Sample Chapter

Jesus, Lord of My Worship

Malcolm L. Hill

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Jesus" means Saviour and "Lord" means Master. If Jesus Christ is to be our Saviour and Master, then we must learn to worship Him in His appointed way (John 4:24). It cannot be the case that we can worship as we please and still be pleasing in His sight. During Christ's ministry on earth, there were those who worshiped God in vain (Matt. 15:8-9). There seems to have always been the false concept that, "as long as I think my worship is right and I like it then it is acceptable with God."

Had God said, "Worship Me," then any kind of worship would be pleasing in His sight. But, wherever and whenever God has spoken, as to how we are to worship Him, we must respect His Word in this matter. Nadab and Abihu had little regard for the Lord's wishes when it came to the kind of fire He commanded (Lev. 10:12). Cain cared little about the Lord's Word when it came to what he was to offer in worship (Gen. 4:1-7). One thing we must get in our heart and soul real good is that when God says something He means it. This principle must be remembered in all of our walk with God.

A FALSE CONCEPT ABOUT WORSHIP TO GOD

There is an idea that is floating around, and it has for some time, that all that the Christian does is worship to God. Let me explain what is being said. There are those who say one is worshipping God when he is working, playing, eating, sleeping, helping others, and the like. All that the Christian does is worshiping God.

This is a false concept of worship. The Greek word for worship that is obeisance, do reverence to. Thus, worshiping God is a particular act performed including obeisance and reverence to God. So, we have the wise men coming to worship Christ (Matt. 2:2). Some would have them worshiping Christ while they walked or rode their camels to worship Him. When the wise men came to Christ and His mother, the Bible says they fell down and worshiped Him (Matt. 2:11). According to some they were worshiping Christ before they fell down to worship Him. Christ told Satan that God alone was to be worshiped (Matt. 4:10). But in this same verse we have our Lord saying that we are to serve God. The Christian serves God all the time but he worships God at various times (Matt. 4:10).

The Eunuch went to Jerusalem for to worship God (Acts 8:27). If all that we do as God's children is worship, then the Eunuch as well as the Holy Spirit did not know it. Paul told Felix that he had before gone up to Jerusalem to worship (Acts 24:11). Thus, we can see that worship is a specific act in which we engage. It is not something we do all the time, as some have supposed.

THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF WORSHIP

Actually, there are only two kinds of worship. We have true worship and we have false worship. We have worship according to God's plan and we have worship according to man's plan. Jesus talked about the true worshiper in John 4:23, and that the true worshiper would worship God "in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). "In spirit" means that we will worship God from our hearts. "In truth" means that we will worship God according to His word (John 17:17).

False worship includes a number of things. It includes the worship of includes merely going through a form or ritual. It includes leaving out something God has demanded. It includes adding to what God has prescribed for worship.

WHAT ARE THE FIVE THINGS TO BE DONE ON THE LORD'S DAY?

The Bible reveals five things that the early Christians did on the first day of the week. If we would be like them, we must do as they did. There must not be any additions nor subtractions. First, we know they had a period of Bible study or preaching. Paul preached to the church at Troas on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). Second, while Paul preached at Troas he also observed the Lord's Supper with the Christians there at the same time (Acts 20:7). So, we have the Lord's Supper in our Lord's Day services, if we would be like the early church.

Third, they had prayer in their worship assemblies on the first day of the week (Acts 2:42). Fourth, they had singing in the early church on the Lord's Day (Acts 2:42; Eph. 5:19). Fifth, they had giving of their means on the first day of the week (I Cor. 16:1-2). We do not know the order in which these things were done, but we do know they were observed in the early church. Sometimes we have those who would make fun, or, at least, they would speak disparagingly about these things being observed.

We have those among us today who seem to be related to the gnostics of the First Century A.D. The gnostics claimed to have a deeper understanding and greater knowledge than anyone of their time. So it is with us today. We have those who want us to know they are scholars and have a much keener insight on matters than all others put together. These five things I have mentioned that were observed by the early church are too simple for this intellectual group. So, they ridicule us for observing these things and talking about the five items of worship. Well, call them what you may, there are still five things the early Christians did on the first day of the week. This still stands, and it will stand in the day of judgment. We shall see where the "scholarly" and the "wise men" are on that day. They may make fun now but on that occasion it will not appear too humorous.

MISTAKES MADE IN WORSHIP TODAY

There are a number of mistakes made in worship to God today. Men do not seem to be too concerned about these matters. But, I would impress on your mind that it is very, very serious to do things which God forbids or has not authorized. Everything we do as Christians should be done by the authority of God (Col. 3:16-17). "In the name of the Lord" means by the authority of the Lord. "Open up the door, in the name of the law," means to open the door by the authority of the law.

There are those who do not observe the Lord's Supper on the first day of the week. They may observe it two or three times a year or even more, but this is far from what the early Christians did (Acts 20:7; 2:42). To leave off the Lord's Supper is but to separate ourselves from Christ (II John 9…11). When we leave off what God has commanded, then we will have our names taken out of the Book of Life (Rev. 22;18…19). It is vain worship when people come together on the Lord's Day and leave off the Lord's Supper.

Another mistake made by many is that of adding instrumental music to the worship of God. There is not one jot or tittle of authority for such. Instrumental music was never in the early church. Not a single congregation of God's people ever used it during the days of the apostles. If so, then, where is it?

Some are quick to say that instrumental music is a church of Christ issue. But let us set the record straight. It is not a church of Christ issue. There were many who opposed the instruments of music in worship to God who were not members of the New Testament church.

Theodore Beza said:

"If the apostle justly prohibits the use of unknown tongues in the church, much less would he have tolerated these artificial musical performances which are addressed to the ear alone, and seldom strike the understanding even of the performer themselves" (Girardeau, Instrumental Music, p.166).

Beza was not a member of the church of Christ.

Erasmus, a Catholic, in writing on I Cor. 14:19, said:

"We have brought into our churches certain operatic and theatrical music; such a confused, disorderly chartering of some words as I hardly think was ever in any of the Grecian or Roman theatres. The church rings with the noise of trumpets, pipes, and dulcimers; and human voices strive to bear their part with them. Men run to church as to a theatre, to have their ears tickled. And for this end organ makers are hired with great salaries, and a company of boys, who waste all their time learning these whining tones" (Girardeau, Instrumental Music, p. 166).

Thomas Aquinas, a Catholic scholar of the 13th century, said:

"Our church does not use musical instruments, as harps and psalteries, to praise God withal, that she may not seem to Judaize" (Bingham's Antiquities. Vol. II, p. 483, London Edition).

John Girardeau, Professor, Columbia Theological Seminary, Presbyterian, wrote:

"It has thus been proved, by an appeal to historical facts, that the church, although lapsing more and more into defection from the truth and into a corruption of apostolic practice, had no instrumental music for twelve hundred years; and that the Calvinistic Reformed Church ejected it from its services as an element of Popery, even the Church of England having come very nigh to its extrusion from her worship. The historical argument, therefore, combines with the Scriptural and the confessional to raise a solemn and powerful protest against its employment by the Presbyterian Church. It is heresy in the sphere of worship" (Girardeau, Instrumental Music, p. 179).

James Pierce, Presbyterian scholar of the 18th century, said:

"I come not to say somewhat of the antiquity of musical instruments. But that these were not used in the Christian Church in the primitive times is attested by all the ancient writers with one consent. Hence, they figuratively explain all the places of the Old Testament which speak of musical instruments, as I might easily show by a thousand testimonies out of Clement of others. . . From what has been said, it appears no musical instruments were used in the pure times of the church" (Pierce, A Vindication of the Dissenters, Cited by Girardeau, Ibid. pp. 157-158).

John Calvin, the Presbyterian founder, said:

"Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting up of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the law. The papists, therefore, have foolishly borrowed this, as well as many other things, from the Jews. Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us by the apostle is far more pleasing to Him" (Calvin, Commentary on Ps. 33 and I Sam. 18:1-9).

Dr. Lyman Coleman, a Presbyterian, said:

"The prevailing mode of singing during the first three centuries was congregational. The whole congregation united their voices in the sacred song of praise in strains suited to the ability....The most ancient and the most common mode of singing was confessedly for the whole congregation, men, women, and children to blend their voices in their songs of praise in great congregation. Such is the testimony of Hilary of Augustine and Chrysostom. 'Formerly all came together and united in their song, as is still our custom. Men and women, the aged and the young, were distinguished only by their skill in singing, for the spirit which led the voice of each one, blended all in one harmonious melodyí" (Coleman, The Primitive Church, pp. 370-371).

Charles Spurgeon, a Baptist preacher, wrote:

"David appears to have had a peculiarly tender remembrance of the singing of the pilgrims, and assuredly it is the most delightful part of worship and that which comes nearest to the adoration of heaven. What a degradation to supplant the intelligent song of the whole congregation by the theatrical prettiness of a quartet, bellows, and pipes! We might as well pray by machinery as praise by it" (Spurgeon, Commentary on Ps. 42).

"Praise the Lord with harp. Israel was at school, and used childish things to help her to learn; but in these days when Jesus gives us spiritual food, one can make melody without string and pipes. . .We do not need them. That would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument like the human voice" (Spurgeon, Ibid.).

Mr. Benedict, a Baptist historian, said;

"In my earliest intercourse among this people, congregational singing generally prevailed among them. The introduction of the organ among the Baptists. . . This instrument, which from time immemorial has been associated with cathedral pomp and prelatical power, and has always been the peculiar favorite of great national churches, at length found its way into Baptist sanctuaries, and the first one ever employed by the denomination in this country, and probably in any other, might have been standing in the singing gallery of the Old Baptist meeting house in Pawtucket, about forty years ago, when I then officiated as pastor (l840).... Staunch old Baptists in former times would as soon tolerated the Pope of Rome in their pulpits as an organ in their galleries, and yet the instrument has gradually found its way among them.....How far this modern organ fever will extend among our people, and whether it will on the whole work a RE-formation or DE-formation in their singing service, time will more fully develop" (Benedict, Fifty Years Among Baptists, pp. 204-207).

John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church, said:

"I have no objection to instruments of music in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen" (Cited by Clarke's Commentary, Vol. 4. p. 684).

Adam Clarke, the great Methodist Commentator, wrote:

"I am an old man, and an old minister; and I here declare that I never knew them 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. This is the abuse of music; and here I register my protest against all such corruptions in the worship of the Author of Christianity. The late and venerable and most eminent divine, the Rev. John Wesley, who was a lover of music, and an elegant poet, when asked his opinion of instruments of music being introduced into the chapels of the Methodists, said in his terse and powerful manner, 'I have no objections to instruments of music in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen.' I say the same." (Clarke, Commentary Vol. 4, p. 684).

Professor Edwin Dickinson, of Oberlin College, wrote the following (He was not a member of the church of Christ):

"In view of the controversies over the use of instrumental music in worship which have been so violent in the British and American Protestant churches, it is an interesting question whether instruments were employed by the primitive Christians. We know that instruments performed an important function in the Hebrew temple service and in the ceremonies of the Greeks. At this point, however, a break was made with all previous practice, and although the lyre and flute were sometimes employed by the Greek converts, as a general rule, the use of instruments in worship was condemned. Many of the fathers, speaking of religious song, make no mention of instruments; others like Clement of Alexandria and St. Chrysostom, refer to them only to denounce them. Clement says, 'Only one instrument do we use, viz., the word of peace wherewith we honor God, no longer the old psaltery, trumpet, drum, and flute.' Chrysostom exclaims, 'David formerly sang in psalms, also we sing today with him, he had a lyre with lifeless strings. Our tongues are the strings of the lyre, with a different tone indeed but with a more accordant piety.' St. Ambrose expresses his scorn for those who play the lyre and psaltery instead of singing hymns and psalms: and St. Augustine adjures believers not to turn to theatrical instruments. The religious guides of the early Christians felt that there would be an incongruity and even profanity in the use of the sensuous, nerve-exciting effects of instrumental sound in their mystical, spiritual worship. Their high religious and moral enthusiasm needed no aid from external stimulus: the pure vocal utterance was the more proper expression of the faith" (Dickinson, History Of Music in the Western Church, p. 54).

McClintock and Strong's Cyclopedia, Vol. 8, p. 739, says:

"The Greek word psallo is applied among the Greeks of modern times exclusively to sacred music, which in the Eastern Church has never been any other than vocal, instrumental music being unknown in that church, as it was in the primitive church. Sir John Hawkins, following the Romish writers in his erudite work on the 'History of Music,' makes Pope Vitalian, in A.D. 660, the first who introduced organs into churches. But students of ecclesiastical archaeology are generally agreed that instrumental music was not used in churches till a much later date.; for Thomas Aquinas, A.D. 1250, has these remarkable words: 'Our church does not use musical instruments, as harps and psalteries to praise God withal, that she may not seem to Judaize.' From this passage we are surely warranted in concluding that there was no ecclesiastical use of organs in the time of Aquinas. It is alleged that Marinus Sanutus, who lived about A.D. 1290, was the first that brought the use of wind organs into churches, and hence he received the name of Torcellus. In the East the organ was in use in the emperor's courts, probably from the time of Julian, but never has either the organ or any other instruments been employed in public worship in Eastern churches; nor its mention of instrumental music found in all their liturgies, ancient or modern."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, p. 652, states:

"Although Josephus tells of the wonderful effects produced in the Temple by the use of instruments, the first Christians were of too spiritual a fibre to substitute lifeless instruments for or to use them to accompany the human voice. Clement of Alexandria severely condemns the use of instruments even at Christian banquets. St. Chrysostom sharply contrasts the customs of the Christians when they had full freedom with those of the Jews of the Old Testament.

Schaff, in his History of the Christian Church, Vol. 4, p. 438, says:

"The use of organs in churches is ascribed to Pope Vitalian (657…672). Constantine Copronymos sent an organ with other presents to King Pepin of France in 767. Charlemagne received one as a present from the Caliph Haroun al Rashid, and had it put up in the cathedral of Aixla-Chapelle. . . The attitude of the churches toward the organ varies. It shared to some extent the fate of images except that it never was an object of worship .... The Greek church disapproved the use of organs. The Latin church introduced it pretty generally, but not without the protest of eminent men, so that even in the Council of Trent a motion was made, though not carried, to prohibit the organ at least in the mass."

American Encyclopedia, Vol. 10. p. 688, states:

"Pope Vitalian is related to have first introduced organs into some of the church of western Europe about 670; but the earliest trust-worthy account is that of the one sent as a present by the Greek Emperor Constantine Copronymos, to Pepin, king of the Franks, in 775."

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, p. 657, says:

"For almost a thousand years Gregorian chant, without any instrumental or harmonic addition was the only music used in connection with the liturgy. The organ, in its primitive and rude form, was the first, and for a long time the sole, instrument used to accompany the chant."

Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, p. 1702, states:

"In the Greet church the organ never came into use. But after the eighth century it became more and more common in the Latin church; not, however, without opposition from the side of the monks....The Reform church discarded it; and though the church of Basel very early introduced it, it was in other places admitted only sparingly and after long hesitation."

In Chamber's Encyclopedia, Vol. 7, p. 112, it is stated:

"The organ is said to have been first introduced into church music by Pope Vitalian I in 666. In 757, a great organ was sent as a present to Pepin by the Byzantine emperor, Constantine Copronymos, and placed in the church of St. Corneille at Compeigne. Soon after Charlemagne's time, organs became common."

In Questions on the Confession of Faith and Form of Government of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, published by the Presbyterian Board of Publications, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1942, p. 55 the following question is asked:

Question 6. Is there any authority for instrumental music in the worship of God under the present dispensation? Answer. Not in the least; only the singing of psalms and hymns and spiritual songs was appointed by the apostles; not a syllable is said in the New Testament in favor of instrumental music nor was it ever introduced into the Church until after the eighth century, after the Catholics had corrupted the simplicity of the gospel by their carnal inventions. It was not allowed in the Synagogues, the parish churches of the Jews; but was confined to the Temple service and was abolished with the rites of that dispensation.

Now, none of these quotations are from members of the church of Christ. How then could instrumental music in worship to God be a church of Christ question only? Almost everyone of our day thinks the instrumental music question is and has been a church of Christ issue. Many, many outside the church of Christ realized it was sinful and wrong.

Another mistake in worship to God is that of hand clapping, humming, and the sounds of instrumental music, even though made by the voice box. We have those among us today who think that as long as the thing done in worship is done with the voice box or without any outside assistance, other than the human body, it is Scriptural and right.

Would it be right to whistle in worship to God? If it is right, then there is a passage that authorizes such. Where is that passage? If humming in worship is acceptable to God, then where is the passage that authorizes it? If sounds like instruments, even though made by the voice box, are pleasing to God in worship, then where is the passage that authorizes such? We must always remember that the Christian relies on the Bible for all that is done in worship to God (Col. 3:17). It is not enough to say we like a thing or that it sounds good in worship to God. Often I hear members of the church say. "I can see no wrong in this or that." Does this make it right? Since when is a thing right or wrong because members of the church of Christ see no harm in it? We condemn the sectarians for this kind of reasoning, and rightly so. Remember, brethren, we have no more right to do a thing just because we like it or we see no wrong in it than do the sectarians. We are to seek to do what God sees right (Matt. 6:33).

While we are on this point, I would like to deal with another interesting point that I think needs some attention. We have had and continue to have much discussion about choruses, quarters, and singing groups in performances. Sometimes these groups will perform before or after worship. Sometimes they perform during the week and with no connection to a worship service of the church. Some have asked the question for many years, "Is it worship or is it entertainment?" Some say that it if is worship, then all should be involved in it and this is right. On the other hand, if it is entertainment, then we have people entertaining using the name of God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit in vain. They say this is sin and I believe it is. So, what about quartets, choruses, and singing groups singing songs, hymns, and spiritual songs for an audience other than in worship to God. Is it right or wrong?

I do not believe that the singing of songs, hymns, and spiritual songs upon occasions as described is either worship or entertainment. I think there is a third thing to be considered and that is exhortation, strengthening and enlightening through song (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16)… When I hear a chorus singing, I think of it as a period of edification in song. The same is true with a quartet and a singing group. We have Bible Study on Sunday morning one hour before the Worship period. Why could we not, if we so wished, have a chorus to sing to us one hour before Worship on Sunday morning or on Sunday night? Would it not serve as a period of edification, exhortation and enlightenment?

But, it would be sinful and wrong if a quartet, chorus, or a singing group should use instrumental music in addition to their singing songs, hymns and spiritual songs upon such occasions; the reason being that there is no Bible authority for such. Suppose I decided in a Bible class to use an instrument of music and sing a religious song. Would this be sinful and wrong? Some may say it would not, but I say, based on Bible authority, that it would be sinful and wrong since there is no Scriptural authority for such.

But, what about quartets, choruses, and singing groups humming, clapping their hands, and making sounds like instruments of music as they sing songs, hymns, and spiritual songs! Is this right or wrong? If it is right, then there must be Bible authority for such. Where is that authority? There is as much authority for instrumental music in worship to God as there is for the above-mentioned things. Let us never forget that we must have Bible authority for all that we do in religion and in life.

CONCLUSION

Do not ever forget that Jesus is Lord of our Worship. He tells us what to do and what not to do in these matters. We should not call Him Lord and then do as we please. To go to heaven when life is over, Christ must be Lord in all things and this includes Worship.