What are the differences between assembly of god and Evangelical Covenant Church?

Question by Raissa: What are the differences between assembly of god and Evangelical Covenant Church?

Best answer:

Answer by John
The name. And maybe one has more money than the other. But, the similarities are endless in that both are death machines, designed to draw in young people and brainwash them into supporting a system that just takes. See below:

Add your own answer in the comments!

Dillon Assembly of God

Dillon Assembly of God
Church advertising
Image by J. Stephen Conn
In the summer of 1964 I was the 19-year-old leader of a seven member Summer Witness Team from Lee College (now Lee University), Cleveland, Tennessee. Our team spent the summer in Dillon, Montana, where we planted the Dillon Church of God in this building.

It was a vacant Assembly of God property at the time with broken windows, a leaking roof, and waist high weeds in the yard. The Montana District Assemblies of God gave us permission to use the facility. Three other young men and I slept on used mattresses in the basement of the church. We rented a trailer for the three girls on the team.

During the summer we went door-to-door, visiting every home in Dillon. We also advertised on the radio and in the newspaper, conducted a Vacation Bible School, held revival services, Sunday morning and evening Worship and Wednesday evening Bible Study. By the end of the summer we had gathered a small congregation of 20-30 people and Aaron Lavender, one of the young men on the team, stayed behind to become the first official pastor of the Dillon Church of God.

A year or two later, the the Assemblies of God decided to take the building over again. Since there is no significant difference in the two sister Pentecostal denominations, the congregation became a part of the Assemblies of God.

The building has since been completely remodeled and updated and a thriving church continues there to this day. August 10, 2009, was my first visit back to Dillon in 45 years. The current pastor, Ryan Spurlock and his wife Brianne, very graciously invited me over to their home for dinner and gave me a tour of the remodeled facilities. It was great to see that some of the seeds I had planted so long ago are still bearing fruit.

I have written about that summer, and much more, in my book, Growing up Pentecostal: www.amazon.com/Growing-Up-Pentecostal-Stephen-Conn/dp/160…

Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly

Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly

Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly

Free Online Articles Directory

Why Submit Articles?
Top Authors
Top Articles
AB Answers

Publish Article

0 && $.browser.msie ) {
var ie_version = parseInt($.browser.version);
if(ie_version Hello Guest

Login via

My Home
Sign Out



Remember me?
Lost Password?

Home Page > Spirituality > Religion > Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly

Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly

Edit Article |

Posted: May 11, 2010



Ask a question

Ask our experts your Religion related questions here…200 Characters left

Related Questions

I have downloaded a video file from internet. The video part of the file plays correctly. The instrumental music part of the audio also plays correctly. But human voice part is faulty. Can it be fixed
What are some really good mystery books ?
I am looking for a church that has revivals for people that need to be up lifted back toward christ in the milwaukee area?
Does the music industry worship the devil ?

Syndicate this Article

Copy to clipboard

Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly

By: Still Waters

About the Author

Still Waters Revival Books (SWRB) has been publishing and distributing (free and at discounts) classic and contemporary Christian (Puritan, Reformation, Reformed, Presbyterian, Baptist, Covenanter, Calvinistic, etc.) books, audio (lately MP3s), and videos, worldwide, for over 25 years.

(ArticlesBase SC #2345824)

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/ – Instrumental Music in Public Worship: The Westminster Assembly



Instrumental Music in Public Worship: History Surrounding the Westminster Assembly




By John L. Girardeau (Still Waters Revival Books, [1888] 2000), pp. 132, 133.


Before the Westminster Assembly of Divines undertook the office of preparing a Directory of Worship, the Parliament had authoritatively adopted measures looking to the removal of organs, along with other remains of Popery, from the churches of England. On the 20th of May, 1644, the commissioners from Scotland wrote to the General Assembly of their church and made the following statement among others: “We cannot but admire the good hand of God in the great things done here already, particularly that the covenant, the foundation of the whole work, is taken, Prelacy and the whole train thereof extirpated, the service-book in many places forsaken, plain and powerful preaching set up, many colleges in Cambridge provided with such ministers as are most zealous of the best reformation, altars removed, the communion in some places given at the table with sitting, THE GREAT ORGANS AT PAUL’S AND PETER’S IN WESTMINSTER TAKEN DOWN (emphasis added), images and many other monuments of idolatry defaced and abolished, the Chapel Royal at Whitehall purged and reformed; and all by authority, in a quiet manner, at noon-day, without tumult.”1 So thorough was the work of removing organs that the “Encyclopaedia Britannica” says that “at the Revolution most of the organs in England had been destroyed.”2


When, therefore, the Assembly addressed itself to the task of framing a Directory for Worship, it found itself confronted by a condition of the churches of Great Britain in which the singing of psalms without instrumental accompaniment almost universally prevailed. In prescribing, consequently, the singing of psalms without making any allusion to the restoration of instrumental music, it must, in all fairness, be construed to specify the simple singing of praise as a part of public worship. The question, moreover, is settled by the consideration that had any debate occurred as to the propriety of allowing the use of instrumental music, the Scottish commissioners would have vehemently and uncompromisingly opposed that measure. But Lightfoot, who was a member of the Assembly, in his “Journal of its Proceedings”3 tells us: “This morning we fell upon the Directory for singing of psalms; and, in a short time, we finished it.” He says that the only point upon which the Scottish commissioners had some discussion was the reading of the Psalms line by line.




1. Girardeau cites this quotation from the Acts of Assembly of the Church of Scotland, 1644.


2. Girardeau cites Art., Organ.


3. Girardeau cites Works, Vol. xiii., pp. 343, 344; London, 1825.


For information about the Puritans, including free and discounted Puritan books, Puritan MP3s, Puritan digital downloads, and Puritan videos, as well as the Puritan Hard Drive, please visit Still Waters Revival Books at http://www.puritandownloads.com/swrb/.

Retrieved from “http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/instrumental-music-in-public-worship-the-westminster-assembly-2345824.html”

(ArticlesBase SC #2345824)

Still Waters
About the Author:

Still Waters Revival Books (SWRB) has been publishing and distributing (free and at discounts) classic and contemporary Christian (Puritan, Reformation, Reformed, Presbyterian, Baptist, Covenanter, Calvinistic, etc.) books, audio (lately MP3s), and videos, worldwide, for over 25 years.


Rate this Article


0 vote(s)


Source:  http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/instrumental-music-in-public-worship-the-westminster-assembly-2345824.html

Article Tags:
still waters revival books, instrumental music in public worship, westminster assembly, directory of worship, covenant, churches of england

Related Videos

Latest Religion Articles
More from Still Waters

Gospel Keys 202: Learn Worship Music on the Piano by ear

Learn over 60 new voicings, chords, progressions, and fancy arrangements to playing worship music!

From fancy inversions of the ninth chord to the secret “Quartal” chord (which sounds very very smooth), you’ll learn how to replace all of your basic triads and 3-fingered chords with full-sounding 9ths, 11ths, 13ths, and altered chords! Believe me when I say: “Others will notice!” (02:40)

Learn to Play Worship Music by Ear

Learn, step-by-step, how to transition from praise music into worship with various chords and fill-ins. Almost every chord that I’ll be introducing to you can serve this purpose but I’ll specifically show you what chords sound the best!

www.GospelKeys202.com (01:59)

Gospel Keys 202: Mastering Worship Chords Couldn’t be Easier

Discover one chord that is used in probably 60% of gospel worship music. All chords are not created equal. Some chords are used far more frequently than others.

Not only will you be equipped with this one chord but you’ll learn tons of chords like this — chords that reappear in song after song.

I will also show you how to pick out this chord in all of your gospel recordings because its definitely there (whether you hear it or not) (01:59)

GospelKeysUrban.com-Discover a new approach to progressions

Jonathan Powell teachs over 85 fancy chords voicings, fat chords progressions, licks and tricks.
GospelKeysUrban.com (01:13)

Tune in: Novice Guide to iTunes – #6 – Using the iTunes Genius

The iTunes Genius is a recent addition to iTunes that helps you to build a playlist by assembling music it thinks you’ll like. This playlist is based on the data that iTunes has about your musical tastes and the more you use iTunes, the more information the Genius

Presbyterian Church USA Middle East Study Committee recommends Kairos Document adoption for study by General Assembly 2010 by Peter Menkin

Presbyterian Church USA Middle East Study Committee recommends Kairos Document adoption for study by General Assembly 2010 by Peter Menkin

Presbyterian Church USA Middle East Study Committee recommends Kairos Document adoption for study by General Assembly 2010
by Peter Menkin

The Kairos Document is a work that is a kind of Christian peaceful means of declaring war based on various “peaceful methods” of protest and action regarding an unfair and unjust nation’s activities in its own national self-hood, in its own national actions and policies against its citizens, and in its own national actions against another people. The Kairos Document is a work created by Palestinian Christians and aimed at Israel, as a State, a government, and this writer thinks also in its reflection on its Jewish citizens and Jews in general regardless of nationality.

That latter statement about it is a reflection of Jews as people, rather than the government of Israel and Israeli actions towards Palestine is probably the widest area of judgment against what is in many respectable quarters considered a radical document that should not be adopted as recommended by the Presbyterian/Israel policy committee on the Middle East by the Presbyterian Church USA at their General Assembly meeting July, 2010. All of the parts of the Kairos Document have been strongly criticized, and held as anti-Semitic by major mainline Jewish organizations in the United States, including the respected human rights organization, The Wiesenthal Center, based in Los Angeles.

This article is the third in a series of three on the Middle East Policy Committee of the Presbyterian Church USA paper that is more than 150 pages long and can be found here. It is the final of the three reports in this series, and for readers not familiar with the Kairos Document, a PDF of the Document is found here. This is an important Document, supported by many Presbyterians, obviously since it appears in their recommendations for policy towards Israel, and is popularly support by numerous “peace” groups in the United States, and even in Europe and the Middle East.

In an effort to be more transparent in this last of the series, this writer offers an opinion regarding the Israeli need for peace, and peace for all the Middle East. With the proviso that this is a commentary and report, not an editorial or opinion piece reflecting the writer’s views, nonetheless, it is appropriate to say that the key element for work towards peace in the Middle East is continuing dialogue, lack of hostilities, which means truces and aspects of various kinds of truces. This takes a mature diplomatic series of helpful actions on the part of nations. The effort of the Presbyterian Church USA in its policy recommendations is an effort to work towards peace, as is the intent of the Presbyterian Church USA. No doubt of their sincerity, in this writer’s estimation, and is the clear work of the Presbyterian as they form Christian responses to Israel and Middle East issues.

Readers who are familiar with the Presbyterian Church USA policy report and have followed it as it has developed know it is a controversial document made all the more controversial by its inclusion this year with the Kairos Document as part of its recommendation for adoption. One recognizes Jewish Community fear and repulsion of what it believes is anti-Semitism and a planned policy that will get rid of the State of Israel. The list of organizations believing this act of affairs is long, and this writer prefers to stay with one example, The Wiesenthal Center. After all, this is a commentary and report for the web and as such requires out of fairness a statement and statements that reflect this major concern and shocked series of observations resulting in opinions held by Israelis and significantly for this writer, noted Jewish organizations in the United States. They are joined by many other voices who find the report unbalanced and unfair to Israel and the Jewish Community. That said, and with the hope that there is much of worth in the report that Christians and Presbyterians need to read and even adopt, in all fairness to the Presbyterian Church USA, this commentary and report will go on with the effort to tell about the Committee recommendations in this space of words. Please note this article also is a compilation of other comments and reports on the Kairos Document in an effort to outline and illuminate the issues.

The “Christian Century”, a more liberal American magazine has looked at the report and two writers who are themselves respected academics comment on the paper coming before the General Assembly. The writers are: Ted A. Smith and Amy-Jill Levine. The title of their article is: “Habits of anti-Judaism: Critiquing a PCUSA report on Israel/Palestine.”

The assembly charged the committee with preparing “a comprehensive study, with recommendations, that is focused on Israel/Palestine within the complex context of the Middle East.”

The study committee made several moves that demonstrate its desire to avoid some of the most common forms of false witness against Jews. For example, it notes that most Presbyterians reject supersessionist narratives in which “Christians have supplanted Jews” to become “the only legitimate heirs of God’s covenant with Abraham.” Signaling this rejection of supersessionism, the report speaks of “Older Testament” and “Newer Testament” in its biblical references. Such language is neither necessary nor sufficient for avoiding supersessionism, but it at least suggests a desire to proclaim a gospel that does not begin with God’s rejection of Jews.

Though critical of the Middle East Study Committee report, the academics who say much in their Christian Century article given the Presbyterian Church USA good marks for a good attitude.

What the Presbyterian Committee itself asks is that Presbyterian Church USA members, and Christians in general, take time to look at this report. The Reverend Doctor Ron Shive, in a Press Statement, says, “It is a challenge to present a report of this length,” “The temptation to lift out a sound bite to support or defend one’s position will be incredibly strong. But we prayerfully ask that everyone read the full report for themselves and make use of the additional resources at www.pcusa.org/middleeastpeace.”

“The situation in the Middle East is too critical to do anything less,” he says.

Here in the same Press Statement is a good representation of the Middle East Study Committee interests and perspective:

Within the report is a review of General Assembly policy statements on the Middle East, which date back to the founding of the State of Israel in 1948. The committee found that these statements have consistently called for a two-state solution with rights, dignity, and security for both Israelis and Palestinians.

However, the committee’s report lifts up the growing urgency to find a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: “The real concern that we all embrace is that the window of opportunity for an end to the occupation and the viability of a two-state solution is rapidly closing. This is due in large part to the rapid growth of settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the increasing number of bypass roads, the injustice of the separation barrier, and tragic numbers of house demolitions.”

The report continues, “A just and lasting peace and security for Israel is possible when the occupation has ended and the Palestinian acts of violent resistance are no longer employed. A just and lasting peace and security for the Palestinians is possible when the occupation has ended and Israel does not need to resort to military force to maintain its illegal land possession. If there were no occupation, there would be no Palestinian resistance. If there was no Palestinian resistance, Israelis could live in peace and security.”

“Inexcusable acts of violence have been committed by both the powerful occupying forces of the Israeli military and the Jewish settlers in the West Bank, as well as the Palestinians, of whom a relatively small minority has resorted to violence as a means of resisting the occupation.”

The committee concludes, “Violence is not an acceptable means to peace, regardless of its rationale.”

It is clear that the report is a “peace” document, for it says, “Violence is not an acceptable means to peace, regardless of its rationale.”

A reader can see in the Press Statement the explanatory position regarding the report and its intention, seen by its Chairman Ron Shive. The Reverend Doctor Ron Shive makes a good spokesman for the statements released by the Presbyterian Church USA. Their Statement regarding the report continues at length:

The committee’s 39 recommendations to the 219th General Assembly are as detailed and extensive as the report itself.

In their introductory comments to the recommendations, committee members write that they seek to strengthen the PC(USA)’s “past positions on behalf of peace between Israelis and Palestinians and the cessation of violence by all parties, and its opposition to Israel’s ongoing expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and its continuing occupation of those territories.”

The comments continue, “We also call upon the various Palestinian political factions to negotiate a unified government prepared to recognize Israel’s existence. We proclaim our alarm and dismay—both over the increasingly rapid exodus of Christians from Israel/Palestine caused by anti-Palestinian discrimination and oppression, the growth of Islamic and Jewish