Contact Us

Use the form on the right to contact us.

You can edit the text in this area, and change where the contact form on the right submits to, by entering edit mode using the modes on the bottom right. 

Form Block
This form needs a storage option. Double-click here to edit this form, and tell us where to save form submissions in the Storage tab. Learn more
         

123 Street Avenue, City Town, 99999

(123) 555-6789

email@address.com

 

You can set your address, phone number, email and site description in the settings tab.
Link to read me page with more information.

Database

Harper I.1

James Dodson

PART FIRST.

Declarative; or, the State of the Controversy.

CHAPTER I.

THEORIES AS TO THE RELATION OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC TO THE WORSHIP OF GOD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH.

The importance of ascertaining and indicating at the outset of our inquiry, the actual or supposable competing views touching the question in hand must be apparent. So far as I know, the theories in respect to the use of instrumental music in the worship of the present dispensation, are reducible to three, which, for sake in part of alliteration, may be called, The Preceptive or Prescriptive, The Permissive and The Prohibitory theory.

The Preceptive theory is to the effect that the use of instruments of music in worship is still obligatory, such use having been commanded by God. The Permissive theory is, that the use of musical instruments in worship is neither forbidden, nor enjoined absolutely, but is allowable, and in certain circumstances may be rather advisable or commendable.

The Prohibitory theory, is that the use of instrumental music in worship, so far as the present dispensation is concerned, is destitute of divine sanction, and is unlawful.

According to the first view, instrumental music in New Testament worship is commanded; according to the second view, conceded, and in certain circumstances commended; according to the third view, condemned.

If the first and second of these views can be proved untenable, the third shall have been established, because it is the only alternative left after their rejection, unless it be the alternative of nescience, or confessed inability to decide for any of the theories. The line of argument which shall set aside its rivals, will tend to the confirmation of the third theory. If we can show that God has not made the use of instruments in worship obligatory upon us; if, besides, it can be shown that he does not commend, or in any way sanction this use, it will follow that to use them now for such a purpose is unlawful. For, all concerned in this controversy will admit, that no mode of worship is allowable which God has not in some way sanctioned; whether directly or indirectly. Even Romanists do not claim a liberty to introduce ceremonies which God has not warranted the Church to devise and adopt. If it can be proved that God has neither enjoined instrumental music, nor pronounced its use optional in New Testament

Page 5

worship, nor furnished the Church with a general commission to enact modes of worship not clearly prohibited in his word, the conclusion drawn must be that instrumental music should no longer form a feature of the service of song. It is our conviction that God has done none of the things specified in the previous sentence, and therefore we hold to the conclusion just indicated.