Are Some Kinds of Instrumental Music Objectively Better Than Others?

Whether God has made known that He values certain instruments over others is not the same thing as whether He regards certain kinds of music as better than others.

This is another rather obvious point you're making. Of course the "valuing" of something is different from "regarding as better" since "value" is but one specific factor that may or may not be considered in the regarding of something as "better," and of course the instruments used are more specific than the overall kinds of music that can be played on instruments.

Even concerning how He may comparatively regard musical instruments, there is more data that yet needs to be discussed before it can be validly claimed that He "hasn't specifically let us know that He values certain instruments over others."

I can't imagine what "more data" you would need to present. I read your article about harps and there you presented a reasonable possibility that God considers a harp to be better than other instruments, a very strong reasonable possibility, in fact. However, none of the verses you used in that article specifically stated that the harp is valued above other instruments.

Those who say that the same is not true of kinds of instrumental music must present some valid biblical conceptual basis for holding that the same is not true for kinds of instrumental music.

Earlier in the thread, you wrote this:

"Whether God has made known that He values certain instruments over others is not the same thing as whether He regards certain kinds of music as better than others."

Using the same logic, I can say:

Whether God has made known that He values certain fruit or oil or wheat or wine or spices over others is not the same thing as whether He regards certain kinds of music as better than others.

Moreover, I notice that you used "value" instead of what the Bible says about the fruit, oil, etc. The Bible statements use the word "best," which is the superlative of "better." The distinction in those biblical statements, then, is not between "value" versus "better."

Yes, I believe the distinction in those verses IS regarding value. What makes one fruit or container of oil or wine better than another as the Israelites were picking the best? It was the stuff that was purest, or closest to perfect, that was best, which is also the fruit or oil or wine that is the most valuable. The verse about spices in Exodus even mention the exact value of those spices.

We can't really discuss "better" without mentioning "better in what way." A discussion about fruit or wheat or spices is different than a discussion about kinds of music because the "better in what way" factor is different for fruits than it is for music. They are two separate discussions and what is true for one may or may not be true for the other.

If you want to assert that, yes, all those categories of entities are validly comparable to each other as to which ones are better than others, but the same is not true for kinds of music, you have to provide some valid biblical rationale for your claim that there is something distinctively different about kinds of music so that they are not similarly able to be compared as to which ones are better than others.

Yes, there is a biblical rationale for treating them differently, because the words of the Bible itself treats them differently. You posted specific Bible verses in which we are specifically told that some fruit and wheat and wine and spices are better than others. That specificity is NOT true of kinds of music. If you think the issues are comparable, and that the same kind of specificity IS shown for kinds of music, then you would have the burden of proof to show that that is the case.

No, according to your methodology, unless you have specific, explicit Bible statements that delineate exactly what made those things the best, your claims are mere assertions that may or may not be what made them the best in the statements in Scripture.

You're absolutely right. I was actually stating reasonable possibilities rather than making definitive assertions. I do think the things I stated are quite valid reasonable possibilities, though.

Think about this. If we can't make definitive assertions about what is "best" even when the Bible tells us something is categorized as "best,' then surely we can't make definitive assertions about what is "best" in the category of kinds of music, or even make the assertion that that some kinds are best, when the Bible doesn't even have specific verses about some kinds being best.

No, the measurements in Exod. 30:23 are the quantities of the spices to be used to be used in making the holy anointing oil--not the values of them.

Thanks for correcting me on this. I saw "shekel" and immediately thought of the monetary unit instead of the weight like I should have. Still, the myrrh was specifically described as being "pure," so I do think a value judgment would have to be made.

Still, the myrrh was specifically described as being "pure," so I do think a value judgment would have to be made.

I'm responding to a comment that I myself wrote, since I'm glad that Rajesh hasn't responded to it yet. I look at what I wrote here, and I have to start nitpicking my own phrasing and argumentation over the last day or so. It wasn't until I used the phrase "value judgment" that the lightbulb popped up and I realized "value" isn't just "monetary value," but is also used in reference to whatever is highly sought after (such as purity). Purity can be valued, beauty can be valued, and all sorts of other things can be valued, such that you do have to talk about the individual factor that is "valued" in order to have the discussion of what is "better." I shouldn't have been arguing so much that "value" is different from "better."

So far, three people have voted, "No." I do not know if Kevin Miller was one of them or not, but he is the only one so far who has attempted to support that position.

Actually, I didn't even vote at all. My position was that there are so many factors involved in the discussion of "better' that one really needs to pin down the specific factor one is speaking of in order to say for sure whether some instrumental music is better than others.

If we are just talking "beauty," then I would say that some instrumental music is more beautiful to my ears than others, but that is not an "objective" measure. Does God hold an "objective" standard of beauty? Perhaps so, but He hasn't revealed that standard to us, so I can't definitively assert that he does. One could say "perfection" is God's standard for music, but how would we know what exactly is "perfect" instrumental music in God's eyes if He hasn't told us in His Word?

Another factor we could consider is "appropriateness for congregational worship." In that regard, I would definitely say some instrumental music is better than others. I don't think God has a distain for circus music, but I personally think circus music is "less better" for congregational worship than other instrumental music. That being said, if the Vacation Bible School theme is circus-related, then having the kids memorize Bible verses to a circus tune would not be inappropriate.

So saying some instrumental music is better than others really depends on the context and purpose of the music, and there very well may be contexts in which God doesn't consider one kind of instrumental music to be better than another.

Just to be clear, I did not make my most recent comment with the hope that you would reveal whether you were one of those who voted "No" or not. Nor did I make that comment with the hope that you would again engage with the thread.

Oh, I wasn't assuming that you had any expectations from me when you made the post. In fact, your expectations were clearly for people other than me to consider adding their thoughts to the thread.

As I have already pointed out in this thread, Jesus made striking comparisons without specifying what factor(s) made the one entity better than the others to which He compared them.

That's quite true. But as I already pointed out in the thread, we can't really discuss the issue ourselves without considering various factors. If you want some discussion about your opening question in this thread without considering factors, then all you will get from people is "Sometimes yes and sometimes no" and the conversation will stop right there. Is that really where you want the conversation to stop?

I think that we can and should continue to discuss the subject by continuing to examine what content Scripture itself has that is relevant.

Well, are you ever going to present relevant Scriptural content regarding instrumental music which is "better"? You listed verses regarding wheat that is better and vineyards that are better and even man that is better, but none of those things are relevant to whether music might be better, since all those things are better in different ways from the ways in which kinds of music might or might not be better.

Here's an analogy to show why I think the question in your opening post is rather odd in the first place. Suppose I started a thread titled "Are Some Kinds of Food Objectively More than Others?" You would be right to wonder "More in what way?" before you could try discussing the question. Would I be meaning "more nutritious"? If so, one could evaluate the vitamin content and objectively determine whether some kinds of food are more nutritious. If I was asking if some foods are "more delicious," then there wouldn't really be an objective standard to use to determine the answer.

I suppose I could just assume that the answer would have to be "yes, some kinds of food are "more," since the Bible describes certain things as "more" or "less." Mark 4:31 describes a grain of mustard seed as "less than all the seeds that be in the earth." In Ephesians 3:8, Paul describes himself as "less than the least of all saints," so even people can be "less" or "more." However, listing verses about seeds or man being "more" or "less" would not really have much bearing on whether foods are "more," if I haven't given in my question any specific factor upon which I am basing the determination of whether some kinds of food are objectively "more." Without specifying the factor, the question of whether some kinds of food are objectively "more" is basically nonsense.

It's the same way with your question about about kinds of music that are objectively better than others. Without specifying an objective factor upon which one makes the determination of "better," the question is basically nonsense.

If you claim that the same is not or cannot be true about kinds of music, you are free to show from Scripture why that is true.

My position has never been that such a notion cannot be true, so I wouldn't need to show from Scripture that it cannot be true. Someone who definitively asserts that it must be true has the burden of proof of showing from Scripture that some kinds of music are better than others. You have clearly shown from Scripture that some wheat is better and some vineyards are better, but I'm still patiently waiting for the Scripture to show that some kinds of music are better. I'm very much open to the possibility that it is true, so I would never assert that it cannot be true. Therefore I don't have to prove that it cannot be true.

Perhaps Romans 14:5 is applicable to this discussion. "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

One man might consider one kind of music to be above another. A different man might consider all kinds of music to be alike.

Romans 2:11 tells us "For there is no respect of persons with God."

If God isn't a respecter of persons, then perhaps God isn't a respecter of kinds of music either.

We know that neither of these biblical statements applies in the realms that I have already presented biblical revelation that inerrantly shows that they do not apply to those comparisons.

For example, there are multitudes of people who in various ways in effect hold that all life forms are equal, but Jesus refutes such views and shows that they are false. Neither Romans 14:5 nor Romans 2:11 applies to those comparisons.

Just last night you were saying that you wanted a "general" discussion of all the biblical data. I presented some. It seems rather hypocritical of you to start criticizing my verses based on them supposedly not applying. Are you changing your mind now about dealing with specifics of why some comparisons, like the ones you've made, may not really apply?

Hypocritical? Criticizing?

The passages that I have already presented show that the two verses from Romans that you suggested do not, in fact, apply in the manner that you have suggested regarding any of the comparisons that I have already presented.

The post you made right before I listed the verses from Romans was titled "More biblical comparisons and superlatives." You then simply listed verses that used the word "best" or chief." You even listed a verse that used the phrase "none like that," even though that particular comparison has nothing to do with something that is "better." To me, that phrase simply means that Goliath's sword was demonstrably "different" from any other sword around, but still, it is a comparison so I guess it would count in a list of comparisons.

I then also posted verses that contained some comparisons. If this thread is containing various lists of comparisons and superlatives simply because they add to the Biblical data of comparisons and superlatives, then I don't understand why my additions would be excluded.

Earlier in the thread, I told you that some of your comparisons involving wheat or vineyards or spices wouldn't really be applicable to a music discussion because the "factors" involved in what made those things best are not necessarily the same as the factors involved in kinds of music being potentially better or the same. You summarily dismissed that logic. You implied that we don't need to discuss the various factors that might make your list of comparisons valid to a music discussion because you want to start out with a "general" discussion characterized by "searching out Scripture for all the various kinds of content it has about comparisons."

Now you are rejecting my list of comparisons as if they don't apply to a list of comparisons in the Bible. It feels to me that you have an unwillingness to look at all the pertinent data in the Bible regarding comparisons. You're totally fine with presenting you own lists of comparisons that might or might not have anything to do with music, but then you reject my list of comparisons that might or might not have anything to do with music. That's what seemed hypocritical to me.

I am not saying that they do not apply to a list of comparisons in the Bible. What I am saying is that I have already provided explicit biblical content that shows that those statements do not apply to numerous things. Because the Bible itself shows that those statements do not apply to numerous things, there is no necessity to hold that they apply to comparisons among kinds of music.

Of course, there is no necessity. Why do you think there would have to be a necessity? I've just been saying there is a possibility. Showing that my comparison do not apply in relation to some factors would not disprove that the comparison may apply in other factors. This is why the discussion of specific factors is so important. Yet you only want to deal with specific factors when it comes to the particular ones that might disprove one part of my comparison. This doesn't mean that my comparison would be totally false in all factors.

I am still waiting for you to provide some explicit biblical content that supports what you want to say or to suggest is true about comparisons among kinds of music.

I've already asked you for this same thing several times, and you've flatly refused. Why should I provide the thing that you refuse to provide?

For example, there are multitudes of people who in various ways in effect hold that all life forms are equal, but Jesus refutes such views and shows that they are false.

I don't believe Jesus would refute ALL the various ways in which life forms could be designated as equal. This is where the conversation about specific factors is so important. Just look at John 1:1-3 .

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

So even though there are objective differences between animals and man and between man and angels, there is also an equality in that ALL life forms are created by God. You pointed out a verse in which man is better than animals, and that is true in regards to certain factors, but is it true in regards to ALL factors? Man has a sin nature and animals do not. In regards to sinning, animals are better than man in that they do not have sin charged against them.

In regards to a "proper and necessary foundation for establishing the true and full significance that the biblical content about music actually has," any list of comparisons that someone comes up with from the Bible is going to eventually have to include a discussion of the potential factors that make up the comparison and whether those factors have any bearing on objective standards by which music can be assessed.

1 Kings 10:23 So king Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth for riches and for wisdom. 24 And all the earth sought to Solomon, to hear his wisdom, which God had put in his heart.

Correlating 1 Kings 10:18-20 with 10:23-24 makes it certain that the end of verse 20 signifies the unique excellence of Solomon's throne above all other thrones in all other kingdoms.

I'm glad you pointed out these verses, since these verses actually give us two specific factors by which Solomon's excellence could be objectively judged, that of his riches and his wisdom. How do these verses, however, form a foundation for a discussion of instrumental music? Are "riches" an objective standard by which we could judge whether some kinds of instrumental music are better than others? Do we look at the cost of an instrumental composition? How is "wisdom" an objective standard by which we could judge the "better" of some kinds of instrumental music?

God's viewpoint is the only one that matters. It does not matter that there are (many) animals that are bigger, faster, stronger, etc. than humans. It does not matter that there are animals that live far longer than humans do.

What matters is that God has said that humans are better than animals.

So in what way do you think God was meaning that humans are better than animals when God said that? Is that really not important? How can you think that? To really understand the verse, doesn't one need to discuss the context of how or why or in what manner humans are better than animals. Should we just ignore the context of a passage in order to make some point about a topic that a passage doesn't really deal with?

You can keep on trying to nuance and limit what the Bible says, but that will not change the reality that the Spirit in His perfect wisdom repeatedly does not do the very thing that you are insisting has to be done--talking about "factors."

You must be misunderstanding my point. I'm not trying to limit what the Bible says. I'm trying to limit our discussion of the Bible to what the Bible says. If the Bible says that humans are better than animals, then we can have a discussion about the ways in which humans are better than animals, That would be dealing with what the Bible says. If we take some verses about humans being better than animals and use those verses to have a discussion about some kinds of music being better than others, then we are having a discussion that goes BEYOND what the Bible says. Once one starts going beyond what the Bible says, then it's very easy to be just presenting opinions or even to be just making things up. Those opinions could very well be possibilities, but they can't legitimately be labeled as "what the Bible says."

Undoubtedly, there had been and were even in Solomon's day many other kings of other lands who were extremely wealthy and were also very wise.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to point this out. Even if they were wealthy and wise, the Bible explicitly states they were not as wealthy and wise as Solomon.

Some of them and their people would no doubt have denied that Solomon's throne was any better than theirs. I can envision them trying to reason about "factors" to show how their thrones were in fact equal to or even better than Solomon's.

They may have reasoned that way, and they may even have been right about some factors, but those factors would have been insignificant compared to the factors that God considered important for us to know about. The ones He listed were the ones we need to pay attention to, and we don't need to speculate about which other factors may have been present.

There may even have been Israelites in Solomon's day who held such views or held that all the thrones were to esteemed alike and none could be validly esteemed above another.

Those Israelites would have been wrong if they claimed all thrones were to be esteemed alike since God gave two specific factors in which Solomon was more esteemed than other kings.

Regardless, God has declared that Solomon's throne was superior to them all so all those other people in whatever views and assessments they may have had were wrong in denying that Solomon's throne was surpassingly superior to all others.

The Bible explicitly says Solomon was superior in two specific factors. That's what we know from Scripture. Listing those two factors would not remove the remote possibility that some other insignificant factor of equality might be present. God didn't mention any other factor, so we need not be concerned with any other factor. Denying the remote possibility of any other factor is going beyond Scripture. It would be an opinion, and a valid opinion at that (there is nothing wrong with having opinions), but one can't assert that this opinion is what "God has declared."

Solomon's wisdom exceeded that of all the kings of the earth. There was no one anywhere in the world whose wisdom was greater than, better than, or superior to Solomon's wisdom because his wisdom was divine wisdom that "God had put in his heart."

Yes, we already know from the verses you posted previously that in regards to the factor of wisdom, Solomon exceeded everyone. I'm not sure why you felt the need to repeat this.