The Function of Music in the Old Testament

INTRODUCTION

Music was an important part of the worship system of the Old Testament. God was very specific in describing exactly how he wanted to be worshipped. He did not leave it up to the choice of the Israelites, or leave it to chance. God specified the very way in which He wished to be worshipped. Nadab and Abihu are classic examples of the importance that God placed on how he was worshipped. They worshipped God in a way that He had not told them too, and God killed them as a result. (Lev. 10:1-3)

The purpose of this paper is to determine how music was used in the Old Testament, if the way music was used in the Old Testament applies to the Church, and what are the implications thereof.  Even though the Old Testament was part of the Old Covenant, and the Temple was a part of the old “worship system” there is much that the Church can gain from studying the use of music in the Old Testament, specifically the temple.

How Music was used in the Old Testament.

Music is seen throughout the Old Testament. From the Peneteuch through the prophets, there are numerous mentions, and allusions of music. The first time music is referred to in the Bible is when Jubal, the descendent of Cain, is introduced as the father of all who play the harp and the organ. (Gen 4:21) However, just because it is the first mention of music, does not necessarily make Jubal the inventor of music. We know that God sings, (Zeph 3:17) and this seems to imply that “music has existed as long as He (God) has been and He did not have a beginning.”[1]

Music in celebrations

Music is used often in the Old Testament in celebrations, both religious and secular. It is used to celebrate the coronation of Solomon (1 Kings 1:40-41)[2], Joash (2 Kings 11:14, 2 Chron 23:18), and Jehu (2 Kings 9:13). Victories in war are also celebrated using Music, specifically those of David and Saul. (1 Sam 18:6-7, 21:11, 29:5)

Music is also used in religious celebrations. It was used to celebrate the dedication of the temple, (2 Chron 5:12-13, 7:6) the return of the Ark to the temple (2 Sam 6:5, 15, 1 Chron 13:8, 15-16), the dedication of the walls of Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s time (Neh 12:27-47), and the laying of the foundation of the temple (Ezra 3:10-11).  It is also used to celebrate the Passover (2 Chron 35:15,25) and the feast of unleavened bread. (2 Chron 29:30).

Musical Instrument (Trumpet) Used as a Signal

The trumpet, which is a musical instrument, was used often in scriptures as a signal. Often times it was used in times of battle. Some examples are Moses and Joshua’s battle against the Midianites, (Numbers 31:6), Ehud’s battle against the Moabites (Judges 3:27), by Gideon against the Midianites (Judges 7), and Saul against the Philistines (1 Samuel 13: 3) to name a few.

Trumpets however were not only used as signals during times of war, they were also used for civil matters, and even religious reasons. At Mount Sinai a trumpet was used as the signal to tell the children of Israel to approach unto the mountain (Exod 19:13-19, 20:18). It was also used to call the congregation together (Num 1:2-10, and to announce the coronation of Solomon (1 Kings 1:34, 39)

Music used for Pedagogical Reasons

One of the most important things that a father was to do was to teach his children about their God, and all He had done for them. We see the importance that God places on teaching the people even in music. God instructed Moses to teach the people a song before He died that would remind them, when they were suffering the judgment of God, that they were at fault for their dire circumstances. (Deut 31:19-30) This song was to teach the people the result of disobeying their God and straying from Him. Moses gave a song to the children of Israel to remind the people of the covenant that they had made with God, and the consequences, either good or bad, of their behavior regarding the covenant. (Deut 34)

Music in Worship/Praise

In the Old Testament there are many examples of music used in worship, both good and bad. In Exodus 32:18 Moses heard the voice of the children of Israel singing, and found them worshiping a golden calf that Aaron had built for them. Also in Daniel 3 music was used in the false worship of the idol that Nebechenezzer built of himself. So in both these instances is seen that music was used in false systems of worship, and therefore is not music that is edifying or satisfactory to God.

However, there also are instances of music used in worship of the true God. In Exodus 15 we see a song that Moses and the children of Israel sang to God in praise for the deliverance that He gave them in the crossing of the Red Sea.  About worship in this passage Wm. J. McRae writes, “Three salient elements of genuine worship emerge from the Song of Redemption in Exodus 15. First, worship acknowledges the worth of God. Second, worship may be expressed in music. Third, worship is reserved for the redeemed.”[3] Other instances of music used in worship when the children of Israel praised God for providing them water (Num 21:17), and praise for victory in battle (2 Samuel 22, Judges 5:1-12)

While there are very few direct references to the music used in the Temple worship, there is ample evidence that it was used. David appointed many Levites to be singers and musicians in the tabernacle. In 1 Chronicles 23:5 David appointed 4000 musicians to play instruments in the temple. Also an entire chapter is devoted to numbering the musicians David appointed to worship in the temple. (1 Chron 25) In addition these temple musicians are mentioned during the reign of Josiah (2 Chron 34:12) and during the return to Jerusalem with Ezra (Ezra 7:7, 24).  It is of interest to note that these musicians were Levites, whose sole job in the temple seemed to revolve around music. It was not just a afterthought, but rather an important part of the worship system of the Temple.

Summary of Music Uses

Music had a variety of uses in the Old Testament. From basic uses such as trumpets being used as a signal, to teaching, to worship, music was used in a variety of ways throughout the O.T. One cannot help but realize that to God, music was important. Why else would it be mentioned so often throughout scripture? The Psalms for example are a book of songs for the people of Israel.[4] Rather than just something to fill time, Music was an integral part of Worship in the Old Testament. We also see that one can use music in wrong ways, such as idolatry, as well as right ways, such as worshiping God.

Applications for the New Testament Church

The Use of Instruments

What does the way music was used in the Old Testament have to do with the way it is used in the New Testament? James D. Bales for example argues in part that the temple and its ordinances were a carnal system of worship, that has been replaced by the spiritual worship system of the New Testament church. He further argues that the use of instruments is not allowed in churches, for they are a part of the carnal temple worship and have no place in the new spiritual worship system.[5] He says that because we are under the New Covenant we cannot use instruments in our worship, for just as circumcision was abolished, sacrifices were done away with, and infant membership is not true of the New Covenant as it was of the Old Covenant, so also are instruments. Because Christ (or the New Testament) has not authorized the use of instruments in worship, we are forbidden from using them.[6]

However this line of reasoning seems to fly in the face of not only logic, but scriptural principles as well. First of all, circumcisions, and its counterpoint in the N.T. baptism, are marks of identification, not methods of worship. Second, just because it is not mentioned, does not necessarily mean it is wrong. Bales argues that if you allow instruments because they are not forbidden in scriptures, then you must also allow infant baptism because it is not forbidden either.[7] This however is confusing ordinances of the church with methods of worship, which are not the same! Baptism is an ordinance of the church, music is a form by which God is worshipped. We are given very clear instructions in regard to how and when someone is to be baptized (after salvation). We are not given any such instruction regarding the use of music in the church. Finally, the New Covenant is not a new law that Christ has subjected us to. Rather it is the fulfillment of the law. God did not exchange one law for another, rather he fulfilled the law in grace, and to promulgate the idea that the New Covenant is just a new system of rules to obey is a dangerous thing indeed.

On the other end of the spectrum Peter Masters argues that the Old Testament only allows three instruments to be used in worship: The harp, psaltery, and cymbals. And not only that, but only a few were used in the worship service.[8] But it is hard to see how this makes sense when one realizes that David appointed 4000 Levites to praise with the instruments he had made. Why would he have 4000 musicians and only use a small portion of them? Also, while it is true that those three instruments are the only ones mentioned in connection with temple worship, they are not mentioned in the law, but rather the historical books. Unlike many other areas of worship, there is no “thus sayeth the Lord” regarding what instruments are allowed to be used in worship. The passages he uses are not prescriptive, rather they are descriptive. They are just telling us how it was done, not how it must be done. Their is a difference between the two that must be noticed and understood.

The truth is somewhere in between these two views. While the Old Testament use of Music is useful to the church, it does not dictate to her either. Through the Old Testament is learned the purpose for music in worship, the importance of music in worship, and the variety of uses for music. However, today men have invented instruments that the Old Testament saints could not have even dreamed of, such as the piano, the organ, etc, and to restrict the church to just those instruments mentioned as used in the temple seems to put the believer back under the law from which she was freed. Neither Masters nor Bales have it right. While it is true the believer is no longer to worship according to the temple system, this does not eliminate every aspect of that worship. Likewise, just because it was done that way in the temple, does not mean that is the only way it should be done today.

Lessons on Worship from the Old Testament

Dr. Milo Thompson identifies three lessons that can be learned from the Old Testament for the use of music in worship today. First, Music should be a reflection of the creator who created man in his image. That is, to create. Unlike God, however, man cannot create from nothing, but rather takes what God has given him and creates from that. Second, Music can be used in a negative way as seen in the false worship at Sinai and in Daniel. Third, and most importantly however, is that Music can and should be played to glorify, praise and honor God.[9]

McRae gives another important lesson learned from the Old Testament. Regarding the song Moses sang when delivered from the Egyptians through the Red Sea McRae writes, “When the Spirit of God is in control, worship begins with God. It is because He is highly exalted that Israel worships. It is because He has gloriously triumphed that they sang unto Him. Here is where true worship always begins. Self and blessings are forgotten. God and his glory alone are seen.” [10] Later in his article he writes that the focus of a hymn ought to be the Lord, for true worship is focused on God’s sufficiency, rather then man’s needs. [11]

CONCLUSION

It has been seen that music is used prevalently throughout the Old Testament. It was used in celebrations, both religious and secular, it was used as a signal, for war, civic, and even religious purposes,  it was used in worship, both true and false, and it was used to praise God for all He had done for his people. While the Old Testament ‘s use of music is very important when determining the way to use music in the church, one must  be careful not to raise up the Old Testament methods of using music to such a pedestal that there is no room for creativity, or variety. However, one must also be careful not to dismiss the Old Testament methods as out of date, because they were part of the Old Covenant, and have no place in the New Covenant. Both views show an misunderstanding of how a Christian is to look at the Old Testament.  Masters seemed to want to almost place Christianity back under the temple worship system, where music was concerned, whereas Banes wanted to not only free us from the Old Testament methods, but also prohibit us from their use of instruments in worship.

The most important lesson to learn from this study is that music is a powerful median with which to worship God, which He has ordained as such. However, one must be careful that what they call “worship” is truly worship.  As seen from Exodus 15, worship ought to focus on God, not on man.  Yes, God has done incredible things for each individual, and it is good to thank Him for those things, but when a body of believers gets together to worship, they ought to focus on God, rather then on their specific blessings from God. God is to be lifted up and man abased, for is this not what worship is truly about?

 

 

---

[1] Leanord J. Seidel, God’s New Song (Springfield: Grace Unlimited Publications, 1980) p. 2 quoted in Michael S. Doney ,” A Bible Philosophy of Music For the Local New Testament Church” (Graduate Paper, Pensacola Christian College, 1985) 6

[2] Frank Garlock, Biblical Music Concordance (Greenville, SC Majesty Music, Inc., 1991) the author of this paper is greatly indebted to this resource for helping locate all references to music in Scripture. All following scripture references were found using this tool.

[3] Wm. J. McRae, The Nature of True Worship, (Bibliotheca Sacra, Winter 1997) 224

[4] While a thorough treatise of the Psalms is not in the scope of this paper, such a study is a fruitful way in which to understand the music of the O.T. and to see examples of how music can be used to worship God.

[5]James D Bales Instrumental Music and New Testament Worship (Searcy, AR: Resource Publications, 1973) 11-12

[6] Ibid, 17-21

[7] Ibid, 311-312

[8] Peter Masters, Worship in the Melting Pot (London: The Wakeman Trust, 2002

[9] Dr. Milo Thompson An Old Testament View of the Ministry of Music

[10] McRae, 225

[11] Ibid, 231

Is it Appropriate?

Many times in the great music debate we get tied up in whether or not a certain style or song is “good” or “wicked”, right or wrong. We want to be able to categorize all music into two categories; that which a Christian should listen to, and that which a Christian shouldn’t listen to. The problem with this approach (which is used by many on both “sides” of the “worship wars” debate) is that it completely ignores and misses the the importance of appropriateness when considering the issue. We want to be able to make blanket statements about the moral nature of music styles/songs that apply across the board to all uses of music, whether in the church or in the home. Because of this tendency we end up falling into one of two camps: either we condemn all styles of music (or songs) we do not believe should be used in church, or we accept for use in the church any music style/song that we like to listen to and enjoy outside of the church. This ends us in one of two extremes: either we have a narrow view of what music a Christian is allowed to listen to, or we end up thinking that anything goes when it comes to music and worship. Both of these extreme views come about because of this false dichotomy that puts all music into only one of two categories.

The problem is that there are two different issues that are being lumped together and this results in this false dichotomy. The issues are:

1. what music should a Christian listen to vs. what music he should not listen to.
2. what music we should or should not use in the worship service.

Each of these issues has two categories that all music falls into, and the problem arises when we begin to merge the two issues. The categories are:

1. Music/Songs a Christian can listen to.
2. Music/Songs a Christian should not listen to.
3. Music that is appropriate for use in the Worship service.
4. Music that is not appropriate for use in the Worship service.

While it is safe to say that  all music (song) that is appropriate for the worship service is okay for a Christian to listen to, we must realize that not all music that is okay to listen to is appropriate for the worship service. In addition while it is true that there is no music that  is wrong for a Christian to listen to that is appropriate for the worship service, we must be careful not to think that music that is not appropriate for worship is not okay to listen to. This means that there is some music that is okay to listen to that is not appropriate for the worship service. Therefore in the context of this discussion if we want to merge these two issues we end up with 3 categories of music, instead of 2.

1. Music a Christian can listen to that is appropriate for the worship service.
2. Music a Christian can listen to that is not appropriate for the worship service
3. Music a Christian should not listen to.

I would be neither surprised nor upset to walk into a preschool sunday school class and find the teacher leading the children in a rousing rendition of “Father Abraham” or “I’m in the Lord’s Army”. However, I would not feel it appropriate for the very same songs to be used in the Sunday Morning Worship Service. Why? Because while these (and many other songs) are great for use with small children, it would not be appropriate for the worship service.  This holds true as well for much music that is not “children’s music”. A question we must ask ourselves when deciding what music to use in the service is what is the purpose of music in the church service?  (Which first and foremost ought to be bringing the congregation together (fellowship) through corporate worship of our God). If a song does not serve this purpose, then it is not appropriate for the Worship Service. This however does not mean that the song/music is not appropriate for listening to in the car, at home, or even at a church picnic. Just because certain music/styles/songs are not appropriate for the worship service does not inherently make them wrong. The clothes I would wear to a formal dinner/event would not be the same clothes I would wear to build a fence. Why? Because of appropriateness. If you saw me nailing boards to a fence while wearing a Tuxedo you would wonder what was wrong with me. There’s nothing wrong with wearing a Tuxedo, but wearing one while building a fence just isn’t right!

Appropriateness is a very important part of the discussion when considering what music should be used for corporate worship.  I would even go so far as to say that the context of the church’s culture should play a role in the appropriateness discussion. Now, I am not saying that we are to choose our music based on what the people like. Rather I am positing that we need to be careful that we choose music that does not speak a foreign language to our audience. While I personally love Bach’s St. Matthew’s Passion and find it to be very conducive to worship, I understand that most people in the churches I have attended/attend would not find it worshipful because they would not understand it. So therefore while it may be appropriate for worship in some contexts (such as worship services during Bach’s day) it would not be appropriate in other contexts (say a country church in Kentucky this upcoming Sunday) where the people just would not find it worshipful to try to sing a Bach Cantata. (Perhaps if one felt led to they could try to get their church to the point where it could sing a Bach cantata and find it worshipful, but that is another discussion for another day). The discussion on Christians and Music too often becomes a two dimensional argument when in reality there are many other dimensions that must be considered such as the appropriateness factor.

Missing the forest for the trees: what about the words?

On a forum I regularly visit we were having a discussion about “Jesus tunes.” The discussion followed the regular route of some people lamenting the fact that most Christian rock just isn’t as good musically as its secular counterpart and others talking about what Christian groups they like/dislike and why. We also began discussing “secular music” and a Christian’s response to it (see previous post) when one user posted a comment that didn’t change my mind in any way on the subject but did cause me to stop and consider the issue from a different perspective. The argument usually boils down to a discussion of the quality and appropriateness of the music style being used in the Christian music being discussed. However this forumite rightly posed the question (in different words); Why is everyone always so focused on the quality and rightness of the music, what about the words?

The more I thought about this question, the more I began to realize this question was one we really need to consider. In fact I have come to the conclusion that it one of the first questions or even the first that we should ask when evaluating a specific song for use in our churches. I would even go so far as to say we shouldn’t even worry about the “rightness” of the music and it’s style/instrumentation until we settle the issue regarding what the song is saying through it’s words. Why do I think the words are so important?

1. While it is true that music itself communicates a message; that message is open to interpretation and is a vague message at best. The words to a song however can communicate a very specific message that has a very specific meaning (at least in comparison to music)
2. Music is a powerful educational/indoctrination tool. How many songs are taught to children in schools? Why? Why do you think commercial jingles are so catchy? Hitler even used music to propagandize Germany! How many times do you hear a song from your youth and suddenly you remember all the words to it? Even though you can’t remember anything else you were taught back then? Music has the ability to ingrain words into your memory like rote memorization never will.
3. Music affects more than just our minds, it affects who we are, our moods, our feelings, and even our health! Plus it is the second most powerful form of media communication (Cinema being the first because it combines music, words, and sight.)

What do these three points have to do with the topic at hand? They show why the words to a song matter. When a song is sung repeatedly the words can and will become ingrained into the minds of the singer and even the hearers. I have some CD’s that I can sing along with for the entire CD because I have listened to them so much that they are ingrained in my memory. The music helps ingrain the words into your mind, and those words will have an affect on what I believe, how I think, and my outlook on life. This is why it is of utmost importance that we pay attention to the words of the songs that we choose to listen to/sing, especially those of us who are parents. Children learn much from the music they are exposed to, it’s not limited to just their ABC’s.

I would rather have a poorly written song musically with good words then a well written piece of music with words that are theologically/philosophically incorrect. Especially if it claims to be a Christian song. Nothing is more dangerous than a well-written (musically) song with a worldly philosophy wrapped up in Christianese. The better written the music the better the message will be ingrained into our hearts.

So before we begin arguing over whether or not the style of a certain song is wrong or right, let’s look at the words and make sure that they are right. If the words of a song are not theologically/philosophically correct it really doesn’t matter if the music is good (morally or aesthetically).

Should Christians listen to "Secular" music?

Recently on a forum where I regularly participate someone asked a couple questions regarding a christian’s response to “secular” music.

1. Is secular music evil?
2. Should Christian musicians perform secular music?
3. Should Christians listen to secular music/musicians?

If you were to ask most Christians this question their initial response would probably be “of course not!” However the truth is that almost no Christian actually believes and lives it. Part of the problem lies in what a Christian initially thinks of when they hear the term secular. Often we think secular = worldly = wicked/evil. However if we carefully begin to consider what secular actually mean this preconceived notion that secular is bad begins to fall apart.

Secular- 1: not sacred or ecclesiastical. 2: not bound by monastic vows. ( The Merriam-Webster dictionary)

So if secular literally means “not sacred” then we have to understand what sacred means to understand what secular means.

Sacred – 1. Set apart for the service or worship of deity 2: devoted exclusively to one service or use. 3: worthy of veneration or reverence 4: of or relating to religion, religious.

This means that secular is anything that is not considered sacred. Anything that is not set aside for worship of deity, devoted for one use, or of or relating to religion. Seeing as how sacred is a very limiting narrow term that includes only that which pertains to worship/religion this means that secular is a very broad general term that means anything not used for worship or religious in nature.

So then let’s apply what he have learned to music. Secular music is any music that is not worship or religious in nature. While most Christians think of popular music such as “rock” music (or jazz, rap, r & b, metal, etc.) when they hear the term secular music, in reality it is much broader than that. Secular music includes folk music, classical music, children’s songs (the alphabet song), camp songs, and many other types of music. Now to be clear some classical music is sacred, however not all classical music is sacred and therefore much of it is secular. The same goes for many other genres such as folk and children’s songs. They have some sacred music but by and large have much secular music. Should a Christian only listen to those particular songs that are sacred, or is it okay to listen to some secular music?

Hopefully at this point you have realized that not all secular music is wrong to listen to. When we sing “Happy Birthday” to someone in Sunday School or at a birthday social after church in the fellowship hall we are singing a “secular” song in church and I don’t think there are many who would say that is wrong. When we are listening to Beethoven’s 9th symphony on the radio as we drive to work we are listening to secular music and even the most conservative Christians I personally know or have read would not think that is wrong.

So if it isn’t wrong for a Christian to listen to/sing secular music then that means we can listen to pretty much whatever we want, right? Hold on there just a minute. While there is nothing wrong with secular music in general, that doesn’t mean there isn’t anything wrong with specific secular music. There is secular (and even “Christian”) music that a Christian should not listen to. Well then, how do we know what we should and shouldn’t listen to?

I could spend quite some time discussing the answer to this question but I’ll save that for another time. The short answer is that we need to determine which music is okay to listen to the same way we make decisions regarding what books we read, what movies we watch, where we go for fun, etc. We need to evaluate their message, philosophy, and theology using scripture and if the message of the song is incompatible with the message of the Bible then we ought to avoid that song. Philippians 4:8 gives us a good rule of thumb to use when deciding these things.

Philippians 4:8 (KJV)
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

If a song contradicts scripture then we as Christians shouldn’t listen to it. If it is proclaiming a worldly philosophy then it is not right for us to listen to. We need to be filling our minds with the good, pure, virtuous things. They do not necessarily have to be sacred or Christian, but they ought to be good and right before the eyes of God.  One things that I see often is that some Christians rail against all new secular music, but think all classical music is good and fine to listen to. However, there are many classical opera songs that a Christian should not listen to, songs about lust, murder, hate, etc. etc. Just because it is classical does not make it right to listen to. Neither does the fact that it is a top hit in today’s world make it wrong. We need to carefully consider what the message of the song is, or whether or not it contradicts scriptural teachings. “Butterfly Kisses” and “Christmas Shoes” are a good example of two pretty new secular songs that have a wholesome message. They are both about the love between a child and parent. They are not “christian” songs, but they teach a message that is compatible with scripture and therefore even though they are “secular” songs, they are good songs.

What is Worship?

I am currently working on an in depth series of posts on this subject. Right now I am doing a lot of word studies in the OT and NT to find out how the Israelites and the early church viewed this subject.

Here are some things to think about in regards to worship. I will hopefully be discussing all of these questions/issues throughout this series on worship.

1. What is worship?
2. When do we worship?
3. How do we worship?
4. Why do we worship?
5. What do we worship?
6. Is music worship?
7. Is music the only way to worship?
8. does all music a Christian listens to/plays need to be worship?
9. does all Christian music need to be worship?
10. the difference between corporate and individual worship.
11. How did the Israelites worship?
12. What can we learn/apply from the OT temple worship system?
13. How did the early church worship?
14. Does the NT propose a new “worship” then the OT?
15. What can we learn from the early church/NT about worship?
16. Does God accept any and all forms of worship?
17. Are there specific ways in which God wants us to worship him?
18. Are there ways in which God does not want us to worship him?

I am sure there are other good questions that need to be asked as well. If you can think of any yourself, please post them as a reply. It will help me to develop my ideas and perhaps give me some directions to pursue I have not yet considered.

The importance of developing a philosophy of music

The necessity of having a thought out philosophy of music is a subject I briefly touched on in my last post and would like to discuss in further detail now. Why is it important that we have a philosophy regarding music ministry? Is it something we can do without? I believe that much of the confusion regarding music standards in the church could be solved if every pastor, musician, and church were to take the time to develop their philosophy regarding music and the church. It of course would not result in all churches and pastors agreeing on music standards, but I do believe it would help all of us to understand exactly where we stand and why, thereby giving us a way to communicate clearly and effectively our views in this area. Unfortunately today most churches today (and most pastors) have not given this issue the time or thought it needs. This leads to the following problems.

1. A church without a philosophy of music ministry will base their music standards and choose music to be used in church based on personal preference; not on biblical precept or principle.
2. Without a philosophy of music, music standards will not make sense and will either be abandoned or cause many to leave the church in frustration.*
3. Without a philosophy of music our worship services will be haphazard and lack any clear purpose.
4. Without a philosophy of music it will be hard to create a standard that makes sense. This often leads to different people in the church/ministry applying the music standards in completely different ways. **

But not only are there problems with not having a philosophy of music, there are also many benefits of having one.

1. When we have a philosophy of music for the church it gives us a solid foundation upon which to build our music standards.
2. This means when we are asked why we do or do not use a particular song or style in our services we will have a coherent answer to give the questioner based on our philosophy (which hopefully is based on biblical precepts and principles)
3. It will help us give a purpose and unity to our service.
4. It will help get everyone in the ministry on the same page regarding our music standards.
5. It will help (not completely fix) us to not allow our personal preferences in music to dictate the standards that we set. (i.e. No CCM allowed, but all Southern Gospel is A-OK)

How then can a person/ministry develop a philosophy of ministry? First, one must be ready and willing to put a lot of thought and effort into the process, it will not be a quick five minute problem, it will most likely take weeks, months, or even years to develop fully. (And one should always be seeking to refine and better their philosophy, it is not something that once accomplished will never need to be thought about again.) Secondly it requires an open mind. We need to be willing to abandon our “pet” standards if we find they do not hold up to scriptural precept or principal. (I am not implying that they will not hold up, just that we need to be open minded enough that we are willing to change our views if necessary). Thirdly we need to do a careful study through scripture on music, worship, Christian liberty (with a focus on the needs of the “weaker” brethren), for principles and precepts that we can use to shape our philosophy.

One of the reasons I began writing this blog was to help me shape and develop my own philosophy of music. I have not yet figured it all out. Part of my purpose for this blog is to force myself to do what I am advocating here. In that vein of thought, sometime in the near future, I am going to be posting the results of some scriptural studies I am beginning on worship and music in both the NT and the OT to help us as we begin to develop a scriptural philosophy of music.As with all philosophies we develop for use in the church (i.e. philosophy of minstry, philosophy of youth ministry, philosophy of counseling, etc. etc.) we need to start at the source, the Bible, and work our way out from there.

——————————————-
* I think this is one of many areas in which a general unwillingness within IFB circles to truly explain the why’s of our doctrines and practices is leading to the abandonment of our churches by youth today. Too often the answer is simply “because the Bible says so!” when we should be explaining how and where the Bible says so. I worry that the source of this reluctance is that many of us don’t know why either, but do not want to find out why for fear of finding out we are wrong. Or, perhaps because we are too lazy to find out why and are content to accept “because the Bible says so” without actually looking to see if the Bible does say so. As I look back in the history of the fundamentalist movement I see that  many of the “fathers” of the movement were very intellectual and knew why they believed what they believed. However over the past generations, while the beliefs have been retained (although many times mutated)  the reasons have been lost and our beliefs are based on what our predecessors believed, not on our own careful study.

** The College I attended had very strict music standards. However, not everyone who “checked” the music applied the standards in the same way. It was common knowledge which Resident Managers to take your music to and which ones not to. A CD that wouldn’t pass according to Miss. A, was considered perfectly fine by Mr. C, or Mrs. Q. I had a friend who was not allowed to sing specials in Sunday School for quite a while because his “style” did not pass. However, one day a certain person heard him sing (who had a good deal of influence in the music department) and suddenly he was one of the “favorites” for church and Sunday School specials. He didn’t change his style, he merely was heard by someone who interpreted the “standards” differently.

Why do we remain silent?

Disclaimer: In this post, I am NOT advocating that we need to try to change the music standards or doctrine taught by our pastors. For the purpose of this post, I am assuming that the pastor’s music standards are correct, but he is unknowingly (and innocently) using factually incorrect or misleading arguments to promote them.
————————

Something an anonymous person posted on my blog recently got me thinking. Why do we as church musicians sit and listen to sermons about music standards (for both church and home consumption) that make absolutely no sense, and never say anything to the pastor about it? Why do we allow our pastors (whom we admire and love) to continue to sound ignorant on a topic that we are so familiar with? Is this how we should be reacting? Should we sit and say nothing? Should we remain silent?

What am I talking about you may wonder? I am talking about the many sermons that I have heard (thankfully never from a pastor of a church I attend) where the preacher makes broad statements that make absolutely no sense if you understand anything about music. Such statements as: We don’t use CCM because it is syncopated, and syncopation is a sign of rock music, or we don’t use CCM because it uses a lot of “jazz” chords (usually they mean 7ths).

And yet any person who understands music theory and/or history will see that these statements are misleading or even just plain false.  Are pastors purposely using illogical arguments to get their point across? Are they intentionally misleading their congregation? I don’t think so. Most of them are just repeating what they have read or heard on the issue. Where do such statements come from then? As I see it they come from two sources:

1. musicians who, believing that most pastors and people could never understand the complexities of music theory, come up with a simplistic over generalized “rule” by which to measure music.
2. People who, having a little bit of knowledge regarding music, see something that is true, but misapply that knowledge.  For example, Jazz theory is based in part on the use of 7th chords, so many come to the conclusion that 7th chords are Jazz and therefore are wrong. (My Sophomore music teacher had to straighten out a few of my fellow music students at college on this particular one).

And yet a musician can tell you that syncopation is a part of almost all music, and even the “back-beat” type of syncopation can be found in Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms, and that 7th chords are used in all music, not just jazz.
So then why do we who know the silliness of such “rules” remain silent when our pastors preach them as truth? I think perhaps there are many reasons we remain silent.

1. We don’t want to contradict our pastor(s) and evangelists.
2. We agree with the pastor’s ultimate standards of music, so we don’t think it is really necessary to correct his erroneous reasons. After all he agrees with us in the end and that’s all that matters.
3. We really don’t care
4. We don’t believe that our pastors could handle the truth
5. We are afraid of the possible outcomes of talking to the pastor about it.
6. We don’t know why we have the standards we do, so we don’t want to say anything, lest we get put in the hot seat.
7. We just don’t want to take the time to articulate (or don’t believe it necessary) a good thought out reason for our (and our pastor’s) music standards.

I have to admit that I am guilty of remaining silent in these areas. And as I have been thinking about it, I have begun to think that perhaps I have been wrong in doing so. Some reasons why I think perhaps we ought to say something.

1. A wrong justification for a right action or standard will often lead to many abandoning that standard when they realize the justification they have been taught is not valid.
2. I, who am called to be not only a musician but a pastor as well, would never want to be unknowingly say something foolish or untrue. (for example many pastors use illustrations in their sermons that are not factually accurate, it is easy to do, especially with the multitudes of “illustration” books available that do not check to make sure their facts/illustrations are accurate) If I were to proclaim a false fact I would want someone to tell me so I could not only apologize, but not repeat it.
3. When we do not say something because we do not think others can handle the true complexity of the issue at hand (specifically music standards in this discussion) smacks of elitism and intellectual pride. If it is a difficult issue then we need to put the time and effort into finding a way to make it not as difficult, rather than coming up with a over-generalized broad statement that really isn’t true.
4. If our churches do not have an understandable legitimate set of standards to judge music by, they will abandon their standards when the current generation is no longer in charge.
5. If a pastor sounds foolish and ignorant on one topic, many will begin to doubt the rest of what he says.

So then should we go up to our pastor after a message in which he says misleading things about music and confront him in front of everyone? Of course not. That will only create discord in the church and put the pastor on the defensive. But perhaps we should invite him out for lunch one day and discuss our concerns with him. This can be done in a gentle and considerate way, provided we have the right motives. (seeking to improve his ability to minister to his flock, rather than showing him up or proving him wrong)

There is one catch though. If we are going to inform our pastor that his reasons for his music standards don’t make sense, then we need to be willing, ready, and able to provide him with reasons that do make sense. And this ultimately means that we personally need to understand why we hold the music standards that we do. If we do not know why, we need to figure it out. We as church musicians ought to have a clear philosophy of music that guides us in the music we use, the standards we hold, and the way in which we “perform”. Until we know what our philosophy of music is (what, why, and how to keep true to it) we have no right to correct anybody on their erroneous reasons for their standards. And ultimately I think this is why we remain silent, because we don’t know why we believe what we believe either, and we are afraid to let anyone know.

"Give Me That Old Time Religion"

How many of us have heard this song growing up in Conservative Christianity, either in our home church, on the radio, at the school/college we attended, etc. etc.?

Give me that old time religion
give me that old time religion
give me that old time religion
it’s good enough for me.

And the verses are usually something like this:

It was good enough for Father [replace with mother, sister, grandpa, etc. for other verses]
it was good enough for Father
it was good enough for Father
it’s good enough for me.

Now, let me ask you this, have you ever actually thought about this song as you were listening to it? Have you ever considered what it is saying, what is meant when it is sung, or even whether or not we ought to sing it at all? I know when I first started thinking about what music is used in the church, this song quickly rose to the top of my list of songs I will never use in a worship service, will never use at a summer camp, will never listen to in the car, will never use period.

A few thoughts about this song.

1. What old time religion are we singing about?

• the song never states which religion we want.
• it could easily be talking about paganism (whose followers claim it is the oldest religion, btw)
• or any other religion for that matter.
• This song could easily be sung by anyone, a buddhist, a moslem, a pagan, etc. etc.

2. Why do we want this “old-time religion?”

• according to this song we are Christians (or whatever religion we are) because it’s the “good old religion”
• according to the verses we are Christians (or whatever) because that’s what our parents were.
• thought doesn’t seem to be important in this process. Just the fact that it’s what my daddy believed, so that’s what I’m going to believe.
• according to the logic of this song we should just stay whatever religion our parents are, because it was good enough for them wasn’t it?

3. Are we satisfied with it being “good enough”?

• just because something is good enough for me, doesn’t mean it is the best choice for me.
• are we satisfied with the religion that is “good enough” or should we seek the one that is best?

And yet if I were to sing this song as a special in most conservative Baptist churches I would get a lot of hearty amens and pats on the back.  Very few would question the words or meaning of this song. Very few would wonder if we should be singing this song. Very few would question the song at all. They would just agree with the sentiment that we need to stick to the “good old-time religion” and not any of this new-fangled stuff. I have news for these people. There was a time Christianity was considered the “new religion.” Could the early church have sung this song? Most of them were ostracized and even disowned by their parents for believing in that “new-fangled” religion. According to this song you should stick with whatever religion your parents follow, whether it’s buddhism, taoism, paganism, islam, satanism, etc. etc. What matters is it is the good old time religion that our parents follow. According to this logic then the early Christians should have just stayed Jewish or pagan, and not switched to this “new” religion.

But even more importantly this song completely misrepresents why we should be a Christian. If you are a Christian merely because it’s the “Old-time religion” or because “it was good enough for Father” then you really aren’t a Christian, are you? To truly be a Christian one must make a conscience choice to accept the work of Christ upon the cross for redemption of our sins.  It is a personal choice, not something we are born into, and if we choose to be a Christian merely because it’s the good old religion, then we don’t even truly understand what Christianity is, nor are we truly saved!

So then why do we sing this song? Why do we fill our children’s heads with ideas that directly contradict scripture? I want my children to choose Christianity because they understand that they are a sinner, that the punishment for sin is death, that their works will never make them righteous enough for God, that the only payment for our sin is death, that Jesus Christ died on the cross to pay for our sins, and that he rose again victorious over the grave. I do not want them to choose Christianity merely because Daddy is a Christian.

I think the answer to why we sing this song lies in the fact that it expresses the true reason many of us do many of things we do (especially those things we do in the church) for specifically this reason. We’ve always done it this way, it’s the good old fashioned way, and we aren’t a a part of the “new” crowd. I however submit that we should never do anything merely because it is the way it’s always been done. If the people who started doing it had thought that way, it would never have been done in the first place! Furthermore, how do we know that it is right? The ones who started doing it could have been wrong! God help us if we do wrong the first time! I personally am glad that Martin Luther, John Calvin, Martin Zwingli,, Menno Simons, John Smith, John Huss, Wycliffe, Tyndale and many others didn’t stick with the “old-time religion” of their parents or the accepted institution known as the church in their day. We as Christians and musicians ought to be testing everything we do according to the standard of the Word of God, not the standard of time, or acceptability in our “circles”.

Why am I a Christian? I can tell you one thing for sure: it is not because it’s the good old-time religion that was good enough for my parents.

Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater

This past weekend I visited and candidated at a church that was looking for a music director. And whether or not I and they decide I am right for the job I learned a lot and had a wonderful experience there. The church does not have what I would consider a contemporary worship service. (And no CCM fan would consider it a contemporary service either). Yet, I know many IFB’s (Independent Fundamental Baptists) who would have condemned them as going contemporary. Why? Because of a few methods that they use.

They only used a piano (Keyboard on grand piano setting) for the accompaniment of the congregational singing, and the  “soundtracks” (for lack of a better word) were recorded on a Yamaha synthesizer by the church pianist, and would be considered by most as very conservative in instrument choices and lack of heavy rhythm. However, there were many aspects of their song portion of the service that many IFB’s would have been upset over.

1. The format of the worship service: They sang the songs in 2 groups of 3 songs without a break between the songs in each section, they just went straight into the next song.
2. They used song sheets, instead of hymnals.
3. They used prerecorded “sound tracks” for their accompaniment of singing groups.
4. They used keyboards instead of actual pianos.
5. The song leader was joined by a group of 6 church members on stage to lead the singing. (they did not call it a worship team because of the associations with that phrase)
6. They used some songs that were at one time popular CCM songs. (mainly from the 1980’s).
7. the group held microphones while leading singing.

Now, there are many who would condemn this church for going “contemporary”, but the truth of the matter is that they haven’t. They are merely using different methods then they used to use. They had very good reasons for everything that they did.

1. They changed the format of their song service because they noticed a lot of “dead” time between each song. They are now able to sing more in less time than before when they announced each song separately and waited for everyone to find the song in the hymn book. In addition they have found that this new format seems to lend itself to creating an atmosphere conducive to worship better than the old way.
2. Because of the change in format, hymnals were no longer practical. They still have them, and sing only songs in their hymnal, but they use the song sheets to once again get rid of dead time in the service. They wanted to use a projector screen, but due to the shape of their sanctuary this was impractical.
3. They used pre-recorded sound tracks because they needed the pianist in their singing groups. However, because they were having trouble finding conservative enough sound tracks to buy, they began creating their own with the Yamaha synthesizer.
4. They used keyboards instead of pianos because they were having to tune their piano at least 4 times a year (sometimes even more!) due to the climate variation in their location and after the initial investment, keyboards are more cost effective for them.
5. They had the group lead singing because they noticed that once the choir was disbanded (they didn’t have anyone to lead it anymore) the congregational singing was dead and really only served the purpose of filling time. Now that they have 6 people lead singing (singing parts) the congregational singing is alive and vibrant, and is now more than just a time-filler, it is a vibrant and important part of their worship service.
6. They used old CCM songs that were good theologically sound and beautiful songs (especially once stripped of the CCM trappings). They also used the “old” hymns as well, and it was a good mixture that really lended itself to worship.
7. Their sound man insisted they used microphones so that he could get better recordings of the service.

I personally like using hymnbooks better than song sheets, but that is only because I like to be able to sing the parts, and song sheets with words only don’t allow me to do that as easily. I personally prefer using a piano over a keyboard, because no matter how good a keyboard is, it just can’t compare to a Steinway 9 ft grand piano. I also like live accompaniment rather than sound tracks because it gives much more flexibility to the singers and instrumentalists. However, in this church I would agree that their choices in these matters were not only acceptable, but the best choice given the talents they had and their situation. In truth their group that helped lead singing was no different than having a 200 member choir behind the music director (with area microphones) helping bolster the sound. Yet this very method is the one I am certain would be the most offensive to many IFB’s. (In fact they had their music director leave the church over it).

What then would many have against the way this church did their music? There are many who would claim some or all of the methods I mentioned are “CCM” and shouldn’t be used by good IFB’s. And, yes it is true that these methods are often used by “contemporary” churches in their worship services, but that does not necessarily make them wrong. Just because they were even the ones who first started doing some of these things does not make them wrong. We as church musicians need to be careful that we do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. When we are looking at an idea for use in the worship service our question should not be, “Does the CCM church down the road do this?” (And if they do I shouldn’t!) Our question should be “Is there something wrong with this particular method?: Biblically or Practically?  If not, then we should at least be willing to consider it and should weigh the positives vs. the negatives. Change for the sake of change is not a good reason, but neither is staying the same because that’s the way we’ve always done it. There are some good, useful ideas (and even songs) that have come out of the Contemporary movement, and we need to be able to look at them carefully and be able to realize that just because a CCM church started it doesn’t make it wrong. Just because the pope is against abortion doesn’t mean I am for it.

Let’s at least be open to considering and thinking about new ideas and methodology in our church music and the use of it in the worship service. Just because we adopt or use a method first used by a “CCM” church does not make us a “CCM” church, neither does refusing to do it make us a good “IFB” church. Instead of using our traditions and preferences to dictate what we believe is right and wrong, let’s use the Bible to guide us in our decisions about the music and methods we as church musicians use in the worship service.

Southern Gospel vs ..CCM

One of the most confusing things for me, as a musician is trying to figure out the logic behind many conservative Christians (especially us Baptists) who preach long and hard against all forms of CCM music, and yet view Southern Gospel Music (of all kinds) as the music of heaven. Many of the very arguments they use against the “CCM movement” could easily be used (and justifiably so) against Southern Gospel. I recently visited a church that was looking for a youth pastor, and they and I were considering whether or not I was right for the job. During the interview with the pastor and the assistant pastor, it was very clear that this church took a strong stand against CCM music of any kind. They stayed away from that “wordly” music. However, they loved Southern Gospel.

Well, I visited the church a few days later for the Sunday Morning service, and then the Wednesday Evening Service, and I got to experience their idea of good godly music. I was actually surprised. The choir sang to a tape/cd accompaniment and it had a very strong rhythm, in fact I would say most of the track was rhythm. As I was sitting there in the service listening to this music I could not help but wonder why they were so against CCM and yet had no trouble with the music they were using. The backbeat was very strong, the lyrics were so shallow a 4 year couldn’t have drowned, and I could barely hear the words because the music was so loud (especially the rhythm).

And yet if you were to ask the pastor why he is against CCM, most likely his answers would have been too much rhythm, shallow words, can’t understand what is being sung, too worldly, too showy, etc. etc. And yet I could easily take all of their arguments against CCM and use them just as effectively or more-so against Southern Gospel. (especially the kind they were using).

Some will point to the lives of the CCM artists, but the same can be said of Southern Gospel. Some will say CCM is all about the performer and not about God, but once again this can be said of Southern Gospel! In many ways CCM and Southern Gospel are similar, and many in the Christian music business are involved in both! So why is CCM so evil, and Southern Gospel so good? The more I study, listen, and think about this the more confused I get, or rather I should say the more I see how confused most Conservative Baptists are on the issue.

My point is not to demonize Southern Gospel music, or any type of music. I simply want to get us to think about why we take the stands we do. Our position on CCM music ought to be reflected and mirrored in our position on Southern Gospel. Why is the bass and drums okay in Southern Gospel, but wicked and ungodly when used in CCM? Why are shallow lyrics such a turnoff for CCM, but A-okay in Southern Gospel? I am not saying that we can or cannot use Southern Gospel or CCM in our churches that is not the point of my questions. Rather, I am calling for consistency in the way we apply our philosophy of music in the church. One of the greatest turn offs to the younger generation regarding church is hypocrisy. I think that there is much hypocrisy in church music today. We need to apply the same standards to our music as we do to the younger generations music. Only when we are consistent will they be willing to listen to what we have to say.