Steve Pettit and the Skillman family
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
….and the point about David being in fact a prophet is well taken. That noted, we still have the question of not only all the other Psalmists and those bringing songs to church per 1 Corinthians 14, but quite frankly the question of whether David’s contemporaries would have recognized him as a prophet. Now certainly, in one way every Psalmist is a prophet—he has had the privilege of at least once speaking God’s very Word for the first time, and it was preserved in God’s Word—but even so, we need to remember how these men were seen in their own lives, before God’s seal of approval was put in their work.
As common, ordinary men, often without the authority that would come from being a priest or known prophet. That’s a profound thought if we consider the idea that many would see it as important that we have “known authorities” guide these things.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Thanks for the welcome, Bert!
Based on how the Spirit frames David’s arrival on the biblical scene, we have reason to understand that David’s attestation as a prophet was well-established whenever the Spirit began to inspire the writing of his Psalms through him. First, God directed Samuel, the leading prophet of his day, to anoint David. Shortly thereafter, the Spirit came upon him and remained on him thereafter (1 Sam. 16:13), which was vital to his status as a prophet.
In a key scene for our musical perspectives (1 Sam. 16:14-23), a servant of Saul testified to David’s being a skilled instrumentalist of whom he knew that “the Lord is with him” (1 Sam. 16:18). In the biblical narrative, this expression is predicated of only a few people up to the time of David, highlighting that he was already distinguished overtly as a man who was specially related to God.
Based on this data, we are justified in holding that David was well-attested to as a prophet when he wrote his Psalms under divine inspiration.
[Ron Bean]It’s a Thanksgiving miracle. A music thread lives again!
So I’ll ask again: Is this music sinful, evil, bad, whatever?
Please assign it a moral quality, Don.
Make it even “easier” and someone analyze the Shai Linne song that someone just referenced. That should be easy…right? This is where the crickets always start chirping. Still don’t expect anyone to change their “belief” though.
So Lee argues that music is wrong because it has to do with the intention of the artist. I put up a song and ask Lee to explain how the intention of the artist is wrong.
Don objects because of the music itself, although he’s probably never listened to Shai before. Don, have you ever listened to the song before this? Or are you objecting because I disproved Lee’s point? And as Ron notes - on what basis can you definitely say that the music itself is wrong? Where is the Scriptural violation within the music, since you’ve ceded the point on the ‘literature’?
I’m putting that song out there because it blows holes in both arguments, as I did when Aniol was on this website. But the philosophy must be defended because the results must remain sancrosact. That’s why a song by SGM is verboten until someone within the “authoritarian fundamentalist movement” deems it so or it magically appears in a sanctioned hymnal. Then all of a sudden, we’re OK with that one song but no others. Rinse and repeat.
Sometimes the ‘tragedy of compromise’ looks more like ‘the inability to change’ more than it does anything else. But that’s me.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
You clearly haven’t been reading Pickering very closely! Behold:
The Contemporary Christian Music so loved by large numbers of evangelicals today is witness to the theological deterioration of the church. Spiritual Christians are aghast at the frothy, wild, undisciplined, and earthly music sung and played by so-called Christian rock groups. There is more than an age gap here. There is a difference between that which is spiritual and that which is fleshly (Tragedy of Compromise, pg. 114).
How so? Pickering foes on to provide a quote from another author who observes that old music was intellectual and is aimed at the mind and feelings, whereas the “new music” “rocks the whole body and penetrates the soul.” He claims CCM is all about experience. “It fits in with the self-centered culture of the day in which persons concentrate on ‘meeting their needs.’”
Pickering recognized what I’ve been saying; intent matters. I’m just not willing to impugn the intent of people whom I’ve never met and know nothing about; I’m willing to judge their intent on the basis of the lyrics. Pickering had no such qualms.
Pickering goes on, and states:
Although music can reflect emotions, it must never be merely emotional. It must be tied to the mind which in turn is anchored firmly in theological concepts taught in the Scriptures … Music that honors God must not only be heartfelt but also have intellectual validity (pg. 114-115).
In short, Pickering gives us nothing but broad-brush statements and wholesale imputation of bad motives. You’ll have to look elsewhere for substantive analysis, and an answer to your question, Jay …
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[Jay]Don objects because of the music itself, although he’s probably never listened to Shai before. Don, have you ever listened to the song before this? Or are you objecting because I disproved Lee’s point?
Jay, simply posting a poem is not the same as the music. I don’t particularly care about this song, the artist, the music, whatever. Simply making that point. You post the poem and want people to make a judgement about the music? Weird. Some kind of disconnect there.
As for the song itself, I have never heard it and don’t plan to. I’m not making a judgement one way or the other. Simply calling attention to the fact that you can’t judge music on the basis of literature.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
[RajeshG]It never calls them angels, only beasts or creatures. They may be angelic like creatures, but they are not called angels. Note that v. 11 distinguishes between angels and the living creatures.Greg Long wrote:
Kevin Miller wrote:
RajeshG wrote:
David was a prophet who is the most important musician spoken of in Scripture.
We have David’s lyrics and references to musical instruments, but I wonder what David’s music actually sounded like. I’ll have to ask him to sing something for me when we get to heaven.
Come to think of it, I wonder if we’ll be creating our own music in heaven, or if we’ll just be listening to the angels singing their songs.
Except it doesnt say that angels “sing,” only that they “say.”
Revelation 5:8-9 says that angelic creatures sing:
Revelation 5:8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. 9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
In the flow of thought in this passage, both the beasts and the elders are the subjects of both verbs, “fell” and “sung.” There is no grammatical basis for limiting the antecedent of “they” in 5:9 to just the 24 elders and saying that they symbolize the Church, etc. This passage says that the beasts, which are angelic creatures, and the elders fell down, having harps, and both groups sing the new song.
Angels are recorded as saying, not singing (for example to the shepherds at the birth of Christ, Luke 2).
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Jay, simply posting a poem is not the same as the music. I don’t particularly care about this song, the artist, the music, whatever.
Don, this is embarrassing, even for you. It’s Christian hip-hop. Linne expressly identifies himself and his music as such.
You object to a piece of music on the basis of the singer’s intent and then argue that it isn’t actually a song but a poem? And you object to a song on the basis of the music when you haven’t even listened to the song you are objecting to?
I rest my case, everyone.
Tyler, some fundamentalists are ok with shoddy argumentations. And some of us are not.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
While we are discussing whether or not angels sing or speak (put me down for doing both, BTW), let’s solve the ancient mystery or not they can dance on the head of a pin and just how many can do so.
;)
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
While we’re waiting for answers let’s not get sidetracked by how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. We all know that holy beings don’t dance. As to their singing, when we consider the loudness often assigned to their verbal utterings, it is only logical that any singing they would do would be too loud to be acceptable. Personally if God is singing I hope he has a choir behind him.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
It turns out that the song I linked to earlier has a purely instrumental version - there are no lyrics or words at all. If anyone wants to dissect the music itself and demonstrate the flaws from Scripture, you can get it at Spotify’s site here.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
[Jay]Jay, simply posting a poem is not the same as the music. I don’t particularly care about this song, the artist, the music, whatever.
Don, this is embarrassing, even for you. It’s Christian hip-hop. Linne expressly identifies himself and his music as such.
You object to a piece of music on the basis of the singer’s intent and then argue that it isn’t actually a song but a poem? And you object to a song on the basis of the music when you haven’t even listened to the song you are objecting to?
Jay, I am well aware of who Shai Linne is. I don’t agree with using his style of music. Yet you insist that I evaluate his music on the basis of the words of a song. Please note, Jay, this is very elementary. When you go to a piano and strike a key, it doesn’t SAY anything. It plays a note. If you put enough of them together in an organized fashion you have music. Evaluating music requires evaluating music. I don’t particularly care about your attempt to get me to evaluate this poem (poems are made of words, Jay. Words make up literature. I am sure you might have run across this concept at some time, but you are still young.). We know the genre Shai Linne uses. I object to the genre as inappropriate for Christian expression, but it has nothing to do with the words. And you know that. So stop the silly posturing.
[Jay]Tyler, some fundamentalists are ok with shoddy argumentations. And some of us are not.
For that proposition to be true, you would have to be a fundamentalist.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
The larger point of Jay’s question is on what basis you dismiss the music he mentioned, if not by the content of the lyrics. This has been what many people have asked, on the various recent music threads. It’s what Riley did not address. I don’t know if it can be addressed. None of us will likely ever minister with the other, so I don’t believe there is any posturing going on!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
The subject is well over done now. There is no point in hashing it over again. See my article on P&D. Cultivate an understanding of what music communicates. There are many resources, including secular. Probably especially secular would be important, since you mistrust Christian sources. When you understand what music communicates, you won’t have any problem evaluating.
But please spare me the challenge of “see these lyrics, now evaluate the music.” Lyrics aren’t music.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Discussion