First I would like to thank you all for being so respectful in your comments. I hope you find my heart to be the same. I also hope this makes sense as I wrote it quickly and late at night.
I would dare to say that "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." Therefore, I do not believe that what I am about to say will change your opinion.
I am responding for those who may not be "fully persuaded" (Romans 14) in their conscience.
 |
| I typed in African Dance and after several pictures with nudity, I came across this "cleaner" one. I want to point out that much African rhythm bear fruit of the holiness of God. That does not say that all "negro" music is the same. |
Tamra: I can honestly say that the thought about syncopation being racist never came to my mind. I don't consider music a matter of race, but a core part that speaks to human nature (whether that nature be the flesh or the spirit.)
That being said, I do believe that there are clean negro spirituals. I believe that many predominantly black churches have a beautiful sound to their choir, and that God has given that race a very special gift.
For Instance this video of The Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir has the historic "negro" harmony, but they have a clean rhythm. It is edifying to God and does not promote a sensual movement.
For Instance this video of The Brooklyn Tabernacle Choir has the historic "negro" harmony, but they have a clean rhythm. It is edifying to God and does not promote a sensual movement.
What I said about rhythm I believe to be the truth regardless of if it comes out of Ray Charles', Elvis's or Gerald Wolf's recording. There are many parts of music and all should be scrutinized according to God's Word.
I hope you do not feel as if I glazed over your comment lightly. I just want to further explain my point about rhythm in relation to Derby's comment as it is a certain rhythm (regardless of it's origin) is the matter in question.
Derby:
I love how your organized your content. I am going to respond to a couple of points. You said that you feel a part of my argument is;
"1) Music with certain (driving or sensuous) beats influences persons in certain ways.
2) A thing that influences persons in these certain ways is evil.
3) Music with certain beats is evil."
I want to point out that the above parts of what I said are in relation to JUST the fruit of a music.
I would like to go back to the foundation for the article. It is:
1. God has one way of doing things.
2. Satan has a completely separate way of doing things. He takes what God has made good and perverts it.
3. God want NOTHING to do with ANY PART of Satan's perversions.
Therefore,
1. God has a music.
2. Satan has a music.
TRUE?
Going back to Exodus (paraphrase), Joshua said, "It is the noise of war," "Moses replied,
 |
| Crazy, but there is a "Screamo" style "Christian music." |
 |
| Does this look like God wants ANYTHING to do with it? Who's fruit is here? You know what the underlying rhythm of Screamo is? Check out "Flight of the Bumblebee" on the previous Music post. |
Exodus 32:18 And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear.
It is very clear that it was not the confusion in the camp that sounded like war, it was the sound of their singing that was like the "noise of war."
I also am aware that it was Aaron that told them to take off their clothes to show their shame.
I wanted to show a correlation (and it is an easy one to see) that the music caused dancing, was related to idol worship and brought them to shame and nakedness.
THAT IS THE FRUIT OF THE DEVIL!
 |
| Again I would like to point out that this was one of the "cleanest" pictures I could find. Satan's sensual music does not bear the fruit of holiness. If you took the words out of your music, could you dance this kind of dance to it? |
If it is indeed true that:
1. Satan has a music.
2. A corrupt tree CANNOT bring forth good fruit.
3. God gave this illustration of Satan's music being involved with idolatry, a type of dancing, and the shame of nakedness.
Can we not all see what other type of music brings forth this same fruit? Therefore, it MUST BE from Satan's music.
RHYTHM: I BETTER NOT CATCH YOU TAPPING YOUR TOE! (Sarcasm)
I believe you misunderstood me as you commented,
"It follows that rhythm is also good when it is used in a proper way. Yet you reach the opposite conclusion:"
I do not have a different conclusion than "rhythm is also good when it is used in a proper way." That WAS my point of the illustration of a marriage bed.
My point was this: A PERVERTED RHYTHM is wrong.
So I go back to the natural question;
"What is a perverted rhythm?"
1. One that sounds like war.
2. One that causes sensuality.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Now on that point, I know that I spoke specifically of the nudity in Exodus, but my goodness, it is OBVIOUS that Satan uses sensuality and all forms of sensuality to pervert Christians. THAT IS HIS MAJOR TOOL. That is why God speaks so much about abstaining from touching, fornication, lasciviousness, and all manners of sexual filth.
I didn't think I needed to talk much about sensuality, because it is common knowledge that Satan uses it.
How do I know that he uses it's rhythm in his music?
This is where I go back to the fruit aspect of the argument. It is not the key of my argument, it is in addition to the foundation.
Satan HAS A MUSIC. I hope it is not at this point that we disagree.
Yet, could you tell me what his music is? Neither Moses nor Joshua heard the words, they heard the singing / music first.
So, here is the question again.
Outside of it sounding like war or promoting sensuality / fornication, how do you identify it?
The Bible answers: "By it's fruit you shall know them."
What is the fruit of a rock rhythm? Sex, drugs and suicide. This is statistically true.
Again, what is the fruit of a sensual rhythm? Kids in the backseat of a car after dances, adultery, Hollywood.
If this is the fruit of that rhythm, (and it is a very obvious one to the world. It seems to be only Christians who argue it) than it is the fruit of a corrupt tree.
SOME CONTEMPORARY CHRISTIAN...
Look at the pictures. Can you identify which one is NOT the Christian rock concert?
 |
| This one ISN'T. |
How than can Rich Mullins seem to have a different fruit?
Because God's Word can not return void.
GOD'S WORD HAS FRUIT.
Yet, it doesn't mean that God was pleased with a music that mixes His message with Satan's rhythm.
He is the one who stated five different ways in II Corinthians 6 that He DID NOT want ANYTHING to do with Satan and his perversions. GOD is the one who said that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. GOD SAID in Revelation that,
Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
He doesn't want a mixture. He wants it all clean or all world. It is vile to Him to have the mixture.
I personally believe that many forms (not all) of Contemporary Christian are WORSE than blatant music like Slipnot because it goes specifically against what God wants. He would rather spew it out of His mouth than have it sung "in HIS name."
My pastor said that some people say that "Christian Rock" is a bridge for lost people to God, but it is more true that it is a bridge the other direction.
In conclusion in response to your reference that music with wrath seems appropriate;
I would like to point out that wrath is fine for God, but not for the Christian.
Col 3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
Col 3:6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
Col 3:7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.
Col 3:8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
Music should not provoke that within us which God has told us to put away.
Melissa, good response.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Satan uses music in various ways. I'm not convinced, as you hoped, that "Satan has a music" which I understand to mean that Satan owns or created a particular style or rhythm, much less an incredibly broad style such as rock. But even if he did, that still assumes that the rhythm itself is all it takes to make a piece of music "Satan's". I consider the key element of screamo to be not the beat, but screaming - and second, a despairing and hating message.
I'm not convinced that the passage means that the Israelites' music was a rock or similar rhythm. Yet if it was, that doesn't mean that the rhythm was the part of the music that made it evil. I'm not sure that you can get that from this passage.
It comes down to a question of how we know the rock rhythm is evil. You offer the criteria:
1)An evil rhythm sounds like war and/or sensuality, which I would argue doesn't include all "rock" beats - there can be other beats with other effects as I said in my previous comment (though I'm not 100% convinced of this argument) and even these two attitudes (intensity, sensuality) can be used in proper ways and can even be found in the Bible. Or is the Song of Solomon Satan's book because it's sensuous? (I'm being facetious, but you see my point).
2)An evil rhythm can be determined by the fruit of the music, but you haven't shown that the generic fruits of "rock music" are the result of the rhythm: You say the fruits of rock music are sex, drugs, and suicide. Well, these are the fruits of the 60's revolution, which included rock music, which includes a rock rhythm, but it also included a cultural message that devalued God and life. I don't think the statistics on sex, drugs, and suicide indicate that these were the fruit of the rhythm.
If we can see good fruit from some Christian music that uses these rhythms, I would suggest that perhaps it isn't a generic rhythm that makes many rock songs evil, and produces evil fruit in its listeners, but something else, such as the overall message.
You're trying to prove that Satan owns or created a specific style or rhythm of music rather than simply saying Satan uses music. It could be argued that Satan has used rock music quite a bit in recent decades, and even that he "owns" or created certain styles of rock, but you haven't (yet?) shown that Satan owns this whole set of rhythms. And just because Satan has used something that isn't inherently bad, doesn't mean we can't use it ourselves.
Anyway, thanks for hearing me. Don't let me derail your series. :)
Well, Derby I do think it goes back to the main questions in my first article which included my personal testimony.
ReplyDeleteI know that music is a big deal to many and it is not something that anyone would want to give up quickly.
Yet, if something seems at all to be of the appearance of evil, or seems to share in the leaven of Satan; would we be willing to go the extra mile just to be sure... even if all the "T"s weren't crossed and all the "i"s weren't dotted.
Are we willing to surrender all to be on the safe side. Because ultimately the question becomes who is our god: our music or the one true God. We ALL should be careful that nothing becomes an idol, and that's my final word of caution. (Not particularly to you, because I believe we are going to agree to disagree). :)
Nice talking to you Derby.