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.)
- 5011 views
I've been patiently reading Aaron's and Rajesh's exchanges and feel like I'm going to be severely let down. At some point, Rajesh, you have to make a cogent, rational, and Scriptural argument based on actual instruments and actual music being played today by Christians. I've never been to a church or Christian concert where the band uses occultic human skull drums.
Please tell me your argument will not rely on this illogic:
- occultic skull drums are evil and all music played on them is evil.
- all modern drums are descended from occultic skull drums.
- therefore, all modern drums are evil and all music played on them is evil.
I bet you could use human skull drums to perform any music you want, including every hymn in your hymnal.
Is that so? It seems that you have either extensive personal experience playing skull drums to back up this statement or you have accessed objective, factual information that shows that this is true. Please provide your source(s) of information.
I've been patiently reading Aaron's and Rajesh's exchanges and feel like I'm going to be severely let down. At some point, Rajesh, you have to make a cogent, rational, and Scriptural argument based on actual instruments and actual music being played today by Christians. I've never been to a church or Christian concert where the band uses occultic human skull drums.
Actually, no. There is no biblical basis for you to assert rightly that I have to make any kind of arguments that are limited to what Christians are doing.
What Christians are doing musically in the world is not the sum total of what is true about music that is or is not acceptable to God.
My interest is in establishing what we are to believe about human music making activities all over the world. Any sound biblical approach to music must have worldwide applicability to it.
Please tell me your argument will not rely on this illogic:
- occultic skull drums are evil and all music played on them is evil.
- all modern drums are descended from occultic skull drums.
- therefore, all modern drums are evil and all music played on them is evil.
This is a ridiculous argument, so, no, it is not anything that I espouse.
So, consequently, you are way off on a rabbit trail pursuing triumphantly something that no one is advocating. I'd call that straining at gnats.
Whether anyone on SI is advocating something or not is not the standard by which a sound, fully biblical, and thorough theology of music is to be based.
I bet you could use human skull drums to perform any music you want, including every hymn in your hymnal.
Is that so? It seems that you have either extensive personal experience playing skull drums to back up this statement or you have accessed objective, factual information that shows that this is true. Please provide your source(s) of information.
Ask any musician you respect.
The fact is, I probably agree with your standards on music more than anyone else in this discussion, but you are just making yourself look foolish with your constant argumentation over exceedingly narrow points.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Ask any musician you respect.
The fact is, I probably agree with your standards on music more than anyone else in this discussion, but you are just making yourself look foolish with your constant argumentation over exceedingly narrow points.
Wow, this is strong language and unwarranted. You claim that any hymn can be played on a skull drum. I was not aware that melodies can be played on skull drums. Can you provide any factual information to support your view?
Rajesh, right up there in the "straw man fallacy" with skull drums is the notion that musicians might be using sacrificial blood to consecrate their instruments. Again, I've been around the block a few times, and not only have I never heard of such a thing (though maybe somebody in Babylon or somewhere did it at some point), but to make a good instrument out of natural materials, uncontrolled application of liquids with water, fats, and more is going to throw off the tone, or even cause the wood to crack and split.
I would dare suggest that if you told a top luthier about this practice, he'd smile and suggest that you lay off the funny weed. You seriously need to restrain your investigations to things that people actually do, or else it is, yes, a basic logical fallacy called the straw man.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Rajesh, right up there in the "straw man fallacy" with skull drums . . .
False. Evil humans use skull drums all over the world to engage in demonic practices--speaking of those very real and widespread practices is not in any way the "straw man fallacy."
You and others falsely took my statements as claims that Christians were using such skull drums. I did not say anything to that effect. If anything, it is you who is attacking me by erecting a straw man.
Directing necessary attention to such wicked practices as the use of skull drums in demonic activities is a fully legitimate part of establishing a truly biblical theology of music that has worldwide relevance and applicability. What people in Western countries have or have not ever experienced or believe about music based on their Western musical understandings is not the worldwide standard for what music is or is not acceptable to God.
Wow, this is strong language and unwarranted. You claim that any hymn can be played on a skull drum. I was not aware that melodies can be played on skull drums. Can you provide any factual information to support your view?
Yes, strong language. I'll not engage much further, but here is what I said:
I bet you could use human skull drums to perform any music you want, including every hymn in your hymnal.
In performing music, any instrument can be used to perform it. Sure, you wouldn't make melodies with a drum, but you can still perform the music using as part of a group of instruments.
Again, you strain at gnats. It's really quite astonishing.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
as usual poor reading comprehension rears its head
Wow, this is strong language and unwarranted. You claim that any hymn can be played on a skull drum. I was not aware that melodies can be played on skull drums. Can you provide any factual information to support your view?
Yes, strong language. I'll not engage much further, but here is what I said:
I bet you could use human skull drums to perform any music you want, including every hymn in your hymnal.
In performing music, any instrument can be used to perform it. Sure, you wouldn't make melodies with a drum, but you can still perform the using as part of a group.
Again, you strain at gnats. It's really quite astonishing.
I'm deeply disappointed with your entire approach to this discussion. You have attacked me verbally without warrant.
I hold that whether you use skull drums by themselves or in a group, you are performing unrighteous musical activity because skull drums made of human skulls are a perverse creation of unrighteous humans that have no legitimate place in any human musical activity.
You say, "Whether such drums exist or not or are any good or not is irrelevant." I vehemently disagree with you. We will have to leave it there.
Lots of comments ago I made a really brief list of the ways reasoning goes awry. I noted that several of most common reasoning mistakes can be understood as species of relevance errors.
Rajesh, you have a lot to say that simply isn’t relevant to anyone here, and not many elsewhere.
Anybody likely to use a skull drum, likely doesn’t care what the Bible says. And anyone who who cares about worshiping in a Christian way isn’t going to use a skull drum.
So, I just don’t know who exploration of that topic would be for.
… or what you are trying to say.
Maybe it would help to lay out briefly and summarize.
- Claim + evidence + reasoning.
Then it might be possible to interact in a coherent way.
One claim that might be relevant (I’m not sure!) is what can and can’t be played on drums.
All music has rhythm, and you can play the rhythm of any song on any drum… or just tapping your finger on your desk.
Some drums have a fair amount of pitch, so you can play some or all of a melody. Any set of drums with a full octave’s worth of pitch can be used to play pretty much any melody. But with far less, than a full octave, you can play many, many songs.
Any pitched set of drums with five consecutive whole steps (actually 3 whole, 1 half, 1 whole) can play God Is So Good.
Non pitched drums can play literally any song’s rhythm.
So, again, I’m not sure what your point is, but it doesn’t work to reason that if a melody or rhythm can be played on an occultic drum that melody or rhythm is evil.
Any hymn’s rhythm can be played on any drum, pitched or otherwise. Any hymn melody can be played on any sufficiently pitched set of drums.
So the counterargument here (if we’re even answering an argument) is that if it were true that any music that can be played on an occultic drum is evil, it would follow that almost all music is evil.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
I've never seen human skulls used in worship to the Lord, but I would agree that would be wrong.
I have seen trash cans (SBC annual convention) and hand saw (missionary presentation) used for musical worship, and I thought both were inappropriate. In both cases it reduced the worship of our holy God to a novelty act, and I don't think that is how our God ought to be worshipped.
This thread was looking like it might be profitable when it was about hermeneutics. That’s the area that most of us are disagreeing with you Rajesh and it would probably be helpful if it stayed there. I went back and reread to see where it went astray since we are now talking about skull drums. I’m guessing Rajesh will say that we are on to application of passages now. I did find these words from Rajesh which I think are illustrative of the problem.
“2. A drum that has a humanly indecipherable inscription on it that in actuality expresses praises to Satan.”
If it is humanly indecipherable, how do we humans know that it actually expresses praises to Satan?
I suggest moving back into hermeneutics and away from all these ancillary issues. I can already hear Rajesh’s response “I don’t agree that what God has revealed in His word is an ‘ancillary issue.’”
But that’s the problem, Rajesh has not shown that He has revealed on these issues. It’s back to bad hermeneutics.
2. A drum that has a humanly indecipherable inscription on it that in actuality expresses praises to Satan.”
If it is humanly indecipherable, how do we humans know that it actually expresses praises to Satan?
The Bible reveals that angelic beings have languages. It also speaks of people who have fellowship with demons and of occultists who have familiar spirits through whom the occultists obtain information.
It would be a simple thing for a demon to direct an occultist to put such a humanly indecipherable inscription on a distinctively occult instrument and explain to the occultist what the significance of the inscription is even though it remains indecipherable to the occultist through his own abilities to read and understand what the inscription says.
What is the relevance of skull drums to issues concerning music for believers?
By careful attention to what we know about skull drums, we can see plainly how many espouse faulty hermeneutics, theology, and reasoning about music.
In an earlier comment in this thread, the following was asserted:
Bert Perry
Mon, 10/21/24 2:10 pm
Let's phrase it differently
It's clear from the book of Galatians that God has made us for freedom, not bondage, and hence the primary question to be asked here, from a systematic theology point of view, is not what ought to be allowed, but rather whether we have some reason to prohibit certain instruments, techniques, or the like.I think we should take the hint.[bold added to the original]
In these comments, the writer three times uses what is in effect an argument from silence about what God does not say in Scripture. Ordinarily, many would fault such an argument as being a "fallacious" argument from silence, but somehow these comments were given a pass in that respect.
In any case, in effect, this writer asserts that there are no instruments or "genres" that are off-limits to Christians because the Bible does not say that there are any "genres" or instruments that are off-limits.
Where, then, does this leave this writer in respect to skull drums? In order to maintain the validity of his comments, this writer must hold that skull drums are not "some tainted instrument" that we are not to use because the Bible does not say anything about skull drums being such.
This writer, however, has made several later comments in which he appears to hold the view that skull drums indeed are not legitimate instruments for believers to use.
He and others whose hermeneutics, theology, and reasoning have led them to the same faulty views about music face a seemingly insoluble problem for them. Either they must hold that skull drums are legitimate for Christians to use because the Bible does not say anything against their use, or they must admit that their hermeneutics, theology, and reasoning about music have been faulty concerning proscribed instruments and "genres" because skull drums are plainly not acceptable for use in Christian anything even though the Bible does not say anything against them.
In conclusion, skull drums are plainly not acceptable for any Christian use even though the Bible does not say anything to that effect.
Faulty hermeneutics, theology, and reasoning have led many to hold faulty views about music, and skull drums serve as a very important basis for showing that has been true and still is true for many.
Discussion