This time, we’ll be taking a quick break from my series critiquing Bob Pulliam’s book “In the Days of Those Kings”. This issue has been weighing on my heart for at least a couple years, now, and I want to include a link to this post in my upcoming book (which I can’t do unless I know what the link will be!). I’ll give you Part 4 of the series next time (I also intend to create a list on this website linking to each Part in order for easy reference, so keep an eye out for that). In the immortal words of Charmx, “So without any further ado, let’s begin!”
If there’s one thing the Churches of Christ are more legalistic on than anything else, it’s forbidding the use of any instruments whatsoever in worship. I call them “legalistic” in this regard because whenever I hear a Church of Christ member talking about a church congregation that is using instruments in worship, they always do so in a condemnatory tone, as if the church is straight-up sinning. If you walked in on such a conversation just after they’ve already said what they were talking about, you’d think the church they were talking about was espousing some dangerous teaching like indulgences, Calvinistic predestination, or pro-LGBT theology. Does the use of instruments in worship really deserve to be lumped together with those kinds of things?
Churches of Christ have no shortage of arguments that have been offered in favor of using instruments in worship that they can easily shoot down (indeed, the ones I’ve seen them call out tend to be very weak), and they’ve even compiled long lists of authority figures in Christendom who publicly condemn the use of instruments in worship and claim that the New Testament never authorizes it, century after century after century. This easily gives the impression that any case anyone makes that the NT does allow it must be utterly hopeless. But is the case that the NT church isn’t authorized to use instruments in worship really as overwhelming as they’re making it out to be, or is it really just elephant hurling — throwing out a long list of items that seem to refute your opponent’s position, to intimidate them to the point where they don’t realize that (probably even unbeknownst to the one giving the list) the list is irrelevant?
Well, I find it intriguing that despite everything I’ve seen Church of Christ teachers say on this subject (in sermons, in writing, or in Facebook posts), I’ve come across something that I’ve never once seen them address (not even when I bring it up in the comments of said Facebook posts!). As far as I’m concerned, that alone should prompt further investigation. So let’s take a fresh look at which musical instruments, if any, the New Testament authorizes for corporate and/or individual worship; and if there are any, let’s investigate the historical record to try figuring out how the condemnation of such has come to be so near-universal throughout the Christian era — if, of course, the condemnation is near-universal.
“The Bible Never Authorizes the Use of Instruments in Christian Worship…”
A questioner at the La Vista Church of Christ’s website asked one of its elders, Jeff Hamilton, why he used the “argument from silence” differently between masturbation and instrumental music in worship, acknowledging that the Bible never says that masturbation is sinful, yet claiming music is wrong in NT worship because it’s never mentioned in the NT. (I cover the former line of reasoning in Chapter 7 of my upcoming book.) Hamilton responded using the exact proof-texts I expected him to:
there were laws that covered masturbation, but there are no laws that say that masturbation is a sin — only that it made a man unclean for a day under the Law of Moses. Since masturbation was not ignored, and it was not labeled a sin, it is wrong to declare it a sin on your own initiative. This doesn’t mean a man can’t sin while masturbating. Too many men watch pornography or imagine themselves committing fornication while masturbating. It is these lustful things that are wrong (I Thessalonians 5:3-7).
Instrumental music is different. God did specify what kind of music He wanted in Christian worship.
“Speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:19).
“Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God” (Colossians 3:16).
To change what God specified becomes wrong and adding instruments would be changing what God said to do.
Notice that in both cases, I started with what God said. Masturbation was unclean under the Law of Moses and no more was stated. Vocal music was specified for worship in the New Testament and no other kind of music was stated. Consistency requires that in both cases we cannot assume more (masturbation is a sin or instruments are acceptable in worship) without adding to God’s teachings.
{Italics and indentation in original. Boldface mine.}
To my knowledge, just about any Church of Christ teacher will concede that the portion I’ve boldfaced here is fairly representative of the core argument against the use of musical instruments in Christian worship: God authorized the use of “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs”, “singing”, and “making melody with your heart” (I’m personally surprised he didn’t use a translation that renders it “in your heart”; I’ll address that alternative rendering in item #4 in the list near the bottom of the next section), but not musical instruments. All other arguments they use on this topic are at best circumstantial in comparison, since they aren’t conclusive; so if this argument fails, none of the others are strong enough to prove the point in lieu of it.
Note that I’ve so far only considered worship as laid out in the NT. Plenty of examples of instruments being used in worship occur in the OT, but Church of Christ teachers dismiss those out of hand as being “Old Testament worship” that’s irrelevant to Christians under the NT, and even go so far as to flip around the argument: the fact that advocates of instruments in worship resort to OT passages to justify their position betrays the fact that they have no NT passages they can point to — reinforcing the notion that the NT never authorizes it!
Let’s just set aside the fact that such lines of reasoning about ignoring OT passages regarding instruments in worship stem from all-too-common misunderstandings about the connections between Biblical covenants (e.g., confusing the “Old Testament” as a whole with the “Mosaic Covenant” in particular; or buying into the idea that one should try to be a “New Testament Christian” instead of a “Whole Bible Christian”). The fact that those defending instruments in worship overwhelmingly use such equivocal arguments is certainly no help to their cause, since that makes it easier for their opponents to claim they have no unequivocal ones. In fact, some of their arguments are downright pathetic. For example, in December 2006, Rick Atchley preached a sermon at Richland Hills Church of Christ in Fort Worth where, among other things, he “assert[ed] that instrumental music in worship is acceptable since when Jesus cast out the ‘money changers’ in the temple, he did not cast out the ‘musicians’. [Russ McCullough responded to this non-sequitur by saying]… Today, there is no temple, there are no money changers and there is no instrumental music in God approved worship!” {“Emerging Towards Apostasy: A Documented Effective Analysis of Post-Modern, Evangelical & Patristic Influences Upon Departing Churches of Christ”. McCullough, Russ. 2013. Trafford Publishing. 326.} I’d like to add here that the Gospels also don’t say he “cast out the temple prostitutes”; so should we infer from that point that prostitution is allowed in Christian worship?!
However, the core argument that I boldfaced above overlooks something critical: that those who use this argument (Church of Christ or otherwise) unwittingly are changing what God specified!
…Or Does It?
You see, contrary to Rudd’s claim {scroll to “L.7.” in the outline} that there are “Nine New Testament passages to sing, [and] none to play instruments”, I’m aware of six verses in the NT epistles that do mention the use of instruments. They are as follows:
“and the nations for kindness to glorify God, according as it hath been written, ‘Because of this I will confess to Thee among nations, and to Thy name I will sing praise,’” (Romans 15:9 YLT)
“For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 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 Corinthians 14:14-15 ASV)
“What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one [TR adds “of you”] hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.” (1 Corinthians 14:26 ASV)
“addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart” (Ephesians 5:19 ESV)
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” (Colossians 3:16 ESV)
“Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing praise.” (James 5:13 ESV)
Now, you’re probably thinking: “Wait, where are instruments mentioned in these verses? And didn’t we just see Hamilton pointing out that the 4th and 5th of these don’t mention instruments at all?” Well, this is where the phenomenon I call “translational inertia” is showing its ugly face. As I’m sure many of my readers are aware, there are quite a few common terms throughout the NT that have acquired so much significance and baggage within Christendom that English translators would rather avoid being perceived as controversial (not to mention potentially hurting their sales numbers in the process) by continuing to render them “the generally-accepted way”, rather than providing the actual English equivalent. A prime verse for demonstrating this is 2 Corinthians 1:1. Here’s how the KJV renders it: “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia:” Now here’s how the LGV renders it: “Paul, Emissary of Jesus Anointed by the will of God, and Timothy the brother, to the assembly of God, the one in Corinth, together with all the holy ones being in the whole of Achaia.” Where the KJV transliterated the words ἀπόστολος (apostolos) and Χριστός (Christos) and gave the theological jargon corresponding to ἐκκλησία (ekklēsia) and ἅγιος (hagios), the LGV rendered all 4 words with their actual English equivalents.
Unfortunately, when one uses such transliterations and jargon, it becomes easy, with time, to impose whatever ideas you want on the terms, rather than letting the text speak for itself. Indeed, Church of Christ teachers have long pointed out some false teachings that are given cover by such renderings. A prime example is when congregations who practice sprinkling water on someone or pouring water over their head get away with calling it a “baptism”, because most English versions transliterate the Greek word βαπτίζω (baptizō) as “baptize”, a word that can mean whatever the reader wants it to mean. Such false teachers wouldn’t gain anywhere near as much traction if βαπτίζω was properly translated as “immerse” or “submerge”!
Yet ironically, Church of Christ teachers make this exact mistake with two key Greek words that show up in the 6 verses I presented at the start of this section. Watch how these verses read when every word is translated, with none of them being transliterated:
“Moreover, the nations [i.e., Gentiles] concerning [God’s, cf. verse 8] mercy, to glorify God, inasmuch as it has been written, ‘Through this I will celebrate to You with nations, and to the name of You, I will strum.’” (Romans 15:9 my word-for-word translation, boldface added)
“For if I might pray in a tongue, the breath/spirit of mine prays, but the mind of mine is fruitless [because I can’t understand the language in which I’m praying!]. Which, therefore, is it? I will pray with the breath/spirit, but I will pray also with the mind. I will strum with the breath/spirit, yet I will strum also with the mind.” (1 Corinthians 14:14-15 my word-for-word translation, boldface added)
“What, therefore, is it, brethren? Whenever you may come together, each one [TR adds “of you”] has a praise-ballad, has a teaching, has a disclosure [i.e., “revelation”], has a language, has a translation. All things toward building up should come to pass.” (1 Corinthians 14:26 my word-for-word translation, boldface added)
“Speaking to yourselves with praise-ballads and sacred odes and spiritual songs, singing and strumming with the [collective; “heart” is singular but “of yours” is plural] heart of yours to the Lord.” (Ephesians 5:19 my word-for-word translation, boldface added)
“The word of the Anointed One must dwell [imperative] in you [plural] abundantly, in all wisdom teaching and cautioning yourselves with praise-ballads, with sacred odes, with spiritual songs; with the graciousness singing in the hearts of yours to God.” (Colossians 3:16 my word-for-word translation, boldface added)
“Someone is undergoing hardship among you? He should pray [imperative]. Someone is joyful? He should strum [imperative].” (James 5:13 my word-for-word translation, boldface added)
The noun I’ve rendered “praise-ballad” above is G5568, ψαλμός (psalmos), a word that refers to a pious piece of music that was to be played on a stringed instrument and sung along to {what I’ve presented here is a synthesis of all the definitions available at the page cited}. The verb I’ve rendered “strum” above is G5567, ψάλλω (psallō), which refers to plucking or twanging a stringed instrument, with or without vocal accompaniment. In fact, there was an ancient Greek stringed instrument called the ψαλτήριον (psaltērion) {sorry to link to Wikipedia, but I couldn’t find any other search results with a decent amount of images!}; its name gave rise to the English word “psaltery”.
While “strum” was easily the most concise English equivalent I’ve ever seen for psallō, coming up with an English equivalent for psalmos was considerably more difficult. At first I was thinking “harp-song”, to emphasize that strings are being plucked on a musical instrument, but then I realized that this term wouldn’t necessarily imply vocals (it also seems to limit the type of stringed instrument used). Even the LGV transliterates the word as “psalm” in 1 Corinthians 14:26 {scroll to p. 27} and “psalms” in Colossians 3:16 {scroll to p. 10}, renders the word as “play” in Romans 15:9 {scroll to p. 33}, and most descriptively translates the word as “instrumental music” in Ephesians 5:19 {scroll to p. 11}. Unfortunately, all my years of listening to instrumental metal songs has taught me that the term “instrumental music” implies a lack of vocals, so that’s not gonna work here, either! When I tried looking up an English term on Google using my phone, the AI Overview said that there’s no universally accepted term, but the closest ones would probably be “folk song” or “ballad”. Between the two, I’d go with “ballad”, since ballads are traditionally played on stringed instruments (guitar, fiddle, etc.), and they blatantly involve vocals; the only problem is that I typically think of a ballad as telling a story, which isn’t necessarily the case with a psalmos; so to clarify the song as being pious in nature or used for worship, I prefixed the adjective “praise” to it. This highlights a better reason why English translators keep transliterating psalmos instead of translating it: they’re hard-pressed to give an accurate-enough translation!
Now, the common response to this would undoubtedly be that “they were referring to responsively reading chapters from the book of Psalms”. But that assumes that psalmos was being used exclusively as a proper noun at this time, and had lost its meaning as a common noun. That might be more believable if the Greek title of the book of Psalms was simply a transliteration of the Hebrew title, but that’s not even close to the case: in what universe would Ψαλμός (Psalmos) be considered a transliteration of תְהִלִּים (Tehillim)? The Hebrew word tehillim literally means “praises” or “praise-songs” {scroll to entry 3. Under “Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon”}, reinforcing my choice of “praise-ballad” as the closest English equivalent to psalmos. This is consistent with psalmos being an already-existing Greek word that meant the same thing as tehillim at the time the LXX was translated. It clearly wasn’t until later that “psalm” was being transliterated as if it was a proper noun (e.g., the book of Psalms is named Liber Psalmorum in the Latin Vulgate); even in the Quran, the book of Psalms is referred to with the Arabic word زَبُورُ (Zabūr), meaning “inscription” or “writing” (perhaps they got this term from the traditional Jewish threefold division of the OT: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, the book of Psalms being the first and longest book in the third section). Even setting aside all that, this argument fixates on the noun psalmos, while ignoring the verb psallo. Unless you’re willing to render that word as “psalming” in English bibles and expect readers to understand what that’s supposed to mean (without explaining it in a margin note), this argument won’t get you anywhere.
Having established, then, that these passages clearly show that Paul wholeheartedly approved of the use of stringed instruments in worship, I should note that they also present some caveats:
- The first passage is quoting from 2 Samuel 22:50 & Psalm 18:49, which David originally spoke “on the day that the LORD delivered him from the hand of all his enemies” (Psalm 18:1b NKJV). In fact, it’s been pointed out {scroll to “New Defender’s Study Bible Notes” on verses 9-12} that this is the first of 4 seemingly obscure OT passages that Paul quotes in Romans 15:9-12, all of which mention Gentiles glorifying, rejoicing over, praising, or trusting in the God of Israel. So this mention of “strumming” seems to be less prescriptive of what Gentile believers should do, and more descriptive of David’s desire to bring the Gentiles to God in the first place, something that was ultimately fulfilled in his descendant, Jesus — note that the passages Paul was quoting from in Romans 15:9 end with a mention of God showing “mercy to His anointed, To David and his descendants forevermore.” (2 Samuel 22:51c & Psalm 18:50c NKJV)
- The context of the second of these passages is discussing the misuse versus proper use of spiritual gifts in the assembly (1 Corinthians 14:12-19) — which clearly shows that the church at Corinth was dealing with the issue of tongues being misused in the assembly even while singing along to stringed instruments! This not only establishes that at least some congregations at Corinth were playing stringed instruments and singing along to them in their assemblies, but it gives us the additional instruction that such songs should only be used if the lyrics can be understood by the congregation at large (because otherwise, the congregation at large won’t benefit from those lyrics)! This tells us there’s nothing wrong with, say, English or Spanish-speaking congregations using songs that include Hebrew, Greek, or Latin words in their lyrics, so long as the meanings of those foreign words are either already known by everyone in the assembly, or somehow explained to those who don’t know in the course of the assembly (verses 9, 13 & 27-28).
- The third passage tells us the song should only be accepted if it is of an edifying nature (e.g., screaming lyrics like many metal bands do should be rejected, since it makes the lyrics harder for the listeners to understand and be edified by; and as I mention in my upcoming book, singing isn’t very edifying to the hearers if the instruments are so loud that you can’t hear the singing! {HIDMF, p. ##}), and the greater context (verses 26-33) tells us that the use of such praise-ballads in the assembly should be as orderly (verse 40) as the other things mentioned in verse 26.
- The fourth passage tells us that the singing needs to be done with the congregation focused on God (the Greek sentence structure suggests that the qualifier for “singing and strumming” isn’t merely “with/in your collective heart”, as some might claim in an effort to make the “strumming” figurative — which would also require the “singing” to be figurative, to be consistent! — but “with your collective heart toward the Lord”), rather than mere entertainment as seen in far too many congregations today.
- The fifth passage saying basically the same thing as the fourth, but with “heart” being plural instead of singular, tells us this also applies on the individual level, lest one wind up just “going through the motions” like many of the Jews who rejected Jesus had gotten into the habit of doing in temple worship.
- It’s significant that the one passage from James is the only one of these where the verb psallō is in the imperative mood — indicating a command. Yet not only is this command clearly meant on the individual (not congregational) level, but it’s obvious that James was giving prayer and strumming as examples of what Christians should do in hardship and joy (i.e., they’re not the only things permissible for Christians in such circumstances). The complete lack of any other instances of psallō in the imperative mood, combined with Paul’s obvious approval of doing this action in the assembly, would’ve yielded an unmistakable implication to the 1st-century Christians who were reading these passages in the original language: stringed instruments are allowed in worship, but not required; so whether to use them is up to each congregation within a city.
As far as I can tell, this is the Biblical position on the use of instruments in Christian worship. (But feel free to tell me if I’ve overlooked something in the text!)
A Brief History Lesson on Ancient Music
It’s important to bear in mind that for most of the world throughout history, musical instruments have been prohibitively expensive. (I’ve even found a Reddit post asking how jazz musicians of the early-to-mid 20th century were able to afford their instruments and suits — and the answers give good insight into just how many sacrifices they had to make to do so!) This meant that the majority of synagogues and local churches couldn’t have afforded instruments for use in their worship, which is probably why Paul approved of the use of stringed instruments, but didn’t command it — he was accommodating the assemblies who simply couldn’t follow such a command. This may also help us understand one of the quotes Steve Rudd offered to show that Jewish synagogues had banned the use of instruments before the temple was destroyed:
“For Me an instrument of ten strings, and for Me the psaltery (Ps. 92:4). Among the people of Israel all assemblies [synagogues], to be legally valid, require the presence of ten men, even as the harp upon which David played had ten strings. The service at [the burial of] the dead requires the presence of ten men; the service at a circumcision requires the presence of ten men; the blessing of the Lord requires the presence of ten men; Chalishah requires the presence of ten men; the marriage service requires the presence of ten men, for it is said And he took ten men of the elders of the city (Ruth 4:2). The Holy One, blessed be He, said: I desire from Israel not music of the harp but the solemn utterance of their mouth, as is said For Me a solemn sound, more than a harp (Ps. 92:4).” (The Midrash on Psalms, Tehillim, Psalm 92)
{Red text, content in brackets, and citations in original. Boldface mine.}
Notice that the website I lifted this quote from fixates on the final statement in red (which is nowhere to be found in the Bible, by the way; note that “(Ps. 92:4)” is cited in two places in this quote, but only the first one actually matches the corresponding quote, by the Masoretic Text’s verse numbering — we’ll see later that this isn’t an isolated incident, by the way!) to justify banning instruments in worship, while totally ignoring the sentences leading up to it that explain the justification for giving that statement at all. As far as the Rabbis quoted in the Talmud were concerned, either all synagogue gatherings must have ten men playing harps, or none of them can; if even one assembly can’t afford 10 harps, then all assemblies must worship with no harps whatsoever. This may even give us more insight into just how selfish and greedy the temple priesthood had become by the Apostolic period: they’d been making a killing by using the temple complex as “a house of merchandise” (John 2:16c ASV), yet they couldn’t spare any money to purchase harps for use in the synagogues?
I should probably also mention that melodies in the Biblical period were considerably shorter and simpler than what we’re used to hearing in developed countries today. Perhaps you’ve seen an old movie with a scene involving a native American or African tribe dancing around a campfire while playing highly repetitive music with occasional improv and only 1 or 2 — maybe 3 — different instruments contributing to it. As racist as some of the other details in those scenes may be, this portrayal of the music is historically realistic. In fact, that’s just about how intricate music could get, anywhere in the world, until musical notation was developed circa A.D. 800-1050. Had musical notation (and audio recording) never been invented, the music we produce and listen to today would probably be very similar to that! You see, before musical notation was invented (enabling music to be written down, eliminating the cultural necessity of memorizing every note), music had to be passed on exclusively through oral tradition. That meant that how long or elaborate a piece of music could get was limited to whatever could be passed on to and memorized by successive generations. If there were any further elaborations before then, they were lost to the mists of time because successive generations couldn’t memorize them reliably enough to retain them (which is why that “improv” mentioned above is pretty much the greatest extent of elaboration they could achieve).
Tracing False Teaching Back to the Source
So now that we’ve established that Paul did indeed authorize Christian churches to use stringed instruments in worship, we must now tackle the obvious next question: why has the use of any instruments, including stringed ones, been so vigorously condemned throughout church history? This is where I felt compelled to apply the 10th foundational principle of the Bereans Bible Institute: “Whenever possible, trace modern doctrines back to the source to see when, where, why, and how they originated.” {Italics in original} As Tim Warner explains:
These principles are intended to remove personal bias and faulty presuppositions as much as possible. The first nine principles guide our handling of Scripture. They would be entirely sufficient if we did not have nearly two centuries [sic; I’m pretty sure he meant “millennia”] of theological baggage polluting our modern understandings of the Scriptures. Most of us are not new to Christianity or to the Scriptures. We have been indoctrinated for many years by various denominations and the pastors and teachers in our churches. Some of us have also been indoctrinated by Christian college and/or seminary professors, reading required theological source material, and the various theological systems of the schools we attended. This exposure colors our thinking and imposes biases and presuppositions, many of which do not reflect the pristine teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles. Most Christians are oblivious to the fact that their minds have been conditioned to assume certain things as being true and other things as being anathema and heretical without solid proof. Most have not even attempted to apply Paul’s admonishment objectively or thoroughly – “Test all things; hold fast what is good.”
It is because of this theological baggage that the tenth principle is absolutely critical if we expect to arrive at the whole truth. This principle provides a check against the possibility that we might have overlooked something important, or are still being influenced by personal biases of which we are not aware. If our conclusions cannot be found in the writings of the earliest Christians, we need to know why. The last thing we want to do is come up with something unique that was not taught by Jesus and His Apostles and thus faithfully passed on to the earliest Christian assemblies. Worse yet, we do not want to teach something that was considered heresy by the earliest Christians who were instructed by the Apostles.
{Ibid. Italics in original}
Indeed, if you look through that list of quotations condemning the use of instruments in worship I mentioned earlier, you’ll see that Scriptural citations are relatively rare; and whenever they do name names, the names are almost always of people who lived multiple centuries after the Apostles (who thus had their own theological baggage coloring their views), meaning the argument amounts to: “We do it this way because that’s what my teacher taught me, and it’s what his teacher taught him…” Yet in no instance does the chain of teachers ever end with an Apostle. However, there is one authority figure within Christendom who wrote on this subject within 150 years of the Apostle John’s death: Clement of Alexandria (there is another, actually, but we’ll get to him later). All other witnesses cited in that list were writing in A.D. 300 or later, so this is the earliest extra-biblical authority Rudd cited on the subject. We already know that Clement of Alexandria preferred to interpret the Bible allegorically in order to make Christianity more palatable and respectable to pagan Greek intelligentsia (who were very fond of interpreting things allegorically). In light of that background knowledge about Clement of Alexandria and his situation, his take on music is quite understandable:
“Moreover, King David the harpist, whom we mentioned just above, urged us toward the truth and away from idols. So far was he from singing the praises of daemons that they were put to flight by him with the true music; and when Saul was Possessed, David healed him merely by playing the harp. The Lord fashioned man a beautiful, breathing instrument, after His own imaged and assuredly He Himself is an all-harmonious instrument of God, melodious and holy, the wisdom that is above this world, the heavenly Word.” … “He who sprang from David and yet was before him, the Word of God, scorned those lifeless instruments of lyre and cithara. By the power of the Holy Spirit He arranged in harmonious order this great world, yes, and the little world of man too, body and soul together; and on this many-voiced instruments of the universe He makes music to God, and sings to the human instrument. “For thou art my harp and my pipe and my temple”(Clement of Alexandria, 185AD, Readings p. 62)
“Leave the pipe to the shepherd, the flute to the men who are in fear of gods and intent on their idol worshipping. Such musical instruments must be excluded from our wingless feasts, for they arc more suited for beasts and for the class of men that is least capable of reason than for men. The Spirit, to purify the divine liturgy from any such unrestrained revelry chants: ‘Praise Him with sound of trumpet,” for, in fact, at the sound of the trumpet the dead will rise again; praise Him with harp,’ for the tongue is a harp of the Lord; ‘and with the lute. praise Him.’ understanding the mouth as a lute moved by the Spirit as the lute is by the plectrum; ‘praise Him with timbal and choir,’ that is, the Church awaiting the resurrection of the body in the flesh which is its echo; ‘praise Him with strings and organ,’ calling our bodies an organ and its sinews strings, for front them the body derives its Coordinated movement, and when touched by the Spirit, gives forth human sounds; ‘praise Him on high-sounding cymbals,’ which mean the tongue of the mouth which with the movement of the lips, produces words. Then to all mankind He calls out, ‘Let every spirit praise the Lord,’ because He rules over every spirit He has made. In reality, man is an instrument arc for peace, but these other things, if anyone concerns himself overmuch with them, become instruments of conflict, for inflame the passions. The Etruscans, for example, use the trumpet for war; the Arcadians, the horn; the Sicels, the flute; the Cretans, the lyre; the Lacedemonians, the pipe; the Thracians, the bugle; the Egyptians, the drum; and the Arabs, the cymbal. But as for us, we make use of one instrument alone: only the Word of peace by whom we a homage to God, no longer with ancient harp or trumpet or drum or flute which those trained for war employ.” (Clement of Alexandria, 190AD The instructor, Fathers of the church, p. 130)
{Punctuation, spelling, and citations in original.}
However, Rudd (or more likely, as we’ll see below, the source he relied on) seems to have muddled these quotes a bit: when we look at these statements in their contexts, we see that Clement of Alexandria was saying something very different. Bear in mind that going into the first case, Clement had used Greek myths about the power of music to set up a contrast with Judeo-Christian teachings:
The silly are stocks and stones, and still more senseless than stones is a man who is steeped in ignorance. As our witness, let us adduce the voice of prophecy accordant with truth, and bewailing those who are crushed in ignorance and folly: For God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham; Matthew 3:9; Luke 3:8 and He, commiserating their great ignorance and hardness of heart who are petrified against the truth, has raised up a seed of piety, sensitive to virtue, of those stones — of the nations, that is, who trusted in stones. Again, therefore, some venomous and false hypocrites, who plotted against righteousness, He once called a brood of vipers. Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7 But if one of those serpents even is willing to repent, and follows the Word, he becomes a man of God.
Others he figuratively calls wolves, clothed in sheep-skins, meaning thereby monsters of rapacity in human form. And so all such most savage beasts, and all such blocks of stone, the celestial song has transformed into tractable men. For even we ourselves were sometime foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another. Thus speaks the apostolic Scripture: But after that the kindness and love of God our saviour to man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy, He saved us. Titus 3:3-5 Behold the might of the new song! It has made men out of stones, men out of beasts. Those, moreover, that were as dead, not being partakers of the true life, have come to life again, simply by becoming listeners to this song. It also composed the universe into melodious order, and tuned the discord of the elements to harmonious arrangement, so that the whole world might become harmony. It let loose the fluid ocean, and yet has prevented it from encroaching on the land. The earth, again, which had been in a state of commotion, it has established, and fixed the sea as its boundary. The violence of fire it has softened by the atmosphere, as the Dorian is blended with the Lydian strain; and the harsh cold of the air it has moderated by the embrace of fire, harmoniously arranging these the extreme tones of the universe. And this deathless strain — the support of the whole and the harmony of all — reaching from the centre to the circumference, and from the extremities to the central part, has harmonized this universal frame of things, not according to the Thracian music, which is like that invented by Jubal, but according to the paternal counsel of God, which fired the zeal of David. And He who is of David, and yet before him, the Word of God, despising the lyre and harp, which are but lifeless instruments, and having tuned by the Holy Spirit the universe, and especially man — who, composed of body and soul, is a universe in miniature — makes melody to God on this instrument of many tones; and to this instrument — I mean man — he sings accordant: For you are my harp, and pipe, and temple. — a harp for harmony — a pipe by reason of the Spirit — a temple by reason of the word; so that the first may sound, the second breathe, the third contain the Lord. And David the king, the harper whom we mentioned a little above, who exhorted to the truth and dissuaded from idols, was so far from celebrating demons in song, that in reality they were driven away by his music. Thus, when Saul was plagued with a demon, he cured him by merely playing. A beautiful breathing instrument of music the Lord made man, after His own image. And He Himself also, surely, who is the supramundane Wisdom, the celestial Word, is the all-harmonious, melodious, holy instrument of God. What, then, does this instrument — the Word of God, the Lord, the New Song — desire? To open the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf, and to lead the lame or the erring to righteousness, to exhibit God to the foolish, to put a stop to corruption, to conquer death, to reconcile disobedient children to their father. The instrument of God loves mankind. The Lord pities, instructs, exhorts, admonishes, saves, shields, and of His bounty promises us the kingdom of heaven as a reward for learning; and the only advantage He reaps is, that we are saved. For wickedness feeds on men’s destruction; but truth, like the bee, harming nothing, delights only in the salvation of men.
You have, then, God’s promise; you have His love: become partaker of His grace. And do not suppose the song of salvation to be new, as a vessel or a house is new. For before the morning star it was; and in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1 Error seems old, but truth seems a new thing.
{Clement of Alexandria. “Exhortation to the Heathen”. Chapter 1. Italics and verse citations by Wilson/Knight. Boldface mine.}
Notice that Clement portrays David’s harp playing as a sort of one-up to Greek myths; that certainly sounds like he was agreeing with the idea that music has power (note that David is said to have cured Saul just by “playing” rather than “singing”). Yet he also compares David’s harp playing with what Christ has been doing to orchestrate history (pun intended). The allegories are thick in this passage, lining up with what we know about Clement’s hermeneutic. Yet these additional details make it clear that when Clement said Jesus “despised the lyre and harp”, he didn’t mean that Jesus hated them, but merely ignored them in favor of something else. Overall, a careful reading of this passage shows that it’s not merely ambiguous, but utterly silent on the use of instruments in worship. However, the other passage goes over quite a bit of nuance about instrument usage (among other things) in feasts. Please bear with me; I think quoting the entire chapter is necessary to see just how selective Rudd’s quotation of it is:
Let revelry keep away from our rational entertainments, and foolish vigils, too, that revel in intemperance. For revelry is an inebriating pipe, the chain of an amatory bridge, that is, of sorrow. And let love, and intoxication, and senseless passions, be removed from our choir. Burlesque singing is the boon companion of drunkenness. A night spent over drink invites drunkenness, rouses lust, and is audacious in deeds of shame. For if people occupy their time with pipes, and psalteries, and choirs, and dances, and Egyptian clapping of hands, and such disorderly frivolities, they become quite immodest and intractable, beat on cymbals and drums, and make a noise on instruments of delusion; for plainly such a banquet, as seems to me, is a theatre of drunkenness. For the apostle decrees that, putting off the works of darkness, we should put on the armour of light, walking honestly as in the day, not spending our time in rioting and drunkenness, in chambering and wantonness. Romans 13:12-13 Let the pipe be resigned to the shepherds, and the flute to the superstitious who are engrossed in idolatry. For, in truth, such instruments are to be banished from the temperate banquet, being more suitable to beasts than men, and the more irrational portion of mankind. For we have heard of stags being charmed by the pipe, and seduced by music into the toils, when hunted by the huntsmen. And when mares are being covered, a tune is played on the flute — a nuptial song, as it were. And every improper sight and sound, to speak in a word, and every shameful sensation of licentiousnes — which, in truth, is privation of sensation — must by all means be excluded; and we must be on our guard against whatever pleasure titillates eye and ear, and effeminates. For the various spells of the broken strains and plaintive numbers of the Carian muse corrupt men’s morals, drawing to perturbation of mind, by the licentious and mischievous art of music.
The Spirit, distinguishing from such revelry the divine service, sings, Praise Him with the sound of trumpet; for with sound of trumpet He shall raise the dead. Praise Him on the psaltery; for the tongue is the psaltery of the Lord. And praise Him on the lyre. By the lyre is meant the mouth struck by the Spirit, as it were by a plectrum. Praise with the timbrel and the dance, refers to the Church meditating on the resurrection of the dead in the resounding skin. Praise Him on the chords and organ. Our body He calls an organ, and its nerves are the strings, by which it has received harmonious tension, and when struck by the Spirit, it gives forth human voices. Praise Him on the clashing cymbals. He calls the tongue the cymbal of the mouth, which resounds with the pulsation of the lips. Therefore He cried to humanity, Let every breath praise the Lord, because He cares for every breathing thing which He has made. For man is truly a pacific instrument; while other instruments, if you investigate, you will find to be warlike, inflaming to lusts, or kindling up amours, or rousing wrath.
In their wars, therefore, the Etruscans use the trumpet, the Arcadians the pipe, the Sicilians the pectides, the Cretans the lyre, the Lacedæmonians the flute, the Thracians the horn, the Egyptians the drum, and the Arabians the cymbal. The one instrument of peace, the Word alone by which we honour God, is what we employ. We no longer employ the ancient psaltery, and trumpet, and timbrel, and flute, which those expert in war and contemners of the fear of God were wont to make use of also in the choruses at their festive assemblies; that by such strains they might raise their dejected minds. But let our genial feeling in drinking be twofold, in accordance with the law. For if you shall love the Lord your God, and then your neighbour, let its first manifestation be towards God in thanksgiving and psalmody, and the second toward our neighbour in decorous fellowship. For says the apostle, Let the Word of the Lord dwell in you richly. Colossians 3:16 And this Word suits and conforms Himself to seasons, to persons, to places.
In the present instance He is a with us. For the apostle adds again, Teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your heart to God. And again, Whatsoever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and His Father. This is our thankful revelry. AND EVEN IF YOU WISH TO SING AND PLAY TO THE HARP OR LYRE, THERE IS NO BLAME. You shall imitate the righteous Hebrew king in his thanksgiving to God. Rejoice in the Lord, you righteous; praise is comely to the upright, says the prophecy. Confess to the Lord on the harp; play to Him on the psaltery of ten strings. Sing to Him a new song. And does not the ten-stringed psaltery indicate the Word Jesus, who is manifested by the element of the decad? And as it is befitting, before partaking of food, that we should bless the Creator of all; so also in drinking it is suitable to praise Him on partaking of His creatures. For the psalm is a melodious and sober blessing. The apostle calls the psalm a spiritual song. Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16
Finally, before partaking of sleep, it is a sacred duty to give thanks to God, having enjoyed His grace and love, and so go straight to sleep. And confess to Him in songs of the lips, he says, because in His command all His good pleasure is done, and there is no deficiency in His salvation.
Further, among the ancient Greeks, in their banquets over the brimming cups, a song was sung called a skolion, after the manner of the Hebrew psalms, all together raising the pæan with the voice, and sometimes also taking turns in the song while they drank healths round; while those that were more musical than the rest sang to the lyre. But let amatory songs be banished far away, and let our songs be hymns to God. Let them praise, it is said, His name in the dance, and let them play to Him on the timbrel and psaltery. And what is the choir which plays? The Spirit will show you: Let His praise be in the congregation (church) of the saints; let them be joyful in their King. And again he adds, The Lord will take pleasure in His people. Psalm 149:4 For temperate harmonies are to be admitted; but we are to banish as far as possible from our robust mind those liquid harmonies, which, through pernicious arts in the modulations of tones, train to effeminacy and scurrility. But grave and modest strains say farewell to the turbulence of drunkenness. Chromatic harmonies are therefore to be abandoned to immodest revels, and to florid and meretricious music.
{Clement of Alexandria. “The Instructor”. Book 2, Chapter 4. Italics, parentheses, and verse citations by Wilson/Knight. Boldface, underlining, and all-caps mine.}
Clearly, Clement wasn’t calling for a wholesale ban on Christians using instruments when assembling, but for them not to be used in the sinful ways that the unbelieving world has come to use them. This lines up perfectly with what we’ve already seen Paul approved of: “playing stringed instruments with your hearts toward God”. Some might claim this refers to feasts, not assemblies. But setting aside the fact that a feast is a type of gathering (assembly), Paul commanded the early Christians (including Gentiles in Corinth!) to observe the feast of Passover, albeit with a different focus than Israelites historically had: “Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. Therefore let us celebrate the feast, [literally, “Therefore, let us keep the feast-day,”; the verb is subjunctive, but it’s a hortatory subjunctive — acting as a 1st-person imperative, because the imperative form can’t be used in the 1st person {“Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament”. Wallace, Daniel B. 1996. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic. 464-465. 1 Corinthians 5:8 is listed as an example.}; also, while the Greek verb occurs only here in the NT, the rendering “keep (a/the) feast-day(s)” fits every context where this word occurs in the LXX {scroll to “Concordance Results”}] not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” (1 Corinthians 5:6-8 1995 NASB, boldface added)
The Real Problem Exposed: Bad Scholarship
Now, for a while I was thinking that the widespread condemnation of music since the Apostolic period was a result of the anti-Semitism that was starting to become more prominent in Christendom at large in the later 2nd century, because in another version of this list, I came across a couple passages with such import, dated before all the others and attributed to Justin Martyr:
MARTYR “Simply singing is not agreeable to children (Jews), but singing with lifeless instruments and with dancing and clapping is. On this account the use of this kind of instruments and of others agreeable to children is removed from the songs of the churches, and there is left remaining simply singing.” (Justin Martyr, 139 AD)
MARTYR The use of music was not received in the Christian churches, as it was among the Jew, in their infant state, but only the use of plain song.” (Justin Martyr, 139 AD)
{Punctuation and “citations” in original.}
Note that I put “citations” in quotation marks; “Justin Martyr, 139 AD” doesn’t tell us where Justin said this. In keeping with my methodology up to this point, I started running internet searches to determine which of Justin’s works these quotes came from, so I could place them in their proper context(s). But New Advent wouldn’t yield anything like these quotes no matter what I tried typing into their search bar. And eventually, I came across a blog post by Jason L. Weatherly that confirmed what I was starting to suspect: these quotes don’t come from Justin Martyr at all! As far as scholarship has been able to determine, at least one of these statements more likely came from Theodoret, who lived three centuries after Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 versus c. 393-460) and is now recognized as one of the Pseudo-Justinian authors (an author of a work falsely attributed to Justin Martyr, which is probably what caused this confusion in the first place). This is probably why Rudd didn’t include these alleged quotations of Justin Martyr in his list (at least, I hope that’s why).
In fact, Weatherly’s blog post already did much of the work for me regarding this list, presenting the original contexts of some quotations, calling out the absurd citation errors associated with others (e.g., citing page 961 of a volume that doesn’t even have 700 pages!), pointing out the biases of some of the more modern historians quoted, and even highlighting some patristic quotations that advocate in favor of musical instruments in worship!
Yes, you read that right; there are patristic quotes that actually approve of musical instruments in worship! The sentence I put in all-caps in my above quotation of Book 2, Chapter 4 of Clement of Alexandria’s “The Instructor” is just one example — and it’s not even the earliest. As far as I’m aware, the very earliest of those are the following quotes from Dialogue with Trypho, which Justin Martyr wrote sometime in the mid-to-late 150s A.D. — meaning they predate every last quote in Rudd’s list!
Then Trypho said, “We know that you quoted these because we asked you. But it does not appear to me that this Psalm which you quoted last from the words of David refers to any other than the Father and Maker of the heavens and earth. You, however, asserted that it referred to Him who suffered, whom you also are eagerly endeavouring to prove to be Christ.”
And I answered, “Attend to me, I beseech you, while I speak of the statement which the Holy Spirit gave utterance to in this Psalm; and you shall know that I speak not sinfully, and that we are not really bewitched; for so you shall be enabled of yourselves to understand many other statements made by the Holy Spirit. ‘Sing unto the Lord a new song; sing unto the Lord, all the earth: sing unto the Lord, and bless His name; show forth His salvation from day to day, His wonderful works among all people.’ {Quoting from Psalm 96:1-3, 95:1-3 by the LXX verse numbering} He bids the inhabitants of all the earth, who have known the mystery of this salvation, i.e., the suffering of Christ, by which He saved them, sing and give praises to God the Father of all things, and recognise that He is to be praised and feared, and that He is the Maker of heaven and earth, who effected this salvation in behalf of the human race, who also was crucified and was dead, and who was deemed worthy by Him(God) to reign over all the earth. As[is clearly seen] also by the land into which[He said] He would bring[your fathers];[for He thus speaks]: ‘This people[shall go a whoring after other gods], and shall forsake Me, and shall break my covenant which I made with them in that day; and I will forsake them, and will turn away My face from them; and they shall be devoured, and many evils and afflictions shall find them out; and they shall say in that day, Because the Lord my God is not amongst us, these misfortunes have found us out. And I shall certainly turn away My face from them in that day, on account of all the evils which they have committed, in that they have turned to other gods.’ {Quoting from Deuteronomy 31:16-18 LXX}
{Justin Martyr. “Dialogue with Trypho”. Chapter 74. Content in parentheses and brackets theirs. Boldface, underlining, and content in curly brackets mine.}
“Let us glorify God, all nations gathered together; for He has also visited us. Let us glorify Him by the King of glory, by the Lord of hosts. For He has been gracious towards the Gentiles also; and our sacrifices He esteems more grateful than yours. What need, then, have I of circumcision, who have been witnessed to by God? What need have I of that other baptism, who have been baptized with the Holy Ghost? I think that while I mention this, I would persuade even those who are possessed of scanty intelligence. For these words have neither been prepared by me, nor embellished by the art of man; but David sung them, Isaiah preached them, Zechariah proclaimed them, and Moses wrote them. Are you acquainted with them, Trypho? They are contained in your Scriptures, or rather not yours, but ours. For we believe them; but you, though you read them, do not catch the spirit that is in them. Be not offended at, or reproach us with, the bodily uncircumcision with which God has created us; and think it not strange that we drink hot water on the Sabbaths, since God directs the government of the universe on this day equally as on all others; and the priests, as on other days, so on this, are ordered to offer sacrifices; and there are so many righteous men who have performed none of these legal ceremonies, and yet are witnessed to by God Himself.
{Ibid. Chapter 29. Boldface and underlining mine.}
I quoted these chapters out of sequential order because the boldfaced statement in Chapter 74 is the actual example, while the boldfaced statement from Chapter 29 reinforces the legitimacy of the example. After all, these quotes don’t seem so conclusive until you check the underlying Greek text. The underlined phrase in the first quote is the Greek verb ψάλλοντας (the accusative plural masculine present active participle of psallō), and the underlined phrase in the second quote is the Greek verb ἔψαλλεν (the imperfect active indicative 3rd-person singular form of psallō). Sure, they aren’t translated here in a way that implies instruments are involved (no surprise there, I suppose…), but the latter term is used twice (also with reference to David) in the Septuagint version of 1 Samuel:
καὶ ἐγενήθη ἐν τῷ εἶναι πνεῦμα πονηρὸν ἐπὶ Σαουλ καὶ ἐλάμβανεν Δαυιδ τὴν κινύραν καὶ ἔψαλλεν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνέψυχεν Σαουλ καὶ ἀγαθὸν αὐτῷ καὶ ἀφίστατο ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ πονηρόν (1 Samuel 16:23 LXX, boldface and underlining added)
And it came to pass when the evil spirit was upon Saul, that David took his harp, and played with his hand [literally, “David was taking the Kinnor (a type of stringed instrument) and was strumming with the hand of his”]: and Saul was refreshed, and it was well with him, and the evil spirit departed from him. (1 Samuel 16:23 BLXX, boldface and underlining added)
καὶ ἐγένετο πνεῦμα θεοῦ πονηρὸν ἐπὶ Σαουλ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν οἴκῳ καθεύδων καὶ δόρυ ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ Δαυιδ ἔψαλλεν ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν αὐτοῦ (1 Samuel 19:9 LXX, boldface and underlining added)
And an evil spirit from God was upon Saul, and he was resting in his house, and a spear was in his hand, and David was playing on the harp with his hands [literally, “David was strumming with the hands of his”]. (1 Samuel 19:9 BLXX, boldface and underlining added)
The context of the latter passage is the famous incident where Saul threw a spear at David while he was playing music for him. The inclusion of the qualifier “with his hand(s)” in both passages makes it obvious that the action being referred to in both places was David plucking strings on an instrument, not singing a cappella. Indeed, the corresponding Hebrew word in both passages is נָגַן (H5059), which always refers to playing a stringed instrument! This should make it crystal-clear that my understanding of the Greek verb psallō is exactly the same as that of the LXX translators, and that Justin Martyr used this verb in the same way the LXX translators did some 300-400 years after them (after all, the LXX set the “Biblical precedent” for how early Christians were to use and understand this Greek term) — and by implication, that all the 1st– and 2nd-century Christians who lived between the LXX translators and Justin’s use of this verb in “Dialogue with Trypho” also understood the verb this way!
I decided to keep my above discussions in the present post as a supplement to Weatherly’s blog post, since I felt like bringing out some points that he didn’t. In fact, not only does his post specifically cite Rudd’s article, but it points out that it’s only one of many that present, with few exceptions, the exact same dozens of quotes — erroneous citations and all! This shows that these one-sided lists of cherry-picked quotations have just been copied-and-pasted from one website to another, without even bothering to check whether the citations are correct, let alone whether they accurately represent the entire view of the author responsible for each of them!
This just might be worse than what Grant Jeffrey did to make it seem like some ante-Nicene Church Fathers taught a pre-Tribulation rapture! It’s admittedly a close call though, since Jeffrey utilized a tactic I haven’t noticed in any of these lists:
On page 91, Jeffrey listed another quotation he said comes from “Lactantius’ Commentary on the Apocalypse.” He then proceeded to quote the very same passage he had previously attributed to “Victorinus’ Commentary on the Apocalypse” on page 89! I don’t know how this mistake was made, but, Lactantius did not write a commentary on Revelation. Was Jeffrey trying to make it appear that he had even more ancient “pretribulation” writers? One might suspect that this was just an editing error. But, Jeffrey made another identical major blunder, by listing the “Didache” on page 87, and his quote from it, and then on page 91, listing “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles,” and the very same quote again, but from a different translation! These are exactly the same document. (The word “Didache” is the Greek word for “Teaching” and is the abbreviated name for “The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles.”[)] Jeffrey quoted both of these passages twice, both times using different names or titles, as though this added more to his pile of evidence! Are these simply editing errors? Or, is there something more going on here?
{Scroll to p. 14-15 in the PDF at the previous hyperlink. Parenthesis in brackets added to correct a punctuation error.}
Yet I still see people appealing to the writers Jeffrey cites {again, see the article just cited} as support for pre-Tribulationism, and Church of Christ teachers (such as Rudd) presenting these quote lists to denounce the use of any musical instruments in Christian worship. Both groups of people should be called out for using such quotes (and for giving ammunition to evolutionists who promote the false accusation that most if not all creationists rely on quote-mining to make their cases). This sort of sloppy scholarship and mindless parroting is unacceptable for children of God. Grant Jeffrey died in 2012 (so we can expect God to hold him accountable for these tactics1 at Jesus’ return — assuming, of course, that he really was saved; I haven’t found any statements about his baptism, but maybe I just didn’t look hard enough…), but Church of Christ teachers who are still alive owe it to themselves and their students (not to mention our Lord Jesus) to do better. I don’t have a problem with people taking a position on a topic and trying to support it; what I have a problem with is when they do so in an intellectually dishonest way. So if you come across anyone doing these things to promote those ideas, feel free to direct them here and to Weatherly’s above-mentioned blog post (or to Warner’s article linked to above the previous blockquote, in the case of patristic quotes supposedly showing early belief in pre-Tribulationism — I don’t know of any such ante-Nicene quotes that aren’t just taken from Grant Jeffrey’s book; but if you come across any that aren’t covered there, feel free to let me know in the comments!). That way, they have an opportunity to learn the truth of the matter.
Conclusion
I’d like to add one more fascinating point that’s admittedly weaker than the ones I’ve already brought to bear on this topic. Out of all creatures that have auditory systems, only humans are known to derive pleasure from hearing music. Other animals (including songbirds) can hear music, of course; but they don’t get pleasure from doing so. This is circumstantial evidence that the capacity for enjoying music is a part of being made in God’s image.
Now, to be perfectly transparent, I say all this as someone who prefers congregations that don’t use instruments, simply because it’s easier on my autistic nervous system, leaving me less overwhelmed and better able to focus on worshiping alongside everyone else. The sudden shock of an organ starting to play can mess with me more than you might think. Then again, I’ve never attended a congregation that only uses unamplified harps, guitars, etc.; so I might change my tune (pun intended) if I find one of those.
I personally suspect that’s why God singled out stringed instruments in the New Testament: music from stringed instruments (particularly unamplified ones) tend to be less piercing (and thus, less jarring for worshipers who need to focus more) than the alternatives. Maybe God will bring back other instruments for worship in the New Heavens and New Earth, when the tree of life will be available for those of us who are easily jarred by other instruments to reset our nervous systems to a pristine state where such instruments won’t bother us.
To summarize: Contrary to what Christians may have been taught in many different congregations and/or denominations, the early church’s position on musical instruments in worship wasn’t monolithic. There were some congregations that used them, and some that didn’t. Again, this coheres perfectly with what Paul actually wrote: He approved of the use of stringed instruments in worship, but didn’t command it. Hence, Paul left the question of whether to use them in worship as something to be decided on the congregational level (after all, some congregations, especially in the early centuries when Christianity was subject to intense persecution, wouldn’t have been able to afford instruments). Any early Christian (and Synagogal) quotations that seem to argue one way or the other on the musical instruments issue would be better understood as justifications for why that writer’s congregation operated the way it did. Yet Paul’s divinely-inspired stance implies that all such justifications will be inconclusive.
So, all those congregations (and their attendees) who accuse other congregations of doing something wrong for taking a stance on this issue opposing their own should stop doing so. Christian Unity does not require all congregations on the planet to worship in exactly the same ways as each other. There are already plenty of truly dangerous teachings that erring congregations should be rebuked for, without attacking minor variations in worship that the NT permits (as it’s well been said many times, it’s a sad testimony that entire congregations have split over the color of the carpet). As I hinted at above, it’s good for congregations to have reasons (however inconclusive they may be) for making the decisions they do on issues like this. But talking as if the use of any musical instruments in worship is sinful amounts to adding to God’s word. And claiming the NT never authorizes us to use any musical instruments in worship amounts to subtracting from God’s word. I’m sure those who’ve done either of these things in the course of their teaching are well aware of the consequences of doing such things with God’s word (e.g., James 3:1; Revelation 22:18-19), so it’s my prayer that such teachers who read this post will adjust their behaviors and attitudes accordingly, especially now that they can no longer claim they don’t know any better (Luke 12:47-48; James 4:17).
- Warner mentions in an earlier version of the article just quoted that “I have tried to give the man the benefit of the doubt. But, I am at a loss to explain how he could not have known he was misrepresenting these ancient witnesses.” {p. 1} Indeed, Grant Jeffrey originally published the book in which he presented his supposed ante-Nicene pre-Tribulationist quotes in 1992, when internet search engines for the patristic writers hardly existed. Since nobody else is known to have claimed that any ante-Nicene Church Fathers were pre-Tribulationist before Grant Jeffrey published this, I can only see 2 ways that he could’ve acquired the quotes he presented in his book: (a) he exhaustively read the patristic writings, extracting these snippets as he encountered them; or (b) he took these quotes from one or some of the several books that had already been published during the several decades prior, in which these quotes were presented in-context to illustrate the post-Tribulationism of the Church Fathers! Either way, it’s impossible for Grant Jeffrey to have not known the original contexts of these quotes — and by implication, it’s impossible that Grant Jeffrey didn’t know he was taking these quotes out of context when presenting them in his book! No matter how you look at it, Grant Jeffrey was deliberately lying to his readers. ↩︎