Thrust statement: Paul exhorts Christians to sing and play to the Lord.
Scripture reading: Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16
We are heirs of the “Fathers,” of medieval
theologians, of the Reformers, and of the Puritans. To deny such inheritance is
to deny our faith. But to claim a historic faith also means to claim one that
is constantly moving toward God’s future, and therefore we must learn to claim
our inheritance in such a way that it is a help rather than a hindrance in our
march toward the future. In other words, we must learn to reevaluate and
reinterpret what has been handed down to us. To do this in the case of
Scripture is the primary task of a preacher of liberation.[1]
Within the Churches of Christ, the issue
of instrumental music in the so-called worship service is a source of division
among equally godly men and women—some in favor, others not. This essay is an
analysis of James Burton Coffman’s article: “The Sinful Use of Instrumental
Music.”[2]
The first part of this study focuses on the principles of interpretation and
the last part of this investigation concentrates on the arguments set forth by
Coffman against instrumental music. My examination of Coffman’s composition is
not to question the integrity of this godly man, but rather to scrutinize his
points to see if his opinions are compelling in his rejection of instrumental
music—a position that most Christians within the Churches of Christ uphold.
This paper will focus primarily upon the arguments presented by Coffman, not
judgments expressed by others who are also in opposition to instrumental music.
Two Scriptures that many of the Churches
of Christ rely upon to uphold their views concerning the rejection of
instrumental music surrounds Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16.[3]
These two Scriptures are cited by many well-meaning Christians to substantiate
their beliefs that it is sinful for Christians to “sing and play” in the
corporate assembly of God’s people. Coffman, for example, denies the word play, or make
music, as set forth in Ephesians 5:19. He writes: “It is the commandment of
Christ through the sacred writers of the New Testament that commands Christians
to sing, not to make music.”[4] These two passages are frequently viewed as
Scriptures to regulate singing without the use of the instrument in a so-called
worship service.[5] For
one to praise God with instruments during the gathering of the saints on Sunday
morning is tantamount to rebellion against God. In fact, to sing with the
accompaniment of instrumental music is high treason against God, Christ, and
the Holy Spirit. God will send, according to some believers, one to an eternal
burning hell if one dares to praise Him or Christ with instrumental
accompaniment. According to Coffman, as well as many other Christians, one
cannot sing and play, but only sing (a capella).[6]
Ephesians 5:19 is generally interpreted as a “worship
service” text.[7] In
other words, Paul wrote this text in order to regulate the kind of singing
within the assembly, not outside the church. One may praise God with instruments,
providing one is not worshipping God during a church service. When the church
assembles between the hours of 10am and 11am for Sunday morning worship, the
congregations must sing without the accompaniment of instruments, which
constitutes one of the five-acts of worship.[8]
Why? Some Christians assert that God forbids His people to praise Him with the
instrument when they assemble as a corporate body for corporate worship.
Worship: One’s Way of Life
Just a perusal of the Book of Ephesians
reveals that Ephesians 5:19 deals with one’s way of life twenty-four hours a day, not
just Sunday morning worship. If one is
to identify with this particular verse, one must first learn the whole book in
context before postulating his or her interpretation of 5:19. If one fails to read this book as a
book, one can draw conclusions that are not sound. An understanding of the
whole helps one to be aware of the part. The task of every interpreter is to
seek to know the one specific meaning intended by the author. An author helps his readers to recognize his
meaning through its context. Francis W. Beare correctly calls attention to the
context in his exegesis of this passage:
19-20. Spiritual fullness comes to expression
in joyful fellowship, in song, in perpetual thanksgiving. The Christian’s whole
life, when it is given its true direction, moves in the atmosphere of worship.
In the context the words cannot refer to the meetings for public worship alone
or even primarily, but to everyday social intercourse. The whole expression is
modeled on Col. 3:16-17; but addressing one
another suggest the general relationships of life over a broader
area than the “teaching and admonishing” of the Colossians passage.[9]
Also, Theodore O. Wedel, co-author with Bear, draws attention to the error of limiting this text to the “architectural” building and “Sunday worship”:
But here, as so often, we make the mistake of
limiting the concept of church and religion to their architectural expression
in a house of God or to our Sunday worship. Have we not also parish halls and
cottage parlors and a common life of Christian fellowship on weekdays? Must
Christian singing and making melody
be restricted to our rightly decorous worship hours? And as for giving thanks always for all things unto God—this
can surely find social expression in games and picnics and singing around a
campfire.[10]
Wedel also bemoans the travesty of limiting Ephesians 5:19 to special hours. He writes:
Is it not a tragic misreading of the
Christian faith that all of us are inclined to relegate “religion” to special
hours or seasons and to appointed pieties? Churchgoing and prayer hours are a
necessity for the Christian life. Woe unto us if we neglect them. They are the
time for listening to the word of God which will clarify for us his will. But
the doing of his will is both costing and rewarding in the now of every day.[11]
INTERPRETATION: CONCEPTUAL GRIDS
Before one embarks upon an analysis of
Coffman’s essay against instrumental music and an interpretation of Ephesians 5:19, a word of caution is given in order to
help one approach the text without colored glasses—consciousness of one’s
traditions as one approaches the text. It is not uncommon for interpreters to
impose their own conceptual grids on a text without due reflection. When one
approaches the Word of God, one should approach every text with a hermeneutics
of suspicion. In other words, one should be conscious of his or her own
fallibility in interpreting Scriptures. One’s interpretation should always
remain the object of suspicion and of critical evaluation. Everyone must have a
self-critical stance toward the tendency to impose one’s own agenda upon the
exposition of Scripture. This is especially true in the interpretation of Ephesians 5:19.
For many believers, this Scripture is a verse that regulates corporate
singing in an assembly on Sunday morning during a so-called worship service.
Through a sleight of hand, this passage is cited in such a way that
instrumental music is eliminated from the believer’s life of worship or praise,
except when it is outside the church building. In the nineteenth century,
Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) originated the idea of the hermeneutic
circle. The hermeneutic circle philosophy simply means: “Each part of a text
must be interpreted with reference to the whole; yet the meaning of the whole
cannot be grasped without considering the parts.”[12]
Interpretation is an attempt to understand the work as a whole by an
analysis of its elements.[13]
Hermeneutics[14]
ordinarily covers the whole field of interpretation, including exegesis.[15]
Nevertheless, hermeneutics is often used in a much narrower sense to grasp the
relevance of ancient works. In other words, it is concerned about the “here”
and “now.”[16] Hayes
and Holiday define exegesis as an attempt “to reach an informed understanding
of the text.”[17] This
essay is an attempt to reach an informed understanding of the text by looking
at the whole and then the particular. The traditional interpretation, among
many Christians within the Churches of Christ, is so entrenched in the thinking
of men and women that many can no longer distinguish between tradition and the
Word of God itself. Everyone should weigh carefully his or her tradition in the
light of God’s Word. Jaroslav Pelikan calls attention to the necessity of
rethinking cherished traditions:
Like any growth, development may be healthy
or it may be malignant; discerning the difference between these two kinds of
growth requires constant research into the pathology of traditions. But it is
healthy development that keeps a tradition both out of the cancer ward and out
of the fossil museum.[18]
It is possible for an interpreter to miss the point of the text if he or she does not consider the “linguistic, cultural, and historical background to the inspired writings,” writes Cedric Johnson.[19] It is also in this vein that Berkhof cautions Christians not to fall into the same trap that many fell into during the Reformation. L. Berkhof again sharpens the focus of caution when he writes:
The militant spirit of the age found expression in hundreds of polemical writings. Each one sought to defend his own opinion with an appeal to Scripture. Exegesis became the handmaid of dogmatics, and degenerated into a mere search for proof-texts. The Scriptures were studied in order to find there the truths that were embodied in the Confessions.[20]
EXAMINATION OF BURTON COFFMAN’S ESSAY
As stated above, this examination of Coffman’s article is not to question the sincerity of this man of God. The primary purpose is to help individuals who are struggling with this issue, to make a more accurate interpretation of Ephesians 5:19 in order to bring about more unity among God’s people. To set the tone for a clearer understanding of Ephesian 5:19, I have chosen to review Coffman’s article written against the use of the instrument in praise to God.[21] His essay is chosen as an example to illustrate the lengths that individuals will resort to in order to uphold one’s own “interpretative community.” It is obvious that Coffman allows tradition to stand in the way of listening anew to the biblical texts. Every interpreter must exercise caution that he or she does not prune or crop the text to fit one’s theological presuppositions. Every believer must learn to reinterpret and to reevaluate the customs handed down through the centuries. It is not uncommon for Christians to identify the traditions of their “interpretative community” with the Word of God itself. It is in this regard that Johnson expresses the basic problem well in his discussion of presuppositions:
Generations of scholars in the field of hermeneutics have recognized the influence of preunderstanding on interpretation. C. S. Lewis observed “What we learn from experience depends on the kind of philosophy we bring to experience.”[22]
Christians often accept what they are taught without question. It is in this sense that their interpretation is neither subjective nor objective. In other words, they have never taken the time to employ their minds subjectively in analyzing the Scripture for themselves, nor have they looked at the Scriptures objectively. Their interpretations are “ready-made or prefabricated meanings.”[23] Their interpretations are hand-me-downs from their interpretative community. It is in this same vein that Stanley Fish rightly says, “In other words, interpretive communities[24] are no more stable than texts because interpretive strategies are not natural or universal, but learned.”[25] In spite of Fish’s deconstruction philosophy, nevertheless, he is correct when he writes:
And, moreover, the way of seeing, whatever it was, would never be individual or idiosyncratic, since its source would always be the institutional structure of which the “see-er” was an extending agent. This is what Sacks means when he says that a culture fills brains “so that they are alike in fine detail”; it fills them so that one’s interpretive acts are exclusively his own but fall to him by virtue of his position in some socially organized environment and are therefore always shared and public.[26]
Leaders, especially minister within the Churches of Christ, often memorize verses from the Bible by the hundreds. But frequently their interpretation is not so much theirs, as it is the interpretation of a social structure to which they belong; that is to say, their interpretative community. Traditions still stand in the way of listening anew to the Biblical text.[27] Once more, the Gonzalezs’ caution: “We must learn to reevaluate and reinterpret what has been handed down to us.”[28] It is still very difficult for individuals to conceive that one might cite Scripture and, at the same time, fail to apply the text correctly in light of its historical background. It is also in this vein that O. E. Payne writes about the acceptance of arguments against instrumental music without regard to an examination of long-held traditions:
Most men in like positions, instead of dismissing prejudice and divesting themselves of the warp and woof of long years of custom and environment, preparatory to open-minded research, have passionately rushed to the defense of that to which they have been accustomed, resorting to the Scriptures with no loftier purpose than to search for proof or pretext with which to bolster the doctrine or practice which is questioned.[29]
Some religious writers within the Churches of Christ suppose they have all the answers. And as a result of this kind of intellectualization, the intellectually correct party ostracizes those who go against the grain with their particular interpretative community. One must be careful that one does not go to the Scriptures to prove what one already believes, but rather to see what they say. Many are so accustomed to reading the Bible as previously taught by generations of interpreters that they cannot distinguish between interpretation and Revelation. In other words, for one to question the traditional interpretations is tantamount to questioning the Word of God itself.[30]
This failure to discriminate between explanation and Divine inspiration is one of the main obstacles that believers encounter in their efforts to liberate the Bible from its culture and to maintain unity among God’s people. The heritage of explaining is confused with the text itself. The faith of the fathers becomes the watchword for orthodoxy; the interpretation of the fathers becomes normative and is passed on as authoritative. One of the most difficult obstacles for any Christian is to approach the text without any strong personal biases. Studying the Bible with colored glasses ultimately leads to distortion of the text.[31]
People often tend to give preconceived beliefs the same authority as they give to the Bible. In other words, one’s preconceived political power is equal to that of the Scriptures. One’s own personal journey of faith, with the ghosts of the past, makes it very difficult for one to view the Scriptures without prejudice. One’s prior understanding and interpretation makes it difficult to sift out the truths of God in dealing with the text.[32] The culture of one’s heritage controls the text of the Bible. One should never forget that one’s own journey occurs within a vast architecture of preunderstanding—no thinking takes place in a vacuum. Frederic W. Farrar draws attention to the religious hatred that generates from this know-it-all attitude:
My opinions are founded on interpretations of Scripture. Scripture is infallible. My views of its meaning are infallible too. Your opinions and inferences differ from mine; therefore you must be in the wrong. All wrong opinions are capable of so many ramifications that any one who differs from me in minor points must be unsound in vital matters also. Therefore all who differ from me and my clique are “heretics.” All heresy is wicked; all heretics are necessarily wicked men. It is my religious duty to hate, calumniate and abuse you.[33]
ANALYSIS OF JAMES BURTON COFFMAN’S
“THE SINFUL USE OF INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC”
Pagan Society: First and Fourth Arguments
Coffman’s first and fourth
arguments against instrumental music surrounds paganism. Since the pagans used
instruments in their gatherings, therefore, God and Christ do not approve
instruments in either the Old Testament or New Testament, according to Coffman.[34]
Having set forth the basic principles of how to interpret the Word of God, as
discussed above, it is now appropriate to examine Coffman’s essay to see if he
followed the fundamental principles of interpretation or if he allowed his
prejudices to blind his eyes to a careful reading of Ephesians 5:19. Since his arguments are presented in
written form in the Gospel Advocate,
it is appropriate to deal with his views in order to see if his arguments are
sound logically and biblically. Many Christians do not have the background of
knowing how to deal with his outlook. Since, I, too, taught many of these same
views for over seventeen years in the early part of my ministry among the
one-cup and nonSunday School movement, I am qualified to examine the
arguments—positive or negative. On the surface his points of view may seem
sound, but, at the same time, a closer examination reveals carelessness on his
part in the handling of several texts to support his presuppositions.
As stated above, this analysis of Coffman’s
article in no way questions his integrity and his sonship to God. But a perusal
of his essay does illustrate the scale to which Christians will violate the
text, even though not intentionally, in order to uphold tradition. His approach against instrumental music is
extremely weak—even to the point of denying that God commanded musical
instruments in 2 Chronicles 29:25.[35]
He begins his tirade against “mechanical musical instruments in the worship of
God” by calling attention to its use in a pagan society. He states rather
boldly his opposition: “Is the use of instrumental music in Christian worship
sinful? Certainly! There is not the slightest doubt of this.”[36] How does he conclude that instrumental music
is sinful? He states categorically his objection with absolute certainty of its
sinfulness. Listen to him as he prepares his readers for his examination, “Let
us examine a few of the basic facts that underlie such a certainty.”[37]
How does he know for certain that his views
are correct? Pay attention to him as he seeks to justify his negative reaction
to the use of instruments. His first argument almost causes one to just stand
in shock as he or she peruses his reasoning—pagans used instruments. This
argument almost shocks the imagination. This argument is one of the weakest
arguments against instrumental music that has ever come to my attention. In the
development of this argument, he calls attention to the use of mechanical
instruments of music in pagan temples and Nebuchdnezzar’s employment of musical
instruments (Daniel 3:5). From this he assumes that Jesus forbids the “worship of
God with mechanical instruments of music.”[38]
Response to Coffman’s Pagan Society Argument
Is the use of instruments sinful simply
because one finds the employment of mechanical instruments in a secular
society? Coffman advances the notion that since instrumental music is utilized
in a pagan society, then God condemns the use of the instrument in praise to
Him. This argument is extremely weak in the light of God’s Word. For instance,
one cannot help but wonder about David and his instruments of music utilized in
the Temple to praise God. Toward the end of David’s life, he called in the
leaders of Israel, the priests, and the Levites—a total of thirty-eight
thousand men (1 Chronicles 23:1-2). Of this number called in by David, four thousand were
chosen to “praise the Lord with the musical instruments” that David had
“provided for that purpose” (23:5).
The Chronicler also reveals that David, together with some of the
commanders of the army, set apart “some of the sons of Asaph, Heman and Jeduthun for the ministry of
prophesying, accompanied by harps, lyres and cymbals. Here is the list of the
men who performed this service” (25:1). The sons of Asaph, the sons of
Jeduthun, and the sons of Heman were assigned the task of “thanking and
praising the Lord” with the “harp” (25:2-4). After the enumeration of the
sons of Asaph, Jeduthun, and Heman, the Chronicler writes:
All
these men were under the supervision of their fathers for the music of the
temple of the LORD, with cymbals, lyres and harps, for the ministry at the
house of God. Asaph, Jeduthun and Heman were under the supervision of the king.
Along with their relatives—all of them trained and skilled in music for the
LORD—they numbered 288. Young and old alike, teacher as well as student, cast
lots for their duties (25:6-9).
If one thinks that God was not behind this use of musical instruments
to praise Him, then one only has to read 2 Chronicles 29:25 to quickly see that it was God who
instructed David, not a fertile imagination of David’s own devising. This chapter records the purification of the
Temple by Hezekiah. The Chronicler clearly states: “He did what was right in
the eyes of the LORD just as his father David had done” (29:2). In the recounting of the events that
occurred in the purification of the Temple, the author of Second Chronicles reveals the use of instruments in praise
to God. Listen as he calls attention to the ultimate source of the authority
for this action of the introduction of musical instruments:
He stationed the Levites in
the temple of the LORD with cymbals, harps and lyres in the way prescribed
by David and Gad the king’s seer and Nathan the prophet; this
was commanded by the LORD through his prophets. So the Levites stood ready with David’s
instruments, and the priests with their trumpets. Hezekiah gave the order to
sacrifice the burnt offering on the altar. As the offering began, singing to
the LORD began also, accompanied by trumpets and the instruments of David king
of Israel. The whole assembly bowed in worship, while the singers sang and the
trumpeters played. All this continued until the sacrifice of the burnt offering
was completed (2
Chronicles 29:25-29).
Contrary to the thinking of Coffman,[39] the Chronicler says that the source of authority behind the use of the instruments was God Himself: “commanded by the LORD” (29:25). How did God command the employment of instruments? Again, the Chronicler says, “through his prophets” (29:25). Who were His prophets? The record says that they were David, Gad, and Nathan. Does this sound as if instruments were a stench in the nostrils of God because pagans also employed instruments in their everyday life? In Coffman’s efforts to nullify the force of 2 Chronicles 29:25, he develops two arguments under the caption: “Crooked Efforts to Justify Their Use.” He writes,
‘But they did it in the Old Testament.’ All advocates of the use of such instruments in Christian worship invariably quote 2 Chronicles 29:25, which in the common versions does indicate that God commanded their use. In all probability, this verse is a mistranslation because it is not found in the Syriac or Arabic version.”
He wants to deny this passage since it does not fit his theology. Should one also discount where the Chronicler says, “The Levites and priests sang to the Lord every day, accompanied by the Lord’s instruments of praise” (2 Chronicles 30:21). The instruments in 29:25 are called the “Lord’s instruments” in 30:21. Earlier this same Chronicler wrote: “The priests took their positions, as did the Levites with the Lord’s musical instruments, which King David had made for praising the Lord and which were used when he gave thanks, saying, ‘His love endures forever’” (7:6). Should this verse, too, be eliminated from the Scriptures in order to fit one’s objection to instrumental music? 2 Chronicles 7:6 is associated with the dedication of the Temple built by Solomon. Should this Scripture be eliminated from the Bible?
As one examines Coffman’s arguments, one quickly observes that this kind of illogical reasoning is the same illogical reasoning that Jesus experienced with the religious leaders in His day over traditions, which ultimately ended in the crucifixion of Jesus. Traditions take precedence over what God has said. Coffman cannot distinguish, so it seems, between his customs and the Word of God. In fact, he nullifies the Word of God through his inherited traditions from the Stone/Campbell Movement. When he writes: “Is the use of instrumental music in Christian worship sinful? Certainly!” Let us examine a few of the basic facts that underlie such a certainty.”[40] Once more, how does he prove that instruments of music are sinful?
His first and fourth arguments are, as stated above, one and the same, focus on the pagan use of instruments. He states his opposition in clear terms: “The whole world in Bible times was full of mechanical instruments of music, and the pagan temples were loaded with their orchestras.”[41] He thus reasons that God was not behind the use of instruments. Further more, he indicates that God condemned David for the use of instruments—he then based his arguments upon a misapplication of Amos 5:23 and 6:5.[42] Is David condemned because He commanded instruments in the Temple? Is God condemned because He commanded David, along with some other prophets, to institute musical instruments in praise to Himself? One wonders if God knew that the pagans were using instruments. Well, perhaps God was sleeping when all this took place! Perhaps, God had not reasoned this issue out very carefully?
The Pattern Concept for a Worship Service:
Singing Excludes Instruments
Pattern Theology: Second Argument
His second argument hinges on pattern
theology.[43] In
other words, “pattern theology” is the belief that God has ordained a worship
service with five acts to be performed in a prescribed manner in order for
worship to be true worship. For Coffman, worship is “prescriptive,” not
“descriptive.” He views any passage that describes activities in the assembly
as prescriptive—five unalterable rituals. For one to deviate from his supposed
rituals (acts or elements), one faces the fires of hell. He labors under the impression that
objection to instrumental music is based on the New Testament, not tradition as
some say. He then seeks to answer the
argument that “The banning of mechanical instruments is more of a tradition
than something based on Scripture.”[44]
To refute the argument that the rejection of instrumental music is based on
tradition, not Scripture, Coffman then relies upon Hebrews 8:5 to prove that mechanical instruments are
not in harmony with the divine pattern for a worship service: “It is the New Testament,
not tradition, that prescribes a pattern for Christian worship (Hebrews 8:5).”[45]
There is not one word in Hebrews 8:5 about five acts of worship for a Christian assembly. This deduction is a figment of a very fertile imagination. There is not one Scripture found in the New Testament that speaks of Christian meetings as a worship service. The Christian assemblies appear to be based on the synagogue meetings—meetings in the synagogue were not prescriptive, but descriptive. In other words, they were left open as to the elements/acts of the gatherings. This was not true of the Temple. This passage in Hebrews 8:5 had to do with the Tabernacle—later Solomon’s Temple. On Mount Sinai, God gave Moses the instructions to construct the sanctuary—a sanctuary representative, or copy, of what was in heaven--prescriptive.
He assumes that God has prescribed a worship service with five acts to be performed in a prescribed manner, but he cites no Scripture—in context—that supports his conclusions. He cites Hebrews 8:5 out of context in order to prove his presupposition that God has ordained a pattern for a worship service in the New Testament.[46] After misapplying Hebrews 8:5, he then asserts: “Singing is a special kind of music. That special kind of music was only prescribed and allowed by the holy apostles (emphasis mine—RDB).”[47] He discounts Ephesians 5:19 in which Paul explicitly tells the Ephesians to sing and “make music,” or play. He says, “Thus, when the Scriptures say, ‘Sing,’ it was not necessary to add, ‘but don’t play musical instruments.’”[48] In this second argument against instrumental music, he drops in this unbelievable statement that also demands a response. One almost stands aghast as one reads his words:
It is the commandment of Christ through the sacred writers of the New Testament that commands Christians to sing, not make music (emphasis mine—RDB). Only ignorance can confuse these terms. Singing is a special kind of music. That special kind of music only was prescribed and allowed by the holy apostles.[49]
Did Paul exclude the instrument in praise to God? Did he say that the
Ephesians were to sing and not to play instruments? Perhaps, a study of
The Greek word psallw will
clarify the confusion. The verb psallw is employed in the New Testament as
expressing praise. The verb psallw has its primary meaning ‘“to sing’ with at least the possible nuance
of ‘to sing’ with instrumental accompaniment.”[50]
The New Testament writers employ the word yavlmo" (psalmos) in two senses: (1) the Old Testament
psalms, and (2) songs of praise and joy.[51] For example, Paul in writing to the Romans
declares:
For I tell you that Christ
has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, to confirm the
promises made to the patriarchs so that the Gentiles may glorify God for his
mercy, as it is written: “Therefore I will praise (yalw' psalw, “I will sing praise”[52])
you among the Gentiles; I will sing hymns to your name” (Romans 15:8-9).
By the use of the word psalmos, Paul is not excluding instruments,
even though the singing may be without musical accompaniment. The citation, in Romans 15:9,
is from Psalm
18:49, which appears to be a Psalm sung with instruments. This statement of Paul is about Christ’s
ministry to the Jews to confirm God’s mercy to the Gentiles. Just as David praised
God for his victory over the surrounding nations, so Christ celebrates His
victory over satanic powers that brings about redemption for the Gentiles.
Because
of God’s mercy, Jesus is saying, “I will praise (ψαλῶ' psalw) you among the Gentiles,” and “I will sing
hymns to your name.” This is not related just to the congregational gathering
of the corporate body of believers, but also to individuals in their every day
walk with God. This perception of God’s mercy is one of the reasons that
Christians sing Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs. This outburst of joy,
assembled or not assembled, is to praise God for His mercy. Paul and Silas’
singing in prison is an example of this explosion of joy in song to God (Acts 16:25).
Prior to Paul calling upon the Ephesians to “sing and make music,” he
burst forth in rapturous language to capture the hearts of men and women in
gratitude.
Praise εὐλογητός, euloghtos, “blessed”) be to the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every
spiritual blessing in Christ. For
he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in
his sight. In love he
predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance
with his pleasure and will—to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has
freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his
blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace
that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. And he made known to us the mystery of
his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put
into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all
things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ. In him we were also chosen, having been
predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity
with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first
to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were
included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your
salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised
Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption
of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory (Ephesians 1:3-14).
Ephesians 5:19
is reminiscent of the praise in Ephesians 1:3-14. Again, one also finds the word psallw employed by Paul in his First Epistle to the
Corinthians: “So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I also will
pray with my mind; I will sing (yalw' psalw, “I will sing praise”) with my spirit, but I
will also sing (yalw' psalw, “I will sing praise”) with my mind” (1 Corinthians 14:15). As one reflects upon this verse, one is
conscience that the word yallw' (psallw, “to pluck, pull”) is employed in the Septuagint (LXX, the Greek
translation of the Old Testament—translated between 285—250 BC) to translate the Hebrew word /g^^n` (n`g~n, “to play a stringed instrument”) and rm~z` (z`m~r, “to make music in praise to God”).[53] The usage of psallw in the Septuagint is used to translate the
Hebrew word n`g~n twelve
times. On the other hand, the word psallw in the Septuagint is used to translate the
Hebrew word z`m~r
forty times.[54]
Did Paul exclude the use of
instruments in his use of the word psallw? There is no evidence from the context that
Paul excluded instrumental accompaniment, but rather the reverse is obvious.
Every Christian’s life should be one of praise. Every believer’s life should be
one of praising God in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs for God’s
unsearchable love. In Paul’s letters to the Christians in Ephesus and Colossae,
he compares the behavior of the unbeliever with the believer. Toward the close
of the Ephesian Epistle, he writes that they were to “sing and make music”:
Be
very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of
every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but
understand what the Lord’s will is. Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to
debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs.
Sing (a[/donte", adontes)
and make music (yavllonte", psallontes) in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for
everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:15-21).
As stated above, many Christians
still associate Ephesians
5:19 with public worship, but there is nothing, as stated
above, in the context to identify this as an act that only takes place on
Sunday morning between 9am and 10am. While this verse no doubt includes
activities that take place in the corporate assembly, the text does not suggest
such a restriction.[55]
Believers are to instruct one another through psalms (yalmoi'", psalmois), hymns (u{mnoi", Jumois) and spiritual songs (wj/dai'", wdais). Paul encouraged them to “sing and make
music.” The words sing and make music
are from the Greek words a[/donte" kaiV yavllonte" (adontes kai psallontes), which is translated by R. C. H. Lenski as
“singing and playing.”[56]
Lenski further states: “Singing is done by the voice; playing by means of an instrument. Yavllw means to let a string twang and thus to play a lyre or a harp, and then to play any instrument as an accompaniment to the voice.”[57] In other words, the Christians at Ephesus were to “sing and make music.”[58] This would be applicable not just to formal (corporate) worship, but also on other occasions. Paul’s use of the word Psalms appears to refer to the Old Testament psalms.[59] This analysis of the Greek and Hebrew words sets forth the argument that this line of reasoning is the most logical conclusion, since this book, as well as the other thirty-eight books, was looked upon as the Word of God (see 2 Timothy 3:14-17).[60]
The writers of the New Testament cite the psalms frequently. For
example, Luke records a conversation between Jesus and the religious leaders in
which Jesus cited from Psalm 110 (Luke 20:41-44). Also, Jesus, before His
ascension, called attention to the Psalms in His farewell instructions to the
disciples (Luke
24:44). Prior to the Day of Pentecost, Peter stood before a
group numbering about one hundred and twenty and cited from two psalms (Acts 1:20-21):
“For,” said
Peter, “it is written in the Book of Psalms, ‘May his place be deserted; let
there be no one to dwell in it,’ [Psalm 69:25] and again he pens: ‘May
another take his place of leadership’” [Psalm 109:8]
Now the Spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD tormented him. Saul’s attendants said to him, “See, an evil spirit from God is tormenting you. Let our lord command his servants here to search for someone who can play the harp (r/NKiB' ÷G«n"m], m+n~gg}n B~kkh!nnor). He will play when the evil spirit from God comes upon you, and you , will feel better.” So Saul said to his attendants, “Find someone who plays well and bring him to me.” One of the servants answered, “I have seen a son of Jesse of Bethlehem who knows how to play (÷G«n" ['deyœ y)d}~a n~gg}n) the harp. He is a brave man and a warrior. He speaks well and is a fine-looking man. And the LORD is with him” (1 Samuel 16:14-18).
The Hebrew
words in First
Samuel: “can play the harp” is translated into the Greek text
as eijdovta
yavllein ejn kinuvra/[63] (eidota psallein en kinura,
“skilled to play on the harp”). The Greek word psallein (“to play”) is equivalent to
the Hebrew word m+n~gg}n (“play”). Then the phrase “know how to play” (y)d}~a n~gg}n) is translated into the
Septuagint Greek text as eijdovta yalmovn (eidota psalmon, “understands playing on the harp”). Thus,
when Paul told the Ephesians to engage in adontes (“singing”) kai psallontes (“psalming”), he is utilizing a word (psallontes) that the Jewish Christians in Ephesus
understood.[64]
The believers at Ephesus were encouraged to “sing and play,” frequently translated as “make melody.” Since the Septuagint was the Bible utilized by Jesus and the apostles, it is logical that they would have employed the word psallontes as the Jews currently understood it. The translators of the Septuagint utilized the Greek word psalmon (“playing on the harp”) to express the Hebrew word m+n~gg}n (“play”). When Paul says, “sing and make music (psallontes),” is he not reflecting upon musical composition associated with the Psalms?
It is significant, at least to this author, that Paul, in the Ephesian epistle, unlike the Colossian epistle, adds an additional thought. In the Ephesian letter, he says to “sing and make music,” but in the epistle to the Colossians, he only says, “sing.” Consider the following parallel:
EPHESIANS 5:19-20 |
COLOSSIANS 3:16-17 |
|
Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. |
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. |
Does the phrase “sing psalms” in Colossians convey the same admonition that Paul expresses in “sing and make music”? The word “sing,” even today does not exclude “making music” through instruments. It is not uncommon for individuals to invite someone to go and hear individuals—quartets—sing, but it is understood that just the mention of the word “singing” does not exclude mechanical music. “Make music” is a common term among musicians to mean to “play” instruments along with their singing.
Paul says that this “singing and making music” is to be “in your heart to the Lord.”[65] How were they to give thanks? Paul says with “singing and playing.” But, Paul added the prepositional phrase, “in your heart to the Lord.” In other words, this singing and playing on instruments should not be mechanical. It is to be done with your hearts, that is to say, not merely with your lips and with your fingers. One sings and plays with his heart when he excites his mind to an understanding of the sentiments presented in the words repeated. This expression attached to “singing and playing” is very similar to the words found in 1 Chronicles 13:8 concerning David and assembled Israel in their rejoicing about the return of the Ark of the Covenant: “David and all the Israelites were celebrating with all their might before God, with songs and with harps, lyres, tambourines, cymbals and trumpets.”
Whether one says, “in your heart to the Lord” or “with all their might,” one is saying the same thing. Moses also said to the children of Israel concerning their devotion to God and His Law: “And now, O Israel, what does the Lord your God ask of you but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul (Deuteronomy 10:12). When David exhorted his son Solomon about the building of the temple, he said:
And you, my son Solomon, acknowledge the God of your father, and serve him with wholehearted devotion and with a willing mind, for the Lord searches every heart and understands every motive behind the thoughts. If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever. (1 Chronicles 28:9)
Paul, in the Ephesian Epistle, varies this expression in order to drive home the necessity of doing one’s “singing and playing” from the soul, not just the mouth. Listen once more to Paul as he addresses the servants of earthly masters: “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ” (Ephesians 6:5). Again, he writes: “Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart” [ἐκ ψυχῆς, ek yuxhs, “from the soul”] (6:6). The words of Peter also call attention to the inward versus the external: “Love one another deeply from the heart” [ἐκ καρδίας, ek kardias] (1 Peter 1:22).
This
thought—in your heart—is very similar to the words of Paul, as cited above, to
the Corinthians: “So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I
will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also
sing with my mind” (1 Corinthians 14:15). Paul is saying, in
essence, that the whole soul of men and women should be filled with praise. The
psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs should be sung with a spirit of
thankfulness, which spirit permeates the believer’s singing and
playing—corporately or individually.
Amos and Instrumental Music
Under the caption “Crooked Efforts to Justify Their Use, he
develops three additional arguments to substantiate his belief system about
instrumental music. His first argument under this caption focuses on Amos 5:23 and 6:5). Coffman cites Amos 5:23 and 6:5 to justify his position that instrumental music is
sinful. He writes: “Furthermore, we
must point out that Amos condemned the use of instruments in the Old Testament:
‘Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody
of thy viols’ (5:23; cf. 6:5).”[66]
Goebel Music (associated with the Churches of Christ), also makes this same
argument against the use of Instrumental music.[67]
As one seeks to unravel his convoluted reasoning, it is necessary to call
attention to the proper method of exegesis. The task of any interpreter is to
discover the intended meaning of the author. The way an author helps his
readers to interpret his statements is through his context. If one isolates a
passage from its context, one can arrive at a meaning that is totally foreign
to the author’s intent. If one wishes to understand what Amos meant in a
particular verse, the reader must examine the way the author thinks and writes
in the verses preceding and following his statements. Amos 5:23 and 6:5 are anchored in history. One cannot separate the
historical setting of the author without destroying the intended message. Is it
possible to understand these two texts? Yes, Amos’ meaning is available and can
be understood from his book. Interpreters need to learn how to read a book as a
book. As one seeks to uncover the
meaning of any text, one should never read isolated passages divorced from its
historical background. In the examination of these two texts, this study now
focuses upon these two verses separately.
Amos 5:23
Amos 5:23 is a favorite text among many Christians
within the various subdivisions within the Churches of Christ. Misapplication,
in my judgment, is not deliberate on the part of those who cite this verse to
give credence to their opposition to instrumental music, but an honest mistake
of the heart. An important rule of interpretation of any text is to approach
the text with a sound historical treatment. One has to look at the writers of
both the Old and New Testaments with a detached eye; that is to say, one must
learn to look at the various Scriptures from a neutral standpoint and to see
the historical background and to hear the historical Word as it was uttered to
the first audience. Many Christians do violence to the historical context in
justifying their presuppositions. In the following explanation of this text (5:23) as well as 6:5, one must take into consideration the
relevance of the historical details leading up to a particular statement.
There are two different contexts for each of these isolated Scriptures. Amos 5:23 is associated with the nation of Israel (Northern Kingdom) and 6:5 is associated with both the nation of Judah (Southern Kingdom) and the nation of Israel (Northern Kingdom). Amos writes: “Away with the noise of your songs! I will not listen to the music of your harps” (5:23). The best choirs may have sung their songs, but to God their music was simply noise. The Israelites worship had become meaningless and empty. When one approaches this text with certain presuppositions against instrumental music, this text appears to give validity to one’s beliefs.[68] The background leading up to this terse statement deals with ritual punctiliousness, even to the point of excess. Just a casual reading of Chapter 4 and 5 reveals worship that is “soulless worship”—worship that was no longer pleasing to God. God, through Amos, states His opposition to that He had earlier commanded:
I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies. 22 Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them. Though you bring choice fellowship offerings,a I will have no regard for them. 23 Away with the noise of your songs! I will not listen to the music of your harps. 24 But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream! (5:21-24).
The nation of Israel had turned their hearts from God, and they were using their “religious feast,” their “assemblies,” their “burnt offering and grain offerings,” their “fellowship offering,” and their “instruments” to praise God in a soulless fashion—only mechanical. The Israelites, like so many Christians today, used religion as an emotionless means to stay, hopefully, in God’s grace. The Lord is interested in the heart as well as the mind. It is in this same vein that Jesus responded to an individual who tested Him about the greatest commandment in the Law:
Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’a 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’b 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments. (Matthew 22:37-40)
The Israelites failed in all three. Fifteen hundred years after Moses penned these words (Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18), Paul, too, desired the Ephesians to “sing and make music in your heart (τῇ καρδίᾳ, th kardia, “with the heart”) to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:19). The Revised Standard Version renders this phrase as “with all your heart.” William Barclay in his the New Testament: A New Translation translates: “with all your heart.” Edgar J. Goodspeed in his The Bible: An American Translation also translates: “with all your heart.” Also, James Moffatt in his The New Testament: A New Translation renders this phrase as “praise the Lord heartily.” The case in Greek can be either dative, locative, or instrumental. The sense of this phrase in context is “with the heart.” This sense is also found in a parallel passage in Colossians: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God” (Colossians 3:16). Even if one translates th kardia as locative (“in the heart”), the meaning is still “with the heart.” Just a comparison of Colossians 3:16 with Ephesians 5:19 settles the matter—“with gratitude in your hearts.”
In the Ephesian Epistle, Paul calls attention to the ethical behavior that a servant should exhibit toward his owner or master. He writes: “doing the will of God from your heart” (Ephesians 6:6). The phrase “from your heart” is a translation of the Greek, which is literally translated “from [the] soul” (ἐκ ψυχῆς, ek yuxhs). Psalm 111:1 also captures the expression (“with all your heart”): “I will extol the LORD with all my heart.” When the ark of God was being moved from Abinadab’s house on a new cart, the Chronicler pens: “David and all the Israelites were celebrating with all their might before God, with songs and with harps, lyres, tambourines, cymbals and trumpets (1 Chronicles 13:8). Another psalm of David also expresses the thought of Paul in Ephesians 5:19. Listen to David: “I will praise you, O LORD, with all my heart” (Psalm 138:1).[69]
The context of Amos 5:23 sets forth God’s attitude about observance of the things
commanded by Him when one’s lifestyle is totally contrary to love—love for God
and love for one’s neighbor. Many Israelites labored under the impression that
if they attended their “solemn assemblies” with their punctilious observance of
the rituals commanded by God, then all things would be okay. They failed to
understand that what God really desires is the person, not their rituals. Even
though the offerings were important aspects of their Levitical heritage,
nevertheless, the Lord rejected his own institutions and his instruments of
music. These rituals gave its performers a false a sense of security. They had
rejected the very heart of the Law. In fact, God taunted them, as it were, to
sin:
“Go to Bethel and sin; go to Gilgal and sin yet more. Bring your sacrifices every morning, your tithes every three years.b 5 Burn leavened bread as a thank offering and brag about your freewill offerings— boast about them, you Israelites, for this is what you love to do,” declares the Sovereign Lord (Amos 4:4-5).
Later, God says, “I hate, I despise your religious feasts; I cannot stand your assemblies” (5:21). These activities became the focus of God’s hatred because they furthered the false sense of security. One can hardly reflect upon Amos 5:21 without due deliberation upon the words of Isaiah (739 BC), approximately twenty years later, concerning the same mindset of God against the southern kingdom of Judah:
Stop bringing meaningless offerings! Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations— I cannot bear your evil assemblies. 14 Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts my soul hates. They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them. (Isaiah 1:13-14)
As with Amos (760 BC), so, too, Isaiah (739 BC) gives God’s reaction to their rituals,
rituals of worship not expressive of emotions of the heart. Both Israel and
Judah were lulled into thinking that their religious rituals were fulfilling
their religious duties. As observed earlier in this essay, God commanded
instruments of music (2 Chronicles 29:25) to be employed in the Temple to honor Him. God is not
condemning the use of the instrument anymore than He is condemning their
offerings. God’s rejection of their rituals focused upon their external
behavior—behavior that God deplored. They employed their music in a mechanical
way as well as their other activities in order to please or appease the God of
heaven, so they thought Their worship was not “from the soul.” Their worship
was “soulless” worship. The people of Israel practiced ritual over heart
obedience. God wants worship from the soul/heart, not mere external ritual. The
same is still true today. This is why one must sing and make music with all
one’s heart. What did God want from the Northern Kingdom? Listen to Amos as he
reveals the words of God to this apostate nation:
12 For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins. You oppress the righteous and take bribes and you deprive the poor of justice in the courts. 13 Therefore the prudent man keeps quiet in such times, for the times are evil. 14 Seek good, not evil, that you may live. Then the Lord God Almighty will be with you, just as you say he is. 5 Hate evil, love good; maintain justice in the courts. Perhaps the Lord God Almighty will have mercy on the remnant of Joseph. (5:12-15)
Amos 6:5
Once more, Amos focuses upon the
don’t-care attitude (Amos 6:1). In this Scripture, he begins with the Southern Kingdom
and then, immediately turns his attention to the Northern Kingdom and then back
to the Southern Kingdom. Once again, Amos leads up to the use of instruments in
their gatherings—their homes. Amos 5:23 appears to be in a context of Temple
worship, but Amos 6:5 appears to be in a context of one’s life outside the
Temple. He deals with their sumptuous
lifestyles—lives lived in total disregard for the poor. Listen to Amos as the
Holy Spirit speaks through him:
3 You put off the evil day and bring near a reign of terror. 4 You lie on beds inlaid with ivory and lounge on your couches. You dine on choice lambs and fattened calves. 5 You strum away on your harps like David and improvise on musical instruments. 6 You drink wine by the bowlful and use the finest lotions, but you do not grieve over the ruin of Joseph. (6:3-6)
Just a casual reading of this text reveals the ghastly consequences of surface religion. In 5:18, Amos pronounced a “woe” on the Northern Kingdom, now he pronounces a “woe” on the Southern Kingdom (6:1). In this pericope (6:1-7), Amos condemns their luxurious lifestyle—a lifestyle of self-indulgence and gluttony, which was supported by a reign of terror (6:3). This same life of self-indulgence also appeared in the Northern Kingdom. It is in this regard that God called attention to their extravagance at the expense of the common people: “I will tear down the winter house along with the summer house; the houses adorned with ivory will be destroyed and the mansions will be demolished,” declares the Lord” (3:15). How does this lifestyle coincide with the Southern Kingdom? One reads of their ivory-inlaid beds, drinking wine by the bowls, use of the finest lotions, no feelings for the poor, and no compassion or understanding of the impending judgment of the Northern Kingdom.
It is in this context that Amos mentions musical instruments. In 5:23, one discovers that God is not pleased with their musical instruments since their worship was hypocritical—performed in order to impress the people with their acts of piety. Now Amos turns his attention to the imitation of musical instruments employed by David, instruments commanded by God. What is the difference between David and the Southern Kingdom leaders who also employed musical instruments? The answer lies in the attitude. In other words, David employed the instruments to God’s glory, but, on the other hand, their instruments were used for frivolous songs. David made songs for God’s glory, but they made songs to the glory of their feast. These individuals were not serving the Lord but their own appetites. The context of 6:5 is that the songs were “frivolous” in nature. They composed songs and played them on harps as David did. The one was frolicsome; on the other hand, the other was for God’s glory. They had, so to speak, their jazz, thei