Thanks, excellent.
Musical Instruments: Denial of Christ's Final Sacrifice
- Thread starter Romans922
- Start date
- Status
Scottish Presbyterian
Puritan Board Sophomore
I suppose though, how do you know that rock bands in church are an abuse of instruments. If instruments are allowed they're allowed, so what's wrong with a rock band? The fact you recognise it as an abuse in worship, suggests you must have some reason for that.
See Iain Murray’s article above.
Scottish Presbyterian
Puritan Board Sophomore
I might be missing something, but he doesnt seem to be approving instruments at all in that article. The question is, for those who do think instruments are permissible, what is the standard by which to decide what kinds (or volume) of instruments are allowable and what are not?
iainduguid
Puritan Board Junior
If, for the sake of argument, we have established on Biblical grounds that Instruments are a desirable accompaniment to aid to the Word of Christ dwelling richly in our hearts, they would be regulated by exactly the same general teaching of Scripture about worship that governs everything else we do. For example, 1 Corinthians 10:23-24:
"All things are lawful," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful," but not all things build up.
24 Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.
(1 Cor. 10:23-24 ESV)
There are people who preach, pray, and sing in ways that are entirely unedifying; the solution is not to get rid of preaching, praying. and singing, but to reform the practices. So too the real question is solely what the Bible as a whole teaches about instrumental worship, not what some churches may misguidedly do with it. Of course, I understand that you are not convinced of the initial thesis, which is fair enough, but that's really the only question, not the supposed "slippery slope".
"All things are lawful," but not all things are helpful. "All things are lawful," but not all things build up.
24 Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor.
(1 Cor. 10:23-24 ESV)
There are people who preach, pray, and sing in ways that are entirely unedifying; the solution is not to get rid of preaching, praying. and singing, but to reform the practices. So too the real question is solely what the Bible as a whole teaches about instrumental worship, not what some churches may misguidedly do with it. Of course, I understand that you are not convinced of the initial thesis, which is fair enough, but that's really the only question, not the supposed "slippery slope".
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Junior
These 3 elements are clearly commanded to be done in the Church in public worship in both dispensations of the covenant of grace, albeit differently (as with the sacraments). The onus is on those who wish to introduce/reintroduce/continue to use instruments in public worship to show that this is "expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture" (WCF 1.6). And so WCF Ch.21: "the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited to his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture) (21.1); "Prayer with thanksgiving, being one special part of religious worship, is by God required of all men" (221.3), "The reading of the Scriptures with godly fear; the sound preaching; and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God with understanding, faith, and reverence; singing of psalms with grace in the heart; as, also, the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God (21.5). Just as there is no mention of instruments or uninspired songs in worship in Scripture since Christ's incarnation, there is also none in the Westminster Standards. I am not aware that there was even any debate about the use of instruments at Westminster - if someone knows of such a source, I would be very interested.
See Dr. Duguid’s post above. Basically, you are presenting a false dichotomy—namely, either a) instruments are forbidden, or b) any and every kind of instrument/decibel level/style/etc. are permitted. There are clearly other options.
C4MERON
Puritan Board Freshman
Yes and I think brother Neil was enquiring as to what the standard is for these alternative options.
Scottish Presbyterian
Puritan Board Sophomore
There are of course other options, I'm trying to tease out which of those other options you believe is biblical.
That "If" is just as solid as your comment at the end where you use the word "Supposed". We have experienced the slippery slope. It is a fact. It isn't supposed.
The passage you use to back up your thought in 1 Corinthians 10 is not a passage about the weekly sabbath worship service. It is about idolatry at the common eating table. Using that passage to regulate worship kind of bothers me. Why does the word libertines come to mind? What are you truly suggesting here in your response to Jeri. Your statement below really bothers me attached to 1 Corinthians 10:23,24.
Which is why I initially pointed you to Iain Murray’s helpful article, as I thought it laid out at least some kind of baseline to work from: music should not be used as a tool for emotional manipulation.
I don’t agree with your earlier comment that Murray’s article argues against instruments, as he approvingly cites his old mentor Martyn Lloyd-Jones, who most certainly used instruments.
As for our church, we used a piano strictly to assist the singing in terms of pitch and timing—nothing else.
iainduguid
Puritan Board Junior
Hi Martin,
I'm not sure why the word Libertine comes to your mind, when I have specified that we would need to a) have Scriptural warrant for the use of musical instruments in church worship (which I understand many here are skeptical about) and as well as that be subject to everything else the Scripture has to say about worship being God centered, edifying, etc. I didn't say that 1 Cor 10:23-24 was the only criteria to be satisfied.
Perhaps you are stumbling over the "all things are lawful" part since it is certainly not true in worship that "all things are lawful". But then it is no more true in all of life that "all things are lawful": Paul must mean by that "Out of the many things that God has lawfully permitted to do, not everything is profitable". Alternatively, you are probably aware that many commentators think that Paul is actually quoting his opponents in Corinth when he says "All things are lawful", which perhaps helps us to understand his argument better. Imagine having a conversation with someone who does not share your convictions about the RPW; 1 Cor 10:23-24 would provide you with another argument that might help them see why you oppose some of the unedifying things they are doing. But if you don't like that verse, feel free to add in numerous other Biblical texts.
I'm not sure why the word Libertine comes to your mind, when I have specified that we would need to a) have Scriptural warrant for the use of musical instruments in church worship (which I understand many here are skeptical about) and as well as that be subject to everything else the Scripture has to say about worship being God centered, edifying, etc. I didn't say that 1 Cor 10:23-24 was the only criteria to be satisfied.
Perhaps you are stumbling over the "all things are lawful" part since it is certainly not true in worship that "all things are lawful". But then it is no more true in all of life that "all things are lawful": Paul must mean by that "Out of the many things that God has lawfully permitted to do, not everything is profitable". Alternatively, you are probably aware that many commentators think that Paul is actually quoting his opponents in Corinth when he says "All things are lawful", which perhaps helps us to understand his argument better. Imagine having a conversation with someone who does not share your convictions about the RPW; 1 Cor 10:23-24 would provide you with another argument that might help them see why you oppose some of the unedifying things they are doing. But if you don't like that verse, feel free to add in numerous other Biblical texts.
retroGRAD3
Puritan Board Senior
I believe this is the standard for most OP churches in the USA. It's possible a guitar or other single instrument is being used in other parts of the world where pianos and organs would be entirely out of place.
Our church has occasionally used an "orchestra" as well (2 horn players) which is unfortunate. My wife and I did go and speak to our pastor about this and we used a similar line of argumentation. Instruments are only supposed to assist with pitch and timing and nothing else. Once you start adding an ensemble, it would seem to me you are no longer using the instruments for pitch and timing. There is wisdom required by the session for all these types of situations.
I came across this sermon on musical instruments today (Rev. Rob McCurley at Greenville Presbyterian). Good food for thought! "Musical Instruments in Worship" https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1140719162
Last edited:
Jake
Puritan Board Senior
This is a picture from an OPC church's website. I think there is more diversity than that in the OPC.
JH
Puritan Board Sophomore
That sermon indeed was a great one, and closed the case for me about 9 months ago. I already was aware it was the universal view of the Puritans, but this made the exegetical case in point.
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Junior
While perhaps a wise distinction, I find this hard to support Biblically. Did instruments in the temple exist simply/only to assist with pitch and timing and nothing else. Also, a piano would surely add more than this (rhythm and melody, for example). It remains a slippery subjective slope - I might prefer a guitar, harp, or banjo to assist with pitch and timing. Why not a pitch pipe and hand claps? The point remains that allowing any man-made instrument into worship allows them all. The fact that you had to go and speak to your pastor about this demonstrates the divisiveness of musical instruments in the body - someone else in your congregation obviously felt 2 horn players was fine else it would not have occurred.
Unfortunately, this is the sad, sad truth for the OPC…
When you let a piano in it eventually sneaks its buddies in with it. It can be patient and wait out a determined session/presbytery/denomination.
I was stumbling over the context. The passage you sight is not set in the context of worship. It is set up in the common daily meal with someone that worships another god and eats meat offered to that false god.
Context is important.
This isn’t logically necessary.
It’s just been true as a trend historically— not in every case of course. I realize there are at present some holding a line and that may go on yet for a long time. But the temptation has been for a declension into more, as seen in the OPC.
This is a better way to say it. There is a difference between saying something will occur and something might occur. Plus, even if a church that only uses a piano eventually moves on to a rock band, it still has to be demonstrated that there is something inherent to using a piano that necessarily leads to a rock band. I’m not convinced such could be logically and indisputably demonstrated, apart from the leadership of the church saying as much, of course.
Polanus1561
Puritan Board Senior
If the goal is to lead the congregation in meter and in key (and not a stylistic element), the piano is objectively better than a guitar. (Saying this as a hobby guitarist myself)
retroGRAD3
Puritan Board Senior
I am willing to bet this church is very theologically liberal. I could be wrong, but there is a lot off in this picture. Still point taken and this is very sad
Last edited:
aaronsk
Puritan Board Freshman
We are currently looking to join a reformed church. The first OPC we visited also had an array of instruments/musicians on stage much as the one pictured. The only discernible difference in worship style seemed to be a preference of traditionalism over the modern instruments used in our current unreformed/non-denominational church (this really gets into the same line of thinking Ive interacted with before with firends in the mennotnite church, with traditionalism dictaitng worship style not the bible). Ive yet to sit in a church where the instruments were not performative in some sense (prelude, plate passing & Supper interludes and postlude) even if their primary reasoning is to aide the congregation in singing. Though we have limited reformed options in our area (like most folks it seems) so my sample size is quite small.
En Kristo
Puritan Board Freshman
Would it be inappropriate on this forum for me to express my gratitude to Dr. Iain Duguid for taking the time to address this issue in such a gracious, pastoral manner? I found the entire thread interesting, but some of us (and I specifically include myself here) struggle to maintain an irenic tone in our posts. Not only were Dr. Duguid's theological reflections thoughtful and edifying, they were pleasantly gracious.
Prov. 16:24 Gracious words are like a honeycomb,
sweetness to the soul and health to the body.
Prov. 16:24 Gracious words are like a honeycomb,
sweetness to the soul and health to the body.
Grant
Puritan Board Graduate
Exactly. I have not yet seen instrument use as circumstance. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but I have not seen it. Further, for traditional hymns, why would they be needed beyond the first stanza for most hymns? We sing Acapella for family worship. However for new psalm selections we often hear the audio piano tune for a few sessions and then once we have it to memory, we don’t need it. This would seem to be a better fit for circumstance. Mostly, as we listen to more seasoned saints, their own voices can help correct our pitch mistakes.
I enjoy reading Iain on his exegetical proposition that instruments fall into a “civil law” realm, but that seems like a relatively new approach that I need to spend more time pondering. I think there are idolatrous attachments to instruments, even in confessional bodies, and if not AO, I hope more congregations consider trying Acapella from time to time, especially on the more popular Psalms selections.
Scottish Presbyterian
Puritan Board Sophomore
It still has to be demonstrated that there is a material difference between the allowability of a piano and the allowability of a rock band in the context of worship. And if so, why.
As Dr. Duguid and Iain Murray both pointed out, there are other factors at play than simply instruments vs. no instruments. Just like everything we do in worship—singing, prayer, preaching, etc.—Scripture regulates not only the whether, but the how. Dr. Duguid did a good job explaining the edification principle above.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
