The New
Testament scriptures do not command the use of a mechanical
instrument in the worship of God. This fact is generally conceded by
"instrumentalists" and "non-instrumentalists" alike. Therefore those
who wish to use the mechanical instrument must find some other means
of justifying their musical preference. Some seek to discover in the
old covenant what they cannot find in the new. Dwaine Dunning stated
in an article that,
those who
advocate them may go to the Old Testament Scriptures, such as Psalm
92, "It is a good thing to give thanks to God ... upon an
instrument."
He
anticipated the non-instrumentalists' reply that the mechanical
instrument of music could not be used because, as part of the old
covenant, it was taken out of the way, by adding,
It is hard to
believe that this argument is considered at all valid among people
who believe that "the new covenant is in the old concealed, the old
is in the new revealed." God certainly declared himself under the
old dispensation as highly favorable to instrumental music in His
praise, and never did He rescind His approval. Is it proper exegesis
to take His "silence" in the New Testament in such a manner as to
outweigh His prior approval?1
It is the
purpose of this paper to demonstrate that the mechanical instrument
is not to be used in worship to God, not simply because, "the old
testament was nailed to the cross and the instrument right along
with it," but because the very nature and purpose of the new
covenant demand such not to be used.
Let us first
contrast the nature of the old covenant with the new covenant. In
the fourth chapter of John, a Samaritan woman, seeking to know "the
place where men ought to worship," asked Jesus whether it was in Mt.
Gerizim or in Jerusalem. Jesus gave the surprising reply that soon
worship would be in neither of these places, "but the hour cometh
and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in
spirit and truth" (John 4:23).2 There are several contrasts worthy
of notice. Worship will soon not be identified with a physical place
such as Jerusalem, but will be in spirit and truth. Secondly, Jesus
said that the Jews were right, "salvation is from the Jews,"
however, a change in the system would soon take place. Finally, the
law itself is contrasted with Christ as in John 17:17: "the law was
given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ."
Some have
suggested that the phrase "spirit and truth" refers to the sincerity
of worship and its accordance with God's revealed truth. This,
however, fails to reveal the true impact of the statement. Even
under the old covenant, sincerity was demanded. God's law was to be
upon the heart, and obedience was to be motivated by love for God
(Deut. 6:4-9). Jesus condemned the Pharisees for hypocrisy in
worship-mere lip service without the sincerity of the heart is vain
(Matt. 15:6-7). Truth, also, was a necessity of the-old covenant.
Otherwise, how could Jesus have answered the woman's question,
"Where ought men to worship?" The law could not be added to nor
diminished from; the result of such would make void the law (Deut.
4:2; Mk. 7:5-13).
What then is
the meaning of this contrast? To comprehend this, we must first
understand and appreciate the nature and purpose of the old
covenant. The writer of Hebrews states that the "first covenant had
ordinances of divine service," but he terms these ordinances carnal,
that is, material, worldly, sensual (9:1,10). It consisted of things
to see, as "the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry"
(9:21); things to do, as "the priests go in continually into the
first tabernacle, accomplishing the services" (9:6); things to
smell, as the "golden censer" (9:4); and even things to hear' as
"with harps, with psalteries, and with cymbols" (I Chr. 25: 1).
Instruments of music were an integral part of the old covenant,
having been used in the dedication of the temple of Solomon (2 Chr.
5:11-14), in cleansing of the temple by Hezekiah "for the
commandment was of Jehovah" (2 Chr. 25:29)3, and generally in all
worship to Jehovah (Psalm 150). Some of the instruments used were
trumpet, psaltery, harp, timbral, stringed instrument, pipe, and
cymbols.
However, the
Hebrew writer maintains that the old covenant was "weak and
unprofitable" (7:18), and that it was "imposed until a time of
reformation" (9:10). This does not mean that God failed in His first
attempt at legislation, but simply indicated that the purpose of the
old covenant caused it to be inherently "weak and unprofitable."
There are, in actuality, two purposes of the old covenant that are
pertinent to this discussion.
The old
covenant was never meant to justify man before God, but was given to
demonstrate that man needed to be justified, (Rom. 7:7, 12-14; Gal.
3:21-22; Heb. 10:4,11). Paul said, "It was added because of
transgressions till the seed should come" (Gal. 3:19). Through the
old covenant, man was caused to recognize the need for a Messiah. In
this sense, the old covenant brought the Jews to Christ (Gal.
3:23-24). When the seed came, the need for the old covenant no
longer existed; its time had lapsed (Gal. 3:25; Col. 2:14; Heb.
7:18-19).
Secondly, the
old covenant revolved in the realm of the sensual for a reason-it
was to be the divine demonstration of coming attractions. The
Hebrews writer calls it a "shadow of the good things to come, not
the very image of the things" (10:1). The law, therefore, was "weak
and unprofitable" because it was only a shadow, not the reality.
According to the chart given on page 12 many of the old covenant
types found their anti-type, or reality, in the new covenant.4
(See chart at
bottom of preceding page)
Truly, "the
new covenant is in the old concealed, the old is in the new
revealed." Once the nature and purpose of the old covenant are
firmly fixed in our minds, we can readily understand what Jesus
meant by the expression, "in spirit and truth."
When Jesus
speaks of "in truth," he is referring, not to true as opposed to
false, but shadow as opposed to reality. "True worshippers" worship
in the truth of the new covenant, not in the shadow of the old.
Under both covenants, worship is based upon man's relationship to
God. The old covenant relationship of the Jews to God was intensely
physical-they were His chosen people through whom the seed was to
come. God's dealings with them were on a worldly plane. When
obedient, they were materially blessed; when disobedient, they were
materially cursed. It is understandable that worship would be
compatible with this relationship. The outward show of the temple,
priesthood, mechanical instruments of music, and daily ministries
reinforced it. The new covenant, however, is not based upon such a
sensual, ritualistic system; its worship should quite naturally be
expected to possess a different nature also.
Man is
created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26); as God is a spirit (Jno.
4:24), so is He the Father of our spirits (Heb.12:9). Under the new
covenant, the emphasis is upon the Christian's relationship to God
as the spiritual seed of Abraham, not his physical seed. Those who
are obedient are spiritually blessed, those disobedient are
spiritually cursed. Worship, therefore, must be compatible or
coordinate with the spiritual nature of the covenant. Under this
covenant, there is the twofold aspect of the temple: first, each
Christian is a temple (2 Cor. 6:16) and an officiating priest,
"accomplishing the services;" also, each Christian is a unit that is
integrated with others "into a holy temple in the Lord" (Eph.
2:19-22). Indeed, we worship "in spirit" John 4:24; Rom. 1:9, 7:6; 2
Cor. 3:6). The Christian is to present his body "a living sacrifice,
holy, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service" or logike
latreia (Rom. 12:1, cf. I Pet. 2:5).
The adjective
logike was current in the philosophical literature for the
distinctive nature of man, the reasoning power (logos), which
distinguished him from animals, and his spiritual nature in contrast
to his sensual nature ... worship characterized in this way can
neither proceed from nor appeal to the lower nature of man, but is
not thereby simply "intellectual" worship. 5
Logike must
describe all aspects of worship under the new covenant.
Is
instrumental music as much a part of the new covenant as it was a
part of the old covenant? To this question, we must answer "yes"
along with Dwaine Dunning, "God certainly declared himself under the
old dispensation as highly favorable to instrumental music in His
praise, and never did He rescind His approval." However, with this
answer, we are faced with the crux of the whole matter. The
instrument of music, as a part of worship, must be coordinate with
the nature of the covenant. The old covenant was sensual, and the
instruments employed were mechanical. The new covenant is spiritual,
and the instruments used must correspond with this nature.
Music, as
described in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16, served two
purposes. The first was for edification. Paul said, "speak one to
another" and "teach and admonish one another." The instrument thus
specified is the vocal cords.
Edification
for Paul in I Cor. 14 meant intelligible, verbal instruction, in
contrast to speaking in unintelligible (to those present) tongues.6
"I will sing
with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also" (v.
15). If a tongue cannot edify because it has no appeal to the
understanding (and "ye will be speaking into the air," v. 9), how
can a mechanical instrument be used for edification? It cannot teach
nor admonish. It does not cause one to understand. Like the unknown
tongue, it Aspeaks into the air." Secondly, music is to be used in
worship to God. The instrument specified for worship is the
heart-"sing and make melody with your heart to the Lord." Music is
no longer representative, as when the Levites played for the
assembly (2 Chr. 29:25). It is now an individual act. Every
Christian can make melody to God. Just as the temple and the
priesthood, the mechanical instrument typified the new covenant.
Can the
mechanical instrument then be consistent with the spiritual nature
of worship? Some have erroneously assumed that what stimulates the
feelings, that what is 11 aesthetically satisfying" constitutes
worship to God. Nothing could be further from the truth. Worship is
maintained on a rational, spiritual level, and feeling should come
as a result of knowing we have pleased God in acceptable worship.
Mechanical music, on the contrary, cannot offer spiritual worship. A
mechanical instrument cannot worship God.
Those who
advocate using an instrument assert that it is merely an aid, to
help the assembly worship God. There are several problems with this
view in light of what has been shown. The use of a mechanical
instrument denies the individual act of making melody to God, by
placing the worship service back to the representative system of the
old covenant. If an instrument is needed to "help the assembly," the
implication is that the heart is not sufficient to offer acceptable
worship to God. A mechanical instrument is sensual by nature. It
activates the feelings by appreciation of the sound of the
instrument, rather than by the recognition that acceptable worship
has been offered. In this sense, the instrument diverts the
attention from the heart, and thus depreciates the worship.7
Finally, for something to be an aid, it must first be compatible
with the nature of the thing it aids. The sensual nature of the
mechanical instrument and the spiritual nature of the new covenant
worship are directly antagonistic, in antithesis to one another.
Such an instrument therefore, cannot be an aid.
We are asked,
"Is it proper exegesis to take His 'silence' in the New Testament in
such a manner as to outweigh His prior approval?" Many years ago,
the prophet Ezekiel complained that some. men "have made no
distinction between the holy and the common ... between the unclean
and clean" (22:26). The writer of Hebrews states that the tabernacle
was cleansed, or sanctified, by sprinkling of blood (9:18-22), as
was the temple dedicated by sacrifice of animals (2 Chr. 7:4-7). God
set all things that were to be used for worship within the bounds of
the sanctified temple area, including the instruments of music (2
Chr. 29:25). The sin of Nadab and Abihu was that they violated God's
silence by offering that which was not sanctified. The law specified
that the fire to be used for the censer had to be taken from the
altar (Lev. 16:12), yet they disobeyed by offering "strange fire"
(Lev. 10: 1). The temple of the new covenant has also been
sanctified by blood (Heb. 10: 10), including the instrument of
worship-the heart (Heb. 10:22, cf. 8:10). The mechanical instrument
has been left outside the temple gates, and within the silence of
the NT scripture. Shall we call holy, what God has left profane?8
In new
covenant worship, therefore, the mechanical instrument would be an
anachronism, that is, something historically out of place. In
Shakespeare's Tragedy of Julius Caesar (II.1), the conspirators were
interrupted by a clock that strikes three times. Now, although
striking clocks were plentiful in seventeenth century England, there
were, in fact, none in Rome during the time of Caesar. Anyone that
would seek to play a mechanical instrument in worship to God today
would be, like Shakespeare's clock, at the wrong place and at the
wrong time.
An attempt
has been made to show that the mechanical instrument has no place in
the worship of the new covenant. This has not pretended to be an
exhaustive treatise,.but a summary of some arguments that have
proved persuasive in our own mind. Since the instrumental music
question is of such grave import and not to be lightly discarded, if
we have overlooked any important detail, the reader will please bear
the responsibility of guiding us to the right path.
Footnotes
1. "New
Thoughts on an Old Problem,@ Christian Standand, Feb. 12,1966.
2. For an
excellent analysis of this passage, see James D. Bales, Instrumental
Music and New Testament Worship, pp. 15-30.
3. Some
discredit this passage due to an alleged corruption in the text, but
see Hugo McCord's article, "Old Testament Instrumentation", Firm
Foundation, Apr. 26, 1966.
4. Adapted
from Book-Miller Debate, p. 26.
5. Everett
Ferguson, A Capella Music, pp. 88-90.
6. Ferguson,
pp. 90-91.
7. See R. L.
Whiteside's comments, Reflections, pp. 368-369.
8. For a
similar argument, see Foy E. Wallace, Jr., Bulwarks of the Faith,
II.226-228.
Bibliography
Bales, James
D., Instrumental Music and New Testament Worship, Searcy: 1973.
Book-Miller
Debate. Gainesville: Phillips Publications, 1955
Dunning,
Dwaine, "New Thoughts on an Old Problem", Christian Standard.
February 12, 1966.
Ferguson,
Everett, A Capella Music in the Public Worship of the Church,
Abilene: Biblical Research Press, 1972.
McCord, Hugh,
"Old Testament Instrumentation?" Firm Foundation, April 26, 1966.
Wallace, Foy
E. Jr., Bulwarks of the Faith, Part 2, Oklahoma City: Wallace
Publications, 1951.
Whiteside,
Robertson L., Reflections, Denton: (privately published),'1965.
Truth
Magazine, XVIII:37, p. 12-14
July 25, 1974
Other
Articles
A Factious Man
Is the
Bible Inspired?
Modernism's Assault on
Prophecy
Scarcely A Ripple
Abiding in the Doctrine
The Simple
Power of the Lord's Supper
The
Entrenched Position of Religious Error
- Caffin,
B.C. (1950), II Peter – Pulpit Commentary, H.D.M. Spence
and Joseph Exell, eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
For Past Auburn Beacons go to:
www.aubeacon.com/Bulletins.htm |
Anyone can join the mailing list for the Auburn Beacon! Send
your request to:
larryrouse@aubeacon.com |
Other Articles by Wayne Jackson
Is the Restoration Plea
Valid?
Are We Under Law or Grace?
Apostasy - A Clear and Ever
Present Danger
Three
Dimensions of Love
What is Truth? A Question
for the Ages
The Challenge of Agape Love
That Mysterious Disciple
The Value of the Kingdom of Heaven
Did the Early Church Observe the
Lord's Supper Daily?