Today's post is by guest writer Keith Ward.

It has happened fairly often lately with the climate change – we will go through a long spell of dry in mid-May sometimes into June. Then the rains come. 2 inches in two days, 3 or 4 inches in a day. Rains every day for a week or two. Actually, this causes little problem if it has rained from the beginning. But, after weeks of just enough irrigation, the sudden influx of too much rain causes my tomatoes to crack, then the gnats and other bugs and the rot get in. Often, even green tomatoes burst.

Someone will say, well, Keith, God knows more about how much rain to send and when to send it than you do. No doubt. But, this is a sin cursed garden, not Eden. So, I have weeds, too much rain, too little rain, blights caused by just a dampening shower every evening which does not in a week add up to a tenth, but keeps it wet so fungi grow.

It surely makes me long for THE garden.

In a similar way some say that the will of God will not lead where the Grace of God is not sufficient. But, then, their self will leads them to situations and they expect the grace of God to rescue them....without harm. NOT!

Or, something has happened that derailed me, and I just know that God has a better plan for me. Seems more likely that sin ruined the better plan God had for me (and you) and now you (and I) are stuck with plan B or even plan J. We just cannot go our own way and expect to escape consequences. Our lives may turn out far worse and our service may be much less than would have been possible had we not gone our own way for a time, or two, or three.…

It is by the grace of God that I enjoy anything from my garden, even the tomatoes that did not crack and the other veggies rescued at great effort from bugs, blights and weeds. It is by the grace of God that there can be a Plan C (or Q). Rather than moaning about what might have been or expecting something better, we must press on with what is left in the service of God who loves us.
 
​Why should a living man complain, a man, about the punishment of his sins? … but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. (Lam 3:39,   Heb 12:10).
 
Keith Ward

The first few years I only had one catbird at my feeder, a chary fellow who only visited during winter when he couldn’t find anything easily on his own.  He sat clumsily on the suet cage, which was almost too small for him, and pecked away, but it only took a micro-movement from me on the other side of the window to scare him off.

            Although I had read that the catbird got its name from its call, I had never heard him utter a peep.  He quietly came to the square of suet, ate his fill, and left.  The other morning, as I sat by the window he flew into the nearest azalea on the other side of the feeder and I heard it, a “mew” just as clear and sweet as a newborn kitten’s.  And what caused him to mew?  There on the suet perched another catbird--he was jealous.  Suddenly he flew at the interloper and chased him away.   

            Within a week, a third catbird had joined the fray, this one a bit smaller and slimmer, probably a fledgling.  Now they all go at it.  It isn’t enough to chase one away and then eat your fill.  They think they must sit guard and keep the others from getting any of it.  This is not the catbird personality I had always seen before, and I hear that mew more often too.  Now I know what truly lies beneath those slate gray feathers.

            I have seen it happen with people too.  You think they are one sort of personality but when circumstances don’t go their way, suddenly they morph into someone you have never met before.  Sometimes that’s a good thing, like quiet mothers who instantly, and fiercely, protect their young, but others times it means we have not really become new creatures, we have just hidden the old one and stress made him rear his ugly head once again.

            Becoming a better person is difficult.  Baptism doesn’t instantly fix the flaws in your character.  They have deep-seated roots from childhood or traumatic experiences in your life.  It takes effort to change yourself.  You have to first realize where the problems lie.  Then you have to prepare yourself to meet those stressful situations with study, prayer and meditation, deciding ahead of time how you will react should the same thing happen again.  You have to learn to accept the help of others, even if it does come in the form of a stern rebuke or disapproving look.  Finally, you have to be on watch.  Most of us just let life happen to us, then wonder why we weren’t able to do better “after all these years,” as if time were the only thing that mattered.  Doing better must come from being better or it won’t last.

            God will not remove the stress from our lives.  He won’t make the trials suddenly disappear.  Any time we convert someone with the promise that all of their problems will now be solved, we are giving them false hopes.  The true hope is that now we have help with our problems, but only if we use it.  God does not allow trials so we will have an excuse for bad behavior but so we will become stronger and better able to handle those trials. 

            I watch those catbirds and wonder if I have really become a new creature.  Today it’s time to get up out of my chair and work on it.
 
For the love of Christ constrains us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all, that they that live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again…Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they have become new. 2 Cor 5:14, 15, 17                                                         
 
Dene Ward

George Washington is credited with creating the order of the Purple Heart.  It was actually called the Badge of Merit and was made in the form of a purple heart.  Only enlisted men were eligible to receive it.  The award ended with the Revolution.

              But the idea never died.  Finally on May 28, 1932, the Purple Heart we are now familiar with was first awarded.  It has been awarded since to all who were "wounded, killed, or died after being wounded" in battle.

              I remember people, including soldiers who received it, belittling the Purple Heart.  "All I did was get shot.  What's so brave about that?"

              Here's what:  You were brave enough to put yourself in the line of fire.  You were brave enough to risk your life.

              What if we gave Purple Hearts in the Lord's kingdom?  Who should get them?

              The preacher who dares to preach the unvarnished Truth to the church that pays his salary.

              The teenage Christian who dares to say, "No," in the face of constant peer pressure.

              The secretary who refuses to lie for her boss and risks losing her job.

              The Christian who doesn't shrink back into a corner when a certain subject comes up.

              The brother or sister who risks losing the goodwill of one who needs correction—not to mention his reputation with the church who takes up for the sinner.

              The one who risks being kicked out of the family by obeying the gospel.

              I am sure you can come up with others, and I invite you to do so in the comment section below.  But here is something for you to consider.  Sooner or later, every disciple of the wounded Savior ought to have a few Purple Hearts of his own.  How many do you have?
 
If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name. (1Pet 4:14-16)
 
Dene Ward

I taught piano lessons (and later added voice lessons) for over 35 years.  By the time I had to quit due to my eye problems, I had a full studio with a two year waiting list.  My students participated in three competitions a year, and no less than four joint recitals, depending upon their ages and their pieces.  At the end of the year, we had what I billed as "the Spring Program," because most people considered recitals "boring" and our programs were anything but.  We put on a show and we had fun.  And afterward I handed out sometimes as many as 20 awards, including some state competition trophies.  Yes, it was a very big deal in our lives.

              "Our lives" because my boys were part of it.  I taught them both.  Lucas went on to focus on voice and theory, while Nathan stayed with the piano.  It's always satisfying to see your children follow in your footsteps.  One day Nathan and I sat down and sightread duets for a half hour or so.  I don't know about him, but I had a blast.  He had grown and learned enough that we could share on an equal footing, a truly exhilarating experience.

              And now, thanks to seeing Daddy play at home, my grandson Silas has started piano lessons.  Last spring I went to his first recital.  He had wowed me all morning, playing a hands-moving-together piece at a difficulty that no 6 year old student of mine had ever reached—with only 8 months of piano under his belt.  We not only practiced his piece, but his bow as well. (Any of my old students reading this will understand.)  And so we all went to the auditorium and sat four rows from the front while he walked up to the grand piano and played his piece.  Perfectly.  With the classiest bow of the evening.  Just last week he did the same thing, this year playing three pieces—perfectly with an almost professional bow.

              I couldn't stop smiling.  And I also couldn't stop the tears from welling in my eyes.  Somehow I managed to get them under control before he saw them, and I gave him a huge hug.  "I am very proud," I said.  "You have made me very happy."

              As proud and happy as I was that day, there are a few other things that would make me even happier.  I doubt I even have to list them.  You know exactly what I am talking about because you wish them for your children and grandchildren too.

              I still help Silas with his piano practice.  With a new piece I often play the left hand while he plays the right, and then we swap places.  By then he can manage to put both hands together himself.  I still help with the theory homework, clapping out rhythms and asking questions that lead him to the right answers.

              But more often than that, we talk about Bible characters, narratives and principles.  We talk about God.  We pray together and sing together.  We memorize verses and recite them together.  Doesn't he get this from his parents?  Of course he does, but the more he gets from more different people—especially people who mean something to him—the more it will mean to him, and the better it will stick.  Just like his Grandma and Daddy playing the piano.

              That first recital was wonderful.  But a first public prayer, a first sermon, and of course, the first commitment--when the time is right--will be even better.
 
But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear him, and his righteousness to children's children, to those who keep his covenant and remember to do his commandments. (Ps 103:17-18)
 
Dene Ward

A long time ago, I invited a newcomer to our women’s Bible study and was shocked when she adamantly refused to come.  “I know what happens in those so-called classes,” she said.  “They gossip and try to run the church.”  I assured her that such was not the case in our class, but she soon left us without ever giving us the opportunity to prove it. 

            That comment upset a lot of the women in that place, but you know, she had probably seen a class that did do those things.  I have heard of classes like that from others.  I have also visited in places where the cotton candy fluff being touted as serious Bible study was enough to turn me off as well.  Then I recently sat in a gathering of women where we were told that we probably had more interest in the teacher’s choice of makeup brand than in her qualifications to teach us.  Shame on us if that is true, and double shame for perpetuating it.

            Some shallow-minded women probably do sit on the pews in every meetinghouse—right beside men who spend more time talking sports, cars, and tools than they do Bible.  Trivial pursuit has nothing to do with gender; it is just that each gender considers the others’ more trivial than theirs.       Why we think that women are incapable of deep study and deep thought is a mystery.  I can bear witness to more deep discussions on a Tuesday morning than I have ever heard on Sundays or Wednesdays in a class dominated by male conversation.  It may be true that women are the practical ones who get things done, but that does not mean they cannot think!

            There have always been Marys, willing to sit at the Lord’s feet.  But just because Martha was busy serving—especially in John 12 where she was not chided by the Lord—does not mean she was not listening.  If women couldn’t cook supper and hear what was going on across the room at the same time, the family would fall apart.  At the death of her brother, Martha met Jesus with exactly the same words her sister did, Lord if you had been here, he would not have died, but she went on to add, and even now I  know that whatever you ask of God, God will give you, 11:21,22.  She then discussed the final resurrection with him.  Don’t tell me this woman was shallow because she knew how to cook.

            When Paul says to Timothy, From a babe you have known the sacred scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through Jesus Christ, 2 Tim 3:15, it wasn’t his Greek father who taught him that.  It was his mother and grandmother, and they taught him about Christ from the Old Testament in such a way that all of them could recognize him when he came along, something most of the scribes, priests, rabbis, and Pharisees, learned men that they were, could not do.

            In every place I have been, I have found a group of women who will spend hours studying the scriptures, who will dig deeply into subjects that confound even the great Biblical scholars.  They not only do it, they eat it up.  Once or twice, the growth of the women has finally inspired their men to study more, just so they wouldn’t be embarrassed.

            Today, ladies, I challenge you to study—to dig deeply into subjects you may have never even heard of.  Open your minds to ideas that may seem new and show God that you do care about Him and what He says, and not just the daily running of your homes.  If people think we cannot handle the depth, it is up to us to show them otherwise.  Don’t just get angry at the stereotypes, prove them false.
 
And there was a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was advanced in years, having lived with her husband seven years from when she was a virgin, and then as a widow until she was eighty-four. She did not depart from the temple, worshiping with fasting and prayer night and day.  And coming up at that very hour she began to give thanks to God and to speak of him to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem. Luke 2:36-38.   

Dene Ward

In the country the power can go out for no apparent reason.  You expect it in a storm.  Limbs break and fall on power lines.  Ground becomes saturated with rain and the trees uproot themselves and fall over, taking the lines underneath with them.  Lightning strikes sub-stations and transformers.  All of that is understandable.  What is not is an outage on a calm, sunny day, something that happens far more often in the country than in town.

            When you are not expecting an outage, it can cause problems.  I once put a sour cream pound cake in the oven only to have the power go out twenty minutes later.  (Yes, the sun was shining brightly.)  I needed another 40-60 minutes of 325 degree heat.  I was afraid to take the cake out, but unsure how the residual heat would affect the cooking time, nor how the reheat time would affect it when the power came back on.

            I decided to leave it in the oven, thinking that it was less likely to fall from that than from suddenly moving it from the oven heat to room temperature when it wasn’t even half-cooked.  Two hours later, the lights came on and the oven began reheating itself.  I compromised on the time and with the aid of a toothpick was able to find the moment when the cake was done but not over done.  It was a little more compact than usual, but it didn’t fall, and it tasted fine.

            When you live in the land of unexpected outages, you really appreciate the consistency of God’s power.  Eph 1:19 tells us it is immeasurable, which means it cannot be contained and is therefore infinite.  Romans 1:20 simply mentions “the eternal power” of God.  Whenever we need it, it is there for the asking and nothing can deplete it.  Every time I hear someone say, “There are so many others with bigger problems, I hate to bother God with mine,” I wonder if they really understand the “eternal” power of God.

            God’s power guards us (1 Pet 1:5); it strengthens us (Eph 6:10; Col 1:11); it preserves us (Psa 79:11); it supports us in our suffering (2 Tim 1:8); it redeems us (Neh 1:10).  Paul prayed that the Ephesian brethren would know that power, the same power that raised Christ from the dead (1:19,20) and the same power that can answer any request we might possibly think of (3:20).  And, he says, that same power works within us as well.

            When the storms of life rage around you, you will not have to worry about the power going out.  In fact, that power will be stronger the more you need it.  Paradoxically, we are never stronger than when we need God the most because we are letting Him take care of things.  Counting on yourself is the weakest you will ever be, and that usually happens on the sunny days, the days when life is easy.  On stormy days, the days when we finally give up and lay it all before God, the power at our disposal is awesome. 

            The Light never goes out, or even dims in a brownout, when run by the power of God.
 
Ascribe power to God, whose majesty is over Israel, and whose power is in the skies. Awesome is God from his sanctuary; the God of Israel--he is the one who gives power and strength to his people.  Blessed be God! Psa 68:34-35
 
Dene Ward

Wrens are known for building nests in odd places and we have a couple who have proven the point.  They can’t seem to help themselves when it comes to building nests.  And fast?  In less than an hour they are ready to set up housekeeping.   Anything that is left open and alone for that amount of time is fair game.

            We’ve found nests in boxes of empty mason jars in the shed, and on the lawn mower seat under its protective tarp.  We’ve found them on the bristles of the push broom which hangs upside down near the ceiling of the carport.  We’ve found them in roof gutters, and draped plastic sheeting.  We’ve found them in flower pots, tomato vines, and empty buckets.

            We usually buy dog food in 50 lb bags at the feed store and keep it stored in a large plastic garbage can in the shed.  We carry Chloe’s daily allotment in an old three pound coffee can, which we then shove sideways on the handlebars of the old exercise bike until the next day’s feeding.  Last month we found a wren’s nest in that can, obviously built after Chloe had been fed the day before, hanging precariously, rocking in the breeze. 

            Immediately Keith duct-taped it more securely to the handlebars so it couldn’t be blown or jostled off, and found another old can to use for Chloe’s feed.  It has become something of a joke now—remember to put up the [whatever] before the wrens find it.

            This doesn’t happen just once a year.  The mother wren incubates the eggs for about 2 weeks and then both parents feed them until they can fly, about two weeks later.  Often, the last few days of feeding, the father takes over completely so the mother can start another nest.  In our climate, they often build a third nest after that one.  They are like little nest-building machines—wherever they can, whenever then can.

            Isn’t that the way we should be about the gospel?  Too many times we’re out there making judgments about where to sow the seed instead of strewing it about everywhere we can.  We decide who will and who won’t listen and worse, who we deem “worthy” to hear.

            That certainly isn’t what Jesus did.  He taught dishonest businessmen and immoral women.  He taught the upper class and the lowest of the low.  He taught the diseased and the disabled, as well as the hale and hearty blue collar workers.  He taught people who wanted to hear and people who just wanted to make trouble for him.  Shouldn’t we be following his example?

            Too many times we worry about the reception we will get.  When Jesus sent out the seventy, he didn’t say, “If you don’t think they’ll listen, then shake the dust off your feet and go elsewhere.”  What he said was, “If they don’t listen,” which means everyone had a chance to decline if that is what they chose to do.  We can’t seem to stand the possibility of rejection, not an auspicious trait for disciples of the one who was “despised and rejected of men.”

            We should be like wrens, speaking about our faith anywhere, even the most unlikely places, to anyone, even the most unlikely people.  Over and over and over, like we can’t help ourselves, like our lives depended upon it, because maybe they do.
 
Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all of you, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.  Acts 20:26-27.
 
Dene Ward

One day recently, just to see what would happen, I googled one of my past devotionals, the one called “Chloe and the Green Beans.”  Now if I understand what the Google search engine does, it searches the internet to find places where all those words are used in more or less the same place.  Sort of like a Bible concordance lists all the passages that contain a certain word.  I was amused by what Google came up with.

            “But Chloe doesn’t like green beans…”

            “Chloe Green bought some beans.”

            “Joan Rivers spills the beans about celebrities including Tom Green and Chloe Kardashian.”

            “Chloe Intense—a new perfume with notes of rose, amber, pink pepper, and tonka beans”

            Finally on page 8, I found my devotional, “Chloe and the Green Beans.”

            I never dreamed that those words—“Chloe,” “green,” and “beans”-- had been put together in so many different ways. Some of those are from blogs, some articles, and some ads.  Do you think the “Chloe” in all those snippets referred to the same Chloe?  Of course not.  And then I thought, that is exactly how some people try to study the Bible—they google it, in method if nothing else.  They see a word in one passage and then simply look for it in another, assuming it means the same thing, regardless of the fact that different authors are writing about different topics to different audiences many, sometimes hundreds of years, apart.

            They see the words “the coming of the Lord” and “judgment” and decide that, even though one is in Isaiah and one is in Matthew and one is in Peter, they must all be talking about the same “coming of the Lord”—which they inevitably view as the final Day of Judgment.  They see similar language in the book of Revelation and decide the same thing, regardless of John saying, “These things must shortly come to pass.”

            They also completely ignore to whom the words were originally written and what they meant in the context of the time and circumstances.  For example, when you said the phrase, “the promise” to a Jew, you would create a far different understanding than you would to a Gentile.  Jews who heard or read “the promise” would see it in their minds in all caps on a flashing neon sign.  They had been looking for “THE PROMISE” for thousands of years.  Remember that when you read passages like Acts 2:39, which was originally spoken to a Jewish audience.

            Things also become skewed when you forget that the Bible was not written in English.  Just because the same English word is used in two different places, does not mean it was the same Hebrew or Greek word.  Just as English has many words for “bread” that limit its meaning (biscuit, loaf, bagel, scone, muffin, etc), those people had different words for things that might have been translated into one English word.  Did you know that in the Bible there were several Hebrew or Greek words used for queen?  One meant “a daughter of royalty.”  Another meant “queen-mother.”  Still another simply meant “the king’s wife.”  A really strange one meant “the moon.”  Yet they are all translated “queen” in our language.  That one is not too important, but there are other words that make a much larger difference in your understanding of the scriptures, and that is why you must learn how to use a concordance, either on a computer program or a real book. 

            What started out as simple curiosity that afternoon at the computer reminded me of some important things about Bible study.  Be careful with the word of God.  It isn’t a comic book, so it takes some thought.  It isn’t a thriller, so you sometimes have to make yourself plow through it.  It isn’t a romance, so you may find things in it you didn’t really want to find, like the fact that you need to change your life.  In the end, though, it’s worth every minute of study you put into it.
 
But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God… For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, 2 Cor 4:2,5,6.
 
Dene Ward

Part 1 of this entry was posted yesterday.

II. Music History
 
          There is no doubt historically that the first century church used only vocal music.
 
         “All the music employed in their early services was vocal,” Frank Landon Humphreys, Evolution of Church Music.

          “[Early church music was] purely vocal,” Dr Frederic Louis Ritter, Director, School of Music, Vassar.

          “While pagan melodies were always sung to instrumental accompaniment, the church chant was exclusively vocal.  Clement says, ‘Only one instrument do we use, the word of peace…’ Chrysostom: ‘Our tongues are the strings of the lyre, with a different tone, indeed, but with a more accordant piety.’  Ambrose expresses his scorn for those who would play the lyre and psaltery instead of singing hymns and psalms…Augustine adjures believers not to turn their hearts to theatrical instruments.  The[se] religious guides of the early Christians felt that there would be an incongruity, and even profanity, in the use of…instrumental sound in their…spiritual worship…the pure vocal utterance was the more proper expression of their faith.”  Edward Dickinson, Professor of Music History, Conservatory of Music, Oberlin, Music in the History of the Western Church.

          “[There was a time] when organs were very seldom found outside the Church of England.  The Methodists and Baptists rarely had them, and by the Presbyterians they were strongly opposed…even in the Church of England itself, organs did not obtain admission without much controversy,” Johh Spencer Curwin, Royal Academy of Music.

          From A History of Western Music by Donald Jay Grout:  Early Christian music was monophonic, meaning it had no harmony or counterpoint—everyone sang the same tune.

          Judaism had a huge influence on the singing in the early church.  Psalms were sung almost exclusively in the beginning, in several different ways.  Sometimes they sang in alternation between a soloist and the congregation.  This was called RESPONSORIAL PSALMODY.  Sometimes two parts of verses or alternate verses were sung by two groups.  This was called ANTIIPHONAL PSALMODY.  At still other times a SOLOIST sang a certain passage using melodic formulas which could be altered to suit the cadence of the text.  Because he was doing it ad lib, it was simply impossible for anyone else to sing with him.

          Early hymns were probably sung to folk tunes the people knew, and were eventually put into a book.  The oldest piece of church music found was a hymn of praise.  We have only the last few lines and it was so mutilated it could not be completely reconstructed.  It was found in Oxyrhynchos, Egypt and dated from the end of the third century (200’s).  It is known as the Oxyrhynchos fragment. 

          The emphasis of music in the early church was on ecstasy (Spirit-filled revelation) and individual liberty, 1 Cor 14:26.  It can be established absolutely that the early church sang without instrumental accompaniment.
A capella does not mean unaccompanied music.  A capella is Latin for “in the style of the church.”  Everyone simply understood that sacred music in the church was to be sung without accompaniment because it always had been.

          When instrumental music was first introduced in the Catholic Church, it was fought vehemently, and only fully accepted several hundred years later, around the 11th century.  Even in the nineteenth century, some conservative denominations avoided it, calling it “Romanist,” as in Roman Catholic.”

          The Greek Orthodox Church divided from the Roman Catholic Church in the 11th century.  (Today it consists of 13 branches, including the Russian Orthodox, Bulgarian Orthodox, Slavic Orthodox, etc.)  These native Greek speakers had two issues with the Romans, the use of the word baptizo and the word psallo.  They understood the original language and therefore rejected the introduction of sprinkling as baptism, and instrumental music in the singing of hymns.  They knew that the one word in the first century meant “immerse” and the other meant “sing” and nothing else.  To this day, the Orthodox church still sings a cappella.
         
 
A Personal Note
 
          Some of you might be surprised if I said, “Yes!  The early church had music.”  “They sang without music,” is a common error, and one of my pet peeves.  If you sing without music, you are a mighty poor singer!  Singing is music. 

          As someone who has been there, in college you study two types of music—instrumental or vocal.  Under the vocal division, you can sing with accompaniment or without—a capella.  So much for the piano being merely an incidental—it totally changes the type of music. 

          As a piano/vocal major, one of my music education professors reminded me not to be tempted to play the piano every time the children sang.  “They will never learn to carry a tune in a bucket,” she said, speaking of the crutch the piano would be to their ear development.  In fact, a capella choirs are considered the most elite because their singers must have a good ear to stay on pitch.  Any voice students I have had who were raised in the church singing a capella always had better aural capability than their friends in the denominations.  And I have always considered it a little presumptuous to think that a manmade instrument can improve on the one God made.
 
Dene Ward

The posts today and tomorrow will be a little different.  As a musician I am sometimes asked about our music practices in the church.  I hope these two posts will give you the information you need to answer similar questions.
 
 I.  Characteristics of Language
         
          The first thing we need to understand is that words in any language change over the years.  What may have one meaning now, meant something else entirely a couple hundred years ago.
          Take the word “silly.”  We know it means “absurd, foolish or stupid.”  Did you know that it originally meant “happy and blessed?”  How about “lewd?”  It now means “sexually unchaste;” originally it meant “a common person as opposed to clergy.”  “Idiot” now has the specific meaning of “someone whose mental age does not exceed three,” and a colloquial meaning of “a foolish or stupid person.”  Originally it meant “someone in private station as opposed to someone holding public office.”  So five hundred years ago, most of us could have been described as silly, lewd idiots and we would not have taken offense!
          Be careful of root words too.  Do you know what the root word for “nice” is?  The Latin nescius.  Nescius means “ignorant!”  Think about that the next time someone tells you how nice you look on Sunday morning.  None of these English words’ early definitions have much of anything to do with the way they are used nowadays, so when you look up the definition of a Greek or Hebrew word you must be careful to find the definition for the time period of the original writing.
          “In the age of Alexander the Great…the Greek language underwent [a huge] change…a literary prose language was formed which was founded on the Attic dialect, yet differed from it by adopting a common Greek element…admitting numerous provincialisms.  A popular spoken language arose in which the previously distinct dialects spoken by the various Greek tribes were blended, with a predominance of the Macedonic variety.”  Dr George Benedict Winer, Grammar of the Greek Testament.
          “The usage of the classic Greek authors varies so much according to the time, place, subject, etc.”  Alexander Buttman, Grammar of the New Testament Greek.
          “…Gradual changes in the vocabulary were going on steadily through the whole period which [led up to the first century].  That force of spoken language which is always weakening old words and bringing in new expressions to be toned down in their turn, was acting powerfully in Greek as it does now in English.”  James Moulton, An Introduction to the Study of New Testament Greek.
          “The historical investigation of the language of the New Testament…has shown [it] to be…a specimen of the colloquial form of late Greek, and of the popular colloquial language in particular.”  Dr Adolph Deissman, New Light on the New Testament.
          “By far the most important changes…are those which refer to new or modified meanings given to already existing and current Greek words, whether in the old Classic or in the new Postclassical Greek.  It is these changes which especially concern us in the study of the New Testament.” Charles Louis Loos, Professor Emeritus of Greek Language and Literature, Christian Quarterly Review.
          Accordingly, psallo went through the following changes in meanings as the years progressed:
 
          To pull out one’s hair
          To pull the string of a bow
          To twitch a carpenter’s line
          To play a musical instrument
          To sing (any type of song)
          To sing praises
 
Psalmos went through these changes:
 
          Music of a harp
          A song accompanied by a musical instrument
          A song, sacred or secular, accompanied or a capella
          A hymn of praise
 
          I found the following definitions for psallo and its derivative psalmos as they were used in the first century AD:
 
Robinson—in later usage, a song of praise to God.
Pickering—a psalm, an ode, a hymn
Groves—a psalm or hymn
Donnegan—by later writers, a hymn or ode
Parkhurst—to sing, to sing praises or songs to God
Dunbar—to sing, or celebrate with hymns
Greenfield—to sing, to sing in honor or praise of, to celebrate in song; a sacred song
Cantopolous—to sing or celebrate
Maltby—to praise
Hamilton—to sing; a song or hymn
Thayer—to sing; to celebrate the praises of God in song; a pious song
Sophocles (Greek playwright)—to chant or sing religious hymns
Green—in the New Testament to sing; in the New Testament, a sacred song
 
          By the first century it is obvious that the word psallo had left behind any meaning having to do with strings and simply meant “to sing.”  Psalmos had become far more specific than its origins and was used to refer only to sacred unaccompanied songs.

More on this subject tomorrow.

Dene Ward