Is Music Worship? - John MacArthur

Excerpted from here. Our comments in bold.

-------------------

It seems that every MacArthur sermon or article we read causes us to wonder how this man can be regarded as a stellar Bible teacher. We don't wish to dishonor the man, but we are fully willing to examine and evaluate his teaching.

Today we have excerpted his sermon about contemporary worship music. That's his target. He doesn't tell us about why his opinion is better, only that contemporary worship music is Satan's music and doesn't belong in the church.

Though he does quote Scripture, none of it comes to bear on his assertions.

This is simply bad Bible teaching.)

Ephesians 5:18-20: “Do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father.” 

(...)

Another misconception is this, that non-Christians aren’t going to come to church unless we import their music. ("Their music?" Is it really true that contemporary music styles cannot belong to God? Does God redeem and sanctify the unholy and lost, or not? If He does this with humans, why not with "their music?")

Music so dominates our culture. It is so ubiquitous that if we’re going to appeal to nonbelievers, we’ve got to change our music. We’ve got to do the kind of music that they like and somehow baptize it if we’re going to reach out evangelistically. (Is this really a misconception people have? Or rather, is it actually a ministry strategy churches might use? It seems that Dr. MacArthur doesn't understand why churches use contemporary-style music. 

Churches don't use contemporary worship because they think people won't otherwise come to church, they use it because they think it might open a door into a closed and evil generation needing to hear the Gospel. 

Further, all generations of Christians have utilized the music of the day to worship. All historic music of the church was at one time contemporary music.)

That’s not true. Never, never in Scripture is music ever, ever stated to be used as an evangelistic technique in some direct sense.

In an indirect sense, it is because we’re singing of our Savior, right, we’re singing of salvation. But we’re singing to God, not the world, and not the unbeliever. (Waaait. Let's unpack this. First, Dr. MacArthur concedes that the lyrics can testify of salvation. So, is there any difference between singing the Gospel and preaching it? 

Second, he claims that we're singing to God and not unbelievers. But he just agreed that we sing of salvation, which means that some of our church singing is not directed to God. An obvious example is

(vs.1) Amazing grace, How sweet the sound

That saved a wretch like me.

I once was lost, but now I am found,

Was blind, but now I see.

(vs. 4) The Lord has promised good to me

His word my hope secures;

He will my shield and portion be,

As long as life endures.

The entire song is sung as a testimony to the listener, and none of it is directed to God. Many traditional hymns are constructed this way, like

Softly and Tenderly

Praise God, from whom all blessings flow

I'd Rather Have Jesus

All Creatures of Our God And King

Praise Him, Praise Him

It is Well With My Soul

Blessed Assurance

It is clear that we don't always sing to God. Sometimes we testify to the people what God has done for us, sometimes we sing the Gospel, and sometimes we worship God directly addressing Him in worship and praise.)

There’s no mandate for the church to make its music appeal to the sons of Satan. (This is a summary statement. However, Dr. MacArthur does not speak for any other church than his own. Further, he cannot know if other churches "have a mandate," that is, a desire to reach various types of people by using various styles of music as a vehicle to do this.

In addition, the use of the phrase "sons of Satan" gives us a peak into Dr. MacArthur's character. Rather than have compassion for the lost [particularly for those who are not clean and respectable, maybe with tattoos and piercings], Dr. MacArthur disparages them.) 

(...)

  
There are other songs that we enjoy. Some of you enjoy classical music. Some of you enjoy various kinds of music. Some of you enjoy jazz music or whatever it might be. Some of you enjoy country music. Those have a place in our lives like other common graces that God gives us. (??? Hmm, Dr. MacArthur has just affirmed and legitimized listening to contemporary music. But for some reason we cannot use this style of music in church.)

But the song of the redeemed is far beyond all of that. It doesn’t focus on our emotions, it focuses on God. And this is a song that is new, and only believers have it. (What any of this has to do with what style of music a church uses is a mystery.)

You might be interested to know that the word “new” appears in the psalms, the Old Testament psalms, more often with song than any other term. Go through the psalms and see the word “new,” and more often than any other term, the next word will be “song.” We are a new people. We have been recreated, we have been given life, and we have a new song. It is distinct from all the old music. It is the song of the redeemed. (So how is singing old hymns the "new song," while singing in a contemporary style is not the "new song?"

This is confused thinking, where in fact Dr. MacArthur is defending his tradition, not the Bible.)