SPURGEON
"We should like to see all the pipes of the organs in our Nonconformist places of worship either ripped open or compactly fill with concrete. The human voice is so transcendently superior to all that wind or strings can accomplish that it is a shame to degrade its harmonies by association with blowing and scraping…That the great Lord cares to be praised by bellows we very gravely question; we cannot see any connection between the glory of God and sounds produced by machinery. One broken note from a grateful heart must have more real acceptable praise in it than all the wind which sweeps through whistling pipes. Instrumental music…was no doubt well-suited to…the infant state of the Church under the law, but in the Gospel’s spiritual domain these may well be let go with all the other beggarly elements."
"Praise the Lord with the harp. Israel was at school, and used childish things to help her to learn; but in these days when Jesus gives us spiritual food, one can make melody without strings and pipes. We do not need them. They would hinder rather than help our praise. Sing unto him. This is the sweetest and best music. No instrument like the human voice." (Commentary on Psalms 42:4)
"David appears to have had a peculiarly tender remembrance of the singing of the pilgrims, and assuredly it is the most delightful part of worship and that which comes nearest to the adoration of heaven. What a degradation to supplant the intelligent song of the whole congregation by the theatrical prettiness of a quartet, bellows, and pipes! We might as well pray by machinery as praise by it." (Spurgeon preached to 20,000 people every Sunday for 20 years in the Metropolitan Baptist Tabernacle and never were mechanical instruments of music used in his services. When asked why, he quoted 1st Corinthians 14:15. "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." He then declared: "I would as soon pray to God with machinery as to sing to God with machinery." (Charles H. Spurgeon, Baptist)
CALVIN
"Musical instruments in celebrating the praises of God would be no more suitable than the burning of incense, the lighting of lamps, and the restoration of the other shadows of the law. The Papists therefore, have foolishly borrowed, this, as well as many other things, from the Jews. Men who are fond of outward pomp may delight in that noise; but the simplicity which God recommends to us by the apostles is far more pleasing to him. Paul allows us to bless God in the public assembly of the saints, only in a known tongue (1 Corinthians 14:16) (John Calvin, Commentary on Psalms 33)
The above is pure opinions of men; not exegesis of Scripture, hence irrelevant.
Interesting... Have you not been expressing your "opinion" throughout this thread? Should I therefore conclude that your posts are irrelevant?
In the above quotes, Spurgeon and Calvin support their views with 1 Cor. 14. I would hardly call this the "pure opinions of men" and I wouldn't dare say these men were strangers to the discipline of exegesis. Furthermore, if you look more carefully at the quotes, you'll notice the sources from which they come; they come from commentaries; commentaries on the Psalms; commentaries that exegete the Scriptures and draw conclusions from that exegesis. What we have in these quotes is the fruit of their exegesis, not just the "pure opinions of men."
Just because men are no strangers to the exegetical process doesn't mean they can't make mistakes and just because they cite a Scripture doesn't mean they use it rightly. One element of exegesis is justifying one's view that a particular Scripture entails a particular teaching. To assert, as Calvin and Spurgeon do that the 1 Cor. 14 verse applies to instrumental accompaniment of sung praise is demonstatably false due to misunderstandings of what instrumental accompanyment of sung praise is and what was possible for Paul to have meant by his words. Let me prove my point.
When we accompany sung praise with instruments we are not singing to God with machinery nor are we singing in an unknown tongue, we are accompanying sung praise to God. As far as we can know, nobody in the history of Israel thought accompaiment was another language, nor was it the dominant view of Greek music theorists (I speak as a professionally trained musician), if in fact such a view had been conjectured at all. In context of 1 Cor. 14 Paul is aiming to reduce confusion in services due to multiple speakers using multiple languages. He does not mention instruments at all. But maybe that is an implicit necessary consequence of his words, you say. No it is not. For Paul well knew that instrumental accompaniment of sung praise did not always yield confusion, he had participated in the sacrifices which did involve instrumental accompaniment and he knew by experience that instrumental accompaniment did not necessarily yield confusion. The final proof that instrumental accompaniment does not necessarily lead to confusion in worship is that God had commanded accompaniment in Israel's worship, and he is not a God of confusion but of peace.
Furthermore, I don't even agree with all that these men teach, in fact, they don't always agree with each other, but that's actually the point for including the quotes--there was a great amount of harmony on this position at one time among the various denominations. That harmony lasted many years until it was disrupted by those who introduced instruments into the assemblies. So much for striving for peace within the Church...
We must realize that the use of instruments in worship is an overall new practice in light of the history of the Church. The introduction of instruments into worship is one of the roots to the awful "worship wars" we see today. Brothers, it is my prayer that our Lord will bring back the harmony we once had in the Church. I know He will answer that prayer ultimately, but I pray that we might see it even before glory.
I thought the Reformed believed that one man plus the truth was a majority, not that the majority in error rules. Aside from that, is there some merit to saying that even though the justification for prohibiting instrumental accompaniment is unsound, we should restrict biblical liberty for the sake of peace? Whatever merits this argument may have had at the time accompanying instruments were introduced, and I recognize that it would have had some, it does not apply to the present situation when instumental accompaniment is already established as biblically legitimate in many churches.
In such contexts, the attempt to unbiblically limit Chrisitan freedom will simply add another worship war. I don't ask you to do something that you in conscience cannot do. I don't invade your churches and advocate or demand you conform to my reading of Scripture. But I am not going to create an unnecessary worship war in churches using instrumental accompanyment of sung praise by trying to eliminate accompanying instruments when I have no biblical grounds for doing so and if someone tries to impose such I would resist; for in my context such actions would be adding confusion not peace.
Sadly, this unity is hindered because Churches/elders/leadership have allowed the preferences of men to be included and expressed in the worship service from assembly to assembly. Where preferences are given the stage, there is no end to the "wars."
Unity and peace will be found when we get back to worshipping our Lord in the simple, but profound manner of singing His Word (the Psalms) in light of the glorious work of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (without instruments because He is the final sacrifice).
All we are doing is allowing for a liberty that God has not prohibited. Christian churches/elders/leadership have simply recognized that we have liberty in this area to accompany sung worship with instruments in a manner that does not cause confusion. Churches who in practice abuse the freedom and create confusion (e.g., when guitars & drums are overamplified so that the congregation cannot hear the words it sings, or those using texts teaching unscriptural doctrine), need to be challenged on their practice, but they need to be called out on true biblical grounds not demonstrably unbiblical ones.
And just for the record I am not EP either. Since I am presently a citizen of heaven where other texts than the psalms are sung, I am going to sing any text that is either Scripture or doctrinally faithful to Scripture.
& 
thanks.
