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

“our prediction of musical events remains inexorably bound to our musical upbringing. To explore this phenomenon, a group of researchers met with the Sámi people, who inhabit the region stretching between the northernmost reaches of Sweden and the Kola Peninsula in Russia.” - Neroscience News

Discussion

The scenario about Cain that I posted earlier is based solidly on many things Scripture reveals, including what Scripture explicitly says about what Abel offered that was acceptable.

Furthermore, we know with certainty from Scripture that Cain was of the devil. Moreover, the flow of thought from Gen. 3 and Gen. 4 points to his being the first of many who were, are, and will be the seed of the serpent.

Scripture explicitly speaks of people who depart from the faith and do so because they have contact with demonic spirits and heed them and their demonic teaching:
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Positing that something very much like that may have happened to Cain is therefore a very real possibility based on what Scripture has revealed.

[RajeshG]

A Very Plausible Scenario concerning Cain’s Unacceptable Worship

[…]

Adam instructs Cain that God demands that we offer animal sacrifices and that the animal sacrificed must be the best of the flock. Adam also tells Cain that the fat of the animal offered has to be offered as well.

[…]

Cain does not believe the divine revelation that was given to him from his dad who had received that revelation directly from God. He does not offer what he had been told God required.

It sounds to me as if you are here positing that Cain did, in fact, have a way to know that what he did was wrong, either by direct revelation, or being told enough to figure it out. I.e., he didn’t do what was wrong simply by chance.

Obviously, I can’t know if your scenario is correct, but I agree with what it implies. That is exactly what I am arguing about music. What God has given to us in his Word (earlier generations also had direct revelation) must be enough for us to figure out what we can and cannot use, both for personal use and for worship. As you also said in another post, us experiencing something is not enough for us to make a right determination. Before any of us declares something to be unlawful, or even edifying or expedient, God’s word must tell us, directly or in clear principle that we can apply to our situations and circumstances.

Dave Barnhart

[dcbii]

It sounds to me as if you are here positing that Cain did, in fact, have a way to know that what he did was wrong, either by direct revelation, or being told enough to figure it out. I.e., he didn’t do what was wrong simply by chance.

Obviously, I can’t know if your scenario is correct, but I agree with what it implies. That is exactly what I am arguing about music. What God has given to us in his Word (earlier generations also had direct revelation) must be enough for us to figure out what we can and cannot use, both for personal use and for worship. As you also said in another post, us experiencing something is not enough for us to make a right determination. Before any of us declares something to be unlawful, or even edifying or expedient, God’s word must tell us, directly or in clear principle.

If I am understanding correctly what you are saying, I disagree. The only options are not “God’s word must tell us, directly or in clear principle.” God can and has forbidden an entire realm of sinful human activity (namely, the occult) without giving exhaustive specific details or principles about specifically forbidden aspects or products of that realm.

[dcbii]

It sounds to me as if you are here positing that Cain did, in fact, have a way to know that what he did was wrong, either by direct revelation, or being told enough to figure it out. I.e., he didn’t do what was wrong simply by chance.

Yes, I do believe that Cain had some way to know that what he did was wrong, but I do not believe that information had to be specific in the same manner that you may believe. Cain almost certainly would have known what happened to his parents in the Fall with the serpent. If Cain, nonetheless, chose to put himself into contact with some demonic entity, possibly the serpent …

[RajeshG]

If I am understanding correctly what you are saying, I disagree. The only options are not “God’s word must tell us, directly or in clear principle.” God can and has forbidden entire realms of human activities (namely, the occult) without giving any specific details or principles about specifically forbidden aspects of those realms.

But His Word tells us the occult is forbidden right? And I believe he has given us the capability to determine IF something is part of occult and should be avoided, even if we don’t know all the specific details.

If there is something that is somehow part of the occult, but there is no way for us to know that, then there’s absolutely no way I have any way to know to avoid whatever that is, whether for worship or for personal use. So to be honest, at that point, if I can’t make a determination, whether by my own knowledge or with the help of those more knowledgeable and spiritually mature than I, I don’t worry or even think about it. Christians are not to be people who worry, and worrying what we might be missing about things we can’t know is not only wrong but a colossal waste of time, just like trying to add an hour to our life or a cubit to our stature.

Dave Barnhart

[dcbii]
RajeshG wrote:

If I am understanding correctly what you are saying, I disagree. The only options are not “God’s word must tell us, directly or in clear principle.” God can and has forbidden entire realms of human activities (namely, the occult) without giving any specific details or principles about specifically forbidden aspects of those realms.

But His Word tells us the occult is forbidden right? And I believe he has given us the capability to determine IF something is part of occult and should be avoided, even if we don’t know all the specific details.

Of course, Scripture tells us that the occult is forbidden. Based on your second sentence here, what do you have in mind when you say that you think that God has given us “the capability to determine IF something is part of the occult and should be avoided.”

[RajeshG]

Of course, Scripture tells us that the occult is forbidden. Based on your second sentence here, what do you have in mind when you say that you think that God has given us “the capability to determine IF something is part of the occult and should be avoided.”

For us to be able to avoid anything of the occult, we have to be able to tell what is of the occult and what isn’t. Otherwise, we do not have the ability to obey God completely in this area. That means that God must have given us the tools to use (his commands, principles from his Word, and our created ability to think, research, and reason, among others I might not be thinking of) to be able to evaluate what is of the occult and must be avoided.

Dave Barnhart

[dcbii]
RajeshG wrote:

Of course, Scripture tells us that the occult is forbidden. Based on your second sentence here, what do you have in mind when you say that you think that God has given us “the capability to determine IF something is part of the occult and should be avoided.”

For us to be able to avoid anything of the occult, we have to be able to tell what is of the occult and what isn’t. Otherwise, we do not have the ability to obey God completely in this area. That means that God must have given us the tools to use (his commands, principles from his Word, and our created ability to think, research, and reason, among others I might not be thinking of) to be able to evaluate what is of the occult and must be avoided.

I agree. I encourage you to do a detailed study of all the passages in Scripture on the occult. I have been studying that material intermittently for more than 2 years now. If you are interested in learning more about what I have discovered so far, you can do a search on “occult” on my blog and find several articles that present my findings.
Concerning occult music, I would urge you to read for yourself the works that have been talked about in other threads. Those works, their authors, and the believers who have referred to and made use of them have been the subject of much intellectual misrepresentation on SI. Neither of the two major works that have been referred to was written by Christians or had attacking rock or other music as its objective. There is not even a hint of racism in either work. You really should assess those works for yourself and not allow the false statements that have been made about them on SI to dissuade you from benefiting from them.

[RajeshG]

The scenario about Cain that I posted earlier is based solidly on many things Scripture reveals, including what Scripture explicitly says about what Abel offered that was acceptable.

Furthermore, we know with certainty from Scripture that Cain was of the devil. Moreover, the flow of thought from Gen. 3 and Gen. 4 points to his being the first of many who were, are, and will be the seed of the serpent.

Scripture explicitly speaks of people who depart from the faith and do so because they have contact with demonic spirits and heed them and their demonic teaching:

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

Positing that something very much like that may have happened to Cain is therefore a very real possibility based on what Scripture has revealed.

So when Jesus is talking to Jews in John 8:44 and tells them, ” You are of your father the devil,” are we to understand that Jesus was saying they were of the devil because they all had “contact with demonic spirits” and were actually hearing demons speak audibly to them with demonic teachings?

I just don’t see the need to have some audible teaching from demonic spirits for someone to be “of the devil,” and as I said previously, I do think it implausible to have such audible teaching coming from a serpent that was now crawling on the ground due to judgment of God. I think someone is “of the devil” simply if they fit the rest of the description given in John 8:44, namely, “your will is to do your father’s desires.” Cain, by refusing to offer what God wanted, was fulfilling the rebellious desires of Satan, and he didn’t need a serpent to come talking to him to have rebelliousness that fulfilled Satan’s desires. Is there a remote possibility that it happened as you described? I suppose, but I sure don’t consider it a “very real” possibility.

First Timothy 4:1 is undeniably clear that the people in view depart from the faith because they give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. Such heeding of demonic spirits and their demonic teaching does not require that the person receive “audible” teaching directly from the demons.

Scripture attests to people (such as Ahab) heeding demonic teaching that they received from false prophets who were directly demonically directed to give that false teaching. The ultimate recipients of that demonic information, such as Ahab, did not receive that demonic teaching through direct contact with demons themselves.

In addition, Scripture clearly attests to differing kinds of “professional” occultists who are agents of demonic teaching, such as people with familiar spirits, sorcerers, etc.
Notwithstanding what Scripture says about some of the Jews being of the devil, the teaching of 1 Timothy 4:1 cannot be explained as merely people on their own accord having demonic intents or performing actions that demons desire. First Timothy 4:1 explicitly requires that the people in view (who depart from the faith and are not “professional” occultists themselves) receive demonic influence of the type specified in the verse and that they do so from a demonic source that is entirely outside of themselves.

[RajeshG]

First Timothy 4:1 is undeniably clear that the people in view depart from the faith because they give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. Such heeding of demonic spirits and their demonic teaching does not require that the person receive “audible” teaching directly from the demons.

So are you saying that because Cain would not have had an intermediary person with him, that he himself would have had to have “audible teaching” from a demon in order to rebel against God in a way that was “of the devil”?

It seems to me that a spirit can manipulate circumstances to present a seducing temptation without the spirit having to be audible. The “doctrines of demons” doesn’t even require an audible teaching. After all, teaching can be done by example, so if someone is following the example of demons in rebellion against God, then that person is giving heed to doctrines of demons.

Scripture attests to people (such as Ahab) heeding demonic teaching that they received from false prophets who were directly demonically directed to give that false teaching. The ultimate recipients of that demonic information, such as Ahab, did not receive that demonic teaching through direct contact with demons themselves.

In addition, Scripture clearly attests to differing kinds of “professional” occultists who are agents of demonic teaching, such as people with familiar spirits, sorcerers, etc.

I just want to be sure I have your position clear. Are you saying that people who are “of the devil” may not be getting demonic teaching directly from demons themselves, but SOMEONE has to be getting audible demonic teaching and giving it to them?

Notwithstanding what Scripture says about some of the Jews being of the devil, the teaching of 1 Timothy 4:1 cannot be explained as merely people on their own accord having demonic intents or performing actions that demons desire. First Timothy 4:1 explicitly requires that the people in view (who depart from the faith and are not “professional” occultists themselves) receive demonic influence of the type specified in the verse and that they do so from a demonic source that is entirely outside of themselves.
“Notwithstanding”? I specifically asked you about the Jews that Jesus was talking to, and you give me an answer that doesn’t include them, or at least that’s the way it sounds when you use the word “notwithstanding.” Do you believe that those Jews, whom Jesus described as being of the devil, were getting audible demonic teaching either directly themselves or from some source that had received audible teaching from demons?

[Kevin Miller]

So are you saying that because Cain would not have had an intermediary person with him, that he himself would have had to have “audible teaching” from a demon in order to rebel against God in a way that was “of the devil”?

No.

[Kevin Miller]

I just want to be sure I have your position clear. Are you saying that people who are “of the devil” may not be getting demonic teaching directly from demons themselves, but SOMEONE has to be getting audible demonic teaching and giving it to them?

No.

[Kevin Miller]

Do you believe that those Jews, whom Jesus described as being of the devil, were getting audible demonic teaching either directly themselves or from some source that had received audible teaching from demons?

The Bible does not provide information to know any more specifics about them.

[RajeshG]


No.

No.

The Bible does not provide information to know any more specifics about them.

Thanks for the clarification. You had italicized some stuff in a previous post that made me wonder if your position was more specific than you had otherwise been presenting it.

In reading back over my own words, I see that I was creating a misunderstanding that made you italicize those words. While I was being dismissive of the snake presenting audible teaching to Cain (calling it only a remote possibility), I also started to come across as more dismissive of any audible teaching than what I intended to be. I had said ‘I just don’t see the need to have some audible teaching from demonic spirits for someone to be ‘of the devil,’ ” but then I went further and said “I think someone is “of the devil” simply if they fit the rest of the description given in John 8:44, namely, “your will is to do your father’s desires.” ” That sentence is true in some circumstances, but I realize the word “simply” sounds dismissive of the possibility of any sort of audible teaching or even of outside influence. So I shouldn’t have used the word “simply.”

If I was going to make up a conversation between Satan and Cain, I would put it right before Cain murdered Abel. John 8 describes Satan as a murderer from the beginning, so we have explicit information that Satan’s influence was present in the murder. We don’t have information that explicit about Satan’s influence in Cain’s offering. Satan could have come to Cain and said “You really messed up when you made your offering. Now Abel has God’s favor and your parent’s favor, and you are always going to be rejected. The only solution is to get rid of Abel.”

[Kevin Miller]

If I was going to make up a conversation between Satan and Cain, I would put it right before Cain murdered Abel. John 8 describes Satan as a murderer from the beginning, so we have explicit information that Satan’s influence was present in the murder. We don’t have information that explicit about Satan’s influence in Cain’s offering. Satan could have come to Cain and said “You really messed up when you made your offering. Now Abel has God’s favor and your parent’s favor, and you are always going to be rejected. The only solution is to get rid of Abel.”

It was only after Eve had been deceived by the serpent that she chose to transgress God’s prohibition that she knew very well. Therefore, before Satan was a murderer, he was a deceiver who succeeded in getting a human to violate God’s prohibition.
Positing that he acted similarly in some unstated manner to influence Cain to offer something that both Satan (with full knowledge) and Cain (at least in some manner) knew was not acceptable to God is a very legitimate proposition to set forth as entirely possible.

[RajeshG]
Kevin Miller wrote:

If I was going to make up a conversation between Satan and Cain, I would put it right before Cain murdered Abel. John 8 describes Satan as a murderer from the beginning, so we have explicit information that Satan’s influence was present in the murder. We don’t have information that explicit about Satan’s influence in Cain’s offering. Satan could have come to Cain and said “You really messed up when you made your offering. Now Abel has God’s favor and your parent’s favor, and you are always going to be rejected. The only solution is to get rid of Abel.”

It was only after Eve had been deceived by the serpent that she chose to transgress God’s prohibition that she knew very well. Therefore, before Satan was a murderer, he was a deceiver who succeeded in getting a human to violate God’s prohibition.

Positing that he acted similarly in some unstated manner to influence Cain to offer something that both Satan (with full knowledge) and Cain (at least in some manner) knew was not acceptable to God is a very legitimate proposition to set forth as entirely possible.

Yes, as long as you say “in some unstated manner,” then I do accept it as possible.

You did mention earlier that Eve was never described as being “of the devil” even though she was deceived by Satan. I think Cain being “of the devil” had much more to do with Abel’s murder than with bringing the wrong sacrifice. 1 John 3:12 makes this clear when it says, “Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother.” It doesn’t say, “Not as Cain, who was of the wicked one, and brought the wrong sacrifice.”