Nevin on Instruments with Sacrifice
James Dodson
THE MUSIC OF INSTRUMENTS WAS CONJOINED WITH SACRIFICE AND INCENSE.
The use of instruments in worship was admittedly a part of the Temple service. It had no place in the Tabernacle before David’s day, beyond the use of the two silver trumpets made by Moses, in the hands of the priests. There is not a particle of evidence to show that it entered into the ordinary worship of the family or the synagogue. We are now prepared to take a step further, and note that, in the Temple service, it was uniformly and most closely associated with sacrifice and the burning of incense. The evidence on this point is clear and abundant. There were two removals of the ark by David—first, when it was brought out of the house of Abinadab that was in Gibeah.—2 Sam. vi. 1–11. Comp. 1 Chron. xiii. At that time “David and all the house of Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of fir wood, even on harps, and on psalteries, and on timbrels, and on cornets [sistra], and on cymbals.”—2 Sam. vi. 5. In the parallel passage, 1 Chron. xiii. 8, “trumpets” also are mentioned. We may notice, in passing, a use that was made of this by a speaker at the last meeting of the General Assembly. It was represented that this was the
[Page 29]
worship of a whole people, not of any consecrated class, as if every man, woman, and child in the procession had his and her instrument, and actually played on it. Such construction of the words is simply preposterous. If a serious attempt had been made to carry out such an idea in practice—if the thing were, even in the lowest degree, probable or credible—a mighty noise would certainly have been the result, any thing worthy of the name of music must have been out of the question. The people generally joined in the procession, and probably expressed their joy, some by shouting, others by dancing, as we are informed they did on the second removal, David himself setting the example of dancing. But the playing on instruments was confined to those bands of Levites whom David was training in anticipation of the building of the Temple—these acting in this for and as representing the whole people. Such seems to us the only rational construction of the words, and the other construction, if really intended, appears puerile and absurd in the extreme. The ark was not conveyed to Zion at that time, as at first designed. Because of the judgment on Uzzah, it was carried aside into the house of Obed-edom the Gittite, where it remained three months. There is no mention made of sacrifice on that occasion. There may have been, notwithstanding; and if not, the omission was one of the fatal mistakes which drew down divine displeasure. On the second removal, from the house of Obed-edom to Zion, David called for both priests and Levites; required them to “sanctify themselves,” that they might bring up the ark of the Lord God of Israel unto the place that he had prepared for it; and said, “For because ye did it not at the first, the Lord our God made a breach upon us, for that we sought him not after the due order.”—1 Chron. xv. 11–13. Accordingly we read, “And it was so, that when they that bare the ark of the Lord had gone six paces, he sacrificed oxen and fatlings.”—2 Sam. vi. 13. Again, 1 Chron. xv. 26, “And it came to pass, when God helped the Levites that bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, that they offered seven bullocks and seven rams.” Scott, in his Commentary, says on this, “The Levites offered these sacrifices on their own account, besides those which David offered. Some think that they rested seven times, and offered a bullock and a ram each time.” What is certain is, that there were sacrifices at the commencement of the procession, and also at the end. See 2 Sam. vi. 17, and 1 Chron. xvi. 1. From that time till the end of David’s reign there were two tabernacles. The one which Moses made in the wilderness remained at Gibeon, as also the altar of burnt offering made by Moses, 1 Chron. xxi. 29. But there must have been another altar in Jerusalem, when there were sacrifices. Zadok and Abiathar were conjoined in the high priesthood. Abiathar
[Page 30]
resided in Jerusalem, as it would seem, to be near the king; Zadok, at Gibeon. Provision was made for the service of song in Jerusalem. David “appointed certain of the Levites” to this service—“Benaiah also and Jahaziel the priests with trumpets continually before the ark of the covenant of God.”—1 Chron. xvi. 4–6, 37, 38. No express mention is made of sacrifice, but it is manifestly implied. As to the service at Gibeon the conjunction of sacrifice and song with instrumental accompaniment is expressly recorded. “And Zadok the priest, and his brethren the priests, before the tabernacle of the Lord in the high place that was at Gibeon, To offer burnt-offerings unto the Lord continually morning and evening, and to do according to all that is written in the law of the Lord, which He commanded Israel: And with them Heman and Jeduthun, and the rest that were chosen, who were expressed by name, to give thanks to the Lord, because His mercy endureth for ever: And with them Heman and Jeduthun, with trumpets and cymbals for those that should make a sound, and with musical instruments of God.”—1 Chron. xvi. 39–42.
It was intimated to the Levites by David that they were no more “to carry the tabernacle, nor any vessels of it, for the service thereof. For by the last words of David the Levites were numbered from twenty years old and above: Because their office was to wait on the sons of Aaron for the service of the house of the Lord, in the courts, and in the chambers, and in the purifying of all holy things, and the work of the service of the house of God: Both for the shew-bread, and for the fine flour for meat-offering, and for the unleavened cakes, and for that which is baked in the pan, and for that which is fried, and for all manner of measure and size: And to stand every morning to thank and praise the Lord, and likewise at even; And to offer all burnt-sacrifices unto the Lord in the Sabbaths, in the new moons, and on the set feasts, by number, according to the order commanded unto them, continually before the Lord: And that they should keep the charge of the tabernacle of the congregation, and the charge of the holy place, and the charge of the sons of Aaron their brethren, in the service of the house of the Lord.”—1 Chron. xxiii. 26–32. It is very plain from this passage that the service of praise, as conducted by the Levitical choirs with instrumental accompaniment, was associated with the regular morning and evening sacrifice, and with other sacrifices. We are informed on the authority of the Talmud that, in the Herodian Temple, the “musicians were stationed upon the duchan, or the ascent of several steps which led from the outer court to the court of the priests, and were placed under the leadership of the chief musician, who gave the time with the loud-sounding cymbals.”* On better authority we learn that, at a purer period, the
_____
* Imp. Bib. Dict., Vol. II., p. 304.
[Page 31]
juxtaposition was still more close. At the dedication of the first Temple by Solomon, when he offered in sacrifice no less than 22,000 oxen and 120,000 sheep, the Levites, the singers, “having cymbals and psalteries and harps, stood at the east end of the altar, and with them an hundred and twenty priests sounding with trumpets.” Then, we are told, “It came even to pass, as the trumpeters and singers were as one, to make one sound to be heard in praising and thanking the Lord,” that the house was filled with a cloud.—2 Chron. v. 11–14, comp. vii. 4–7. When the reforming King Hezekiah set himself to cleanse the Temple from the defilements which had accumulated in it during the preceding idolatrous reign, when he might truly be said to re-dedicate it, he seems to have sought most rigidly to adhere to the divinely revealed regulations and precedents of the purest periods in the past. On that occasion there were sacrifices. “And the Levites stood with the instruments of David, and the priests with the trumpets. And Hezekiah commanded to offer the burnt-offering upon the altar. And when the burnt-offering began, the song of the Lord began also with the trumpets, and with the instruments ordained by David King of Israel. And all the congregation worshipped, and the singers sang, and the trumpeters sounded: and all this continued until the burnt-offering was finished.”—2 Chron. xxix. 26–28. Respecting the laying of the foundation of the second Temple, we read—“And when the builders laid the foundation of the temple of the Lord, they set the priests in their apparel with trumpets, and the Levites the sons of Asaph with cymbals, to praise the Lord, after the ordinance of David King of Israel.”—Ezra. iii. 10. There is no express mention of sacrifice, but we cannot suppose it in abeyance on such a solemn occasion. Besides, the mention of the priests in their apparel, and with their trumpets, manifestly implies it.
We have made these references at the greater length, because we think, taken all together, they exhibit a uniform and special connection between the service of praise, as conducted in the Temple, and sacrifice. Professor Wallace does not deny the association. On the contrary, he expressly admits it. “While the sacrifice was consuming upon the altar, the choir sang to their instruments.” But then he brings them together on his page only for the purpose of contrast. He sets himself to dig a gulf as wide and deep as possible between the two, and, in his anxiety to make antithetic points, he commits himself to some statements that are somewhat marvellous. Thus he tells us, p. 10, “Praise is an end in itself, thanksgiving is an end in itself, both terminating in God.” To make this of any relevant use in the argument, it must be translated into this form—‘The music of instruments in praise terminates in God.’ How? The reply must be, as an aid to devotion. It excites, elevates, strengthens, intensifies emotion. All this could be said
[Page 32]
with equal truth of sacrifice, so long as it had divine sanction. The music of instruments, considered apart from the vocalization, could terminate in God in no other sense, way, or manner than did sacrifice. Quoting, again, Paul’s description of the Mosaic economy in Hebrews ix. as containing (not consisting wholly of, as seems insinuated) “carnal ordinances,” he says, “Praise could not be incorporated in a system of which this was a true description.” But, as a matter of undeniable fact, praise was incorporated in the system of Jewish worship, and formed a conspicuous part of it. The only intelligible idea, then, which can be put into this sentence, consistently with truth, is that praise differs in nature from sacrifice—a statement which, we presume no one will controvert. Besides, when you read for praise in the sentence instrumental music—‘instrumental music could not be incorporated in the system’—this makes the allegation rather more glaring—in short, it is seen to be only a begging of the question still. With growing confidence he tells us, “Sacrifice and praise are unlike in nature, and cannot be logically classed under a common head; nor are they so classed in Scripture.” Indeed! Sacrifice was an offering to God. Praise was and is an offering to God. Here is a plain point of analogy, however they may differ otherwise, the force of which no amount of mere assertion can set aside. Not so classed in Scripture! Why, the very name of sacrifice is repeatedly given to praise in Scripture. We read of sacrifices of joy and of thanksgiving, in connection with singing and praise—Ps. xxvii. 6; cvii. 22; cxvi. 17. And Paul writes to the Hebrews, “By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.”—Heb. xiii. 15. The Professor says, moreover, of sacrifice, “It was not designed as an expression of man’s feelings towards God, but of God’s grace to man.” We have here an illustration of the manner in which even an acute mind, in the effort to establish a false distinction, often becomes blind to one that is plain and palpable. The Professor fails to distinguish between the appointment of sacrifice on the part of God, and the offering of sacrifice, thus appointed, on the part of man. The former was doubtless an expression of grace. But it is not the appointment, it is the offering that is most generally in view when sacrifice is spoken of, and it is only this that can be properly brought into comparison with praise. Now, if the sacrifice was not an expression of faith, gratitude, and love (and these are surely feelings), on the part of the offerer, it was simply an abomination to him who searches the heart. “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, and by it he being dead yet speaketh.” Still further, we are assured that “it (animal sacrifice) tells of God’s love to man; not of man’s praise or thanksgiving to God.”
[Page 33]
What in the world, then, are we to make of those sacrifices expressly denominated “thank-offerings” in the law of Moses?