Regarding The Morality of Music
A Response To
“An Imortant Question for Our Times — Is Music Moral?”
by Kurt Woetzel
Page 2 of 4
The ability to worship God with music is one of the greatest
gifts that He has bestowed on us. When we think about it, there is only one
physical being created that can make music — man.[1]
The problem is that many of us differ on what is worshipful and what is not.
Some tend to take a more free approach, saying that any sort of music can be
used for worshipping God. Others, on the other hand, say that music in and of
itself is moral and so only certain styles can be used to truly worship God.
But in all of it, both sides try to focus on one thing: wanting to worship God
in purity and to the best of their abilities.
Not having had too much exposure to the latter idea, I was surprised when
some of my friends and acquaintances made mention of this subject in passing.
As our choir director and some people I highly respect espouse the music-is-moral
view, I figured it would be worth checking it out, simply to form an opinion
on the subject. And so I came across Kurt Woetzel’s article “An
Important Question for Our Times — Is Music Moral?” on Majesty Music’s web
site. I read it with curiosity at first, but then with a twisted feeling in
my stomach. Both my emotional and intellectual responses to this were so intense
that I felt compelled to sit down and write a critique of the article. Here
I would strongly recommend that you first read Mr. Woetzel’s article before
continuing on with this evaluation of it, because you need to make your own
assessment before you look at mine.
In this response I want to first take a look at my presuppositions going
into this brief treatise. Then I will look at the underlying presuppositions
that Mr. Woetzel evidences in his article. After that I want to look at the
Scriptural background he presents and consider some of the implications of those,
as well as of the secular sources that are cited regarding this issue. Following
that we’ll take a quick look at some of the unmentioned history regarding the
music debate and then discuss the music is a language analogy. I would like
to close the discussion with a communication-based model of the morality of
music and a quick look at the all-important human element in the making of music.
I. My Presuppositions
Stating your presuppositions clearly is of key importance
when writing on such an explosive subject as the morality of music. Many times
we just cruise into the writing without formulating our own presuppositions
that we wish to pass on. In order to make sure that we are all on the same page
regarding the logic that I use, I would like to state my presuppositions right
at the beginning.
A. The Bible is the final authority.
When it comes to spirituality there is no higher place that
we can go than the Bible itself. Being the inspired word of God from cover
to cover in all of the words chosen, it is the final standard when it comes
to living our lives in a way pleasing to God. If something is clearly Biblical,
it must be applied to life and practiced. If it is clearly un-Biblical it
must be set aside and not done.
B. There are “gray” areas in the Bible.
While the Bible is the final authority, God chose to not
insult our intelligence (or lack thereof) by prescribing everything down to
the most minute nuance. He primarily gave us principles, not prescriptions.
There are some topics that the Bible is silent about and when confronted with
these, it is our responsibility to form a carefully thought-through opinion
or conviction based on clear Biblical principles. Convictions and opinions
such as these will differ from Christian to Christian and some of the applications
will differ as well, but that is the beauty of the diversity of Body life.
C. Opinions are just that and should not be forced
on others.
It took me a very long time to realize that this presupposition
is key to living in harmony with Godly people who think differently than I
do. My younger brother is one such person. Being a highly opinionated person
myself I would tend to try to force what I thought on him, only to find myself
fighting with him about inconsequential minutiae that had only the effect
of making us angry at each other and disturbing an otherwise fine relationship
where we thought very similarly in the big picture.
While this is merely a small example of what I’m trying to get at, we
need to remember that as Christians our first duty is to love one another
(John 15:12), not to convince one another of our pet doctrines, the way some
of us tend to want to do.
For that reason what I am stating here is mostly opinion, but I want
you to see the logic behind my opinion and the Biblical basis for it. What
you do with it at the end is your responsibility, not mine.
D. Every person is individually responsible for their words,
actions, thoughts, tastes, etc.
While there are certain things that we are corporately responsible
for, it is my conviction from Scripture that God deals with us on an individual
basis. I. Corinthians 3:10-15 suggests an individual judgment of each
believer before the throne of Christ.
It is our responsibility to warn a brother who is sinning and, if possible,
to draw them back from it, but what if they don’t do that? Whose responsibility
is that? If we’ve done our job with teaching, exhorting, and praying for that
brother, we have fulfilled our responsibility towards him and so the responsibility
now rests squarely on his shoulders, not ours.
E. Music is an intensely personal subject.
Every person I have met has certain types of music that
resonate with them and certain types that don’t. The instant you tell them
you don’t like their music they will try to defend it. This suggests to me
that music is something that is deeply rooted within a human being, perhaps
even as deeply rooted as their sexuality. For this reason we need to highly
respect each other’s taste in music, even if we can’t agree with it.
F. Music is not moral in and of itself, but becomes moral
depending on certain variables.
This will most certainly turn off some people who believe
music is moral, but I hope that you will finish reading this paper and try
to understand where I’m coming from. I believe that the whole debate is a
lot more complicated than it is made out to be and that there are certain
variables, including the listener, the musician, and the songwriter, that
must be factored in to the equation before we can come to a conclusion. I
will explain how I came to hold this opinion as we go on.
II. The Presuppositions Mr. Woetzel Evidences
in His Article
Now, having placed my presuppositions squarely on the table,
it is time to take a look at the presuppositions Mr. Woetzel has in writing
his article. (Once more, I would encourage you to read his article carefully
before continuing on here.) He does not come out at the beginning or really
state any of them, but these are gleaned from a careful reading of his paper.
I do not want to make any value judgments about them, but merely collect and
summarize them, so we know where he is coming from. Beneath each supposition
I will either present a direct quote or a summary from the article.
I do believe that Mr. Woetzel and I would agree on the presupposition
that God’s Word is paramount, though our application of that principle will
differ a bit.
A. Worship is primarily a vertical relationship with God
and our music will reflect upon how we worship.
The believer’s music is to be an in-house, vertical activity.
Sacred music is for the saints and unto the Lord.
B. Music in and of itself is moral, regardless of what the
musician does with it.
Whenever music is played or performed, something is being
taught.
Quoting Deryck Cook from The Language of Music, “Of
course, rhythm and form play a large part in moral expression.”
Can an amoral medium have moral impact?
There are many more quotes that could be used to examples
for this presupposition, but to list them here would make me have to basically
reproduce the entire article.
C. Everything can be categorized in black-and-white categories.
The aforementioned presupposition dictates that this presupposition
exists. In many Christian circles, especially those who tend to be a bit more
legalistic, this unspoken presupposition arises, as everything is carefully
ordered according to what the leaders believe to be moral or immoral.
D. There can only be two possible, polar opposite answers
to this problem
We can't have it both ways! Music is either neutral and has
no bearing on values or it is moral and, as do other moral agents, impacts
character and values. Therefore, it is inconsistent and illogical to say music
is amoral, and yet has influence upon values.
E. If the source is negative, it will contaminate the result
beyond redemption.
How did that which was art-oriented, contemplative, uplifting,
wholesome, and orderly get replaced with the pop sound from the lounge, dance
floor, honky-tonk, and other places where the world congregates to feed the
flesh?
F. Change is bad.
This is again one that I cannot supply a direct quote for,
but when reading the article it becomes clear that Mr. Woetzel likes things
the way they were before Don Wyrtzen argued that we should try to reach people
using contemporary music.
These are the presuppositions that I have found within
the text. Knowing these helps understand where Mr. Woetzel is coming from and
helps us to understand how to approach what he is saying to us.
III. Scriptural Background
The biggest problem that I had with the article was what was
done with the Bible. The impression I gained from the introduction of the article
told me that I was going to be reading something that was firmly rooted in Biblical
truth. However, I was shocked to find only a few verses scattered here and there
and the section entitled “A Biblical Perspective on the Question — Is Music
Amoral?” was the last one and it was also the shortest! If this
is something that is supposed to have such a great impact on Christianity, why
is the Bible not quoted more?
I would like to take a careful look at each passage that Mr. Woetzel quotes,
first in the context that he puts it in, and then in the context of Scripture.
I will directly quote him and highlight the passages he quotes so that we can
see the Biblical words themselves.
In each case I would like to argue for a consistent hermeneutic using
the following four points.
- It is important to remember what the full context of
the quote is before applying it. Prooftexting is a highly dangerous practice
as it gives the impression that the exegete is misusing God’s Word for his
own ends and doesn’t know what he is doing.
- We must look at who the recipients were and what they
would have understood when they heard the text. This means taking into account
cultural backgrounds and ideas.
- We must look at where the passage fits into the overall
Biblical picture before using it.
- We must make a point not to stretch the meaning of the
passage beyond what it is within the text, something that all exegetes
and theologians, including this one, are guilty of from time to time.
A. I. Corinthians 15:33
The inherent contradiction evident in the Christianity
Today article reflects the dilemma of those in the Christian community
who stoutly maintain that music is neutral, yet having to admit to its power
and notable influence on character and values. 1 Cor. 15:33 gives further
insight and an unmistakable warning-"Be not deceived, evil communications
corrupt good manners." Music is a powerful instrument of communication.
Manners are the fleshing out of values and character. That which is neutral,
obviously, cannot impact character. However, when we ascribe or attribute
morality to an entity, it must, by its very nature, have the capacity to affect
and influence character. If music is moral, then it will, by necessity, prevail
upon behavior-the evidence of character. We can't have it both ways! Music
is either neutral and has no bearing on values or it is moral and, as do other
moral agents, impacts character and values. Therefore, it is inconsistent
and illogical to say music is amoral, and yet has influence upon values.
The book of First Corinthians was written to the Corinthian
church, which was a predominantly Gentile and highly unruly fellowship of believers
who loved sensationalism and anything that was new and unusual. The passage
quoted is embedded deeply within Paul’s discussion of the resurrection and the
bearing that it has on our life. When we look at the immediate context of this
quote, we find that there are people who have been teaching that there will
be no resurrection and that the Corinthians are believing them. Following the
quote is specific teaching on the resurrection.
This is a quote of a secular proverb from Corinth, something the
Corinthians would be familiar with.
If we take the understanding of the passage itself, Paul is saying that
“evil communications” (KJV) or “bad company” (NASB), i.e. the false teachers,
“corrupt good manners,” i.e. the understanding concerning the resurrection.
The word “manners” can also be translated “customs” or “habits”, which is the
root meaning of the word  .
The idea here deals with false teachings that are dangerous to our personal
salvation. We could apply it to the idea of music, but the question hinges
on whether to translate the word 
“communication” or “company” and all translations of the original Scriptures
are not only fallible, they also contain errors. That is why we need to compare
various translations before coming to a conclusion, unless we can read the Koinė
Greek.
B. Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16, and
Hebrews 2:12
The Scriptural model for sacred music is quite clear. Ephesians
5:19 suggests, "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and
spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord."
The sister passage, Colossians 3:16, reminds us that we are to be "teaching
one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in
your hearts to the Lord." Hebrews 2:12 echoes these two passages
with ". . . I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst
of the church will I sing praise unto thee." The believer's music
is to be an in-house, vertical activity. Speaking to yourselves, teaching
one another, and declaring the Lord's name in the midst of the church,
does not even hint at evangelism. Sacred music is for the saints and unto
the Lord. Over and over the admonition of music references in God's Word includes
the same sentiment, "unto Him, unto the Lord, unto the Most High, unto
Thee, unto Thy Name." When a society abandons its mores, restraints,
and conscience, as it did in the 1960's, it is not the duty of the church,
nor is it appropriate for individual believers, to cast off the Scriptural
model of music and follow a decadent-bent community in locked-step for the
opportunity "to get a hearing in the contemporary culture."
1. Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16
Ephesians is a letter sent to the saints in south-western
Asia-Minor, modern-day Turkey. Colossians was sent to the church at Colossae.
It is conceivable that both were meant to be read together, as they cover much
of the same ground.
Both of these passages appear towards the end of each book, in Ephesians
after a lengthy treatise talking about what God has done for us and how He gave
the mystery of the church, and in Colossians after calling the recipients to
not be deceived by false teachers, but to live in a manner worthy of Christ.
In the immediate context in both cases Paul is dealing with what the transformed
life of the Christian is to be like, imitating Christ. It is only natural that
in this context he would talk about this.
This context seems to suggest a primarily horizontal use of the
songs, and secondarily a vertical use, in which being thankful to God
is the primary focus. Would that mean that these passages strongly suggest a
teaching use of music in the church? It is interesting that it does not prescribe
any sort of set forms of what the songs are to be like. In each case
the “psalms” (probably Old Testament ones), “hymns” and “spiritual songs” seem
to suggest the content of the lyrics not necessarily the type of music
used. We must also remember that there probably were unsaved people in the congregation,
just as there are today. Thus the music would take on an evangelistic character
as well.
2. Hebrews 2:12 and Psalm 22:22
The letter to the Hebrews was written, as mentioned, primarily to the Hebrews
living in Asia Minor. From the context it is clear that the recipients were
in danger of leaving Christianity for the comfort of the old Jewish religion.
For that reason the writer of Hebrews focuses primarily on how Jesus is far
better than anything that has gone before.
If we look at the immediate context of this verse, we find first of all
that what it is talking about is that Jesus is better than the angels and that
Jesus is human. The one who is singing here is not the Christian it is Jesus!
This passage emphasizes that He is human by this action and that we are
His brothers! We need to look at the whole swath of the writing before we grab
it out of context to support our point. If anything this says that Jesus proclaims
God’s name to his brothers and sings God’s praises in the congregation.
Granted, that’s what the context of Hebrews suggests, but what about the
place that this is quoted from? Psalm 22 is the psalm of the suffering king.
And here the king again sings in God’s presence to exalt and extol Him before
his brothers. This is not applicable in the way that Mr. Woetzel is using it.
C. I. Corinthians 14:7-11 and Deuteronomy
31:19-22
Can we support music's linguistic character and attributes
Scripturally? 1Corinthians 14: 7-11 includes an unmistakable example
where music is used as an analogy for language. "For if the trumpet
give an uncertain sound . . . how shall it be known what is spoken?"
Deuteronomy 31:19-22 was the last face-to-face meeting between the Lord
and Moses. This was obviously a momentous occasion during which we could expect
the Lord to give Moses some very important instruction. What does the Lord
tell Moses? What would replace God's presence and direction which the Israelites
had known and enjoyed? How would His comfort and care, experienced for forty
years, continue? God instructs Moses to ". . . write ye this song
for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that
this song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel."
1. I Corinthians 14:7-11
As we have already discussed the background of I. Corinthians
above, I’ll focus mainly on the context here. If we look at Chapters 12-14,
we find this passage quoted is in the section dealing with spiritual gifts.
It is in the chapter immediately following the discussion on love. In the immediate
context Paul is arguing for the superiority of prophecy over speaking in other
tongues. The point of his argument is to draw an analogy about language from
the realm of music, which is valid, as music is a language of sorts. The application
of this passage, however, deals with the fact that worship of God must be understandable
to the human, as prophecy is, not unintelligible, as speaking in tongues is.
Just so, certain music may be unintelligible to some people, but deeply moving
to others.
2. Deuteronomy 31:19-22
The book of Deuteronomy contains the farewell words of Moses
to the children of Israel. It is all about remembering what God has done for
His people, warning them of the dangers that lie ahead of them. This portion
falls in the fifth and final section of the book which records Moses’ final
words to the new generation of Israelites who are ready to conquer the Promised
Land. If we look at the context all is now prepared for the commissioning of
Joshua. In the following context we have a copy of this “national anthem” that
Moses wrote for the children of Israel.
We can only assume that the words given Moses were God’s Words. It is
interesting that God would command a song to be given, but then again, as Deuteronomy
is a book about remembering God and what He has done, we would logically find
that God would use just about any method to get His people to remember what
He wants them to know. Thus the song would more be considered a device to aid
in memorization rather than necessarily a measure of whether music is moral
or not. Besides, what kind of music would they be using there? It would
probably not fit within the narrow definitions of what we perceive to be moral
or immoral music, as it arises from a culture vastly different from either our
Christian sub-culture or post-Christian nation.
D. Philippians 4:8 and Proverbs 23:7
His comments should really not come as a great surprise. It
was mentioned earlier that the term music itself is derived from muse
or musa which means to think, to meditate or to contemplate. Could
something which causes us to think a certain way be amoral? If so, then we
would need to conclude that thinking-is just thinking. Fortunately our common
sense tells us otherwise. Furthermore, the Word of God provides candid instruction
for the believer on this matter. Philippians 4:8, "Finally, brethren,
whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things
are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever
things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise,
think on these things." Why is the Lord concerned about how we think?
Why should believers give attention to the thoughts which flow through our
minds? The answer is found in Proverbs 23:7, "For as he thinketh in
his heart, so is he:" Dr. Charles R. Phelps, pastor of Trinity Baptist
Church, Concord, New Hampshire, has well said, "If music impacts thought
and our thoughts are to be righteously regulated, then we must righteously
regulate the music to which we listen."
1. Philippians 4:8
The key idea of the letter to the Philippians is Paul’s joy
in thinking of this, his favorite church. It is a letter that overflows with
encouragement. This verse is found towards the end of the letter and it is immediately
preceded by the admonition to be joyful in Christ and letting Him fill us. The
result of thinking as this verse tells us to is that God will be with us.
This can definitely be applied to music, but it must also be applied to
the way we think of our brothers and sisters who think differently from us.
When our minds are focused on what is good, God’s peace will guard our
minds and hearts, regardless of what’s going on around us.
2. Proverbs 23:7
The book of Proverbs is a collection of wisdom sayings, mainly
from Solomon. This proverb is found in the second part of the book “The Proverbs
of Solomon” and is in the middle of a section on relationships. As a matter
of fact it is torn right out of the center of the proverb relating to the relationship
of a person to a miser or selfish person. The whole context is dealing with
how to face the hospitality of a selfish person. As a matter of fact the word
 , which
the King James translates “thinketh”, should more correctly be translated “calculates”
or “reckons” and the context tells us that the man is really calculating what
you’re eating and is angry that he has to put it in front of you.
This is a gross misuse of this passage and it probably stems from two
things: first, not carefully looking at the whole context, and, second, not
carefully looking at the meaning of the words, either by consulting other translations,
or by doing a Hebrew word study, which anyone can do, thanks to Strong’s concordance.
E. I. Chronicles 25:1-3
Why is music moral? Why is it critically important for the
believer to grasp this concept? Because Scripture declares music moral-without
the help of secular wisdom. The evidence from the "world" only reinforces,
clarifies, embellishes and perhaps contemporizes what the Bible already declares.
For those perhaps still uncertain let us consider a final passage in the Old
Testament. In 1 Chronicles 25:1-3, we find a particularly valuable
and interesting phrase which unmistakably indicates that music, without words,
is moral. In verse one we read, ". . . of the sons of Asaph, and of
Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and
with cymbals: . . ." In verse three the same thought is repeated,
". . . under the hands of their father Jeduthun, who prophesied with
a harp, to give thanks and to praise the Lord." The words "prophesy"
and "prophesied" literally suggest that preaching took place. A
prophet addresses social, political, and spiritual issues. In this instance
the "preaching" was done with instruments-with sound-music! Could
such prophesying be considered amoral or neutral? No. Thus, for the Christian
to take a music-is neutral position is not only to dismiss the enormous amount
of data which exists from secular experts, but more seriously, to deny and
deliberately oppose the clear teaching of the Word of God.
Chronicles was written after the exile, primarily
to explain the temple rites and give the priestly perspective on the history
of the southern, God-pleasing kingdom of Judah and the house of David. This
passage falls at the end of David’s life when he was ordering the worship in
the temple. In that vein he appointed the sons of Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun
to “prophesy” with various musical instruments.
If we take the time to study the Hebrew term  ,
which is translated “prophesy”, we find that the form it is most often used
in is the passive form (“he was caused to prophesy”), suggesting, as
Scripture says[2], that prophecy is something brought upon
a person by the Spirit of God or some other external force. The rest of the
time it is used in a reflexive form (“he caused himself to prophesy”), which
scholars generally consider to imply wild frenzy.[3]
The word is used a grand total of 110 times in Scripture, the bulk of
which are found in Jeremiah (37 times) and Ezekiel (37 times). The earliest
uses in Numbers, Samuel, and Kings (as well as a parallel passage in Chronicles)
are almost all in the reflexive form. The usage of the passive form in these
books is clearly a direct parallel to the reflexive, carrying the same idea
of maddened ecstasy, which included dancing, shouting, playing
music for hours on end, entering trances, and in some cases even stripping down
and self-mutilation. As a matter of fact, in some instances some translations
translate the term as “rave”.
In the later books (late Divided Kingdom, Exile, and Post-exilic periods),
the passive form dominates, but the strange behavior accompanying prophecy has
not vanished, especially when viewing some of the things the great prophets,
like Isaiah, Hosea, and Ezekiel did.
When we look at who this term “prophesy” is used for, we find that from
Kings on it is primarily used for false prophets in their worship and their
false predictions of the future. It is also mostly the godless men who use the
term to describe what is going on. Amos is accused of prophesying by the godless
high priest of Bethel, and the prophet then uses the term “prophesy” polemically
in response to his opponents charge.
In Jeremiah only 10 out of 37 uses of the word are used either by God
or by godly people to describe the actions or words of a prophet of God. It
is not until Ezekiel that it is primarily used for the prophet of God, when
God tells Ezekiel to prophesy. Interestingly Ezekiel is one of the strangest
prophets in Scripture, as he uses unusual actions, word pictures and utterances
to make his points. Again the idea of frenzy is not far away.
The term is used in the postexilic prophets only by Zecariah and he again
uses it to describe godless predictions of false prophets which result in their
death, as prophecy is unnecessary when Messiah rules from Jerusalem.
Joel uses the term only once in the famous passage about the Spirit of
God being poured out upon the people. Interestingly the term “prophesy” is used
in parallel with dreams and visions, something that we fundamentalist Evangelicals
don’t like either, which once more suggests unusual actions and words.
In general the term “prophesy”, when not signifying frenzied ecstasy,
applies to proclamations of the word of God, which some people might call “preaching.”
Many times these were unpopular or strange words that the hearers did not fully
understand or want to understand. In Ezekiel’s case it might have involved
a trancelike state (see here Ezekiel 8:1). Only Jeremiah seems to not exhibit
too much strange behavior during his ministry.
The most recent usage of “prophesy” is the one used by Ezra in the I.
Chronicles passage (the II. Chronicles passage is almost a word-for-word copy
of the I. Kings passage) mentioning the musical ministry of Asaph, Heman and
Jeduthun, and their “sons” (or students as the term “sons” can designate the
student of a master, who is called “father” by his pupils). The term used here
is in the passive form, not the reflexive. The idea of proclamation through
music is clear, but, as even in late uses of
involve strange behavior, we can assume that this was by no means a quiet, meditative
kind of ministry. There is no reason to think that it would be different in
this case. It would more probably be very loud and perhaps in places very ecstatic,
perhaps even more wild than many of the most modern and loud worship concerts
that happen today.
It definitely pays to take a careful look at the cultural background
before you make statements. The prophet may address social, political and spiritual
issues, but when he is doing that he is not necessarily “prophesying” in the
Old Testament. He is speaking a word from God. When he is prophesying he’s more
often in a nearly insane frenzy of worship where his entire focus is on God
and the proclamations come as a sub-set. If we take this into account, the only
real application we can get from this passage is that our God does not enjoy
disorder in His worship. Even the most frenzied times are given an ordered frame
to operate in.
The focus of the prophecy of these men and their “sons” is not on the
music they used — which we westerners would find exceedingly strange and perhaps
even “immoral” — but on the words that accompanied the music. If we look at
their “prophecies” we find many of them in Psalms, all of them focusing on God
and what He has done.
F. II. Kings 3:15
Music has a powerful influence in individual lives, families,
and churches. My prayer, aim, and purpose for this discussion is that the
music in the life of the reader would cause him to experience the reality
of the words in 2 Kings 3:15. "But bring me now a minstrel. And it
came to pass, when the minstrel played, that the hand of the Lord came upon
him."
II. Kings is a historical book written by a prophet
to show God’s dealings with Israel and Judah. When we look at this passage it
is in the middle of a narrative concerning the evil King Jehoram of Israel and
the good King Jehoshaphat of Judah coming to Elisha to get a word from God concerning
their war against Moab. Elisha is so incensed at the coming of King Jehoram
that he cannot calm himself to be able to hear God’s voice. The harpist’s music
calms him enough that he can hear God’s voice and he predicts how Jehoram and
Jehoshaphat will see the defeat of Moab.
When we look at this passage two things immediately come to mind. First,
it is a narrative, and it is notoriously difficult to get principles out of
narratives. Secondly, we’re not looking at the full cultural background here.
Remember, Elisha is a prophet in a time when prophets were considered to be
slightly crazy. The music used here was to calm him and it may have been a mystical
sort of calming effect. Thus this passage could be used to teach that
using music to call down a word from God is an acceptable way to do it. However,
this is the only time in Scripture that this happens. Basing a principle
on one passage only is also dangerous, as strange heresies have come from those.
In summary we must note that Mr. Wotzel tends to use prooftexting
to make his point, a very dangerous practice. He often does not consider the
full hermeneutical background, including the cultural and historical backgrounds
of each passage, and he even quotes a few of them out of context, filling them
with an entirely different meaning than the context gives them. That is misuse
of Scripture and it is highly dangerous, because it brings us to do things that
may be un-Biblical and in some cases even anti-Biblical.
|
