Why Certain Types of Music Make Our Brains Sing, and Others Don’t

[Kevin Miller]

RajeshG wrote:

In the Asian country of Tibet, indigenous occultists use real human skulls as drums in their occult musical activities. These occultists do so in order to have contact with spirit beings and have occult experiences through the demonic powers of the spirit beings.

Plainly, such musical activity and such kinds of instrumental music are entirely unacceptable to God. God’s people are forbidden from having anything to do with such things.

Of course it’s unacceptable to try to have contact with spirit beings. Nobody would argue with that. The use of a human skull to contact spirits is displeasing to God. However, the use of a human skull by occultists does not make the skull unusable in other situations. Various science classes use human skulls, Should we find that use problematic due to the use of human skulls by occultist?

….poor Yorick, I knew him, Horatio! A fellow of infinite jest….

Weird me, I think there might be a rationale that would allow us to eschew the use of human skulls for drums without using guilt by association to eliminate entire genre from song in the church. Start with the “ick” factor, go on to “do we really abuse the bodies of the dead this way?”, go on to “does this really add anything to the tonality of a drum that we’d want to use?”, and the like.

And really, all this is terribly selective, as you’ll find this kind of thing all over, but it tends to be just rock & roll that gets proscribed.

[RajeshG]

Kevin Miller wrote:

Of course it’s unacceptable to try to have contact with spirit beings. Nobody would argue with that. The use of a human skull to contact spirits is displeasing to God. However, the use of a human skull by occultists does not make the skull unusable in other situations. Various science classes use human skulls, Should we find that use problematic due to the use of human skulls by occultist?

Is that demonic Tibetan musical activity pleasing to God or not?

I already said that trying to have contact with spirit being is displeasing to God, so the specific musical activity done while trying to have this contact is displeasing. Does the use of percussion by a demonic Tibetan make the use of percussion for any reason displeasing to God?

Is the Tibetan occultists using human skulls as a musical instrument acceptable to God or not?

The use of a skull during this attempted spirit contact is also displeasing, but does this make further use of skulls for any reason displeasing? Both the music played and the instrument are part of this attempted contact with spirits. If one claims that the music itself is displeasing for any other use, then honesty before God and His Word demands that one be consistent and say that the instrument as well is displeasing to God for any other use.

Is Tibetan human skull drum music a kind of instrumental music that God accepts for use in worship or not?

[Kevin Miller]

RajeshG wrote:

Kevin Miller wrote:

Of course it’s unacceptable to try to have contact with spirit beings. Nobody would argue with that. The use of a human skull to contact spirits is displeasing to God. However, the use of a human skull by occultists does not make the skull unusable in other situations. Various science classes use human skulls, Should we find that use problematic due to the use of human skulls by occultist?

Is that demonic Tibetan musical activity pleasing to God or not?

I already said that trying to have contact with spirit being is displeasing to God, so the specific musical activity done while trying to have this contact is displeasing. Does the use of percussion by a demonic Tibetan make the use of percussion for any reason displeasing to God?

Quote:Is the Tibetan occultists using human skulls as a musical instrument acceptable to God or not?

The use of a skull during this attempted spirit contact is also displeasing, but does this make further use of skulls for any reason displeasing? Both the music played and the instrument are part of this attempted contact with spirits. If one claims that the music itself is displeasing for any other use, then honesty before God and His Word demands that one be consistent and say that the instrument as well is displeasing to God for any other use.

Quote:Is Tibetan human skull drum music a kind of instrumental music that God accepts for use in worship or not?

I highly doubt that human skull drum music is even able to be replicated on any instruments available in a typical church. The sound just wouldn’t be the same. I’m pretty sure CCM artists don’t study out Tibet occultist musical patterns either, so any similarity to the sequence of rhythm used by Tibetan occultists would be entirely coincidental.

[RajeshG]

Scripture makes clear that there are acceptable and even commanded uses of some percussion in some musical activities.

Having said that, we can be certain from a valid understanding and application of 1 Cor. 10:23 (and other passages) that not all kinds of percussion, etc. are acceptable to God for use in corporate worship.

God created human skulls. The skulls are not sinful. The use of them as musical instruments is not explicitly prohibited by Scripture.

Nonetheless, we know with certainty that using skulls as drums is an unacceptable, sinful musical activity.

Whether any other uses of skulls are acceptable to God cannot be answered by using the reasoning that you have set forth because God created the skulls as good things.

We have extensive, detailed information from a famous rock drummer who has written an entire book in which he relates how he traveled to many places in the world to experience and learn firsthand occult musical practices. We also have other sources of similar information about quite a number of other musicians who have participated in occult musical practices and learned those kinds of occult music and have used them in their music. All such musical activities and music are unfruitful works of darkness that God commands believers not to have any fellowship with—we must condemn and reject that music.

One possibility is that their incomes depend on a certain image, and if they revealed that they’re simply mixing and matching the rhythms they learned in high school band class, that doesn’t work with the schtick. There is also the reality that a fair number of musicians in many genre are heavily into drugs, and hence their powers of perception are, to put if mildly, impaired.

I guess if Rajesh wants to take their words at face value, that’s his choice, I guess, but last I checked, the only source that was inerrant was Scripture.

Since Rajesh brought up a test case concerning a skull, i did a little research concerning the occult use of bones. One occultist had the following to say:

Bones have been used as sacred objects since the very beginning of mankind. In the oldest of neolithic sites we find the ritual use of bones, both animal and human, central to the practice of magic.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

Bones hold a special power, culturally and spiritually. They work in many ways in magic, both practically and ritually. Beyond being ingredients they are particularly good as containers for those things that need binding.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

A bone is a useful place to keep a spirit bound, or even the shade of some ill intended persons that need straightening out. It is a living container, a perfect lure for those more pesky spirits that crave the form of flesh.

So is it accurate to say that the shade of some person can be bound in a bone? Is it consistent with what we know of spirits in the Bible to think that “pesky spirits” can be lured into a bones and thus bound up? It seems to me that this idea is something that a spirit would deceive a human into believing, all the while binding the human to the spirit’s influence and control. Relying upon the word of occultists is potentially passing along satanic deceptions.

This article by an occultist also mentions ritual music:

The ritual of washing bones is one that is accompanied by a rhythmic tune, one that evokes a tone of appeasement and cooperation.

Rock music doesn’t strike me as having a tone of appeasement and cooperation, so this is likely some other style of music. Do we need to research what this style is so that we never use it in our own worship? Another paragraph states:

For the more musically inclined a length of lamb or sheep’s leg bone can be fashioned into a short flute with a beeswax fipple, or even just a single note whistle, for playing ritual music and clearing ritual spaces.

So we see that wind instruments can be used by the occult. It’s logical to assume that many different instruments and many different styles can be used by the occult, and God is displeased with all those instruments and all those styles WHEN they are being used in those occult manners. However, those instruments and those styles are also used in non-occult ways, and if one says that God is displeased with them in those non-occult ways, then one would have to provide scriptural reasons for God’s displeasure.

Using the reason of “the occult” is not sufficient when the instruments and styles are not being used occultically, and using the reason of “not edifying” is insufficient since many people are edified by many different instruments and styles.

[Kevin Miller]

Since Rajesh brought up a test case concerning a skull, i did a little research concerning the occult use of bones. One occultist had the following to say:

Bones have been used as sacred objects since the very beginning of mankind. In the oldest of neolithic sites we find the ritual use of bones, both animal and human, central to the practice of magic.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

Bones hold a special power, culturally and spiritually. They work in many ways in magic, both practically and ritually. Beyond being ingredients they are particularly good as containers for those things that need binding.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

A bone is a useful place to keep a spirit bound, or even the shade of some ill intended persons that need straightening out. It is a living container, a perfect lure for those more pesky spirits that crave the form of flesh.

So is it accurate to say that the shade of some person can be bound in a bone? Is it consistent with what we know of spirits in the Bible to think that “pesky spirits” can be lured into a bones and thus bound up? It seems to me that this idea is something that a spirit would deceive a human into believing, all the while binding the human to the spirit’s influence and control. Relying upon the word of occultists is potentially passing along satanic deceptions.

This article by an occultist also mentions ritual music:

The ritual of washing bones is one that is accompanied by a rhythmic tune, one that evokes a tone of appeasement and cooperation.

Rock music doesn’t strike me as having a tone of appeasement and cooperation, so this is likely some other style of music. Do we need to research what this style is so that we never use it in our own worship? Another paragraph states:

For the more musically inclined a length of lamb or sheep’s leg bone can be fashioned into a short flute with a beeswax fipple, or even just a single note whistle, for playing ritual music and clearing ritual spaces.

So we see that wind instruments can be used by the occult. It’s logical to assume that many different instruments and many different styles can be used by the occult, and God is displeased with all those instruments and all those styles WHEN they are being used in those occult manners. However, those instruments and those styles are also used in non-occult ways, and if one says that God is displeased with them in those non-occult ways, then one would have to provide scriptural reasons for God’s displeasure.

Using the reason of “the occult” is not sufficient when the instruments and styles are not being used occultically, and using the reason of “not edifying” is insufficient since many people are edified by many different instruments and styles.

[RajeshG]

Your claims about people saying that they are edified do not overrule what God says. God says that not all things edify. You have to prove biblically that what God says does not apply to any kinds of instrumental music or any kinds of percussion.

Sometimes, it does apply to kinds of music. Therefore, I’m not overruling what God says.

You are misinterpreting the passage, in my opinion, by claiming a blanket prohibition upon something that is non-edifying for everyone at every time in every place. The context of the rest of the passage speaks against that. The passage goes on to talk about eating meat from the marketplace. If someone tells you that the meat has been offered in sacrifice, then it would not be edifying or appropriate to eat it, but that ONLY applies to the situation in which you’ve been specifically told. The very same meat CAN be eaten in an edifying and appropriate way by someone who hasn’t been told. Different people can consider partaking and one is prohibited and the other isn’t. The statement that something wouldn’t bet edifying is NOT a blanket statement that the item in forbidden for everyone. It could be edifying for someone else.

[Kevin Miller]

RajeshG wrote:

Your claims about people saying that they are edified do not overrule what God says. God says that not all things edify. You have to prove biblically that what God says does not apply to any kinds of instrumental music or any kinds of percussion.

But I wasn’t saying that it doesn’t ever apply to kinds of instrumental music, so I don’t have to prove that point that I never made. Why would I have to prove a point i never made?

Sometimes, it does apply to kinds of music. Therefore, I’m not overruling what God says.

You are misinterpreting the passage, in my opinion, by claiming a blanket prohibition upon something that is non-edifying for everyone at every time in every place. The context of the rest of the passage speaks against that. The passage goes on to talk about eating meat from the marketplace. If someone tells you that the meat has been offered in sacrifice, then it would not be edifying or appropriate to eat it, but that ONLY applies to the situation in which you’ve been specifically told. The very same meat CAN be eaten in an edifying and appropriate way by someone who hasn’t been told. Different people can consider partaking and one is prohibited and the other isn’t. The statement that something wouldn’t bet edifying is NOT a blanket statement that the item in forbidden for everyone. It could be edifying for someone else.

[RajeshG]

No, the Bible never speaks of eating food as food as a matter of edification. Edification concerns building someone up in the things of God. Paul says that “the kingdom of God is not meat and drink (Rom. 14:17a). He also makes clear that whether one eats or does not eat does not make one better or worse (1 Cor. 8:8b-c). Eating food as food does not commend us to God (1 Cor. 8:8a). Paul would never had said these things if eating food as food were a matter of edification.

[Kevin Miller]

RajeshG wrote:

No, the Bible never speaks of eating food as food as a matter of edification. Edification concerns building someone up in the things of God. Paul says that “the kingdom of God is not meat and drink (Rom. 14:17a). He also makes clear that whether one eats or does not eat does not make one better or worse (1 Cor. 8:8b-c). Eating food as food does not commend us to God (1 Cor. 8:8a). Paul would never had said these things if eating food as food were a matter of edification.

I can see you totally missed my point if you think I was simply talking “about eating food as food” without any other consideration. The consideration of one’s conscience, and the conscience of one another, in regards to eating marketplace food IS an edification issue. 1 Cor 10:27 ends with “whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.” Then verse 28 contains the words “eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake.”

[Kevin Miller]

Since Rajesh brought up a test case concerning a skull, i did a little research concerning the occult use of bones. One occultist had the following to say:

Bones have been used as sacred objects since the very beginning of mankind. In the oldest of neolithic sites we find the ritual use of bones, both animal and human, central to the practice of magic.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

Bones hold a special power, culturally and spiritually. They work in many ways in magic, both practically and ritually. Beyond being ingredients they are particularly good as containers for those things that need binding.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

A bone is a useful place to keep a spirit bound, or even the shade of some ill intended persons that need straightening out. It is a living container, a perfect lure for those more pesky spirits that crave the form of flesh.

So is it accurate to say that the shade of some person can be bound in a bone? Is it consistent with what we know of spirits in the Bible to think that “pesky spirits” can be lured into a bones and thus bound up? It seems to me that this idea is something that a spirit would deceive a human into believing, all the while binding the human to the spirit’s influence and control. Relying upon the word of occultists is potentially passing along satanic deceptions.

This article by an occultist also mentions ritual music:

The ritual of washing bones is one that is accompanied by a rhythmic tune, one that evokes a tone of appeasement and cooperation.

Rock music doesn’t strike me as having a tone of appeasement and cooperation, so this is likely some other style of music. Do we need to research what this style is so that we never use it in our own worship? Another paragraph states:

For the more musically inclined a length of lamb or sheep’s leg bone can be fashioned into a short flute with a beeswax fipple, or even just a single note whistle, for playing ritual music and clearing ritual spaces.

So we see that wind instruments can be used by the occult. It’s logical to assume that many different instruments and many different styles can be used by the occult, and God is displeased with all those instruments and all those styles WHEN they are being used in those occult manners. However, those instruments and those styles are also used in non-occult ways, and if one says that God is displeased with them in those non-occult ways, then one would have to provide scriptural reasons for God’s displeasure.

Using the reason of “the occult” is not sufficient when the instruments and styles are not being used occultically, and using the reason of “not edifying” is insufficient since many people are edified by many different instruments and styles.

[RajeshG]

I am fully aware of the teaching in those verses concerning conscience. Those verses, however, are not talking about building up in the things of God either the person who does the eating or the unbeliever who sets food before him to eat as ordinary food. The Bible never uses the word “edify” in that sense.

To argue otherwise would be to say that every time a believer eats food in good conscience before God, he is edifying himself. That would be attaching an unbiblical meaning to the biblical concept of edification.

More importantly, likening any eating of food in any non-worship context to either the use of musical instruments or the use of kinds of instrumental music or both in any worship context would be (and is for any who do so) a very seriously flawed understanding of Scripture. Those things are worlds apart.

[RajeshG]

Kevin Miller wrote:

Since Rajesh brought up a test case concerning a skull, i did a little research concerning the occult use of bones. One occultist had the following to say:

Bones have been used as sacred objects since the very beginning of mankind. In the oldest of neolithic sites we find the ritual use of bones, both animal and human, central to the practice of magic.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

Bones hold a special power, culturally and spiritually. They work in many ways in magic, both practically and ritually. Beyond being ingredients they are particularly good as containers for those things that need binding.

Then a couple paragraphs later:

A bone is a useful place to keep a spirit bound, or even the shade of some ill intended persons that need straightening out. It is a living container, a perfect lure for those more pesky spirits that crave the form of flesh.

So is it accurate to say that the shade of some person can be bound in a bone? Is it consistent with what we know of spirits in the Bible to think that “pesky spirits” can be lured into a bones and thus bound up? It seems to me that this idea is something that a spirit would deceive a human into believing, all the while binding the human to the spirit’s influence and control. Relying upon the word of occultists is potentially passing along satanic deceptions.

This article by an occultist also mentions ritual music:

The ritual of washing bones is one that is accompanied by a rhythmic tune, one that evokes a tone of appeasement and cooperation.

Rock music doesn’t strike me as having a tone of appeasement and cooperation, so this is likely some other style of music. Do we need to research what this style is so that we never use it in our own worship? Another paragraph states:

For the more musically inclined a length of lamb or sheep’s leg bone can be fashioned into a short flute with a beeswax fipple, or even just a single note whistle, for playing ritual music and clearing ritual spaces.

So we see that wind instruments can be used by the occult. It’s logical to assume that many different instruments and many different styles can be used by the occult, and God is displeased with all those instruments and all those styles WHEN they are being used in those occult manners. However, those instruments and those styles are also used in non-occult ways, and if one says that God is displeased with them in those non-occult ways, then one would have to provide scriptural reasons for God’s displeasure.

Using the reason of “the occult” is not sufficient when the instruments and styles are not being used occultically, and using the reason of “not edifying” is insufficient since many people are edified by many different instruments and styles.

You still have not provided full source information for what you have presented from one or more sources in this comment. Not providing such information calls both the authenticity of this information and the ethicality of its use into serious question.