Before we examine this subject, I want to emphasize the importance of having Bible authority for our worship to God. If it isn't necessary to have scriptural authority for what we preach, teach, say, and practice in worship, then we don't need the Bible for anything, and Christ died in vain! There is a catastrophic irreverence, both for the inspiration, and authority of God's word; and, this problem is being compounded by modern translations which insert denominational bias.
"If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God..." (1 Pet.4:11);
"And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him," (Col.3:17).
Whatever we do in word (something said), or in deed (work, an act or labor), we must do it all in the name of (by His authority) the Lord. The Bible is our standard of authority:
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works," (2 Tim.3:16-l7).
Notice what the "Divinely inspired scriptures" are good for: Doctrine - learning, teaching; Reproof - conviction, evidence; Correction - a straightening up again; Instruction - tutorage, education or training.
Ask yourself the question, "Is there anything pertaining to religion, that is absent from the scriptures?" Jesus revealed the will of the Father, and after His ascension, He sent the Holy Ghost upon the twelve apostles (Luk.24:49; Acts 1:5,8; 2:1-4) to bring all things to their remembrance whatsoever He had spoken, (Joh.14:26).
"God who at sundry times and divers manners spake in times past to the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His son..." (Heb.1:1-2).
Notice: "God hath spoken!" Not only is the proliferation of scriptural ignorance causing great multitudes to fall prey to the cunning hypnosis of "educated" preachers, it is being compounded by modern "updated" versions of the Bible, some of which even add text to make it more suitable to the denominational whims of man. "Hath" is past tense, and God speaks to man today solely through His word. Man doesn't receive new revelations today as many claim (Gal.l:6-9), especially a message differing from the Word Jesus died for, revealed by the Holy Spirit, and by which we are being judged, (Jas.2:12)!
"For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad," (2 Cor.5:10).
The Bible is the only infallible authority, or standard to follow in all religious instruction. If it isn't necessary to adhere to what the Bible says, or if we can change one thing it says, then why couldn't we change it all, or just throw it away completely!? The priests of Israel were instructed not to change any of God's commandments to the people, (Deu.4:2); and, the Bible closes with the solemn warning of not to add to, nor take away from what the word of God says, (Rev.22:18-19). Consider what happened to Adam and Eve as the result of Satan changing only one word in God's commandment! God hath spoken, and we must capitulate to His word.
"Come now let us reason together saith the Lord..." (Isa.1:18).
Does the Bible teach that we must have musical instruments in our assemblies? Does the Bible teach that it is acceptable if we use instrumental music in our worship, or, does God's word prohibit the use of such instruments in the Christians' assemblies? The objective of this study is to ascertain beyond any reasonable doubt, for anyone who is willing to accept the authority of God's word, whether or not musical instruments have any place in the worship of the Christian assembly.
The fact that musical instruments are not even hinted at in the New Testament church, nor for several centuries thereafter, forces one to seek approval from the original Greek terminology to justify an already prejudiced opinion; therefore, an adequate study of this subject requires us to comprehend these terms and their original meanings. (Definitions by J. H. Thayer.)
1. Psalmos - noun - ψαλμός "1) a striking, twanging: 1a) of a striking the chords of a musical instrument; 1b) of a pious song, a psalm."
2. Psallo - verb - ψάλλω "1) to pluck off, pull out; 2) to cause to vibrate by touching, to twang: 2a) to touch or strike the chord, to twang the strings of a musical instrument so that they gently vibrate: 2b) to play on a stringed instrument, to play, the harp, etc.: 2c) to sing to the music of the harp: 2d) in the NT to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song."
3.Speaking - verb - λαλέω "1) to utter a voice or emit a sound; 2) to speak: 2a) to use the tongue or the faculty of speech: 2b) to utter articulate sounds; 3) to talk; 4) to utter, tell; 5) to use words in order to declare one's mind and disclose one's thoughts: 5a) to speak."
4.Hymns - verb - ὕμνος "1) a song in the praise of gods, heroes, conquerors; 2) a sacred song, hymn."
5. Singing - verb - ᾄδω "1) to the praise of anyone, to sing."
6. Heart - noun - καρδία "1) the heart: 1a) that organ in the animal body which is the center of the circulation of the blood, and hence was regarded as the seat of physical life: 1b) denotes the center of all physical and spiritual life; 2a) the vigour and sense of physical life: 2b) the center and seat of spiritual life: 2b1) the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours: 2b2) of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence: 2b3) of the will and character: 2b4) of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions."
From the definitions of the Greek words, "psalmos" and "psallo," it is argued that we are permitted to play on musical instruments in our worship to God. While some go so far as to say we must have them, most rely on the opinion that it's not a salvation issue to suggest that it's permissible rather than obligatory. These two words, like most other words, have more than one meaning. Consider the English word "bar" for example; See how many definitions you can think of, and then look at the word as defined in Webster's Dictionary:
1) a straight piece (as of wood or metal) that is longer than it is wide and has any of various uses (as for a lever, support, barrier, or fastening);
2) something that obstructs or prevents passage, progress, or action: as
3) A:
B:
4) a straight stripe, band, or line much longer than it is wide: as
5) a counter at which food or especially alcoholic beverages are served;
6) a vertical line across the musical staff before the initial measure accent; measure.
7) a lace and embroidery joining covered with buttonhole stitch for connecting various parts of the pattern in needlepoint lace and cutwork.
8) standard "wants to raise the bar for approving new drugs".
9) behind bars; "in jail."
When the word "bar" is used in a sentence, the grammatical structure and context of the sentence determines which definition is intended. Likewise, it is the same with the words "psalmos" and "psallo," i.e., how each term is used determines which definition is intended.
Let's look at what Paul told the church at Ephesus, and as I quote directly from Eph 5:19 (KJV), notice the words with numbers beside them, and refer back to the above list of definitions which are taken directly from Thayer's Greek Lexicon.
"Speaking(3) to yourselves in psalms(1) and hymns(4) and spiritual songs, singing(5) and making(2) melody(2) in your heart(6) to the Lord."
Notice the definition for the term, "speaking." The sound made by speaking comes from vibrations in the throat of a person, or in other words, it is vocal rather than from a man-made instrument. We are to speak (to use words in order to declare one's mind) to ourselves in psalmns(1): "1) a striking, twanging: 1a) of a striking the chords of a musical instrument; 1b) of a pious song, a psalm." These three forms of praise, i.e., psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, are to be implemented by speaking. This speaking of psalms is specified to be in the form of singing: "Speaking to yourselves in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing..." As the context of the sentence determines which definition of the word "bar" is used, so it is with the noun "psalmos:" the sound made while speaking is produced from vibrations of the vocal chords, not, striking the strings and chords of a musical instrument. "Singing"(5), is a verb, which simply means, "to sing." Now, I want you to pay particular attention to where Paul said the melody (psallo(2)) is to be made: "...singing and making(2) melody(2) in your heart to the Lord." What is the heart? The heart(6), in this context, is the inner man: the thoughts, conscience, intellect, and seat of emotions--i.e., our mind. Jesus said, "...for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh," (Mt.12:34). Words spoken from the lips come from the heart, and psallo (melody), is to be made, "in your heart." Since the melody is to be made in your heart, it must come forth from your mouth; therefore, Paul cannot be referring to the melody of a musical instrument! If "psallo" (or psalmos) means both, i.e., to sing and play, then no one has obeyed the command until he has done both--i.e., the playing can no more be left off than the singing. The command is in the word! It cannot merely permit instrumental music: it either includes it (in which case it cannot be omitted), or it excludes it (in which case it cannot be used). If it includes it, then everyone must play an instrument, but if it excludes it, then no one can play on musical instruments in the assembly! Paul used the only words (psalmos, and psallo) that would allow the use of instrumental music, and specified both as vocal, both here, and other places in the New Testament as well. The singing is to be accompanied with melody in the heart, not melody from a musical instrument.
Now let's consider another passage penned by this same apostle:
"What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also," (1 Cor. 14:15).
It should be realized by all Bible students, that the things Paul wrote were the commandments of the Lord (1 Cor.14:37), and that he taught the same thing everywhere in all congregations of the Lord's church (1 Cor.4:17), whether or not we have a written account of it. We see then in this verse that the praying is to be done in the same manner as the singing--i.e., with the spirit, and the understanding. Is prayer accompanied with instrumental music!? "Spirit" here is: pnuema - πνεῦμα - "the rational soul," and "understanding" is: nous - νοῦς "the intellect, the mind," (Thayer). The word "sing" in this verse is "psallo." As psallo is to be made in the heart (Eph. 5:19), it is clearly specified in this verse also that psallo is to be done in conjunction with the soul: in the mind, i.e., in the heart, and what is in our heart comes forth from the mouth. It should be of utmost concern to all who claim to be Christians that "psallo" is used only 7 times in 4 verses in the New Testament, and in all instances, it is translated in a vocal capacity without the slightest hint of instrumental accompaniment. It is translated "sing" which is vocal, and "making melody" in the heart, or, singing as the result of melody in the heart. (Rom. 15:9; 1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 5:19; Jas. 5:13).
Please consider the following: Our faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God, (Rom. 10:17); we must speak as the oracles of God, (1 Pet. 4:11), and whatsoever is not of faith is sin, (Rom. 14:23). Since there is no command or example, nor is there even a tinge of an inference in the New Testament that the early church of Christ used musical instruments, how can you play them in your worship services and claim you are serving God "by faith," in spirit and in truth? If you don't serve God by faith, then it is sin (Rom. 14:23). Christ never gave a command, nor did the apostles give command or example, of the early church playing musical instruments, therefore it cannot be done by faith. When I try to teach people this fact, I will invariably get one of two very common arguments, sometimes both: 1) The Bible doesn't say not to; 2) David did it, why can't I? Both of these arguments stem from ignorance of the scriptures, and a reckless disregard for how God punished people who did not obey His commands.
When God looked upon the earth, and man's every thought and imagination was only evil continually, it repented God that he had made man (Gen. 6:6); however, God found one man and his family that was righteous, and that was Noah (v.8). God instructed Noah how to build the ark for the saving of himself and his family. Notice for example, in these instructions that God said, "Make thee an ark of gopher wood," (v.14). I want you to visualize Noah using argument #1 here, and building the ark out of pine. Then God asks Noah, "Why did you build the ark out of pine?" Noah answers, "You didn't say not to!" I think you will readily agree that this would've been a ridiculous thing for Noah to have done! Because God specified the use of gopher wood, that eliminated all other species of wood; therefore, it wasn't necessary for God to say, "Don't use Pine; don't use Oak; don't use Poplar, etc., etc." We should learn (Rom. 15:4) from this, that when God specifies a certain way of doing something, all other ways are eliminated! Rom. 4:15 says, "...for where no law is, there is no transgression." Had Paul only written, "sing psalms," then it might (?) be reasonably argued that Christians could use instruments in the assembly, but the Holy Spirit specified that psalms be implemented through speaking; then, Paul reinforces the verb speaking with another strictly vocal verb of singing, i.e., the "singing" is limited to "speaking," which leaves no lee-way for the inclusion of musical instruments.
Furthermore, the command to speak psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs through singing is to be accompanied with melody (psallo) in the heart, and what is in the heart comes forth from the mouth. It is impossible for the vibrations of musical instruments to come forth from the heart via the mouth! We cannot make excuses, and ignore what the Bible says in order to pacify man's fleshly appetites, and expect God to accept an improvised worship. "The Bible doesn't say not to" is an invalid argument, and it will never justify our alteration of God's word. It's truly appalling that otherwise intelligent people will attempt to exegete God's word with an argument that won't work in any other venue of life. Consider again:
"And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD," (Lev. 10:1,2).
Paul said, "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning...," (Rom.15:4); therefore, what should we learn from examples like this of persons who attempted to worship God in a way, "which he commanded them not?" The apostles were to preach what the Lord had commanded (Mat. 28:18-20), and He sent the Comforter upon them to bring to their remembrance all things that He had spoken, (Jn. 14:26). Since we are to worship God the way He has commanded, then the question is, "Did the apostles authorize the use of instrumental music in the Christian assembly?"
"God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things," (Acts 17:24-25).
My Bible, and your Bible, says that God is not worshiped with men's hands, therefore, whether men play a musical instrument, or carve an idol, they are not worshiping God the way He has prescribed, because He is not worshiped with men's hands. Paul said that we are to lift up holy hands in prayer, (1 Tim.2:8), but nothing is said of clapping hands, or strumming the strings of an instrument. That is a physical worship; we are commanded to worship God in spirit. Furthermore, notice what the writer of Hebrews says:
"Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee," (Heb. 2:12).
"Sing" in this verse is, humneo, which means, "1) to sing the praise of, sing hymns to; 2) to sing a hymn, to sing" (Thayer). What Paul said was to be done in the midst of the church, is what Paul and Silas did at midnight in the prison (Acts 16:25), they sang praises!
"By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name," (Heb. 13:15).
The apostles knew Greek, spoke Greek, wrote in Greek, and were guided into all truth by the Spirit (Jn. 16:13), and when they established churches of Christ (Rom.16:16), they taught them to sing -- there is no evidence that they taught them to play, (Eph.5:19; 1 Cor.14:15; Col.3:16). I don't read anywhere in the New Testament of traveling bands visiting the various congregations of the Lord's body and performing a concert for the church. Instrumental music is beautiful, but it has its proper place, and that is not in the assembly of the church.
A clever new variant of the it-doesn't-say-not-to argument is that of authorial intent.
In literary theory and aesthetics, authorial intent refers to an author's intent as it is encoded in their work...Long time literary theory has held that the main authority for any piece of writing comes from the author's intent when writing it, in which all other views or interpretations are secondary to the author's intent, (Wikipedia).
When it is pointed out that instrumental music is excluded because Paul specified that the psalms be spoken through singing, then it is contended that we can't use Paul's statement to exclude instrumental music because Paul didn't intend to exclude them; therefore, we are permitted to use them. This is a double assumption! To ignore the specificity of the Holy Spirit's directive, and claim to know He intended to not exclude musical instruments simply because He didn't say, "Thou shalt not..." is calamitous arrogance; and then, to insist that we have liberty to use instrumental music if we want to, is a vulgar disregard for the sanctity of the Holy Spirit's message. If Christians were willing to do what Paul did state, there would be no need to advance the argument of exclusion. This use of authorial intent is nothing more than an educated ruse to dupe the gullible! The methods mankind will invent, and the extremes to which he will go in order to nullify what the Holy Spirit has specified is nothing short of astounding. With this type of reasoning, virtually anything in the Bible could be negated simply by declaring that the author had no intention to exclude it. Even though King Saul was told to, "go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass," he could have argued that it wasn't the author's intent to exclude bringing back the best of the flocks to sacrifice, and to spare Agag's life; however, the result of Saul's improvisation of God's command is quite clear:
"And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry," (1 Sam.15:22-23).
Brethren whose consciences are seared with a hot iron (1 Tim.4:2) fail to see that rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry; and, to turn a blind eye to the plain language of God's commands and insert instrumental music where the Holy Spirit said speaking is taking more delight in man-made sacrifices, than obeying the voice of the LORD!
The second excuse (David did it) also needs to be looked at honestly and intelligently. God gave Moses the pattern at Mt. Sinai for the tabernacle, and all the instruments to be used therein:
"And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them. According to all that I show thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it." (Exo.25:8,9).
God gave Moses the pattern of "all the instruments" that were to be used in their tabernacle worship, so WHY, if God wanted his people, under the law of Christ, to use musical instruments in their worship, why did He not include the pattern for their construction, and specific directions for their use, as He did with everything else? There were no musical instruments made for use in the tabernacle; however, shortly thereafter, God instructed that 2 trumpets of silver be made:
"Make thee two trumpets of silver; of a whole piece shalt thou make them," (Num.10:2).
We see that these trumpets were fabricated at God's instruction, however, they were not used as man today uses pianos, guitars, drums, etc., to play music in accompanying songs; rather, these trumpets were mainly employed for convening a public assembly for worship, or for assembling the hosts for battle; remember that the children of Israel numbered into the millions, and their camp would've been enormous; thus, depending on whether one or both trumpets were blown, and in what order, then the various groups of this vast multitude would know how to properly respond.
"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Make thee two trumpets of silver; of a whole piece shalt thou make them: that thou mayest use them for the calling of the assembly, and for the journeying of the camps. And when they shall blow with them, all the assembly shall assemble themselves to thee at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And if they blow but with one trumpet, then the princes, which are heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather themselves unto thee. When ye blow an alarm, then the camps that lie on the east parts shall go forward. When ye blow an alarm the second time, then the camps that lie on the south side shall take their journey: they shall blow an alarm for their journeys. But when the congregation is to be gathered together, ye shall blow, but ye shall not sound an alarm," (Num.10:1-7).
They also blew these trumpets to commemorate the beginning of their New Year in what is referred to as the Feast of Trumpets:
"Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. Ye shall do no servile work therein: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD," (Lev 23:24-25).
These trumpets were blown to announce the year of jubile:
"Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. A jubile shall that fiftieth year be unto you: ye shall not sow, neither reap that which groweth of itself in it, nor gather the grapes in it of thy vine undressed. For it is the jubile; it shall be holy unto you: ye shall eat the increase thereof out of the field. In the year of this jubile ye shall return every man unto his possession," (Lev.25:9-13).
These were also used to call the assembly together for their other feasts as well:
"Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I am the LORD your God," (Num.10:10).
"And the Levites stood with the instruments of David, and the priests with the trumpets. And Hezekiah commanded to offer the burnt offering upon the altar. And when the burnt offering began, the song of the LORD began also with the trumpets, and with the instruments ordained by David king of Israel," (2 Chron. 29:26-27).
Now, what is highly interesting to note here is the purpose of these instruments:
"Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day. For this was a statute for Israel, and a law, of the God of Jacob," (Psa. 81:3-4).
"And the sons of Aaron, the priests, shall blow with the trumpets; and they shall be to you for an ordinance for ever throughout your generations," (Num.10:8).
Even a casual glance at these passages shows that the purpose of these instruments was not even remotely similar to churches today using pianos, organs, Bluegrass, Country, and Rock-n-Roll bands in the assembly. Not only is there no similarity, what they did was specifically stated that it was an ordinance for Israel, just like the 10 commandments, and all the laws and ordinances recorded in Exodus and Leviticus, which is specifically stated that it was a law and a statute for Israel. We must remember what Jesus said:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled," (Mt.5:17-18).
To deny that the law and the prophets have been fulfilled is to accuse our Lord of failing in His mission. Jesus came to fulfill the law and the prophets, and usher in the new covenant, in which man would worship in spirit. Since the Old Testament law is no longer in force, we today cannot be justified by it. Paul, writing to Gentiles whom the law of Moses never applied, makes this emphatically clear, notice:
"For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace," (Gal.5:3-4).
Paul was very troubled by the condition of the church in Galatia as is evident from his letter to them:
"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed," (Gal.1:6-9).
"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain," (Gal.4:9-11).
Paul admonished the Galatians that observing, "days, and months, and times, and years," from the OT law would cause his labor toward them to be in vain. These, "days, and months, and times, and years," would have included the statutes and law clearly stated in (Num.10:8; 2 Chron.29:26-27; Psa.81:3-4) to be an ordinance for Israel, and Paul specifically said here that observing these things would void his labor toward them. How then can we today justify the use of instrumental music in the Christian's worship assembly because of an ordinance David followed under the law of Moses?
Paul went to the "Jerusalem council" for the specific reason of addressing this teaching of requiring the Gentiles to be circumcised and keeping the Old Testament law. He said to do so was "troubling," "subversive," and that they (apostles) had not given a commandment to do so, (Acts 15:24-29). This should show anyone that is capable of understanding plain language, that instrumental music is not authorized because the apostles never gave the commandment. Since David invented (Amos 6:5) other types of instruments, and incorporated them along side of the trumpets (2 Chron.29:26-27), the unavoidable fact is that these instruments were used under the Old Testament law; was a part of that law; and, was an ordinance to Israel; therefore, to insert musical instruments into the Christian's worship would be a subversion, just like binding circumcision. Furthermore, Paul said that those who seek to justify themselves by certain portions of the Mosaic Law are also under the curse:
"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them,"(Gal.3:10-12).
In spite of these plain passages of scripture, those today who seek to justify instrumental music in the assembly go to the Old Testament for their authority. If we can justify instrumental music in worship under Christ's law today because David did it under the Law of Moses, then by the same reasoning, we could offer animal sacrifices, burn incense, bind circumcision, and keep the Sabbath. The fact is that those who seek to justify instrumental music because "David did it," are not in God's grace! The Law of Moses is not in force today, so chronologically speaking, we must find Biblical authority under Christ's law. It cannot be found, and therefore instrumental music in worship cannot be practiced by faith, and whatsoever is not of faith is sin!
A variant of this excuse, which has emerged of late, contends that even though the Psalms were written during the Old Testament dispensation of time, they are not part of the law of Moses given at Sinai, nor are the Prophets. As we have already observed, Christ stated that He came to fulfill the law and the prophets, (Mt.5:17-18); Jesus also stated just prior to His ascension:
"These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me," (Lk.24:44).
That our Lord's use of the terms, law, prophets, and psalms stood for the three Jewish divisions of the Old Testament Scriptures is without objection, except by those whose agenda forces them to reject good sense.
If we refuse to acknowledge the obvious as is shown here, Scripture itself will prevail, for common sense tells the Bible student that anything in Psalms which is not prophetic, is based under Old Testament law, which Christ plainly said He came to fulfill; since David was a prophet (Acts 2:30), anything in the psalms which is not of the law of Moses would be prophecy, all of which Jesus fulfilled; therefore, there's nothing left which has not been taken away and nailed to the cross.
"For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John," (Mt.11:13).
"The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it," (Lk.16:16).
"But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled," (Acts 3:18).
"Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days," (Acts 3:24).
Indeed, an honest observation of the writings and statements recorded in the New Testament, by various parties, will also confirm that the Psalms belong to Law of Moses. It is evident that Jesus considered Psalms as part of the law:
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods," (Jn.10:34).
Here, Jesus cites from Psalms 82:6; and again, on another occasion He says:
"But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause," (Jn.15:25).
It is clear that the Author of the Old Covenant, as He quotes here from Psalms 35:19, considered the Psalms as part of the Law of Moses.
The Jews understood that the Psalms were part of the law, as they cite Psalms 110:4:
"The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever:" (Jn.12:34).
Not only did Jesus and the Jewish people understand the Psalms to be part of the law, so did the apostle Paul, which is unmistakable from his inspired writings:
"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one," (Rom.3:10-12).
This is quoted from, Psalms 14:1-3.
"Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:" (Rom.3:13).
Here, Paul quotes from Psalms 5:9, and also from Psalms 140:3.
"Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:" (Rom.3:14).
Paul quotes the sense here from Psalms 10:7 of when David was describing his bitter enemies.
"There is no fear of God before their eyes," (Rom.3:18).
Paul cites here Psalms 36:1 which actually describes entirely why such a work as this is necessary to refute the error of the musical instrument protagonists. Referring to all of these verses from Psalms which Paul has just quoted, he says:
"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God," (Rom.3:19).
Clearly then we see that Paul, inspired and guided into all truth by the Holy Spirit, understood that the Psalms indeed were part of the law of Moses, even further citing from Psalms 107:42, "...and all iniquity shall stop her mouth;" however, what about the notion that the Prophets are not part of the law?
"Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known:" (Rom.3:15-17).
The apostle abridges Isaiah 59:7-8 here in these 3 short verses amid his citations from the Psalms, all of which he references as the law. Again, we find the apostle writing to the Corinthians where he said:
"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord." (1 Cor.14:21).
This passage, quoted by the apostle, is found in Isaiah 38:11-12, which Paul called the law.
It forever remains a fact that truth confutes the false doctrines, opinions, and feelings of man. Proper exegesis of the scripture quashes the erroneous theory that the book of Psalms, and the Prophets, are not part of the Law of Moses.
The most logical reason in favor of musical instruments, that I have ever heard is, "I like it!" You and I may indeed like them, and that is the fleshly appetite to which they appeal, i.e., they satisfy and stimulate the animalistic desires within us; however, we are to worship God in spirit, not by emotionalism.
Another argument which is put forward to support instrumental music in the assembly comes from a catastrophic mishandling of the symbolic language in the Revelation vision, from which it is suggested that there are literal, stringed musical instruments in Heaven, and some even go so far as to argue that a trumpet will be played at the final resurrection. What then, does the Bible say about this?
"I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last..." (Rev.1:10,11).
Here, the voice of the Lord is clearly described as that of a trumpet.
"After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me..." (Rev.4:1).
Can a material trumpet talk??
"And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet..." (Rev.8:13).
Harmonizing these passages reveals that God's voice is like a trumpet.
"And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation," (Rev.5:8-9).
"And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth," (Rev. 14:1-3).
"And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God. And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints," (Rev.15:1-3).
From the above passages, it is argued that the reference to "harps" and "harpers" in the Revelation vision justifies instrumental music in the Christian's worship assembly, but a symbol can never symbolize itself, just as a type can never typify itself! In this scene of spirits redeemed from the Earth, and pictured in the home of the soul (heaven), what possible use could a spirit have of a literal mechanical device? Even if instrumental music could find support elsewhere in the New Testament, to use this vision to support it is worse than recklessness with the scriptures, it is crass stupidity to make such a literal application of stated figurative language. The harps could be no more literal, than the angels or the souls of the martyred saints could be physical.
The voice of unison in this vision was that of singing a song of triumph, and the perfection of rhythm was as the flowing of many waters; the great volume was as the crack of mighty thunders; and, the sweetness of the melody was as the perfectly tuned strings of a 144,000 harps. To zealously argue that "God is handing out literal harps in Heaven" is a blooming display of catastrophic ignorance of the specifically stated purpose of this vision (Rev.1:1-3).
Another, last-ditch effort used to prove Christians can use instrumental music in the assembly is found in Exodus:
"And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances. And Miriam answered them, Sing ye to the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea," (Exo.15:20-21).
It is contested strongly that this incident sets a Biblical precedent proving that the word sing can also include instrumental music; therefore, we can't exclude instruments from the Christian's assembly; and since we can't exclude them, they are permitted. The concept of Miriam and the girls doing a victory dance on the banks of the Red Sea, validating singing with instrumental accompaniment in the churches of Christ, is well beyond the outer fringes of lunacy; however, that doesn't prove by sound doctrine that it is a faulty argument; therefore, we must prove, or disprove this assertion based on evidence. The corresponding noun to the verb "sing," is "song," just as the evidence shows us:
"Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea," (Exo.15:1).
This verse, in the exact same context, in the exact same circumstances, on the exact same day, shows us that Moses sang (verb) the song (noun); conversely, in verse 20, we have evidence of the presence of musical instruments because the text names the instruments; then, in verse 21, we find the verb sing; so then, the contextual evidence shows us that they sang with instrumental accompaniment.
In order for this event to prove that Christians can sing (verb) a song (noun) with instrumental accompaniment, then we must be able to establish the presence of instruments by the contextual evidence in New Testament passages like (Eph.5:19; Col.3:16; 1 Cor.14:15); therefore, since there is no contextual evidence of instruments, when Paul specified that the singing be done by speaking, the absence of any contextual evidence of instruments of music, coupled with the facts that the type of singing is to be speaking; and the type of speaking is to be singing; and the type of melody is specified to be spiritual; the context proves that musical instruments could not have been in use. The contextual evidence proves a-Capella singing.
If you are willing to accept what the Bible says, it should be clear, beyond any doubt, that one cannot worship God acceptably by playing on mechanical instruments of music in the Christian's assembly. The use of such instruments by 'churches' for the most part is a 'Johnny come lately' rather than something that has been observed from the time of Christ. One needs only to consider the voices from yesteryear to understand this fact.
"All our sources deal amply with vocal music of the church, but they are chary with mention of any other manifestations of musical art... The development of Western music was decisively influenced by the exclusion of musical instruments from the early Christian Church." (Paul Henry Lang, Music In Western Civilization, pp.53,54)
"Only singing, however, and no playing of instruments, was permitted in the early Christian Church." (Hugo Leichtentritt, Music, History and Ideas, p.34)
"There can be no doubt that originally the music of the divine service was everywhere entirely of a vocal nature." (Emil Nauman, The History of Music, Vol. 1, p.177)
"We have no real knowledge of the exact character of the music which formed a part of the religious devotion of the first Christian congregations. It was, however, purely vocal." (Dr. Frederick Louis Ritter, History of Music From The Christian Era to the Present Time, p.28)
"Both the Jews in their temple service, and the Greeks in their idol worship, were accustomed to sing with the accompaniment of instrumental music. The converts to Christianity accordingly must have been familiar with this mode of singing...But it is generally admitted, that the primitive Christians employed no instrumental music in their worship." (Lyman Coleman, Presbyterian, The Apostolic and Primitive Church, pp.368-369)
CATHOLIC: "... the first Christians were of too spiritual a fibre to substitute lifeless instruments for or to use them to accompany the human voice." (Catholic Encyclopedia)
GREEK ORTHODOX: "The execution of Byzantine church music by instruments, or even the accompaniment of sacred chanting by instruments was ruled out by the Eastern Fathers as being incompatible with the pure, solemn, spiritual character of the religion of Christ." (Constantine Cavarnos, Bysantine Sacred Music)
PRESBYTERIAN: "Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting up of lamps, 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 apostle is far more pleasing to Him." (John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Vol. 1, p. 539)
METHODIST: "I have no objection to instruments of music, in our chapels, provided they are neither heard nor seen." (John Wesley)
"I am an old man and an old minister, and I here declare that I never knew instruments productive of any good in the worship of God, and have reason to believe that they were productive of much evil. Music as a science, I esteem and admire: but instruments of music in the house of God I abominate and abhor. This is the abuse of music; and here I register my protest against all such corruptions in the worship of the Author of Christianity." (Adam Clarke)
LUTHERAN: "Martin Luther called the organ an ‘ensign of Baal.'" (McClintock & Strong's Encyclopedia)
BAPTIST: "I would as soon attempt to pray to God with machinery as to sing to Him with machinery." (Charles H. Spurgeon)
Please involve yourself in a prayerful and sincere study of these scriptures. If I can be of any further help in your studies, feel free to contact me anytime. Thank you.