Great question. Keep in mind the two quotes I referenced were from two different sources, however, both by Edwards.

I think the point is this. God designed music to affect our emotions. However, music can contradict or overshadow what the truth is meant to do, or complement or support it. We should seek to use music that does the latter. Obviously, that’s a fairly subjective standard. Practically I try to avoid songs where I think the music is stronger than the lyrical content. I’d rather sing great lyrics to poor music than weak lyrics to a great tune. Actually, I’d rather sing great music with even stronger lyrics. Is that helpful?

I agree with all of the insights you’ve shared here, but these two Edwards quotes lead me to a question: Why does he say the value of music and verse is that “these things have a tendency to move our affections,” and then also that his goal is “to raise the affections of [his] hearers as high as [he] possibly can, provided they are affected with nothing but truth”? Which is it? Should music and verse move our affections, or should truth? I think this is what you’re getting at in saying, “Worship leaders must teach their people the difference between being moved by music and being moved by the beauty of God’s glory in Christ.” I often find myself heavy with that burden. I want people to respond to a great God, not to great music. Maybe I’m missing something in Edwards’ explanation, or might it be that sometimes the truth of God by itself moves us to heartfelt worship of Him, while at other times music first focuses and aligns our hearts on truth so that it can have its effect? In the first scenario, which seems to be more what Piper is describing in the quote here, singing is the necessary expression of true affections. In the second scenario, singing is the aid that helps transform head-knowledge into heart-response.

So aptly put. I really appreciate that comment. It will help my focus in leading worship.

scott