Is Instrumental music authorized in Worship in the Bible by God the Father, and Jesus The Lord ?

Dear reader: Sorry about the messy composition structure. The article is very long, comprehensive, and therefore formatting this on blogspot has turned out to be difficult. It's not the fault of the author! If you can see fit to read until I figure out how to fix it, (working at it) please read on! God bless you.
An amazing composition ...
Article written by the honorable elder Bill Autry, an elder of the Church of Christ, California, posted       Sept. 2/2012 by David K., by permission of the author.

 Dear reader, from David K.: I was baptized  into Christ at the State College Blvd. Church of Christ in January, 1981. Bill Autry was then, and still is an elder with the Church there as of the writing this comment. I reconnected with Bill in Sept. of 2011. I still had my church directory from 1981, and thought I would like to try to call elder Autry with some questions I have, thinking that it would be awesome to talk with Bill. ( I had last visited the congregation in 2003. )  So, I called his number from the directory from way back in 1981, and lo' and behold : Bill answered ! His and his wife's phone number was the same number as always, since 1981 ! Talk about dependable ! Talk about faithfulness in Christ ! Wow, what guy ! I love and appreciate the faithful, dedicated  members of Christ in this congregation and am ever grateful to the Lord for elder Bill Autry.

- Is Instrumental Music Authorized - By Bill Autry

October 2005

Addressed below are (A) notes on the Greek word psallo, (B) notes on the use of the OT to justify instrumental music, and (C) other notes.

(A) Regarding the NT use of psallo, five major points follow (with sub-points) --

 1. Words can and do change in meaning over time.

a. One example in English, just in my lifetime: If someone came across a letter I wrote 50 years ago,

in which I wrote, “I went to a gay party last night,” he would probably conclude that I had partied with a bunch of homosexuals. However, if he bothered to check out the meaning of gay in the  time frame in which I wrote it, he would learn it had no reference to homosexuality.

b. The King James Version (KJV) of the Bible is an outstanding translation. But there is                      

the possibility of misunderstanding certain passages due to the use of words which havechanged    completely in meaning since 1611 when the KJV was done. An example is Psalm    88:13, which reads, “But unto thee have I cried O Lord; and in the morning shall my prayer     prevent thee.” I might wonder how the psalmist’s prayer was stopping God, until I learned that in 1611 prevent meant come before. Less than 300 years later the ASV (the next major  translation) did not use prevent in the same way the KJV did because it was no longer a valid usage.

2. The Greek word psallo changed in meaning over time.

                         a. Psallo in its basic original usage had no inherent musical               

         meaning. It was used to refer to plucking a carpenter’s

             string (to mark a line) or a bow string (to shoot an arrow).

b. Its 1st musical application was to instrumental music only, such as plucking the harp or lyre. If the New Testament (NT) was written during this time, psallo would have excluded vocal music unless another Greek word for sing (ado) was used in conjunction with it.

c. Over time psallo ceased to refer to instrumental music only, and came to refer to singing with instrumental accompaniment. If the NT had been written during this period, the command to sing would have required instrumental accompaniment. Acappella music would not even be optional.

d. Again, over time psallo came to refer to vocal music only. This was the meaning when the NT was written. In the same way that I can understand that a document using the word gay 50 years ago isn’t talking about homosexuality; and a document using the word prevent 400 years ago isn’t talking about keeping something from happening; I can understand that psallo didn’t mean the same thing when the NT was written that it had meant just 200 or 300 years earlier.

e. There’s much evidence that psallo didn’t have any instrumental meaning in the 1st Century in “common” (or Koine) Greek literature, not just the NT. The work of a Greek scholar named E. A. Sophocles is particularly noteworthy. Not only was he an accepted Greek language scholar (a professor of Greek language at Harvard University for 38 years), but he was Grecian -- Greek was his first language. He authored the Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Bryzantine Periods (from B.C. 146 to A.D. 1100). In developing this lexicon (dictionary of an ancient language), Sophocles examined 594 Greek authors (255 secular, 339 ecclesiastical). After his extensive survey, he found no association of instrumental accompaniment with psallo in the common Greek of the period of time he covers. He defines psallo “to chant, sing religious hymns.” 

Interestingly, while Sophocles was still living, a zealous advocate of instrumental music by the name of “Reverend” G. P. Slade wrote to him seeking support for the classical Greek use of psallo. He received nothing to lessen the force of Sophocles work. The lexicographer wrote back stating, “Dear Sir: My lexicon is intended for those who wish to read the authors of the Roman and Byzantine periods of the language.” This, of course, would include the apostle Paul.

3. Even in the same time period, a word can mean something different depending on the form of a given language that is being used. For example, having worked a lot in South America and Mexico, I quickly learned the necessity of being able to ask for the location of the bath-room in Spanish (Donde esta el bano?). However, I also learned (the hard way) in Spain, where a different form of Spanish (pure Castillian) is used, that bano did not refer to a toilet.   

a. One purpose of Sophocles’ lexicon was to isolate the common Greek of the Roman and Byzantine periods from the form of the language in earlier times. The “classical” Greek is usually identified with a period ending about 320 B.C. The Greek poets, of whom Homer (about 9th Century B.C.) was the most notable, and philosophers such as Socrates (5th Century B.C.) and Plato (427-347 B.C.) wrote in classical Greek. Possibly because of this, classical Greek was still used in the writings of “scholars” long after it was not used by the common people. In the 1st Century A.D., writers such as Plutarch (A.D. 46-125) and Josephus (A.D. 1st Century) wrote in “classical” Greek. Also, of course, the transition from one form of Greek to another was gradual, which may explain the gap of over 150 years between the era of “classical” Greek and the Koine Greek era. Nonetheless, by about 200 years before the NT began to be written, Koine, or “common” Greek had become the form of Greek used by the common

people.

b. The NT was not written in classical Greek. It was written in Koine (or “common”) Greek. It clearly was not intended to be the language of scholars, but rather to communicate with the common man and woman.

c. The question is not how psallo might have been used in classical Greek in the 1st Century. The question is what the word meant in Koine Greek in that time frame.

d. One article on the topic mentions 30 different recognized Greek lexicographers who have addressed the meaning of psallo. To the best of my knowledge, all or almost all of them are associated with churches which use mechanical instruments of music. Any bias would therefore favor that. One might expect all or almost all to contend for the earlier meaning of psallo during the classical era of the language. However, about half indicate that psallo does not suggest instrumental accompaniment in the NT. A very small minority contend that instrumental accompaniment is required; the remainder indicate that the use of instrumental accompaniment is optional. Here are some that define the term as basically meaning “to sing” --

· A. T. Robertson, one of the most highly regarded Greek scholars, explains the significance of psallo thus -- “... originally meant to play on strings, then to sing with an accompaniment, and here (referring to I Cor. 14:15) apparently to sing without regard to an instrument.” He explains that the meaning of the word changed through time.

· Joseph H. Thayer, was arguably the foremost Greek lexicographer of his time. He was Professor of New Testament Criticism and Interpretation at the Divinity School of Harvard University, and participated in the translation of the American Standard Version of 1901 (which was published in the year of Thayer’s death). Thayer, in his 1885 Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, after commenting upon the word’s use in classical Greek, and in the Septuagint, notes that “in the NT (psallo signifies) to sing a hymn, to celebrate the praises of God in song.”

· In his Word Studies in the New Testament, Marvin Vincent in commenting on Jas. 5:13, says of psallo -- “The word means, primarily ‘to pluck, or twitch.’ Hence of the sharp ‘twang’ on a bow-string or harp-string, and so ‘to play upon a stringed instru-ment.’ The verb, however, is used in the NT of singing praise generally. Then, in commenting on the noun psalmos in Col. 3:16, Vincent states, “A psalm was originally a song accompanied by a stringed instrument ... The idea of accompaniment passed away in usage, and the psalm, in NT phraseology, is an Old Testament psalm, or a composition having that character.”

· W. E. Vine is another of the foremost Greek lexicographers. In his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, he addresses psallo under “melody,” noting the classical sense, the Septuagint usage, and then says, “... in the NT, to sing a hymn, sing praise.” In another book, First Corinthians, Vine explains the matter more fully. He writes, “The word psallo originally meant to play a stringed instrument with the fingers, or to sing with the accompaniment of a harp. Later, however, and in the NT, it came to signify simply to praise without the accompaniment of an instrument.”

e. There are similar quotations from other Greek scholars. Again, it’s important to note that these men were associated with denominations that use mechanical instruments of music in their worship. They don’t have any reason to misrepresent the facts. Evidently, they each felt the objectivity that scholarship should demand outweighed their personal preference.

f. Of course, there are Greek lexicographers who say that psallo either requires or allows instrumental music. I am not aware of any, however, who take this position that also address the change in meaning over time, or the difference between “classical” Greek and “common” Greek,. I’m no mind reader, but I can’t help wondering if those who choose to ignore the historical evidence, are being swayed by their own theological prejudice.

g. There are internet articles that contend for the use of instruments of music in worship. They typically quote someone who agrees with them for authority, while making no mention of the many highly regarded lexicographers who refuse to ignore the actual meaning of psallo in the koine Greek in the 1st Century when the NT was written, in spite of their personal worship practice. In contrast, I’ve acknowledged that several lexicographers define psallo to permit instrumental accompaniment, and a few define it in such a way as to make instrumental accompaniment mandatory.

4. Ultimately, however, I’m not a Greek language scholar. I can’t do my own Greek lexicog-raphy analysis. I’m sort of like the guy on a jury who listens to “expert” witnesses for both sides, and has to decide whose testimony is valid. When “expert” Greek language scholars of the 19th and 20th Centuries disagree, I start asking how did the common people of the 1st and subsequent centuries understand psallo. There I find amazing agreement. Note --

a. The English word Acapella for unaccompanied singing is from the Latin a capella which literally means “as in the church.” This fact provides great insight into the practice of the early Christians. It is supported by virtually all church music historians.

b. In his concordance, James Strong gives the meaning of psallo as it was prior to 300 BC without mention of the historical change in meaning. However, Strong joined with a John McClintock in producing their Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological & Ecclesiastical Literature. On page 759 is found this statement: “The Greeks as well as the Jews were wont to use instruments as accompaniments in their sacred songs. The converts to Christianity accordingly must have been familiar with this mode of singing; yet it is generally believed that the primitive Christians failed to adopt the use of instrumental music in their religious worship. The word psallein, which the apostle uses in Eph. 5:19, has been taken by some critics to indicate that they sang with such accompaniments ... But if this is the correct inference, it is strange indeed that neither Ambrose ... nor ... Basil ... nor Chrysostom ... in the noble encomiums which they severally pronounce upon music, make any mention of instrumental music. Basil, indeed expressly condemns it ... The general introduction of instrumental music can certainly not be assigned to a date earlier than the 5th or 6th centuries ...”

c. The 3 men named above are men in the 4th Century who wrote of church music. Edward Dickinson in his Music in the History of the Western Church (p. 54,55), quotes Chrysostom thus: “David formerly sang in psalms, also we sing today with him; he had a lyre with lifeless strings, the church has a lyre with living strings. Our tongues are the strings of the lyre, with a different tone, indeed with a more accordant piety.” Clement of Alexandria is also quoted. This man was an early Greek Christian, born less than 100 years after the death of the apostle John. Clement certainly understood psallo in “common” Greek. He wrote, “Only one instrument do we use, viz. the word of peace wherewith we honor God, no longer the old psaltery, trumpet, drum, and flute.” These quotes are a part of Dickinson’s addressing the question of whether instruments were used by the early Christians. He writes, “We know that instruments performed an important function in the Hebrew temple service and in the ceremonies of the Greeks. At this point (start of church), however, a break was made with all previous practice ...”

d. Frederic L. Ritter, History of Music from the Christian Era to the Present Time, p. 28 -- “We have no real knowledge of the exact character of the music...of the first Christian congregations. It was, however, purely vocal. Instrumental music was excluded ...”

e. From Emil Nauman, The History of Music, Vol. 1, p. 177 -- “There can be no doubt that originally the music of the divine service was everywhere entirely of a vocal nature.”

f. Several similar quotes are available from church music historians. Again, all or almost all are members of Protestant denominations that use mechanical instruments of music. They have no reason to misrepresent the facts. Further, to the best of my knowledge, there is no music historian who disagrees with them.

5. The use of instrumental music in Christian worship has no higher authority than the Catholic Church.

a. The Roman Catholic Church does not worry about the meaning of the Greek words baptizo and psallo. They believe they have the authority to overrule the NT. So they readily admit that they made the change to add sprinkling and pouring to immersion as modes of baptism. Likewise, they also readily admit that they added instrumental music and singing with instrumental accompaniment to acapella singing for worship to God. The following quote is interesting --

· “Although Josephus tells of the wonderful effects produced in the temple by the use of instruments of music, the first Christians were of too spiritual a fibre to substitute lifeless instruments or to use them to accompany the human voice.” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, p. 651).

b. While the split in the Catholic Church into the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church had political overtones, language also came into play. Greek speaking people rejected the use of sprinkling and pouring because they knew what baptizo meant in their everyday language. Likewise, the Greek Orthodox Church rejected the use of instrumental music because they knew what psallo meant in their everyday language.

c. At the close of the 20th Century the Greek Orthodox Church in Europe still rejected instrumental music. In America, some of their congregations introduced mechanical instruments of music in the mid 20th Century. About eight years ago, a friend of mine, Glenn McCoy, had a conversation about this change with an official of the Greek Orthodox Church, San Francisco Diocese. This official indicated that the introduction of the instrument into some of their congregations had not occurred because of a change in their understanding of psallo in the NT, but rather it was due to the influence of “the Western Church” -- his term for the Catholic Church.

(B) Regarding use of the OT to justify instrumental music in worship --

1. One argument that is used is that since David added the use of instrumental music, and it was not a part of the Law of Moses, its use was not a part of what was nailed to the cross.

a. In the NT when “the law” is used without qualification, it usually does refer to the law of Moses. But it sometimes is used to refer to all of the first 5 books of the Bible (example Acts 24:14). It is also used to refer to the Psalms (John 10:34, quoting from Psa. 82:6) and to the prophets (I Cor. 14:21, quoting from Isaiah 28:11-12).

b. Jesus said, “Think not that I come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Moreover, Jesus then moves into contrasting what had been in effect with what He was commanding, This contrast included the hatred of enemies expressed in a number of Psalms with His requirement that we love even our enemies (Matt. 5:43-44). In this context Jesus actually made God’s requirements tougher (Matt. 5:21-44) which should make the need for God’s grace even more apparent.

c. Heb. 1:1 isn’t limited to the law of Moses, in contrasting prior times to the Christian age.

d. The OT, of course, also gives a number of general principles that were/are true in every dispensation. This includes, “the just shall live by faith” (Habak. 2:4), which has been a requirement of God since the first family of mankind (Hebrews 10:38; 11:4). General truths are found throughout the OT, and comprise almost the entire book of Proverbs. Most of the Psalms are enhanced by the NT (Psa. 23 for example is enhanced by NT revelation that Jesus is the good shepherd).

e. The OT clearly has crucial information for those of us living in the Christian age on the nature of God and the history of His dealings with mankind. But it’s in the NT where I find the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2), a law of faith (Rom. 3:27), “the truth” which we are to obey (Rom. 2:8) and which is the standard against which we’ll be judged (Rom. 2:2).

f. However, we don’t pick and choose elements of the old system that were done away with and those which were not. Pure and simple, the new has replaced the old. The two greatest commandments of the law of Moses, love God, and love neighbor as self, are the two greatest commandments under the law of Christ. Nine of the “10 Commandments” in the law of Moses are also a requirement for us. However, I know that it’s wrong to covet not because Moses said so, but because Christ and the inspired NT writers say so.

g. It’s curious that some would contend that which was there by the authority of God was done away with but not that which was there by David’s authority. I think that they are failing to recognize that there were some things which God permitted in the OT which were not a part of His will. For example --

(1) He permitted the Israelites to have a king contrary to His will (I Sam. 8:7-9).

(2) He permitted divorce with less limitations than the NT (Matt. 19:4-9).

(3) He permitted polygamy, although contrary to the creation model which Jesus cited (Matt. 19:4-5). David had many wives. The law of Moses does not mention polygamy. Let’s compare statements made about David and music to comparable statements about David and polygamy (with no sarcasm intended).

David & Music	David & Polygamy
David played the harp.	David had many wives.
but that was not part of the Law	but that was not part of the Law
instruments couldn’t have died with the Law	polygamy couldn’t have died with the Law

I’m opposed to polygamy not because of its OT coverage, but because I can find nothing in the NT that allows it. The same is true of instrumental music in worship.

2. Some contend, “instrumental music is okay because God commanded it per 2 Chronicles 29:25.” Of course, they fail to note that the preceding four verses deal with animal sacrifices also commanded by God. How those, the animal sacrifices, was a part of what Jesus nailed to the cross but instrumental music was not is not explained. Why not be honest? If animal sacrifices appealed to us as much as instrumental music, there would be many contending for that also on the basis that God commanded it. (Further, as Adam Clarke points out, various ancient texts cast doubt on the accuracy of the last part of verse 25 -- but it doesn’t really matter whether the instruments were a part of a now obsolete covenant -- it’s obsolete - Heb. 8:13.)

3. Others say, “1 Chron. 16:42 says “instruments of God.” While the KJV (and NKJV) do render the Hebrew phrase this way the other major translations do not. Note --

· American Standard Version -- “instruments for the songs of God”

· New American Standard Bible -- “instruments for the songs of God”

· Revised Standard Version -- “instruments for sacred song”

· New International Version -- “instruments for sacred song”

The idea behind using the KJV rendering may be to say that God devised the instruments. But multiple scriptures point out that David was the source (I Chron. 23:5; 2 Chron. 29:26; Amos 6:5). It’s really not possible to get the ordaining of instrumental music in worship out of David’s hands and into God’s.

4. Some argue that “singing was ordained by David.” It’s worth rereading the passage they cite (2 Chron 23:18). It seems to be saying that (even though the temple was built after David’s death) David had left orders regarding the singing that was to be done in it. It can hardly be true that David initiated singing (as he did the instruments) given the various OT references to song and singing by the Israelites prior to the time of David -- examples: Ex. 15;1-, Num. 21:17, Deut. 31:19-22, Judg. 5:3. This argument is really a smokescreen, however, as the question is what is authorized in the NT.

 (C) Other Notes --

 1. Some argue that NT authority is not needed for instrumental music since the NT doesn’t specifically authorize congregational singing in worship. One person wrote, “Where does the Bible directly say to use instruments of music in worship? I’m not exactly sure of the spot, but I do know it’s right beneath the verse that says to worship and sing as a congregation. (((sarcasm)))”

 a. Two of the five times psallo is found in the NT are in I Cor 14:15. Note the context:

Þ The context of an assembly for worship actually begins in I Cor. 11:22 addressing their abuse of the Lord’s Supper (“When you come together in one place ...”).

Þ Verse 33 is still in an assembly setting (“... when you come together to eat [the Lord’s Supper] ...”).

   Þ Paul then takes up their abuse of miraculous gifts in the assembly, first discussing the role of those gifts (chap. 12), then stressing the importance of love and the abiding nature of faith, hope and love in contrast with the temporary miraculous gifts. Chap. 14 then addresses their abuses in the assembly, mostly involving their abuse of tongue speaking, and competing for attention.

Þ Note 14:12 -- “... edification of the church (or assembly) ...”

      Þ Note 14:16 -- the basis for our making a prayer worded by someone else our own by saying (aloud or silently) “Amen.”

Þ Note 14:19 -- “yet in the church (or assembly) ... that I might teach others also...”

Þ Note 14:23 -- “... the whole church ... together in one place ...”

Þ Note 14:26 -- “... Whenever you come together ...”

  Þ Note 14:27 -- number of tongue speakers used in an assembly is limited and they can’t speak at the same time.
Þ And 14:29 -- the assembly specifically contrasted with a private situation.

Þ And 14:34 -- “Let your women keep silent in the churches (or assemblies) ...” The leading roles set forth in verse 26 for worship assemblies is restricted to men.

Þ And 14:40 -- the assembly is to be orderly.

Quite frankly, and no sarcasm is intended, I don’t see how congregational worship and singing can be removed from I Cor. 14. >>> In passing I wonder why those contending for instrumental music in worship don’t point to I Cor. 14:7-8. Maybe it’s because the instruments are called lifeless.

b. The “one another” in Eph. 5:19 and Col. 3:16 requires multiple persons to be together. While not limited to congregational singing, it certainly includes it. While on these verses, the instrument to be plucked is identified in Eph. 5:19 as the heart. And Col. 3: 16 says we’re to “teach and admonish” in song. Not even an electric guitar can do that.

c. Lastly, on this point, Heb. 2:12 includes this statement, “In the midst of the congregation I will sing praises to You.” We all do that when we participate in congregational singing.

6. Some have even used the parable of the “prodigal son” in an attempt to justify instrumental music in worship.

 a. Parables were told to teach a particular lesson --     look at the context. In Lk. 15, the Pharisees were condemning Jesus for eating with sinners. Jesus      responded with three parables -- lost sheep, lost coin, and lost son, and the rejoicing that accompanies the finding of each. In the case of each parable, a party follows -- not a worship service.


b. Moreover it refers to instrumental music for

dancing, not accompanied singing. Strangely, most who use this parable to argue for instruments in worship don’t also contend for or defend dancing in worship. But, the point is valid, IF this parable approved instrumental music it would also approve dancing in worship, and somehow or other we’ve got to fit the robe, the ring, and the fatted calf into worship (please pardon the sarcasm).

7. Rev. is commonly used to try and justify instrumental music in worship.

     a. This reminds me some of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ (JW’s) attempt to use Rev. to prove that only 144,000 persons will go to heaven. Of course, Rev. has this number made up of 12,000 each from 12 tribes of Israel. The JW’s say that part is figurative, but somehow 12 figurative numbers add up to one literal number.

           b. Likewise, to pick one element (harps) from the scene in Rev. 5:8, and say that’s literal, but others (beasts and golden bowls of incense) are symbolic, makes as much sense as the JW’s treatment of the 144,000. It’s hard for me to understand how anyone can say that Rev. 5:8 has a physical harp in a purely spiritual realm played by spirit beings, unless desperation has overtaken their attempts to justify instrumental music in the NT.

c. Rev. 14:2-3 is also quoted. This passage no more says there will be harpists in heaven than that there will be rushing waters and thunder there. John says he heard a sound like that. You might also note that nothing is said about the 144,000 redeemed from the earth playing harps.

 8. Some argue that the instrument is just an aid like a pitch pipe. That, however, is like saying because Noah may have used some primitive saw and hammer (aids) in building the ark, he was free to use cedar and oak in addition to gopher wood in its construction. -OR- Since a cup is used for the fruit of the vine and a plate for the bread (obvious aids in the Lord’s Supper), it would be OK to add Pepsi and pizza. It’s clear that David intended for the sound of the instruments to be a part of the worship. Those who try to justify instrumental music by the OT and then claim it is only an aid, can’t have it both ways. It either is or it isn’t.

9. I’ve referred to instrumental music, because that is the common term for music from playing mechanical instruments. However, vocal music is also instrumental music -- it’s just using the instrument created by God rather than one invented by man. There’s an amazing difference. God’s instrument can simultaneously make music while speaking in song (Eph. 5:19), teaching and admonishing (Col. 3:16), singing with Spirit and understanding (1 Cor. 14:15), and making melody in heart (Eph. 5:19). Man’s inventions cannot do any of that. If God intended for us to add instruments created by man to that which He created, why didn’t the first Christians, who were devout Jews instructed by the apostles, do so???