Category Archives: Ministry

regarding discipleship, evangelism, pastoring, and other ministry related topics separate from corporate worship

Who Decides What is Beautiful?

(Original posting 10/26/2017)

A) Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
or
B) Beauty has absolute standards.

 Which, if either, of these statements is true? The first is subjective, dependent on the values of the observer. The second is objective, having a source of authority. Is appreciation of beauty up to the individual or can one point to some standard? Does the Bible provide an answer?

Let’s begin with the standard the Bible uses to define beauty. Among other references to God’s beauty, Psalm 96:9 says, “Worship the LORD in the beauty (or splendor) of holiness.” This is referring to the beautiful garments the high priest was required to wear when entering the Holy of Holies once per year. It conveys the sense that God regards holiness as beautiful. We know that one of the prime attributes of God is his holiness, as in the familiar phrase from Isaiah 6:3, “Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts.” He is three times holy! In biblical terms, triple repetition represents completion and perfection. So, if God considers holiness beautiful, and the Bible claims him to be complete and perfect in holiness, then the Bible also portrays God to be the perfection of beauty.

Additionally, the creation account encompasses the concept of beauty with the word “good.” Gen 1:31 says, “And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.” The world as God made it was good, meaning complete, perfect, purposeful, and yes, beautiful.  Also, in verse 26, Genesis tells us that God made man in his image.  Thus by argument from the greater to the lesser, pre-fall mankind was also beautiful in the image of God.

So, there is an objective, universal, standard of beauty. It is all the attributes of the invisible God: his splendor, majesty, glory, holiness, perfection, harmony, order, balance, righteousness, loveliness, etc. It is also the nature of visible creation prior to the curse of sin, for “his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation, in the things that have been made” (Rom 1:20). It is also the attributes of the incarnate, sinless son of man, Jesus Christ, who is the “radiance of the glory of God” (Heb 1:3) whom we have seen (John 1:14). It can also be perceived in our own bodies; “I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well” (Ps 139:14). Obviously, then, statement B above is correct. But, if this is true then statement A must be false. If beauty is not up to the beholder how may one recognize it?

First, we must recognize that  our sinful nature warps our judgment so that we are unable to reliably discern beauty from ugliness on our own; “The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately sick, who can understand it?” (Jer 17:9); and, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” (Isa 5:20). To correct our warped judgment God’s word must be applied to our hearts by the Holy Spirit; “But solid food is for the mature, for those whose power of discernment is trained by constant practice to discern evil from good” (Heb 5:14); and 2 Tim 3:16, “All scripture is breathed out by God, and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16-17).

And what in God’s word teaches us to discern beauty from ugliness? A good place to begin is Phil 4:8: “Finally, brothers, whatsoever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.”  This list may be arranged into three categories: truth, goodness, and beauty, which could all be summed up into beauty itself. But truth, goodness, and beauty are good categories to learn to identify. Furthermore, this is not just a list, but it is a command. Paul says, “think about these things!” For the Christian, appreciating beauty is not the optional domain of just the artist. Every believer in Jesus Christ is obligated to learn to appreciate beauty. Consider Psalm 37:4, “Delight yourself in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart.” Beauty being one of God’s attributes, it is something we must delight in. And here in Philippians is where one begins to train his powers of discernment to distinguish beauty from ugliness. This is also the beginning of how the church can resolve its divisions over music and art, but that is another topic!

Contextualization, Evangelism, Worship

(Original posting 10/26/2017) When the Apostle Paul said, “I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some” (1 Corinthians 9:22), did he mean that anything goes in missions and worship? If not, what did he mean? Well, that’s the topic of this afternoon’s post from my music ministry philosophy exam. Read this brief overview of the topic for yourself:

What is the relevance of Acts 17:16-34 and 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 to discussions of cultural contextualization?

First of all, what is contextualization? As it relates to ministry, contextualization has a spectrum of definitions, all having to do with communicating the biblical message from its ancient context into a contemporary culture. This spectrum ranges from merely translation of the gospel into a local language, to allowing each culture to determine what its own gospel truth is. The difference in philosophy from one end of the spectrum to the other is quite striking. What can we learn from these two scripture passages to help us evaluate these positions?

Acts 17:16-34 and 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 are often used to justify radical modifications of the gospel message for the sake of contextualization. One very common application is the use of pop culture art forms, i.e., music, to make “church” more appealing. But to what degree, if any, was the Apostle Paul actually using contextualization in these passages?

The Acts 17 passage narrates Paul’s encounter with the Athenian philosophers on Mars Hill. Prior to the encounter Paul had toured the innumerable altars erected across Athens and had been deeply grieved at this idolatry (v. 16) and was moved to fervently proclaim the gospel. Speaking to the philosophers, Paul notes that the Athenians practice religion actively – “are very religious” – and have many idols, including one dedicated “to the unknown god.” Some argue that Paul was commending the Athenians for their efforts to find God. They then reason from this that we should accommodate non-Christian cultures by modifying the gospel message and our worship practices. However, the impression that Paul was commending the Athenians is suspect. The meaning of the phrase translated “very religious” has been greatly debated among translators for centuries. Its meaning could range from the above, “very religious,” to “extremely superstitious,” to “devoted to demons.” Given that Paul was greatly disturbed at their idolatry it hardly seems likely that he was approving of their worship. At best, “very religious” should be taken as a neutral observation and certainly not approval. It could even be seen as polite criticism. Further, Paul’s observation that they had an altar to an unknown god likely isn’t a commendation that the Athenians were somehow close to knowing the true god. Rather, judging from Paul’s subsequent preaching, he used this to take a subject in which they had great interest and show them the ignorant emptiness of their worship practices. His charge of ignorance would have been a great challenge to the intellectual ego of the Athenians. He followed up by showing them their need for Christ, and to call them to repentance.

Thus, the Acts 17 passage certainly is an illustration of how to present the gospel to a different culture. But rather than justification for contextualizing the gospel to a culture it is an encouragement to use a common point of interest to boldly present the eternal truths of the intact gospel. Paul’s presentation of the gospel in Athens was unique to the audience but the message was the same one he preached across the Roman Empire.

1 Corinthians 9:22 contains the well-known phrase, “I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” This phrase is sometimes used to justify contextualization of the gospel and, in the worst case, dilute the gospel to avoid offense. However, the context of the passage clearly shows that all Paul advocates is for Christians to lay down their liberty for the sake of the lost so as to avoid unnecessary offense in the delivery while boldly proclaiming the unavoidable offense of the gospel message (“for the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing” (1 Cor 1:18).

​From these two passages we see that Christians are to use humility, compassion, wisdom, knowledge, and skill in our encounters with divergent cultures, but the gospel message is to be exactly the same as what Paul preached nearly 2,000 years ago.

Inside-out or Outside-in?

(Original posting 10/25/2017) Does the way you look at the world affect how you think about music in worship? Do you see yourself as an individual on an island in time and space, or as a link in a line extending backward and forward to generations gone by and yet to come? Those two points of view have, or at least so some scholars say, a lot to do with your attitudes toward music and life in general. As part of this continuing series of music ministry philosophy exercises, here is my synopsis of the history of church music philosophy:

How has the church’s view of music changed over its history?

Quentin Faulkner argues that the story of the church’s perception of music is one of changing world views: from what he calls a world-conscious view, where a sense of belonging and obligation to a people, or cult, is paramount, to a self-conscious worldview, where the individualism is supreme [his use of cult is not our 21st century concept of a perverted religion, but a group of people with common beliefs, ethos, and behavioral standards]. He feels that the world-conscious view was predominant in the church, and indeed in all western societies, until the Enlightenment of the 18th Century. Prior to the enlightenment, the church viewed music as essential to development of intellectual and spiritual character, an essential part of perpetuating the well-being of the cult. Since the Enlightenment music has become a vehicle for stimulation and expression of emotion, a tool to enhance the esteem of the individual.

As the church began, it inherited its musical practices from the Hebrew synagogue, which came from a people raised in an Old Testament ethos that was sympathetic to music in religious services. Synagogue music was modest, text-focused, objective, and corporate, and predominated by psalms. From what we can see in the New Testament, which is fairly neutral towards music, early church music imitated the synagogue practices, adding canticles (biblical texts outside the Psalms) and hymns to Christ.

In the centuries immediately following the New Testament, the early church fathers, with their classical training, applied and adapted Greek philosophy with a Christian perspective. They applied the Doctrine of the Ethos, which taught that certain musical modes developed good character and other modes degenerated good character. Music’s purpose was to make people noble. They saw that music could help develop good Christian character.

The Middle Ages saw the church develop an indigenous Christian style of music that affected all of Western civilization. Augustine and Boethius, writing De Musica and De Institutione Musica, respectively, helped to promote this with an extensive philosophy of music that put Greek thought into Christian terms. They established music as a science which saw beautiful music as reflecting the cosmic order created by God, thus making music of essential importance in the church.

This same era saw the rise of first, the monastic movement and then, cathedral schools. Both taught the philosophy of Augustine and Boethius. This had several effects: it integrated music philosophy into the church’s theological tradition, produced increasing church music excellence, and led to an emphasis on musical perfection and splendor so as to represent heavenly worship. Unfortunately, this latter spurred the removal of congregational singing from the church lest the congregants mar the perfection of the heavenly representation.

The Renaissance period saw a revival of the Doctrine of Ethos and continued emphasis on music as science. The 1st wave of humanism also took place, emphasizing the value of individuals as carriers of the imago dei (image of God). Much emphasis was placed on appropriately matching texts with the correct musical mode and music theory focused on music’s revelation of the divine. Music continued to be valued for its development of character rather than for pleasure. Music and architecture were seen as means to incarnate and contemplate cosmic perfection. Thus, musical splendor and complexity exploded.

Humanism’s valuation of the individual was also a catalyst for the Reformation. No radical new musical thought came out of the Reformation but it paved the way for the rise of the self-conscious worldview. Congregational singing was restored in the reformation churches but this had the adverse effect of segregating the clergy from the choirs which eventually cast church music loose from its theological influence. Music theory began to disappear from university programs soon thereafter. Lutheran churches continued to value a rich musical aesthetic but without the philosophical underpinnings and the suspicion that had been in place for over a thousand years. Other reformation churches took an ascetic approach to music, from mild to extreme, similar to the synagogue and early church practice.

The arrival of the Enlightenment, and the 2nd wave of humanism that came with it, saw the self-conscious worldview displace the world-conscious worldview. This had a profound effect on music both in and outside the church. Music’s purpose changed from developing character to stimulating the senses and expressing emotions. Individuality and originality became prestigious virtues in composition and performance. The public took the place of theologians/philosophers as the supreme judge of music quality, and an anti-intellectual attitude toward musical science prevailed.

Secular thought in music was adopted during the Enlightenment by the church such that music was robbed of any ethical dimension. A movement toward pietism (self-expression) in music replaced contemplation on the divine. The entire gamut of sacred music philosophy, composition, and performance was relegated to backwater status.

This course progressed through the 19th century to the point that church music became a theological orphan, having no coherent theological basis for its significance or function. It resulted in emotional, highly personalized church music and church music that followed secular music trends. This appeared in evangelical churches as excessively sentimental music which moved from camp meetings and revival services into Sunday worship. A reaction in Lutheran and Anglican/Catholic circles known as the Oxford movement sought to restore more reserved ancient and historical sacred music forms but it was as much driven by nostalgia as philosophy.

In the 20th and 21st centuries the condition became a muddle of worldviews about music. Church music continues to follow trends rather than set them. Its music is dominated by a consumerist attitude and an anti-art ethic that values the emotional and subjective ethos of a self-conscious worldview and rejects the transcendent philosophies of the world-conscious view. It is left without an objective qualitative system of evaluating its music.

More Excitement!

(Original posting 10/24/2017) Today’s post follows up on the previous topic of the music communication debate which I left somewhat hanging yesterday in a rather unsatisfying ending. Let’s looks a little closer at some of the theories of musical communication:

Felix Mendelssohn once said, “What music expresses is not too indefinite to put into words; on the contrary, it is too definite.” In other words, language lacks the specificity of music so that when we have trouble describing the meaning of music, it isn’t the music’s fault, it’s because we lack the words to fully define the music. Thus, music can very exquisitely describe emotion; as per Susan Langer’s contour theory, music sounds the way emotions feel. Or, as Stephen Davies describes it, music has the appearance of the characteristics of emotion. So, music has the ability to express what words can’t.

Thus, music is very powerful, and it is needful for church musicians to have some understanding of this ability because music can teach and shape our hearts. First of all, contrary to popular thought, some level of musical meaning is discernible. In similar fashion to how we can interpret body language, facial expression, and tone of voice to better grasp the meaning of a person’s words (often on a very subtle level), humans are built with the ability to discern meaning from music’s characteristics. Second, to at least some degree, musical meaning is universal to all humans. We are made with physiological, and emotional characteristics such that we respond in similar fashion to certain musical characteristics. This makes sense when we consider that without some commonality in the perception of emotions people from different cultures would find themselves unable to relate at all. It is also true that much, maybe most, of music’s meaning is derived from conventional associations (sleigh bells imply Christmastime, etc.), but we must be aware that there are also universals.

Now, what are the mechanics of how music accomplishes this? A common theory is the hypodermic model, namely, that music has a direct and irresistible physiological effect on the body. It operates outside of symbols to affect everyone in the same way. Its effect is a result of the acoustical properties of the sounds. Most scholars reject his model as it is obvious that music is not irresistible except, perhaps, at a primitive level where sounds can impact pulse, respiration, etc.

A second, more promising, theory is the semiotic model which posits that musical meaning is accomplished through audible symbols and references. It has two streams of thought: bio-acoustic signification and iconic signification.

Bio-acoustic signification proposes an analogical relationship between music and the shape of emotions, what Langer and Davies were describing above as the morphology of feelings: music sounds the way emotions feel. Here is a crude example: sad music is slow and soft as sad people are somber and quiet.  In this theory, music doesn’t stimulate emotion, it expresses its shape.

Iconic signification posits that melodic phrases, tonal progressions, rhythmic patterns, etc. are icons that the listener must interpret through culturally imprinted associations. Drum rolls and brass fanfares convey martial imagery while calliopes imply circuses.

Both means of signification have proponents who strongly argue for the preeminence of one means over the other, while many others argue for a blend of the two. But either way, current scholarly thought sees some version of the semiotic model as the best explanation of music’s emotive communication. The semiotic model can be thought of as music using emotional metaphors as its means of communication.

Job 30:31 is often proffered as a biblical argument for the bio-acoustic model. It says, “My harp is turned to mourning and my pipe to the voice of those who weep.” John Makujina argues that the language clearly leans to supporting the bio-acoustic version of semiotics. Whether this is the case or not, it is apparent that the writer of Job saw music functioning semiotically, very much like Langer and Davies’ morphology of feelings, whether that morphology is natural, conventional, or both.

What is Scripture’s role in regulating worship?

(Original posting 10/13/2017) I’m currently preparing for comprehensive exams to complete my Master of Music in Church Music degree. Part of that is being prepared to answer a number of questions on worship and music philosophy. So, in preparation for that portion of the exams I’m going to inflict, . . . I mean share, some of my practice answers to those questions with you! So the first topic is, “what role should Scripture play in developing a worship and music philosophy?”

I’ll use Scripture to make the case for defining its own role. ​All references are to the ESV translation unless otherwise noted.

​Hebrews 12:28b says, “offer God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe.” The word acceptable clearly implies that God has criteria for what pleases Him in worship. Also, there must be means of worship that are unacceptable to Him or else there would be no point for the above instruction. But this raises the obvious question, what determines acceptable worship?

In ​Deuteronomy, Moses gives the Israelites their final instructions before crossing the Jordan into the Promised Land. Chapter 12 contains instructions on the proper worship of God and verse 8 says, “You shall not do according to all we are doing here today, everyone doing whatever is right in his own eyes.” Thus, God determines what acceptable worship is, and our own intellect and feelings will only lead us astray. We must turn to God to know what is acceptable in His eyes. But again, we have an obvious question: where do we find these criteria?

First we see in Matthew 4:4 that we must turn to the word of God, as when Jesus quotes Deuteronomy to Satan, “Man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.” Further, in 2 Timothy 3:16-18, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”

​So here we have the principle that Scripture is our sole authority in all matters of faith and practice, known since the Reformation as the principle of Sola Scriptura. Thus, Scripture must be our guide in developing our worship and music philosophy. But how, then, are we to apply the Scriptures today? The Old Testament gave the what, when, and how of all the particulars of Tabernacle and Temple worship. But, although the New Testament gives the content of Christian worship, it provides very little to go on for the means and methods of worship in the assembled body of Christ.

The approach of finding chapter and verse for the direct answer to every question, as could be done for Tabernacle and Temple worship, is called the Encyclopedic View of scripture. One just looks up the answer. Since we don’t have those direct answers in the New Testament we must approach Scripture using what is called the Encompassing View. This is what Paul was talking about in 2 Timothy about being “trained for every good work.” We use Scripture to train our discernment. The writer of Hebrews explains in chapter 5, verse 14, “But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.”

​An example of this can be found in Galatians 5 where Paul provides two lists, one of the works of the flesh, which are to be avoided, and one of the fruits of the Spirit, which are to be developed. In the first list He appends, “and things like these,” and to the second, “against such things there is no law.” The words like and such show that these lists are not exhaustive but that the trained Christian is to use their trained powers of discernment to know how to apply these lists to their own life experiences.  Thus, Scripture provides boundaries and objectives for the Christian walk but leaves many details up to our trained powers of discernment.

​Applying all this to the role of Scripture in developing a worship and music philosophy goes back to where we started: “offer God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe.” Reverence and awe are examples of the boundaries and objectives that Scripture sets for worship. Our worship must contain these two characteristics plus any others prescribed in Scripture, such as John 4:24, “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” In applying the freedom of discernment, Galatians 5:13 instructs, “Do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.”

​Thus the answer to, what role should Scripture play in developing a philosophy of worship and music, is: Scripture must be the sole guide in all matters of faith and practice within which we may apply the freedom of discernment trained by the word of God.

Seeking the Face of God: Evangelical Worship Reconceived

(Original posting 4/10-2017) Today brought a complete surprise. In my music ministry philosophy class last Spring one of our assignments was to write a review of a recently published book on Christian worship. Well, I had mostly forgotten about even reading the book, let alone writing the review, when the announcement came through that my review had been published in Artistic Theologian, the annual journal of the School of Church Music at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. To say I was shocked would be an understatement. The book in question is J. Daniel Day’s Seeking the Face of God: Evangelical Worship Reconceived. Re-reading the forgotten review was a bit of an out-of-body experience as it felt a lot like reading someone else’s writing. But I’m glad to have read it again as it reminded me of what an important book it is, one that has played no small role in developing my own philosophy. I won’t go into a description here (a link to the full review is shown below) but merely recommend it highly to everyone in vocational worship ministry as well as anyone with a healthy curiosity about what Christian worship is all about.

http://artistictheologian.com/2017/04/08/seeking-the-face-of-god-evangelical-worship-reconceived/
 Available from: https://www.amazon.com/Seeking-Face-God-Evangelical-Reconceived/dp/1938514408

Kids are smart enought to learn Christian doctrine

(Original posting 7/1/2015) I don’t get geeked out about too many things, just a few, like college football, science fiction, Yellowstone, etc. But when you start talking about theology, doctrine, and music, all at the same time you’ll have my full attention.  So, when I discovered one of The Gospel Coalition’s latest projects, Songs for Saplings, my ears perked up. One of my pet peeves is the weak doctrinal foundation of many Christians. Combined with this is the steady decline in musical skill in the general population and the church in particular. Songs for Saplings addresses both of these problems at the same time with a musical approach to teaching our children the underpinnings of our faith. You may shudder to think about teaching your kids about the nature of God, the Trinity, sin, atonement, end times, and the like. But with short, simple, fun songs for kids, Songs for Saplings tackles all these topics and many more. So, if you have kids, or have any responsibility for a child’s Christian education, please look into this and think about how you might put it to use.

A Baptist’s Thoughts on Baptist Ordinances

(Original posting 12/19/2015) Mere symbols. That’s how a Baptist might typically describe baptism and the Lord’s Supper. However, reading the New Testament one would get the impression that these are something more than that. For their first two hundred years, Baptists thought of these ordinances as more than symbolic. Perhaps they were onto something? Here’s a paper I presented for Baptist Heritage this summer (2015) arguing that what Baptists call ‘ordinances’ are not mere symbols, but, ‘mighty signs’.

Baptist Ecclesiology – The Ordinances

The Holy Spirit’s Role in Corporate Worship

(Original posting 6/22/2015) Unless you’re of the charismatic persuasion, you probably get a little queasy at the thought of “Spiritual” worship. It conjures up all kinds of images of out of control assemblies that just aren’t what you might think worship should be like. But we shouldn’t shy away from this topic, because it’s totally biblical. Paul says that we are “the ones who worship by the Spirit of God” (Phil 3:3). So how then should we think about the Holy Spirit’s role in worship? Well, it happens that Timothy Ralston at Dallas Theological Seminary has written an enlightening discussion of this topic that answers just that question. It’s hosted at the excellent site, bible.org. Check this out: https://bible.org/seriespage/spirits-role-corporate-worship

A Philosophy of Church Music

One of the hurdles, er . . . blessings, of completing a degree in Church Music is the preparation of a detailed personal philosophy of the scriptural basis of the purposes, functions, and methods of using music in corporate worship. I successfully completed this work last Spring (hooray!). However, even though my professor granted a generous grade on the paper I wasn’t completely satisfied with the document. It didn’t contain everything that I wanted to say, nor was it well suited for general consumption. It’s taken a while, but I now have a paper that fully expresses my thoughts on this topic in a way that is accessible for both lay and clergy church members. I present it here for your consideration. You likely won’t agree with all of my positions. They are, though, based on serious contemplation of the issues, extensive readings of related literature, and prayerful evaluation of the pertinent Scriptures. It is my prayer that, whether you agree or disagree with one or more positions, they stimulate fresh and profound thinking and intentional actions in your future thoughts and deeds regarding the corporate worship of our Savior. May this contribute to producing worship that more perfectly approaches what our God asks and desires.

A MUSIC and WORSHIP MINISTRY PHILOSOPHY
What is worship? Although worship is at the crux of the church’s purpose, it is also one of the most challenging terms to define in the Church’s life. Condensing the significance of worship into a few words or sentences often boils off its essence, or worse, misses the mark entirely. However, I have found two definitions that, combined, set a solid foundation for an understanding or worship. Scott Aniol coined this definition of worship: “drawing near to communion with God through Christ by faith.”[1] A moment’s thought allows one to give assent to the accuracy of this succinct definition, yet, it seems a bit abstract and cold. I have found that supplementing this with William Temple’s colorful definition from early last century brings the meaning of worship to life. He states,
Worship is the submission of all our nature to God. It is the quickening of conscience by His holiness; the nourishment of mind with His truth; the purifying of imagination by His Beauty; the opening of the heart to His love; the surrender of will to His purpose — and all of this gathered up in adoration, the most selfless emotion of which our nature is capable and therefore the chief remedy for that self-centeredness which is our original sin and the source of all actual sin.[2]
From this, it is apparent that communion with God (worship) is an activity that forms, or better transforms the worshipper. This is worship as Paul describes it in Rom 12:1-2, worship that changes worshippers.  In assembled body, participants are renewed in community awareness and their connection with a faith passed down through the ages by a great cloud of witnesses. They are taught and reinforced in values and beliefs, and cultured in the community’s standards of conduct. They are transformed.
And what are worshippers changed into? Christ-likeness (Rom 8:29); Saints leading holy and blameless lives (Eph 1:4) and bearing the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-25).
Worship is one of the ways the church fulfills the third leg of the Great Commission, a means to teach disciples to obey everything that Christ has commanded (Matt 28:19-20). Worship is an essential component of taking off the old self and putting on the new creation (Eph 4:22-24).

The role of the Bible in worship.
How then, ought we to worship? Are we free to worship in any form and content that seems right and effective? If we hold that the Bible is the very word of God, and that it is sufficient for equipping the servant of God for every good work (2 Tim 3:16), then the Bible must be our guide for all matters of personal and corporate worship. If that is so, then the Bible should be the lodestar of our worship practices rather than the surrounding culture. Hebrews 12:28 tells us to offer God acceptable worship. The qualifier, acceptable, implies that there is such a thing as ‘unacceptable’ worship. Deuteronomy 12:8’s warning not to practice “everyone doing whatever is right in their own eyes (ESV)” and Proverbs multiple warnings that, “there is a way that seems right to a man but its end is the way to death,” show that our own judgment is inadequate. Thus, our worship should be guided by what is pleasing to God, not what is pleasing to man. What, then, does the Bible prescribe for worship? Here are some of the most vital elements:

  • Worship Is For God Alone (Neh. 9:6, Luke 4:8)
  • Worship Is About God (1 Chron. 16:28-29)
  • Worship Has Standards (Deut. 12:4, Heb. 12:28)
  • Worship Is Submission to God (Rev. 4:9-11)
  • Worship Is From Believers (Heb. 11:6)
  • Worship Is Through Christ (Heb. 13:15, 1 Peter 2:5)
  • Worship Is By the Holy Spirit (Eph. 2:18, Phil. 3:3)
  • Worship Is In Spirit and Truth (John 4:24)
  • Worship Involves Our Affections and Intellect (1 Cor. 14:15)
  • Worship Is In Awe and Reverence (Heb. 12:28)
  • Worship Is In Expectation (Matt. 21:22, James 4:8)
  • Worship Is Glorious (Ps. 66:2, Ps. 96:7-9)
  • Worship Is Glad and Joyful (Ps. 100)
  • Worship Draws the Faithful (Ps. 84:1-4)
  • Worship Shapes Us (Col. 3:16)
  • Worship Convicts the Sinner (1 Cor. 14:25)
  • Worship Is Orderly (1 Cor. 14:39)

Why music?
Music belongs in corporate worship because, again, the Bible calls for it.  The edict is strongest in the Old Testament but it is clearly commanded in the New Testament as well, being principally exhibited in the commands to sing to one another and to the Lord in Eph. 5:18-21 and Col. 3:16.
Besides obedience to Scripture, are there practical, biblically-ordained reasons for using music in worship? Yes. Although other art forms can be justified on a biblical basis, music is explicitly commanded in the New Testament, as just seen.  What, then, is the point of using music in worship? Because facts and propositions are insufficient to convey the essence of all truth. Art is able to communicate on an emotional plane that the mere transmission of information cannot reach. Art is able to communicate the inarticulable. James K. A. Smith says, “words mean more than their propositional content.” Their sequence, meter, rhyme, alliteration, etc., combine to convey something greater than the sum of their definitions. Art is thus a way to convey meta-truths, to speak to the heart in more precise ways than any words could. Art is a God-demonstrated and Bible-sanctioned means of telling the truth. For example, the poetry of Psalm 19:1-2 says more than the content alone, and the content points to God’s artwork that says more about him than words ever could:
The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
Day to day pours out speech,
and night to night reveals knowledge.
What is music’s function?
These New Testament passages which command us to sing also explain music’s corporate purpose. Colossians tells us to teach and admonish one another with music. This fulfills one of the church’s primary functions, to edify believers (Eph. 4:11-16). Both Ephesians and Colossians tell us to gratefully express our hearts to the Lord. This supports the church’s ultimate purpose, worship (John 4:23-24). Obvious by omission is any mention of church music as a vehicle for self-gratification, entertainment, or individual exhibition.
Who should make music?
From Ephesians and Colossians we see that music should primarily be a congregational activity; it involves the body of Christ ministering to one another and communally expressing their heart to God. This also implies that the music is primarily vocal – that is, containing words – but instrumental music is also implied (the Greek behind make music or make melody in Eph 5:19 implies stringed instruments). Second, music is not just an activity of the talented; rather, all are expected to participate. If you have been redeemed, it seems that God expects you to sing about it, no matter what kind of voice he has given you (Ps 107:1-3)!
Should there be any restrictions on music ministry participation?
Should music ministry participants be church members? Need they be baptized? Do they even need to have a clear confession of faith in Christ? On one hand, the Bible is clear that our worship must be “in spirit and truth (John 4:25)” and that “without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6).” As Paul Clark says, “There is no such thing as genuine Christian worship without faith.” On the other hand, effective outreach has been accomplished through choir and instrumental participation. Attending a weekly rehearsal of doctrinally sound music is an effective discipleship and evangelism tool. Ultimately, this is a decision for each church body to make for itself, but a clear policy is needed whichever position is taken. At a minimum, the people in prominent leadership positions need to have clear confessions of faith, evidence of spiritual fruit, and upright character. However, some leeway may be appropriate towards participation in larger ensembles.
What is the relationship between music and worship?
First of all, worship is mandatory (Ps 96:9, Lk 4:8). It is the highest and ultimate function of the church (Isa. 43:20-21, 1 Pet. 2:9). Second, a time will come when evangelism and discipleship and preaching will cease, but worship will go on forever. Third, worship is what we give to God, not what we get out of it. However, in many ways we have lost track of what worship is and is for. One hears all manner of Christians today refer to music as “worship,” and so it should be. However, the usual intent is to identify the church’s music as the worship portion of the service and everything else as, well, something else. This should not be. Our music in assembled unity should be worship, but worship does not consist solely of music, nor is it a foregone conclusion that when we have made music we have worshiped. Music performed solely for the gratification of the performer or the congregation is no offering of worship at all. The preaching, prayers, offerings, scripture readings, and ordinances are all part of corporate worship as well (Neh. 9, 1 Tim. 4:13). Even the announcements can be offered in worship when envisioned as commissioning of the saints. From this perspective it is clear that the primary worship leader of a service is the pastor not the singer!
So how then do we worship through music? The biblical Hebrew and Greek words translated into the English ‘worship’ convey the sense of bowing to the ground in complete submission. We don’t do much bowing in Western culture these days, but what we typically do in the musical portion of our worship doesn’t often convey submission either. How, then, could we explain submissive musical worship in modern terms? Refer back to the earlier definition of worship from William Temple and consider these questions:
Does our music exalt His holiness? Does our music feed our minds with biblical truth? Does our music purge our imaginations from vain, worldly concepts and replace them with His beauty? Does our music call us to know and emulate His love? Surrender to His will? Come and adore Him? If so, then we have approached His throne to “worship the LORD in the splendor of holiness” (Ps. 96:9).
Who should lead worship?
As mentioned above, the true worship leader of a church is its pastor who is ultimately responsible for all elements of a service and for leading the church body in the spiritual disciplines. Aspects of a service, such as the music, may be delegated, both to allow the Holy Spirit to utilize all the gifts he has distributed among the leaders and to relieve the pastor from duties that might distract from teaching and shepherding the flock. Unfortunately, a service’s musical responsibilities are all too often dispensed on musical ability alone rather than pastoral calling and training. David de Bruyn says this “is like delegating the planning of the Lord’s Supper to the kitchen staff.” (And may God bless those who emulate servant leadership in our kitchens!) In most churches, as much or more time is spent on music than on preaching, scripture reading, and praying combined. This is formative time for feeding the flock and they need nutrition, not empty calories. Those planning the musical ‘menu’ need to understand how to feed the flock biblical nourishment. If the musical staff doesn’t have the theological background to provide this, then it needs to come from the pastor or pastoral staff.
What about quality?
Psalm 66:2 tells us to “make his praise glorious.” As our creator, the only being worthy of worship, God’s praise should be the most excellent we can provide. Also, no matter how wonderful the praise may be, it must be given sacrificially. Stale, routine, half-hearted offerings give the LORD no pleasure. Consider David’s words: “I will not offer burnt offerings to the LORD my God that cost me nothing” (2 Sam. 24:24). To guard against quality itself becoming an idol, we need to keep the standard of measure to be our heart’s sincerity, as shown by the widow’s offering of two coins. Jesus commended her sincerity, not the quantity, saying, “out of her poverty she had put in everything she had” (Matthew 12:44). Thus, there is no room for pride or envy in our worship. “We do not worship excellence; we worship God excellently” (Emmanuel Baptist Church, Mauldin, SC). Thus, each church body should offer the best they have from the resources that the Lord himself has provided them and, without boasting, give God the glory for the result. This is sufficient (2 Cor 10:17-18).
Still, for most of the church’s history it has been the fount of the finest music of its age. The tendency towards inferior church music is a relatively recent development. At a time when public education continues to de-emphasize music, the church has an opportunity to raise the quality of God’s praise and restore a measure of its historical artistic excellence so as to make God’s praise glorious. Consider, then, Ps 66 as a challenge to never be satisfied until the excellence of our praises is worthy of the excellence of our Savior.
Should worship and music be aimed towards unbelievers?
Authentic worship can only be offered by regenerate believers in Jesus Christ (John 4:23-25). Corporate worship is intended to be accomplished by the congregation of the saints. Evangelism is a legitimate component of worship, but the scriptural model for effective proclamation of the gospel is authentic worship by true believers (1 Corinthians 14: 24-25). Services sculpted to appeal to “seekers” or non-believers may be worthwhile evangelistic meetings but I submit that these are not a substitute for scriptural corporate worship. Thus, our worship services should be designed for the communion of the saints with the triune God. This will provide compliance with Scripture and the most excellent witness to unbelievers.
A Description of Scriptural Worship Music
This paper began by asking, “What is Worship?” Having argued that Scripture should determine what acceptable worship is I now submit that Bible-shaped worship music looks like this:

  • God focused
    • For God, about God (who he is, what he is like, what he has done, what he has said, in all three persons), and towards God (Ex. 20:3, Ps. 7:17, Ps. 105:2, Matt. 4:10, Heb. 13:15).
  • Christ Centered (Col. 3:16-17, Phil. 2:9-11, 1 Peter 2:5)
    • Jesus is exalted, proclaimed, adored, emulated, obeyed, and expected.
  • Spirit Empowered
    • True worship is by believers regenerated by the Holy Spirit (Heb. 11:6, Eph. 2:18)
    • This doesn’t mean charismatic, just that worship without the Spirit is void.
    • Corporate worship that is acceptable to God assumes a covenant community that has been created and qualified by the Holy Spirit (Bible.org).
  • Scripturally Saturated
    • Magnifying the gospel: in content and shape, worship must conform to the scriptures (John 4:23b).
    • Music is a vehicle for proclaiming the Word of God… “The gift of language combined with the gift of song was only given to man to let him know that he should praise God with both word and music, namely, by proclaiming [God’s word] through music and by providing sweet melodies with words.” – Martin Luther
    •  “The Word of God is the bedrock foundation upon which all of our worship practice is built.” – Grace Bible Church, Plantation, FL.
  • Doctrinally Sound (Col 3:16, John 4:23)
    • The church’s music boldly proclaims the whole gospel. It should “distinguish between the unavoidable offense of the gospel and the avoidable offense(s) of obscure traditionalism” (Parker Hills Bible Fellowship, Parker, CO).
    • Care must be taken to ensure the church’s music supports its doctrine without mixture of error or confusion.
  • Unifying
    • Segregating a congregation by musical taste is completely unbiblical. We wouldn’t dream of dividing by race, nationality, or gender. The gospel is supposed to unite diverse peoples into one body (Rom 5:12). Worship services should unify multiple generations into one family, exemplifying mutual submission (Eph. 5:21), and deference over preference (Rom 12:10), where each generation rejoices in blessing others (Rom 12:15). Corporate worship should build up the body in unity, not segregate it (Phil. 2:1-4).
    • “One of the leading ways the church can testify to God’s unifying power before our segregated world is to establish and maintain congregations and worship services that transcend cultural barriers, including age and musical styles” (Tullian Tchividjian).
  • “Double-Directional” (Gordon Fee)
    • Given to God (vertical).
    • Experienced with fellow believers and demonstrated to unbelievers (horizontal).
  • Comprehensible, Communicable, Meaningful (1 Cor. 14:15)
    • “Our own experiences, our own words, our own voice” – David de Bruyn
  • Congregational
    • The most important instrument in the church is the congregation  (Ps. 5:11, Ps. 30:4, Ps. 95:1-2, Ps. 100:2, Ps. 111:1, Eph. 1:11-12, Eph. 5:19, Col. 3:16).
  • Accessible
    • Congregational songs should suit the abilities of the people or, in other words, be ‘singable’. Most congregations will have little musical training and shouldn’t be asked to sing music beyond their abilities.
    • This doesn’t mean ‘immediate’, or instantly appealing. It means that it should be within the grasp of the people. Nutritious eating takes a little more effort than junk food consumption. Music is the same way.
  • Excellent
    • Despite the preceding thought, we should not seek the easy way out. Our music should be the highest quality the church can produce commensurate with the congregation’s abilities and resources. This is because God deserves our best (Ps. 66:1-2). Our sacrifice of praise should cost us something (2 Sam 24:24, Ps 33:3), always keeping in mind that quality without sincerity is ritualistic and vain and displeasing to God (Amos 5:21-23), driving man away from God rather than drawing him near.
  • Evangelistic
    • Proper and sincere music and worship will be evangelistic. When we offer clear and orderly gospel-centered worship, then when “an unbeliever . . . enters . . . he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.” (1 Cor. 14:23-24, 1 Chron. 16:23, Isa. 12:5)
  • Expanding
    • We should avoid complacency and seek to always broaden our musical vocabulary. The Christian’s expression is impoverished when restricted to the familiar and the trite (Ps. 96:1-2, Ps. 98:1, Ps. 149:1). Exposure to unfamiliar styles and new music provides a foretaste of the great heavenly assembly when “every creature in heaven and on earth” will sing to the Lamb “blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever” (Rev 5:18).
  • Biblically Shaped
    • The Bible provides an authorized, inspired, hymnal in the Psalms (2 Chron. 29:30). The psalter provides significant guidance for us, not only in explicit song texts, but also in matters of form, style, and expression. It covers the full gamut of human emotion, expressed in ways that God finds acceptable, with a rich and deep vocabulary that tells us much about how our music should be structured.

Stylistic Issues
All the above intentionally omits any overt discussion of style. Do I support traditional, contemporary, classical, country, cutting edge, blended or what? The answer is yes. To me, quality and sincerity are far more important than style, and both must yield to offering music in spirit and truth. However, at least part of the reason that music has been such a contentious church issue in recent decades is because of music’s profound ability to shape us. How it does so has long been debated, but it is nearly universally regarded to affect our emotions, and, for most of civilizations’ history, music has been believed to have the power to develop or degrade character as well. This should not be surprising. God designed the physics that allows music to function. He designed our ears and auditory systems to perceive music’s modulations. He designed our hearts in a way that allows music to interact with our deepest affections. If this is all true, then the Church’s leaders are obliged to apply music in a way that fulfills worship’s formative purpose, to make Christ-like disciples. So, there is a choice: to ignore what Augustine called, “the danger that lies in gratifying the senses,” and adapt the musical forms of the surrounding culture, or, to creatively practice music in a way that renews the people’s minds in the shape of Christ. Music conveys a message, whether it has lyrics or not. The message of the sounds and rhythms needs to support the message of the church just as much as the lyrics do.
In light of all this, I find the following points to be practical stylistic guidelines for our music:

  1. The styles should be emotionally and intellectually meaningful to the people. Music that is unintelligible to the mind or the heart fails to meet a number of the scriptural guidelines outlined above and fails to edify the church and express our hearts to God. The styles used should express the congregation’s own voice, in its own words.
  2. The styles used should center on what the people can do well. Music that is too difficult or is outside the people’s expressive range fails also.
  3. Rather than use musical styles that conform the church to our surrounding culture, we should creatively practice our music in a way that transforms our minds with an aim towards transforming the culture around us.
  4. Music shouldn’t be about creating a mood. We’re not to be like the prophets of Baal, dancing and bleeding in an effort to draw our God down to us. He is already among us! “For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them” (Matt 18:20). Nor is the music’s purpose to manipulate our emotions, but rather to serve our affections in expressing our response to God for who he is and what he has done. In serving our affections, the musical style should be congruent with the message of the music so that the form of the music doesn’t counteract its content.
  5. Our music should appropriate the best from the Church’s heritage and today’s practices. Styles and taste change with time and building a worship practice around a particular style or genre of music either freezes a congregation into a historical rut, or subjects it to the whims of popular culture or both. Keeping music relevant, authentic, and scripturally sound takes hard work. Let’s not get stuck in a rut!
  6. Our music should be beautiful, in all the connotations of the word, and not just referring to ‘prettiness’. In the Bible’s depictions of beauty, its epitome is found in the radiance of God’s manifold perfections, or his glory. Psalm 104:1 says God is clothed with honor and majesty. Psalm 19:1 says the heavens declare the glory of God. In the creation narrative God looks at his handiwork and declares it “good” (Gen 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), with a clear connotation of beauty in regards to creation being sufficient, sound, functional, and complete. Thus, the Bible declares that the standard and source of all beauty is God himself and that it has been displayed to all people through His creation.

This contradicts the popular concept that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In other words, beauty is not relative. Rather, things have absolute, objective qualities that are beautiful when they reflect the truth, goodness, and beauty found in God. Although the perception of beauty can be subjective based on the perceiver’s knowledge and experiences, the apprehension of actual beauty can also be developed. This development is one of the responsibilities of the Christian and particularly of Christian leaders.
Phil 4:8 (ESV) says “whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” Christians are obliged to praise what is absolutely beautiful, discern that which reflects God’s beauty, and contemplate such things with the goal of aligning what is subjectively beautiful (thoughts, values, preferences) with what is objectively beautiful (God, Jesus, Scripture, creation) in order to point the church away from the world’s corruptions and toward God’s perfections. Our music needs to project and instill these values among the saints.

REFERENCES:
A Conservative Christian Declaration; Article 13: “On Today’s Congregational Music”; David de Bruyn (religiousaffections.org/articles/articles-on-aesthetics/artice-13-on-todays-congregational-music).
“Brief Philosophy of Corporate Worship,” Dan Kreider, http://canemus.org/2011/07/brief-philosophy-of-corporate-worship/.
“Deference Over Preference,” Paul Clark, September 9, 2013, http://paulclarkjr.com/2013/09/09/deference-over-preference/.
“Do You Hear the People Sing?” Marshall Segal, November 16, 2014
“Is Your Worship Music Driven by Complaints or Mission in Context?” Ed Stetzer, Christianity Today, March 27, 2014.
“Our Pursuit of Biblically Authentic Worship,” Immanuel Bible Church, Sheboygan, WI.
“Philosophy for Music in Corporate Worship,” Grace Bible Church, November 17, 2006.
“Philosophy of Music & Worship,” Grace Bible Church, Plantation, FL, http://www.westgatebaptist.org/site/cpage.asp?cpage_id=140026146&sec_id=140002402.
“Philosophy of Worship”; Emmanuel Baptist Church, Mauldin, SC (ebcupstate.com/about/what-we-believe/philosophy-worship).
“Principles on Effectively Leading Corporate Worship,” Chad Stafford, The Sanctuary, Deland, FL.
“The Worship Service: A Hindrance of a Highway for Revival,” Ron Owen, Cornerstone Baptist Church, Clinton, SC.
“What Is the Philosophy of Worship that Unites Us?” John Piper, Desiring God, April 1, 1994, http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-is-the-philosophy-of-worship-that-unites-us.
“What Is Christ-Centered Worship?” Karl Dahlfred, February 1, 2010.
“Worship Philosophy,” Countryside Baptist Church, Olathe, KS, http://www.cside.org/worship.aspx.
“Worship Philosophy,” Scofield Church, Dallas, TX, http://www.scofield.org/ministries/93.
“Worship & Arts Philosophy of Ministry,” Grace Community Church, Mills River, NC, http://www.graceinfo.org/ministries/worship/philosophy-of-ministry.
“Worship Verses and Quotes,” Sherwood Baptist Church, Newcastle, OK, http://sherwoodbaptist.com/about/music-philosophy/worship-verses-quotes/.
“7 Biblical Tests for Christians and Music,” Ed Stetzer, Christianity Today, June 5, 2013.

[1]Scott Aniol,“Draw Near to God Through Jesus Christ By Faith,” Religious Affections Ministries, June 29, 2011, accessed April 20, 2016, http:// religiousaffections. org/ articles/articles-on-worship/draw-near-to-god-through-jesus-christ-by-faith/

[2]William Temple, Readings in St. John’s Gospel, First and Second Series, (New York, Macmillan Co., 1945), 68.