I grew up in an acapella church tradition. We rejected the use of musical instruments when singing any religious song, whether publicly or privately. There are still many aspects of an acapella tradition that I admire and prefer. In an age when so many churches pattern their worship on the world’s music and tastes, the simplicity and beauty of unadorned singing has an aesthetic and other-worldly appeal. But while I would be happy, and truly content, to sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs without instrumental accompaniment for the rest of my life, I cannot require it of anyone’s conscience or as a minister of the Gospel claim that such is required by Scripture. What follows is a brief outline of seven reasons (and an eighth observation) I believe instrumental accompaniment is lawful in Christian worship. These reasons have not been elaborated, only stated simply and, it is hoped, sufficiently. At some point I hope to develop this list into a more comprehensive work on the subject.
1) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship Began Prior to the Law of Moses
2) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship Was Not Limited to Temple Services in the Mosaic Period
3) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship Was Not a Typological Ordinance in the Ceremonial Law
4) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Supported by the History of the Verb Psallo (ψάλλω)
5) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Approved by the Command to Sing Psalms
6) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Not a Violation of Any Part of God’s Law
7) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Permitted under the Believer’s Liberty of Conscience
In closing, let me offer one final observation.
8) The Use of Musical Instruments is Not Made Unlawful by the Antipathy of Patristic and Reformation Fathers
We first see musical instruments accompanying the praises of God in Exodus 15:20 where Miriam and the women of Israel sang with tambourines. Like the Sabbath (Gen. 2:3; Ex. 16:26) and tithing (Gen. 14:20), musical accompaniment has precedents prior to the Law of Moses. Their use cannot be limited to the ceremonial law.
2) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship Was Not Limited to Temple Services in the Mosaic Period
Opponents of musical accompaniment in worship often argue their use in the Old Testament was associated with or limited to the Temple system and animal sacrifices. But this is clearly incorrect. David, the sweet psalmist of Israel, played the lyre to soothe Saul (1Sam. 16:22)--maybe he was playing U2 and not the psalms. Are we to assume that David did not play the lyre when writing and singing the psalms he wrote throughout his life, before the Temple and apart from assemblies for worship and sacrifice (e.g. Ps. 6:1; 12:1; 57:8)? The psalms call for the use of musical instruments to accompany the praise and prayers of God’s people and do not limit this to the context of corporate worship (e.g. Ps. 33:3; 98:4-6). Even in Babylon the Jews had lyres for the purpose of singing psalms (Ps. 137:1-3). Such praise belongs to the heavenly Zion, not only the typological, earthly Jerusalem (Ps. 87:7).
3) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship Was Not a Typological Ordinance in the Ceremonial Law
Some will say, “Yes, the psalms speak of musical instruments, but they also speak of altars, animal sacrifices, and incense. Should we use those features of OT worship as well?” The difference here is that each of those features of OT worship are explicitly identified in the New Testament as typological and both fulfilled and abrogated by the mediatorial work of Jesus Christ (cf. Heb. 9-10; Rev. 5:8-10). But musical instruments are never identified in this way as only a shadow of what is to come. They are simply an aid to worship and properly used beyond the cross.
The verb psallo means “to pluck” or “pull” referring, most often, to a stringed instrument. The verb eventually came to mean to sing the psalms, but while the verb might be used to refer to unaccompanied singing, this cannot be dogmatically required given that the verb of command Paul uses refers to playing psalms on a harp (Eph. 5:19).
5) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Approved by the Command to Sing Psalms
The NT writings specifically command Christians to sing psalms (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; 1Cor. 14:26; Jas. 5:13), which would include the 150 psalms of the OT Psalter (among others). The Book of Psalms calls believers to sing praise to God with musical accompaniment (cf. Ps. 150). Given that nothing suggests this feature of the psalms is no longer valid for Christian worship (as is the case with animal sacrifices and incense), the command to sing the psalms includes the positive authority to sing them accompanied by instruments.
6) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Not a Violation of Any Part of God’s Law
The Regulative Principle of Worship states that only what God has commanded may be allowed in worship. I do not believe instruments are a required element of worship, but the Bible clearly allows their use throughout redemptive history. What command of God precludes their use today? Nothing in God’s moral law forbids such a help.
7) The Use of Musical Instruments as an Aid to Worship is Permitted under the Believer’s Liberty of Conscience
It is not legalistic to require strict obedience to God’s revealed law. But we must be very careful that we only require obedience to the laws God, not man, has made. There may be many good and wise reasons to limit or refrain from using musical instruments in worshipping God. An individual or congregation may choose to do so as a matter of Christian liberty--and I will gladly worship with them! But the rejection of their use should not be made a doctrine of the faith or a requirement for church membership because God has not clearly revealed such a doctrine.
In closing, let me offer one final observation.
8) The Use of Musical Instruments is Not Made Unlawful by the Antipathy of Patristic and Reformation Fathers
It is true that the majority of early Church fathers and many Reformation-era leaders rejected the use of musical instruments in worship. This fact is often cited by opponents of their use today. But this is a selective and misleading use of historical sources. The patristic writers not only rejected the use of musical instruments in Christian worship, they rejected their use everywhere else and all secular forms of music whether accompanied or not! They did so not on the grounds of later opponents of instrumentation but in reaction against their association with paganism and the immorality of the Roman world. Similarly, Reformation leaders who rejected the use of instruments in worship did so because of their association with Roman Catholicism. (Zwingli went so far as to reject the use of all songs, accompanied or not, in corporate worship.) When I see the degradation and carnality of many contemporary church services, I have sympathy for the view of our fathers in the faith. But this is not a biblical argument; it is a pragmatic and, if we are not careful, a Pharisaical one. The fact that instruments are frequented abused and misused in worship to the neglect of obedience to God’s commands does not mean their use is always unlawful. (Churches misuse their buildings, bank accounts, and ecclesiastical authority. Should we abandon these as well?) It is anachronistic and misleading to use the early Church fathers and early Reformation leaders in support of modern arguments against musical accompaniment. Some second generation Reformers did make such arguments, but the earliest opponents to musical instruments in worship did not.
--Joel M. Ellis, Jr. (June 2019)
