We Must Heed the Vital Message of 1 Corinthians 10:18-20

1 Corinthians 10:18-20 provides vital instruction that every believer must heed:

1 Corinthians 10:18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

To eat in a worship context of what has been sacrificed on an altar to an idol is to be a partaker of the altar. To do so is also to have fellowship with demons!

Such fellowship with demons is not contingent upon a person's having to offer the sacrifices himself. Anyone who eats of such sacrifices comes into fellowship with demons.

The passage also does not provide any basis to say or to hold that this only happens sometimes--in a worship context, anyone who eats what has been sacrificed to an idol has fellowship with demons. God does not want any humans to have fellowship with demons!

45647 reads
RajeshG's picture

dcbii wrote:

I've engaged with you at several points in the 2.5 months this thread has been alive, but it has been, shall we say...mostly fruitless.  I commented because I do think that it's important for those involved in this discussion, especially those with your views, to realize that disagreement with your views on music is not equivalent to wanting to use any type of music in church or for worship.  I'd bet you and I would largely agree on what music we would use for worship in our respective churches.  How we get to that point is completely different though, and I still reject the view you propose in this thread because you have been totally unable (or at least unwilling) to demonstrate which music falls under your assertions and how we would judge it.  You claim "rock" fits that category.  Fine -- demonstrate it, don't just claim it and expect others to just say yes and amen.  Tell us what elements are present in rock music that must be avoided.  Beat?  Notes?  Chords?  Tell us something about how that music is bad.  Clearly, "created or composed by idolaters" is not sufficient, as you don't believe all tunes composed by them are unusable.  Without that application step, the main assertion fails to be useful to the rest of us.  I'm sorry, but it's a large leap from Exodus to "now we know what kinds of music to avoid," and there are a lot of missing steps in between.

I actually agree with Greg's short take that people with your views either don't know or won't say how to judge which music is acceptable, but somehow believe we are still held responsible to know.  Although most people with your views or similar will never admit it, their judgment eventually comes down to "let me hear it and I'll tell you whether it's good or not," i.e., it's essentially a completely subjective judgment, because no objective criteria are ever given.  We somehow just have to know, and if we come to an opposite conclusion, we are wrong.

As to exegesis, I personally think it's irresponsible to "exegete" what isn't actually there.  When the Bible doesn't say something, it's hard to cogently discuss "the Bible's view" on something on which it doesn't speak at all or what it does say is inconclusive.  I agree with those who will not claim that all music must be "neutral" or acceptable, but after 20 pages of discussion, you have still been unable to convince just about anyone on this thread that your "exegesis" has merit, and that the main passage in question is capable of telling us, or, for that matter, even applies to music itself being evil rather that simply evil in context.  You are the one making the claim that the Exodus passage proves your point, and therefore, the burden of proof is on you.  It's not on me to find other scripture passage(s) that disagree with your view.  I don't have to prove you wrong if you haven't made your case, so I can disagree without making any case of my own.  When someone asks "how does the passage tell us which types of music are acceptable?" and you deflect, I don't need to make an opposing argument.  I can simply disagree.

My personal view is that God has a mind on everything being good or evil, but in some cases, he has not given us enough to make a judgment.  That leaves either a. the concept or object in question is actually good (because it hasn't been declared bad), or b. we have to act as if it were good or "practically" neutral because we don't know enough to tell, then it comes down to conscience, which is admittedly imperfect.  God may not have told us everything that is wrong, and expects us to use our discernment (coupled with the Holy Spirit) to judge.  I do believe he has given us the tools to discern which things are absolutely wrong and have no redeeming quality.  However, for things where we still can't come to a solid, biblical conclusion, it has to fall under Romans 14, and you have to use your own conscience as do I.  I think Paul's overall tone implies that for some things this is ultimately unsatisfying, but we still have to live charitably with Christians who disagree if we can't prove them wrong from scripture, even if we wouldn't choose to do or use the things they would.

Thanks for a detailed response. I see that you do not mention the single most important component that this thread treats and is the key to the entire thread: demonic influence on evil idolaters. Do you believe that demons influenced the people in the GCI in their activities or not? If not, why not?

If you believe that demons did influence them, do you believe that the demons influenced the people to behave unrighteously or not? If not, why not?

Exodus 32:18 specifically mentions that they were singing. Exodus 32:19 specifically mentions that they were dancing. Do you believe that people under demonic influence in a worship context will still sing and dance righteously? If you believe that they will still sing and dance righteously, why do you believe that they will still do so?

GregH's picture

RajeshG wrote:

 

GregH wrote:

 

3) When Jay says your position is without support through church history, I doubt he is referring to your conclusion. He is rather referring to how you get there which I suspect he would say is dubious exegesis. In that regard, I strongly suspect he is right. I have certainly not seen exegesis like you use from others that share your conclusion.

 

 

It's easy to say "dubious exegesis" when you do not have to engage in actual discussion of the Bible to support your assessment. Just because you have not seen something said before based on a passage does not automatically invalidate it. 

The impasse as I see it:

* You are not here to discuss. You are here to educate us on your beliefs. You attempt to steer these threads as if you own the joint, smacking down the unruly and refusing to consider valid points that are in opposition to you.

* In general, I think it is widely recognized that your beliefs are more about your biases than the Bible. Otherwise, you would not have to contort yourself into knots to try to pull principles out of the Bible as you do. (As an aside, I would really like to know your back story as to why you came to hate CCM so badly.)

* You refuse to answer hard questions. 

* You refuse to give specifics. You have not even defined rock music but you claim we should avoid it. 

* You do not draw lines that give any help. Your claim is that we should avoid rock music because of the quotes of a few rock musicians. Why shouldn't we only avoid the music of those musicians? Or maybe we should only avoid the music from the same era as those musicians? Or, why should we not avoid all music that uses the same elements of those rock musicians? As an example, if those musicians like minor 7ths, why should we not avoid all music with minor 7ths? Or trapsets? Or a million other things?

 

 

Kevin Miller's picture

RajeshG wrote:

 

dcbii wrote:

 

I've engaged with you at several points in the 2.5 months this thread has been alive, but it has been, shall we say...mostly fruitless.  I commented because I do think that it's important for those involved in this discussion, especially those with your views, to realize that disagreement with your views on music is not equivalent to wanting to use any type of music in church or for worship.  I'd bet you and I would largely agree on what music we would use for worship in our respective churches.  How we get to that point is completely different though, and I still reject the view you propose in this thread because you have been totally unable (or at least unwilling) to demonstrate which music falls under your assertions and how we would judge it.  You claim "rock" fits that category.  Fine -- demonstrate it, don't just claim it and expect others to just say yes and amen.  Tell us what elements are present in rock music that must be avoided.  Beat?  Notes?  Chords?  Tell us something about how that music is bad.  Clearly, "created or composed by idolaters" is not sufficient, as you don't believe all tunes composed by them are unusable.  Without that application step, the main assertion fails to be useful to the rest of us.  I'm sorry, but it's a large leap from Exodus to "now we know what kinds of music to avoid," and there are a lot of missing steps in between.

I actually agree with Greg's short take that people with your views either don't know or won't say how to judge which music is acceptable, but somehow believe we are still held responsible to know.  Although most people with your views or similar will never admit it, their judgment eventually comes down to "let me hear it and I'll tell you whether it's good or not," i.e., it's essentially a completely subjective judgment, because no objective criteria are ever given.  We somehow just have to know, and if we come to an opposite conclusion, we are wrong.

As to exegesis, I personally think it's irresponsible to "exegete" what isn't actually there.  When the Bible doesn't say something, it's hard to cogently discuss "the Bible's view" on something on which it doesn't speak at all or what it does say is inconclusive.  I agree with those who will not claim that all music must be "neutral" or acceptable, but after 20 pages of discussion, you have still been unable to convince just about anyone on this thread that your "exegesis" has merit, and that the main passage in question is capable of telling us, or, for that matter, even applies to music itself being evil rather that simply evil in context.  You are the one making the claim that the Exodus passage proves your point, and therefore, the burden of proof is on you.  It's not on me to find other scripture passage(s) that disagree with your view.  I don't have to prove you wrong if you haven't made your case, so I can disagree without making any case of my own.  When someone asks "how does the passage tell us which types of music are acceptable?" and you deflect, I don't need to make an opposing argument.  I can simply disagree.

My personal view is that God has a mind on everything being good or evil, but in some cases, he has not given us enough to make a judgment.  That leaves either a. the concept or object in question is actually good (because it hasn't been declared bad), or b. we have to act as if it were good or "practically" neutral because we don't know enough to tell, then it comes down to conscience, which is admittedly imperfect.  God may not have told us everything that is wrong, and expects us to use our discernment (coupled with the Holy Spirit) to judge.  I do believe he has given us the tools to discern which things are absolutely wrong and have no redeeming quality.  However, for things where we still can't come to a solid, biblical conclusion, it has to fall under Romans 14, and you have to use your own conscience as do I.  I think Paul's overall tone implies that for some things this is ultimately unsatisfying, but we still have to live charitably with Christians who disagree if we can't prove them wrong from scripture, even if we wouldn't choose to do or use the things they would.

 

 

Thanks for a detailed response. I see that you do not mention the single most important component that this thread treats and is the key to the entire thread: demonic influence on evil idolaters. Do you believe that demons influenced the people in the GCI in their activities or not? If not, why not?

If you believe that demons did influence them, do you believe that the demons influenced the people to behave unrighteously or not? If not, why not?

Exodus 32:18 specifically mentions that they were singing. Exodus 32:19 specifically mentions that they were dancing. Do you believe that people under demonic influence in a worship context will still sing and dance righteously? If you believe that they will still sing and dance righteously, why do you believe that they will still do so?

But as we make application to current worship music, we wouldn't be talking about music produced by  idolators or demon influenced people, and we certainly wouldn't be allowing demon influenced singing and dancing in our churches, so I'm not sure how your points here apply to our current worship music choices.

TylerR's picture

Editor

Rock 'n roll ain't noise pollution ...

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and an Investigations Manager with a Washington State agency. He's the author of the book What's It Mean to Be a Baptist?

RajeshG's picture

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Thanks for a detailed response. I see that you do not mention the single most important component that this thread treats and is the key to the entire thread: demonic influence on evil idolaters. Do you believe that demons influenced the people in the GCI in their activities or not? If not, why not?

If you believe that demons did influence them, do you believe that the demons influenced the people to behave unrighteously or not? If not, why not?

Exodus 32:18 specifically mentions that they were singing. Exodus 32:19 specifically mentions that they were dancing. Do you believe that people under demonic influence in a worship context will still sing and dance righteously? If you believe that they will still sing and dance righteously, why do you believe that they will still do so?

 

But as we make application to current worship music, we wouldn't be talking about music produced by  idolators or demon influenced people, and we certainly wouldn't be allowing demon influenced singing and dancing in our churches, so I'm not sure how your points here apply to our current worship music choices.

Says who? Many rock musicians have testified either of their music itself being demonic or of their being demonically influenced as they played their music. 

Do you have a biblical reason for rejecting the testimonies of the rock musicians themselves that their music was demonic? Do you have a biblical reason to reject their own testimonies that their music is sensual to the core, and that it is the music of chaos and rebellion, all of which are condemned in the Bible?
 

GregH's picture

RajeshG wrote:

 

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Thanks for a detailed response. I see that you do not mention the single most important component that this thread treats and is the key to the entire thread: demonic influence on evil idolaters. Do you believe that demons influenced the people in the GCI in their activities or not? If not, why not?

If you believe that demons did influence them, do you believe that the demons influenced the people to behave unrighteously or not? If not, why not?

Exodus 32:18 specifically mentions that they were singing. Exodus 32:19 specifically mentions that they were dancing. Do you believe that people under demonic influence in a worship context will still sing and dance righteously? If you believe that they will still sing and dance righteously, why do you believe that they will still do so?

 

But as we make application to current worship music, we wouldn't be talking about music produced by  idolators or demon influenced people, and we certainly wouldn't be allowing demon influenced singing and dancing in our churches, so I'm not sure how your points here apply to our current worship music choices.

 

 

Says who? Many rock musicians have testified either of their music itself being demonic or of their being demonically influenced as they played their music. 

Do you have a biblical reason for rejecting the testimonies of the rock musicians themselves that their music was demonic? Do you have a biblical reason to reject their own testimonies that their music is sensual to the core, and that it is the music of chaos and rebellion, all of which are condemned in the Bible?
 

Rajesh, what is rock music? And if you can't define it, why are you talking about it?

Your argument here is absurd. For every one strung out musician who talks about demonic music, there are 99 others who would laugh at that.

 

Jay's picture

Do you have a biblical reason for rejecting the testimonies of the rock musicians themselves that their music was demonic?

When do we ever need a Biblical reason to reject foolishness?  There’s a dozen or more good reasons to reject rock music / CCM in our churches without having to lean on the testimonies of the unsaved.

"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

RajeshG's picture

Joe Whalen wrote:

Rajesh,

You must have missed my earlier post.  You said God's prohibitions against idolatry applied to the worship music of Israel. 

I responded asking you if you could point to any OT passages where that occurred.  Where God evidences the sinfulness of His people by pointing to their worship music.  And then, continuing, where God takes His commands against idolatry and applies those commands directly to the pagan music Israel was using in their worship of Him so that their music changed.  Or, continuing, God's people understood God's commands against idolatry to apply to their worship music, so that their music changed.

Does this occur in the OT, and if so, where?

I did not miss your earlier post.

To my knowledge, the specific types of statements about music that you are talking about in these questions are not mentioned directly in the OT. There are many passages that speak about their idolatry that would have included the matter of any idolatrous worship music that they may have had, but there are no explicit statements. 

Regardless, Exodus 32 established the foundation for all their subsequent understanding of the dangers of idolatry. When the prohibitions in passages such as Deut. 12 were given, which were given after Exodus 32 was given, God's people were naturally expected to bring to their understanding of what was prohibited by keeping in mind the previous revelation that they had been given about idolatry in passages such as Exodus 32 and Numbers 25.

It is vital to keep in mind that Jeroboam introduced the idolatrous worship of two golden calves to the Northern Kingdom and devised his own idolatrous feast as well (1 Kings 12:28-33). The Spirit chooses not to give details about that feast because He expects us to understand what such a feast would include from passages such as Exodus 32.

The corrupting influence of Jeroboam's idolatry plagued the Northern Kingdom throughout its history. The Spirit refers back to his sins on numerous occasions, but does not talk explicitly about his feast in any other passages. The fact that He does not do so does not mean that the initial occasion was the only actual time that they celebrated that idolatrous feast because the Spirit says in a summary passage that the Northern Kingdom walked in all his sins until the end of the kingdom (2 Kings 17:22-23).

There are also condemnations of Babylon's music (for example, Isaiah 14) and commands to come out from her sinfulness (Is. 52:11; Jer. 51:6, 9, 45) that certainly would have included rejecting her idolatrous music.

In any case, the apostle Paul explicitly cites the idolatrous playing in the GCI when he commands us not to be idolaters as they were. For the Corinthians and for us, therefore, we can be certain that the Spirit wanted the Corinthians and wants us to pay very close attention to the revelation in the GCI in knowing what we He wants us not to do, as those idolaters did.

RajeshG's picture

GregH wrote:

Rajesh, what is rock music? And if you can't define it, why are you talking about it?

Your argument here is absurd. For every one strung out musician who talks about demonic music, there are 99 others who would laugh at that.

There are many sources that you can consult if you want to know what is rock music.Here is one: https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_music

I do not have to be able to define it myself--the musicians who have produced that music have known what they have talked about when they have called their music "rock music."

Any attempts by you or anyone else to try to force further discussion about this or any other definitions of rock music are going to be ignored so do not waste my time and yours trying to engage me in any such discussions. I am not going to waste my time talking about such things that the Bible does not talk about directly.

Furthermore, the Spirit does not tell us all the specifics about what comprises "the unfruitful works of darkness" that we are to have no fellowship with (Eph. 5:11). In His perfect wisdom, He does not specify or define such things because the list would be endless. We do not have to be able to define such things precisely to know what things we must reject--things connected with supernatural evil.

Similarly, in Romans 1:30, the Spirit does not specify or define for us what comprises the things that reprobate idolaters have made when He speaks of them as "inventors of evil."

You should learn from what God does in these passages and quite a few others when He does not define sinful things and yet speaks of them as things that are wicked and must be rejected.

 

GregH's picture

RajeshG wrote:

 

GregH wrote:

 

Rajesh, what is rock music? And if you can't define it, why are you talking about it?

Your argument here is absurd. For every one strung out musician who talks about demonic music, there are 99 others who would laugh at that.

 

 

There are many sources that you can consult if you want to know what is rock music.Here is one: https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_music

I do not have to be able to define it myself--the musicians who have produced that music have known what they have talked about when they have called their music "rock music."

Any attempts by you or anyone else to try to force further discussion about this or any other definitions of rock music are going to be ignored so do not waste my time and yours trying to engage me in any such discussions. I am not going to waste my time talking about such things that the Bible does not talk about directly.

Furthermore, the Spirit does not tell us all the specifics about what comprises "the unfruitful works of darkness" that we are to have no fellowship with (Eph. 5:11). In His perfect wisdom, He does not specify or define such things because the list would be endless. We do not have to be able to define such things precisely to know what things we must reject--things connected with supernatural evil.

Similarly, in Romans 1:30, the Spirit does not specify or define for us what comprises the things that reprobate idolaters have made when He speaks of them as "inventors of evil."

You should learn from what God does in these passages and quite a few others when He does not define sinful things and yet speaks of them as things that are wicked and must be rejected.

Rasjesh... How are you supposed to reject rock music if you apparently don't know what it is? I am referring to you personally. How do you personally figure out what is rock music and thus to be rejected?

And why have you wasted 20 pages of defending a position when you can't even define the most basic terms of the debate? 

I don't mind you ignoring this by the way. I am just pointing out to everyone else the absurdity of your arguments. Not that they need help figuring out that your arguments are absurd.

RajeshG's picture

GregH wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

 

GregH wrote:

 

Rajesh, what is rock music? And if you can't define it, why are you talking about it?

Your argument here is absurd. For every one strung out musician who talks about demonic music, there are 99 others who would laugh at that.

 

 

There are many sources that you can consult if you want to know what is rock music.Here is one: https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_music

I do not have to be able to define it myself--the musicians who have produced that music have known what they have talked about when they have called their music "rock music."

Any attempts by you or anyone else to try to force further discussion about this or any other definitions of rock music are going to be ignored so do not waste my time and yours trying to engage me in any such discussions. I am not going to waste my time talking about such things that the Bible does not talk about directly.

Furthermore, the Spirit does not tell us all the specifics about what comprises "the unfruitful works of darkness" that we are to have no fellowship with (Eph. 5:11). In His perfect wisdom, He does not specify or define such things because the list would be endless. We do not have to be able to define such things precisely to know what things we must reject--things connected with supernatural evil.

Similarly, in Romans 1:30, the Spirit does not specify or define for us what comprises the things that reprobate idolaters have made when He speaks of them as "inventors of evil."

You should learn from what God does in these passages and quite a few others when He does not define sinful things and yet speaks of them as things that are wicked and must be rejected.

 

 

Rasjesh... How are you supposed to reject rock music if you apparently don't know what it is? I am referring to you personally. How do you personally figure out what is rock music and thus to be rejected?

And why have you wasted 20 pages of defending a position when you can't even define the most basic terms of the debate? 

I don't mind you ignoring this by the way. I am just pointing out to everyone else the absurdity of your arguments. Not that they need help figuring out that your arguments are absurd.

I grew up heavily immersed in rock music and lots of other wicked music of the world. I do not have to be able to define it myself to know what it sounds like. More importantly, as I said, we can be confident that the people who say that the music that they play and produce is rock music know what they are talking about.

I have not wasted 20 pages. I have carefully and in great detail presented how the Bible attests to the reality of demonically influenced music and how God repeatedly demands that His people not have anything to do with any such wickedness.

There is not anything absurd about my arguments. It is deadly to give the devil any benefit of any doubt about any music that is sourced in wickedness. Many Christians have explained away the many biblical warnings about rejecting the things of the world such as its ungodly music. Many have become desensitized to it.

God's people must reject all the wicked music of demonically influenced people and other evil people and reject all use of such music in worship.
 

Joe Whalen's picture

RajeshG wrote:

To my knowledge, the specific types of statements about music that you are talking about in these questions are not mentioned directly in the OT. There are many passages that speak about their idolatry that would have included the matter of any idolatrous worship music that they may have had, but there are no explicit statements. 

This certainly weakens your position.  Your position is that their idolatry certainly included music and God's commands against the peoples' idolatry must be applied to their music.  But you have no places in the OT where the Spirit says that directly.  1,100 years of the Spirit giving revelation (from Moses to Malachi) and He never says it directly.

According to your writing, the only person who explicitly makes this connection is Paul, 1,500 years after Moses.  And then, after Paul makes his one-only-connection, no one else in Scripture makes the explicit connection, according to you.

Rajesh, what you have is a preference.  You would prefer a certain musical genre not be used in worship.  But you don't have any revelation where God ever says such a thing.

And I'm not faulting you for your preference.  In fact, I'm glad you've given this some thought and that you've come to a conclusion.  The danger is when one takes his preference and tries to say that his preference is a command from God that others must agree to and obey.  Our preferences, no matter how strongly held, are terrible substitutes for God's Word.

RajeshG's picture

Joe Whalen wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

To my knowledge, the specific types of statements about music that you are talking about in these questions are not mentioned directly in the OT. There are many passages that speak about their idolatry that would have included the matter of any idolatrous worship music that they may have had, but there are no explicit statements. 

 

 

This certainly weakens your position.  Your position is that their idolatry certainly included music and God's commands idolatry must be applied to their music.  But you have no places in the OT where the Spirit says that directly.  1,100 years of the Spirit giving revelation (from Moses to Malachi) and He never says it directly.

According to your writing, the only person who explicitly makes this connection is Paul, 1,500 years after Moses.  And then, after Paul makes his one-only-connection, no one else in Scripture mentions it.

Rajesh, what you have is a preference.  You would prefer certain musical genre not be used in worship.  But you don't have any revelation where God ever says such a thing.

And I'm not faulting you for your preference.  In fact, I'm glad you've given this some thought and that you've come to a conclusion.  The danger is when one takes his preference and tries to say that his preference is a command from God that others must agree to and obey.

No, this is not an accurate representation of the data. The Spirit explicitly directs the attention of God's people to the GCI in 6 books of the Bible and implicitly in a 7th passage. Exodus 32, as the key passage about the GCI, is therefore a premier passage to heed for God's people to know what He wants them to know about worship that is not acceptable to Him.

You do not get to dismiss an apostolic command, even though it be given only once in a particular specific form, and call it a preference. When you do so, you take a position that you are wiser than God and know more about what He wants His people to do in worship than He does.

In addition, my position is not based just on that one command. There is much other biblical revelation about music to back up my position.

For that revelation, however, to have its intended effects on God's people, the false notion that all instrumental music--no matter its source or nature--is inherently acceptable to God for use in worship has to be refuted. I have done so in this thread and have much more biblical data that further shows that position is false.

My position on this point is not just based on the data presented in this thread. There is much more explicit biblical data of various sorts to support the command from Paul and its application to what we are to do musically and what we are not to do musically.

Dan Miller's picture

Joe Whalen wrote:
...

According to your writing, the only person who explicitly makes this connection is Paul, 1,500 years after Moses.  And then, after Paul makes his one-only-connection, ...

FYI, Paul’s reference to “playing” is much closer to “playing like a child” than “playing music.” There isn’t any reason to insist that music is in 1 Cor 10 at all.

Joe Whalen's picture

RajeshG wrote:

This not an accurate representation of the data.

You do not get to dismiss an apostolic command and call it a preference. When you do so, you take a position that you are wiser than God and know more about what He wants His people to do than He does.

In addition, my position is not based just on that one command. There is much other biblical revelation about music to back up my position.

For that revelation, however, to have its intended effects on God's people, the false notion that all instrumental music--no matter its source or nature--is inherently acceptable to God for use in worship has to be refuted. I have done so in this thread and have much more biblical data that further shows that position is false.

My position on this point is not just based on the data presented in this thread. There is much more explicit biblical data of various sorts to support the command from Paul and its application to what we are to do musically and what we are not to do musically.

Rajesh, I feel for you.  Honestly.  I have been where you are - I've felt this way about my preferences, too.  Because you are my brother in Christ, beloved by Jesus, I urge you to take my (and other's) pushback to your teaching as a gift from God.  Please keep your preference - I'm not asking you to change it.  But none of us are allowed to elevate our preferences to commands from God.  

RajeshG's picture

Dan Miller wrote:

 

Joe Whalen wrote:
...

 

According to your writing, the only person who explicitly makes this connection is Paul, 1,500 years after Moses.  And then, after Paul makes his one-only-connection, ...

 

 

FYI, Paul’s reference to “playing” is much closer to “playing like a child” than “playing music.” There isn’t any reason to insist that music is in 1 Cor 10 at all.

Is that so? Do bring forth the biblical data that supports this notion.

GregH's picture

Here is the thing Rajesh. There is not one person here that thinks that demonic music belongs in a church. Not a single one.

The problem for you is that you can't seem to tell us what demonic music is. You use squishy terms like "form" and "rock" and when pressed, you don't even know how to define them. You duck all the hard questions and hide behind your assertion that you are commanded not to know anything about the music you condemn.

I really don't think you know that much about music since you can't seem to answer basic questions about it. Yet, your arbitrary decision of what music is demonic ("rock") is supposedly so clear that it should be binding on all of us. Apparently, it is so clear that no one else is allowed to draw their line in a different place. 

RajeshG's picture

GregH wrote:

Here is the thing Rajesh. There is not one person here that thinks that demonic music belongs in a church. Not a single one.

The problem for you is that you can't seem to tell us what demonic music is. You use squishy terms like "form" and "rock" and when pressed, you don't even know how to define them. You duck all the hard questions and hide behind your assertion that you are commanded not to know anything about the music you condemn.

I really don't think you know that much about music since you can't seem to answer basic questions about it. Yet, your arbitrary decision of what music is demonic ("rock") is supposedly so clear that it should be binding on all of us. Apparently, it is so clear that no one else is allowed to draw their line in a different place. 

The more that I interact with you, Greg, the more doubt I have that you really believe that the Bible is the inerrant, infallible Word of God. Do you or do you not believe that the entire Bible is the perfect inspired Word of God?

Kevin Miller's picture

RajeshG wrote:

 

Kevin Miller wrote:

But as we make application to current worship music, we wouldn't be talking about music produced by  idolators or demon influenced people, and we certainly wouldn't be allowing demon influenced singing and dancing in our churches, so I'm not sure how your points here apply to our current worship music choices.

 

 

Says who? Many rock musicians have testified either of their music itself being demonic or of their being demonically influenced as they played their music. 

Do you have a biblical reason for rejecting the testimonies of the rock musicians themselves that their music was demonic? Do you have a biblical reason to reject their own testimonies that their music is sensual to the core, and that it is the music of chaos and rebellion, all of which are condemned in the Bible?
 

Exactly which contemporary Christian music musicians have testified that their music is demonic or that they were influenced demonically? I talked about making application to "current worship music." I can't think of any current CCM artists that claim their music is demonic. And we certainly don't use music in church that has been written by those particular musicians who have claimed demonic influence.

Joe Whalen's picture

RajeshG wrote:

 

GregH wrote:

 

Here is the thing Rajesh. There is not one person here that thinks that demonic music belongs in a church. Not a single one.

The problem for you is that you can't seem to tell us what demonic music is. You use squishy terms like "form" and "rock" and when pressed, you don't even know how to define them. You duck all the hard questions and hide behind your assertion that you are commanded not to know anything about the music you condemn.

I really don't think you know that much about music since you can't seem to answer basic questions about it. Yet, your arbitrary decision of what music is demonic ("rock") is supposedly so clear that it should be binding on all of us. Apparently, it is so clear that no one else is allowed to draw their line in a different place. 

 

 

The more that I interact with you, Greg, the more doubt I have that you really believe that the Bible is the inerrant, infallible Word of God. Do you or do you not believe that the entire Bible is the perfect inspired Word of God?

Rajesh, many of us have discovered that teaching and defending biblical teachings have humbled us and made us more thankful children of God.  Contra that, many of us have discovered that teaching and defending our preferences as biblical doctrine made us frightened and proud.  Frightened because others were poking holes in our teachings, and proud because we really thought we were right and they were wrong (although, as it turned out, we were wrong). 

If you were an outsider reading your posts (and specifically this line, "The more that I interact with you, Greg, the more doubt I have that you really believe that the Bible is the inerrant, infallible Word of God,") would you say you come across as humble and thankful, or frightened and proud?  In light of that, do you think you are teaching and defending true biblical doctrine or your own preference?

Dan Miller's picture

Joe Whalen wrote:

If you were an outsider reading your posts, would you say you come across as humble and thankful, or frightened and proud?  In light of that, do you think you are teaching and defending true biblical doctrine or your own preference?

I guess you’re serious. And it’s generous to ask this question. But if he has genuine insight into himself I’ll be very surprised. 

 

RajeshG's picture

Kevin Miller wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

 

Kevin Miller wrote:

But as we make application to current worship music, we wouldn't be talking about music produced by  idolators or demon influenced people, and we certainly wouldn't be allowing demon influenced singing and dancing in our churches, so I'm not sure how your points here apply to our current worship music choices.

 

 

Says who? Many rock musicians have testified either of their music itself being demonic or of their being demonically influenced as they played their music. 

Do you have a biblical reason for rejecting the testimonies of the rock musicians themselves that their music was demonic? Do you have a biblical reason to reject their own testimonies that their music is sensual to the core, and that it is the music of chaos and rebellion, all of which are condemned in the Bible?
 

 

Exactly which contemporary Christian music musicians have testified that their music is demonic or that they were influenced demonically? I talked about making application to "current worship music." I can't think of any current CCM artists that claim their music is demonic. And we certainly don't use music in church that has been written by those particular musicians who have claimed demonic influence.

I have not claimed that any CCM musicians say that their music is demonic. There are testimonies of CCM musicians who say that their music is sensual music.

You obviously believe that CCM musicians can use the same instrumental genres/styles as wicked musicians use and still be accepted by God provided the words are biblical. I reject that view categorically.

It is also a well-established fact that many CCM musicians routinely listen to secular rock bands and pattern their music after them. This is so much so the case that the music of many CCM musicians has been classified by what secular rock bands their music is similar too. The only way to justify such copying of the music of ungodly secular rock bands is to hold that the instrumental aspects of the music of the secular bands is perfectly good and acceptable to God for use in worship.

GregH's picture

RajeshG wrote:

It is also a well-established fact that many CCM musicians routinely listen to secular rock bands and pattern their music after them. This is so much so the case that the music of many CCM musicians has been classified by what secular rock bands their music is similar too. The only way to justify such copying of the music of ungodly secular rock bands is to hold that the instrumental aspects of the music of the secular bands is perfectly good and acceptable to God for use in worship.

Well duh, good musicians copy, great musicians steal and for that matter.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVyNnKsmdok

RajeshG's picture

GregH wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

It is also a well-established fact that many CCM musicians routinely listen to secular rock bands and pattern their music after them. This is so much so the case that the music of many CCM musicians has been classified by what secular rock bands their music is similar too. The only way to justify such copying of the music of ungodly secular rock bands is to hold that the instrumental aspects of the music of the secular bands is perfectly good and acceptable to God for use in worship.

 

 

Well duh, good musicians copy, great musicians steal and for that matter.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVyNnKsmdok

Psalm 1:1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.

Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

 

GregH's picture

RajeshG wrote:

Psalm 1:1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.

Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Sorry, not really applicable like you think it is. Secular musicians are just in general far better and knowledgeable than Christian musicians. There is a lot to learn from them. I learned far more from a few years of study with a jazz pianist than I ever did in Christian college. And if you think all secular musicians or all rock musicians are ungodly, you are sadly misinformed. Some of the finest people I know are in professional secular music. By the way, some of my favorite people in the world are in professional Christian music too (most definitely music you would disapprove of). 

You apparently claim that learning rock is being conformed to the world. I could use the same arguments about you using the guitar. I would be as wrong as you are but I could make the same arguments. 

 

RajeshG's picture

GregH wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Psalm 1:1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.

Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

 

 

Sorry, not really applicable like you think it is. Secular musicians are just in general far better and knowledgeable than Christian musicians. There is a lot to learn from them. I learned far more from a few years of study with a jazz pianist than I ever did in Christian college. And if you think all secular musicians or all rock musicians are ungodly, you are sadly misinformed. Some of the finest people I know are in professional secular music. By the way, some of my favorite people in the world are in professional Christian music too (most definitely music you would disapprove of). 

You apparently claim that learning rock is being conformed to the world. I could use the same arguments about you using the guitar. I would be as wrong as you are but I could make the same arguments. 

Your pronouncement equals it being so without any biblical argumentation? Wrong.

The Bible shows that righteous people sometimes used some of the same instruments as the unrighteous, but it never says or supports in any way that the righteous ever borrowed or copied the wicked music of the wicked to play on those instruments in the worship of God.

GregH's picture

RajeshG wrote:

Your pronouncement equals it being so without any biblical argumentation? Wrong.

The Bible shows that righteous people sometimes used some of the same instruments as the unrighteous, but it never says or supports in any way that the righteous ever borrowed or copied the wicked music of the wicked to play on those instruments in the worship of God.

This is not hard Rajesh. Regardless of what you say...

All rock music is not wicked.

All rock musicians are not wicked.

Even in the secular world of professional rock music, there are many Christians. Who are you to speak of fellow Christians in this way? The Bible speaks only once of rock music (Luke 19:40) and in a quite positive way Smile Your preference against rock music is noted but it is simply a preference.

RajeshG's picture

GregH wrote:

 

RajeshG wrote:

 

Your pronouncement equals it being so without any biblical argumentation? Wrong.

The Bible shows that righteous people sometimes used some of the same instruments as the unrighteous, but it never says or supports in any way that the righteous ever borrowed or copied the wicked music of the wicked to play on those instruments in the worship of God.

 

 

This is not hard Rajesh. Regardless of what you say...

All rock music is not wicked.

This is pure assertion. You do not have any Bible to establish the validity of this statement.

And of even greater importance is the fact that you do not have any Bible to support the notion that God accepts the use of any rock music in worship.

Kevin Miller's picture

RajeshG wrote:

You obviously believe that CCM musicians can use the same instrumental genres/styles as wicked musicians use and still be accepted by God provided the words are biblical. I reject that view categorically.

If you reject that view "categorically ," then you must believe that a wicked musician using a lullaby would make that instrumental style unacceptable by God. If not, then you are just picking out parts of the view to reject rather than rejecting it categorically .

Quote:
It is also a well-established fact that many CCM musicians routinely listen to secular rock bands and pattern their music after them. This is so much so the case that the music of many CCM musicians has been classified by what secular rock bands their music is similar too. The only way to justify such copying of the music of ungodly secular rock bands is to hold that the instrumental aspects of the music of the secular bands is perfectly good and acceptable to God for use in worship.

But not all CCM musicians do that. Besides, whatever classifications are made by others are not biblical classifications, and the Bible doesn't directly deal with "styles" anyway, unless you somehow assert that a "use" is the same as a "style," which is a notion that I reject.

Bert Perry's picture

While we're at it, this is a song that encouraged me while a young pup in Christ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZQxH_8raCI

OK, bad line in there.  Fix it, I"d sing it in church.  Now here's one that really shows how problematic it is to come out against a blues beat in music:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4hdWcxa0lQ

Now parse that out and tell me how you differentiate that, musically speaqking, from early Temptations.  You've got the tight harmonies, similar rhythm, etc.  And remember, black Gospel came first.  You wanna argue demonic attacks there, be my guest, but don't complain when someone responds in no uncertain terms.  Here's some more from the Five Blind Boys of Alabama.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0EN_Hmq534

Keep in mind here that the basic tune of Amazing Grace is....yes, a spiritual.  Forerunner to blues, jazz, and yes, rock-n-roll.  

And here's another one, from the Five Blind Boys of Mississippi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baje6r60do4

Yeah, you'll hear a lot of the same thing in 1950s rock-n-roll, and it's worth noting that respectability was very important in that era.  And of course, there's someone else we can't forget here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThsYX4RBtbw

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

Pages