And Can It Be . . . Another Post on Music?
- 4 views
Agreed fully that it’s hard to figure out that a tune does or does not fit, but one example that comes to mind of a place where it’s not as hard to figure out is a little CD my kids had of Bible verses to music. While generally pretty helpful, I could not help groaning at a bouncy, cheerful little tune with the lyrics “Lying lips are abomination to the Lord.” Maybe we start with some basics—imprecatory songs should not have cheerful, danceable tunes or something like that—and see if we start to grow to understand musical genre a bit better over time?
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I’d quibble with the order a little first, as others have, and go like this:
-
The lyrics should be theologically accurate
-
The lyrics should be understandable to the congregation
-
The music should be singable by a congregation
-
The genre of music should be appropriate to the lyrics
The only thing I might not be agreement with is that 4th point about the genre, and I think that’s because it has the potential to be a backdoor for the same kinds of cultural music standards that people have used in the past. Hopefully DBTS will discuss that point in another post.
[begin rant]
I’ve had some ‘worship teams’ that wanted to sing “My Lighthouse”so many times that I think I have developed a spiritual allergy to it, so this is a little bit of a rant…
That song is a terrible song. There’s no substantial or explicitly Christian content (the “my God will protect us” lyric could be sung by anyone!), and most of the time is spent talking about how God will take care of us. It is catchy, though, and I know some people will be encouraged by it, but that’s one lighthouse I’d personally like to see shut down. I also think that it’s a perfect example of so much CCM that is worthless and empty.
[/endrant]
"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
I’d rather hear a donkey bray at midnight in a tin barn than hear bluegrass music!
If a group showed up at my church, I’d leave the service. Absolutely no interest in it.
[Mark_Smith]I’d rather hear a donkey bray at midnight in a tin barn than hear bluegrass music!
If a group showed up at my church, I’d leave the service. Absolutely no interest in it.
What if you were called to reach out in Appalachia, or (perhaps more likely) among hipster urbanites with logger beards and flannel shirts? :^)
Personally, my take is that if I’m going to serve Christ, that will probably mean that I will have to suffer through music I don’t personally like from time to time. For me, that’s most medleys in any genre (let’s work on our attention span instead of changing the subject every 14 bars, OK?), anything where the composer appears to have forgotten about the de/crescendo (always uniform medium loud), and anything where the composer appears to think that adding more instruments playing the same notes makes it more musical. It would be a vast improvement (IMO) to have more bluegrass, black gospel, ancient hymns (prior to 1700), and even decent rap & heavy metal.
But that said, until we can demonstrate that a particular song (or perhaps genre) is sinful, sometimes I’ve just got to swallow my pride and make it through somehow….
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
For me, I could go the rest of my life without hearing “special music” because I’d rather sing than be sung to.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Biblically we see music used to quiet the soul as David played for Saul ..or to stimulate the soul to worship or meditate of the attributes of God..with the final goal to stir the “emotion” yea there is that word that terrifies we fundamentalists…now emotion van go in any direction and music can take it in any direction so we must be aware of “association” with ungodly themes and melodies…at the same time musical “styles” are a matter of culture and up bringing..I remember growing up in WVa and hearing what I call “mountain Gospel” some would call bluegrass..but at times a man or woman would stand and sing without musical accompaniment..with a nasal thwang that many here would not like but it was very effective with that culture.
In essence I see the role of music in corporate worship as setting the atmosphere or “plowing” the soul for the planting of seed..I see it as a “tenderizer” for a heart hardened by a week in the world..We are told not to be “drunk with wine” but to be filled with the spirit …singing to yourselves, making melody in your heart …with thanksgiving…Why did God use “intoxication” as a allegory ? because it is a secular way man soothes the soul..or attempts to..for me music breaks up the hard ground that grieves the spirit and frees that spirit..sooooo…yes it really is intended to be an “emotional” experience…doctrinal correct,in order and without secular association of evil.
I see music as a plastic pipe into the soul of man.. with the capability to carry pure water or sewage into or out of the heart of man..for music to pass the test it must pass three tests : first the message has to be sound doctrine, it does not have to be “deep” doctrine..some doctrinal truths are very simple but very powerful..Holy,Holy Holy has moved me to adoration at a level that has left me broken ..also putting a three part sermon to music makes bad preaching and music.. Second , it must be free of evil association I really cany worship to “rap” style …regardless of the words..I just cant get past the image. Of course this is the subjective issue that usually causes the divide..ie: southern Gospel is “beer joint” music to many….and “classical” music is considered “high church” or represents the classical style developed in and by European elites that defined the arrogance and self righteousness of that time..so there I have managed to offend all. Third as mentioned here it has to connect with the listener … singing words that were written with the vocabulary of your great great grandmother may fit some requirement of our “conservative” style..but will not “connect” with most people under 45..
I recently went through a church change from a very conservative fellowship… I must say that the music I prefer is not sung in many growing churches here..after my wife and I visited my son in Fl at their Mega church I had to ask my son “do you like this type of music” ? He said he grew to like it..so after a couple of visits I started watching the congregation„,and yes most were singing with great gusto…some with raised hands..and my grandsons loved to go to that church anty time the doors are opened..I went back and watched my congregation singing the old classical hymns . Very few men or children were singing, mostly the women and some men who are musically talented…then it hit me ..some of those old hymns are hard for the lay singer to connect ..so they dont try..
Jim
Agree with much of that, but the concept of “soul” in the OT especially is not equivalent to our modern (as in post-Plato) idea. Maybe heart/mind is a better term when talking about “soothing” and preparation for preaching, etc. In the West we use “soul” pretty much for that. But in the Hebrew view of things, “soul” is just your whole living self, body and spirit.
I’m still not sure if the NT writers continue that perspective, and we’re reading a more distinct body-soul distinction into them—that isn’t really there, or if the Platonic-seeming language in places indicates Plato was pretty close to the truth…. another topic.
Anyway, on the whole music debate, it seems like we’re often jumping too quickly to the ethics of how to use it in church when we haven’t yet thought through how it works in relation to human beings in general. There are some things to be gleaned from Scripture on that. Along with what in the world music actually is. Apart from the extremes, we all know it when we hear it, but try to define it some time… it’s surprisingly difficult.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[jreeseSr]
In essence I see the role of music in corporate worship as setting the atmosphere or “plowing” the soul for the planting of seed..I see it as a “tenderizer” for a heart hardened by a week in the world..We are told not to be “drunk with wine” but to be filled with the spirit …singing to yourselves, making melody in your heart …with thanksgiving…Why did God use “intoxication” as a allegory ? because it is a secular way man soothes the soul..or attempts to..for me music breaks up the hard ground that grieves the spirit and frees that spirit..sooooo…yes it really is intended to be an “emotional” experience…doctrinal correct,in order and without secular association of evil.
I see music as a plastic pipe into the soul of man.. with the capability to carry pure water or sewage into or out of the heart of man..for music to pass the test it must pass three tests : first the message has to be sound doctrine, it does not have to be “deep” doctrine..some doctrinal truths are very simple but very powerful..Holy,Holy Holy has moved me to adoration at a level that has left me broken ..also putting a three part sermon to music makes bad preaching and music.. Second , it must be free of evil association I really cany worship to “rap” style …regardless of the words..I just cant get past the image. Of course this is the subjective issue that usually causes the divide..ie: southern Gospel is “beer joint” music to many….and “classical” music is considered “high church” or represents the classical style developed in and by European elites that defined the arrogance and self righteousness of that time..so there I have managed to offend all. Third as mentioned here it has to connect with the listener … singing words that were written with the vocabulary of your great great grandmother may fit some requirement of our “conservative” style..but will not “connect” with most people under 45..
I had a conversation with my pastor on “free of evil association” yesterday, and pointed out that it is (once again) the guilt by association fallacy. Moreover, it’s quite silly, as anyone who listens to NPR ought to be fully aware that they play almost all kinds of church music for a mostly unbelieving audience. The pagans love it! Another example is the Minnesota men’s chorale Cantus, which had a program of church music sung by a group of men who have “husbands” for mostly nonbelieving audiences. If one things that “classical” music is somehow more pure, simply look up what went on in the Hotel Sacher in Vienna. It looked more respectable, but it was behavior that was every bit as sinful as that which you’d imagine at a heavy metal or rap concert.
In other words, if we apply “free of evil association” consistently, we won’t be needing a music pastor or music leader simply because of Romans 3:23. We need to use sound logic as we approach music, starting with defining what we ought to be trying to do with it. As Aaron notes, there is quite a bunch of work to be done in taking a look at how poetry and music interact with our minds differently than prose. If we haven’t picked up our discussion of poetic and musical devices lately, it will be a challenge.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Aaron Blumer]Agree with much of that, but the concept of “soul” in the OT especially is not equivalent to our modern (as in post-Plato) idea. Maybe heart/mind is a better term when talking about “soothing” and preparation for preaching, etc. In the West we use “soul” pretty much for that. But in the Hebrew view of things, “soul” is just your whole living self, body and spirit.
I’m still not sure if the NT writers continue that perspective, and we’re reading a more distinct body-soul distinction into them—that isn’t really there, or if the Platonic-seeming language in places indicates Plato was pretty close to the truth…. another topic.
Anyway, on the whole music debate, it seems like we’re often jumping too quickly to the ethics of how to use it in church when we haven’t yet thought through how it works in relation to human beings in general. There are some things to be gleaned from Scripture on that. Along with what in the world music actually is. Apart from the extremes, we all know it when we hear it, but try to define it some time… it’s surprisingly difficult.
I am obviously not prepared intellectually or academically to address . much less debate the four basic theory of the essence of man…even when throwing out the two obvious secular ones..the debate of Tri and Di..goes on between better biblical scholars than I ,My conclusion comes from a lay study of Rom 8, Thes 5:23 , Heb 4:12 and my interpretation of Paul’s struggle in Rom 7..where the struggle to me is one of soul and spirit..
But honestly I have not the confidence of one who has studies to your extent and will defer to you…let it suffice to say that ….”the seat of our feelings and emotions’ , that cannot be trusted without doctrinal oversight !
Jim
[Bert Perry]jreeseSr wrote:
I had a conversation with my pastor on “free of evil association” yesterday, and pointed out that it is (once again) the guilt by association fallacy. Moreover, it’s quite silly, as anyone who listens to NPR ought to be fully aware that they play almost all kinds of church music for a mostly unbelieving audience. The pagans love it! Another example is the Minnesota men’s chorale Cantus, which had a program of church music sung by a group of men who have “husbands” for mostly nonbelieving audiences. If one things that “classical” music is somehow more pure, simply look up what went on in the Hotel Sacher in Vienna. It looked more respectable, but it was behavior that was every bit as sinful as that which you’d imagine at a heavy metal or rap concert.
In other words, if we apply “free of evil association” consistently, we won’t be needing a music pastor or music leader simply because of Romans 3:23. We need to use sound logic as we approach music, starting with defining what we ought to be trying to do with it. As Aaron notes, there is quite a bunch of work to be done in taking a look at how poetry and music interact with our minds differently than prose. If we haven’t picked up our discussion of poetic and musical devices lately, it will be a challenge.
Bert , point very well made…and to your point, when the Children of Israel were commanded not to wear the “garments” of the infidels after capture because they did not want that “association” … They were not told not to wear “clothes” …soooo is the the message one of degree ? or “maturity” of the listener…..or again one of a comfortable “enviorment” to worshipper ? …..I have no problem with the questions its the answers that foul me up ):
Jim
[Joeb]Is their a difference in what Music you use in whorship and Evangelistic Outreach. Example the cofounder of Korn Brian “Head” Welch came out of a terrible drug driven rock and roll life and accepted Christ. His former life cost him his marriage and he now has custody of his daughter.
In effort to be a better father to his daughter he accepted the Lord and bowed out of music for threes years to get himself anchored in the word.
Now he is back into the music scene and playing in Evangelistic rallies to reach millennials for Christ. Brian plays what they call nu metal. I have no idea what that is.
Now Many milleanials are caught up in this drug tattooed and nose ring world and Brian Welch is trying to reach them for Christ. A missionary friend of mine works with Brian Welch in concerts and Evangelism in Europe. So the question is this ok for this man to reach out to his contemporaries to bring them to Christ in this way Brian and my friend work through the Stieger Mission School in Germany
Personally I can’t stand the music but my 61 year old buddy is involved with this type of Music and Evangelism. I don’t have a problem with it but I sill can’t stand the music. I think it nuts but as you pointed out Bert that may be my personal taste
Also Brian Welch just took a lot of heat from the Fundementalist and conservative Evangelical Community for praying with members of the LGBT community after a concert. He said the person he was praying with came from a terrible childhood of abuse. Brian’s argument is your not going give these people a hell and fire and brimestone speech and cause them to instantly turn to Christ. Brian said some yes right away but others it takes years and maybe a decade. Brian said by being a loving friend he is trying to plant a seed and lead them to Christ one step at a time.
Additionally I can’t stand rap either. I’m a Country Rock Bluegrass guy ie Pastor Richie Furay is my man By the way Richie I believe went to a Baptist Seminary after he accept Christ and left Rock and Roll
Some of you guys might like Richie he is a Tea Party Republican and likes the FRC Apparently Richie and Huckabee had a differences in the past on Rock and Roll but now HUCK is all in. I believe he has a praise album and his latest album is Dreamer. Plus he can’t be that bad to my knowledge he is the one and only Evangelical/Fundementalist Christian singer in the Rock and Roll Hall of fame via his participation with Buffalo Springfield He is 73 but he can still sing and his daughter sings with him Aaron Richie might be right up your alley politically and musically
Last year I was at Dollywood with my wife when a group of African orphan children(7-14) was introduced at one of their out door theaters.. after a moving time of testimony of how their parents were murdered by the Marxist regime and praising their Saviour Jesus Christ the began to sing…Now as with most African cultures their music had a distinctive rhythm and they danced in unison with that rhythm …now hearing and watching the gusto and obvious joy of their Dance and worship to a much aligned version of “nothing but the blood” blessed my soul in spite of my strict Baptist prejudice…now some might argue that it was all just (what is the word we use ?) ahhh yes “sensual” to justify our hard heart..(; but I know that their worship was to our saviour and my joy was in seeing that expressed ….
Jim
After all these years the “association” argument now amuses me. Ever since I was in a church that wouldn’t sing “How Great Thou Art” because of its “association” with Billy Graham nor John Peterson songs because of their “association” with the rhythm of the waltz, I’ve come to the conclusion that one can find a negative association with nearly any hymn.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
[Ron Bean]After all these years the “association” argument now amuses me. Ever since I was in a church that wouldn’t sing “How Great Thou Art” because of its “association” with Billy Graham nor John Peterson songs because of their “association” with the rhythm of the waltz, I’ve come to the conclusion that one can find a negative association with nearly any hymn.
I believe we all would agree that any stand on “separation” would be one of degree…I remember Dr. Garth Sibert 40 yrs ago teaching us using an illustration of a megaphone for degrees of separation , narrow on one end and wide on another . starting on the narrow end is the individual (priesthood of the believer) expanding to family, expanding to Church, further expansion for fellowship and further for friends.. I find Paul exhibiting degrees of separation for evangelization while observing some rituals that he had no convictions of without defiling his priesthood or calling..
But I would agree that it has been abused as in the cases you have cited …but I dont believe that justifies a swing all the way to the other extreme..
Jim
Regarding the utter ban on the property of the Canaanites, we have to remember that even the very clothing of the Hebrews was to be distinctive, and that until the industrial age, almost all cultures wove and embroidered very distinctive patterns into their clothing—when it took days to weeks to make the cloth, why not embroider it to make it prettier, and for that matter to make it very clear to whom it belonged?
(historical examples: sweaters from the U.K, especially Aran sweaters, Norse embroidery, smocking, etc…)
So I’d have to guess that the clothing of the Canaanites would have been so decorated in homage to their gods in the same way the Hebrews decorated their clothing in homage to YHWH, and hence the issue is not guilt by association, but rather idolatry. The Hebrews would have been tempted to use these clothes, however, simply because of the effort needed to weave their own cloth. Hence the “ban”.
It is worth noting as well that “guilt by association” arguments are not merely fallacious, but are also generally sinful. Think about it a moment; if I say that a particular instrument or genre in music is inextricably connected to a particular sin, false god, or whatever, I have more or less accused a legion of instrumentalists, or all of those using a certain genre, of rather grievous sin.
If I am anything less than 100% correct, I’m guilty of slander.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Bert Perry]Regarding the utter ban on the property of the Canaanites, we have to remember that even the very clothing of the Hebrews was to be distinctive, and that until the industrial age, almost all cultures wove and embroidered very distinctive patterns into their clothing—when it took days to weeks to make the cloth, why not embroider it to make it prettier, and for that matter to make it very clear to whom it belonged?
(historical examples: sweaters from the U.K, especially Aran sweaters, Norse embroidery, smocking, etc…)
So I’d have to guess that the clothing of the Canaanites would have been so decorated in homage to their gods in the same way the Hebrews decorated their clothing in homage to YHWH, and hence the issue is not guilt by association, but rather idolatry. The Hebrews would have been tempted to use these clothes, however, simply because of the effort needed to weave their own cloth. Hence the “ban”.
It is worth noting as well that “guilt by association” arguments are not merely fallacious, but are also generally sinful. Think about it a moment; if I say that a particular instrument or genre in music is inextricably connected to a particular sin, false god, or whatever, I have more or less accused a legion of instrumentalists, or all of those using a certain genre, of rather grievous sin.
If I am anything less than 100% correct, I’m guilty of slander.
[/quote
The garment itself was not sinful but what it represented…and was not allowed…I agree that no musical instrument is inherently evil… nor any style..but I would contend that musical styles do have an association with the culture and artists that originate them and promote it…that cannot be denied..”Guilt by association” is your term as I have never used it because I dont believe in it… I would say that “Pork” has an association with uncleanliness to the Hebrew and I would recognize that if I were to prepare a meal… My point in stating that musical association has an impact on some people and needs to be considered.
Paul recognized that some people associated offering meat with Idol worship …Paul knew in reality is was just a meal…He did not accuse these Christians of being sinners nor did he concede it was sin…but he did recognize the “association” of that meat with Idolatry in the minds of other Christians.. I have some christian friends that consider “Southern Gospel” Beer joint music..I dont associate it as such but would avoid playing it when he was around…
The bottom line is that recognizing association exists does not condemn styles or instruments but when considering the ministry of music to deny ignore it would not be wise.
Jim
Discussion