On Bible Interpretation, Evidence, and Music
Image
2 Timothy 3:16 reveals that all of Scripture is God-inspired and instructive. Taken with Romans 15:4, similar verses, and examples of NT use of OT passages, some have concluded that even incidental narrative details are potential sources of doctrine.
Since OT narrative details reference everything from clothing to cooking, tools, weapons, vehicles (carts, chariots), and so much more, there are, of course, references to music. There are even references to specific instruments, moods, and uses of music.
I want to offer a few thoughts here for two audiences. The first is those who claim the hermeneutic (interpretive approach) that takes every narrative detail as a potential source of doctrine. The second audience is those who have participated in conversations, debates, or quarrels on the topic of “what the Bible teaches about music” and sensed that there was some kind of disconnect regarding how to use Scripture to address features of present-day culture.
Maybe something here can help a few understand each other a little bit better on these topics and more accurately identify points of agreement and disagreement.
Narrative and Evidence
I’ve written about proper use of narrative before, with a focus on why we should avoid “spiritualizing” elements of narrative—whether OT or NT. Many of the same problems afflict efforts to extract doctrine from narrative details.
Here, we’ll focus on the role of evidence in Bible interpretation, especially narrative.
It should be a given that since we’re talking about God’s Word, and teaching we are going to claim is “biblical,” any interpretation we take of any passage of Scripture—narrative or not—needs to be justified by evidence and reasoning. Saying “God meant this when He said that” is a weighty claim! It needs to be justified.
In other words, whenever we claim, “This information in this text has this meaning for us,” we should be expected to prove it. The “proof” may be informal, as it usually is in preaching. Still, we should expect listeners to want reasons. Our beliefs and assertions should be warranted, and we should help others see why they are warranted.
Narrative is no exception to this duty—any more than poetry, prophecy, or epistles.
Classifying Evidence
Some years ago, I wrote about casting lots as a thought experiment on handling biblical evidence. A lot of readers wanted to debate the validity of casting lots—but my intent was to stir curiosity: Why don’t churches or individual believers generally make decisions that way today?
There’s a reason we don’t. It has to do with evidence.
I’m going to talk about three qualities of evidence, two types of evidence, then five sub-types.
First, three qualities:
- Consistent with
- Supportive
- Conclusive
Say a building burned down, and we discover that Wolfgang was at the location when the fire started. His presence there is consistent with the claim that he started the fire, but it doesn’t support that conclusion at all. This is more obvious if lots of other people were there, too.
But suppose we also learn that Wolfgang had publicly said he wished that building would burn. He also bought lots of flammable liquids earlier that day. That still doesn’t prove he did it, but it is supportive. Though inconclusive, it is evidential for the claim that Wolfgang started the fire.
Now suppose Wolfgang was the only person there at the right time to have started the fire. Suppose the building was recently inspected and found to have no faulty wiring. There were no electrical storms that day, either.
We are now probably “beyond reasonable doubt” about Wolfgang’s guilt. The evidence is conclusive in the sense that it warrants a high-confidence conclusion.
On to the two types:
- Internal evidence
- External evidence
In reference to the Bible, internal evidence is anything within the 66 books of the Bible. External evidence is everything from human experience, human nature, and the whole created world outside the Bible.
Simple enough. On to the five sub-types. These are types of internal evidence. We could choose almost any topic, then classify every (or nearly every) biblical reference to it as one of these types. I’ll use music for this example:
- Direct teaching on the nature and purpose of music in all contexts.
- Direct teaching on the nature and purpose of music in a particular setting.
- Examples of people using music, with contextual indications of quality, and evidence of exemplary intent.
- Examples of people using music, with contextual indications of quality but no evidence of exemplary intent.
- Examples of people using music, but no contextual indications of quality or exemplary intent.
What do I mean by “exemplary intent”? Sometimes we read that person A did B, and the context encourages us to believe we’re seeing an example of good or bad conduct. For example, we read that Daniel prayed “as he had done previously” (Dan 6:10). The context encourages us to see Daniel’s choices as both good (“contextual indications of quality”) and something to imitate in an appropriate way (“exemplary intent”).
Evidence and Certainty
Why bother to classify evidence? Because classifying the information (evidence/potential evidence) guides us in evaluating how well it works as justification for a claim. In turn, that shapes how certain we can be that our understanding is correct and how certain we can encourage others to be.
Looking at the five types of internal evidence above, the evidential weight and certainty decrease as we get further down the list. By the time we get to type 5, we may not have evidence at all—in reference to our topic or claim. Depending on the size of the claim, there might be information that is consistent with a claim, but not really anything supportive, much less conclusive.
As we move up the list of types, relevance to the topic becomes far more direct, and interpretive possibilities are greatly reduced. Certainty increases because there are fewer options.
There is no Bible verse that tells us this. It’s a function of what is there in the text vs. what is not there. We know there is a difference between an apostle saying, “Do this for this reason” and an individual in an OT history doing something, with no explanation of why it’s in the text. The relationship of these realities to appropriate levels of certainty follows out of necessity.
How Narrative Is Special
Speaking of differences between one genre of writing and another in Scripture, let’s pause to briefly note a few things about narrative.
- Humans pretty much universally recognize narrative. They may not be able to explain what sets it apart from other kinds of writing, but they know it when they read or hear it.
- The characteristics of narrative that enable us to recognize it are not revealed in Scripture. There is no verse that says “this is the definition of narrative.” We just know.
- Those characteristics include the fact that many details in narratives are only there to support the story. They are not intended to convey anything to us outside of that context.
- There is no Bible verse that tells us narrative works this way. We just know. It’s built into the definition.
What does this mean when it comes to evidence and justifying our claim that a passage reveals a truth or helps build a doctrine?
It means that narrative detail has a different burden-of-proof level by default. Because the story-supportive role of narrative detail is inherent in the nature of narrative, our starting assumption with these details is normally that they are there to give us information about the events and characters, not to provide other kinds of information.
Can a narrative detail have a secondary purpose of revealing to us the nature of, say, hats and other clothing, carts and other vehicles, stew and other dishes, axes and other tools, lyres and other musical instruments? Probably sometimes. As with any other interpretive claim, the burden of proof lies on the interpreter to justify it. In the case of narrative, though, the interpreter has a lower-certainty starting point, and a longer journey to arrive at a warranted belief.
The Profitability of All Scripture
2 Timothy 3:16 and Romans 15:4 do indeed assure us that all of Scripture is important. “Verbal, plenary inspiration” describes our conviction that every original word of the Bible is fully and equally from God. So we don’t look at any words and dismiss them as unimportant. What we do is ask how do these words work together in their context to provide us with “teaching… reproof.. correction… and training in righteousness.”
Narrative details are important. They’re so important that we’re obligated to stay out of the way and let them do their job.
Aaron Blumer 2016 Bio
Aaron Blumer is a Michigan native and graduate of Bob Jones University and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He and his family live in small-town western Wisconsin, not far from where he pastored for thirteen years. In his full time job, he is content manager for a law-enforcement digital library service. (Views expressed are the author's own and not his employer's, church's, etc.)
- 3521 views
When participants are just yelling at each other, we are generating heat, not light.
Bad arguments on both sides...
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Bert Perry repeatedly comes onto threads in which I am seeking to discuss the Bible and music and brings up the same nonsense, false charges of racism against me again and again.
I have not made a single comment in this thread about any of the false claims that he is making. Yet, it appears that he has succeeded in sabotaging another legitimate thread by this tactic.
Why should he be allowed to do so to yet another thread?
In my opinion, every thread where you keep pounding your theories descends to this. You fail to convince anyone, even those who would probably agree with your general position on music (i.e., me).
Logic, evidence, exegesis... it would be nice to see them used.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
I encourage those who are interested in learning more about just how perverse and evil human skull drums are to read the Wikipedia article on the subject: Damaru - Wikipedia
If you look at the footnotes and external links to the article, you will find even more information that shows just how corrupt and perverse these abominable musical instruments are.
God commands believers to reprove the unfruitful works of darkness:
Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Christians who are ignorant or misinformed of the true dangers and horrors of the occult lack foundational information that is needed to obey the Spirit's command in Ephesians 5:11 and His commands in many other passages.
I encourage those who are interested in learning more about just how perverse and evil human skull drums are to read the Wikipedia article on the subject: Damaru - Wikipedia
Again, no one is questioning whether drums made from human skulls are legitimate. Make the connection between them and modern Christian practices please.
Rajesh, look back on the other article of Brennan's you linked to. So transitively, you've made a lot of points which point back to these two articles. Side note; it also appears that you've vastly overstated the use of the "skull damaru", as they seem to be linked predominantly to Tibetan Buddhism. There are plenty of atrocities all over the world linked to plenty of varieties of pagans, but I'm not finding reference to skull drums except in reference to Tibetan Buddhism.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Again, no one is questioning whether drums made from human skulls are legitimate. Make the connection between them and modern Christian practices please.
Many Christians hold the false view that all musical "genres" or "styles" are pleasing to God and fit for use in corporate worship. Influential Christian leaders such as Harold Best, Rick Warren, Bob Kauflin, and others have misled and mistaught God's people to accept such false views in one form or another and to one degree or another.
In order to answer these false views, the false reasoning about both what the Bible teaches and what evil humans are capable of doing and have done musically has to be brought to light. In order to do so, the discussion cannot and must not be limited only to what modern Christian practices are or are not doing.
Before right application to modern Christian practices can be made, false notions about human music making activities have to be answered.
false notions about human music making activities have to be answered.
But this isn't what you are doing by going on about skull drums. By all means, answer whatever notions Christians today have that you believe are false. Just show us your work, so we can be convinced or respond.
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Notice carefully that the Spirit specifies that sinful humans give heed to seducing spirits and demonic doctrine. In order for them to give such heed to demons, they must come into contact with them.
Factual information exists from all over the world that shamans and other occultists use occult percussive practices (including on skull drums) specifically to have contact with and receive information from demons. Christians who deny that any of this information about such occult percussive practices is true must have authentic and factual bases for doing so.
The Bible certainly does not provide any such basis.
But this isn't what you are doing by going on about skull drums. By all means, answer whatever notions Christians today have that you believe are false. Just show us your work, so we can be convinced or respond.
Actually, it is. Skull drums prove that sinful humans involved in occult activities have engaged in creative activities to produce a combination musical product (skull drums) that is categorically unacceptable to God for any righteous use.
Because we know with certainty that sinful humans have done so with regard to producing an utterly unacceptable musical instrument, we then have to examine what we are to believe about the distinctively occult percussive practices that those occultists have originated that they play on those skull drums.
Is there any basis, biblical or otherwise, to hold legitimately that all the distinctively occult musical practices of sounding their skull drums that they have originated are themselves all perfectly holy, righteous, and acceptable to God? If so, what are those bases?
some shall depart from the faith
First of all, I think you've overlooked this key phrase in interpreting what it means to giving heed to doctrines of demons. Paul is not talking about some kind of inadvertent contact with the occult, he's talking about those who abandon their profession of faith.
Second, you are still not connecting any of the dots between A and Z. No one here disagrees with 1 Timothy 4:1, which explicitly indicates that Christians cannot have anything to do with seducing spirits or demonic doctrines. And no one is advocating for skull drums to be added to the Sunday morning worship set. It is just not obvious at all what skull drums and demonic doctrines have to do with Christian worship practices (some of which you apparently believe are false).
Yes, what Paul is talking about in 1 Timothy 4:1 teaches that, but in order for that to happen, they have to have contact with the seducing spirits. The point that I am making is that sinful humans do have such contact with seducing spirits, and the Bible explicitly testifies to their having such contact.
Concerning your second point, you are jumping ahead and missing what I am driving at. Occultists all over the world engage in occult percussive activities that put them into contact with demons. They themselves testify that they use distinctive percussive practices to initiate and engage in that contact with the demons. The whole purpose of their occult musical activities is to have contact with demons and receive information from them.
What are we to believe about those distinctively occult percussive practices that those occultists use to have contact with demons?
Did God create those distinctively occult practices of sounding the skull drums and other occult musical instruments?
Are all those practices of sounding those skull drums and other musical instruments themselves holy, righteous, and acceptable to God?
What are we to believe about those distinctively occult percussive practices that those occultists use to have contact with demons?
Did God create those distinctively occult practices of sounding the skull drums and other occult musical instruments?
This is conflating two different things, drums made from human skulls and "occult percussive practices" (whatever those may be). The existence of the one does not prove the existence or influence of the other. That's what I mean about connecting all the dots.
This is conflating two different things, drums made from human skulls and "occult percussive practices" (whatever those may be). The existence of the one does not prove the existence or influence of the other. That's what I mean about connecting all the dots.
Of course, the existence of the one proves the existence of the other. The skull drums have to be sounded in some manner when they are used in the occult activities. What are we to believe about those distinctive percussive practices that the occultists use to sound their skull drums?
Discussion