6. Arguments in favour of using musical instruments in the worship of God in gospel times.
Objection 1. We have an instance in Miriam of instrumental music being used in the worship of God, before the law (Ex 15:20). The custom was therefore not introduced by the law, or abolished with it.
Answer: We read of sacrifices being offered by the patriarchs before the giving of the law, such as Abel, Noah, Abraham; but in the Epistle to the Hebrews it is proved that the sacrifices of the ceremonial law are now abolished, and that Christ “by one offering, hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified”. At Sinai there was a republication of what God had formerly revealed to the Church, and of the ceremonies of worship formally approved by God, along with the ordinances which were then given. These were arranged and digested into a regular system by Moses, who was faithful as a servant in the house of God. It has already been shown that this music was a constant attendant of sacrifice from the days of David, and the blowing of trumpets from the days of Moses. But as the sacrifices under the law terminated in the death and sacrifice of Christ, it is most reasonable to conclude that all the accompaniments of that typical service were also abolished with them.
Objection 2. Musical instruments were used in the temple in Old Testament times, and there is no commandment in the New Testament for laying them aside; therefore they may still be used.
Answer: There is no need for any particular commandment laying them aside, since the whole temple service, of which instrumental music was a part, is now abolished. We can have no authority to recall it into the worship of the Christian Church without as particular an instruction for it as it had under the law, any more than we have to introduce any of the other rites of the Jewish religion.
Objection 3. If instrumental music was of divine appointment under the law, it cannot be improper under the gospel.
1This piece is understood to be the work of Rev Malcolm MacSween, Oban. It is based on, probably, a nineteenth-century publication and has been edited. The original title was, Should Musical Instruments Be Used in the Public Worship of God Under the New Testament Dispensation? The third section, last month, dealt with “musical instruments in the Scottish Church”. This article concludes the series.
Answer: It was so under the law, as were all the other parts of that figurative service. In the temple, sacrifices were daily offered, incense was offered with prayers, and various instruments of music were employed with the voice in praising the Lord – and all by divine appointment. This, however, is no proof that sacrifices, incense and musical instruments are proper in the service of the gospel Church. But the whole design of the Jewish ceremonial law is now fulfilled and abolished in the death of Christ; “by His own blood, He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us”. (See also Galatians 4:9, 2 Corinthians 3:10).
Objection 4. Vocal music was as much connected with the typical service of the temple as instrumental, and no good reason can be given why instrumental music should be abolished as a legal ceremony, and vocal music, which was as much so, should be retained.
Answer: The singing of Psalms is retained in the practice of Christ and His apostles. While Paul teaches the abolition of ceremonial rites, he enjoins Christians to sing the praises of God as a duty of continued obligation under the gospel. In Ephesians he states that “the middle wall of partition” has been “broken down”, and that “the law of commandments contained in ordinances” has been “abolished”; but in the same Epistle he exhorts them to speak to themselves “in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in their heart to the Lord” (Eph 2:14,15, Eph 5:19). Similarly note Colossians 2:14,16,17 and Colossians 3:16. These are good reasons why singing the praises of God, though a part of the service of the Jewish temple, should still be retained in the Christian Church. There is, however, no direction for employing instruments of music.
Objection 5. When the Apostle John was in the spirit, he heard “the voice of harpers harping with their harps” in heaven (Rev 14:2), not only hearing them singing praise. No good reason can be given why what saints are represented as doing in heaven should not be done by saints on earth.
Answer: Taking it for granted that this passage of Scripture is descriptive of the heavenly state, it must be considered as figurative language, and nothing can be more erroneous than to give the figurative language of prophecy a literal interpretation. In the Book of Revelation there are many allusions to the typical service of the Jewish temple, and this passage is evidently one of them. In Revelation 7, 12 000 are represented as sealed from each of the twelve tribes of Israel, making in all 144 000. In the beginning of this chapter 14, the same number is represented as standing with the Lamb upon Mount Sion, “having His Father’s name written in their foreheads”. It is added, “I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps, and they sang as it were a new song before the throne, and no man could learn
that song, but the 144 000 which were redeemed from the earth” (vv 1-3).
This passage of Scripture, considered as describing the heavenly state, is only a proof that instrumental music, with all the service of the Jewish temple, had been blessed by God as the means of preparing those sealed from the twelve tribes for the service and enjoyment of the heavenly state. It is where the temple service and worship on earth have been fully perfected. This passage, however, can be no proof that this music is to be employed by the gospel Church on earth – any more than the many allusions to the different parts of the Jewish temple service, contained in the prophetic descriptions of the Book of Revelation, prove that the services alluded to are to be admitted into the worship of the Christian Church.
Objection 6. Other Reformed Churches, such as those of the Netherlands, America and England, use the organ in the worship of God, and why then should we not admit organs?
Answer: Organs were not used in New Testament Church worship until the ages of Roman ignorance, will-worship and idolatry. Instead of following such Churches, we should be the more diligent in keeping pure and entire the worship of God. Our religious worship must be regulated by divine authority, and not by the opinions and practices of men.
Objection 7. The music of the organ, well regulated, tends to calm the passions and enliven the affections in the worship of God; it thus assists our devotion and gives us pleasure in the way of duty.
Answer: This argument supposes that we may accommodate the worship of God to our own taste and feelings, whereas our worship must be founded on the Word of God, and our active principles must be regulated by its authority. Christ has made full provision for the comfort of His people, but has nowhere appointed organs for that purpose. No one may add to, or take away from, the ordinances of the King of Zion, who has appointed His people to sing “psalms, and hymns and spiritual songs”. It is the duty of Christians “to observe all things whatsoever” Christ has commanded them. The desire to embellish the worship of God has always been a fertile source of corruption and has frequently led men to make “the commandment of God of none effect by [their] tradition” (Mt 15:6).