I was recently examining an article by John Piper, a denominational minister, on this subject. I believe he does really understand the problem. He made two statements that summarize his, and perhaps the belief of many others. He wrote:

“There's a view of church life that says we should only do what the Bible commands us to do in worship: the regulative principle. Another view says we are free to do whatever the Bible doesn't forbid us to do.”

         When I looked at his examples I was disappointed to find he did not use items that are actually involved in our worship, but things that did not pertain to worship. Here are his points: “…virtually nobody only does what the Bible commands them to do. The Bible doesn't tell them what kind of shirt to wear. It doesn't tell them whether to stand at the front or the back when they preach.” He also added: “And the people who say that we are free to do whatever the Bible doesn't prohibit have to come to terms with the reality that you have to work with principles. For example, preaching with a bathing suit on: the Bible doesn't forbid it, but if a preacher walked out with a bathing suit….” His thought was, who would listen to the preacher?

         Notice the shirt we wear, where we stand, and bathing suits are not a part of any aspect of worship. Let me give some example of what would be a fair example. The “regulative principle” would say when we partake of the Lord’s Supper, we must use only unleavened bread and only the fruit of the grape. On the other hand, the position that insists that “we are free to do whatever the Bible doesn’t forbid us to do” is acceptable, the following must be acceptable. This position insists God would approve if we can put a piece of unleavened bread in a hamburger, and pour a little grape juice in a glass of Coke. That is the difference in these two concepts.

         While this sets the positions before us, but does not prove anything. What we need to do is look for Biblical examples to help us understand how God would react to these two positions. Does God care how we worship as long as we do worship Him.

         We need to add a passage in Hebrews to fully understand what happened in the Genesis account.  Hebrews 11:4 “By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain….” And couple that passage with Romans 10:17 “So faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

         What Cain and Abel offered did make a difference. According to Hebrews and Romans, God did not tell Cain he could not offer the fruit of the ground. Therefore according to some, God should have accepted his worship, but God did not accept his worship. Also understand Cain’s worship was “excellent”, for the Bible uses the term describing Abel’s sacrifice as “more excellent” than Cain’s. Therefore, though Cain offered an excellent sacrifice, God rejected it. 

         During the Mosaic age we have another example to consider. The manner of burning incense in the temple service was, according to the Jews, as follows:  

“One went and gathered the ashes from off the altar into a golden vessel, a second brought a vessel full of incense, and a third brought a censer with fire, and put coals on the altar, and he whose office it was to burn the incense strewed it on the fire at the command of the governor. At the same time all the people went out of the temple from between the porch and the altar.”  ADAM CLARKE’S COMMENTARY.

         I want to share the following Leviticus 10:1 in two different versions to help with clarity. First, the King James Version:

“And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not.”

The second reading is from the Easy-To-Read Version:

“Then Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu made a mistake. They took their incense dishes and put some fire and incense in them. But they did not use the fire that was on the altar—they took fire from some other place and brought it to the LORD. This was not what he had commanded.”

              We saw in Clarke’s Commentary how God wanted things to happen. But then we read about the sons of Aaron and what they did. They did use their censer with incense and fire. God didn’t tell them that they could not do what they did. But He took their lives.

         The third example comes from the Christian Age. When Paul was writing to the church at Corinth about their actions concerning the Lord’s Supper, he actually covered this same concept. Consider 1 Corinthians 11:20-21:

“When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk.” [I used the English Standard Version here to show that the church at Corinth in their mind was partaking of the Lord’s Supper.]

Notice again in our age, the Christian age, the Apostle Paul condemned the manner in which the Lord’s Supper was being observed. I also want to stress that in no place did God forbid the manner in which the Lord’s Supper was being observed until the Apostle Paul corrected this congregation. 

         Mr. Piper next made the following argument. He said, “I think this fear of using instruments was based on the regulative principle understood a certain way that said that in the New Testament you don't find any instruments. ("Singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord.” Ephesians 5:19) is there, but nobody is playing a harp or guitar or drum.) And I think that's a mistake to limit it that way.”

         At the end of this argument Mr. Piper said “And I think that’s a mistake to limit it that way.” But there is no authority in the phrase “and I think”. The authority comes from God’s word. Truth comes from God’s word. John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. Does Mr. Piper believe God does not have a right to command what He wants from us? I can just hear Mr. Piper say to Noah, had he lived in that day, “Use gopher wood”, but I think it’s a mistake to be limited to just gopher. Is that example not saying exactly what Mr. Piper said? He understands that we have a scriptural reason to sing, but he thinks we can add instruments as well. 

              Mr. Piper further said, “Another reason why this decision was made is that accompanying music was considered an artificial way of arousing the affections. They argued that God should rouse your affections, and he should arouse your affections through truth, not through the artificiality of sounds that make us feel good. Well, there is a real danger in sounds, but goodness gracious, if you're going to go that route then you've to do away with singing, because the human voice can make a beautiful sound that also is emotionally affecting.”

              This is one argument I have not heard used in defense of rejecting instrumental music. First, I don’t know of anywhere in God’s word that indicates instrumental music does or does not arouse affections. Even if it does, what is the scriptural reason for its acceptance or rejection? Doing what God asks of us is where our focus should be. It is not about our emotions. It is about our obedience.

              Piper concludes by saying, “God doesn't seem to be as afraid—whether with instruments in the Old Testament or voices in the New Testament—of possibly putting that stumbling block in our way. We just need to make sure that the accompaniment is suitable to the truth that we're saying and that we go through the sound and through the truth to God himself.”

              God is not in the business of putting stumbling blocks in our way, but He is in the business of telling us what to do. That is not a stumbling block. Otherwise everything is commands might be a stumbling block to some, as this passage indicates. 1 Corinthians 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

         We need to remember the words of Samuel the prophet to King Saul when he returned from defeating the Amalekites, “1 Samuel 15:22-23 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.  For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.”

         Based on this passage, God expects obedience over “a sacrifice of praise” as we see in Hebrews 13:15 “By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name. If we are concerned about obedience, we have authority from God’s word. If we are trying to “sacrifice with musical instruments” there is no authority in God’s word, and to obey is better than sacrifice.

         I realize much more could be said. If you have any questions concerning this or any other subject send me an email and I will respond as quickly as possible. But, let me ask, are you willing to risk your soul and all eternity over this addition to God’s worship?