RICHLAND HILLS, RICK “ABIHU”
ATCHLEY, AND INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC (4)
Gary
W. Summers
Those who have read
the previous articles about the latest “defense” of adding instrumental music
to worship by Rick Atchley have probably been asking
the question: “What does he do with the historical fact that the church did not
use instruments of music for several hundred years?” He provided his rationale on Sunday, December
17th, along with an attempt to justify Saturday evening worship with
the Lord’s Supper.
Apparently, the
Richland Hills elders thought that Rick’s teaching might be better received if
they began each session with an endorsement.
The one for this concluding week of the series came from the son of a
former elder, who affirmed that his family enjoyed all kinds of music—including
gospel music, in which instruments were played.
He talked about how his father had an open and intelligent mind that
didn’t crystallize his beliefs at the age of 30 and then spend the rest of his
life defending it (unlike the rest of you bozos, who don’t ever think, the
implication is).
An observation is
in order here. Those who listen to songs
of praise to God with instrumental accompaniment outside the assembly not
only do what is unauthorized by Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 (which do
not specify, but certainly, include the worship assembly); they are also more
amenable to their eventual introduction into the worship assembly. After all, if we can ourselves sing around
the piano at home, why can we not do the same thing in Sunday worship? If we can listen to popular “gospel” groups
who incorporate it into their songs of praise, why can we not do the same? The fact is that we should not participate in
false worship whether in the assembly, in the home, or in the car.
A further thought
to consider is, “Did Jesus crystallize His teaching and spend the rest of His
life defending it (His Deity, for example)?”
Or was He open-minded, constantly changing His views on things?
Two other
statements the elder’s son made were that his father didn’t invest much energy
in peripheral matters and that the mission of the church trumps tradition. Both of these should be true for all
Christians, but he includes the use of instruments of music in worship as a “peripheral
issue.” Obviously, he also thinks that
the non-use of instrumental music is simply a tradition. Both of these conclusions are false. Jesus had a high regard for true worship
(John
Four Reasons for Its Absence
After rambling
about “cultural concessions” for a few minutes, Rick presented four reasons
that might explain why Christians did not use instrumental music, a fact he
conceded.
1. “It may be that they had to gather
in secret to avoid persecution, and the use of instruments would call attention
to themselves.” Really? Jesus was so popular during His public
ministry that He could at times not find a moment to be alone (Mark
2. “The use of instrumental music was
associated with pagan worship and associated with debauchery. The guilds were known for their drunken
orgies, and bands played music during these.
The early Christians may have wanted to distance and distinguish
themselves from these events.” This
proposal is as lame as the first one.
The Jews, according to Atchley, filled the
temple with the sound of trumpets and other instruments. It would be the most natural thing in the
world for Christians to continue what was already being practiced.
Besides, what are bands associated
with today? Even three decades ago, this
writer knew a high school student that refused to attend a rock concert because
of the smell of the marijuana smoke in the civic arena. Much of rap music contains extremely vulgar
language; rock n roll (almost from its very beginning) has been associated with
and promoted promiscuous sex, drinking, and drug use. If Christians refused to use instrumental
music in the first century because of some of its associations, why would not
the same thing hold true today?
3. “Christian worship was modeled after
the synagogue, and instrumental music was not used in the synagogue—perhaps
because playing the instruments might have been regarded as work.” Surely, the flaw here is apparent to all. Christian worship was not patterned after
anything; what Christians do in worship was revealed by the Holy Spirit. If anything, God may have foreshadowed what
Christians would do later through the use of the synagogue, but God had the
church in mind from eternity. The
apostles did not just copy something else because they had no imagination. Jesus said that all authority was given to
Him (Matt. 28:18). What Christians did
or did not practice was by His authority.
He did not authorize instruments of music in worship.
4. “In Psalm 137 the Israelites were
saddened in their Babylonian captivity and could not sing the songs of
One wonders about
how open and intelligent the members of Richland Hills are to swallow this
tripe and applaud Rick when he finishes these jewels of wisdom. Not one of these four explanations makes any
sense whatsoever, nor could any one of them be defended in a serious
discussion. Where did he even get such information? Having raised these four possibilities, he
then concludes that in the first century—because of their culture—it was
expedient NOT to use instruments of music in worship. No basis for such a conclusion exists—except that
he needs this culture theory to justify using instruments of music in worship.
The Fifth Reason
“Abihu” only gave four reasons in his vain attempt to
explain the reason that the church did not use instrumental music for hundreds
of years. The most obvious reason either
did not occur to him, or he simply does not wish to even acknowledge it. God
did not design New Testament worship to include the use of instruments of music! Wow!
That idea would explain why no mention is made of them and why the
church never used them. Can it be that
simple? Yes, and it is the only
explanation that fits all of the facts.
And since brethren have been making this claim for centuries, it is
surprising that it never crossed Rick’s mind.
All he can say is that “scholars” are not sure as to the reason.
Perhaps those
whom Rick classifies as “scholars” should read the New Testament. Those who obeyed the gospel immediately
“continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine…” (Acts
Culture
Atchley argues that many of our customs are based on
culture. Keeping worship to about an
hour is one such concession, as is less formal dress than we once wore. He pointed out that we use more contemporary
media and technology than we once did, as well as more modern translations. Even if all of these things are true, it does
not establish his case because these are all matters of option. At one time, worship lasted longer than it
currently does, but the Bible does not specify a length of time. The dress of members has changed over the
decades, and while the matter is somewhat subjective, it is still the case that
God deserves our best and that we ought to dress modestly.
Employing
PowerPoint or the Internet is no different than flying somewhere by jet instead
of traveling by mule. Modern
translations can be helpful—especially for some who are not very proficient in
Elizabethan English—but they need to be accurate; the NIV that Atchley uses is poorly and inaccurately done in many
passages. He could provide a list of
2,000 items that relate to our culture, however, and it would not in any way
put our singing into that category.
Atchley quotes some church expert, who says that music is
the first and last impression that visitors have of us. Is that what people are looking for when they
visit? Some want to know if anyone is
going to be healed. Some are interested
mainly in the message presented. Some
have questions about the Lord’s Supper.
All that a few people are interested in is: “Do you have a kitchen in
your building?” Do people really visit,
wondering what kind of music program there is?
Musical Worldviews
One of the
strangest statements anyone has ever made follows. Atchley admitted
that our parents viewed instrumental music as entertainment. Then he added that the younger generation
turns to music to obtain their worldview.
That’s not good, if true. In the
world of rap, a woman (any woman) is regarded as nothing more than a “ho.” Is that the kind of philosophy Christians are
willing to let the world dictate to them?
Is that what the younger generation relates to? What kind of an argument is this? People have always been influenced by music,
but are they so shallow as to get their deepest thoughts from Beyonce, Snoop Dogg, or 50
Cent?
Atchley assured his audience that in this postmodern world
people don’t get truth propositionally but through experience. He may be right as it pertains to a great
segment of the population because many are misguided by their feelings rather
than by evidence. The problem with his
statement is that people are not getting truth through their feelings; they
are obtaining error that way. “He who
trusts in his own heart is a fool…” (Pr. 28:26). “The heart is deceitful above all things, and
desperately wicked; who can know it?” (Jer.
17:9).
When people
decide to sin, do they follow their feelings or think logically? Dierks Bentley had a
popular song that contained the words, “Well, I know what I was feeling, but
what was I thinking?” Even in the song
his actions were governed by his emotions (despite the question). People have been advised by both music and
Say, Rick, guess
what? You might be the next casualty. In Sunday’s (
Although we have
the liberty to make certain adjustments to worship based on culture, we do not
have the right to delete prayer or add instrumental music or restrict the
effectiveness of a message. Whom do we
seek to honor: God or self? It is
obvious, from the fact that people arrive late, dress overly casual, and desire
to inculcate their musical preferences, that people think more of themselves
and their own comfort and likes than they do of God’s.
A Cappella Singing Hinders
Evangelism
More than two
decades ago this writer had a discussion about divorce and remarriage with some
Crossroads advocates (before they became the Boston Movement). When questioned about their position on
divorce and remarriage, they said that they could not take the truths taught in
Matthew 19 and apply them to unbelievers: “It gets in the way of
evangelism.” Sin frequently does. If a person has a problem with gambling,
showing its sinfulness will probably get in the way of evangelizing those
folks. The same thing could be said
about those using drugs, cigarettes, or alcohol.
Rick adopted this
approach, also, when he affirmed: “Our exclusive a cappella
music hinders our evangelistic
efforts.” He added: “This fellowship is
not doing well; it’s in decline. We’re getting smaller and older.” So what happens when jazzy musical programs
and state-of-the-art theatrical productions lose their luster? Someone will introduce yet another innovation
to capture the crowds who basically have no interest in things spiritual?
Rick asks the
question in places where he speaks: “How many of you have children that no
longer attend churches of Christ?” He
said that invariably a number of hands are raised. He further observed: “God is not honored by
dying, irrelevant churches.” God is not
honored by false worship, either!
One would think
that the absence of instrumental music in worship is the key reason that young
people decide to leave the church. Has
he done a survey? He knows better. Most of the denominations have experienced a
loss of young people, also—and they have it!
Many different reasons could be assigned to young people leaving the
church, but the chief reason is sin—the willingness to exalt emotion over
principle. Many young people who have
been taught better are now divorced and remarried. Some have become engulfed by worldliness,
despite persistent warnings. Many of
them have had excellent parents, who loved them and set the proper example for
them—especially in their worship attendance and in their good works.
The comment about
irrelevant churches is a throwback to Rubel Shelly,
who once said that his children would not grow up in an irrelevant church. The Lord’s church is not irrelevant, and to insinuate
so is to cast reproach upon Christ, who gave His blood for it (Acts
Shame on Atchley for so lightly regarding the church and saying, “I
know the
*Send comments or questions concerning this article to Gary Summers. Please
refer to this article as: "Whatever the article name from above is (
Return
To Article Index