HOW ABOUT INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC?
By CLAUDE STULTS

STUDENT: Professor, I heard a preacher say that we are commanded to “sing and make melody with the heart”; and that that commandment prohibits the use of a musical instrument, just like the commandment to build the ark of acacia wood, prohibited building it of oak, or hickory.

PROFESSOR: Yes; I, too, have heard that, many times. But there is no such prohibition in either the word “singing—adontes”, or “making melody—psallontes”. The Greek word “psallo” is often translated “play”, in the Old Testament; and should be translated that way, at least once, in the New Testament, Romans 15:9, by reason of being a quotation of Old Testament prophecy, where it means “play”. But, let’s look at this word “ado”. It occurs five times in the New Testament, and primarily and properly means, “sing”; but its meaning does not exclude the playing of an instrument as accompaniment to the voice. It occurs three times in the Book of Revelation, at 5:8, 9; 14:2, 3; and 15:2, 3; in every instance of which, musical instruments are mentioned, as accompaniment to the singing. In Colossians 3:16, an instrument is not mentioned; but in Ephesians 5:19, while an instrument is not specifically stipulated, the word ‘’psallo’‘ is used, which does mean to “play a musical instrument.” So I must conclude that if “psallontes en te kardia umon” does not specifically stipulate the playing of a musical instrument, neither it, nor “adontes” preclude it.

STUDENT: This dialogue seems to leave everything up in the air; leaves it entirely a matter of opinion, as if God is worshipped the way that we think right and proper, or the way we want to worship; just as though God has no notion of what constitutes acceptable worship. I think that God had something definite in mind, when He commanded to “psallo”, and that “psallo” meant a specific action. I seriously doubt that it can be performed by anyone, or all, of a dozen different activities. But, Professor, you have said that its meaning is a matter of opinion; doesn’t that place our opinion above God’s will, in the worship of God?

PROFESSOR: Oh, I quite agree with you, that things are left rather up in the air, by our subservience to our human opinions; and I quite agree with you, that God had something definite in mind, when His Holy Spirit used the word “psallo”, or “psallontes”. But because of the multifarious ways in which the word has been translated in the Bible, and defined in the dictionaries, we are faced with a dilemma of blindly accepting the Translators’ rendering, or choosing among the lexicographers’ definitions. Thus, its usage in any particular passage becomes a matter of choice and opinion. In virtually every instance, the initial rendering of the word was entirely a matter of the Translators’ opinion, selecting one, from, at least, five different definitions for one and the same word. And, at this late age, whether we think that they made the proper translation, or not, is entirely a matter of our opinion. The value of that opinion depends largely upon the validity of the evidence upon which it is based. There is one thing that you should remember: God did not say, “sing”, or “sing a psalm”, or “sing praise”, or “play”, or even “make melody”; He said “psallontes”. The Translators “decided” what they thought He meant. In doing so, they formed and expressed an opinion . . . their opinion.

I have my opinion, and I sincerely believe it, based upon what I believe to be valid evidence. I believe that when God said “psallo”, He meant “play” a musical instrument, and authorizes the use of instrumental accompaniment to singing, in Christian worship. But I must recognize that other men have differing opinions; and also must recognize that there is a possibility (however small, I think it is) that their opinion is the correct one, both being opinions. Nevertheless, I am fully persuaded that I have a responsibility, before God, to worship Him, in the way that I believe that He said to do it. I also believe that every other man has a like responsibility to worship God in exactly the way that he believes that God has specified that He must be worshipped. At the same time, I believe that each of us must respect the sincerity of the other’s opinion, and not anathematize him, for honestly differing from us. I also believe that neither of us has any right before God, to make our opinion a condition or test of fellowship in worship and service to our God, in view of the fact that it is God alone who knows for a certainty.

STUDENT: Professor, the people whom I know, who oppose the use of musical instruments, say that it is not a matter of opinion, but of faith—believing and doing exactly what God commanded.

PROFESSOR: That, too, is just their opinion. They say that, because they do not realize what an opinion is, or what constitutes an opinion. Whenever there is an explicit, specific and unequivocal word of God, concerning any matter, then it is a matter of the faith revealed from God. But when a word has several, or many, meanings, we are faced with the necessity of ascertaining just which meaning God had in mind. Quite often, perhaps usually, or almost always, this can be achieved by comparing that word’s usage in every place where it occurs; but there may be times when that usage, itself, is not clear. Whenever it is possible to translate a word in as few as two ways, and both ways seem adequate and reasonable, it becomes necessary to choose between the two. That choice is inevitably the translator’s opinion. Then, whenever the reader must consider whether the translator was correct in his choice, or not, what he thinks about it is inevitably an opinion . . . his own opinion . . . based upon an opinion. That is the situation that is involved in “psallo”, except that there are at least six translations of the word found in the Bible, and as many definitions of it found in the dictionaries. Either we must blindly accept and follow what the Translators have opinionated, or set out on a “witch-hunt” for another opinion—our own opinion.

STUDENT; For the sake of harmony in doctrine, or faith; for the sake of fellowship and brotherhood; why can’t sincere Christians come together in honest and friendly discussion and study, and agree to the determining of what is the primary and essential meaning of this divisive word; and agree to accept that as the solution to division?

PROFESSOR: One would think that that might be possible, and that it might be the solution to our problem; but so far, it has not worked out, that way. For nearly forty years, I have been trying to get my brethren, whose opinion differs from mine, to do just that. I have engaged in seven public debates with them, and have participated in many more discussions by correspondence, all with a desire to that end; that we might consider each other brethren, and have fellowship together. But not in one single instance has there been any success, whatsoever. Even after my best and most conciliatory effort, they forbade me to call them “brother”, and refused to acknowledge me a brother, even an ‘erring brother”

STUDENT; Whose fault was that? Didn’t you have a “case”; or didn’t you present it; or were they just blind to it, and obdurate?

PROFESSOR: Let’s not ascribe any blame or fault; I don’t want to take the blame, and I am sure that they feel no guilt of wrongdoing. The difficulty has been, and always will be, that we each brought into the meeting, or discussion, our own private opinion of what the primary meaning of “psallo” is. It was my opinion that the primary and essential meaning, the inherent meaning, of the word is that given as such, in virtually all Greek-English dictionaries and lexicons, which is “play”. It was their opinion that the word had alienated, or changed its primary and essential meaning, and now means “sing”. As a consequence, each found the other like “the village schoolmaster” in Goldsmith’s “The Deserted Village”. “Even the parson must admit his skill, for when he’s beaten, he’ll argue still.” You surely know the old adage, “Convince a man against his will; he’s of the same opinion still” No; no; I see no more prospect of getting all of us to agree, concerning the primary and essential meaning of “psallo”, than we are already agreed. Even if we did come to agreement, would not the process by which we came to it, almost inevitably, be one of ratiocination, or reasoning, where God has not explicitly and unequivocally declared what the primary meaning is; and would not our conclusion be an opinion, even if we all agreed to it, and held the same opinion? If we all agreed that “psallo” means “sing”, would not that agreement be an opinion, under the circumstances of the numerous definitions in the dictionaries? Would not our agreement be an agreement of opinion, if not of accommodation?

STUDENT: That is a pretty dismal picture. Is there no hope for unity and brotherhood among several million people, who have prattled so much about Jesus’ prayer that His followers might be one? Is there no means of agreement and fellowship?

PROFESSOR: It does seem quite dismal, but perhaps is not so dismal as it seems. I am so anxious for some kind of agreement and fellowship, and brotherhood, among warring brethren, that I am willing to let the wish be “father to the thought”, and dare to hope that we might all come to agree, that the actual meaning of “psallo” has been manufactured and distorted into a matter of opinion; and that whatever meaning we may assign to it, is strictly a matter of our opinion. I allow myself to hope that, out of that agreement, there can, and will, emerge a tolerance for the differing opinion of another, and a willingness toward fellowship and brotherhood. I allow myself to hope that there will spring up, among the “saints”, an independence of reading and thought, that will recognize opinions, as opinions.

When I was a boy preacher, I had a very dear friend in an elderly preacher, the State Secretary of West Virginia, John Ray Clarke. He used to say, “We could have Christian Unity in one generation, if we would just kill-off all the preachers, and let the people read the Bible for themselves.” That would be sort of rough on the preachers, but it might be worth a try.—Baldwyn, Miss.