Instrumental Music in Christian Worship

In studying the subject of instrumental music in Christian worship, there is no person living today in the Western world who can remember a time when instruments were not in common use and generally accepted across what is called Christendom in denominational churches. However, that is not the case everywhere.

In Eastern Europe, the Russian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, as well as the Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Georgian, Ukrainian, and Antiochian Orthodox churches do not use instrumental music in their worship services. Neither do the Eastern Catholic Churches of the Byzantine Rite, which include the Ukrainian, Melkite, Romanian, Italo-Albanian, Slovak, and Hungarian Greek Catholic Churches.

It was over 600 years after Christ’s death before instrumental music was introduced into worship. If there is any truth to the tradition, Pope Vitalian was the first to add the instrument to worship, with the date being a little uncertain, but somewhere approximately 670 AD. It was another 300 years or more before it became common in the Western church, some would say even later. It was opposed vigorously and only slowly came to be accepted. These are the historical facts of the matter and can be easily checked by anyone.

These historical facts are immensely important. It proves the introduction of instrumental music into Christian worship was done by man rather than by God. If of God, rather than man, why did they not use the instrument from the beginning of the church rather than wait hundreds of years?

Remember when Jesus was confronted by the chief priests and elders who wanted to know by what authority he was doing the things he was doing? He told them he would answer when they answered his question which was, “The baptism of John, where was it from? From heaven or from men?” (Matt. 21:25 NKJV) Thus, we need to ask the question of the instrument in Christian worship: where is it from, from heaven or from man? To ask is to answer if for no other reason than the date of its introduction. One must ask who gave man the authority to bring it into the worship? Did man just usurp the authority?

A person then has to ask himself some questions as he considers whether or not he wants to worship with those who use instruments. Do I want as my authority for worship what men gave or what God gave? They say it doesn’t matter; God doesn’t care. How can we know this? How can a person know that a thing that clearly came from man, not God, is a matter of little or no consequence to him?

Do you just know it because your heart tells you so? Jeremiah said, (Jer. 17:9 NKJV), “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Again, the Lord says, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.” (Isa. 55:8 NKJV)

The Bible has examples of men who thought it was a little thing to deviate from what God said with regard to the worship of him. They thought it would not matter. One thinks of Nadab and Abihu, Aaron’s sons, who “each took his censer and put fire in it and laid incense on it and offered unauthorized fire before the Lord, which he had not commanded them. And fire came out from before the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord.” (Lev 10:1-2 ESV) We can be absolutely certain they did not think it mattered.

Uzziah was one of the kings of Judah whom you can read about in 2 Chron. 26. The Bible says, “he transgressed against the Lord his God by entering the temple of the Lord to burn incense on the altar of incense.” (2 Chron. 26:16 NKJV) Azariah the priest, along with 80 other priests, went in after him and withstood him to the face for only the priests, the sons of Aaron, had God authorized to perform this service. Uzziah became very angry with them at which time leprosy broke out on his forehead, a direct intervention from God. He remained a leper until the day of his death, living in isolation. Do you think Uzziah thought it would matter to God if he entered the temple and burned incense?

Why was Cain’s offering rejected if how we worship God is just left up to how man decides he wants to do it? Surely, Cain thought in his mind that God would accept his sacrifice before offering it. He had faith in that, but the trouble was the faith he had was the faith in his own thinking. That is what he had faith in. Abel, his brother, on the other hand, had faith in what God had said about the offering before offering it. Heb. 11:4 says Abel offered his sacrifice by faith, and we know from the scriptures that faith comes from hearing God’s word (Rom. 10:17), thus Abel did his offering God’s way, offering what God wanted according to God’s word. Cain offered his offering his own way.

What is Paul’s rebuke of the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 11 all about if it is not about the corruption of the worship in how the Lord’s Supper is to be partaken of? Does it matter to God? Some are still saying today it does not matter. We can do this or that with it. How can one say that in light of history? Why does Paul place restrictions on women in the public worship if things do not matter in worship, that is, if God does not care how he is worshiped?

Those who say the instrument does not matter know more than any man can possibly know about it. No man can know a thing with certainty about which God has said nothing. I once read a sermon whose message in the title has stuck in my memory now for decades. The sermon was by a preacher named Benjamin Franklin, some distant relation to the Benjamin Franklin of historical fame, in a book entitled The Gospel Preacher, Vol. 1. The name of the sermon was “The Course to Pursue to be Infallibly Safe.” That sermon had nothing to do with instrumental music, but it seems to me the title is exceedingly applicable to the subject.

Is there an infallibly safe way where a man can be right beyond any question and in which all men would agree there is safety with regards to the subject of music in the worship? Yes, there is. No person who calls himself a Christian has ever questioned the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with the voice only and without the use of musical instruments. All agree this is pleasing to God without question or doubt of any kind.

Paul says we are to speak to one another “in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19 NKJV). See also Col. 3:16. All accept the teachings of these two passages without question as being what is good and right and acceptable and pleasing before the Lord. Yes, there is an infallibly safe way we ought to pursue.

However, if a person chooses to be reckless, if a person desires to be a gambler, if a person wants to take a chance, he must also be prepared to take the consequences if his heart misleads him on the matter and he finds out that God does not think as he thinks on the last day. It is quite a gamble. Of course, if you ask the man or woman who is involved in the worship where the instrument is used, they will tell you they are not gambling, they know it is okay. Ask them how they know and they are not able to give a satisfactory answer, only that their heart tells them so.

G. K. Wallace wrote a tract on the subject of instrumental music years ago that took an unusual slant but one that also left a lasting impression with me. His point was that we have to decide what we will be guided by. Will it be by what the Bible says or by what the Bible does not say? Many justify the use of the instrument in worship, saying “the Bible does not say not to,” thus they are guided in their decision-making by what the Bible does not say. That opens a very broad door for what can be brought into worship, going far beyond just instruments of music.

The New Testament is the new covenant of Christ under which we live today, not the Old Testament. There were instruments of music used in Old Testament worship. Why was it okay to use them? Because there was word from God approving such under the Law of Moses (2 Chron. 29:25 and various Psalms). Why is it wrong to use them today? Because there is no word from God approving such under the law of Christ under which we live today.

If a man desired to live under the Law of Moses today, he could not be saved. Much of the books of Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews discuss this very issue. We cannot hope to be saved today by animal sacrifice, by worshiping as they worshiped, by observing Jewish festivals, etc.

Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17). Where there is no word from God, there can be no faith. Faith based on the word of God demands word from God. There is no word from God in the New Testament regarding men worshiping him with instruments of music.

When the word of God is silent on a subject, no matter how much you may believe, what you really have is opinion, not Bible faith. If there is no word of God on a subject, there can be no faith, only opinion. To have faith, you must first have the word of God (Rom. 10:17). Walking by faith demands word from God. We are to walk by faith (2 Cor. 5:7).

A foundational principle of the Christian faith is that “without faith it is impossible to please Him (God--DS)”. (Heb. 11:6 NKJV) Faith is always dependent on evidence. We don’t believe in little green men because there is no evidence of their existence. We do not actually have to see a thing to believe in it, obviously, but we do have to have evidence. When it comes to instrumental music the problem is that evidence is lacking. There is not a single word about its use found in the New Testament. It is hard to have faith in a thing that is not even mentioned or hinted at. Since when did silence become evidence?

Those who use instruments of music in Christian worship teach their acceptability. Is this teaching of God or man? If of God, where does the New Testament teach the thing? If of God, why did it take hundreds of years after Christ's death to get it started?

Had God desired that we use instruments, how hard would it have been for him to of told us? Not very! He told the Jews under the Law of Moses, but he did not tell Christians living under the law of Christ. What does the law of Christ teach in the New Testament about instrumental music? Not one thing. Where is there a single passage found that gives any support whatsoever, any command, any example, of instrumental music in the worship of Christians? The passage cannot be found.

One might go to the book of Revelation and find it there, one might say. But the book of Revelation is a symbolic book. Do we think spiritual beings in heaven play literal material instruments? Besides, if they are found in heaven, what does that have to do with the here and now? If they are there, I will be glad to play them with you if we both get there (and learn how to play). Right now, you and I are living in the here and now under the law of Christ.

Brother Wallace was correct. If I use the instrument in worship, I am not being guided by what the Bible says but by what the Bible does not say. The Bible does not say not to use them. I am being guided by what the Bible does not say if I do so. Do I want to live my life based on what the Bible does not say about things?

If this is how I derive Bible authority for what is right, the silence of the Bible, then we are free to bring into the worship anything not specifically prohibited by direct command. We can again burn incense as did the Jews of old, have drama, dance, you name it. The Bible is silent about a lot of things.

As I write this paragraph my car is in the shop. When I go to get it I do not want a bill for a muffler in addition to the seals that are being put in elsewhere on the car. I do not want to hear “you didn’t say not to” from the shop owner. Real everyday life does not get its authority for action from silence. We all know that. Why then do we accept that argument in religion?

The argument from silence, the scripture did not say not to argument, has opened the floodgates in Christendom already. We all know this has happened. You name it and some denomination is doing it. However, ask the question whether what they are doing is of God or man and you easily come up with the answer.

If a man does not need the Bible as a guide then of what value is it? Paul tells us, “We walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7 NKJV). The whole teaching of the Bible is that a man is to hear the word of God, believe it, and obey it. This is the only way a man can walk by faith--hear, believe, and obey. You do not walk by faith by adding to God’s word, not by adding instrumental music.

[To download this article or print it out click here.]

The Silence of the Scriptures

 From a book entitled A Short History of Christianity by Stephen Tomkins I quote as follows:  "The basic difference between Zwingli and Luther was in their attitudes to the Bible.  Zwingli saw it as a precise blueprint for church life.  For Luther, what is not forbidden is permitted; for Zwingli, what is not permitted is forbidden." (page 141)  Both Zwingli and Luther lived in the Age of Reformation, often referred to as the Protestant Reformation, and both men were leading figures in its beginnings.

The subject of this article is the issue that separated Luther from Zwingli, namely, the silence of the scriptures.  While I will be concentrating primarily on issues related to worship practices in this article the principles enunciated extend beyond what happens inside the doors where we meet for worship weekly.  Does the silence of the scriptures permit a practice or forbid it in Christianity?

This can only be answered by an appeal to the scriptures to which we will go but before doing so it would be good to make the point that some have answered this question without an appeal to scripture at all.  Authority within the Roman Catholic Church, for example, resides in the church itself, the Magisterium, not in scripture.  However, I suppose, if one was forced to put them in either Luther’s camp or Zwingli’s camp they would have to be placed with Luther.

When one takes the position Luther took one cannot complain too much, and be consistent, about wild innovations in the church.  If what is not forbidden is permitted then pretty much anything goes.  On what basis could you forbid it? 

But what do the scriptures teach for those desiring to know?  If there was only one passage one could use to settle this debate as it relates to worship it would be for me John 4:24, "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (NKJV)  It is easy to overlook a very important word in this passage, the word "must."  That means neither you nor I have any choice in the matter.  It is we "must."  It is the only worship God will accept, that which is in spirit and truth, or else the word "must" is a word without meaning.

We know what is meant when we are told we must worship in spirit.  I think we all agree about the meaning of that part of the passage.  That leaves only the word truth and the question about that only revolves around what is truth, where it’s found, and how you can know it.  The Bible tells us. 

"Truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17 NKJV)  Whatever Jesus spoke was "truth."  In prayer to the Father, Jesus said, in John 17:17, "Your word is truth." (NKJV)  The words Jesus spoke, whatever, wherever, to whomever were truth.  He spoke the words the Father had given him.  Hear Jesus, “I have not spoken on my own, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a command to say everything I have said.”  (John 12:49 CSB)  And, again, “I speak just as the Father has told me.” (John 12:50 CSB)

All the words of the New Testament, red letter or not, are the words of Jesus, the words of God the Father, the words of truth.  After Jesus’ death and ascension, when the Holy Spirit was given to men, the Holy Spirit did not speak independently of Jesus and the Father.  Jesus referred to the Spirit calling him “the Spirit of truth.” (John 14:17, 15:26 NKJV)

Jesus further speaking of the Holy Spirit said, “He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.  He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you.  All things that the Father has are Mine.  Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.” (John16:13-15 NKJV)

To worship in truth, then, involves worshiping by the word of God.  That means, and it seems so obvious that I do not see how men overlook it, that if there is no word from God there is no truth in matters religious.  If God has not spoken on a practice how does man practice that thing, whatever it be, and say he is worshiping in truth?

Additionally, how can we have faith in a worship practice if there is no word from God when “faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” (Rom.10:17 NKJV)  And, again, “Whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Col. 3:17 NKJV)  If there is no word from Jesus (God) how do you practice an activity in worship “in the name of the Lord Jesus”?  Perhaps it would be more accurate to say we are doing it in our own name.

There is such a thing as the teachings of men.  Listen to Jesus again, "Hypocrites!  Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: …'And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' " (Matt. 15:7-9 NKJV)  Paul says in Titus we are to not give heed "to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14 NKJV)  A worship practice that does not have a book, chapter, and verse for it in God’s word is a commandment of men, an invention of men, and is certainly not worship in truth for if it was book, chapter, and verse could be provided.

Now I know many are with Luther on this—if a practice or act is not specifically forbidden then it’s permitted.  If he was right then truth, God’s word, does not matter and one can on his own authority, manmade and man-given, institute worship according to one's desire.

Paul's rebuke of the Corinthians regarding the Lord's Supper provides further evidence that what is not clearly revealed in scripture is prohibited.  The Corinthians had been taught about the Lord's Supper or else they would not have been observing it, correctly or incorrectly.  Furthermore, Paul comes right out and tells us they had been taught when he says, "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you." (1 Cor. 11:23 NKJV)  That is past tense.  Since he had last met with them they had obviously made some changes in the way they were partaking of the supper.  I ask—on whose authority did they do so? 

Note the principle Paul is establishing.  He is telling the Corinthians to do what you are told to do by inspiration and do not make changes, or additions, or subtractions.  To do so is to change the word of God and is to go outside of truth for one's worship.

In the book of Deuteronomy, we find Moses addressing the children of Israel, acting as God's spokesperson.  Hear what he has to say, "You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." (Deut. 4:2 NKJV)  Upon what evidence do you think that principle has changed today?  Do you think that today God does not mind us adding to his word or taking from it?

We recognize the principle of silence being prohibitive in human wills and legal documents.  Why do we not recognize the same principle in the last will and testament of our Lord and Savior, the New Testament?  What was left out of that will was left out for a reason.

If a doctor writes you a prescription for drug X then you cannot use it to get drug Y in addition to drug X.  The silence of the prescription prohibits that.  And there is no substitution unless it is specifically written on the prescription that is allowed, normally to a generic.  Silence has meaning.  Silence prohibits and does not authorize.  It is impossible to gain authority from silence.

The police need a search warrant to search your home.  That warrant does not give them the legal right to search your neighbor's home.  Why not?  Because the warrant is silent, it does not speak about your neighbor's house.  You cannot have faith in silence no matter how strongly you may feel about what ought to be.  Our faith must be in what is written, not in the unsaid.

We cannot change what is written in the New Testament (the guide for Christians and Christ's last will and testament).  If we add to it we do so without having the authority to do so and thus do so as men using man's authority, not God's.  If we take away from what is written, ignoring it, then we may as well take a pair of scissors and cut it out of the biblical text.  Who would dare do that?  There is a Day of Judgment when men must stand before God and tampering with his word is not something you want to do when you contemplate that fearful day. 

A practical application of all of this, because it is such a widespread practice, is that of the use of instrumental music in worship.  It was allowed under the Law of Moses.  Why?  Because there was word from God commanding it (see 2 Chron. 29:25).  It is prohibited, even though commonly practiced, under the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2, 1 Cor. 9:21) under which we live today.  Why?  There is no command for it.  The scriptures are silent.  You can only bring it into New Testament worship by adding to the words of Christ.

The secular history of the church is such that it can be proven instrumental music was not used in the New Testament church for a few hundred years after the first century.  Most historians date it to the late seventh century.  The Jews were a people well versed in the use of harps and other musical instruments.  One must ask why Jewish Christians did not use them in the earliest years of the church.  I think the answer is self-evident. 

I close this by reiterating what I have already said.  If the silence of the scriptures allows freedom to do as we please there is no end to the man-made innovations that men can dream up and bring into the church.  Who can believe we can do anything and everything with God’s approval?

[To download this article or print it out click here.]