Truth Magazine

By Marc Smith

There is no more despicable behavior among men of war than the traitor. A great gulf lies between the valiant warrior and the traitor.

Just think of the examples we can take from famous battles of true selfless devotion and sacrifice for the sake of others. Too numerous to count have been the lives that were freely given with the full knowledge that they themselves would die so that others might enjoy some benefit of their ultimate gift. We know this is the most noble sacrifice of all because our Lord offered himself for us so that we might have eternal life. He respects this selflessness when shown in man, as well. John 15:13: “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends” (NKJ). We too, are to display this greatest form of love and honor it highly.

Being a Texan, I always think of the Alamo and its place not just in Texas history but in the greater story of democracy for the entire American nation. There are examples of battles from wars in ancient history that had even greater importance than those that usually come so easily to our minds.

One such battle was fought at a place called the Pass of Thermopylae in Greece in 480 BC. The Persians under their King Xerxes, intended to conquer Greece which was a collection of small city states that were each independently ruled. The two greatest of these were Athens, the center of high minded philosophies, culture, trade, and the city state of Sparta, a strict military society of elite warriors, somewhat reminiscent of the feudal Japanese. The Spartans, in their early history stressed high standards like honor above all and extreme hardy physical fitness in each individual. Each of these city states was ruled by its own king but individual rights seem to have always been respected among these Greeks.

The conception of democracy is credited to these same ancient Greeks. King Xerxes of Persia controlled an expanse of territory that stretched from the Indus River to the Black Sea. He hungered to conquer the small but fiercely independent city states of Greece. According to history Xerxes wanted to get his gigantic army of two million men onto the main continent of Europe and pass down into Greece from the north. The best passage took him through the narrow pass of Thermopylae, which is only a couple of hundred yards across at its broadest. King Leonidas, king of Sparta, brought an army of under four thousand allied Greek troops, including his three hundred Spartans, to this place to take their stand against the mighty army of Persia. The Spartans were the cream of the crop of Sparta; all being men proven in battle and each with a son back home to carry on his name should he not return. They knew the fixed battle ahead would most likely end in their annihilation but they were fearless. When told that the Persian archers were so numerous that when their arrows were let fly they darkened the whole sky, a great warrior among them commented, “Then we shall fight in the shade!” When finally confronted by the massive forces of Xerxes’ army, a Persian envoy before the battle commenced, commanded them to lay down their arms and surrender, another Spartan warrior said, “Come and take them!”

According to the story this small army led by the Spartans, fought off all the massive attacks of the Persian cavalry, archers, chariots, pike men, and heavy infantry for the first several days. Infuriated, Xerxes, fearing a non-existent trap or the depletion of his supplies because his forward momentum had been stopped by the tiny Greek army began to seriously contemplate returning home and forget about taking Greece.

However, at the last moment a Greek came forward, by the name of Ephialtes, who for money betrayed his brethren by telling the Persians about an obscure trail that extended around and behind the Greek lines. The name “Ephialtes” has been a “hiss and a byword” in Greece to the present day because of his treachery. King Xerxes dispatched a huge number of his best heavy infantry to go with the traitor, Ephialtes, and the trail, indeed, brought them to a position of great superiority behind the Greek lines. When this was discovered King Leonidas ordered the majority of the Greek forces to retreat before their path was cut off by the encircling Persians so that they might live to fight the Persians another day.

However, King Leonidas intended to continue to hold the pass for as long as he could so that the others could make good their escape and to hold onto the valuable position for as long as was possible and delay the Persians. There was an ethic of the Spartans that is hard to understand today. Their devotion to victory and to honorable battle fought by warriors who were always brave in the face of danger is the main concept that has remained of their culture. It is said that there was a ceremony enacted in every home when a boy was considered old enough to go into battle. His mother would give him his shield and would say the words to him, “Either return carrying this shield or be carried dead upon it!” This was indeed a powerful mind-set of the entire society if the mothers were so devoted to the Spartan way of life.

On this day, King Leonidas ordered his three hundred Spartans to hold their positions and not retreat. On that fateful day this mighty little band withstood the gigantic and accomplished Persian army for hour after hour. Finally, Leonidas was struck down and all his faithful soldiers with him to the last man. Their delaying action allowed the Greeks to completely regroup their total forces and at the Battle of Salamis, the Persians were annihilated.

Why is this battle the Spartans fought long ago so significant to us today? By the defeat of the Persians at Salamis, Greece was not conquered and invaded. At that time Greece was the only barrier to the total conquest of all of Europe. If Greece had been destroyed, Rome would never have become a power. Without the Roman Empire, which began not too many years after this, Persia would have forever changed Europe’s nationalities, all the languages we know, cultures; all of it would be completely different. No Roman/Latin culture. No Greek philosophies and sciences. Western Civilization as we know it would never have come to be. Truly one of the most pivotal battles ever fought. But no thanks to the traitor Ephialtes!
On occasion, when preaching the gospel, I have used the example of the Spartans at Thermopylae to illustrate and symbolize Christians in their highly important spiritual warfare. The importance of our warfare is totally spiritual and the realm defended is that belonging to the Lord. The example of such great warriors seems completely appropriate because soldierly comparisons are used many times in Scripture.

The apostle Paul in the Letter to the Ephesians talks about the spiritual warfare we are to fight: “Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (6:13-17). This kind of language was easily understood by the hearers of his time. There is little doubt that the tradition of the Roman soldiers was built upon that of such great and admirable soldiers as the Spartans, who were said to be of the ultimate warrior type. Paul said, “Watch, stand fast in the faith, be brave, be strong” (2 Cor. 16:13). This seems a very soldierly bit of encouragement. There are a number of times in Scripture that Paul refers to fellow Christians as soldiers (Epaphroditus in Phil. 2:25; Timothy in 2 Tim. 2:3, 4; and Archippus in Phile. 2). Paul tells Timothy in 2 Timothy 2:3, “You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.” In fact, there are quite a few other references to aspects of war, soldiering, watchmen and the like that we are to imitate in a spiritual manner.

The Bible also teaches us about the dangers of traitors. Of course, there is Judas Iscariot who betrayed Christ. He is one figure we can all understand and first comes to mind. However, it seems that failure of the soldier to be vigilant is as despicable and traitorous as being a turncoat. Read Ezekiel 33:29. In this passage the failure of the soldier on watch to warn his brethren brought down total condemnation and death upon himself. The application which is also given in this passage which is directed to the spiritual watchman, the prophet who is on watch against evil brings down spiritual condemnation upon himself. “When I say to the wicked, ‘O wicked man, you shall surely die!’ and you do not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity,but his blood I will require at your hand” (Ezek. 33:8).

Some will undoubtedly wonder how this can apply to Christians, and gospel preachers in particular, in our time. They might say that this instruction is only for the prophet of old. But these fail to take into account the fact that Paul refers to this very principle when he talked to the Ephesian  elders at Miletus. “Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:26-27). This is a direct reference to the principle of Ezekiel 33. That makes this a principle that gospel preachers today must practice! He makes his point even more plainly by saying the following in verse 31, “Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.” Here the apostle Paul shows his role as the one on watch whose duty it was to warn. He commands the Ephesian elders to also “watch” and reminds them to follow his example during the three years he was with them, because he did “not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.”

It is certainly probable that they took his commands and warning seriously because we read in the second chapter of the Book of Revelation that though many years had passed, they still heeded Paul’s warnings. Revelation 2:2-3: “I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars, and you have persevered and have patience, and have labored for My name’s sake and have not become weary.” Though they were in trouble spiritually because they had left their “first love” and were commanded to repent and “do the first works,” the Lord also tells them in verse 6, “But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.” They were known by the Lord to hate the false doctrine and deeds of these followers of Nicolaus. They had clearly opposed this movement or doctrine of error and won the approval of the Lord in this matter by so doing.

Are there traitors to the Lord’s church and to the doctrine of Jesus Christ in our time? There is no doubt in my mind and in the minds of many faithful brethren today that there are, indeed, traitors; those who are on watch but will not stand up and warn those they have the responsibility to warn. The statement here is not meant to be inflammatory in nature but it only takes a cursory view of the direction churches are taking at this time to realize this is true.

One of the main ways some are traitors to the cause of Christ is that they will not take a position, thereby committing themselves to either truth or error. We can only guess at their reasons for this. They would appear unspiritual in nature and the conclusion must be that they fear a change in the status quo. If they “rock the boat,” their incomes may be endangered and their popularity might wane and so not be in demand to hold gospel meetings or for other like events. Also, it seems there is a great reluctance to appear “negative” in any way to the membership which also “rocks the boat.” They do not want to be the one to cause the “party to be over.”

It may be that another reason the Romans 14 error is being promoted to the extent that we can clearly see is that these, catering to the whims of an evil generation, hope to curry favor with the liberal minded intellectual elite of various congregations. Actually, these are quite numerous in our well educated age. Gaining favor with these is done primarily for reasons listed in the previous paragraph, but also so that they “might belong” to this savvy bunch of post-modernist thinkers who are so “high-minded and enlightened” they cannot appreciate the purity of the gospel as it is written in the New Testament and these only are capable of seeing the world in shades of gray. From their lofty view, no one can make judgments of others and no one can determine what is right or wrong. Among such, the word “no” is rarely heard except when it comes to upholding the hands of the sound preachers and elders in the congregations they attend. Rather, these find it easy to be hateful and “negative” to those who remind them of what the word of God truly reveals.

Thinking there are traitors among us is a serious matter. In the parable of the tares, Matthew 13:25 we read, “But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way.” Those who slept in this passage, clearly, were not supposed to be sleeping no matter what the reason!

These outstanding Scriptural examples are quite sufficient to make a strong application that needs to be clear in our time:

1. We must identify those who are “traitors.”
2. We must appeal to them to repent.
3. If they will not repent and join the faithful in upholding the truth, then their guilt and sin requires the faithful to do their duty.

Further, this duty is to “warn the wicked from his way.” Our duty is no less than what the elders at Ephesus did as they identified false apostles and those who promoted false doctrine.

Paul said: “I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel” (Gal. 1:6). And finally he said in verse 9, “As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” There is no room for equivocation on these matters and no room for traitors to the cause of Christ who are only motivated by the flesh. The danger to those faithful to the word of God is that it is possible that taking such a stand will bring us home upon our shields.

The one principle upon which we must stand is not difficult to know. It might be difficult to accomplish. Those not strong in the faith cannot achieve it, Those who love the Lord, must do it as honorable soldiers of Christ: 1 Corinthians 15:58: “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”

The East Florence Contender, Florence, Alabama

By Walton Weaver

One of the greatest problems we all face is that of priorities in our lives. Most of us have a difficult time setting them and then working for them. Peoples’ attitude generally is: give me results without responsibilities, wages without work, and acceptance without achievement.

One does not have to look far into his Bible, however, before he begins to notice that the Bible is quite specific about some priorities. By this we mean that the Bible teaches that some things must come first, or they must be prior to, other things before certain benefits that will follow are assured. Let us now briefly take a look at some of these priorities

Listening To God

Before we take our thanksgivings and petitions to God, thinking that he will hear us, we should first consider whether we are willing to hear God when he speaks to us through his word. Listening to God precedes God being willing to hear us. We should remember that the “Lord is far from the wicked, but he hears the prayer of the righteous” (Prov. 15:29). Again, “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear” (Ps. 66:18). Of the hypocrite, Job asks, “Will God hear his cry when trouble comes upon him?” (Job 27:8-9). Peter says that “the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayers; but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil” (1 Pet. 3:12). James concurs, when he says, “the effective fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much” (Jas. 5:16b). God heard the prayers of Cornelius and remembered his alms (Acts 10:31), but Cornelius was first a man who was willing to “hear all the things commanded . . . by God” (Acts 10:33).

Reconciled To A Brother

What we have discovered to be true about our relation to God is also true of our relation to our brother. Just as we must first be willing to hear God before he will hear us, we must also be right in our relation to our brother before God will accept our worship. Consider the following statement from Jesus’ teaching from the Sermon on the Mount:

You have heard that it was said to those of old, “You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.” But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, “Raca!” shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, “You fool!” shall be in danger of hell fire. Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to our brother, and then come and offer your gift (Matt. 5:21-24).

Brethren often times do not consider this matter seriously enough. They go on trying to worship God while being alienated from a brother. Jesus says this is an impossibility. When one is separated from a brother as a result of some wrong that has been done, true worship is not possible. It is such an important matter that Jesus says that one should interrupt his worship (or attempted worship, we should say) by leaving it behind and going at once to his brother to bring about a reconciliation — then come back and offer your worship to God. 

If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also (1 John 4:20-21).

Examination Of One’s Self

A lot of people who know very little Bible  can  quote Jesus’ statement,  “Judge not, that you be not judged” (Matt. 7:1), but almost without exception, when they do quote it, they misapply it. Jesus is not condemning all judging in this statement. If he were, everybody would be violating it every day.

We must make judgments about things and about people. If we were not permitted to do this we could not do a lot of things that the Bible commands us to do. We could not, for example, judge between teachers, and yet just a few verses later we are commanded to “beware of false prophets” (Matt. 7:15), and John says to “test the spirits, whether they are of God: because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

If all judging is condemned how could a person decide whether or not a thing is worldly, and if he can’t make this judgment, how would he be able to avoid it? If all judging is wrong, how could a Christian who is spiritual know when a brother has been overtaken in a fault, and that he should therefore attempt to restore him (Gal. 6:1)? You get the point by now. Jesus does not condemn all judging, but judging that is unfair. Elsewhere Jesus commands, “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24).

In Matthew 7:1-6 Jesus is addressing a situation where there were those who were quick to find fault with others when there were worse faults in their own lives. He calls them hypocrites and then tells them they should “first remove the plank from their own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” (Matt. 7:5, NKJV). In this statement Jesus gives us another priority: one must examine himself first, and only then is he permitted to proceed to examine others.

Seeking God’s Kingdom

At one place in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus dealt at length with our service in the kingdom of God.  He pointed out that one cannot serve two masters, “for,” he said, “either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon” (Matt. 6:24). Following this statement, he went on to point out the uselessness of worry, and he shows that the remedy for such anxiety is trust in God as our loving heavenly Father. The things that people worry about the most, he said, are things that have to do with food, clothing, and length of life (Matt. 6:26-31), and, yet, “your heavenly Father knows that you have need of these things” (Matt. 6:32). So what is the answer to worry? Jesus answers, “But seek first the kingdom of God and his      righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble” (Matt. 6:33-34).

According to Jesus’ answer, what must come first? Seeking God’s kingdom must come before material things, such  as  food, clothing and shelter.  Things that  pertain  to our physical  needs  and  comforts  are important, but they are not as important as the things that pertain to our spiritual needs and growth. Those who begin to make excuse fail to understand this truth. They have their priorities confused. They say, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father,” but Jesus says, in so many words, “No, that’s not what must come first in your life.” Here are his exact words: “Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and preach the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:59-60). We must seek the kingdom of God first!

Showing Mercy

If one expects God to be merciful to him, he must first be willing to show mercy toward others. James says, “For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment” (Jas. 2:13). Don’t expect mercy from God if you have not first learned to show it yourself. Jesus said, “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy” (Matt. 5:7).

Do you have someone you have been unwilling to forgive? Then don’t look to God to forgive you. Forgiving hearts are loving hearts, and no one can say he loves God and not forgive his brother. Remember Paul’s words:

 Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering; bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do (Col. 3:12-13).

And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you (Eph. 4:32).

By Shane Williams

And after He called the multitude to Him, He said to them, Hear, and understand. Not what enters into the mouth defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man. Then the disciples came and said to Him, Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this statement? But He answered and said, Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be rooted up. Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into the pit (Matt. 15:10-14).

The Pharisees had accused Jesus of not teaching his disciples to keep the traditions of the elders. Jesus’ response was one of great wisdom. He told them that they were guilty of putting their traditions above the commandments of God and worshiping in vain. He went on to explain that it wasn’t what you put into your mouth (food or drink) that defiled the man but what came out of it. It is what comes out of the heart (Matt. 15:18-20). It’s a man’s thoughts, words, and actions that will defile the man. The Pharisees were offended at this statement because they put great emphasis on looking godly and making sure that everyone else thought they were as well (Matt. 23:25-28). The traditions of the elders were not from God but from men. These things that the Pharisees were teaching would not stand. They would be rooted up because they were not of God. When someone who is blinded by his own doctrine teaches someone else that falsehood, he has led that individual into the dark. Both, being blinded, will fall into the pit because they cannot see the truth. Both are guilty, the teacher and the student.

A great responsibility is placed upon one who teaches God’s word. It’s no wonder James gave us such sobering words to heed: “Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we shall incur a stricter judgment”(Jas. 3:1). James shows us that it is serious to take on such a responsibility. A teacher is responsible for himself and those he teaches. Paul gave this important instruction to Timothy. “Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you” (1 Tim. 4:16). I’m afraid that this command is not taken seriously today.

There is so much confusion in religion today that some people just don’t know where to turn. You have 1500 or so groups to choose from, just in the United States. How overwhelming! Are the majority of these groups paying close attention to the doctrine or teaching of Christ? I don’t believe that they are.

One of the things that people seem to be so caught up into today is tradition. This is the way we’ve always done it and it should not be questioned, is many people’s attitude. This attitude is against the teaching of the Bible. John said not to believe every spirit, but “test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1). How do we go about testing the spirits or putting the spirit of a teaching to the test? John continues by saying, “We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error”(1 John 4:6). If we can prove it from the word of God (the spirit of truth) then we need to live it regardless of the cost or consequences. If it can’t be proved by God’s word (the spirit of error), it has no place in our lives or in our worship. Paul said to the Thessalonians: “Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thess. 5:21-22). In his second letter to the Corinthians he said, “Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you — unless indeed you fail the test?” (13:5). The way we worship God and the way we live should be questioned and corrected if need be. Man’s traditions have no part in the life of those who want to live by the word. It was condemned by Jesus when he walked on this earth (Matt. 15:1-14), and it stands condemned today.

Something else that people today like to involve themselves in is different religious events and activities. Often times more importance is placed on the activities than Bible study. We need to get away from the numerous activities and get back to the Bible! You don’t read of various fund raisers, youth events, and other activities of the like in the apostles lives. What you do read about is what they taught, lived, and stood for. Paul said, “I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). Paul goes on to say that his preaching was “not in persuasive words of wisdom but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (v. 4). Their faith should not rest on wisdom of men but in the power of God. Their faith, as well as our faith, should rest on the gospel. It is the power to save (Rom. 1:16), not man’s wisdom. Are we destined to just teach our own watered down version of the gospel or are we willing to take a stand and say, “All I can do is teach what the Scriptures teach and nothing more.” People say, “But we need all these other practices to get others to come to the services.” I challenge you to find in the Scriptures where this was done to get people to see the truth. If all these events and activities are the answer, it’s too bad Jesus or the apostle Paul didn’t think about them. Some people seem to think that Jesus or the apostles just forgot to include some of these ideas in the Bible. In the Scriptures, there were some who came to hear Jesus, not to see signs that he was the Messiah or to hear him teach but to be fed. John 6:26, “Jesus answered them and said, Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled.” They came only to be fed a physical food. People will come today to be fed physically as well. The gospel of Christ, however, is not about physical food but about spiritual. Jesus said, “Don’t work for the food that perishes but for the food which endures to eternal life” (John 6:27).

I’m afraid many people will be horrified in judgment when they find out what they had been led to believe was without foundation. Their beliefs and practices were not based on the authority of Christ (Col. 3:17). What we see in the Scriptures is the story of redemption, God’s plan for saving man. We find Christ and him crucified. That’s what it’s all about! Just as the Pharisees were leading others astray, as well as themselves, so will people who follow man’s wisdom instead of God’s divine word. Make it a point not to be a blind follower. Study God’s word and obey it with your eyes wide open.

P.O. Box 107, Kewanee, Missouri 63860 shanewms@sheltonbbs.com

By Don Hooton

When people worship with most churches of Christ today, the absence of instrumental music nearly always causes a brief quizzing like, “Why don’t you use a piano or an organ or all the other instruments that other churches use?” Frankly, that’s a great question! And as Christians, we are, and should be, always willing to “give an answer for the hope” and the faith that we have (1 Pet. 3:15) whether it is asked by a believer or an unbeliever. So let me try to answer why you hear no pianos when you worship with us. 
 
There are three lines of reasoning or evidence that make us believe that the use of mechanical instruments of music in worship is unacceptable to God. The evidence that supports such a conclusion are: (1) The Historical Argument (the historical fact that vocal music was the only music used by Christians for centuries); (2) The Hermeneutic Argument (the absence of any New Testament passage authorizing its use); (3) The Scriptural Argument (the clear scriptural proof that in the New Testament age, singing was the form of musical worship practiced and thereby was and is the worship God accepts in every generation). 
 
Of course, we are using the term “argument” in its classic dictionary usage of “a course of reasoning to demonstrate the truth or falsehood of something” (Webster’s II). After we present these three “arguments” regarding why we believe instrumental music in worship to God is not acceptable to him, we will also evaluate Bible passages and/or reasons people have used and continue to use to justify the use of musical instruments in worship to God. 
 
Historical Argument 

First, let’s begin with the fact that history and scholarship alike agree that early Christians did not employ instrumental music and in some circles, emphatically opposed it. For emphasis, we will italicize and embolden significant statements in these quotes. 
 
In the History of Western Music, a standard music history textbook, Donald Grout writes, “Hymn singing is the earliest recorded musical activity of the Christian Church” (13). He says further that the early church “excluded instrumental music from public worship” (26). And then Mr. Grout observes that, “The organ does not seem to have been used regularly with the choir in Mass much before the thirteenth century” (64). 
 
The Encyclopedia Judaica says, “jingling, banging, and rattling accompanied heathen cults . . .The voices of nonconformists were emerging from places of Jewish and early Christian worship. Early synagogue song intentionally foregoes artistic perfection, renounces the playing of instruments, and attaches itself entirely to ‘the word’ — the text of the Bible” (“Music,” XII:566).  

 In the Catholic Encyclopedia, these Catholic historians say, “For almost a thousand years, Gregorian chant without any instrumental or harmonic addition, was the only music used in connection with the liturgy” (X:657).  
 
And also in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, “The rejection of all musical instruments for Christian worship is consistent among the (Church,  dph) Fathers. They were  associated with pagan, orgiastic rites” (“History of Sacred Music,” X:106). 
 
In the New Oxford History of Music, the writers say, “The primitive Christian community held the same view, as we know from the apostolic and post-apostolic literature: instrumental music was thought unfit for religious services; the Christian sources are quite outspoken in their condemnation of instrumental performances. Originally, only song was considered worthy of direct approach to Divinity” (“The Music of Post-Biblical Judaism,” I:135). 
 
The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia says, “There is no record in the NT of the use of instruments in the music worship of the church. In this regard, early believers followed the practice of the Hebrew synagogue music” (“Music,” 1163). 
 
Historian Lars Qualben writes, “Singing formed an essential part of the Christian Worship, but it was in unison and without musical accompaniment” (A History of the Christian Church, 112). 
 
And finally from John Girardeau, professor at Columbia Theological Seminary of the Presbyterian Church USA, we read, “The church, although lapsing more and more into defection from the truth and into a corruption of apostolic practice had no instrumental music for 1200 years; and the Calvinistic Reformed Church ejected it from its services as an element of Popery (i.e. Catholicism, dph), 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” (John Girardeau, professor at Columbia Theological Seminary, Presbyterian USA, quoted in the American Encyclopedia). 
 
Hence, history uniformly agrees that instrumental music was not only absent from the worship services of first century Christians but was altogether and universally rejected for twelve centuries of Christian practice.

There are historical writings also that show religious leaders opposed the use of instrumental music. What this means is that the prohibition of instrumental music is not new. Instead, it is the practice of instrumental music that is the new innovation. Consider these well-known church leaders from the last twenty centuries:

Tertullian (c. AD 160-230) wrote, “Musical concerts with viol and lute belong to Apollo, to the Muses, to Minerva and Mercury who invented them; ye who are Christians, hate and abhor these things whose very authors themselves must be the object of loathing and aversion.”
 
Thomas Aquinas (1225-74), a monk and celebrated Catholic theologian, “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, III:137). 
 
John Calvin (1509-64), founder of present day Presbyterianism, “Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the Law (of Moses, dph)” (Commentary of the Psalms, 33). 
 
Joseph Bingham, a writer from the Anglican Church, said, “Music in churches is as ancient as the apostles, but instrumental music not so” (Works, III:137). 

Charles Spurgeon (1834-92), a renown Baptist preacher, wrote, “We do not need them (i.e., instruments of music, dph). They would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto Him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument like the human voice    . . . 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” (Commentary on Psalms, 42:4). 
 
Adam Clark, a Methodist commented, “I declare I never knew (instrumental music) to be productive of any good in the worship of God and have reason to believe that they are productive of much evil. Music as a science I esteem and admire, but instrumental music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music, and I here register my protest against all such corruption of the worship of the author of Christianity” (Commentary, IV:686, on Amos 6:5). 
 
John Wesley (1703-91), another Methodist, wrote, “I have no objection to the instruments in our chapels, provided they are neither seen nor heard” (ibid). 
 
Then Adam Clark responded with, “I say the same, though I think the expense of purchase had better be spared” (ibid). 
 
So clearly, historical scholarship says instrumental music practiced among Christians did not become an accepted practice until thirteen centuries after the church began. And still,  historical church leaders opposed its use even when others wanted to use instruments or were already using them. 
 
The historical truth is that singing was “for almost a thousand years . . . the only music connected with the liturgy” (Catholic Encyclopedia, X:657) because early church fathers “rejected all musical instruments for Christian worship” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, X:106). 
 
However, it would be absurd to say that the practice of instrumental music was wrong for the simple reason that others have thought it was wrong historically. Anyone, including you and me, can be wrong on any subject. So to conclude that something is wrong because others have rejected it places the reason of our faith in people — a very dangerous, as well as prohibited, practice (cf. Prov. 14:12). 
 
Still, the historical argument is compelling by itself. Using again the words of John Girardeau, a Presbyterian, who said, “The historical argument, therefore, raises a solemn and powerful protest against the employment.” Yet it is the reasons why these people opposed instrumental music that should be of greater consideration and imitation. And that