Instrumental music in Christian worship is not acceptable to God or the New Testament

I apologize for the initial lack of definition. If you'll permit me, I'll define musical instrument to mean specifically a mechanical music instrument; guitar, harp, etc. I didn't feel the need to define terms or present evidence without a challenger, so pardon me if this is not the preferred form. I should have at least defined terms. Even going by your definition, that a voice is an instrument, by Colossians 3:16 you cited, only singing is commanded and, I affirm, permitted. The only music one should produce in worship of the Christian Godhead is from the heart and voice. If one permits other instruments, then every worshipper would be bound to play instruments to, frankly, cacophonic effects and to no edification. Citing singing as proof that playing instruments is authorized to Question 1 is not even logical by your own definition. There is a distinction between singing and playing an instrument. As far as the argument that instruments are not forbidden, they are certainly excluded: MCCLINTOCK "The Greek word 'psallo' is applied among the Greeks of modern times exclusively to sacred music, which in the Eastern Church has never been any other than vocal, instrumental music being unknown in that church, as it was in the primitive church. " (McClintock & Strong, Vol. 8, p. 739). GARRISON "There is no command in the New Testament, Greek or English, commanding the use of the instrument. Such a command would be entirely out of harmony with the New Testament. " (J. H. Garrison, Christian Church) These aren't half the quotes available on the subject, but there is ample evidence therein. Organs and other instruments in music were not used in Christian worship until after the 700's, not accepted by early church leaders, and not even used by Protestants until the 1800's! Regarding early practice in singing: AQUINAS "Our church does not use musical instruments, as harps and psalteries, to praise God withal, that she may not seem to Judaize. " (Thomas Aquinas, Bingham's Antiquities, Vol. 3, page 137) CHRYSOSTOM "David formerly sang songs, also today we sing hymns. He had a lyre with lifeless strings, the church has a lyre with living strings. Our tongues are the strings of the lyre with a different tone indeed but much more in accordance with piety. Here there is no need for the cithara, or for stretched strings, or for the plectrum, or for art, or for any instrument; but, if you like, you may yourself become a cithara, mortifying the members of the flesh and making a full harmony of mind and body. For when the flesh no longer lusts against the Spirit, but has submitted to its orders and has been led at length into the best and most admirable path, then will you create a spiritual melody. " (Chrysostom, 347-407, Exposition of Psalms 41, (381-398 A. D. ) Source Readings in Music History, ed. O. Strunk, W. W. Norton and Co. : New York, 1950, pg. 70. ) CATHOLIC "For almost a thousand years Gregorian chant, without any instrumental or harmonic addition was the only music used in connection with the liturgy. The organ, in its primitive and rude form, was the first, and for a long time the sole, instrument used to accompany the chant…. The church has never encouraged and at most only tolerated the use of instruments. She enjoins in the 'Caeremonials Episcoporum', - that permission for their use should first be obtained from the ordinary. She holds up as her ideal the unaccompanied chant, and polyphonic, a-capella style. The Sistene Chapel has not even an organ. "" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 10, pg. 657-688. ) Founders of Protestant movements: CALVIN "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. The Papists therefore, have foolishly borrowed, this, as well as many other things, from the Jews. Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us by the apostles is far more pleasing to him. Paul allows us to bless God in the public assembly of the saints, only in a known tongue (I Cor. 14:16) What shall we then say of chanting, which fills the ears with nothing but an empty sound? " (John Calvin, Commentary on Psalms 33) LUTHER "The organ in the worship Is the insignia of Baal… The Roman Catholic borrowed it from the Jews. " (Martin Luther, Mcclintock & Strong's Encyclopedia Volume VI, page 762) WESLEY 'I have no objection to instruments of music in our worship, provided they are neither seen nor heard. " (John Wesley, founder of Methodism, quoted in Adam Clarke's Commentary, Vol. 4, p. 685) As far as when it was introduced: SHAFF "The first organ certainly known to exist and be used in a church was put in the cathedral at Aix-la-chapel by the German emperor, Charlemange, who came to the throne in 768AD. It met with great opposition among the Romanists, especially among the monks, and that it made its way but slowly into common use. So great was the opposition even as late as the 16th century that it would have been abolished by the council of Trent but for the influence of the Emperor Ferdinand…. In the Greek church the organ never came into use. .. The Reform church discarded it; and though the church of Basel very early introduced it, it was in other places admitted only sparingly and after long hesitation. " (Shaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Vol 2, p. 1702) SHAFF (new) "The custom of organ accompaniment did not become general among Protestants until the eighteenth century. " (The New Shaff-Herzogg Encyclopedia, 1953, Vol 10, p. 257) All sources taken from compilation of quotes from . http://www.bible.ca... It would be difficult to prove that a few sects here and there, whether Gnostics or Montanists or whatever, may not have added instruments to their worship, but it was firmly believed by church leaders that it was not permitted. Call it old fashioned, but, in matters of the church, it is far better to follow the pattern or mold of that church governed by apostles endowed with the Holy Spirit than denominations whose very founders even condemned the use of instruments. Luther and Wesley even warned against party names, and for Christians to not bear any man's name but Christ (. http://www.bibletruths.net...). If it was authorized, there is no record in the New Testament of instruments being used. There is a gap in Christian history that mechanical musical instruments were not authorized. It is the "missing link" in doctrine. If there is a missing link between a doctrine and the apostles, who were guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth (more on this matter in the final round argument), then the doctrine ought to be rejected. The guide is the Bible and the early church, under the oversight of the apostles guided into perfect truth by the Holy Spirit. I will give you the opportunity to make a conclusion for or against the position before I present the final evidence. Pardon the phrasing of my initial question. Your counteractions: 1. I have proposed that they are expressly forbidden by the principle of exclusion. There is no command to use them, therefore they are not authorized by the New Testament, which I also affirm to be our standard for Christian worship, church organization, etc. Also, if only singing is authorized, nothing else will do. 2. My last questions were part of an argument I hadn't laid out yet…I apologize, but challenge you to answer in light of my presentation. 3. My entire argument and evidence presented is the basis for this belief.