I don't think that this argument is convincing.
Correct me if I misunderstand the argument, but it seems to be saying that instrumentation in worship was part of the temple worship system and because the temple worship system has been abolished (or fulfilled - depending on which verbiage you prefer) then the use of instrumentation has also passed away. Here's my response:
- I think this is a misunderstanding of how to apply the Law. It is not the case that the Law no longer applies to us. All of OT Law, including what is sometimes compartmentalized as "ceremonial law" (the Bible itself makes no such distinction), directly applies to us today. The question is "how does it apply?"
- Jesus Christ is our hermeneutical key for applying the Law. Because of Jesus Christ the applications of some laws are significantly altered. The applications of others are not. Two examples follow:
- Laws about animal sacrifice are significantly altered through Jesus Christ. To be sure, a priesthood is still required for us to approach God and sacrifices are still necessary for atonement. But in Jesus we have a better priest and better sacrifice. So the Levitical priesthood is fulfilled in Jesus and so are all the sacrifices.
- A law like "do not murder" is not significantly altered. When this law passes through the hermeneutical filter of the cross it emerges on the other side basically unchanged. We are still called to revere human life, protect it, and refrain from all damage to human life.
- The temple of God still exists. Jesus Christ is our better temple and the body of the church itself is the fulfillment of the temple of God. As such, all Scripture in the OT relating to the temple should be applied to us with this understanding.
- That sacrifices by the hands of the Levites were required in the OT still applies, but is significantly altered because of Jesus. He is our priest who offers himself as our sacrifice. Therefore animal sacrifices and the Levitcal priesthood are fulfilled in him. It is utterly incorrect to say that there is no sacrifice. How can we approach God without a sacrifice? So if the OT sacrifices were accompanied by instruments, how much more should our better sacrifice be accompanied by even greater musical expressions?
- That instrumentation was commanded in the OT still applies, but it is very hard to see how this command is altered by Jesus. The command to use instruments in worship is more similar to a command like "do not bear false witness". The work of Christ as our priest and as the temple of God does nothing to alter the meaning of these commands.
In response to #1 especially: This is not in line with the historic Reformed understanding of the Law. There is by necessary implication a division in the Mosaic Law between civil, ceremonial, and moral laws (cf. WCF 19.3-4 & relevant biblical texts used in support).
I agree with much of what you've stated. The ceremonial aspects of Old Testament life - the Temple, priesthood, sacrifices, et al, find their culmination in Jesus Christ and His redemptive work. Those Old Testament things foresignified what Christ was coming to do, functioning as types & shadows of what was to come. However, given the regulative principle of worship, musical instruments are only prescribed to Levites functioning in the Temple's worship, as previously shown (if I am not mistaken). Though the New Temple has come (Christ, and the Church), a Greater Priest has come (Christ), a new priesthood is here (the priesthood of all believers), there is nevertheless no transference of a musical instrument mandate from Levites functioning in the Old Testament temple, to the New Covenant administration and its worship of God. And since it is not commanded for this covenantal administration, was unique to Mosaic Temple worship (which Temple, sacrifices, priesthood, etc. is fulfilled in Christ and His Church), and was unique to a specific group of families and not for all the people at all times, I conclude that most likely we should not be using musical instruments in corporate worship.
I can understand this thread coming out of the OPC or CRCNA, but not the PCA. I saddens me to see that people in my denomination hold these views.
The OPC has largely also taken a stance against exclusive psalmody, although both the PCA and OPC permit congregations to practice it. I wish exclusive psalmody didn't sadden you, brother. While this thread has been dealing with a really touchy subject (whether hymn-singing is sinful), there is a positive case for singing the Psalms. The Psalms are the very Word of God and are, by their very nature, of a superior class to any hymns we could write. As the Word of God, the Psalms are one of the means of grace God appointed for His people. They teach us about God's creation, man's fall into sin, His Son Jesus Christ, Jesus' humiliation, crucifixion, burial, resurrection, ascension, exaltation, the sending of the Spirit, and the coming judgment more perfectly than any hymn ever could. They give us a more intimate picture of Him than our hymns can, because they are inspired by His Spirit. The Trinity hymnal is not. The Psalms are not only sufficient for the Church's worship, since they are God's songs written for us and for our instruction, but they are also superior to anything we could write. Frankly, I'm perplexed why the PCA has almost altogether abandoned the practice of singing the psalms. What saddens me is the neglect of God's hymnal in our churches, though I recognize that mine is the extreme minority position in the PCA.