Truth Magazine

By Fred E. Pollock

Life on this earth ended for brother B.G. Hope on March 8. The funeral was conducted on March 10 in Glasgow, Kentucky, where he and sister Hope had lived since 1976. Robert Welch, Earl Robertson, Roy Cogdill and John Gardner combined their efforts in Scripture reading, prayers and words of edification and encouragement most appropriately rendered. Two of brother Hope’s granddaughters and their husbands sang, through tears, some of the favorites he had loved when his family gathered around him through the years.

His Life

Most of nearly 63 years as a Christian were spent preaching the gospel. Until 1941, he also taught for many years in public schools. Like all soldiers of the cross, he enjoyed a remarkable combination of the richest and saddest of earthly experiences, coming as the results of his labors shown in the lives of others (1 Cor. 3:15). He felt keenly both the joys and sorrows expressed by the apostle Paul with respect to those who were the fruits of the gospel through his teaching.

I make no claim to total objectivity in writing of this man, as he was not only my older brother in Christ but, for nearly 35 years, my second father on earth – a relationship expressed this way because “father-in-law” seems so inadequate to describe our relationship. Yet, I understand fully how others without our earthly family tie share my feeling of closeness to this humble, courageous servant of God.

Like many before him, he was a faithful preacher of the gospel about whose work much good can be said. What may be most beneficial for us to remember, however, are some of the very personal attributes left behind in our memories for our consideration and adoption.

His Attitudes

He was a man who tried to draw close to every soul, whether rich or poor, young or old, friend or enemy. The mention of enemies may seem strange in this article, but it is appropriate to remember that he had them and how he behaved toward them. Every soldier has enemies, but the Christian will be an enemy to no man. My purpose is not to render a judgment that he was always right and they were always wrong. God is his judge and theirs. Instead, we can be edified by remembering his attitude toward his enemies. Most of us think we have obeyed Christ if we refrain from doing evil to our enemies. At least we act that way. Dad Hope understood that love for our enemies means going beyond this to love their souls as if they were our friends and showing it. His ability to show this love while standing staunchly against the error or other evil in their teaching or lives will be an encouragement to me and a host of others throughout our lives.

His Perseverance

One of our finest legacies from B.G. Hope is his example of unwavering faith and perseverance in adversity. This adversity came as a result of physical afflictions and accidents throughout his adult life. In 1973, Dick Blackford wrote the following:

I remember Monday mornings in Bowling Green how he would be busy phoning those who were absent on Sunday to encourage those who were physically sick or spiritually weak. His right hand is drawn by arthritis, but he has done more with that one crooked finger than most of us do with two good hands in a lifetime. He walks with a limp, but it is a mark of determination rather than an excuse. Sometimes he has voice problems but his love for the truth and the souls of men causes him to plow on.

This continued to be true of him right to the end of his preaching activity near the close of 1979. We would watch in loving concern and admiration every time he resolutely mounted the pulpit. The agony of this physical effort became more apparent with time, but for many years he managed to hide it with his good-natured, “I’m doing all right,” followed immediately by his expression of genuine interest in the well-being of others. Only his quiet, weeping prayer in the middle of a sleepless night told his loved ones a little of what he endured through 25 years of rheumatoid arthritis.

His Disappointments

The disappointments of his life were not those of unachieved wealth or of unfulfilled dreams of personal fame, but of souls lost in spite of his best efforts and prayers. The hope for a sick spirit to become whole continued to flame within him when others of us who were weaker would give up in discouragement, or worse, disgust. I truly believe souls will yet be saved as the direct result of his loving, confident persistence while he was with them. This must be a scriptural hope, according to Hebrews 11:4 (“. . . he being dead yet speaketh”).

His Hope

The final attribute I wish to remember is his oft-stated, “I want to go to heaven when I die.” He kept this one great hope in mind more than anyone I have ever known: He knew his responsibility to share this hope through the preaching of truth; and he knew his responsibility to serve Christ by serving His. I believe this is why we so often sang with him the last song used in his funeral service:

To love someone more dearly every day,

To help a wand’ring child to find his way,

To ponder o’er a noble thought and pray,

And smile when evening falls,

And smile when evening falls,

This is my task.

To follow truth as blind men long for light,

To do my best from dawn of day till night,

To keep my heart fit for His Holy sight,

And answer when He calls,

And answer when He calls,

This is my task.

And then my Saviour by and by to meet,

When faith hath made her task on earth complete,

And lay my homage at the Master’s feet,

Within the jasper walls,

Within the jasper walls,

This crowns my task.

Our Hope

We sorrow over Dad’s leaving us, but rejoice in the hope of the reward laid up for faithful servants. We further rejoice that his faithful wife and our mother can continue with us as a living reminder of the good works, faithful service, and loving concern for others in which she shared with him for over 57 years. We will the more often be made to recall, “I want to go to `heb-n’ when I die”, with the words he so often added, “Don’t you?” Truly, “. . . he being dead yet speaketh.” We loved him.

What Others Have Said

After the passing of brother B.G. Hope, I noticed several bulletins which carried the announcement of his death. I set these aside awaiting this tribute to brother Hope. Here are brief comments regarding his work made by several different preachers:

Tom Wheeler (Tom followed brother Hope in the work at Beaver Dam, Kentucky. He was in a position to know the influence of brother Hope in that area.):

March 10, 1980 the remains of B.G. Hope were laid beneath the sod. His influence will not pass as quickly as his life did. I will not comment at length on brother Hope as I met him only a few times and heard him preach only twice that I remember. Much of what I know about him I know from what I see and hear from, and in, others.

He is spoken of frequently as being a real Southern gentleman. I suppose if he had lived North of the line, people would have called him a Northern gentleman. He was also a dignified man, not vain, dignified. He was dedicated to the Lord, the Lord’s family and his earthly family. His preaching (what I heard) was plain, simple and persuasive. In addition to writing many letters to keep and strengthen friendships, he wrote many letters to help and encourage those within the congregation where he labored. In doing located work he apparently went far beyond the call of duty.

He worked with the church here at Beaver Dam for eight years and one week. There is no way to measure his influence on the Christians here and that influence continues to live. He was loved dearly and is sorely missed by many here.

To his faithful companion, Lena, and the rest of the family we express sincerest sympathy. We must press on toward that heavenly prize with one less of God’s servants to encourage us.

Leslie E. Sloan, The Preston Reporter (26 March 1980):

1 know of very few men who have so touched and influenced lives as did B.G. Hope. His life was indeed an inspiration and a powerful influence for good, and his influence will live on in the lives of many after he is forgotten. He leaves behind a legacy of far more value than silver or gold. Brother Hope, being of humble means, and living the most of. his life on the salary of a preacher, did not amass very much of this world’s goods.

However, this did not seem to be a concern of his. He contented himself with leaving his children and grandchildren with a priceless legacy of faith.

The Church here at Preston Highway was blessed by having brother Hope here for a gospel meeting in September 1977. We marvelled at the time how he was able to “move around” with such ease and maintain such a wonderful spirit; being afflicted so badly with the arthritis. The lessons each night were powerful, and characterized by a sense of sincere pleading for souls to obey God and have hope. I remember several times he used the expression “he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” He always applied this to himself and expressed it as his personal desire.

He was a friend to both old and young. Many young men sought counsel from his volumes of experience, and were always warmly welcomed.

Dudley Ross Spears, The Voice of West End (15 March 1980), Bowling Green, Kentucky:

The loss of a saint is tremendously heart-breaking. The loss of my dear friend, brother B.G. Hope is a loss shared by so many faithful Christians throughout our nation. Death with its finality and strong reality always leaves me with a feeling of fear, of frustration and of the real fact that, “There’s nothing certain in man’s life but this: that he must lose it.” That frustration and fear is soon dissolved as the comforting words of the Almighty assure me that death is not the end, but the beginning – the loss is only bound up in time.

Our loss is not real with brother Hope. I have not really lost him because the memory of his gentle words, his firm commitment to truth and his delightful personality cannot be lost as long as my mind remains intact. To all who loved him for his “work’s sake” and for his gentle counsel and admonition, there is no loss, except it be for a season.

If there is anything to be gained by his blessed memory it is a lesson from his life. I have preached a number of funeral sermons in my short time as a minister of the Gospel; and have used the text of Romans 8:38-39 frequently to give the bereaved the comfort of knowing that those who are called by God, first to His service, and secondly to His presence in eternity, who love the Lord, have no fears in separation from God’s love. I know of no man who better, at this moment in time, illustrates the close relationship of such a saint with his Maker, than brother Hope.

Brother Hope was a steadfast man to the end of his life. His desire was to preach the Gospel to the very last breath of his life. He was not permitted to do so, entirely, due to failing health, over which he had no control – but he was a preacher from first to last. To hear him preach the simple story of the Lowly Jesus of Nazareth was a thrill – not because of his flowery eloquence but because of his sincerity and honesty with the word. It will be missed sorely.

We bid farewell to a fine friend, a nice human being and a devoted man of God with the full assurance that his works do follow him. His works blazed a trail over lands of faith and duty and we do well to follow him, as he followed Christ.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 21, pp. 342-344
May 22, 1980

By Jon Quinn

In the quest to discover some inkling of Biblical authority for the employment of musical instruments in the worship of the Lord’s church, proponents have searched high and low. Finding no scriptural authority for such in this age and realm, their search takes them beyond the boundaries of this earth to that place we know only by faith and not yet by sight. In this lesson, we shall consider John’s inspired account of the vision he saw and its use (or misuse) today in the vain attempt to justify the innovation of mechanical instruments of music into the worship of the church of Christ.

The Book Of Revelation

The attempt to find authority for the playing of instruments in worship by citing their use in heaven leads one to the book of Christ’s Revelation to John. John had been exiled to the island of Patmos (1:9). The year was 96 A.D., during the reign of the cruel tyrant Domitian. Christians were being severely persecuted because they were refusing to worship the emperor-god. The book of Revelation is God’s encouragement to His persecuted people; if they continue to live by faith that they will ultimately triumph. The message rings forth that despite all earthly appearances, God is still in control of His universe (He is still on His throne). John employs brilliant imagery and figures to communicate unto us the glories which he witnesses. How inadequate human speech must be to reveal the true grandeur of heaven! And yet, how impressed we are as we glimpse its beauty through the words John employs.

In John’s description of the events taking place around God’s throne, he mentions four awe-inspiring creatures as well as twenty-four elders who fall down before the Lamb of God. Each has a harp as well as golden bowls of incense, which John explains represents the prayers of the saints (5:8). Also mentioned are those who have triumphed over the beast. They are represented as standing on the sea of glass holding harps of God (15:2). The message: God knows about the trials being faced for His people and eternal victory awaits those who endure. This is the central purpose of the Book of Revelation.

Now then, the question is not whether musical instruments are mentioned in John’s description of his vision – they are indeed. Nor is it a question as to whether or not these instruments are literal. I am persuaded that the crowns of gold, sea of glass, bowls of incense and the harps represent other things. We have already seen that the incense represents the prayers of the saints. Also, we see in 14:2 a voice from heaven “as the voice of many waters.” Not a voice of many waters literally, but as many waters. Also mentioned is the voice of many “harpers harping upon their harps” which represent the praise offered by these heavenly beings. Certainly the harps do not represent pianos and organs used in worship on earth! But literal or not, that is not what is at issue.

The question is whether mechanical instruments of music are authorized in the worship of the church on earth. That is precisely what is at issue here.

Brief Course In Bible Study

When considering any Bible passage, it is good hermeneutical practice to ask oneself several questions: Who is speaking? Who is being spoken to? What are the circumstances? How does it apply?

For example, after the flood, Noah built an altar and offered a lamb on it. God was pleased with Noah’s worship because he was worshipping as he had been authorized. But what God approved of in Noah, He does not necessarily approve of in us. Noah lived in another time and under another system. God would not accept such an offering on our part because He has not authorized the church to worship Him in such a manner. It would be an abuse of scripture to attempt to justify burnt offerings today on the basis of what God accepted under other circumstances.

In the book of Revelation, we find heavenly, not earthly, creatures worshipping God. The twenty-four elders are not only pictured as having harps, but also wearing crowns (4:10) and offering incense (5:8). We also find the use of a censer (8:5), tabernacle (15:5) and the sea of glass (15:2). If those who attempt to justify the use of mechanical instruments of music on the basis of their mention in John’s vision were at all consistent, then they would also be insisting upon these other items. In fact, if the harps are authorized, then all are, and we have not the right to omit any of them from our worship!

Authority In Heavenly Visions?

Our standard of authority must be God’s word. We must obey the scripture’s commands, examples, and those things which we necessarily infer when they apply to the church. The mere fact that proponents of instrumental music have had to leave behind God’s instructions for the church on earth and search in a heavenly vision for authorization of their innovation makes it evident that they are having a difficult time justifying it in a reasonable way.

The argument for the use of musical instruments in worship based on the book of Revelation is stated in several different ways:

“The only example in the New Testament of a member of the church seeing and hearing singing on the Lord’s day involved an instrument.” This argument leaves out some important information that is revelant to the conclusion being drawn. It leaves out the fact that what John saw did not involve an assembly of saints on earth at all. Besides, what John saw and heard is not, nor ever has been, the cause of division. The issue still is whether the church is authorized to use musical instruments in worship.

“Harps are in heaven; God’s will is to be done on earth as it is in heaven; therefore, musical instruments are authorized for the church (Matthew 6;10).” Infants are also in heaven. Shall we baptize them into the Lord’s body? It is the old case of mixing apples and oranges. God’s will for His heavenly creatures is not the same as His will for His children on earth. Also, the meaning of Matthew 6:10 is distorted by this argument. This verse tells us that we on earth should obey God’s will even as angelic creatures obey Him in heaven.

“Instruments should be used because they are used in heaven and the church sits in heavenly places with Christ (Ephesians 1:3; 2:6).” Of course, “heavenly places” does not refer to the eternal place of reward but to the spiritual nature of the church. It is a divine, blood-bought institution. Heaven is God’s throne and the earth is His footstool, It has been given a plan to follow and this plan does not include what heavenly creatures may or may not practice.

The fact if the matter is that these scenes of heavenly worship are clothed in highly symbolic language. They were intended to encourage faithfulness on the part of persecuted Christians, not to instruct them how to worship God.

Some Final Thoughts

Our God is a jealous God and we must approach Him as He has ordained (Hebrews 10:28-29). The book of Revelation says absolutely nothing about the New Testament church worshipping God with musical instruments. To add “worship of the church” to the harp passages is to add to “the words of the prophecy of this book” and, therefore, falls under the condemnation of Revelation 22:18.

Questions

1. What is the purpose of the book of Revelation?
2. Precisely, what is the issue involved?
3. Do you believe the harps to be literal? Why or why not? Does it make any difference as far as the worship of the church is concerned?
4. The lesson employs the example of Noah. What was the point of this example?
5. Think of another example similar to the above.
6. If Revelation did authorize musican instruments, what kind would be authorized? What other items would also be authorized?
7. Answer the arguments: “The only example in the New Testament of a member of the church seeing and hearing singing on the Lord’s day involved the use of an instrument.”
8. Answer the argument: “Harps are in heaven; God’s will is to be done on earth as it is in heaven; therefore, musical instruments are authorized for the church.”
9. Answer the arguments: “Instruments should be used because they are used in heaven and the church ‘sits in heavenly places in Christ.”‘
10. How does Revelation 22:18 apply to attempting to justify instrumental music in the worship of the church by using the book of Revelation.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 21, pp. 340-341
May 22, 1980

By Joe Neil Clayton

There is the story of the gospel preacher who was approached after a service by an obviously affluent visitor, who offered to make a contribution sufficiently large to help the church purchase the piano or organ which they seemed to be unable to afford. If a typical ending to this story was told, it would probably represent the rich visitor as going away in puzzlement over a group of people who would go to the radical extreme of making an issue out of what seemed to him to be a trivial matter. Because the custom of using instruments of music in worship is almost universal, the churches of Christ have been judged by ignorant men to be everything from “poor” to “radical” for failing to include them.

Our contentment to sing without the accompaniment of musical instruments in our worship is not a matter of personal preference, however. It is reasonable to assume that many worshipers in the churches of Christ might prefer to employ instruments in supplement to our singing, if given a choice. But, if they are grounded well in truth, all of them recognize that the absence of mechanical devices of music in our meeting houses serves as a witness to our adherence to a respected principle of Bible interpretation, the prohibition of divine silence.

In almost any sectarian religious body, some instance could be found to show that this principle is applied to some peculiar practice. For example, our Baptist friends follow and extol the principle of local church autonomy. And, when their conventions or associations become too powerful, and encroach upon the independence of the local church, a hue and cry is raised against them. But Baptists would not have adopted the hallowed practice of local church autonomy had it not been for the fact, that they respected (in this one instance, at least) the silence of the Scriptures. The New Testament has no stated prohibition of centralized government for the churches. It does, however, give an extensive set of examples implying local church government, and supplies only directives regarding the rule of local churches. Beyond this information, Scripture is “silent.”

Catholics, likewise, steadfastly refuse to follow the lead of Protestants in attempting to legitimatize justifications for divorce and remarriage not mentioned in Scripture, because of this rule. Numerous other examples could be cited to show the occasional respect given to this principle in Denominationalism.

A problem arises among them,.however, from the fact that there is no consistent application of the rule. Countless examples can be given to show that denominations apply the rule to only a few practices, while ignoring it in many others. The consequence follows that many innovations have been adopted by religious bodies that have absolutely no precedent in Scripture, with no recognition on their part of the inconsistent application of scriptural authority nor of the danger which such inconsistency has for their souls.

On the other hand, concerned and conscientious disciples of Christ are careful to apply the principle of respecting the silence of Scripture consistently to every aspect of the work and worship of the Christian and the church. This spirit of submissiveness to such a rule is governed by their knowledge of the consequence suffered by those in the Bible who failed to observe the rule.

The Bible relates a number of incidents to carry this message to children of God. The classic case of Nadab and Abihu illustrates that when those early priests, in the absence of expressed prohibition, “offered strange fire before Jehovah, which He had not commanded them, ” the wrath of God devoured them in fire for their failure to “glorify” God and what He had commanded (Lev. 10:1-3). In spite of such lessons, the spirit of innovation practiced by Nadab and Abihu is widespread, today, perhaps because so many innovations have been introduced since then with apparent impunity.

Innovators today do not expect to suffer instant physical death because of their presumptions (and seem unaware that their sin has brought them “spiritual death”), so they find it relatively easy to treat such introductions of unauthorized practices as inconsequential. It is true, however, that swift and severe punishment is a deterrent to sinners, for God reveals this truth in such passages as Ecclesiastes 8:11, Deuteronomy 13:6-11, and Acts 5:1-11. By observing the suffering consequent in the mistakes of others, we can be warned to avoid a simulation of the error. David learned to respect the silence of the Scripture in this way.

In his desire to win the nation of Israel to-a reformation of their religious practices, King David sought to relocate the Ark of the Covenant in the Tabernacle, from which it had been so long absent that they “sought not unto it in the days of Saul (1 Chron. 13:3).” Thus, for several decades, the Israelites had apparently forsaken the ritual of Annual Atonement, a most important ceremony which prominently involved the Ark (Lev. 16). The Ark had been stored in the house of one Abinidab (1 Sam. 7:1, 1 Chron. 13:7), and David’s plan was to remove it to a site in Jerusalem (1 Chron. 15:1). He called “all Israel” together to participate in a grand procession, and the record says that “they carried the Ark of God upon a new cart . . . and Uzza and Ahio drove” it. Presently, the oxen stumbled, and in his concern for the safety of the cargo, “Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark . . . and the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him . . . and there he died before God (1 Chron. 13:5-10).”

Now, it is true that there was a prohibition against “touching” the holy objects of the Tabernacle in Numbers 4:15, but there was other information in the passage from which David sought a deeper understanding of the proper handling of the Word of God. After some apparent study, he found a reason for the sudden visitation of God’s wrath. Gathering the people again, he said, particularly to the Levites, “Sanctify yourselves, both ye and your brethren, that ye may bring up the Ark of Jehovah, the God of Israel, unto the place that I have prepared for it. For because ye bare it not at the first, Jehovah our God made a breach upon us, for that we sought him not according to the ordinance.” When the Levites “bare the Ark of God upon their shoulders with the staves thereon, as Moses commanded according to the Word of Jehovah,” they had no more problems (1 Chron. 15:12-16:3).

The use of the “new cart” to carry the Ark was an “innovation” adopted in ignorance of the will of God. The Lord had “commanded” Moses to use the Kohathites, one of the families of the Levites, to carry it. From this specific direction of the Law, David drew the proper conclusion that “none ought to carry the Ark of God but the Levites: for them hath Jehovah chosen to carry the Ark of God” (I Chron. 15:2). David did not need additional information to realize that when God has specifically chosen the means for transporting the Ark and has revealed that will to men, they are, therefore, forbidden to alter or amend the order, even when other means are not specifically prohibited! David showed a respect for the silence of God in this, avoiding any further mistake that might be the result of presumption. David learned, from seeing the punishment inflicted by God on innovators, that God demands adherence to His will coupled with respect for His silence. Should we not learn the same lesson from the same example?

The matter of the use of instruments of music in the worship of the church is parallel to these examples in Bible history. If we respect the principle (demonstrated in a former lesson in this series) that we are confined to the New Testament for our source of authority regarding acceptable worship in the church, we learn that “singing” is exclusively commanded as the musical communication between the worshipers themselves and to God (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; James 5:13). Another writer of this series has shown that the Greek word here must be construed to mean vocal music, in the same sense that the English word “sing” means “to produce musical tones by means of the voice” (Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary). Nothing is said in these passages, or in any examples of music among the saints, about the use of mechanical instruments of music. In addition, it is also to be admitted that the New Testament records no prohibition of their use. Yet, the principle applies that when God is silent beyond a specific command, we are not permitted to innovate upon His will.

The condemnation of such innovations implied in the terrible deaths of Nadab, Abihu, and Uzza leads us to the conclusion that liberties presumed by innovators are contrary to God’s will, and punishable. Only the sort of obedient spirit that was found in Moses and Aaron in the case of Nadab and Abihu, and in David in the case of Uzza will be tolerated by God. Only by this means can God and His will be exalted above the will of man. The Christian who consistently exalts the will of God above man’s, through an application of this principle, will never worship God in music, except by singing.

Questions

1. Is the refusal to use instruments of music in worship by Christians the result of their personal preference for vocal music over the mechanical kind?
2. Do denominational churches consistently apply the principle of respecting the silence of the Scripture in their practices? Give example.
3. What did Nadab and Abihu do which caused God to destroy them?
4. Why do men today feel that it is of no great consequence if they presume to introduce innovations into the practice of religion?
5. Is it a true Bible principle that swift and severe punishment of sinners by God can deter others from following their example? Give a Scriptural example of your answer from the New Testament?
6. Why did David seek to move the Ark of the Covenant from the house where it was stored to the new site in Jerusalem?
7. How could the Ark of the Covenant be carried, so that no one would need to touch it?
8. In his study of the Law to see how the Ark was to be moved, did David find any passage which forbade the use of a cart?
9. Is there any passage in the New Testament which forbids the use of mechanical instruments of music in worship?
10. Is the rejection of instruments of music in worship similar in principle to David’s rejection of the use of a cart to carry the Ark? Why?

Truth Magazine XXIV: 21, pp. 338-339
May 22, 1980

By Larry Ray Hafley

This question has been argued and answered both ways. In America in the last century when instruments were introduced into churches-of Christ, they were proposed as aids to worship by the innovators and opposed as additions by the “anti” debaters. Instruments in worship may be aids, or they may be additions. They cannot be both. Essentially and eventually it is a matter that must be settled in the court of scriptural authority.

The Aid Argument

When it cannot be proven that instruments in worship are commanded, there are those who will contend that a piano or an organ is an aid to the singer in the same sense that a hammer, saw, and axe abetted Noah. “No,” the argument says, “a hammer, saw, and axe are not mentioned, but they are authorized as aids to do what God said; namely, `make thee an ark.”‘ “Further,” our Brother Argument avers and avows, “instruments are aids in the same way that communion cups and collection baskets are aids in taking the Lord’s Supper and gathering the-contribution.”

Bye, Bye Psallo Argument

If the above reasoning is true, instruments are not commanded. Down goes the psallo arguments. In recent years, it has been argued that instruments inhere in the command to “sing” and make melody. However, if instruments are an aid, they are not commanded. Noah’s hammer and a church’s cups and trays are aids. They are not commanded. So, if instruments are aids, they are not commanded in Scripture. You see, if a communion tray had been commanded, its use would be mandatory, obligatory. One could not justify a tray and cups as aids if they had been commanded. Likewise, if instruments were commanded in the psallo, they could not be used on the basis that they are aids to singing.

What Are You Doing, Noah?

“I am building an ark,” Noah replies. And that is what he was told to do. When he hammered, sawed, and chopped, he was building an ark. Hammers, saws, and axes were to expedite the command to build an ark. What are pianos and organs for? They are for playing, for making instrumental music. Did God say, “Make thee an ark?” Assuredly, He did. Hence, the hammer, saw, and axe were aids for Noah to do what God said do. Now, where did He say, “Play,” or “Make instrumental music?” When one finds that command, he will have an argument. Without the command to build an ark, the hammer,, saw, and axe are additions; when used, they cause one to do that which is unauthorized. But with the command to build the ark, they are aids to do what God said do. Therefore, we need the command to play before the instruments are scriptural.

God said, “Sing.” One can make vocal music without a harp, but it is fairly impossible to build an ark without a hammer, saw, and axe, or a reasonable facsimile thereof. Therefore, instruments of music cannot be aids to singing in the same class as hammers are to building.

Generally Speaking

(1) Music is a general term. Under the heading of music, we have two kinds or classes; that is, vocal and instrumental, or singing and playing. (2) Wood is a general term. Under the heading of wood, we have various kinds. We might have gopher wood and oak wood. (3) Travel is a general term. Under the heading of travel, we might have walking and riding.

General Terms Kinds Or Classes

(1) Music Vocal or Instrumental

(2) Wood Gopher or Oak

(3) Travel Walking and Riding

When God specified “gopher wood,” that eliminated all other kinds or classes of wood. At least Noah recognized that it did, for, “Thus did Noah, according to all that God commanded him (including the use of gopher wood LRH), so did he” (Gen. 6:22).

If Christ had said, “Go ye walking into all the world and preach the gospel,” evangelists would be restricted to that kind of travel. But Jesus did not say that. He said, “Go.” This is travel in a general sense. We say walk, ride, sail, or fly, and whichever means we choose we are still doing what God said, nothing more, nothing less, and nothing different.

Again, suppose God had specified “walking” as the way to travel. If He had, we might use a cane as an aid to walking, or even special leg braces and walking shoes. When we did so, we would be doing what God said – “Go walking.” But what if someone came along and said, “Let’s take my car; it is an aid to walking!” Would that be acceptable? No, it is another kind or class of travel. A car is a way to ride, not walk.

When God said “sing,” he declared the class or kind of music he desired and demanded. “Sing” (vocal music) eliminates instrumental music as “gopher” nullified oak wood; or, as walking would remove riding as a mode of travel. An instrument, such as a piano or organ, is no more an aid to singing than a car is to walking. A cane is an aid to walking, not riding. Traveling in a car is riding, not walking. An organ is another way to make music; it is instrumental, not vocal, and God said, “Sing,” not “Play.”

A Quote From G.C. Brewer

Brother Kurfees made the point that God has commanded us to “go” and preach the gospel to every creature, but that God has not told us what method to use in going. We are, therefore, left free to use any method we please. We may (1) walk; (2) we may ride a horse; (3) we may ride on the train; (4) we may go by automobile; or (5) we may go by airplane. Any one of these methods is included in the command to go. All of them together may be used if convenience demands it; they add nothing to the command. We are “going” regardless of which method of travel we use. But now Brother Kurfees shows that if God has specified the method of going, then we could not use any other method without violating his command. If God has said “walk,” then if we should ride, we would be doing something God did not authorize – we would be using a method of our own. Brother Briney came back with the reply that the command to walk does not exclude the use of a walking cane. The cane is simply an aid in doing the thing commanded. Again, Brother Kurfees argues that if God says ride a horse, we could not ride any other animal without violating the command. The riding the horse is the thing God commands. But to use a saddle on the horse would by no means change the command of God. We would still be doing exactly what God said – we are riding a horse to the place of preaching. We may use a bridle, a saddle, a saddle blanket, a quilt, or anything else that a horseman wants to use. These are only his own conveniences in doing the thing the Lord commanded. The walking cane in walking is parallel to the saddle in riding.

The application of this argument should be plain. Here it is: God has commanded us to sing. When we use eyeglasses, we have not added something to the thing God commanded, nor have v”e in any way altered his word. We are still singing. When we urge a hymn book, a tuning fork, we are only using things that are parallel to the bridle and saddle; we have added nothing to what the Lord has commanded; we are simply singing. These are conveniences in the doing of the thing commanded, and are, therefore, implied in the command itself.

But can we put instrumental music in this category? (Note: We must be able to if the instrument is an aid to singing -LRH.) Is it a convenience in doing the thing commanded? However much one may claim that the instrument is an aid to singing, any thoughtful person will have to admit that it is also an addition to the thing commanded. Singing is one thing and playing is another. They are distinct; either one may be done without the other. There are two types of music – vocal music and instrumental music. They are clearly distinct from each other, and some of the very finest vocalists are not instrumentalists and a great many more of the most renowned instrumentalists are not, in any sense, vocalists. A man who is dumb, a man whose tongue has been removed or whose vocal organs are diseased may be able to render excellent instrumental music; but surely anyone can see without further illustration that we here have two distinct things – vocal music and instrumental music. We can also see that God has commanded the one, vocal music; the other he has not commanded. Then to add instrumental music to vocal music would be equivalent not to the use of a bridle or saddle in riding the horse which God commanded man to ride, but it would be equivalent to riding a horse part of the time and riding an automobile part of the time, or a ship, or any other thing that man might want to add to the thing commanded. When God says walks, a man cannot ride. He may use crutches; these would add nothing to the command. If God simply said ride, then one might ride anything that his convenience suggests and still be doing only that which God says do. But if God names a specific vessel or animal upon which one must ride, then one cannot add something else to it without altering the command of God or disobeying his word.

This should take care of the oft-repeated argument concerning hymnbooks, tuning forks, church houses, electric lights, etc. These are only conveniences for the doing of the thing the Lord has ordained. They add nothing to it; they take nothing from it. They do not alter, in any respect, the thing the Lord has commanded (G.C. Brewer, A Medley On The Music Question, pp. 38-40).

Conclusion

Since this article is written to be included and incorporated in a series of topics, the questions it raises have purposely not been pursued. You may find the implications and ramifications of any essay on this theme to be answered by another author under a related heading.

Questions

1. What must finally and ultimately decide the issue of instrumental music? Give Scripture to sustain and support your answer.
2. Why do advocates of the instrument often advance them as aids?
3. If instruments are in the same class as communion trays and collection baskets, can they be considered commands of God?
4. What affect, if any, does claiming the instrument as an aid have on the psallo argument?
5. What is the gist of the psalm argument?
6. When Noah used a hammer, saw, and axe, was he doing anything other than what God told him to do?
7. When one plays on a piano, is he doing anything other than what God told him to do?
8. Is a cane an aid to riding? Is a cane a method of traveling?
9. Could Noah have used Knotty Pine to panel the ark to make the interior look better without adding to what God said?
10. In what ways are songbooks parallel to Noah’s hammer, saw, and axe?

Truth Magazine XXIV: 20, pp. 330-332
May 15, 1980