CHAPTER X.
Apostolic Example and Instrumental Music.

In the search for divine authority for instrumental music in Christian worship, its apologists sometimes attempt to find it in the example of some of the Apostles. It is claimed that inspired Apostles, and particularly Peter and John, worshiped God under Christ with instrumental music, and that, therefore, we have apostolic example for the practice in Christian worship.

Let it be cheerfully conceded, first of all, that if this claim be founded in fact--if, indeed, we have apostolic example for the practice, then all opposition to it should cease; for, if we are not to follow the leadership of inspired Apostles in our efforts to worship and serve God, then we are in hopeless confusion, and it is needless to look anywhere else for guidance.

But what are the facts about this important claim? "To the law and to the testimony," shall be our appeal. The claim in question is based upon the conduct of Peter and John as recorded in the third chapter of the book of Acts. It is alleged that, when these Apostles went into the temple at the hour of prayer, they went for the purpose of engaging in [99] the worship as there conducted, and that they did engage in said worship; that instrumental music was used in that worship; and hence that the use of such music in Christian worship has on it the stamp of apostolic approval.

It is much easier to affirm than to prove; and we now propose to show that the foregoing string of assertions, so far as the one essential thing to be proved is concerned, are utterly without foundation in fact. Even those statements in the list which are true, (and some of them are true), have nothing whatever to do with the point at issue, have not, in fact, the remotest bearing on it, so that the case is not affected by them one way or another. It is amazing to see how even strong men, when committed to the defense of what they cannot prove, will resort to a process of reasoning which assumes or takes for granted the very thing which they have set out to prove. This effort to find support in apostolic example for instrumental music in Christian worship is a conspicuous illustration of this fact. In his debate with Brother W. W. Otey in 1908, Brother J. B. Briney stated the case as follows:

Not only before the day of Pentecost, but afterwards Peter and John were going up into the Temple at the ninth hour of the day, and there were these instruments of music, and that these men went up there to participate in those devotions where these instruments were being used, it seems to me, [100] does not admit of reasonable doubt, and yet, notwithstanding the fact that the Savior was there in his lifetime, and notwithstanding the fact that the Apostles frequented that Temple and participated in those thanks and adoration and praise, yet not one line or one word or one sentence ever fell from Apostle, Prophet or Christ in condemnation of that practice.--Otey-Briney Debate, p. 44.

We desire now to analyze and examine these statements, and especially their logical bearing upon the point in dispute. They are four in number, as follows: (1). "Peter and John were going up into the Temple at the ninth hour of the day." (2). "There were these instruments of music." (3). "That these men went up there to participate in those devotions where these instruments were being used, it seems to me, does not admit of reasonable doubt." (4). "Notwithstanding the fact that the Apostles frequented that Temple, and participated in those thanks and adoration and praise, yet not one line or one word or one sentence ever fell from Apostle, Prophet or Christ in condemnation of that practice."

Now, suppose "Peter and John were going up into the Temple at the ninth hour;" and suppose it is true that "there were these instruments of music;" and suppose, furthermore, that "not one line or one word or one sentence ever fell from Apostle, Prophet or Christ in condemnation of that practice,"--suppose all this is true, still we are confronted [101] with the stubborn fact that, so far as the one point here at issue is concerned, everything depends upon whether the thing assumed in number 3 is true or false. But the unvarnished fact here is that what is assumed in number 3 is nothing more nor less than a bald and groundless assumption with not one word, fact, or intimation in the entire record that proves it. The very thing to be proved is coolly assumed and reasoned on as a settled fact. The author of the statement himself approaches it rather cautiously. He only says "it seems to" him that Peter and John "went up there to participate in those devotions where these instruments were being used;" but where is the proof of it? And why should it "seem" so in the absence of proof? The very utmost that can here be claimed is that the point assumed is a mere inference, but by no means a necessary inference. There is not one word in the whole record that says they were going into the Temple for that purpose, and not a single fact from which it is a necessary inference. Moreover, not only is all this true, but there are clear and indisputable facts in the record which show conclusively that Peter and John went into the Temple for a very different purpose. We now appeal to the record for a verification of this point, and we begin with the third chapter of Acts.

1. It is clearly stated in the record that Peter and John went up into the Temple at the hour of prayer, 3: 1. There is, therefore, no room for dispute on this point.

2. But what did they go for? Everything hinges here. Now, if there could have been no other purpose in going into the Temple at that hour except "to participate in those devotions," then the fact of their going thither at that hour would, of course, be proof of the point in dispute; but this is not only not true, but the record plainly and specifically states a different purpose for which the Apostles went into the Temple. That this purpose may be clearly seen, we will now examine the facts in detail.

(1). Beginning with the third chapter of Acts, we find, first of all, that, as "Peter and John were going up into the Temple," they found the lame man whom the people "laid daily at the door of the Temple which is called Beautiful, to ask alms of them that entered into the Temple," vv. 1, 2.

(2). This lame man "seeing Peter and John about to go into the Temple, asked to receive an alms," v. 3.

(3). Then followed the miracle of healing. The Apostle said: "Silver and gold have I none; but what I have, that give I thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk," v. 6.

(4). Being immediately healed, the lame man stood, and began to walk; and he entered with them into the Temple, walking, and leaping, and praising God," v. 8.

(5). When the people saw what was done, "they were filled with wonder and amazement at that which had happened unto him," and they all "ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomon's," vv. 10, 11.

(6). At this juncture Peter, promptly seizing the opportunity, delivered a strong and convincing sermon, proclaiming the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, and thus set forth the new order of worship and service to God which had come to supersede the service belonging to the Temple, vv. 12-26.

(7). This at once produced a clash between Peter and John on the one hand, and the Temple authorities on the other, the latter "being sore troubled because they taught the people, and proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection from the dead;" and the extent to which the devotees of the Temple worship were stirred up is seen in the fact that they at once had Peter and John arrested and put in prison, 4: 1-3.

(8). The next important fact in Luke's record of these interesting proceedings is his statement of the effect of Peter's sermon upon the people, when he says: "Many of them that heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand," v. 4.

(9). Following Luke in his continuous narrative of apostolic proceedings in and about the Temple, be says that "by the hands of the Apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch. But of the rest durst no man join himself to them; howbeit the people magnified them; and believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women," 5: 12-14.

(10). We now reach the climax of proof touching the purpose for which the Apostles went into the temple, when we are informed by Luke that, as the result of their labors thus far in the Temple, "the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy, and laid hands on the Apostles, and put them in public ward," whereupon "an angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them out and said, Go ye, and stand and speak in the Temple to the people all the words of this Life; and when they heard this, they entered into the Temple about daybreak, and taught." On the following day, thinking their prisoners were secure within the prison, "the high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the council together, and all the senate of the children of Israel, and sent to the prison-house to have them brought. But the officers that came found them not in the prison; and they returned, and told, saying, The prison-house we found shut in all safety, and the keepers standing at the doors; but when we had opened, we found no man within." The captain of the Temple and the chief priests were dumfounded at this unexpected turn in the current of events, and while they were perplexed over the situation, "there came one and told them, Behold, the men whom ye put in the prison are in the Temple standing and teaching the people," vv. 17-25. Finally, when they were again arrested and brought before the council [105] for trial, the high priest said: "We strictly charged you not to teach in this name; and behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us," to which the resolute Apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men;" and after being beaten by the council and charged "not to speak in the name of Jesus," Luke informs us that they "departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name." He then adds the significant statement that "every day, in the Temple and at home, they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ," vv. 27-42.

Now, in the light of this array of facts, the purpose for which the Apostles went into the Temple is so clearly set forth that it amounts to nothing short of a demonstration. The angel of the Lord said: "Go ye, and stand and speak in the Temple to the people all the words of this Life." Luke tells us that they promptly entered into the Temple "and taught." An unnamed person came and reported to the council: "Behold, the men whom ye put in the prison are in the Temple standing and teaching the people." On the very occasion when Peter and John went into the Temple at the hour of prayer, while the object of their going is not stated by Luke in immediate connection with his statement of the fact that they went into the Temple, yet a little further on in his narrative he gives it by giving what they did in the Temple. He not only informs us [106] that they preached to the people there assembled, but he gives substantially a part of the powerful and effective sermon delivered by Peter on the occasion by which he converted many persons to the Christian faith. And finally, to put the matter beyond all doubt and disputation, Luke states the fact that "every day, in the Temple and at home, they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ."

Now, not only do we have all this plainly in the record, but there is not one word that says they "went up there to participate in those devotions." Yea, more; not only is there not a word in the record that says they went there to engage in the Temple worship, but there is not a word that says they went there to worship at all. The record specifically gives a different purpose which led them into the Temple, namely, to introduce the new faith and the new order of worship under Christ. Moreover, as a matter of fact, this new faith and the new order of worship, which we have now seen they went into the Temple to introduce, would completely change and supersede "those devotions" belonging to the Temple service, except in so far as they contained something which the Lord incorporated in the new order. The record distinctly shows that they went there to teach the word of God, to preach the new faith and establish the new order of worship, and they went to the Temple because they could there find the people many of whom would be ready and [107] willing to hear their message, just as, on precisely the same principle, they subsequently went into the synagogues of the Jews throughout the Roman empire to preach the same new faith and establish the same new order of worship under Christ.

We are, therefore, irresistibly led to the conclusion that whoever, in order to find support for instrumental music in Christian worship, appeals to the fact that the Apostles went into the Jewish Temple where such music was used in the Jewish worship, appeals to a record that does not contain a single statement, fact, or word in support of the practice.