Who do you think is the most important musician in human history?
On a social media site, I recently asked a question that elicited an interesting variety of responses:
Who do you think is the most important musician in human history?
What do you think?
Poll Results
Who do you think is the most important musician in human history?
Satan Votes: 4
Jubal Votes: 0
King David Votes: 2
Johann Sebastian Bach Votes: 2
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Votes: 0
Ludwig van Beethoven Votes: 0
Other: please specify below in a comment Votes: 2
Unsure Votes: 0
- 6 views
[RajeshG]Well, unbelievers certainly wouldn’t be having the attitude of praise, now would they? The connection between the “new song” and praise would only apply to believers.Of course, I have looked at all of these passages many times. I have been probing to determine exactly how you were coming up with your views. Many people mistakenly believe that Psalm 40:1-3 is a salvation testimony. The “new song” in Ps. 40 is not a record of how God put a “new attitude” of praise into the heart of someone who went from being an unbeliever to being a believer.
I guess I need to ask you this question again which you haven’t specifically answered yet - “Are you saying the Bible teaches that the ‘new song’ is a specific set of lyrics with a specific tune that God gives to each believer?” If not, then there is a metaphorical aspect to it. Even though God commands singing, He is not giving each person a specific new song.
[Kevin Miller]Well, unbelievers certainly wouldn’t be having the attitude of praise, now would they? The connection between the “new song” and praise would only apply to believers.
I guess I need to ask you this question again which you haven’t specifically answered yet - “Are you saying the Bible teaches that the ‘new song’ is a specific set of lyrics with a specific tune that God gives to each believer?” If not, then there is a metaphorical aspect to it. Even though God commands singing, He is not giving each person a specific new song.
You may have misunderstood my statement. Many misread Psalm 40:1-3 as a testimony of how someone who got saved was given a new song in his heart as a result of his salvation. Psalm 40:1-3 is not a testimony of how an unbeliever was saved and thereby given a new song in his heart at the time that he was saved; it is the testimony of a believer (David) who was delivered from a historical circumstance …
It’s instructive to me how a thread that was not intended to elicit discussion has turned into yet another intense discussion and into an occasion for more personal attacks (not by you) against me. A full examination of what the Bible teaches about the “new song” is not something that I have recently studied. It is also something at this time that I am not interested in doing or in spending the time to do the intensive study that I would need to do to keep answering numerous specific questions that you perhaps likely will keep on asking about the subject, of which many things the Bible may not reveal the specific answers to such questions.
This post was simply intended to see how people would answer the original poll question. Thanks for answering that question. I am going to discontinue engaging in discussion in this thread on other subjects.
[RajeshG]I’m trying not to misunderstand you. Are you saying that there was an actual historical circumstance in which David was in an actual pit, stuck in the actual mud, and God pulled him out and set his feet upon an actual rock and then God gave David an actual song to sing with lyrics and a tune?You may have misunderstood my statement. Many misread Psalm 40:1-3 as a testimony of how someone who got saved was given a new song in his heart as a result of his salvation. Psalm 40:1-3 is not a testimony of how an unbeliever was saved and thereby given a new song in his heart at the time that he was saved; it is the testimony of a believer (David) who was delivered from a historical circumstance …
It’s instructive to me how a thread that was not intended to elicit discussion has turned into yet another intense discussion and into an occasion for more personal attacks (not by you) against me. A full examination of what the Bible teaches about the “new song” is not something that I have recently studied. It is also something at this time that I am not interested in doing or in spending the time to do the intensive study that I would need to do to keep answering numerous specific questions that you perhaps likely will keep on asking about the subject, of which many things the Bible may not reveal the specific answers to such questions.It’s instructive to me how you run from conversations when specific questions are asked about your position. Is it really that hard to answer whether you think the “new song” is a specific set of lyrics with a specific tune? Is it really going to take you “intensive study” to determine that?This post was simply intended to see how people would answer the original poll question. Thanks for answering that question. I am going to discontinue engaging in discussion in this thread on other subjects.
You’re doing the same thing here that you’ve done on other threads. You make declarative statements, and then refuse to answer questions about those statements by claiming “That’s not the subject of the thread” or “I haven’t studied that recently” or “the Bible doesn’t reveal the specific answer.” Yet you’re still willing to make the declarative assertions. It’s like you’re playing some sort of game, trying to proclaim your viewpoint as the truth without being willing to discuss the foundations of your view.
[Kevin Miller]Is it really that hard for you to understand that when the Bible does not give specifics, making demands for specific answers is illegitimate because it seeks specifics that the Bible does not provide? If you believe that Psalm 40 is not a record of a historical situation in David’s life, you are welcome to prove your view. Otherwise, you can choose to continue to hold whatever your present views may be, and I will hold mine.I’m trying not to misunderstand you. Are you saying that there was an actual historical circumstance in which David was in an actual pit, stuck in the actual mud, and God pulled him out and set his feet upon an actual rock and then God gave David an actual song to sing with lyrics and a tune?
It’s instructive to me how you run from conversations when specific questions are asked about your position. Is it really that hard to answer whether you think the “new song” is a specific set of lyrics with a specific tune? Is it really going to take you “intensive study” to determine that?
You’re doing the same thing here that you’ve done on other threads. You make declarative statements, and then refuse to answer questions about those statements by claiming “That’s not the subject of the thread” or “I haven’t studied that recently” or “the Bible doesn’t reveal the specific answer.” Yet you’re still willing to make the declarative assertions. It’s like you’re playing some sort of game, trying to proclaim your viewpoint as the truth without being willing to discuss the foundations of your view.
I am not going to discuss this subject any further.
[RajeshG]Is it really that hard for you to understand that making a declarative assertion about the existence of some “historical circumstance” is illegitimate if there are no specifics in the passage to support it. If there was some information in the passage to support your view, I’m sure you’d show me, but you admit you’re unable to do so.Is it really that hard for you to understand that when the Bible does not give specifics, making demands for specific answers is illegitimate because it seeks specifics that the Bible does not provide? If you believe that Psalm 40 is not a record of a historical situation in David’s life, you are welcome to prove your view. Otherwise, you can choose to continue to hold whatever your present views may be, and I will hold mine.
I am not going to discuss this subject any further.
I’m not even sure why you jumped into the conversation between Mark Smith and myself about the “new song” if you haven’t studied it enough to answer questions about what you think it means.
[Kevin Miller]You are welcome to prove that “new song” in the passage is just figurative language and does not refer to an actual song that God gave David. Since you cannot do so, you admit that you are unable to do so.Is it really that hard for you to understand that making a declarative assertion about the existence of some “historical circumstance” is illegitimate if there are no specifics in the passage to support it. If there was some information in the passage to support your view, I’m sure you’d show me, but you admit you’re unable to do so.
[RajeshG]I never said it is “just” figurative. I was the one who brought it up first as a real thing, so i don’t know why you are arguing so strongly against my position. I even said earlier thar there is a fuzzy line between metaphor and reality. I believe it can be both, a real thing that also has a figurative connection. You are the one who is arguing quite adamantly that there is no figurative element to it, and that doesn’t make sense considering the other times that “new song” is used in the Bible.You are welcome to prove that “new song” in the passage is just figurative language and does not refer to an actual song that God gave David. Since you cannot do so, you admit that you are unable to do so.
[Kevin Miller]I do not find any evidence that “new song” is a figure of speech in any passage. You have expressed your disagreement. If others are interested in continuing to discuss this subject with you, that’s their choice. I am not interested in any further discussion.I never said it is “just” figurative. I was the one who brought it up first as a real thing, so i don’t know why you are arguing so strongly against my position. I even said earlier thar there is a fuzzy line between metaphor and reality. I believe it can be both, a real thing that also has a figurative connection. You are the one who is arguing quite adamantly that there is no figurative element to it, and that doesn’t make sense considering the other times that “new song” is used in the Bible.
[RajeshG]Then I’m going to assume you think the “new song” is a specific set of lyrics with a specific tune. I’d be curious as to whether you think Isaiah is commanding people to sing this same set of lyrics and same tune that was given to David, or whether you think each person’s lyrics and tune are entirely different, but I know you no longer wish to respond (even though you said that earlier and kept responding anyway).I do not find any evidence that “new song” is a figure of speech in any passage. You have expressed your disagreement. If others are interested in continuing to discuss this subject with you, that’s their choice. I am not interested in any further discussion.
Discussion