In Acts it is clear from the beginning until the end that Jewish believers continued doing what they always had as it relates to worship. Prayer times, temple worship, etc. They did not see some line of demarcation created by Jesus resurrection. Why would they? He was their Messiah.

Paul connects us to Abraham. A very Old Testament character and to the promise that God made him. Jesus is connected to this same promise both with Isaac and Melchizedek.

The opening paragraph of the “instrumental music in the synagogue” link you provided at the end promotes the thought that there was singing in the synagogue before the destruction of the temple, and that this synagogue singing was based on the temple singing. That introductory paragraph reads, “The earliest synagogal music was founded upon the same system and method as prevailed in the orchestra of the Temple itself. Joshua ben Hananiah, who had served in the sanctuary as a member of the Levitical choir (‘Ar. 11b), told how the choristers went in a body to the synagogue from the orchestra by the altar (Suk. 53a), and so participated in both services.”

… a VERY misleading assessment, it seems to me.

The evidence cited is Sukkah 53a, which reads, “When we were engaged in rejoicing at the drawing of water, our eyes saw no sleep. How so? The first hour for the morning daily sacrifice; afterwards for praying, and from that to the additional sacrifice; after that the additional prayer; afterwards we went to the house of learning; from there we went to eat and drink at home, and afterwards the Min’ha prayer; and from the Min’ha prayer to the daily evening sacrifices, and from that time we rejoiced at the drawing of the water till the morning.” (http://www.facebook.com/#!/messages/?action=read&tid=4wIRYgyZe4JO4p1UovSHlg or http://halakhah.com/rst/moed/16b%20-%20Succah%20-%2029b-56b.pdf)

Joshua ben Hanania[h] explains that he pulled an all-nighter after a full day. The text demonstrates that this Levite author did not boycott the Synagogue, but it hardly says that any aspect of the temple worship — let alone only the singing — was replicated in any other location listed, whether the synagogue or his home, etc.

I felt compelled to check out the source. Modern scholarship says that there was neither singing nor chanting in the synagogue before the destruction of the temple.

Secondly, I think we understand poorly the concept that law has been supplanted by grace in the example and Person and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Law is not bad, but it is insufficient to save. Its time and function to lead us has past. It is now written on our hearts, which should be much softer than tablets of stone.

Third, God still has instructions for us through Christ. He repealed specific instructions through what He taught, did and suffered – rendering them obsolete: animal sacrifice, priestly tribes, sabbath observance, as examples. They were replaced by much broader, wider, more demanding, more perfect expectations: self-sacrifice, priesthood of all believers, constant spiritual act of worship, etc. But not all were specifically repealed.

Some were specifically reaffirmed. We still are not to commit murder … but neither are we to hate. We are still not to commit adultery … nor are we to look after someone not our spouse with lust, and thereby commit adultery in our hearts.

Some were left as matters of conscience and tradition, not binding on Gentiles.

And some of the 613 precepts of the law just don’t get mentioned at all.

This calls for discernment, which is the gift of the Holy Spirit, and we can ask for it.

Does God still detest divorce (Malachi 2:16) and find remarriage to the original partner detestable (Deuteronomy 24:4)? When did it stop being an abomination to Him, so that some teach it as a requirement to please Him? Does Numbers 23:19 lie about Him?

He commands and is pleased with worship that includes singing accompanied by instruments of music, right through the the Old Testament– see Psalm 150 for a sample. When did He change His mind about this? Why would He not express this change explicitly as Jesus does about the Sabbath? Has He ever failed to tell — no, to SHOW — us what is expected of us?

“He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” – Micah 6:8

I am more and more convinced that we need to read the OT and NT in similar fashions…neither being read exclusively as a prescriptive rule for being God’s people (though both testaments do contain certain prescriptions which are necessary) but as a descriptive story meant to awaken our imagination as to how we, as the people of God, can follow Jesus by the power of the Spirit in ways that are faithful to the gospel and contextualized to our host culture. That means our reading scripture is Trinitarian and Christological approach that moves us to not just confess the Doctrine of Incarnation but to put that doctrine into practice.

Grace and Peace,

Rex

So what did he mean by “right hand of fellowship”? i mean, was there some official handshaking that accompanied their initiation into the deaconate?

This anti-physicality bias reaches deeper than i thought. As i said, i’m visiting an Orthodox parish, and even though i’m conscientiously okay with everyone making the sign of the cross, i have to tell you, i still feel super, super weird every time i do it. And this lingering bias is the only underlying cause i can think of.

–guy

–guy

There are some good things about dispensationalism, but I think there are some errors as well. Especially in failing to differentiate between commands given to a person and commands given to a people. For example, just as Noah was commanded to build an ark, Philip was commanded to go to the desert between Jerusalem and Gaza. It’s not a matter of dispensations as to whether or not those commands apply to us; those commands were given to individuals.

I also worry when dispensationalism wants to leave the gospels out of the New Testament. Not everyone does that, but I have heard it taught that way.

Grace and peace,
Tim

Dr. John Willis did an in-depth study of “sing and make melody” in the Old Testament. I’m not as sure as he is about some of his conclusions, but the study is definitely interesting: http://professorwillis.blogspot.com/2011/04/sing-and-make-melody.html

When Willis talks about the Old Testament, I listen.

Grace and peace,
Tim

I’m still wrestling to understand Paul’s view of the old Law. He definitely held it in reverence, yet not as the basis of our faith.

And he seemed to have no problem with the tens of thousands of Jews in Jerusalem who were converted but continued to be “zealous for the Law.”

Grace and peace,
Tim

Thanks, I think. Can’t really tell if that’s a good thing or not! Anyway, I had never heard of Jule Miller. Turns out he’s from the same subdivision in Louisville where I’m from. Interesting. Regardless, the dispensations in the OT is something I’ve heard in every CoC and Christian church I’ve ever attended, as it relates to God putting His plan of man’s redemption into practice. I realize God chose other ways to communicate with non-Jews (from Jonah and occasional glimpses in other passages throughout the OT). There’s just not a lot of information out there about that, though.

I had an interesting experience trying to get “laying on of hands” included in the ordination of a group of deacons. One elder was strongly against it and stood up during that service and said, “We are substituting the right hand of fellowship for the laying on of hands.” I couldn’t help but wonder what other “substitutions” would have been acceptable to him.

There is definitely an anti-physical bias in our brotherhood. Look at some of the New Testament things we often exclude: holy kiss, washing of feet, laying on of hands, raising hands, fasting.

Grace and peace.
Tim

I think, personally, that’s one of the flaws in Campbell’s description. Neither testament was written to be a “constitution.” When read as such, the true meaning is lost.

Tim

The problem with most brethren is that from the pulpit and the lecture the Hebrew Bible has not been presented as holy scripture. Because it does not contain the “New Testament epistle form” we tend to not treat them with the same exegetical processes and the message to us gets lost. God is purty powerful. If He didn’t want us to “use” the Hebrew scriptures THEY WOULD BE LOST.

Don,

I love that paragraph. Well said!

Tim

P.S. — I’m headed to peanut country this weekend.