Music. The word itself is powerfully charged right now.
Blogs about music.
The idea is almost distasteful, scary, unwanted. But for the last days, weeks, and months, I have been unable to escape considering, hearing arguments, and being faced with ideas about music. So, despite my misgivings and feelings of almost...juvenilishness, I guess I'll start here.
Well, actually, I guess I have to back up. I would like to start with the biblical theology, but I suppose we need some background first.
Nothing can stir a discussion...an argument...a conflagration like music. Web forums were recently created at Bob Jones University. A student posted a one-liner to the effect of, "I hear CCM is a big deal here. What do you think?" In two short days, the number of posts easily outnumbered those in any of the other forums, and I think the guy didn't even come close to getting his question answered. (or perhaps he did...)
Why should I add to the volumns of debate? Why enter the fray? Aren't there enough books, ideas, opinions out there?
I've weighed those thoughts before. I've had posts that danced on the edge of getting into it, I've visited blogs that went on and on and round and round, and I've shied away from my share of discussions. But it seems that now is the time to break at least some of that reticent silence.
Why? Because I need to come to some conclusions. I believe God desires for us to do the hard work of thoroughly investigating, thinking, and studying through issues that aren't clear to us. There are no grey areas to God, but there are to me. I can glorify God by doing my best to find out what would please Him most.
And so I begin. I hope you might possibly be edified along the way, and that you can edify me. A reader recently mentioned his disappointment at clicking the "A theology of music" link only to find a bitty quote my Luther. I hope we can all profit from this experience, that this won't degenerate into mindless rants, but that there will be beneficial interaction. I'm sure the experience of writing, cataloging, and weighing what I've been thinking will be helpful to me. I can only pray it is to you.
This blog begins where every discussion ought--considering the biblical data. Have you ever done that? Ever put all the books and preconcieved notions and prior mindsets down so you could focus only on the biblical data? I know it's not quite possible to dispel all prior thoughts, but spiritual maturity demands the ability to be intellectually honest.
My plan of attack is 1. find the relevant biblical data
2. determine the relevant biblical principles
and 3. evaluate the extra-biblical arguments.
One night I and three of my best friends sat down with Bible Works and 572 verses. This is a survey of that data.
Genesis 31:27
Validity of secular music.
Exodus 15:1
Songs can celebrate specific works of God (see Deuteronomy 31, 32; Judges 5; I Samuel 22:1). Yahweh is his song. Women participate in public worship.
Exodus 32:1-7
There is a raucous, confusing sound that is better suited to accompany drunken orgies than the worship of God.
Deuteronomy 31:16; 32
Music is memorable, can be didactic, is a witness, holds accountable, and can testify against. Truth can be preserved in music.
I Samuel 16:16ff
Music itself has power to affect emotion and spirit.
I Samuel 18:10; 19:9
Music is limited in its effect, does not have unlimited power, can’t control a person, and can’t sanctify.
I Samuel 22
Balance of personal experience and doctrine in David’s song.
I Kings 1:41
Celebratory music was loud (uproar, noise).
II Kings 3:15
Music itself may be used to quiet worshippers before God.
I Chronicles 6:31
Music is a ministry to the people.
I Chronicles 13:8
Songs and musical instruments are to be used to celebrate before God.
I Chronicles 15:28
Music was loud and with shouting.
I Chronicles 15-16
Asaph’s inauguration
I Chronicles 25
Singing with accompaniment.
II Chronicles 5:13; 20:21
God responds to worshipful singing.
II Chronicles 23:18
David established a system for musical worship.
II Chronicles 29:26
Good description of music in OT worship
Nehemiah 11:21
Singers are from priestly line; we now are priests.
Job 21:9
Music is used by the wicked – common grace
Job 33:27; Ps. 13:1,6
Testimonial song
Psalm 18:1
Music speaks to God.
Psalm 28:7
Songs used for thanksgiving
Psalm 33:3
New song – something fresh, not as opposed to old (see Rev. 5:9). We should produce new songs.
Psalm 45:1
Songs of love
Psalm 69:12; 78:63; Ecc. 7:5; 33:32; Isa. 14; Rev. 18:22
Songs of drunkard, weddings, etc.
Psalm 149:5
Singing is to be used in private worship.
Proverbs 25:20
Songs that are out of touch with reality are not welcome.
Isaiah 23:15
Song of the harlot
Daniel 3
Music was distinctive.
Amos 5:23
Worship without obedience is repulsive to God.
Matthew 11:17
Music does not compel a reaction, but there is an expected natural response.
Matthew 26:30; Mk. 14
Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn after the Lord’s Supper.
Acts 16:25
Evangelism is a natural by-product of the combined force of testimony and true worship. Music is natural for Christians; it’s part of being a Christian and is what God expects (Rom. 15:7-11 and Ps. 18 – not just Jewish)
I Corinthians 14:15
Music must be spiritual and intelligent. If the musical tones are haphazard, then the music is meaningless. We are to sing the same way we pray. Our songs will not be chosen without regard for theology.
Ephesians 5:19
“Psalms” – stringed instruments; “Hymns” – teach doctrine; poetic in praise of divinity with stringed instruments; “Spiritual Songs” – testimony
“to give latitude for all kinds of musical expression to exalt the Lord.” - John MacArthur
As a result of our filling with the Spirit, we are to sing various kinds of music (psalms, and songs of joy and praise).
Colossians 3:16
Music is to be used as a means of teaching and admonishing one another.
James 5:13
It is okay to sing when happy.
Thanks, David. Very glad to see that you went ahead and did it. Eager to see the next step, too.
Curious to know what you'd think of an exegetical interpretation of "spiritual song," instead of what most commentaries give.
Curious also to know if you have any further clarifications of what you stated regarding I Samuel 18:10.
Posted by: Andy Merkle at December 3, 2003 11:54 AMWe did discuss "spiritual song" some, but to be honest we haven't thoroughly researched it.
(the nature of this study was primarily a survey, although we did check context and basic details like word meanings in lexicons and what some commentators said in the tougher spots.)
So I don't have an answer on that one. The use of "spiritual" is peculiar, but we don't have any further ideas at this point. I am thinking the purpose of the three words wasn't meant to be an exhaustive list, because there's not enough definition for each of them to separate them. Do you have any thoughts on it? We'd love to hear.
As for 1 Samuel 18:10, our thinking is that David was playing the same music here as he did in 1 Samuel 16, yet the result was far different. Apparently the music itself only has the ability to influence, not control or mandate, because Saul could choose to react differently to the same music. Spiritual music does not guarantee spiritual response, and so it's not the music that has the power to sanctify.
The ramifications are several. Music doesn't control anybody. While it may encourage a particual response, music can't make one do any particular action. Music we view as "spiritual" cannot be attributed a reverse power of sanctification some people give to rock to control someone for evil. Saul's will was still in full operation when he choose the hurl the spear at David. The music did not have the intrinsic power to evoke the same response from Saul when he heard it in ch. 18 that it did in ch. 16. At least that's what I'm thinking...
Posted by: apelles at December 3, 2003 02:51 PMhmmm. i'd never even thought about the comparison of 1 Sam 16 and 18. interesting. thanks, dave! i'm looking forward to more...
Posted by: stephanie at December 3, 2003 07:06 PMA thought on I Samuel 16, 18: It doesn't seem convincing to say that music can't control. Perhaps it's fairer to say that it didn't control in that case--that king, that music, that David. At the very least, music is an influence; but I'd say it can control, if there's no stronger influence controlling the hearer. Saul was apparently controlled by something stronger than David's music. I can be controlled by something greater than the rock music I hear in a store or public sports arena, God's Spirit. However, without that help, I may well be controlled by that music. I think the converse is true if the Spirit isn't operating through the music that a fleshly person hears. Don't know if I'm thinking right here or even making sense. . . .
Posted by: Andy Merkle at December 4, 2003 09:40 AMwell, i can sort of see your point, although i'd be interested in hearing why you think music can control and what biblical data you have of that.
at the very least, those texts indicate music does not have unlimited influence. control is a pretty strong word. to me, it implies music usurps one's will and forces a particular action, which clearly seems to be untrue. if there are other forces stronger than music (i.e they can overcome music's effects), then music isn't in control.
i don't see any biblical data that supports the idea that music can control. perhaps you only mean to moderate the statement from "music can't control" to "music doesn't control in every instance," which may be a good addition.
if there are any biblical texts that support the idea that music controls i'd be happy to look at them.
Posted by: apelles at December 4, 2003 10:23 AMI don't think music can control (control: Power to direct or determine). I think it can move (move: Have an emotional or cognitive impact upon).
I have always wondered why people didn't compare 1 Samuel 16 and 18. It isn't logical to say that music controls and only point to chapter 16.
Let me see if I can prove this. If you compare the two passages you have David, Saul, an evil spirit, and music. But the Bible clearly gives us the another difference between the two passages that clues us into what is really going on.
In 1 Samuel 16:21-23 Saul loved David greatly. David became his armor bearer and whenever Saul needed to be comforted, David played for him.
But after David proved himself in battle in chapter 18, the Bible gives us Saul's attitude toward David:
1 Samuel 18:9 "Saul looked at David with suspicion from that day on."
It is the person, not music, that determines action. If I hear music that inspires joy, I can shout or sing. If I hear music that moves me to sadness, it doesn't control me. It doesn't force me to become depressed. It can't rob me of choice.
I having difficulty saying what I mean. Does any of this make sense? I am going to ponder this some more. I was rereading some of the earlier comments, and I might be repeating somethings already stated.
Posted by: james micah at December 5, 2003 05:33 PMjames micah saying about the person determining the action made me think of something humorous, to me at least. I've been at plenty of "dances" (you know, standard wedding receptions, etc.) where the music was really hoppening, but nobody danced. Reminds me also of a former Sunday school teacher of ours (Appeles and myself) who tried to parallel the golden calf incident with our worship service if we let bad music in. Naked people dancing in the aisle. Okay...
Posted by: keithmo at December 9, 2003 12:03 AMQuestion about Daniel 3: what do you mean by "distinctive"--that you can tell readily tell music apart from plain speech/other forms of noise? Or are you thinking of something else? Just wondering.
Posted by: Jonathan Hanneman at December 11, 2003 07:53 AMjust a general observation that whatever the music was, it made it obvious it was time to bow down and worship. it was hearable and, like you said, could readily be distinguished from other noise. apparently, no one stood there wondering if it was time to bow or not.
Posted by: apelles at December 11, 2003 03:33 PM