Steve Pettit and the Skillman family

As you correctly surmised, my initial questions are outside of the context of corporate worship. I’m curious how you (and other pastors on this thread) set your personal standards regarding music (entertainment options, in general) and how you communicate that to your congregation if asked/needed.

I don’t listen to songs about sex, drugs or immorality. This is why, while I personally enjoy the style of the Notorious B.I.G.s “Hypnotize,” AC/DC’s “Shook Me All Night Long,” Tupac’s “California Love,” or Pink Floyd’s “Comfortably Numb,” I won’t listen to them because of the content.

On the other hand, I also have no problem with listening to popular music that has no sinister moral content. So, for example, I won’t turn the radio if Luke Bryan’s “Play it Again,” Eric Church’s “Talladega” or Led Zeppelin’s “Thank You” comes on.

I also don’t like to watch movies with sex, drugs, immorality and general evil. I personally have no problem watching Jason Bourne kill everyone in sight, but I won’t watch movies with sex scenes. Inconsistent, yes - I admit it.

Thank you. Now …

Are their lines that others can cross and, for example, you would still have them fill your pulpit? And on the flip-side, are there lines that if someone crossed you wouldn’t allow them to fill your pulpit?

I don’t ask what music people listen to, and never plan on it!

Art is not forbidden because it is a style that doesn’t appeal to me. Art becomes forbidden when it violates clear Biblical boundaries. Obscenity is sinful wherever it is found. Calling it art doesn’t remove it from the category of sin and place in into the safe category of liberty. There are enough clear commands in Scripture to rule out sinful art. Sin is sinful whenever it transgresses God’s law.

This is somewhat analogous to “hate crimes.” We don’t need another category of crimes based upon the (supposed) motive of the perpetrator. If someone assaults another, that’s a crime, whatever the motive. If something claiming to be art violates a command of Scripture, it is sin. We don’t need to remove art from the category of Christian liberty. Just deal with whatever is clearly sinful. The rest falls necessarily into the category of liberty.

[G. N. Barkman]

Art is not forbidden because it is a style that doesn’t appeal to me. Art becomes forbidden when it violates clear Biblical boundaries. Obscenity is sinful wherever it is found. Calling it art doesn’t remove it from the category of sin and place in into the safe category of liberty. There are enough clear commands in Scripture to rule out sinful art. Sin is sinful whenever it transgresses God’s law.

Ok, fair enough. What makes some music sinful and some not?

Tyler’s comments in this thread have to do with literature (what do the words say). The words aren’t the music.

Is there some music that is clearly sinful or not? How do you decide?

If music is NOT sinful, ever, or not clearly sinful, then why is it the only art form that is exempt?

Painting can be pornographic, lewed, edgy, suggestive, questionable, acceptable, noble. Probably you could add other adjectives but I’m trying to give a sliding scale there. Literature, sculpture, dance, etc, all can have the same “scale of holiness.”

But not music?

That is the sixty-four thousand dollar question. When you can offer a clear, objective standard to determine this, please let me know. Otherwise, it pretty much boils down to whatever I say it is.

Is all music of equal quality? Not in my opinion. Is all music helpful and edifying? Not in my opinion. I think we both agree in general that music itself, apart from the words, can be sinful, or at least come pretty close to that category. But how to define that objectively? I don’t know. How to define that Scripturally? I don’t know. And because I can’t do so, I shy away from imposing my opinions upon others. I’ll make selections for music in my church based upon my opinions. Beyond that, I live and let live.

Don, maybe instead of putting the onus on Tyler, why don’t you come up with something that you can defend with Scripture about how some music might be sinful outside of sinful lyrics?

Thinking for myself, I can state that when music is played at such levels (turning it up to 11) that it flat out injures people, that would be a sin against those subjected to it. Beyond that, there are plenty of things I don’t care for—light rock and CCM come to mind—but that I would consider (outside lyrics, again) more distasteful or perhaps ineffective than sinful.

A fun “gut check” on this matter is, IMO, the habit of many harpists, such as “Harptallica” and the “Harp Twins”, to play heavy metal classics on the harp. OK, is that melody acceptable (and downright pleasant) when it’s played on the harp, but gains unacceptability on the electric guitar? (or sometimes the accoustic guitar?) What’s our logic here?

[Bert Perry]

Don, maybe instead of putting the onus on Tyler, why don’t you come up with something that you can defend with Scripture about how some music might be sinful outside of sinful lyrics?

I don’t think I did. I was talking to Greg. I mentioned Tyler as an illustration. Reading comprehension again?

[Bert Perry]

Thinking for myself, I can state that when music is played at such levels (turning it up to 11) that it flat out injures people, that would be a sin against those subjected to it. Beyond that, there are plenty of things I don’t care for—light rock and CCM come to mind—but that I would consider (outside lyrics, again) more distasteful or perhaps ineffective than sinful.

Can literature, sculpture, painting, dance, etc. be erotic/pornographic?

Can music? If not, why not?

Greg wrote:

Why is some music sinful and other music not? That is the sixty-four thousand dollar question. When you can offer a clear, objective standard to determine this, please let me know. Otherwise, it pretty much boils down to whatever I say it is.

To paraphrase Louis Berkhof, that is the question, and it is the only question.

I see myself way outside the bounds. I think On Ilkley Moor Bar’tat” is a great song. One of the few secular songs I know the words to is The Lass of Fyve. I want a piper to play Black Bear when they lower my casket into the ground. But then the first record I bought with my own money was an LP by the Pipes and Band of the 43rd Highland (The Royal Black Watch) Regiment.

[TylerR]

Greg wrote:

Why is some music sinful and other music not? That is the sixty-four thousand dollar question. When you can offer a clear, objective standard to determine this, please let me know. Otherwise, it pretty much boils down to whatever I say it is.

To paraphrase Louis Berkhof, that is the question, and it is the only question.

I’d phrase it somewhat differently. Is some music sinful and other music not? To put “why” there presumes that there are some genre that are inherently sinful, which is precisely the question we ought to be discussing. Those who would argue that some genre are inherently sinful have the onus on THEM to establish that from the Scriptures, and no guilt by association or slippery slope arguments need apply.

For that matter, are there really forms of art that are inherently sinful? Yes, there is the pornographic use of nudity in art—it is no surprise that the portrayal of Venus/Aphrodite, goddess of lust, was the first major use of nudity in art by the Florentines in the Renaissance, and it is simultaneously unsurprising that the portrayals of David by Michelangelo and Donatello resemble little more than the ancient Greek eromenos. But does that impugn all painting and sculpture? Do we consign oils, frescoes, marbles, etc.. to the dustbin because of aberrant use of the techniques? For that matter, should we consign all dance to the dustbin because some use dance as an occasion for a striptease? Do we abandon poetry (a significant portion of the Scriptures, mind you) because of obscene limericks? Or all prose (ahem) because of frankly pornographic “romance” novels?

It’s going to be real quiet in our churches if we do.

There have been a few on this thread who have dealt with the words of “Rocky Top,” but the majority have focused on the musical style and totally ignored the murder and moonshine in the lyrics. This characterizes the larger debate over music within our churches. I would suggest that words trump music in importance.

I am not saying that musical style should have no bearing over what we use in our churches. However, when false doctrine or sinful practices are present in a song, these pose the greater danger.

[Bert Perry]

TylerR wrote:

Greg wrote:

Why is some music sinful and other music not? That is the sixty-four thousand dollar question. When you can offer a clear, objective standard to determine this, please let me know. Otherwise, it pretty much boils down to whatever I say it is.

To paraphrase Louis Berkhof, that is the question, and it is the only question.

I’d phrase it somewhat differently. Is some music sinful and other music not? To put “why” there presumes that there are some genre that are inherently sinful, which is precisely the question we ought to be discussing. Those who would argue that some genre are inherently sinful have the onus on THEM to establish that from the Scriptures, and no guilt by association or slippery slope arguments need apply.

For that matter, are there really forms of art that are inherently sinful? Yes, there is the pornographic use of nudity in art—it is no surprise that the portrayal of Venus/Aphrodite, goddess of lust, was the first major use of nudity in art by the Florentines in the Renaissance, and it is simultaneously unsurprising that the portrayals of David by Michelangelo and Donatello resemble little more than the ancient Greek eromenos. But does that impugn all painting and sculpture? Do we consign oils, frescoes, marbles, etc.. to the dustbin because of aberrant use of the techniques? For that matter, should we consign all dance to the dustbin because some use dance as an occasion for a striptease? Do we abandon poetry (a significant portion of the Scriptures, mind you) because of obscene limericks? Or all prose (ahem) because of frankly pornographic “romance” novels?

It’s going to be real quiet in our churches if we do.

the argument isn’t a “no music at all” argument.

Don, it is, because if you use guilt by association, I guarantee you that I will be able to find an association that is objectionable to most fundagelicals. For example, “Be Still My Soul” is based on a tone poem by Sibelius rooted in Finnish pagan mythology, “Joyful Joyful We Adore Thee” is a re-adaptation of a melody originally used for pantheistic lyrics by Schiller, and “Glorious Things of Thee are Spoken” is different lyrics to “Deutschland Ueber Alles.” Salvation Army songs were often adapted from barroom songs, to the chagrin of the Anglican divines around Booth, but heartily defended by Booth and quite frankly appear in our hymnals today.

Time to make an argument if you’ve got it, Don. Step up to the plate.