Mike wrote: So you, too, disagree with the psalmist who wrote to "play skillfully with a loud noise," or to "praise him upon the loud cymbals," or to "make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise"? You want reverence, but not loud. How do you reconcile your disagreement with the psalmist? Do you suppose he expressed his joy with a mournful countenance, so as not to appear worldly?
I should have been more careful in how I worded my post.
I would never knowingly disagree with the psalmist. There is music to God loud and then there is worldly music loud. One honours Him the other dishonours Him.
Where did I imply that David expressed his joy with a mournful countenance?
Neil wrote: "Music to God should be reverent, sober, holy, peaceable" So what does this mean in detail? You admit not knowing Musicology, & yet you claim to know what is reverent, sober, holy, & peaceable, which begs the question. I want to know how you know, Biblically.
If you don't know Neil how can I tell you. You talk as though these things are unknowable from Scripture.
Neil wrote: No doubt, but how? I want detailed, unsubjective answers. Most of what I read in Scriptures consists of either lyrics themselves, or various injunctions to sing, etc. That's not a lot to go on when folks ask what tunes ought to be used. God in His wisdom did not give us any Biblical musical scores - for what it's worth, the oldest known secular one is the [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seikilos_epitaph]]]Seikilos Epitaph[/URL], thought to be from roughly the time of Christ or earlier. Did Paul's Ephesians sing praises that used similar tunes? I have no idea.
The music of rap, rock etc is inappropriate because it reflects the worldâ€™s music and we are not to emulate the world. Music to God should be reverent, sober, holy, peaceable etc. as opposed to loud, abrasive, irreverent, fleshly etc.
Neil wrote: Because Psalmodists accuse rap tunes of being unacceptable for use in worship. All I'm asking is, by what standard should we judge one musical form inferior (say, rap) and another acceptable (e.g. "Old 100th"), without falling into man-centered judgment ("I don't like rap, therefore God doesn't either").
Is it only Psalmodists that say rap tunes are unacceptable for worship?
The standard we should use to judge one musical form over another is the Scriptures.
Neil wrote: tidbit, videos of a bunch of juveniles is not what I was asking for. Where's the musicological analysis? And the attitude doesn't necessarily follow either. I admit a better example may be hard to find, but that doesn't invalidate my question.
I don't understand what you mean by musicological analysis. It's over my head.
Lurker wrote: Of course not.... unless, of course, the purpose is to establish irrefutable proof of one's assertions.
If that's what you believe and your praise is from a broken and contrite heart, then I bid you God speed. However, I don't happen to agree with your interpretation of these texts. In that case, are you able to bid me God speed knowing that I sing praises to God other than Psalms only?
The reason I posted the article was for anyone who would like to read it and maybe give it some consideration.
All I can do is to stand up for what I believe the Scriptures teach on Psalmody just as you and others do.
I bid you God speed as a brother in the Lord but I believe you err in your interpretation of the verses posted.
Regarding your last point, thanks for explaining what happened.
John UK wrote: Ah yes, but it is not a puritan's mind we should be seeking to emulate, for we already have A MIND, the best mind in the universe. There is far too much looking to men, and not enough looking to Christ, and therein lies the problem today. Men say sola scriptura in vain, for they do not in reality perform that.
That is the name of the website. The article is a short history of the Psalter in the Early Church.
Of course we already have the best mind in the universe, the Lord and His Word. Does that mean it's a sin to read articles on things pertaining to Christianity knowing we should judge all things by the Word of God?
Why do you infer that because I posted this article that I am looking to men and not Christ?
Mike wrote: ghost n. "The spirit of a dead person, especially one believed to appear in bodily likeness to living persons or to haunt former habitats."
There is more than one definition for the word ghost.
Dictionary.com ghost â€“noun
* the soul of a dead person, a disembodied spirit imagined, usually as a vague, shadowy or evanescent form, as wandering among or haunting living persons.
* (sometimes initial capital letter ) A SPIRITUAL BEING.
* the principle of life; soul; spirit.
Synonyms: 1. apparition, phantom, phantasm, wraith, revenant; shade, spook. GHOST, SPECTER, SPIRIT all refer to the disembodied soul of a person. SPIRIT is often interchangeable with GHOST but may mean a supernatural being, usually with an indication of good or malign intent toward human beings
From G4154; a current of air, that is, breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively a spirit, that is, (human) the rational soul, (by implication) vital principle, mental disposition, etc., or (superhuman) an angel, daemon, or (divine) God, Christâ€™s spirit, the Holy spirit: - ghost, life, spirit (-ual, -ually), mind.
"The following is not from a King James Bible Only Pastorâ€¦"
"The Disappearing Ghost by Pastor William P. Terjesen"
"The term 'Holy Ghost' began to be universally replaced with 'Holy Spirit' in the Revised Version (of the Bible) of 1881. One of the members of the revision committee was, mystifyingly, a unitarian universalist by the name of Mr. Vance Smithâ€¦ This anti-trinitarian false prophetâ€¦ campaigned loudly for the discarding of the word 'Ghost' in favor of 'Spirit'. Why? Because the word Ghost connotes a personal being, and no self-respecting heretic wants to confess and believe that the Holy Ghost is an actual personal being; the Third Person of the Trinityâ€¦"
"In the term 'Holy Ghost' we have a â€¦ clear, understandable and accurate designation that forces us to think in terms of personal beingâ€¦ I am not suggesting that we should use only the term 'Holy Ghost'; there are times when it is appropriate and acceptable to use the term 'Holy Spirit'â€¦What I am suggesting is that in this day of manifold heresies, we reclaim a perfectly good, accurate and useful word, 'ghost', and thus in our prayers and Bible readings make clear to a dark world precisely what we mean when we confess that we "believe in the Holy Ghost..."that we are unabashedly orthodox Trinitarians."
"John Francis Wade was a Catholic layman who lived in Lancashire, England."
"At the age of 32, Wade produced a Latin Christmas carol, Adeste Fidelis. Though scholars once thought the music was simply Wade's copy of an ancient hymn, further research has led most to conclude that Wade composed the lyrics and music himself. Since that time, Wade's hymn has been translated to the well-loved "O Come All Ye Faithful" that we sing today."
"When the Jacobean rebellion led to persecution of English Catholics, Wade fled the country in 1745. Settling at a Catholic college in Douay, France, Wade began teaching Latin and church song."
The Lone Wolf wrote: DJC49, .on the first day of the week which corresponds to our Sunday, backing up 3 nights and 3 days. Saturday 6PM to Sunday 6AM = one night. Saturday 6AM to Saturday 6PM = one day Friday 6PM to Saturday 6AM = two nights Friday 6AM to Friday 6PM = two days Thursday 6PM to Friday 6AM = three nights Thursday 6AM to Thursday 6PM = three days. So positing a Thursday afternoon crucifixion would fulfill the prophetical three days and three nights as well as resurrecting on the third day.
Just a tidbit of info that I learned from Jewish friends. .their day started at evening. In Genesis we read, there was evening and morning, one day, evening and morning, a second day, and so on. So, 6 p.m. Thurs. for us would be the beginning of Friday for them.