so
thankful for Paul's big "but" that he puts right here in the middle of
this text, and I want you to think of it that way. I know you won't remember
this, "Did you hear about Walling saying "Paul's big but?" I want
you to remember this.
NO PATTERN THEOLOGY
The
attack on doctrine begins with the philosophy that the Scriptures are not a
pattern for us to follow.
{NOTE:
Such philosophy is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matt. 12:30-32), Who drove
the apostles to write (2 Ptr 1:16-21) that we must follow the pattern that they
delivered, because it was, and is, God’s
pattern (See: Rom. 16:17-18; 1st Cor. 11:1-2; 2nd Cor.
4:1-3; Eph. 4:11-16; 1st Thess. 4:1-8; 2nd Thess. 2:9-15,
3:6-15; 1st Tim. 1:3-11, 4:1-11, 6:3-5; 2nd Tim. 1:13,
2:15-19, 3:1-4:4; Titus 1:9-2:15; Heb. 2:1-4; 2nd Ptr 3:15-18; 1st
John 2:24-27; and 2nd John 1:6-11; as examples-DED}
When the pattern is gone, one can
only imagine what will come next. Walling states this point very clearly:
...and
all we're doin’ is sayin, "I just want to do what the Lord calls me
to." Course, we don't like followin’, we like havin’ a map. Don't tell
me follow you, just give me a map. Some of us think he did, that this is a
diagnostic tool. I don't need the leading of the Lord, I've got the Scriptures.
It is my substitute for the leading of the Lord. The problem is Scriptures
doesn't tell me whether to live in
BAPTISM
One area the Lord's church has
been renowned for defending in years past is baptism. Unfortunately, it too has
come under attack by some of those who once defended it. Walling asks,
How
many of you have been pressed about baptism in the last few years? You guys are
water regenerationalists, that's what you are. You believe there's magic in the
water, and man we work the water. We try and splain how it makes sense folks.
That water makes sense. That water is an important symbol and it shows. ‘And
the uniting, and going down and going up. Baptism is silly, no matter how you
cut it! Let me make it very plain. If you are out there trying to explain
baptism because it makes a lot of sense, and it's this great symbol, and it
shows this, and this is the closest thing you ever come to bein’ buried, you
know, when you go down under that water, and come back up. That's the closest
you ever come to dyin, and don't you see how. Folks, baptism is dumb from any
standpoint other than God's. You (unclear) somebody up there and dunk 'em up and
down in the water, and you try to tell me, "This is really, this is serious
business." We get little baptismal suits, make it look formal, you know.
The continuation of the
discussion on baptism sounds more like something out of a stand up comic
routine. Walling uses the "funny" voices and there is laughter
throughout. He continues,
"And
I ask you now," and they ask them the confession in the water, and I always
wondered, why do we do it in the water? These folks are scared, nervous, half
the time the baptistery ain't well heated. We're askin’ them the most
important question in the world, and they're scared, nervous, and frightened. We
could say, "Taco and a Coke," they'd say, "Uh huh." Am I
gettin to you yet? Have I offended you yet? Hang on, we'll get there. I want you
to feel the ridiculousness of something that is one of God's choices that I have
quit tryin’ to explain.
There is much more that could be
brought out concerning this presentation such as Walling's comments on
"brotherhood wranglings," his gross paraphrasing of biblical stories,
the use of applause offered as praise to God and several other things. Brethren,
the bottom line is this, Jeff Walling is a dangerous man! The evidence is
abundant! We need to get the word out, and warn those who are unaware. He is a
very smooth talker and sways many people, but the Bible still says, "mark
them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have
learned; and avoid them" (Rom. 16:17).